New York’s Ammunition Background Check Law Is a Direct Assault on the 2nd Amendment

Opinion

Albany – state officials have defended New York’s controversial ammunition background check law as “commonsense” gun safety, but in practice, it functions as a government overreach that chills the exercise of a constitutional right. In light of the recent Rhode v. Bonta decision striking down a nearly identical California law as unconstitutional, [currently pending an En Banc review by the 9th Circuit Court], many gun owners believe New York’s system is primed for the same fate.

What California’s Court Said—and Why It Matters Here

Just last month, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez issued a permanent injunction against California’s Proposition 63 ammunition laws, writing that “the ammunition background checks laws have no historical pedigree and operate in such a way that they violate the Second Amendment right of citizens to keep and bear arms.” He compared the requirement to demanding “a background check every time a driver wanted to fill up their vehicle with gas.”

The Ninth Circuit—widely regarded as one of the most liberal appellate courts in the nation—upheld Benitez’s ruling, pending review, but confirmed that forcing background checks for every ammo purchase violates the Constitution.

That legal reasoning directly undermines New York’s nearly identical law.

How New York’s System Works (and Fails)

Under the 2022 Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA), New York requires a background check for every ammunition purchase. The process is run by the State Police, who also mandate that retailers maintain a permanent database recording the buyer’s personal details—everything from their Social Security Number to their occupation—along with the exact caliber, grain, lot number, and quantity of ammunition purchased.

There’s a $2.50 fee for every ammo check and a $9 fee for firearm purchases, including antiques. As Norwich sporting goods store owner Mike Mayhood explained, “We lose money on every box of ammo we sell because of the time involved. I’ve never seen things so difficult. It’s not going to get easier. We’re going to have to raise our prices. We know it’s all intentional.”

The delays are staggering. Mayhood says entering a customer’s data alone can take 15 minutes, and his longest wait for approval was 22 hours.

“Two guys cancelled their order because of the delays and wanted their information taken off the state registry,” he said. “I called the State Police, but they said there was no way to remove their info.”

The Reality: This Is a Registry in Disguise

Gun owners and dealers see the writing on the wall. “New York is creating a gun registry,” Mayhood warned. That suspicion isn’t unfounded—the database effectively logs every single ammunition purchase made by law-abiding citizens, giving the state the ability to track not just who owns firearms, but what they’re buying and how much.

The concern is that this is a stepping stone to purchase limits, caliber restrictions, and eventually, outright denial of ammo sales to citizens who have committed no crime. The Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation has already flagged similar proposals in other states.

Entrapment Concerns & Legal Landmines

Attorney and firearms compliance expert Paloma Capanna has gone even further, calling the system a potential “legal trap.” She points to a recent State Police change allowing two ammo purchases in a month under a single background check—a move she says violates the SAFE Act’s requirement for a check “for each and every” purchase.

“The New York State Police are essentially telling dealers to break the law,” Capanna said. “This opens them up to fines, misdemeanor charges, and even losing their licenses.”

Whether this is entrapment, incompetence, or something more deliberate, the result is the same: confusion, legal risk, and more reasons for gun owners to distrust the state.

Why This Law Violates the Constitution

The Second Amendment protects the right to “keep and bear arms,” and by extension, the ammunition necessary to use them. The Bruen decision made clear that modern gun laws must align with the “historical tradition” of firearms regulation. There is no such tradition of background checks for ammunition purchases—period.

By imposing fees, delays, and an invasive registry, New York’s law is not regulating the right—it’s burdening it. It’s creating a system where the state can decide if and when you’re allowed to exercise a right guaranteed by the Constitution.

What’s Next?

The Antonyuk v. Bruen case—backed by Gun Owners of America and St. Lawrence County—squarely challenges the CCIA’s ammunition background check provisions.

“We are very confident in the legal merits of the argument and feel there is a strong case to be had,” said County Attorney Steve Button. A new hearing in federal court is expected this fall.

Meanwhile, some gun owners are simply voting with their feet—crossing into Pennsylvania to buy ammo without the delays, data collection, and fees. That’s business and tax revenue walking right out of New York, all in the name of a “safety” law that has yet to prove it stops a single crime.

Bottom line: New York’s ammunition background check system isn’t about keeping criminals from getting ammo—they already get theirs through illegal channels. This is about monitoring, controlling, and ultimately restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens. If the courts apply the same constitutional test used in California, this law should be struck down. Until then, every New York gun owner remains on a government watchlist—just for buying a box of ammo.

About Tred Law

Tred Law is your everyday patriot with a deep love for this country and a no-compromise approach to the Second Amendment. He does not write articles for Ammoland every week, but when he does write, it is usually about liberals Fing with his right to keep and bear arms.

California Ammo Sales Still On HOLD as State Pushes for Full Court Review…

New York’s Ammunition Background Check System is a Hot Mess