The stupidity of limiting ammunition
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-04-2013, 10:01 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
I'm not here to argue for ammo bans, because ammo bans won't stop one spree killer anywhere. No ban will stop these people because they are so mentally unstable by the time they set out to do their deeds, they're going to do them one way or another. And frankly, if there were more people walking around armed, these people wouldn't be so inclined toward spree killings. I don't know what they would choose to do or how, but I do know that even if every adult was armed... these people would still do something destructive.

In any event... I came to address the indifference to guns. I was born and raised in Texas and I now live in Louisiana. There are only two things that can derail a conversation about sports in these two states... one is a naked woman and the other is someone pulling out a new gun and showing it off.

I don't know very many (hetero) men who are indifferent to naked women...

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 10:13 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(28-04-2013 09:57 PM)TheBlackKnight Wrote:  For the record. All gun owners are for background checks that keep guns away from crazies and crooks, but that is not all that that Toomey bill was.

No they aren't.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 11:29 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(28-04-2013 09:52 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 07:01 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I'd prefer they just enforce the laws that already exist.

In other words, whatever it is you're doing that doesn't work... just keep doing more of that. Wink

No, some of the current laws aren't enforced. They should be. It's not complicated.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 11:57 PM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
I for one am in favour of quickly and readily stockpiling ammunition like the Sandy hook shooter. I want an arsenal, and a means to use an arsenal whenever I want (just in case of zombies, or hitler, or zombie hitler). Just because I can. It's so crazy, it does a full 360 degrees back to sanity.

...insanity. Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes PoolBoyG's post
29-04-2013, 05:24 AM
Re: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
You still can't reply without making it personal. Either learn to stop making the debate an emotionally-charged one, or continue to talk to yourself. Being a prick is not lending you any credibility and further demonstrates your questions are rhetorical, as you've no interest in learning the opinions of others.

You're background sounds similar to mine with guns, but it wasn't my father who became more interested in guns, it was my older brother (10 years my senior). My mother's side of the family do not discuss it much, but I've seen some of them posting some pro-gun pictures and quotes on Facebook. I had an argument (a discussion as we are friends) with an officemate of mine about a year ago over guns. He was born and raised in central New York. Care to guess which side I was arguing for?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2013, 05:47 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
Most or all of the school and other multiple shootings didn't involve a large amount of ammunition, certainly not more than the limits people are bandying about.

What problem is solved by limiting ammunition purchases?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2013, 07:07 AM
Re: RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(28-04-2013 10:13 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 09:57 PM)TheBlackKnight Wrote:  For the record. All gun owners are for background checks that keep guns away from crazies and crooks, but that is not all that that Toomey bill was.

No they aren't.

OK, all LEGAL law abiding gun owners.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2013, 07:14 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(29-04-2013 05:47 AM)Chas Wrote:  Most or all of the school and other multiple shootings didn't involve a large amount of ammunition, certainly not more than the limits people are bandying about.

What problem is solved by limiting ammunition purchases?

1) It limits the capacity for someone to hole themselves up in their home and prevent capture (Waco)

2) It reduces the amount of damage that someone who does commit a mass shooting could do

3) It provides some measure of tracking on who buys ammunition as a regular user, and someone who buys it in bulk and appears to be storing it up.

4) It tracks someone who may have no history with guns, suddenly using a lot of ammunition at once (as if training themselves).

5) It cuts back on an industry that is pumping out substantial amounts of ammunition and is making a substantial amount of money, that appears to be entering the coffers of the NRA and then the coffers of the USA (senators).

6) If someone does commit a series of terrible acts, these types of trackings and limitations may help id them and then find them.



These are just some I thought of off of the top of my head. And I am no legislator, but I like Revenants idea alright.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2013, 08:36 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
I believe you're projecting your own disinterest in debate onto me. Not one question asked so far has been rhetorical.

(29-04-2013 07:14 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  1) It limits the capacity for someone to hole themselves up in their home and prevent capture (Waco)

Unlikely. Do you think that some guy in his basement will use up more than a couple hundred rounds before a sniper takes him out or the SWAT team comes in and flashbangs him? The guys at Waco didn't even get off many shots before all being killed. That's a naive argument.

Quote:2) It reduces the amount of damage that someone who does commit a mass shooting could do

Oh yes, because you can totally carry around 10,000 rounds of ammunition while committing a mass murder. That totally makes sense. It's not like Lanza was only carrying around 100 rounds or so...

Quote:3) It provides some measure of tracking on who buys ammunition as a regular user, and someone who buys it in bulk and appears to be storing it up.

Yes, and generates millions of false positives because buying in bulk is a common practice. And you won't be able to tell someone storing ammo vs. someone who just uses a lot. Not unless you plan on sitting at the range and counting bullets...

Quote:4) It tracks someone who may have no history with guns, suddenly using a lot of ammunition at once (as if training themselves).

Yes, like people who have become interested in self-defense, or people who have just gotten into guns as a hobby. Generating millions more false positives.

Quote:5) It cuts back on an industry that is pumping out substantial amounts of ammunition and is making a substantial amount of money, that appears to be entering the coffers of the NRA and then the coffers of the USA (senators).

So it's a handy way of quieting people whom you disagree with politically? How very machiavellian.

Quote:6) If someone does commit a series of terrible acts, these types of trackings and limitations may help id them and then find them.

If there were a "series of terrible acts" and it didn't immediately end in a deadly police shootout or a suicide, I doubt tracking by ammunition purchase would be very useful. You see, you've already set it up so as to throw flags on two or three million people every year, virtually all of whom will be law abiding citizens. It's a mass of useless information that is too large to sort through in time to catch a bad guy, and wouldn't even be useful in court, as it would be no more than circumstantial evidence.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2013, 08:37 AM
RE: The stupidity of limiting ammunition
(29-04-2013 07:07 AM)TheBlackKnight Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 10:13 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  No they aren't.

OK, all LEGAL law abiding gun owners.

Still no.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: