Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:30 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) Maybe ammunition restrictions would be more effective?I'm thinking about a lot of countries that have fairly high rates of gun ownership and operation among the population but that heavily restrict the possession of ammunition. Like the Swiss. Maybe we should restrict the amount of ammunition one can own at any given time to 20 rounds or less. And the only place where you could have more than 20 rounds at a time would be at a firing range. It's going to be exceedingly difficult to ban most firearms. But it might be easier to place restrictions on the ownership and purchase of ammunition. 20 rounds is enough for essentially any aspect of home protection. So it would be hard for advocates to argue that we are leaving them without "protection." What's important is that such a restriction would severely limit the capacity for anyone to go on shooting rampages. On edit: To further this idea we could do this: If you use the 20 rounds you have for protection, you would need a police report confirming this in order to buy 20 more. At the shooting range, you would have to purchase ammunition and use it there. No ammunition allowed in or out
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:31 PMkudzu22 (791 posts) 1. So how exactly does that stop the spree killer?Maybe he ignores the 20 round law and buys 20 a week until he has 500.
Response to kudzu22 (Reply #1)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:36 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 2. We'd have to establish some sort of ammunition registry.Requiring that a driver license number be logged. Kind of like how they regulate the purchase of pseudoephedrine
Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #2)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:40 PMkudzu22 (791 posts) 6. I don't mean to sound condescendingbut it'll never work. You can't track each bullet. Once they're fired, they're gone. Guy can come in and claim he shot all 20 of his at the lake last weekend and buy 20 more.
Response to kudzu22 (Reply #6)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:41 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 8. Purchase of more ammunition would require a police report.Explaining that the 20 rounds, or whatever amount, were used for protection and more needs to be purchased.
Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #8)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:42 PMkudzu22 (791 posts) 11. A police report?!?You want a cop to write a report on how some yahoo shot at cans last week?
Response to kudzu22 (Reply #11)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:45 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 15. No, it would have to be used as protection.In other words, to protect oneself from another crime. Like a home intruder.
Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #15)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:46 PMkudzu22 (791 posts) 18. So no more sport shooting? No more hunting?There are places to shoot besides the range.
Response to kudzu22 (Reply #18)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:50 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 24. Hunting may require some further tracking.But you do not need bulk ammunition for hunting.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:58 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 38. It would have to be made illegal to practice shoot on private land.Or we would have to figure out a way to track the rounds used. Like, as I proposed elsewhere, one would have to collect and turn in the spent cartridges. Hunting is a difficult problem. I will not disagree with that
Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #16)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:47 PMX_Digger (12,858 posts) 20. So left unsaid but implied is.... **** target shooting at a public range (that has no staff). Or people who set up their own shooting ranges. Riiiight. *snort*
Response to X_Digger (Reply #20)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:53 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 29. No more private shooting ranges. You are correct.All practice shooting must be done at a licensed shooting range
Response to X_Digger (Reply #34)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:59 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 39. You don't think shooting ranges should be licensed? How do we regulate safety?
Response to X_Digger (Reply #45)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 08:10 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 48. Shooting ranges are licensed and regulated by the Fish and Game departmentOf the respective state.
Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #48)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 08:32 PMformer9thward (5,928 posts) 55. Not true.Where in the world are you getting that from?
Response to former9thward (Reply #55)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 08:38 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 58. Pennsylvania is one such state. Although I'm sure other states utilize other agencies.
Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #4)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:40 PMslackmaster (59,818 posts) 7. Thanks, but I'm not going to allow prohibitionists to dictate what I can and cannot own or doBTW, there's nothing you can do about the approximately 50,000 rounds of ammunition I already own.
Response to slackmaster (Reply #7)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:44 PMapocalypsehow (12,172 posts) 13. You are going to follow the law, slack, if that becomes the law - or you are going to prison.It is as simple as that.
Mar 15, 2013, 07:52 PMGravitycollapse (200 posts) 27. No more practice shooting on private property unless it's a licensed range.Shooting vermin may be a bigger issue. But a possible solution may be that you would have to provide the spent cartridges to purchase more ammunition. I'm not drafting legislation here. I'm simply proposing possible solutions.
Response to Gravitycollapse (Original post)Fri Mar 15, 2013, 07:55 PM apocalypsehow (12,179 posts) 31. I take note every time we get an NRA-swarm on a OP here at DU: it usually means thatwhat is being proposed/discussed truly frightens them, as, if implemented, it would likely be effective. That sight *alone* makes this OP a win.
The large number of people telling Gravitycollapse how stupid his idea is shows what a great idea it is. Got it.
