I’m very surprised that the NRA would suggest the notion of people potentially being “in violation of armor piercing bullet laws”. They know better than to suggest that, unless they think hunters are doing a lot of pistol hunting with monolithic bullets all of the sudden. Obviously the proponents of the lead ammo ban (for hunting) are suggesting that shotgun hunters use tungsten, bismuth, or steel shot, and that rifle hunters use solid copper or frangible bullets. The law is already in place for waterfowl, so it’s no big surprise that they would want this law. True, the anti-gun/ammo types would use this as a stepping stone to further more bans, but what can one expect in California.
The ban on lead core rifle bullets is already in place in certain areas where the California Condor roams. This despite no evidence that lead ingestion is a problem with those birds. Further, the areas they have banned lead-core ammo in hunting come right up to the bottom of San Francisco Bay, near San Jose. I don’t know of anyone that has ever seen a Condor in that area.
There are actually 20 or more anti-gun and anti-ammo bills in the State Legislature right now, and many of them will pass. A coupld are confiscatory - that is, they outlaw possession of items completely, but offer no compensation for surrendering them to authorities. Of course, that constitutes an “Ex Post Facto” situation - making you a criminal if you don’t comply with a law that bans some activity you did before it was illegal, at least in my view. That is absolutely unconstitutional, not that anyone anywhere in government in America of the party that controls California, gives one hoot about the Constitution, which is rapidly becoming a worthless piece of paper.