Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: should we focus on restricting and regulating ammunitions?
Yes. 19 15.70%
Yes, but only restrict the most dangerous bullets, such as the Black Talon,'hollow-points,' and cop-killer bullets. 2 1.65%
No, no new restrictions. 94 77.69%
other (please explain below). 6 4.96%
Voters: 121. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
6,061 posts, read 2,008,045 times
Reputation: 2167

Advertisements

There are over 300 million guns in the US. Guns last a long time. if we banned gun sales tomorrow, it would be literally centuries before they were eliminated.

Bullets, on the other hand, are used only once. Without bullets, he gun becomes a useless hunk of steel. Rep Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D,FL) has taken the lead on this. As she says:

Quote:
“You do not have the right to bear bullets,” Wasserman Schultz said at a news conference at the Pembroke Pines Police Department....
Read the Second Amendment all you wish, it's not in their. Sorry, NRA. I think that is fairly brilliant by DWS.

A friend of mine used to say, the gun is really just a dispenser. You wouldn't expect to control cigarettes by banning high-tech, electronic, push-button cigarette machines. Going back to the old-fashioned spring-controlled mechanical machines wouldn't help. The problem lies in the actual cigarette. Same with guns--the problem lies in the BULLET.

DWS wants to apply the same background checks for guns, to ammunitions. Even the NRA supported background checks; how could they now possibly object to the same for bullets?

This would also allow restrictions on certain, extra-deadly types of bullets. New Jersey actually passed a law banning rapid-fire ammunition that was struck down by an ignorant Trump-appointed judge.

What do you think?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:29 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
8,750 posts, read 3,115,724 times
Reputation: 1747
All gun laws are infringements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:31 PM
 
3,105 posts, read 3,831,270 times
Reputation: 4066
Dream on lefty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Minnysoda
10,659 posts, read 10,720,646 times
Reputation: 6745
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
There are over 300 million guns in the US. Guns last a long time. if we banned gun sales tomorrow, it would be literally centuries before they were eliminated.

Bullets, on the other hand, are used only once. Without bullets, he gun becomes a useless hunk of steel. Rep Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D,FL) has taken the lead on this. As she says:

Read the Second Amendment all you wish, it's not in their. Sorry, NRA. I think that is fairly brilliant by DWS.

A friend of mine used to say, the gun is really just a dispenser. You wouldn't expect to control cigarettes by banning high-tech, electronic, push-button cigarette machines. Going back to the old-fashioned spring-controlled mechanical machines wouldn't help. The problem lies in the actual cigarette. Same with weapons--the problem lies in the BULLET.

DWS wants to apply the same background checks for guns, to ammunitions. Even the NRA supported background checks; how could they now possibly object to the same for bullets?

This would also allow restrictions on certain, extra-deadly types of bullets. New Jersey actually passed a law banning rapid-fire ammunition that was struck down by an ignorant Trump-appointed judge.

What do you think?

I think you should get banned for starting trollish threads all the time.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
6,061 posts, read 2,008,045 times
Reputation: 2167
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebeldor View Post
All gun laws are infringements.
Did you read the post? That is why DWS is recommending going after bullets instead of guns.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/po...323-story.html
Quote:
Mei-Ling Ho-Shing, a Stoneman Douglas junior, praised the proposal. “If we can attack the bullets, we can stop how many people who can get shot with high-capacity magazines,†she said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
8,750 posts, read 3,115,724 times
Reputation: 1747
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
Did you read the post? That is why DWS is recommending going after bullets instead of guns.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/po...323-story.html
Did I stutter?

All gun laws are infringements. Bullet laws are gun laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:41 PM
 
30,058 posts, read 18,650,451 times
Reputation: 20860
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
There are over 300 million guns in the US. Guns last a long time. if we banned gun sales tomorrow, it would be literally centuries before they were eliminated.

Bullets, on the other hand, are used only once. Without bullets, he gun becomes a useless hunk of steel. Rep Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D,FL) has taken the lead on this. As she says:

Read the Second Amendment all you wish, it's not in their. Sorry, NRA. I think that is fairly brilliant by DWS.

A friend of mine used to say, the gun is really just a dispenser. You wouldn't expect to control cigarettes by banning high-tech, electronic, push-button cigarette machines. Going back to the old-fashioned spring-controlled mechanical machines wouldn't help. The problem lies in the actual cigarette. Same with guns--the problem lies in the BULLET.

DWS wants to apply the same background checks for guns, to ammunitions. Even the NRA supported background checks; how could they now possibly object to the same for bullets?

This would also allow restrictions on certain, extra-deadly types of bullets. New Jersey actually passed a law banning rapid-fire ammunition that was struck down by an ignorant Trump-appointed judge.

What do you think?
Travis-

Perhaps you should view your core beliefs, which always involves telling other people how to live and restricting their liberties. That is what we call a fascist. The problem is that the left has convinced themselves that they are "enlightened" an thus able to dictate the lives of others better than the individuals themselves.

Totalitarians always masquerade under less offensive titles, such as "liberal" or "progressive". That way, when they are packing fellow citizens off to death camps, they can feel better about themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:41 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
37,149 posts, read 19,170,135 times
Reputation: 14870
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
There are over 300 million guns in the US. Guns last a long time. if we banned gun sales tomorrow, it would be literally centuries before they were eliminated.

Bullets, on the other hand, are used only once. Without bullets, he gun becomes a useless hunk of steel. Rep Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D,FL) has taken the lead on this. As she says:

Read the Second Amendment all you wish, it's not in their. Sorry, NRA. I think that is fairly brilliant by DWS.

A friend of mine used to say, the gun is really just a dispenser. You wouldn't expect to control cigarettes by banning high-tech, electronic, push-button cigarette machines. Going back to the old-fashioned spring-controlled mechanical machines wouldn't help. The problem lies in the actual cigarette. Same with guns--the problem lies in the BULLET.

DWS wants to apply the same background checks for guns, to ammunitions. Even the NRA supported background checks; how could they now possibly object to the same for bullets?

This would also allow restrictions on certain, extra-deadly types of bullets. New Jersey actually passed a law banning rapid-fire ammunition that was struck down by an ignorant Trump-appointed judge.

What do you think?
As much as I despise DWS, she is right on this one. Self-contained ammo is not covered under 2A. Tightly restrict ammuntion sales and ban the sale of components and individual manufacturing of same without a license, and you would eliminate the majority of the problem within a few years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:42 PM
 
623 posts, read 233,693 times
Reputation: 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
There are over 300 million guns in the US. Guns last a long time. if we banned gun sales tomorrow, it would be literally centuries before they were eliminated.

Bullets, on the other hand, are used only once. Without bullets, he gun becomes a useless hunk of steel. Rep Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D,FL) has taken the lead on this. As she says:

Read the Second Amendment all you wish, it's not in their. Sorry, NRA. I think that is fairly brilliant by DWS.

A friend of mine used to say, the gun is really just a dispenser. You wouldn't expect to control cigarettes by banning high-tech, electronic, push-button cigarette machines. Going back to the old-fashioned spring-controlled mechanical machines wouldn't help. The problem lies in the actual cigarette. Same with guns--the problem lies in the BULLET.

DWS wants to apply the same background checks for guns, to ammunitions. Even the NRA supported background checks; how could they now possibly object to the same for bullets?

This would also allow restrictions on certain, extra-deadly types of bullets. New Jersey actually passed a law banning rapid-fire ammunition that was struck down by an ignorant Trump-appointed judge.

What do you think?
ALL gun laws are unconstitutional and should be erased from the books. Want to live in an Authoritarian state then move to Europe or Asia where they restrict more than just your right to a gun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2019, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Arizona
2,557 posts, read 2,215,576 times
Reputation: 3911
In my circle, some are annoyed by Democrats while others utterly loathe them. Seems to be a lot of that going around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:42 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top