Operation Sudafed: A new approach to ammo control

[KamaAina]

In an FB discussion last night, someone pointed out that, thanks to Tim McVeigh, if you purchase a large quantity of fertilizer, you will be tracked. I chimed in with, thanks to meth heads, if you purchase a large quantity of allergy medicine, you will be tracked. And yet these people purchased a large amount of ammo, and were not tracked.

[valerief]

1. But, but, but the deficit! nt

[Buzz Clik]

2. Every knuckledragging, paranoid jackass in the US has a bazillion rounds of ammunition.

[Fast Walker 52]

5. how stable is it?

[Buzz Clik]

6. What does it smell like when a mole is burning?

?w=640

[jeff47]

9. That's ok, we're good at tracking lots of people.

Well, when we want to be.

[Buzz Clik]

10. Doesn't sound very preventative. But, it's a start.

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. The NRA does not want ammuition tracked.

And their sycophantic money recipients bowed down and said, yes sir.

[Ikonoklast]

4. Tracking ammunition purchases would be a waste of time.

What exactly could be done with this information?

Sport shooters routinely purchase hundreds if not thousands of rounds at a time. The database would be next to useless in predicting criminal behavior.

Just as tracking anhydrous ammonia purchases does nothing to keep anyone safer, but it certainly does make things more difficult for farmers.

And tracking pseudoephedrine purchases just opened up the market to Mexican cartels, where the vast majority of manufactured meth now come from, is far more easily available, and cheaper for addicts to purchase.


And as far as tracking innocent individual's purchases because a microscopic percentage commit a crime is how we got to now living in a surveillance state.

[flamin lib]

7. Always an excuse, always a justification, always a distraction.

No, it doesn't make things more difficult for farmers. A simple registration and you're good to go. But if you don't own a farm???????? Or have a business that services farmers?

Buy 5,000 rounds of .223 green tip and a simple registration as a member of a shooting club and you're good to go. What? No membership to a shooting club or history of target shooting? Maybe you're headed to a movie theater in Colorado or a holiday party at the office.

The fucking projections get so tiring . . .

[Ikonoklast]

8. And this would predict/prevent criminal behavior how, exactly?

Please explain.

[flamin lib]

11. No, you show me how it won't predict or prevent criminal behaviour.

I just put the onus on you. If you order 5-10-15 thousand rounds it's a simple thing to show some reason for doing so.

I've already shown that fertilizer orders aren't a hardship and that justifying large amounts of ammunition and explosives aren't a hardship so YOU show ME that ordering enough ammunition to fill the needs of most police departments shouldn't be reason for scrutiny.

[MohRokTah]

12. No, you've demanded he prove a negative which is a fallacious requirement.

Nobody can prove a negative.

[flamin lib]

14. Didn't ask to prove a negative.

Asked to show me why ordering enough ammunition to supply a small police force isn't reason for scrutiny.

It isn't a hardship for farmers to prove that they are farmers. It isn't a hardship to prove that your shooting hobby is legitimate.

Now I ask that someone show me a reason that ordering thousands of rounds of ammunition with no prior history or legitimate reason to do so is not a reason for scrutiny.

[MohRokTah]

15. "No, you show me how it won't predict or prevent criminal behaviour."

That is the very DEFINITION of demanding a negative be proved.

[Ikonoklast]

13. Because it is currently done by thousands of people every day in this nation who never commit any

crime at all.

[MohRokTah]

16. 5000 round cases of ammunition are quite commonly purchased.

It's the Costco equation. It costs less to buy a massive amount that it does to buy a few boxes in many cases.

[flamin lib]

18. I'm sorry but most people believe that a bulk pack of toilet tissue is a bit

different from 5000 rounds of ammunition.

By that reasoning, buying 5000 pounds of black powder is the same as buying a 12 pack of mouthwash.

Doesn't hold up.

[MohRokTah]

19. All commodities.

This is how pricing works with any commodity and like it or not, ammunition is just another commodity.

[flamin lib]

23. Ammunition, explosives and even fertilizer are NOT just another

commodity.

You can't be serious putting toilet tissue in the same category as ammunition. Really? Can you hear the rest of the internet laughing? Are you not just a little embarrassed at that?

If not I guess this discussion is over.

[MohRokTah]

25. Actually, everything you named are just commodities.

All commodities are regulated to some degree. Yes, even toilet paper.

[Ikonoklast]

33. People who don't shoot can't understand that purchasing that many rounds of any caliber is nothing.

And is done every day by literally thousands of people, none of whom have ever broken any law but must be punished in some way because they are involved in something someone else doesn't like.


Many of whom are Democrats.

[flamin lib]

17. Yes, and by some who do commit crimes.

Sandy Hook
Virginia Tech
Aurora CO
Columbine

Why is it such an onerous burden to provide name, address and identification to buy enough ammunition to supply a small police force?

Does it really come down to inconvenience? If it has to do with guns even a small inconvenience is too much to figure out who is a militiaman or someone bent on really bad deeds?

Does the 2nd amendment rise to the level of minor inconvenience?

[MohRokTah]

20. In most places you are required to provide a name, address, and identification to buy any amoount of

ammunition. Even just a box of 50 rounds.

Same applies to smokeless powder if you are reloading.

[flamin lib]

21. Funny but the Aurora shooter didn't have to provide any of that to buy

his ammo, body armor or tactical gear.

Did it all over the internet with a credit card and a click of the mouse.

If we are in agreement that such purchases should, at the minimum, require ID and in the case of massive purchases some further evidence of non criminal intent (shooting club, police practice ammo, preparation for a major competition, Olympic preparation) then the discussion is over. We're both good with that.

But I guess if we aren't in agreement that such large purchases of lethal ordinance (pick your own level of scrutiny) then I guess the conversation is also over.

[MohRokTah]

22. I disagree with requiring some evidence of need for large purchases.

Ammunition is a commodity and commodities always come with lower unit prices for volume purchases.

If I want to purchase 10,000 rounds of 9mm pistol ammo, there should be nothing stopping me from doing so because it will come with an incredibly low unit price, and last months at a range.

[flamin lib]

24. Well, okay, we disagree. nt

[Ikonoklast]

27. And once again, explain how this would change one thing.

What would keeping track of bulk purchases stop?

[flamin lib]

30. It would discourage buying thousands or rounds of ammo for nefarious reasons

if they knew that someone might look into their backgrounds.

Oh! I see it coming now! Then they'd just buy ammo 20 rounds at a time!

Okay I'm good with background checks on 20 rounds. Particularly if 20 round boxes are bought at 10 different stores day after day after day. It's called a pattern of behaviour that might indicate intent. On the other hand if you have some legitimate reason to buy 5000 rounds of ammunition (or 28 AR15s at a time) just pony up and get a waiver.

But if that was a deterrent they's just use toilet tissue! Yeah, that's the ticket! Outlaw toilet tissue!

Are you beginning to see so silly this sounds? If not just go back into your armory and hug a gun.

[Ikonoklast]

35. Whole field full of Straw Men.

It will still stop exactly *zero* criminals from doing anything.

[flamin lib]

37. *sigh* So it comes down the biggest straw man of all.

Nothing can be done. It is all in vane. It's already against the law. Only criminals will have guns.

That, Ikon, is the true straw man.

[Ikonoklast]

38. None of which I either said or implied.

You never answered my first question to begin with, I assume you you trust your feelings over any factual argument.

What crime would your proposed rule stop from happening?

[flamin lib]

40. I will let others decide what you implied.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7415965

[Waldorf]

28. I will give you a simple thing to show reason.

Buying in bulk saves money. Not only in the actual product but you have just one shipping fee.

I reload and do the same thing on smokeless powder/primers. Paying a hazmat fee of 27.50 for one 1lb container of powder is a waste of money. Paying a hazmet of 27.50 for 8lbs or more makes more sense. Buying in bulk saves money.

[flamin lib]

31. Nobody said you can't buy in bulk. Just submit to a background check and

provide some reason to buy in such huge bulk quantities. Belong to a shooting club? Preparing for the Olympics? Supplying the local shooting club on your personal credit card? Want to save money and here's my ID and address? It's all good.

Just out of curiosity, if you bought 50 or 100 pounds of black powder would it raise any questions? If so do you have a problem with that? If not we're just haggling over quantities.

[Waldorf]

34. I would say saving money is a good enough reason. When you order online a credit card is required,

it can't be shipped to a PO box, its shipped by UPS and needs to be signed for.

Buying that much at a gunshop I have no idea how they would react. Sell it all or ask questions. A few years back in the Ft. Hood area somebody came in to buy powder. He asked the shop owner some weird question about how to use it so he didn't sell it. Notified the police, they went to investigate and found out the guy was intending to make pipe bombs.

[flamin lib]

39. Ya' know you just hit the nail on the head.

It boils down to the guy at the counter. According to the BATF&E (most people call it the ATF but I've learned over the decades that one must be ABSOLUTELY accurate to the most minute detail if discussing guns and such) 90% of guns from crime scenes tracked back to FFLs come from 5% of dealers.

This tells me that 95% of sellers ask questions, size up potential buyers and screen for people that have no business with a gun even if they can pass a background check. Regardless of the reason, be it that this person knows nothing about guns and shows a lack of muzzle awareness or that a guy with lots of gang tattoos is standing next to the one looking at guns, there are tell tales that say "don't sell this gun". Like selling beer at a convenience store. The buyer appears to be intoxicated or there's a couple of teenagers hanging around the door. Don't sell the beer.

It also tells me that the 5% attract straw buyers and that sort like a magnet. You know, the "it fell off the truck" sale or it got stolen from inventory sale.

If all the dealers did the right thing a lot of this discussion would be moot. But they don't. I don't know if it's because they reallllllllllly need that next sale or if they just believe that guns are God given right but some just don't seem to be inclined to give a shit. Then there's the guy you meet in a parking lot after dark who looks over his shoulder a lot.

So the question comes up,"How do we make them give a shit?" One way is with limits and associated checks. Another way is with https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr3853

It gives the AG and BATF&E (can't forget the &E!) authority to go inventory that 5% of dealers who show up on the bad apple list and put them under the magnifying glass. That makes them scrutinize their customer base and do the right thing, like the guy who called about the customer who was going to build pipe bombs.

But https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr3853 isn't going anywhere because, well, gunz.

But all that being so some of us want to do the right thing and try to find ways to curb gun violence. In my case it's because I like guns. Own a lot of them.

And it's because I sat through 9 hours of Sandy Hook live with a three year old in my lap and a first grader at a school a few blocks away.

[deathrind]

29. So true...

But here is one thing tracking ammo would do.

It would allow authorities to know if someone is buying thousands of rounds of ammo.

As I have said before. The 2nd says nothing about ammo so regulating it does nothing to "infringe" the right to "bear arms" so there would be no constitutional conflict in doing so.

[hack89]

42. Except buying ammo in bulk is a common thing

most gun owners do it to save money. So it is not an indication of anything bad.

[mwrguy]

26. Not thank to meth heads, thanks to drug warriors

[MosheFeingold]

32. Feds are drowning in useless information

And I am not sure this would help.

I used to buy pallets of .22 long rifle ammo (500,000 rounds!) for a Jewish summer camp, so the kids could do plinking with 1-shot .22s and demystify guns. Each kid shot 500 over the course of 6 weeks.

My grand son is a sporting clay guy and goes through 200 shotgun shells most weekends in the summer, just for himself, not to mention 200 for each client he brings with him. He buys in bulk.

And yes, there are lots of preppers and the like sticking 1,000s of rounds in their crawlspaces. Weird, but generally harmless.

And something like ~150,000,000 people in the USA (from high 30% to 50% of households depending on who is asking) own firearms. The overwhelming majority of them are law abiding, normal, people.

If you take the average of 1 mass killing (4 or more people murdered) per two weeks* or 26 per year, that's 1.73333333e-7 of the gun owners, it would create a massive, massive, database of basically nothing.

You'd be wasting a lot of time and resources to create a bunch of false leads.

* http://www.gannett-cdn.com/GDContent/mass-killings/index.html#frequency

The political capital expended to get something like that passed would be high, too.

In short, it's a noble idea, but there are better, less expensive and less controversial ways to stop this.

[Lee-Lee]

36. Another person advocating ideas that have already proven failures

Ammo sales background checks and tracking were part of the NY SAFE act.

NY spent millions of dollars over the following years trying to make that work. Just a few months ago they gave up saying it wasn't feasible or possible to do.

If one of the most restrictive states in the union when it comes to gun control gives up on the idea and can't make it work your not going to have any better luck in the other 49 states.

I think the people advocating stupid ideas like this are really out of touch with the things they pretend to be knowledgable enough to regulate. The amount of ammunition sold in this country is far bigger than they imagine, and tracking whatever they consider "large quantities" would send so many reports up to whatever agency that the info would pretty much be useless. The standard bulk case size for ammo is 500 or 1000 rounds and such purchases are very routine. Reporting every one to the Feds would be pretty much worthless and drown them in meaningless data.

Furthermore, 50 round boxes are typical and anyone who wanted to evade this stupid reporting idea would simply buy individual 50 round boxes at several places and have the same result- so in order to combat that you have to track every single small purchase. Good luck with making that work. I could buy 1000 rounds of ammo 50 rounds at a time at stores in one day and not travel more than 15 miles from where I am typing this now. I could buy two boxes per stop and have 1000 rounds before lunch.

And, of course the OP doesn't even grasp the irony of mentioning Sudafed regulation that hasn't actually reduced drug use one bit it just changed what's used and where it's made....

[MindPilot]

41. As stupid ideas go this is nothing!

yesterday someone (on DU) was suggesting limiting the availability of lead and brass.

Yeah you're right about the Sudafed regulations. They have done nothing more than piss off regular people like me when I need to buy cold medicine and make the posionous drug they are trying to suppress even more poisonous.