So yeah you can fire a bullet so many different ways, a rusty nail and hammer will do the trick. Isn’t the real problem the frickin bullet?
I swear in Sweden or something, you can take a gun home but ammo is only sold and consumed at the range and not for taking home.
Sure, you can make this a hollistic approach regulating guns and ammo, but the ammo seems to be the bigger issue here. You can make guns easy peasy, but ammo is much harder to manufacture and easier to regulate.
Unironically, Chris Rock said exactly this in his 1999 comedy special “Bigger and Blacker”.
Exactly the thing I was reminded of
From my perspective both should be regulated.
ammo is much harder to manufacture
I’m not sure if that’s true. I don’t have any experience with it myself, but lead is notoriously easy to cast at home, because of its low melting point.
So it seems to me, all it takes to make some (shitty) ammo is some lead, a mould (which you can make from clay) and an explosive.
For a proper modern gun, that last piece is probably pretty difficult, and you would need to make casings somehow too (I’m not sure how difficult that would be). But if you were using some form of (possibly homemade) flintlock or similar, the gunpowder from fireworks should be enough.
I think regulating both guns and ammo is the way to go.
The primers are the only part that people don’t regularly manufacturer at home.
I wouldn’t say ammo is easier to regulate at all. The average gun owner keeps several boxes of handgun ammo and 500-1000 rounds of rifle ammo on hand to start so none of that ammo will be caught by your regulation.
If you outright banned the new purchase of ammo it would take years before the effects are really noticed, especially considering the rush to buy up every bullet on the market before the ban went into effect. Afterwords you’d see gun owners driving to a state without an ammo ban.
If you slapped a max limit on ownership, say you can’t have more than 50 rounds of ammo per gun, that wouldn’t have stopped almost any of the mass shooters in the last 10 years who almost all fired less than 50 shots on their rampages. Not to mention enforcing that law would be next to impossible because you’d basically need a signed warrant to check a house for illegal amounts of ammo or catch them in transit.
If you put a massive tax on ammo combined with a max purchase limit, let’s say 1,000% tax and a limit of 50 rounds per ID card per day, it would be business as usual, just more expensive.
One thing that might be worth exploring would be an ammo purchase registry. Gun owners haaaaaate their names on lists aand fight it tooth an nail on guns, but they don’t have the protection of the 2nd amendment for ammo. Who knows it might have a chilling effect. Or just drive more transactions through the gun show/private seller loop holes.
Gun owners haaaaaate their names on lists aand fight it tooth an nail on guns, but they don’t have the protection of the 2nd amendment for ammo.
Winds are blowing the other way: short barreled rifles and shotguns, as well as suppressors no longer go through the NFA process as of like two days ago, so details are in short supply.
Gun owners haaaaaate their names on lists
I maintain that lists of all kinds are the bigger threat to the country right now. With all the data that has already been gathered it’s just a matter of time before some upstart company tells a government agency that it can play the Kevin Bacon game with their database and produce a list of <trait> that will result in <adjuctive> results. Company gets to keep a local copy of the database because nobody thought about data privacy/protections when they cut the check.
If you slapped a max limit on ownership, say you can’t have more than 50 rounds of ammo per gun, that wouldn’t have stopped almost any of the mass shooters in the last 10 years who almost all fired less than 50 shots on their rampages.
It would; however, put a damper on anyone funding their own training. I doubt anyone’s going from nothing to being a crack shot in 50 rounds, or even 500.
chilling effect
Those are bad everywhere. I wish that court case in DC that decided a defacto ban (on guns) amounted to a for-realsy ban, and was therefore unconstitutional.
I agree with most of what you’re saying. OP asked so I tried to game it out the best I could. Personally I think we need to approach gun legislation like we do cars. License to carry in public, strict rules about thier usage, and automatic max penalties and enhanced charges for any crime committed while carrying a gun (legally or otherwise), which can include losing your carry license.
I would say though that your trainer wouldn’t be thwarted by a bullet ownership limit either, it would just slow down their training. They’d buy their 50, shoot them, then have to buy more all of which could be done at the range.
I broadly agree with you about lists, eventually they will be misused. But the chilling effort would be the point. A chilling effect isn’t universally a bad thing, modern HR practices had a chilling effect on sexual harassment in the workplace, banning nazi symbols had a chilling effect on the spread of fascist ideals in post war germany, etc. In this case the chilling effect of reducing the amount of ammo purchased might be beneficial.
Chilling effects also maintain sundown towns, keep LGBTQ people out of certain places, and the last time I checked nazi symbolism was back in vogue :-(
I think we need to approach gun legislation like we do cars. License to carry in public, strict rules about thier usage, and automatic max penalties and enhanced charges for any crime committed while carrying a gun (legally or otherwise), which can include losing your carry license.
The USA is big, and not every county/town constablulatory has left the good ole’ boy network behind. You can get on the banned list by doing either the right thing or the wrong thing, and a towns full of grey men who can’t speak up isn’t an attractive future, and it’s some people’s realities. Those licenses to carry have to be approved by the locals after all.
I don’t disagree with the spirit of what you said about max penalties or enhanced charges, but there’ve been some serious injustices to lay down at Mandatory Minimum Sentencing’s feet when it’s been put into practice, and I don’t trust the current crop of people not to misuse it. We can’t even get enhanced charges for misuse of public trust positions right.
I would say though that your trainer wouldn’t be thwarted by a bullet ownership limit either, it would just slow down their training.
You took it wrong or I misspoke; I was talking about the ability for someone to go get practice on their own without having to ask for permission. A box of 50 .22 is like $10 and closer to the size of a pack of gum (or half the size of a harmonica, or whatever size comparison the kids are using these days). I couldn’t justify putting my name on a law that gave Keanu Reeves carte blanche to go train for a new John Wick movie when the average American is under greater restrictions. Where I am I learned from my father and there are ample public lands reserved for the purpose, plus any private land you can convince someone to practice at. Not every place in America has that luxury, though, and not every law is going to fit every place well.
OP asked so I tried to game it out the best I could.
Me, too. Good faith questions and answers are good things. As for strict usage, I think we already have that for the most part. Before adding any more laws I’d really like to see a national agreement on terminology as to what open carry, concealed carry, and all the terms really mean from a legal standpoint. I remember reading stories from when COVID was taking off that folks in California decided it might be time to get armed and didn’t realize what the process there really involves. I doubt there’s a real solid understanding of their gun registry system, either, and that’s without getting into the really weird stuff that’s been on the books.
In general I’m pro second amendment. It wasn’t until commenting in this thread that I realized the firearm used to assassinate Shinzo Abe is probably legal in the US now thanks to the recent NFA changes regarding short barreled shotguns1,2. So, pro second amendment enough to be uncomfortable adding a lot of new legislation that doesn’t seem to understand the underlying technology or what the second order effects might be, but not so second amendment that I’m going to lowe’s when they open to prove a point. I expect someone else will get there soon enough for the clicks, though.
- [1] Legal disclaimer: That is purely speculative on my part.
- [2] Constructing your own firearm in the US has always been legal, the issue isn’t making one, it’s the barrel length and selling one that isn’t serialized.
I’ll do you one better.
We should regulate barrels.
A gun barrel is the only part of a gun that can’t be reliably and descretely be made at home. You can make your own ammo, essentially from house supplies and spent brass casing. With the upsurge of small desk lathes, CNCs and 3D printers you can also fabricate most parts of the receiver at home (which they is now regulated too).
But a barrel however, you need very specialised heavily machinery to cut a threaded barrel in a way that makes the gun not blow up in your face or be able to hit the broad side of a barn.
The barell would also tell you a lot about the gun owners habits. If somebody goes through several barrels in a few years, they are probably using the firearm a lot and are therefore well trained and capable.In my opinion serial numbers should also be stamped or laser engraved on the barrel not the receiver. People would also think twice before filing off the serial number and ruining the structural integrity of the barrel.
Technically you can slap together a home made rifle, as long as it uses a manufactured barrel it will be somewhere in the realm of precision of a fully manufactured firearm, reliability however may differ.That’s why countries like Germany legally define a “firearm” as “A device that expels a projectile through a barrel”. The receiver or more precisely the mechanism of operation is herby completely irrelevant (there are exceptions for muscle powered devices though).
This would also call for a revision on the idiotic suppressor regulation, which is essentially limiting the use of a device to further protect your hearing. Instead you either register a barrel with a fixed muzzle device or a barrel with a threaded end and you can put whatever you want on it. The government is happy, because it can assume you are a dead silent killer with a scary silencer, and you are happy because you don’t have to wait 6 months for a glorified propane tank on the end of your gun.
Some people collect guns like Pokémon cards. Imagine if you can get 1 to 3 barrels and then 40 different receivers without having to register any of them. A lot of AR platfrom barrels are interchangeable, so you can have as many colors, setups from as many different manufacturers as you want. In the end even if somebody decided to go lulu and shoot up a place, they can’t use more than 3 of them at once.
Collectors would also profit since now they can have as many historic firearms as they like as long as they all have a dummy barrel. No need to destroy the beautiful mechanics of the gun to deactivate it. And if they decide to actually fire it for demonstration, they can register a separate real barrel.
The FGC 9, for example, has a barrel that one can electro-chemically machine with 3d printed jigs, wire, salt water, hydraulic pipe, and a 12v battery
You mean EDM wire cutting the rifling? You could technically angle the wire inside the barrel to achieve the proper pitch. But your pitch will be limited by the length of the barrel. Also is you angle a straight wire inside a tube and cut slots into it, the bottom surface of your slot will be parabolic. Not ideal for rifling since the pressure inside the barrel will steadily grow as the projectiles moves towards the middle of the barrel and then decrease past that. You got a video of somebody attempting that. I’d love to see that. Also EDM wire cutting at home is doable, but far from easy.
You do not need specialized machinery. Any metal working lathe will work.
Sorry, English isn’t my first language. I just realised that what I ment by “thread” was actually called “rifling”. And, as far as I know, they either use a button broaching or a cold-hammer-forge (CHF) machines. Both not exactly cheap, easy to obtain or easy to operate. An older, much simpler method was to take an octagonal stock pipe and twist it to get the rifling. But this method is way less effective and less reliable. It was also mostly used for revolvers since it’s very complicated to machine the chamber directly into the octagonal pipe.
Pretty easy to make bullets tbh. And honestly I’m pro-gun. Arm the homeless. Arm trans people. Arm migrants.
Everyone needs to arm now. I did 2 years ago as a gun hating leftist, if I can, you can too.
“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary”
Duuur we need moar guns! Our society is the free-est! My little cousin shot his sister dead when he was five!
Narrator: There are more guns than people in the US.
And?
Narrator: It didn’t solve the problem, it became the problem.
I don’t think he said we need more. He said don’t give up what you have. I don’t like the number of people with guns… but I do have to admit, if noone but the gov had guns. I think we would be in trouble. Nature requires opposing forces to establish equilibrium. Maybe there is another opposing force, but I can’t think of it. Admittedly, people having guns isn’t really stopping ICE from it’s rampage. But I can imagine it would be a lot worse if they had no need to fear armed resistance at all.
We live in a fascist hell hole surrounded by mentally unstable people with guns. Guns are the fucking problem, they have not solved any of our issues. They support the abusive government, not keep it in check. I am so sick of violence and the reality that every pearl clutching gun nut is only one step away from killing someone.
As they say… violence is never the answer… looks at history… uh oh… oh shit… well maybe it is.
Sounds like what you are saying is that then issue isn’t people with guns, it’s the wrong people with guns. And I very much agree. But if you take them from “the people” and leave them in the hands of groups like ICE. You have just increased the percent of people who have guns that are the wrong people.
If I could snap my fingers and make them all go away, I would. But that just ain’t possible. I support requiring licenses to have guns, and training being required for those licenses. I also support safe storage laws. But bans and restrictions that don’t actually stop anyone from having the gun they claim to control access to are pointless theater that needs to be replaced with useful legislation.
Sounds like you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about. If you think violence and murder makes us better then maybe… just maybe… You should take your own advice.
If you ignore the 2nd amendment people are fighting for the government and guns are the oppressive force then you clearly are a gun nutter, no reason to talk with you anymore.
Please just stop with the nonsense about restricting rights and bans. They work, they always have. We can ban transgender but we can’t ban a gun highlights the stupidity we face.
Ok, I get it. Your mind is made up, don’t confuse you with facts. You aren’t even reading what I am typing.
How many people have you lost to gun violence? I have lost several. How many woman do you know who were raped by gunpoint? I know several. How many people that have guns don’t properly store them? Everyone I have ever met save a couple responsible ones. For every responsibile owner there are a hundred that keep their guns loaded under their pillow.
I have read what you are saying thousands of times. It gets old.
Its much harder to cobble together a decent zipgun or slamfire than it is to reload a casing, not that either are particularly hard.
The brass is going to be the hardest thing to manufacture in bulk. You can cast your own lead, mill your own powder, and refill primers at home in your kitchen.
You can pack your own ammo pretty easily
You make your own powder? And primer?
People are working on it.
No, but I feel like it’s easier to get those than a gun
This is literally a Chris Rock joke from the bigger and blacker tour.
This is not how it works in Sweden, if you have a license for a gun you are allowed to buy the ammunition for the specific caliber and have at home.
Gun nuts, totally freaked out when Obama won. They were convinced he would takr thier ammo…
That’s completely backwards. The people who use the most ammo are generally the responsible gun owners who practice regularly. Meanwhile, you only need a handful of bullets to kill a lot of people, and one is enough to cause an accident. It punishes the gun owners you least want to punish while doing absolutely nothing to address the actual problems.
No, the real problem is neither the gun nor the bullet.
Either one, by themselves or together, are harmless until someone with poor training, education, and/or mental health gets involved.
Just to have fun by being a bit pedantic, the a bullet is a possible source of toxic lead, and if you are using the colloquialist ‘bullet’ to mean a charged cartidge containing a bullet, the gunpowder charge makes it a tiny bomb, which can be dangerous as well, even without a gun, especially when exposed to idiots with hammers or fire.
Playing along…
If a lead bullet in a charged and primed casing sits undisturbed in a crowded room, it will neither poison people nor discharge itself
‘Undisturbed’ is doing a bit of lifting there. The same could be said of a person, generally speaking. Leave most people in a room, they won’t hurt anyone either. It’s just a matter of what circumstances make each dangerous. If you put bullets in a room and set the room on fire, they act as little bombs. If you do that with a person, it makes them less dangerous, because they’re dead. If you put a person in solitary confinement for years on end, they’ll come out mentally disturbed, and possibly violent. Do the same with a bullet, and it comes out presenting the same hazards as when it went in.
Sure, and you can walk down the road and get struck by lightning with the same odds of a bullet randomly firing on its own and injuring or killing you.
On the flip side, the reality (to the significant digit) is that a person with a gun but no bullets can hurt you. A person with bullets but no gun can also hurt you. In fact, a person with neither a bullet nor a gun can hurt you too! It happens all the time.
But you know what doesn’t happen all the time?
A loaded gun discharging itself without a person attached.
The common theme is not the guns, it’s the people. Let’s fix that part.
Yeah, I’m with you on the direction to approach from, if slightly different in tack. I was just amusing myself. Hopefully I wasn’t causing you too much annoyance.
Nah, not annoyed. Tbh, fixing the people is going to be much harder than just regulating the implements of their destruction.
It has to be possible, though. Some places seem to manage some kind of sanity, at least.
American detected
There are many countries with many guns and substantially less gun violence than America. The common thread is not the weapon.
The practical effect of any sort of gun (or bullet) control would be to disarm the working class. I will not be disarmed under any circumstances, and the vast majority of American workers, convinced communists or not, will agree with me on refusing to disarm.
“Where the workers are employed by the state, they must arm and organize themselves into special corps with elected leaders, or as a part of the proletarian guard. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.” (Marx, Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm)
It is absolutely insane listening to people in this thread talk about how the same people that rape girls on islands in all these countries political class should take total control of our ability to arm ourselves. It is either wicked evil or bottom of the barrel stupidity.
