[Jerry]

Originally Posted by PettyOfficer

I think Bren has a much better grasp on the reality of gun laws than you do. Check his profile, he's not some limp wristing putz who armchair qb's law discussions.

What do you do every single day in your life? Are you a congressional staffer helping write and research laws day in and day out? If so I'll listen to you, otherwise your argument is purely anecdotal.

What do I do every single day? Argue with MORONS on the subject of gun control.

So you believe we should be wiling to compromise our right away little by little until the right is completely lost. Take a look at history and see how well compromise has worked. Funny how since we said no more compromise and a bunch of Demorats were voted out of congress in the last election we have not had one piece of gun control pass through congress even though there have been several mass shootings and the liberals have tried to push for it.

Yep, it takes real genus to understand you win the war by giving ground ever time a battle threatens.

Funny how much of a grasp you have on this discussion. I was not discussing law but WAS discussing compromise.

Edited to add:

One more thing Mr. PettyOfficer. Since you believe Bren's credentials afford him a better grasp (even though you have no idea what mine are) and I have such a diminished grasp of reality, being the limp wrested putz, armchair quarterback that I am, perhaps you can explain to me and the other less fortunate here how well the firearms compromise thing is working out for the people of Great Britten. I eagerly await your vast wealth of knowledge on the matter.

[Angry Fist]

**** you, Bill O.

[Christopher67]

Cybersecurity Act Of 2012 Killed In The Senate, which also had the high capacity magazine bill slipped in.


http://www.webpronews.com/cybersecur...senate-2012-08

[Jerry]

Thanks Chrysler! Good news.

[Christopher67]

Originally Posted by Jerry

Thanks Chrysler! Good news.

Anytime.

[NBT]

This was the reply my Uncle got after writing his Senator.... thanks Christopher for posting that link...

Dear Mr. "Uncle":

Thank you for sharing your thoughts about Senate Amendment (S.A.) 2575 to S.3414, the Cybersecurity Act of 2012.

This amendment would ban the possession, importation, or sale of any high-capacity feeding device that holds more than ten rounds of ammunition. Anyone who lawfully possesses high-capacity magazines, belts, drums, or other feeding devices prior to the enactment of this legislation would still be legally allowed to own them, but they could not be sold.

Additionally, future large capacity ammunition feeding devices — for use by law enforcement, for example — would be required to be identified by a serial number and other identification markings to indicate that the firearms was manufactured after the enactment of this legislation.

Should this amendment or any similar legislation come before the Senate for a vote, I will keep your views in mind.

Thank you again for getting in touch with me.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown
United States Senator

[TactiCool]

Originally Posted by Jerry

What do I do every single day? Argue with MORONS on the subject of gun control.

So your believe we should be wiling to compromise our right away little by little until the right is completely lost. Take a look at history and see how well compromise has worked. Funny how since we said no more compromise and a bunch of Demorats were voted out of congress in the last election we have not had one piece of gun control pass through congress even though there have been several mass shootings and the liberals have tried to push for it.

Yep, it takes real genus to understand you win the war by giving ground ever time a battle threatens.

Funny how much of a grasp you have on this discussion. I was not discussing law but WAS discussing compromise.

Edited to add:

One more thing Mr. PettyOfficer. Since you believe Bren's credentials afford him a better grasp (even though you have no idea what mine are) and I have such a diminished grasp of reality, being the limp wrested putz, armchair quarterback that I am, perhaps you can explain to me and the other less fortunate here how well the firearms compromise thing is working out for the people of Grate Britten. I eagerly await your vast wealth of knowledge on the matter.

So many people forget the original intent of the Founders. The 2nd amendment was, along with the rest of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, considered to be a fundamental liberty that was inherent to all human beings, and pre-dated the drafting of the Constitution itself.

For some perspective, let's shift this sort of arguement away from the 2nd and transpose it to the 4th, or any of the other first 10 for that matter. CISPA, SOPA, and PIPA are good examples. And the liberal/progressive arguement is still the same. Let the .gov get involved, monitor, and ultimately take control so we can make sure you don't do anything bad. After all, it's for your safety. Yes, personal freedom is the cause of all our problems... wait, that's one of the core tenets of Fascism.

I agree Jerry, the Founding Fathers never meant for our inherent rights to be compromised.

[cangler]

This is really upsetting, hopefully this bill doesn't go anywhere! I only buy my ammo online!

[Chris Brines]

That would be a direct violation of our rights and the rights of the ammunition suppliers. It's funny how these idiots really think that by banning something just because one person used that specific thing (or means of getting it) to do something horrible, that it can never happen again. Like someone told me the other day back in the 1960's when JFK was assassinated it was discovered that his killer ordered his gun through a mail order gun dealership. Apparently that was a good way to buy guns for a good price back then. Then just because it happened to be the way the assassin got his gun, they banned mail order gun sales for that time period. Obviously at some point in time, it came back.

But the point is it's obvious these people KNOW their bans will make no difference to a determined person who is dead set on creating havoc, they KNOW it restricts nobody but law abiding gun owning citizens, yet they still do it because to them, the words "law abiding" and "gun owning citizens" do not belong in the same sentence. To them anyone with guns should be viewed as a criminal, so they'll take the backdoor approach and try to do anything they can to outlaw things that people like us use every single day to enjoy our hobbies and interests in shooting. To them just going to the range for target practice is an evil thing. I'm truly amazed by some of the comments some of these anti gunners make, when they are criticizing and passing judgement on something they know very little, if not nothing at all, about.

But I actually heard these FOOLS on the news (including Fox News, a network I've lost every bit of respect I ever had for them) saying things like, "we need this law banning the sale of ammunition online. This could prevent a massacre by forcing a person to go face to face when purchasing ammunition". How on Earth that would prevent a massacre, is beyond me. I mean I highly doubt a person shooting a bunch of innocent people in a public place really cares if the guy at the store saw his face when he bought that ammo. Just sayin', maybe I'm wrong who knows.

[michael_b]

It's also attached to the cyber security bill via amendment along with limiting magazine capacity.

[Jerry]

Originally Posted by Chris Brines

That would be a direct violation of our rights and the rights of the ammunition suppliers. It's funny how these idiots really think that by banning something just because one person used that specific thing (or means of getting it) to do something horrible, that it can never happen again. Like someone told me the other day back in the 1960's when JFK was assassinated it was discovered that his killer ordered his gun through a mail order gun dealership. Apparently that was a good way to buy guns for a good price back then. Then just because it happened to be the way the assassin got his gun, they banned mail order gun sales for that time period. Obviously at some point in time, it came back.

What you herd is exactly what happened. Except is has never come back. My brother bought a surplus Springfield 3006 for $18.00 mail-order through the NRA. I couldn't wait until I was 18 so I could get my very own. Then JFK got shot.

I bought my first .22 when I was 14. Walked into the hardware store with my dad, said I what that one, paid the man and walked out with it. Now I have a hold put on every purchase. But hey, they are making sure I don't shoot anyone.

[Remington 870]

I like your reply yellowhand! that was some good stuff!

[frizz]

Does anyone else worry that retailers such as WalMart or big box sporting goods stores will try to get this one passed?

[OctoberRust]

Originally Posted by Jerry

What you herd is exactly what happened. Except is has never come back. My brother bought a surplus Springfield 3006 for $18.00 mail-order through the NRA. I couldn't wait until I was 18 so I could get my very own. Then JFK got shot.

I bought my first .22 when I was 14. Walked into the hardware store with my dad, said I what that one, paid the man and walked out with it. Now I have a hold put on every purchase. But hey, they are making sure I don't shoot anyone.

But Jerry, it's to keep us all safe from you. You know convicted felons buy guns from stores and have to deal with the waiting period too, because stores are allowed to sell to convicted felons.


.....I actually never understood the logic behind "waiting periods".

[brokenprism]

Originally Posted by PettyOfficer

I don't think online bulk ammo control will upset the majority of gun owners and won't be career suicide to support. Only online stores and preppers will be impacted negatively.

Don't know where you live, but I can get 50 rds fo HST for $24.90 box online, and my LGS charges upwards of a buck a shot for most of the 'commercial' offerings. Fifty rounds of Nothing Special costs almost 50 bucks now, at least at the retail level, and we all know why the ammo companies invented the 20-rd box.

The difference between online and storefront is at least partly due to the fact that online sellers don't have to maintain brick-and-mortar sites with utilities, lease fees, insurance, employees, etc. And if my guy can sell HST for under $25 online, the 'real' cost is even LESS. So why would a box of Remington Express cost almost $50 at my LGS...?