Obama Ammo Ban Actions Begin

2009-04-11 16:42:43

#1

CC-Marley: Member; +407|7131

http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=1366951
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php? … geId=92095
Searched and didn't find anything.
Discuss. If this goes through, what does it mean for American gun owners?

Last edited by CC-Marley (2009-04-11 16:47:06)

2009-04-11 16:51:27

#2

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5888

With links like those good luck getting any reasonable discussion outta this.

2009-04-11 17:01:55

#3

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6451|'straya

Macbeth wrote:
With links like those good luck getting any reasonable discussion outta this.

Agreed. I saw the word Hannity and decided it wasnt worth reading.

2009-04-11 17:05:52

#4

mafia996630: © 2009 Jeff Minard; +319|7066|d

Macbeth wrote:
With links like those good luck getting any reasonable discussion outta this.

2009-04-11 17:19:03

#5

Roger Lesboules: Ah ben tabarnak!; +316|6880|Abitibi-Temiscamingue. Québec!

Nice to see all those anti-guns prick contributing to more job loss.

2009-04-11 17:31:13

#6

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6954|USA

I would love it if people in here debated the topic rather than the source. Just because you do not like the source does not mean the story is not true. "Your source sucks" is not a valid argument and is only used when the topic can not inteligently, be argued against.

File "Your source sucks" with the famous "You're Generalizing"

2009-04-11 17:45:23

#7

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5888

lowing wrote:
I would love it if people in here debated the topic rather than the source. Just because you do not like the source does not mean the story is not true. "Your source sucks" is not a valid argument and is only used when the topic can not inteligently, be argued against.

File "Your source sucks" with the famous "You're Generalizing"

Fine later on I'll use Michael Moore as a source for an Iraq issue. Or PETA for an animal issue. Or the Catholic Church of a discussion about abortion.

2009-04-11 17:54:25

#8

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6451|'straya

Ok firstly ill raise the question. Assuming the DOD would usually be selling used cartridges for assault rifles or semi-auto pistols (as thats what the army/other forces use)... what need does the public have for this ammunition? why does anyone in America need a AR-15 for home defence or shooting? i'm sure this wouldn't effect the majority of ammo used for hunting or home defence (shotgun rounds, hunting rifle rounds)

(I'm a gun noob so this might be wrong)

2009-04-11 18:07:34

#9

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6748|The Land of Scott Walker

Good discussion here on the issue

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=120672

2009-04-11 18:16:59

#10

nickb64: formerly from OC (it's EXACTLY like on tv)[truth]; +77|5913|Greatest Nation on Earth(USA)

Macbeth wrote:
With links like those good luck getting any reasonable discussion outta this.

Hannity ftw

2009-04-11 18:17:44

#11

xBlackPantherx: Grow up, or die; +142|6645|California

Thread title is catchy...

2009-04-11 18:22:03

#12

krazed: Admiral of the Bathtub; +619|7082|Great Brown North

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
what need does the public have for this ammunition

because ammo is expensive enough as it is, knocking out a massive supply line like this would make prices skyrocket

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
why does anyone in America need a AR-15 for home defence or shooting?

using an ar-15 for home defense is dangerous and stupid, unless you live in the middle of nowhere, or can guarantee that absolutely no rounds will penetrate your walls/windows and go to your neighbours house to say hi.

as for hobby shooting, they're just really fun to shoot

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
i'm sure this wouldn't effect the majority of ammo used for hunting or home defence (shotgun rounds, hunting rifle rounds)

it depends on how many other cartridges they decide to add later on, this is a slippery slope

xBlackPantherx wrote:
Thread title is catchy...

yes it is

Last edited by krazed (2009-04-11 18:22:55)

2009-04-11 18:26:05

#13

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6451|'straya

I don't think this will have the MASSIVE IMPACT that they're claiming. Prices for assault rifle ammo may go up for a while, but like anything, they will find new sources.

2009-04-11 18:33:17

#14

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5888

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
I don't think this will have the MASSIVE IMPACT that they're claiming. Prices for assault rifle ammo may go up for a while, but like anything, they will find new sources.

Wouldn't be surprised if the gun and ammo companies are actually helping push something like that to go through so they have an excuse to drive up their prices for awhile and still have people who will buy it.

2009-04-11 18:36:00

#15

krazed: Admiral of the Bathtub; +619|7082|Great Brown North

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
assault rifle ammo

/facedesk

.223 is a very popular target rifle/varmint caliber

.308 is a very popular target rifle/hunting caliber

both are popular in semi automatics AND bolt actions

Macbeth wrote:
Wouldn't be surprised if the gun and ammo companies are actually helping push something like that to go through so they have an excuse to drive up their prices for awhile and still have people who will buy it.

wouldn't shock me, would piss me off though >.<

Last edited by krazed (2009-04-11 18:38:53)

2009-04-11 18:41:38

#16

imortal: Member; +240|6967|Austin, TX

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
I don't think this will have the MASSIVE IMPACT that they're claiming. Prices for assault rifle ammo may go up for a while, but like anything, they will find new sources.

Prices for these calibers have more than quadrupled since the beginning of the Iraq War. Also, ever since the election, availability has been severely limited, due to panic buying in the gun community. Cutting off this source will be further reducing the supply.

Oh, and the UN cut our supply even further, when they 'banned' goverments from exporting surplus ammunition.

As you claimed, you are a gun noob; I don't think you grasp the situation well.

2009-04-11 18:43:20

#17

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6748|The Land of Scott Walker

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
I don't think this will have the MASSIVE IMPACT that they're claiming. Prices for assault rifle ammo may go up for a while, but like anything, they will find new sources.

This will cover all ammo ...

2009-04-11 18:50:51

#18

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6451|'straya

Stingray24 wrote:
Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
I don't think this will have the MASSIVE IMPACT that they're claiming. Prices for assault rifle ammo may go up for a while, but like anything, they will find new sources.
This will cover all ammo ...

Ok, as i've said im a gun noob. do they just reuse the casings? or do they remake the casings? or what? (i dunno)

All i'm saying is, I doubt this will have a big effect,

2009-04-11 19:03:06

#19

krazed: Admiral of the Bathtub; +619|7082|Great Brown North

they reuse the casings, which i agree doesn't sound like much unless you look at how much it will cost to switch sources. making them buy used elsewhere for more or even worse, to buy fresh casings would cause a price increase. the increase in demand could limit the supply to other manufacturers and cause price increases in other calibers as well because of it. granted that's more of a worst case thing....

the point is, doing what they did had point at all other then trying to make it more expensive to acquire by a legal means

2009-04-11 20:52:11

#20

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6954|USA

Macbeth wrote:
lowing wrote:
I would love it if people in here debated the topic rather than the source. Just because you do not like the source does not mean the story is not true. "Your source sucks" is not a valid argument and is only used when the topic can not inteligently, be argued against.

File "Your source sucks" with the famous "You're Generalizing"
Fine later on I'll use Michael Moore as a source for an Iraq issue. Or PETA for an animal issue. Or the Catholic Church of a discussion about abortion.

That would make for good debating, 2 polar opposites of an argument. Or do expect to find support for pro-choice on a pro-life website?

Debate the issue not the source. Hannity hates liberals, fine argue the point, do not argue that the point is invalid because it came from Hannity.

BF2S Forums Obama Ammo Ban Actions Begin

Macbeth wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

lowing wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

xBlackPantherx wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

lowing wrote:

Board footer