Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
102 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If ammunition were as regulated as Sudafed (Original Post) Scuba Dec 2012 OP
k&r... spanone Dec 2012 #1
It would be a damn good thing! In_The_Wind Dec 2012 #2
As I was providing my ID to buy Zertec D, I mused aloud for all to hear: indepat Dec 2012 #3
To LEGALLY buy an "assault rifle", one must comply with FBI procedures under 26 USC Chapter 53. nt jody Dec 2012 #7
Lordy, I didn't know that. That it is legal is an abomination, but one must realize such is peachy- indepat Dec 2012 #11
Been like that since 1934, long periods that we Democrats controlled government. nt jody Dec 2012 #14
That doesn't apply to any of guns used by Lanza, Stawicki, Holmes, Loughner, Zimmerman, and Hoyt Dec 2012 #27
... who all still had to bobclark86 Dec 2012 #81
Well, Bob, I hope you are more discerning when carrying your gun in public. I was replying to Jody's Hoyt Dec 2012 #84
I still can't believe we have to show ID to get sudafed. It just amazes me. nt Mojorabbit Dec 2012 #53
I also make snarky comments when handing over my ID.... Rockholm Dec 2012 #82
If sudafed were like ammunition... OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #4
Tahnks for the clarification RomneyLies Dec 2012 #23
LOL, absurd. OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #47
Then walk back your shit RomneyLies Dec 2012 #48
Make your own gunpowder? jberryhill Dec 2012 #54
OK, you've explained why sudafed in bulk is bad... Why is ammo in bulk bad? OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #56
You're going to have to learn to follow a discussion jberryhill Dec 2012 #57
Recap... OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #59
It isn't about stopping mass shootings or even individual ones... Coyote_Tan Jan 2013 #92
Point of info: you can't get Sudafed in large quantities, allrevvedup Dec 2012 #60
I agree, sudafed limitations are overly onerous. nt OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #93
K&R. Chorophyll Dec 2012 #5
The problem is establishing a legal limit. NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #6
Three hundred rounds to sight in a rifle? Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #9
sight in and practice shooting the rifle. NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #10
I think it would be cheaper if you just start buying meat at the local Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #12
That takes the fun out of it. It's a hobby/sport. NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #13
Welcome to the fraternity of America's most effective conservation groups: Hunters. Eleanors38 Dec 2012 #15
Welcome me to it too then. zabet Jan 2013 #89
Welcome, but are you responding to the right poster? Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #94
Yes... zabet Jan 2013 #98
He/she said "conservation groups"-not conservative n/t EX500rider Jan 2013 #99
my bad then.... zabet Jan 2013 #100
Nah, plan things well, and you can come in at under $2/lb. for venison. Eleanors38 Dec 2012 #17
I call BULLSHIT RomneyLies Dec 2012 #52
Yeah, they don't eat coyotes... bobclark86 Dec 2012 #79
Got data? I and all my friends who hunt eat their game... Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #95
A picture is worth a thousand data points RomneyLies Jan 2013 #96
So now it's TROPHY hunting exotics? Football & moving goal posts, 'tis the season. Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #101
Trophy hunting happens in the US RomneyLies Jan 2013 #102
Make sure you use the lightest grain bullet... Eleanors38 Dec 2012 #16
It was passed to me from family. NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #46
Make sure stock-to-action screws are tight, sight(s) are tight Eleanors38 Dec 2012 #74
I had some friends look at it for me before use. NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #75
If it took you that much to get "comfortable" sir pball Dec 2012 #66
I did get comfortable. I just had no rifle skills when starting. NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #67
Fair enough sir pball Dec 2012 #68
Understood. NutmegYankee Dec 2012 #69
Good man! sir pball Dec 2012 #71
Call bullshit on that crap. I'm a lifelong deer hunter. I've taken one at ~ 200 yards ... Scuba Dec 2012 #86
Long-range hunting isn't that new, sir pball Jan 2013 #91
I got 40 rounds of 6.5x55 Swedish for Christmas slackmaster Dec 2012 #8
So should cocaine and mj. nt madinmaryland Dec 2012 #18
Think 24th Amendment (and a few others). Jim Crow is a crappy precedent... Eleanors38 Dec 2012 #19
whats a reasonable amount of ammo. i fire around five hundred 40 cal a week in practice loli phabay Dec 2012 #20
100 rounds per month maximum RomneyLies Dec 2012 #22
Never in my life have I seen someone so clueless about firearms yet still claims former-republican Dec 2012 #24
Oh I understand all about weapons RomneyLies Dec 2012 #26
You know all about firearms? former-republican Dec 2012 #29
Look at the timing on the posts RomneyLies Dec 2012 #30
I guess anything can work in fantasy land former-republican Dec 2012 #35
That's what the pro-slavery people told Frederick Douglass. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #36
There's not going to be a law on limiting rounds for shooters former-republican Dec 2012 #44
Keep on hoping RomneyLies Dec 2012 #45
The reason people don't agree with you is because this law solves nothing Travis_0004 Dec 2012 #32
Same argument holds for Sudafed and Meth RomneyLies Dec 2012 #33
Tell that to the NINE meth labs popped bobclark86 Dec 2012 #80
doubt you will get your wish. if it looked like it i would just stock up loli phabay Dec 2012 #31
Gun nuttery knows no bounds, I guess RomneyLies Dec 2012 #34
no its called practice same as i practice my fly casting at the start of the season loli phabay Dec 2012 #37
I envision a day when no civilian may hold arms. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #38
well you cast your vote for it and ill cast my vote against it thats the way a democracy works loli phabay Dec 2012 #39
Yep, black people were 3/5 of a human being for more than four score and seven years RomneyLies Dec 2012 #40
okay no idea the relevance other than society changes but thats self evident loli phabay Dec 2012 #42
Enjoy the range for now. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #43
Good. Do you practice fly casting in your home? jberryhill Dec 2012 #58
dosent help me hunt meat or protect live stock though loli phabay Dec 2012 #61
Having linear discussion issues? jberryhill Dec 2012 #72
Per week per caliber, maybe. sir pball Dec 2012 #70
It would be a start. n/t RomneyLies Dec 2012 #21
People would make their own. lynne Dec 2012 #25
Okay, what do you have to buy to do that? jberryhill Dec 2012 #55
kick samsingh Dec 2012 #28
K & R !!! WillyT Dec 2012 #41
Did you know that ammo used to be registered? X_Digger Dec 2012 #49
Nyquil and Benedryl Sinus as well. lol. nt Jack Sprat Dec 2012 #50
Hell yah +10000000 AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #51
Right on! daschess1987 Dec 2012 #62
If you want to shoot a thousand rounds, do what they do in Switzerland mainer Dec 2012 #63
+1 jberryhill Dec 2012 #73
Some of us don't shoot at the range... Coyote_Tan Jan 2013 #97
Meth is worse since regulating Sudafed obamanut2012 Dec 2012 #64
We've added drain cleaner and caustic chemicals to our ID/signature required list Ibisa Dec 2012 #77
I had to provide proof of age MissMillie Dec 2012 #65
Hey. We DO treat allergy sufferers like Sex Offenders, but we licked that meth problem! Romulox Dec 2012 #76
I don't have a problem with any of that except a "legal limit". geckosfeet Dec 2012 #78
You're right. Much cleaner to just repeal the 2A and ban all sales... Scuba Dec 2012 #83
Good luck with that. geckosfeet Dec 2012 #85
K & R Care Acutely Jan 2013 #87
I don't think sudafrd is protected by the constitution rl6214 Jan 2013 #88
I can only take 1 sudafed at a time. I can't even imagine hughee99 Jan 2013 #90

indepat

(20,899 posts)
3. As I was providing my ID to buy Zertec D, I mused aloud for all to hear:
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:17 PM
Dec 2012

"bet it is easier to buy an assault rifle with a 30-round magazine than to buy a little Zertec D." What a fucked-up RW nation we are.

 

jody

(26,624 posts)
7. To LEGALLY buy an "assault rifle", one must comply with FBI procedures under 26 USC Chapter 53. nt
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:21 PM
Dec 2012

indepat

(20,899 posts)
11. Lordy, I didn't know that. That it is legal is an abomination, but one must realize such is peachy-
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:47 PM
Dec 2012

keen in a RW-dominated society.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
27. That doesn't apply to any of guns used by Lanza, Stawicki, Holmes, Loughner, Zimmerman, and
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:59 PM
Dec 2012

others.

NRA and gun culture have confused the issue to keep the pipeline open to these lethal weapons.

Semi-autos, including handguns, should be clearly categorized as assault weapons, because that is exactly what they are, how they are marketed, and primarily why the gun cultists scarf them up.

bobclark86

(1,415 posts)
81. ... who all still had to
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:12 PM
Dec 2012

file a 4473 with an FFL and pass a background check. Lanza stole his. The rest legally bought their guns and jumped through all the hoops.

Did you have to go through a federal background check to get your Zyrtec? No? Then your comment was incorrect.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
84. Well, Bob, I hope you are more discerning when carrying your gun in public. I was replying to Jody's
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:20 PM
Dec 2012

crud about auto/machine guns.

Rockholm

(4,628 posts)
82. I also make snarky comments when handing over my ID....
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:15 PM
Dec 2012

I tell the folks at CVS that they are crimping my meth production. I like your comment much better. I might have to start using it.

 

OneTenthofOnePercent

(6,268 posts)
4. If sudafed were like ammunition...
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:18 PM
Dec 2012

You could just make your own sudafed at home for 75% of the cost of store bought product.

 

OneTenthofOnePercent

(6,268 posts)
47. LOL, absurd.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:53 PM
Dec 2012

You realize, that even under a STRICT blackpowder/musket/muzzleloader interpretation of the Second Amendment, that's less than 2 shots worth of powder for a tyypical muzzleloader/flintlock?

Go ahead, I support your proposal 100%... all the way through the supreme court and into the trashcan.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
48. Then walk back your shit
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:57 PM
Dec 2012

Those who reload are the least of my concerns, but if you raise the bullshit, then there's no choice but to get fucking HARSH on gunpowder instead of rounds.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
54. Make your own gunpowder?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:01 AM
Dec 2012

Do you machine your own brass? You can only reuse it so many times?

Make your own primers? Extrude your own plastic shell tubing?

You know WHY there are hassles getting Sudafed?

It's not about the Sudafed - it's about people making other stuff at home.

What you are saying is that we can't clamp down on meth, because people can make it at home.

Yes, they can.

That's why it is a hassle getting Sudafed in large quantities.

 

OneTenthofOnePercent

(6,268 posts)
56. OK, you've explained why sudafed in bulk is bad... Why is ammo in bulk bad?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:35 AM
Dec 2012

It took less than $30 worth of ammo to tear apart sandy hill. Regulating ammunition to a limited numerical quantity will not deter a single shooting, let alone mass shooting. A criminal only needs a few bullets to gin up the courage to go rob and shoot someone. A deranged ex only needs one or two bullets to go exact revenge on their former spouse or lover.

Why pursue a ban on amount of ammunition? Seems to me that no matter how much public compliance ammo limitation bans could ever be... it wouldn't stop anything.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
57. You're going to have to learn to follow a discussion
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:42 AM
Dec 2012

The OP proposes controls on the sale of ammunition.

You are among two people who popped up to explain that people make their own, thus bypassing controls on ammunition and therefore making such controls impossible. This objection is, of course, nonsense, because the sale of reloading supplies can themselves be controlled.

I have no comment or opinion on the OP's proposal to control ammunition sales. My response is to the error being made in the assertion that reloading somehow renders such controls impossible.

 

OneTenthofOnePercent

(6,268 posts)
59. Recap...
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:26 AM
Dec 2012

The OP, in a nutshell, said "amount of ammunition purchased needs controlled like pseudophedrine". I said, "then people will just MAKE ammo". To which the OP responded with some silly arbitrary amount of ammo precursor restriction (100grn powder). I responded by pointed out how silly and unconstitutional such an act would be (restricting reloading supplies to one or two shots, lol). And then you started talking about possible limitation on reloading suplies... ?!?

To respond more accurately to your first comment in the subthread; Yes, you can make your own single-based smokeless powder (you'll need a nitrating-acid solution and cellulose). Making a simple black powder mixture is even easier. Lead Styphnate primer filling is a bit trickier, but phosphorus and/or chlorate based priming substitutes exist. All of these ingredients are over the counter. Primer caps/anvils can be reused several times... or you could just stock up on 10,000 primers for like $150. Brass for pistols can be used dozens of times - pretty much shoot it till you lose it. Rifle Brass probably 5-10 times before stress rupture. Lead can be easily melted from tire weights and cast/swaged into bullets.
Firearms and ammo are like 200 year old technology... it's pretty basic science. Lots of people reload.

Nevertheless, a more apt comparison to making your own ammo would be making your own pseudophedrine at home. Also possible at home and not all that difficult, just uncommon. Junkies just buy the psuedofed instead because its WAY easier than synthesizing.

But I digress. The OP compared BUYING pseudophedrine to BUYING ammo. It had nothing to do with the restriction of ammo or pseudophedrine preparation reagents/materials. Perhaps it is you who should stay on topic.

 

Coyote_Tan

(194 posts)
92. It isn't about stopping mass shootings or even individual ones...
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 04:15 PM
Jan 2013

It's just an opportunity to use emotion to bypass logic to enact gun control and eventual removal.

 

allrevvedup

(408 posts)
60. Point of info: you can't get Sudafed in large quantities,
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:32 AM
Dec 2012

only small quantities, and that goes for related products and generics. It's a pain in the ass if you suffer from hay fever and live where trees, grass and weeds grow in abundance all year round.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
6. The problem is establishing a legal limit.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:20 PM
Dec 2012

Target practice consumes a lot of rounds. Just sighting a hunting rifle and getting proficient in aiming it can eat up 300 rounds for a season. And if you just want to target shoot, you can consume a lot more.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
10. sight in and practice shooting the rifle.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:46 PM
Dec 2012

It took some time to get used to a .30-06 and to bring it back onto target after loading the next round. I spent 200 just developing the right feel for the thing. It kicks like hell.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
13. That takes the fun out of it. It's a hobby/sport.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:54 PM
Dec 2012

I just got into hunting this year. My other hobby is pistol target shooting, which I'm very good at. But pistol competition is nothing like hunting.

zabet

(6,793 posts)
89. Welcome me to it too then.
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 01:36 AM
Jan 2013

I hunt to eat on a neighbors chunk of land. With what comes out of my SS check barely covers my meds and utilities. I hunt to put meat on my table and in my freezer. The venison I processed and pachaged this season will provide nicely to my diner table and abate much of the food costs since I also have a large garden every year.

Your broad brush splatters paint on places it shouldn't. Registered Democratic at 18 and have voted that way since. Hunting so I can eat does not make me a freaking Republican....it just shows how narrow-minded your point of view is.

zabet

(6,793 posts)
98. Yes...
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 11:13 PM
Jan 2013

You stated to another poster about hunters = conservatives and 'welcomed them to that group'.....so...I said add me to it too. Because claiming all hunters are republicans or conservatives is perpetuating a fallacy to support yyour beliefs and opinions. Lot of registered, active and voting Democratic huners where I live. Heck they even have the gall to ride around during hunting season with their gun in a rack in the cabs of their trucks.
Of course the previous sentence was facetious sarcasm...since I evidently have to clarify every word I post.

zabet

(6,793 posts)
100. my bad then....
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:17 AM
Jan 2013

My apologies. Should not read so fast on tiny mobile screen. Still, I was mistaken.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
17. Nah, plan things well, and you can come in at under $2/lb. for venison.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:26 PM
Dec 2012

The key is to be a bit of a loud mouth at parties and talk up hunting. Some will drift away like you broke wind, but there are always some folks who are into the honest way to kill and eat (we ALL do that). From there, you might get invited. There's $2,000+ in expenses eliminated right off the bat.

bobclark86

(1,415 posts)
79. Yeah, they don't eat coyotes...
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:06 PM
Dec 2012

which are stringy and nasty, but are usually shot for other reasons (like, getting in the henhouse, or finding a rabid one in your barn like I did in high school). Hunters who suck and lose their animals after they shoot them also obviously don't eat them.

Deer, on the other hand, are generally eaten, as are ducks, squirrels, pheasants, grouse, feral pigs and even bear.

Then there's the charitable donations: Venison Donation Coalition.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
95. Got data? I and all my friends who hunt eat their game...
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 07:58 PM
Jan 2013

There are some hunters who do not eat such animals as coyotes, but kill them because of deprivation, but these hunters hardly constitute the bulk of hunters.

I get 2 deer a yr, and plan on getting 2 next yr. Let me know, and I'll see if I can arrange to send you some venison.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
101. So now it's TROPHY hunting exotics? Football & moving goal posts, 'tis the season.
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 10:29 AM
Jan 2013

My "trophies" are whitetail deer and the occasional turkey, which I consume and even gift out to some veggie restaurant workers. Next you'll be posting pics of blue whales!

'Shoulda had some of my venison chili on new years eve.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
102. Trophy hunting happens in the US
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 11:26 AM
Jan 2013

You also have wolf hunting.

The person moving goal posts is YOU. The statement was not ALL hunters eat what they kill. I have PROVED that point and now you want to move the goal posts.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
16. Make sure you use the lightest grain bullet...
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:22 PM
Dec 2012

Also, practicing with a .22 & cheap ammo will let you bust the flinching problem. .30-06s do boot you. I use a .270; same can, but 130 grain bullet. Kick is not too shabby. But yours is a great hunting round.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
46. It was passed to me from family.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:03 PM
Dec 2012

The flinching problem was the hard part to break. Also, to re-sight precisely after each reload (bolt action).

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
74. Make sure stock-to-action screws are tight, sight(s) are tight
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:44 PM
Dec 2012

including mounts (if you have a scope). An old scope may be defect. internally. Consider a shock-absorbing boot, and recoil-reducing ammo (Remington has a wide selection). And make sure the rifle's dimensions fit you, and your posture is good. Numerous used books on these subjects.

Man! The size of deer in NY!

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
75. I had some friends look at it for me before use.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:54 PM
Dec 2012

My expertise has been pistol competition, so it was a new learning curve for rifles.

sir pball

(4,743 posts)
66. If it took you that much to get "comfortable"
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:16 AM
Dec 2012

I'd say you should seriously think about trading it in on a .243, sentimental value be damned...it took me <100 to get into a steady-fire rhythm with a .300 Magnum. Then again I was already a serious shooter and knew what to expect, but still. That level of exposure tells me you still probably aren't entirely comfortable with the recoil and will never be - that's not a bad thing, '06 can be a pretty solid thump. If you haven't actually taken game with it yet, you might unexpectedly flinch and miss at best, take something awful like a gutshot at worst. Food for thought..

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
67. I did get comfortable. I just had no rifle skills when starting.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:37 AM
Dec 2012

Some fellow hunter friends helped me get very proficient with it.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
69. Understood.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:58 AM
Dec 2012

A clean kill was important to me. That's why I really practiced until I had it down and could repeatedly hold a tight pattern at 200 Yards.

sir pball

(4,743 posts)
71. Good man!
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:02 PM
Dec 2012

(or woman!) I've seen far too many yahoo "hunters" that think "I gots me a TWENTY FOUR POWER SCOPE! I can hits a deer at a MILE!"...I literally knew a guy who had never hunted before, wanted to come along one day with his "new rifle"...shows up with a freakin .338 Win Mag! For whitetail in CT! Thankfully he was smart enough that we were able to talk him down. Firing a full-bore round helped, too

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
86. Call bullshit on that crap. I'm a lifelong deer hunter. I've taken one at ~ 200 yards ...
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:33 PM
Dec 2012

... and several dozen at 50 yards or less, sometimes way less.

There is no reason to try to take game at ultra-long ranges, and trying to do so is both foolish and contrary to the principles of fair chase/clean kill.

sir pball

(4,743 posts)
91. Long-range hunting isn't that new,
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 04:10 PM
Jan 2013

The 270 was developed in the '20s for elk out West at 400+ yards. The problem I'm seeing is the whole "tacticool" movement spillng over even into "traditional" hunting, yahoos running around with accurized rifles and pricey glass thinking that alone will give them the skill to take game at distance. Just because your rifle can shoot 1/3" doesn't mean you can shoot 1/3".

Most of my deer have been inside of 50 yards as well, but I have taken one at a hair over 300 yards - at my girlfriend's dad's farm in north Louisiana, on a clear day, shooting off the rest in the blind, across a sorghum field that showed the wind perfectly, with a heavy-barreled 300 Magnum, mil-dot scope, rangefinder, and handloads of which I knew exact ballistics. And at the time I lived in upstate NY where I didn't need obscenely expensive licenses to own a bolt-action rifle and could get to a range every weekend, ringing the gongs at 250 yards. In other words, a good bit of skill and the luck for excellent conditions came together for a responsible shot. I haven't fired a round in almost a year, no way would I try that again without some serious practice

Point being, it's perfectly reasonable and ethical to take game at range IF one is willing to spend the time and money to become a competent marksman first - but most guys I know who go for whitetails aren't really into shooting as a sport and have no business taking a shot at more than 100 yards, if that. At least the vast majority of them realize this.

 

loli phabay

(5,580 posts)
20. whats a reasonable amount of ammo. i fire around five hundred 40 cal a week in practice
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:33 PM
Dec 2012

Then perhaps another five hundred in 5.56 a month on my rifles then a lots of slugs and buckshot as well. Not to mention. 22 around the yard. I probuably shoot more than most but i know competitive shooters who dwarf me.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
22. 100 rounds per month maximum
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:37 PM
Dec 2012

No more except with increasing taxes on each round and increasing scrutiny on each purchase.

 

former-republican

(2,163 posts)
24. Never in my life have I seen someone so clueless about firearms yet still claims
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:47 PM
Dec 2012

he use to hunt and shoot guns.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
26. Oh I understand all about weapons
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:53 PM
Dec 2012

I'd rather see you have to jump through so many hoops to get your 500 rounds per month it makes you pissed off and takes forever than see 20 dead kids from morons who want AR-15s.

I never needed more than one round to take down any deer.

I never needed more than ten rounds to site in any deer season.

Open sites, Ruger .30-06.

 

former-republican

(2,163 posts)
29. You know all about firearms?
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:04 PM
Dec 2012

You said max you should be able to buy is 100 grains of powder a month

How many grains of powder is in 1 round of 30-06 ?

Then you said the max you should be able to buy of rounds is 100 a month.

I don't think you know as much as you think you know.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
30. Look at the timing on the posts
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:06 PM
Dec 2012

Perfectly willing to go 100 rounds per month max until the "reload" argument was raised. the vast majority (over 99.999% in my view) of those who would reload are of no concern to me because they are far more likely to be responsible than most others. But it HAD to be brought up.

Once the gun huggers push back, my deal becomes worse, thus 100 grains per month instead of 100 rounds per month regardless.

Want to try for 50 grains per month?

On edit: Look to my first post in this thread where I stated it would be a start, which is all it would be. We need HARSH gun laws. Hoipefully we can someday repeal the second amendment though I know it will not happen in my lifetime just as the 14th amendment didn't happen in the lifetimes of so many abolitionists.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
36. That's what the pro-slavery people told Frederick Douglass.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:16 PM
Dec 2012

One day the second amendment will be repealed. Not in my lifetime, but one day.

It serves no purpose whatsoever in a modern world other than to facilitate mass murder.

 

former-republican

(2,163 posts)
44. There's not going to be a law on limiting rounds for shooters
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:24 PM
Dec 2012

As long as there's hunting and target shooting in the world it's going to stay as it is.

If the world changes to the point where there's no crime , no hunting , no violence of any sort.

Then you might see it , by then we will be colonizing other planets.
And smokeless powder firearms will be something people might see in museums.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
45. Keep on hoping
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:25 PM
Dec 2012

You are on the wrong side of history.

One day, it will change, with any luck in YOUR lifetime.

My lifetime is so close to an end and I've already seen the first African American president. I hold no hopes of seeing the change with these damned guns in my lifetime, but I will do EVERYTHING I can in the time I have left to make sure YOU see it in YOUR lifetime.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
32. The reason people don't agree with you is because this law solves nothing
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:10 PM
Dec 2012

Even if your law worked, it would only take 2 months to have 200 rounds. In Virginia Tech, 174 rounds were fired, so if somebody wanted to go on a mass shooting, they could do it in 31 days. (In VT, most of the mags also only held 10 rounds).

Most other mass shootings less than 100 rounds are fired, so this law accomplishes nothing. Plus, its not that unusal for people to keep extra ammo on hand. I have about 300 rounds of 9mm in my safe, simply so I don't have to buy ammo before I go to the shooting range.

You are free to suggest stupid laws, but don't get upset when somebody says they are stupid.

bobclark86

(1,415 posts)
80. Tell that to the NINE meth labs popped
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:10 PM
Dec 2012

this year in my very rural county. Oh, and the busts didn't even scratch the surface.

 

loli phabay

(5,580 posts)
31. doubt you will get your wish. if it looked like it i would just stock up
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:09 PM
Dec 2012

Already got a couple of years worth set by as it is.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
38. I envision a day when no civilian may hold arms.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:17 PM
Dec 2012

Just as Frederick Douglass envisioned a day whe no man would own another man.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
40. Yep, black people were 3/5 of a human being for more than four score and seven years
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:20 PM
Dec 2012

I know for a fact it won't happen in my lifetime, but it WILL happen.

 

loli phabay

(5,580 posts)
42. okay no idea the relevance other than society changes but thats self evident
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:23 PM
Dec 2012

I think its more likely in the future we will all have phasers but in the meantime i will keep going to the range.

 

RomneyLies

(3,333 posts)
43. Enjoy the range for now.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:24 PM
Dec 2012

My hope is that it will be illegal in YOUR lifetime.

Mine is too close to an end for the hope that it will happen before the ending.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
58. Good. Do you practice fly casting in your home?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:14 AM
Dec 2012

Tell you what... You can store and use an unlimited amount of ammunition in your locker at the range (or maintain an account with the range for fungible ammunition).

You can also buy and consume as much as you want... At the range.

How's about them apples?
 

loli phabay

(5,580 posts)
61. dosent help me hunt meat or protect live stock though
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 05:40 AM
Dec 2012

I think i will vote and work to be able to keep my firearms and you can can work on getting them off of knownncriminals first.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
72. Having linear discussion issues?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:24 PM
Dec 2012

The objections noted this far are about practice, sighting in, etc. If you actually follow a discussion and can think about more than one thing at a time, then it would occur to you that having access to an unlimited supply in one place, does not imply or require zero access in another place.

You do not need 500,000 rounds in your house, and you are not going to persuade me that you need 500,000 rounds in your house.

Of course, you would not accept a limit of 500,000 rounds in your house, since your point is that you need an infinite supply at home.

sir pball

(4,743 posts)
70. Per week per caliber, maybe.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:59 AM
Dec 2012

When I carry, I make it a point to fire at least 100 rounds a week in practice. Anything less should be criminally irresponsible. Seriously - I'm a proponent of mandatory practice sessions signed off by the rangemaster for CCW holders.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
55. Okay, what do you have to buy to do that?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:04 AM
Dec 2012

Because the restrictions on Sudafed are not about Sudafed. They are about what people make at home out of it.

Who makes their own gunpowder? Primers? Brass? Shells?

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
49. Did you know that ammo used to be registered?
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:57 PM
Dec 2012

From 1968 to 1986, dealers kept a 'bound book' of every bullet sold.

The head of the ATF had this to say about it..

"The Bureau and the Treasury Department have recognized that recordkeeping requirements for ammunition have no substantial law enforcement value."

http://harrislawoffice.com/content/areas_of_practice/federal_firearms/legislative_history/FOPA%20House%20Report%2099-495.pdf

mainer

(12,022 posts)
63. If you want to shoot a thousand rounds, do what they do in Switzerland
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 09:17 AM
Dec 2012

go to the gun range, where they'll issue you the ammo for target shooting. We can make it no limits, as long as it's used right there.

 

Coyote_Tan

(194 posts)
97. Some of us don't shoot at the range...
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 08:49 PM
Jan 2013

We have this nifty place called "the Nevada Desert" and thus there is no range mommy or daddy to pass out rounds.

obamanut2012

(26,080 posts)
64. Meth is worse since regulating Sudafed
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 09:33 AM
Dec 2012

And requiring law-abiding citizens to show ID to buy a LEGAL product.

Ingredients are brought in illegally through Mexico, mainly into NM and Utah, where they get distributed throughout the US.

Sudafed isn't a good analogy to use, because it hasn't stopped the product from the hands of drug makers and narcotics, only made it more difficult for law-abiding allergy sufferers to get. Including me.

I think it is ridiculous we have to wait in line and have our ID approved and sales entered into a national database to buy NON SCRIPT allergy meds.

Ibisa

(9 posts)
77. We've added drain cleaner and caustic chemicals to our ID/signature required list
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:59 PM
Dec 2012

They added more red tape for household stuff in IL. Seriously, this has got to stop at some point. Am I going to need a government escort everywhere I go? It is starting to look like it.

Romulox

(25,960 posts)
76. Hey. We DO treat allergy sufferers like Sex Offenders, but we licked that meth problem!
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:59 PM
Dec 2012

Oh, wait, no we didn't. We didn't even make a dent. :damn:

geckosfeet

(9,644 posts)
78. I don't have a problem with any of that except a "legal limit".
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:02 PM
Dec 2012

Who gets to decide? What about reloading supplies and equipment?

Also - what criteria do authorities use to decide "when appropriate". And don't kid yourself. It will be FBI and CIA doing the bulk of the investigating. This would have to be a federal database. Possibly restricting access to local authorities. On second thought, I am not so sure that this is a good idea.

That's the problem with simplistic sloganeering - it looks good at first glance, but when you actually think about it for longer than a second the holes start appearing.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
83. You're right. Much cleaner to just repeal the 2A and ban all sales...
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:17 PM
Dec 2012

Which is exactly what we're going to get if the NRA and other gun owners remain completely intransigent on trying to rein in the gun deaths in this country. The backlash will go far beyond what is reasonable and necessary.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
90. I can only take 1 sudafed at a time. I can't even imagine
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 01:48 AM
Jan 2013

how long it would have taken my grandfather to teach me to shoot (accurately) if we went to the range, fired one bullet each day, and went home.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If ammunition were as reg...