View Single Post
Old 02-16-2013, 02:35 PM   #73
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,308


Originally Posted by mkporter View Post
That 10-12 billion number was for non gov't sources. With 300 Million guns in this country, that comes out to 40 bullets per gun per year. I hope most of you gun owners use a lot more than that each year to stay proficient with your fire arms, and ensure that they are in proper working order.

You hit the nail on the head here. People are paranoid. But what has BO really done to warrant this type of paranoia? Pretty much nothing in the way of gun legislation in his first term, even though he had a democratic senate and congress for a couple of years. It clearly wasn't one of his priorities. The only reason there is legislation now is that the general public wants it because of the horrific gun incidents recently. But here, he's just responding to public pressure. And the DHS contracts (note that they have not purchased all of this ammo, they just have contract with manufacturers that allow them to purchase this much) have come well after the general public's gun's and ammo surge, and are for a 5 year duration which limits the market impact. The problem is the cost of copper. Go yell at the Chinese.

I just don't see why anyone thinks that this administration gives a rat's ass about private gun ownership. Find me some legislation that Obama put any effort into passing during his first term. 1.What happened after Ft Hood? What happened after Giffords was shot? What happened after Virginia Tech? "We need to have a serious discussion about guns!" End of story. What happened after Aurora? "We need to have a serious discussion about guns!" Nothing happened. Then Sandy Hook happened, and for those of us who are not nut jobs who think it was faked, it was pretty much one of the most horrific things you can imagine. The build up of all these events has created significant pressure from a majority of the general public (You know, the citizens of the united states) to do something to address gun control. Politicians being who they are, follow suit with proposed legislation.

Even after all this, despite many conservatives beliefs otherwise, most liberals, myself and pretty much everyone I know included, still support the right to own firearms. We just think it's reasonable to discuss what the bounds of these rights should be. All rights have bounds, because if extended without bounds, your rights will begin to infringe on mine. Even the most revered right in our amended constitution, the freedom of speech, has it's limits. 2.The 2nd amendment is no different.

Remember, that while we disagree on many issues, liberal's are not the opposites of conservatives. Lower taxes might always be the answer for the right, but that doesn't mean higher taxes are always the answer for the left. 3.Unrestricted firearm ownership may be the goal of the right, but that doesn't mean that the left wants to eliminate firearm ownership. That's just a fantasy.

4.I'm 1000x more likely to get intentionally or accidentally shot by a private, previously law abiding citizen, than I am to suffer from a tyrannical government takeover, not even to mention non-law abiding citizens. You'll have to pardon me for playing the odds and being more concerned about how we regulate guns. Same reason why I'm glad we've put so much emphasis on regulating car ownership and usage. Gotta play the odds.
1. All those incidents involved people who already broke the laws on the books. Again, you are talking about people who broke laws to carry out killings and crimes and again, you are now punishing all law abiding citizens for the acts of a few. We live in a country of 300m people and you just pointed out what, 5 incidents where some crazy nuts went ballistic on innocent people? Again, over and over and again, this is the act of insane people that broke multiple laws to perpetrate crimes.

If you are going to restrict gun rights for everyone based on the sick actions of a few sick people, then you better also put laws in the books about the violence Hollywood and the video game industry pump out to the masses. If you want to blame the violent incidents on the availability of guns and NOT on the individual's responsible for these horrific crimes then you have to point the finger at the entertainment and gaming industry for spewing out violent movies and games over the last 40 years that coincide with these incidents.

Yes?? You cannot argue with me on this point. I will only accept a YES from you on this. Otherwise we have nothing to discuss.

2. There are already restrictions to the 2nd amendment. I can't own a fully automatic gun. I can't own a rocket launcher. I can't own plastic explosives and such. I can't own an armed tank nor an armed jet. I can't own an armed helicopter, etc., etc., etc.

3. See point 2. Nobody is asking for "unrestricted right to bear 'arms'".

4. You simply cannot predict the future. Just because the feds up to this point and time haveing invaded your home and put a gun to your head and forced you to do something you didn't want to do does not mean this won't happen in the future, even in the immediate future. You are banking on the past which limited government much more than today and the foreseeable future. I'll take my chances with an armed law abiding citizen any day of the week over trusting the federal government with my safety.

Last edited by Tombstone RJ; 02-16-2013 at 02:41 PM..
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote