NFR: No Solution, just dead kids...

Status
Not open for further replies.

SteveA

Gnu to the board
Kent also posted, "Let's not lose sight of the fact that these 'rational' pro-gun advocates purchased record amounts of ammunition from stores like Cabelas in the weeks before and after our recent presidential election, convinced that they 'needed' it to defend themselves and their families against the chaos that was sure to result if American re-elected a black president.

I'm sure there were some bitter clingers buying this ammunition. However for a lot of mentally balanced sport shooters federal policies relating to ammunition were at the heart of this buying. Following the Korean War the US military left a lot of M-1 Garands and 30-06 ball ammo in Korea in case the hostilities reignited. As these arms became obsolete they were sent back to the US and the rifles & ammo were sold through the Office of Civilian Marksmanship, http://www.odcmp.com/. This ammo was relied on by sport shooters for years, however the Obama administration has stopped that re-importation thus driving costs up. The govt had also previously allowed the sale of spent casings from military use. These were purchased by ammunition manufacturers and private parties who loaded their own ammo. This too was ordered stopped by the Obama administration, thus driving up costs. Interestingly enough this brass isn't allowed to be recycled for fears it will fall into shooter's hands, it all goes to landfills by federal order. This coupled with emerging industrial nations (China for instance) desire for metals has caused prices to soar.

There have always been runs on guns and ammunition when a democratic administration or congress is elected. I remember this when Clinton was elected so I highly doubt the president's race had anything to do with it. I hope that you will note that this gun nuts portion of this discussion was rational and fact based.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/casings.asp

I could find nothing on your claim of Korean War ammo. It does seem unlikely to me that Korean War vintage "M-1 Garands and 30-06 ball ammo" would be driving overall ammunition costs.
 
There is something dreadfully wrong with a society that chooses to hide it's head in the sand rather than confront a problem such as this head on. This guy was nuts, off his rocker, snapped, whatever you want to call it. As were all the previous mass murderers. Yet no one whats to discuss how they became mentally deranged. Other than "society failed them", end of discussion, blame the gun. Much less how to recognize the symptoms, or how to deal with these people. It's so much easier to just blame the gun, pass a few more laws, and tell yourselves you've fixed the problem.

There have been restrictions on guns since 1963 when JFK was killed. On full auto machine guns since the gangster days of the thirties. Sometime in the 70's, I think, some guy named Purdy walked up to a school playground with an AK-47 and shot up a bunch of kids. And it's been going on ever since. So it's not like this is something new. Forty plus years we have attempted, unsuccessfully, to prevent these mass murders from recurring. Could it be that we have have focused our attention in the wrong direction?

From the tone of some of these posts, it's not too difficult to determine that some of you are too young to remember when every boy carried a Buck knife in his pocket at all times, including school. We could have brought our father's or grandfathers war trophies to school for show & tell and no one would have given it a second thought. And it's not as though we were uninformed regarding the tragedies of war. We watched the latest war news on the big screen at the movies, shown between shows at the Saturday matinee. Yet, even though guns were readily available, (we shot BB guns & .22 bird shot from home made zip guns) there were no race riots or mass murders. There were always guns in our house. My brother & I knew were every one of them were kept. No big deal. No one ever got hurt because we were taught gun safety at home. Nor were any of us ever confronted by some crackhead crazy kicking the door down & using our guns against us. In fact, the key to the door(s) was a skeleton key. (how many remember what those were?) And seldom did we lock the door when we left home because it was a PITA! I didn't grow up out in the backwoods somewhere either. I grew up in a big city!

If you don't think society has a problem today, you just don't know any better! Therefore, you are part of the problem.
 
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/casings.asp

I could find nothing on your claim of Korean War ammo. It does seem unlikely to me that Korean War vintage "M-1 Garands and 30-06 ball ammo" would be driving overall ammunition costs.
Oh, they can't put anything on the internet that is not true now, can they? And if it's not on the internet, it never really happened? Yeah well, keep your head in the sand.
 

SteveA

Gnu to the board
Oh, they can't put anything on the internet that is not true now, can they? And if it's not on the internet, it never really happened? Yeah well, keep your head in the sand.
Let me get this straight. Somebody posts a "fact" that I point out is false, with evidence.

I cannot find any information about another "fact", which logically doesn't make sense.

Therefore...wait for it...I have my head in the sand.
 

Mike T

Active Member
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/casings.asp

I could find nothing on your claim of Korean War ammo. It does seem unlikely to me that Korean War vintage "M-1 Garands and 30-06 ball ammo" would be driving overall ammunition costs.
Scarcity of 30-06 ammo won't drive prices of .22 or other calibers, I didn't say it would. But it has had a big affect on those who participate in USPSA, 3-Gun, the friendlier John C Garand matches where hand loads aren't used, as well as the loose knit legion of Garand aficianados, as well as hunters who used it to good effect.. This has been an issue since before the election. As a result prices of commercial 30-06, from Cabela's etc, have gone up due to demand. I know this as I used to shoot competitions and the rising cost of ammo were a large factor in my decision to quit.

Calibers affected by the government's decision to not sell used brass would be,9mm, .223 or 5.56 & .308.

The overall point of my thread is that ammunition has gone up in price and become more scarce since Obama took office in 2008 and I some of the sales during the election occurred due to concern new regs would make it ammo more scarce, hence more expensive.

For verification look to ODCMP, reloading forums & blogs, or simply choose not to believe me.
 

Roper

Idiot Savant
It seems this forum is but a microcosm of our Society. Polarized, opinionated, and disrespectful of one another. In the Bahai writings it tells of the total collapse of society in order to become one universal group that cares about and for each other. I may see that collapse in my life time...

Back to my bitch about hypocrisy:
According to figures provided by MADD, 9,878 drunk driving related deaths in 2011, 92 in Connecticut alone almost 4 times the number in the school shooting. No one speaks at all about banning alcohol or cars.

According to the CDC smoking causes about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these smoking-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure. No call for banning cigarettes, pipes, or cigars.

But you say "guns are different..." and I ask "are the other people any less dead?"

Guns are visceral, they evoke fear in many and sporting pleasure for others. It's so easy to jump on the bandwagon against guns because they are so visceral, flashy, emotionally charging. But how many have seen a body mangled beyond recognition in a twisted pile of steel or watched someone gasp for their last breaths? It's all death. It's all because someone made a f*****g stupid decision.

So, should the many be punished by the actions of the few? I'm a responsible gun owner who is still waiting for a "rational discussion" about "gun control". I don't see that happening here. Do you really care about saving people from death or just banning guns?
 
There is something dreadfully wrong with a society that chooses to hide it's head in the sand rather than confront a problem such as this head on. This guy was nuts, off his rocker, snapped, whatever you want to call it. As were all the previous mass murderers. Yet no one whats to discuss how they became mentally deranged. Other than "society failed them", end of discussion, blame the gun. Much less how to recognize the symptoms, or how to deal with these people. It's so much easier to just blame the gun, pass a few more laws, and tell yourselves you've fixed the problem..
I think that there are plenty of us who want to have that discussion. But as long as the majority of our society chooses to get its information from a sensationalized, biased, for-profit tv "news" program, we're going to continue having issues.
 
So, should the many be punished by the actions of the few? I'm a responsible gun owner who is still waiting for a "rational discussion" about "gun control". I don't see that happening here. Do you really care about saving people from death or just banning guns?
As a gun owner with a CWP, and firm believer in the 2nd Amendment (for law-abiding citizens), I think there needs to be a rational discussion on gun control. Is now that time? I don't particularly think so. I don't think we can have such a discussion when emotions are still running like they are. Not all of us who think we should have a look at gun control laws think "gun bans" are the answer. There are other measures to discuss, like gun education, licensing, etc. That discussion can wait until the initial emotional shock is past, in my opinion.
 

Ed Call

Well-Known Member
It seems this forum is but a microcosm of our Society. Polarized, opinionated, and disrespectful of one another. In the Bahai writings it tells of the total collapse of society in order to become one universal group that cares about and for each other. I may see that collapse in my life time...

Back to my bitch about hypocrisy:
According to figures provided by MADD, 9,878 drunk driving related deaths in 2011, 92 in Connecticut alone almost 4 times the number in the school shooting. No one speaks at all about banning alcohol or cars.

According to the CDC smoking causes about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these smoking-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure. No call for banning cigarettes, pipes, or cigars.

But you say "guns are different..." and I ask "are the other people any less dead?"

Guns are visceral, they evoke fear in many and sporting pleasure for others. It's so easy to jump on the bandwagon against guns because they are so visceral, flashy, emotionally charging. But how many have seen a body mangled beyond recognition in a twisted pile of steel or watched someone gasp for their last breaths? It's all death. It's all because someone made a f*****g stupid decision.

So, should the many be punished by the actions of the few? I'm a responsible gun owner who is still waiting for a "rational discussion" about "gun control". I don't see that happening here. Do you really care about saving people from death or just banning guns?
Wisdom! We must be outraged at this, and all senseless loss of life. Thank you Mr. Roper.
 
Back to my bitch about hypocrisy:
According to figures provided by MADD, 9,878 drunk driving related deaths in 2011, 92 in Connecticut alone almost 4 times the number in the school shooting. No one speaks at all about banning alcohol or cars.

According to the CDC smoking causes about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these smoking-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure. No call for banning cigarettes, pipes, or cigars.

But you say "guns are different..." and I ask "are the other people any less dead?"

Roper -
I'm not sure what you mean by hypocrisy here. All thinking and caring people in this country should be concerned about reducing drunken driving and smoking related deaths as well as gunshot related deaths. Each category is different from the other. Banning alcohol, cars, or tobacco products is a strawman, and is not the same as developing more serious restrictions/controls on guns.

A very strong case can easily be made that we have done much more to reduce drunken driving and smoking-related deaths in this country than gun-related deaths in recent decades.

I presume you live in Washington, where it is now illegal to smoke indoors in any public place, or within 25 feet of any door, openable window, or building vent. I work at the University of Washington, where the entire campus is now smoke-free, except for a handful of outdoor spots that are as remote from any buildings as possible. And I doubt there is any other commodity that is taxed as heavily as tobacco, in part explicitly to affect changes in peoples behavior, and with a portion of the proceeds going to anti-smoking education.

You have to be 21 years old before you can buy or be served alcohol. You have to pass a written and road test and be licensed to drive and register and have insurance to purchase a car. New Year's eve is coming up. Across the country highway patrols will be out making random stops and even using roadblocks to nab drunk drivers before they can kill.

Own and use a gun? No license (except to conceal carry a handgun). No registration. Minimum age in WA is 14, so long as you pass a hunter safety test. No permit or requirements for purchase, except for a handgun, where the onus is on the seller to obtain information and supply to the State before the sale can go through. Only a limited subset of people consisting mostly of convicted felons (all guns) and people with serious mental illness (hand gun purchase) are restricted in any way.

And if the highway patrol were to do random stops to check for illegal gun posession? The NRA would cry bloody murder... (pun intended).

D
 

Jerry Daschofsky

Moderator
Staff member
Ok, here's the problem. This is turning WAY too political. I'm thinking of shutting this down since we keep coming off base. No matter how you choose it, this is a political debate. You are either a liberal or a conservative when you talk about guns (and you can tell who is who usually on their posts).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.