This November, Californians will vote "yes" or "no" on Proposition 63, which would introduce more gun control regulations within the state.

If the proposition passes, it will require background checks to purchase ammunition and prohibit the possession of large-capacity magazines. Prop. 63 would also strengthen licensing requirements for those who sell ammunition and mandate that people who are prohibited from owning a gun must turn in firearms to local law enforcement. It would make it harder to purchase ammunition outside of California, require owners and dealers to quickly report a theft or loss and make stealing a gun a felony.

"The Safety for All Act will save lives by closing loopholes in order to prevent dangerous criminals, domestic abusers, and the dangerously mentally ill from getting and using deadly weapons," Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who created the proposition, said in a statement to Annenberg Media.

But Palmer Bailey, a firearm owner and manager of Guns Direct, thinks the proposition won't have the intended effect.

"Felons and criminals are not allowed to own firearms. They're not allowed to set foot into a gun store where ammunition is sold. They are already not allowed to have any ammunition," Bailey said.

Margot Bennett, the executive director of Women Against Gun Violence, said it will will help prevent people who aren't allowed to buy ammunition from having guns.

"No one law is going to prevent gun violence," Bennett said, "But it's a step towards preventing that kind of attack."

Bennett said states with stronger gun laws overall have fewer deaths by guns, which is why she believes Prop. 63 is important.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2014 there were 2,935 firearm deaths in California and 33,390 firearm deaths across the United States. The leading cause of death in California in 2014 was cancer, which took 58,412 lives in comparison.

Lou Salseda is a tactical combat instructor and former LAPD sergeant. In his experience, most of the firearms criminals have were obtained illegally.

"The bad guys are bad guys for a reason and they don't go in and lawfully purchase ammunition," Salseda explained.

Dr. David Schonfeld, who served on the Sandy Hook Advisory Board, is a developmental-behavioral pediatrician and director of the National Center for School Crisis and Bereavement. He said he supports the proposition because of the high-capacity magazine ban.

"The ready access to high-capacity magazines and to assault weapons that can fire those magazines does increase the fatalities and it has a very limited civilian need," Schonfeld said.

High-capacity magazines allow a shooter to fire more bullets in a short period of time.

"The issue is that the high-capacity assault weapons do allow a lot of people to be killed in a very short period of time, and quite honestly from what we've heard from testimony, minutes and even seconds make a big difference," Schonfeld said.

Shoji Hattori, a tactical combat instructor, said the magazine ban won't prevent heinous crimes.

"You can have as many rounds as you want, and you can reload as many times as you want," Hattori said.

Richard Grenell, the co-chair of Coalition for Civil Liberties, does not own a gun, but he opposes the proposition.

"California has the strictest gun laws in the entire United States. Another one is not going to help," Grenell said. "They have now gone to the point where they're looking at ammunition and it's a slippery slope that I think crosses the line and crosses my civil liberties."

The one aspect of Prop. 63 that Bailey supports is that it would make stealing a gun a felony punishable by up to three years in prison.

"I cannot come up with any conceivable excuse for stealing another person's firearm that would not involve some kind of ill intent," Bailey said. "It should absolutely be a felony."

For more on the details of Prop. 63, go here.

Reach Staff Reporter Lauren Day here.