Joined
·
4,604 Posts
this could affect your online ammo buying...
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Joined
·
8,787 Posts
Reports are that the whitehouse is not endorsing this legislation.
Good thing to keep an eye on.
D
Good thing to keep an eye on.
D
Joined
·
133,388 Posts
What people don't relizie is they may not be able to legally ban the sale of guns but they can stop the legal manafacture and sale of ammunition which woule render our guns useless depending on each others stockpile of ammo on hand however perfectally legal. "Scarry"
Joined
·
4,095 Posts
Good find Mike. Kinda was waiting for the next shoe to drop, pretty predictable. I don't think it's got any weight behind it at this point either, but these things are predictable. It's always a Democrat that introduces the bill, usually pandering to his base during an election cycle. Not a chance of passing it right now, but it's out there, and it won't be going away soon.
Joined
·
58 Posts
NJ Senator proposes law to ban on line ammo sales
Here we go...
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/...ates-online-ammo-ban-20120730,0,6439179.story
Here we go...
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/...ates-online-ammo-ban-20120730,0,6439179.story
Joined
·
41,592 Posts
It's not about crime. Look at Lautenberg's record. He along with Chuck Schumer, D. Fienstien, and others have a slate of anti-gun bills on standby. Waiting for any situation that can be used to advance their agenda.GAgal said:They (our elected officials) just don't get it. These kinds of things won't lessen crime.
Luckily, these bills usually don't go anywhere. It's the ones they slip into legislation that we really need to be on guard for.
Joined
·
547 Posts
Man, now the price of ammo is going to go up again because I am buying all I can get my hands on with the limited budget I have.
These horse hockey politicians just refuse to see common sense, oh what was I thinking(bang head) they are politicians. Get rid of the criminals and crime will drop, get rid of the guns and crime will sky rocket.
These horse hockey politicians just refuse to see common sense, oh what was I thinking(bang head) they are politicians. Get rid of the criminals and crime will drop, get rid of the guns and crime will sky rocket.
Joined
·
8,653 Posts
Lousenberg has been a f*cktard ever since was a Senator. Even his first time around.
This is what happens when rich pr*cks like him (founder of ADT), Bloombum and Christie Whitman (husband John is loaded) get bored and they think they know how to best serve "the people".
This is what happens when rich pr*cks like him (founder of ADT), Bloombum and Christie Whitman (husband John is loaded) get bored and they think they know how to best serve "the people".
Joined
·
5,924 Posts
McCarthy's husband was shot to death on the Long Island Railroad. I feel sorry for her, But nothing anyone has proposed would or could stop a madman or plain criminal from getting all the ammo or high cap mags that they want. Maybe some with a CCW could have saved her husband's life. *** is wrong with these people?!? Don't they see the stats showing that there are fewer violent crimes where people have the right to carry?
Being a New Yorker, I get so mad at these idiots! But that's just MHO.
Being a New Yorker, I get so mad at these idiots! But that's just MHO.
Joined
·
26 Posts
Won't effect me , online ammo is to expensive and I don't reload.
Joined
·
287 Posts
One thing I keep noticing - everything that that guy did in CO, somehow has a bill trying to pass to law for each thing - ban ARs, ban online ammo sales, ban handguns, ban this, ban that.. maybe next up is ban shotguns, because they can spread their shot to more than one target if aimed just right? Of course, all of this could have been part of the 'plan' if you look at it that way - why else was everything done just right - he did it legally, so our laws need tightened. He bought online, that should be stopped. He used an assault rifle, a hand gun, and a shotgun. Surprised he didn't have a 10/22 also, to get a ban on those "assault" semi-auto .22 rifles, and a 30-06 to ban hunting rifles... They missed those ones, maybe they should have planted them in the trunk as "possible backups"...
Joined
·
448 Posts
Or Australia....Mike P said:Ask Britain how the whole weapons ban worked out for them?
Joined
·
479 Posts
Consider this: In a country with such a gun history and culture such as ours, not to mention a rather powerful pro-gun lobby, anti-gun legislation requires one major, rare component to successfully pass any legislative body. That component is a horrific gun tragedy. The worse the body count, the more sensational the headlines, the greater the anti-gun support of the voting masses.
Voters are fickle. We tend to not care much about a topic until it happens in our backyard or strikes some deep discordance (or even concordance). The Federal AWB passed into law in 1994 due to popular support yet was allowed to sunset after only 10 years because that same popular support held its attention elsewhere in 2004. California's own state AWB (aka Roberti-Roos) was driven by a terrible shooting of young school children in Stockton, CA. And even then, it barely passed by 1 vote which underscores how hard it is for anti-gun laws to pass under "normal" circumstances.
Given this, responsible gun owners should take extra care to brace for legislative battle following Aurora as well as after the outcome of Zimmerman/Martin. Yelling unintelligible rhetoric just because the other side is yelling does no good for our pro-gun cause, and arguably makes it worse. Remember: for every anti-gunner we find ridiculous, there's one that finds us just as ridiculous and is just as ardent as we are about our relative causes.
And bear in mind that they wield the same powerful weapon we do: 1 vote.
If we are to make pro-gun progress, we ought to consider convincing our opponents rather than just pointing fingers at them.
Edit: And no, my "unintelligible rhetoric" comment was not pointed at "you"... unless you are spewing unintelligible rhetoric. ; )
Voters are fickle. We tend to not care much about a topic until it happens in our backyard or strikes some deep discordance (or even concordance). The Federal AWB passed into law in 1994 due to popular support yet was allowed to sunset after only 10 years because that same popular support held its attention elsewhere in 2004. California's own state AWB (aka Roberti-Roos) was driven by a terrible shooting of young school children in Stockton, CA. And even then, it barely passed by 1 vote which underscores how hard it is for anti-gun laws to pass under "normal" circumstances.
Given this, responsible gun owners should take extra care to brace for legislative battle following Aurora as well as after the outcome of Zimmerman/Martin. Yelling unintelligible rhetoric just because the other side is yelling does no good for our pro-gun cause, and arguably makes it worse. Remember: for every anti-gunner we find ridiculous, there's one that finds us just as ridiculous and is just as ardent as we are about our relative causes.
And bear in mind that they wield the same powerful weapon we do: 1 vote.
If we are to make pro-gun progress, we ought to consider convincing our opponents rather than just pointing fingers at them.
Edit: And no, my "unintelligible rhetoric" comment was not pointed at "you"... unless you are spewing unintelligible rhetoric. ; )
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Another story:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/30/politics/democrats-ammo-sales/
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/30/politics/democrats-ammo-sales/
Joined
·
8,653 Posts
I expect the usual clowns will attempt to hike the hell out of the taxes on ammo. Like Bloombum's reasoning for jacking a pack of cigarettes up to $12.40 in NYC (to offset the medical costs of cigarette related diseases), they say it'll be to offset the medical costs of gunshot wounds.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Join the discussion
