...After watching trends across the country here’s my prediction: the next big “gun safety” push will take aim at regulating the bullets that make guns so deadly. Currently, there are few controls on ammunition sales in this country. There is a federal law that says those who are not legally allowed to buy or have a gun — a convicted felon, for example – are also not allowed to buy bullets, but there is no real system in place to enforce that. In Pennsylvania, bullets are offered like snack food from vending machines. At pharmacies in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and Texas customers have been able to buy guns and ammunition along with their prescription medications. And, of course, residents in almost every state can buy ammo via the internet, although sometimes government-issued identification and/or a valid gun license is required. It is incredibly hassle-free to buy high capacity magazines and bulk bullets online. A 100-round magazine for an AR-15, a favorite of several recent mass shooters, can be had for as low as 125 bucks. Case in point: James Holmes, the young man who walked into a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., and fatally shot 12 people and wounded 70 others, had stockpiled 6,000 bullets from various online sites. There was no way for authorities to track all his purchases. That was in 2012 and now, years later, little has changed to regulate online sales of ammunition. Some states have moved to restrict sales of large-capacity magazines and feeding devices that allow quick release of multiple bullets. But California has gone much further. It has become the model for the anti-bullet movement...MORE
1 comment:
This poor soul must not have access to the internet, or have a television, because it isn’t exactly hard to find gun control pushers explicitly stating that not only is full disarmament their ultimate goal, but that many would not only welcome, indeed relish the opportunity to murder fellow citizens to get the job done. The “nobody is out to take your guns” talking point is definitely on the downward side of its half life at this point.
I am sorry that Ms. Diamond feels that we do not adequately complain about the litany of other senseless rules that make daily life harder, and generally prop up small groups of wealthy and connected individuals at the expense of the greater number. I thought we had done a good job here bitching about gas cans that don’t work, being forced to pour booze in our gas tanks, and subsidizing a bunch of weirdos trashing a specific portion of the Nevada Desert year after year, among other things. Alas, perhaps we should try harder.
I remain curious, well not really, as to why people who desire to continue to own property they duly paid for are considered paranoid for desiring that, but somehow helicopter parents and activists who worry about people getting shot, something with a probability of occurrence far below one’s chances of winning a record sum lotto or dying from a bee sting, are not considered paranoid. Add to this that your best shot, as it were, at being on the front lines of “gun violence” involves law enforcement on the other side, and you’ve got some serious cognitive dissonance going on, as said activists constantly say how only police should have guns. Then, there is this obsession these people have with tracking this very specific class of private property, to a point we do not do with any other article that I know of.
Do we have large, corporately funded groups out there working to undermine the First Amendment the way we do the Second, by the way? You might ask yourself why this is.
Post a Comment