I have posted for a few weeks now. My ideas are different because I look at thing from a different perspective than most. That doesn't mean I am not in favor of most of the same things everyone else is favor of it just means that I have a different way to achieve those things that I find important. Let me give you an example, I am agains…
I have posted for a few weeks now. My ideas are different because I look at thing from a different perspective than most. That doesn't mean I am not in favor of most of the same things everyone else is favor of it just means that I have a different way to achieve those things that I find important. Let me give you an example, I am against weapons like AR-15s. Having carried a fully automatically CAR-15 and used it in Laos when I ran Special Operations during Vietnam. I know that we will never achieve getting rid of the weapon because of the feelings of many about the 2nd Amendment. However, if we control the ammunition, the .223 and .556 and outlaw them, then an AR-15 is no more than a flat baseball bat. Look me up at stephenf.substack.com
Stephen, as a fellow Vietnam vet (25th Inf. combat medic) I do not own an AR or an AK. When guys ask me why I tell them that I used one professionally and I never want to see one again.
Years ago, after President Obama was elected, I stopped by a new gun store in town to see what they had and maybe pick up some clips for my little Walther P22. The parking lot was nearly full. As I walked in there were three pallets of ARs of varying brands and men with shopping carts (shopping carts in a gun store?) loading up. So I gave the store a look around and stopped to ask the lone cashier if they had what I was looking for. The checkout line was too long to wait for a chance to ask, but I saw--with horror--that almost every shopping cart had multiple ARs in it. I counted 5 in one guy's cart. Doing some quick math, I realized that more than a few of these men were going to miss many payments on their trailer house mortgages....
I went home that day knowing that bad things were going to happen in our country. I never went back for my mags.
Living in a semi-rural part of Georgia, I hear the AR style weapons regularly. Too many of those weapons have been made into automatics; I've heard at least three around here.
You just confirmed my worst fears about guns. These people are not going deer hunting. They are arming up for Armageddon. That is really sad and such a perversion of the Second Amendment. Freedom does not come from the barrel of a gun, but death and destruction do. I'm glad you didn't go back for those mags. Thanks.
Susan, my incident at the gun store seemed to be in response to President Obama and the irrational fear that he would "take all our guns away." But my ugly fears did turn out to be correct, unfortunately in a big way--and so are yours. I have never hunted game or varmints; however, it is just obvious you wouldn't hunt such using an assault weapon. Meat and hide are wasted.
On the other hand, students and people you disagree with (or are afraid of) are easy targets for an AR-15.....
It is too late to effectively control assault weapons, but I like Stephen's idea very much. Ruminating about how it could be accomplished.
Thanks Susan--and my little .22 pistol still has only one magazine after all these years....
Hasn’t our right to bear arms backfired? There are countless mass shootings and gun deaths. Plus, profit motives have caused our country to be filled with military style/capacity guns and has continually blocked sensible and necessary gun laws. Some type of control ( ammunition?) is essential!
It's backfired in another way too. The MAGA/Republicans are blaming Dems for supposedly major increases in crime, when gun violence is a huge part of the reason. It's mind-boggling that SCOTUS is making it ever more difficult for states to protect public safety by enacting reasonable limitations on guns.
Curious thing, how quickly people have forgotten the meaning of the 2nd Amendment before Antonin Scalia got hold of and turned it inside out. Post-Scalia, it’s as though the *opening* portion, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State”, had been inscribed using invisible ink! How those so-called “textualists” could obliterate the opening words of the Second Amendment is beyond me. They’re a bunch of Sophists, not true jurists.
Stephen, what are your thoughts on how a black market for such ammo might undermine making it illegal. Logically it would seem like the bigger the object, the easier it is to stop black marketers. Cases of ammo might be easier to smuggle that cases of guns.
Also, how long would such a law stand when it’s clearly designed to make AR-15s unusable? I’m thinking that doing something audacious would be better carried out in a straightforward way. A buy-back, where every semiautomatic owner makes a decent profit, seems a better approach to me. (Maybe after the ammo is tightly controlled?!)
Hm. Wouldn't control over the ammo meet with as stiff a resistance as control over the gun? Hasn't that happened with limitations on the size of the clip? I'm trying to figure out how this would be done.
I've always thought guns that aren't legitimate hunting weapons should be banned and safety and skill classes should be required before a license could be obtained. In CA some years ago that was true. In places where that's not going to happen then maybe such classes could be required before being issued the first hunting permit? Not something that would catch every gun owner, but something that would hopefully improve the culture of gun ownership.
Yehawes, I totally agree with you on classes and licensing. Canada is even more strict about the whole thing, including mandatory membership in a state approved gun club, with recertification intervals and mandatory hours of club instruction. You don't hear about too many mass shootings up there.
Either our politicians have already looked at controlling ammo instead of weapons and found good reasons not to try--or they have decided not to do it because "it's never been done before."
I admit that I haven't done any heavy research on the idea so far; but my brain keeps thinking it could be possible because "it's never been done before."
I am really scared that if Beto loses the election in Texas it will be because he is straight-up for banning assault weapons (like most of us). IN TEXAS. He could be thinking that the time is right because of Uvalde. I am sending money to him, but I will be crushed if a bold and brilliant man loses and Texas remains in the dark ages....
Thanks! You jump-started my brain again. What about: you can have as many assault weapons as you want to, but you can only buy so many rounds annually for each one if you bring proof that you purchased and registered that weapon in the same state. All ammo purchases uploaded to a state database by serial number. Something like that? Well, I'm a free subscriber so I will read your reply if there is one, but I'm not able to pay to subscribe YET. All monies going to various D. candidates right at the moment.
I believe that limiting the purchase of ammunition is part of many gun control bills that have been introduced. If only some of the bills would pass!
As you say here, and stated by others, we will never be able to reign in all the weapons in private hands, nor, I suspect, the amount of ammunition already in circulation, warehoused in basements, garages, shacks…
I know we’re supposed to be positive and hopeful here. My hope is that if and when push comes to shove, the American military will not fall on the side of insurrectionists.
I may be wrong, especially if kept in the correct temperatures and humidity, but I believe that ammunition has a shelf life. I know "old" ammo is often suspected of having increasing misfires.
Yes there is a shelf life, but people still fire old ammo at their own risk. I haven't heard about anyone being killed with exploding ammo, just being shot.
According to Giffords Law Center only 2 states have control laws on ammunition. Neither deal with .223 or .556 rounds. They deal with armor piercing and ,50 caliber rounds.
I wouldn't worry about the military. The military will follow the Constitution. While everyone in the military may not believe, the majority do. For what it's worth, when you talk about the military, it is only the Infantry that you need to worry about everyone else except Special Forces is support.
I did mention that I thought restrictions on ammunition purchases were in *proposed* legislation, not existing.
I have always felt that the military would side with the constitution. Prior to Trump taking office, there were news stories about military brass already determined to prevent him from using nuclear weapons.
My more recent concerns arose after January 6 and the investigations revealed the extent to which some security agencies were willing to do the bidding of Trump and his followers. hopefully, this is a test that will never come to pass.
I agree about some of the agencies, but certainly not all. If you read My Newsletter you will see I believe the guys that run the Russian army feel the same way when it cones to Nuclear weapons.
I read one of your newsletters. It was very impressive. It was one regarding Andrew Johnson and Sheridan. What white people have done to Black people in this country is abhorrent, well beyond even the awful act of slavery. I knew about such things in the abstract, but the source description was shocking
Buy them back and warehouse them or use them in legitimate military defense of freedom. Ukraine for instance has been working wonders with other countries' old and "outdated" guns and armaments.
I have posted for a few weeks now. My ideas are different because I look at thing from a different perspective than most. That doesn't mean I am not in favor of most of the same things everyone else is favor of it just means that I have a different way to achieve those things that I find important. Let me give you an example, I am against weapons like AR-15s. Having carried a fully automatically CAR-15 and used it in Laos when I ran Special Operations during Vietnam. I know that we will never achieve getting rid of the weapon because of the feelings of many about the 2nd Amendment. However, if we control the ammunition, the .223 and .556 and outlaw them, then an AR-15 is no more than a flat baseball bat. Look me up at stephenf.substack.com
Stephen, as a fellow Vietnam vet (25th Inf. combat medic) I do not own an AR or an AK. When guys ask me why I tell them that I used one professionally and I never want to see one again.
Years ago, after President Obama was elected, I stopped by a new gun store in town to see what they had and maybe pick up some clips for my little Walther P22. The parking lot was nearly full. As I walked in there were three pallets of ARs of varying brands and men with shopping carts (shopping carts in a gun store?) loading up. So I gave the store a look around and stopped to ask the lone cashier if they had what I was looking for. The checkout line was too long to wait for a chance to ask, but I saw--with horror--that almost every shopping cart had multiple ARs in it. I counted 5 in one guy's cart. Doing some quick math, I realized that more than a few of these men were going to miss many payments on their trailer house mortgages....
I went home that day knowing that bad things were going to happen in our country. I never went back for my mags.
Living in a semi-rural part of Georgia, I hear the AR style weapons regularly. Too many of those weapons have been made into automatics; I've heard at least three around here.
You just confirmed my worst fears about guns. These people are not going deer hunting. They are arming up for Armageddon. That is really sad and such a perversion of the Second Amendment. Freedom does not come from the barrel of a gun, but death and destruction do. I'm glad you didn't go back for those mags. Thanks.
Susan, my incident at the gun store seemed to be in response to President Obama and the irrational fear that he would "take all our guns away." But my ugly fears did turn out to be correct, unfortunately in a big way--and so are yours. I have never hunted game or varmints; however, it is just obvious you wouldn't hunt such using an assault weapon. Meat and hide are wasted.
On the other hand, students and people you disagree with (or are afraid of) are easy targets for an AR-15.....
It is too late to effectively control assault weapons, but I like Stephen's idea very much. Ruminating about how it could be accomplished.
Thanks Susan--and my little .22 pistol still has only one magazine after all these years....
Brilliant!
Control the ammunition. Brilliant.
Hasn’t our right to bear arms backfired? There are countless mass shootings and gun deaths. Plus, profit motives have caused our country to be filled with military style/capacity guns and has continually blocked sensible and necessary gun laws. Some type of control ( ammunition?) is essential!
It's backfired in another way too. The MAGA/Republicans are blaming Dems for supposedly major increases in crime, when gun violence is a huge part of the reason. It's mind-boggling that SCOTUS is making it ever more difficult for states to protect public safety by enacting reasonable limitations on guns.
Agreed 100 percent.
Curious thing, how quickly people have forgotten the meaning of the 2nd Amendment before Antonin Scalia got hold of and turned it inside out. Post-Scalia, it’s as though the *opening* portion, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State”, had been inscribed using invisible ink! How those so-called “textualists” could obliterate the opening words of the Second Amendment is beyond me. They’re a bunch of Sophists, not true jurists.
Michael: Wow!
Stephen, what are your thoughts on how a black market for such ammo might undermine making it illegal. Logically it would seem like the bigger the object, the easier it is to stop black marketers. Cases of ammo might be easier to smuggle that cases of guns.
Also, how long would such a law stand when it’s clearly designed to make AR-15s unusable? I’m thinking that doing something audacious would be better carried out in a straightforward way. A buy-back, where every semiautomatic owner makes a decent profit, seems a better approach to me. (Maybe after the ammo is tightly controlled?!)
Interesting idea. This is a really useful discussion.
Didn't Chris Rock say something like that in one of his shows some time back? Something like bullets costing $5K each. Indeed, control the ammunition.
Hm. Wouldn't control over the ammo meet with as stiff a resistance as control over the gun? Hasn't that happened with limitations on the size of the clip? I'm trying to figure out how this would be done.
I've always thought guns that aren't legitimate hunting weapons should be banned and safety and skill classes should be required before a license could be obtained. In CA some years ago that was true. In places where that's not going to happen then maybe such classes could be required before being issued the first hunting permit? Not something that would catch every gun owner, but something that would hopefully improve the culture of gun ownership.
Yehawes, I totally agree with you on classes and licensing. Canada is even more strict about the whole thing, including mandatory membership in a state approved gun club, with recertification intervals and mandatory hours of club instruction. You don't hear about too many mass shootings up there.
Either our politicians have already looked at controlling ammo instead of weapons and found good reasons not to try--or they have decided not to do it because "it's never been done before."
I admit that I haven't done any heavy research on the idea so far; but my brain keeps thinking it could be possible because "it's never been done before."
I am really scared that if Beto loses the election in Texas it will be because he is straight-up for banning assault weapons (like most of us). IN TEXAS. He could be thinking that the time is right because of Uvalde. I am sending money to him, but I will be crushed if a bold and brilliant man loses and Texas remains in the dark ages....
Thanks! You jump-started my brain again. What about: you can have as many assault weapons as you want to, but you can only buy so many rounds annually for each one if you bring proof that you purchased and registered that weapon in the same state. All ammo purchases uploaded to a state database by serial number. Something like that? Well, I'm a free subscriber so I will read your reply if there is one, but I'm not able to pay to subscribe YET. All monies going to various D. candidates right at the moment.
Many thanks to our host!
There might be resistance but there is no Constitutional Amendment to worry about.
I believe that limiting the purchase of ammunition is part of many gun control bills that have been introduced. If only some of the bills would pass!
As you say here, and stated by others, we will never be able to reign in all the weapons in private hands, nor, I suspect, the amount of ammunition already in circulation, warehoused in basements, garages, shacks…
I know we’re supposed to be positive and hopeful here. My hope is that if and when push comes to shove, the American military will not fall on the side of insurrectionists.
I may be wrong, especially if kept in the correct temperatures and humidity, but I believe that ammunition has a shelf life. I know "old" ammo is often suspected of having increasing misfires.
Yes there is a shelf life, but people still fire old ammo at their own risk. I haven't heard about anyone being killed with exploding ammo, just being shot.
According to Giffords Law Center only 2 states have control laws on ammunition. Neither deal with .223 or .556 rounds. They deal with armor piercing and ,50 caliber rounds.
I wouldn't worry about the military. The military will follow the Constitution. While everyone in the military may not believe, the majority do. For what it's worth, when you talk about the military, it is only the Infantry that you need to worry about everyone else except Special Forces is support.
I did mention that I thought restrictions on ammunition purchases were in *proposed* legislation, not existing.
I have always felt that the military would side with the constitution. Prior to Trump taking office, there were news stories about military brass already determined to prevent him from using nuclear weapons.
My more recent concerns arose after January 6 and the investigations revealed the extent to which some security agencies were willing to do the bidding of Trump and his followers. hopefully, this is a test that will never come to pass.
I agree about some of the agencies, but certainly not all. If you read My Newsletter you will see I believe the guys that run the Russian army feel the same way when it cones to Nuclear weapons.
I read one of your newsletters. It was very impressive. It was one regarding Andrew Johnson and Sheridan. What white people have done to Black people in this country is abhorrent, well beyond even the awful act of slavery. I knew about such things in the abstract, but the source description was shocking
That was why I posted Sheridan's comments. I had never seen anything like his comments until I read his memoirs.
Prime Minister of NZ on Colbert on gun control: “ We will buy them back and we will destroy them.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qai8LdcY9LQ
Buy them back and warehouse them or use them in legitimate military defense of freedom. Ukraine for instance has been working wonders with other countries' old and "outdated" guns and armaments.