Ammo Sales

[jjtroutbum]

Open carry is limited by every little city or town council that wishes to disallow it. Leaving a patch work of laws from one block to the next in the cities (st. Louis has complete prohibition of open carry)of Missouri they are the very places where one is IMHO at greatest risk.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Thanks JJ.

I want to clarify that I am not anti gun. I am not against any traditional revolver, rifle or shotgun. I am not to hip though on assault type weapons and ballistics that were designed for killing humans instead of game.

[jdmidwest]

For the record, I did not vote for the Current Administration.

The Assault Rifle Ban of 1994 was enacted by the Clinton Administration. It banned a large number of weapons from import based on physical characteristics. It also required US Manufacturers to change design of a large number of weapons to make them acceptable under the law. It outlawed production of magazines larger than 10 rounds and folding stocks to any persons other than Law Enforcement. Parts of it were written by Biden and the Brady's pushed it hard. Other bans took place like the one making it Illegal to own or possess a handgun in their homes in D.C. Several states went above Federal Firearms laws and enacted goofy stuff like making handguns disabled if mags were not inserted and other things. Certain states made it mandatory that you have some kind of locking device on a weapon to disable it. Massive lawsuits were launched against gun makers to try to make them liable for deaths caused by the weapons. Ammunition was outlawed because it caused too much damage, remember the Black Talon. Background checks and waiting periods were enacted.

The Bush Administration allowed the Assault Rifle Ban to expire. The Supreme Court upheld last summer the right of D.C. citizens to own handguns and possess them in their homes. Concealed carry started becoming an option in many states.

As citizens of MO, we were immune from alot of this, it did not affect us. We have always had sensible gun laws with the exception of the STL and KS City areas. We are not One Nation Under God that abides by the Second Amendment, each individual state has its own set of gun laws and even some counties and cities have them too. In reality, there should be one universal set of laws and states should not be allowed to modify it.

[DoveTail]

I am not to hip though on assault type weapons and ballistics that were designed for killing humans instead of game.

Not to debate, but someone that shoots black powder in a .45 cal or .50 cal and shoots a big buck will leave the animal alone because those ballistics may not be as effective as other centerfire ammo. Probably everyone has a .30-06, many were brought home from WWII and continued as an effective hunting round. There have been a lot of ballistics developed since then. A human is approximately 200 lbs as are deer or other game. So an effective round on game can have devastating effects on humans. President Regan was shot with a .22 caliber! That was a serious injury but he pulled through it. Bottom line, I don't want to be hit with any round.

There are many hunting applications for high capacity clips and guns for management and control - feral hogs for example. The problem with trying to identify which weapons can be used to kill "humans" is the list can include every caliber and type of gun.

I am for STRONG punishment for any offenses with the use of firearms. In my opinion, we want to protect the criminals saying they had a bad childhood so we need to control the rest of the public with anti gun legislation instead. There will always be some whacko that goes off the deep end. I think it is good for a criminal to think if they decide to break into someone's home there is a VERY good chance there is a high capacity clip in a firearm that will be pointed in their direction. Too bad society does have criminals in it, but I don't want to be a statistic.

[trout fanatic]

I have never been one to join anything but I will be a member of the NRA soon. Real soon.

[bigredbirdfan]

People kill people and in case you didn't notice there are plenty of morons around theses days.

The right wack job could get it done with household chemicals or forrest fires.

[jdmidwest]

There are many uses for the weapons banned by the Assault Rifle ban. Any 223 is legal for deer although a little light. I have carried my AR 15 on those nasty days when my nice walnut stocks would absorb too much moisture and damage them. 223 is great for coyotes, groundhogs, crows, prairie dogs, hogs, and target practice. Other military weapons banned were chambered in 308, 30.06, and 7.62 x 58 which is the SKS/AK 47 round. These are heavy enough to take most large game animals. Since the ban, a majority of rifles are fitted with black synthetic stocks, a signature that used to be primarily assault rifles.

Plus side about any cartridge that is chambered for a military weapon, ammo and brass are usually readily available and cheaper.

Just because you can't justify a use for a weapon is no excuse for it to be banned. Personally, I would never own or shoot a Lorcin or Hi Point pistol but I would not ban it. There are consumers out there that enjoy them and it is the only pistol they can afford.

If a citizen is capable of owning a legal firearm, I don't feel we need to restrict that citizen's choices.

As far as killing humans, ballistics really does not come into play. Most humans could be killed or incapacitated with any round applied at close ranges. Most human target practice takes place in the distance of 7-15 yards, that is the range you need to qualify for concealed weapon use and is the range you will probably be at in self defense situations. Meanwhile, most hunting cartridges are designed and sighted in at distances of 100-200 yards and bullets are designed for terminal effects at that range and beyond.

Please don't make statements about weapons that you are not hip enough to realize what they really are. And please don't make judgements about weapons based on your lack of knowledge about their use and capabilities. That is how gun bans are made. Someone may not realize that the single shot 22 rifle with a black synthetic stock you buy for your son has a reason, they may misinterpret is as a mean, ugly, weapon of mass destruction whose only reason for existence is to destroy humans because it looks like the black plastic M16 rifle that the military uses.

[jjtroutbum]

Thanks JJ.

I want to clarify that I am not anti gun. I am not against any traditional revolver, rifle or shotgun. I am not to hip though on assault type weapons and ballistics that were designed for killing humans instead of game.

Your welcome

I am of the mind that the Second Amendment you know the one that defends every other part of the Bill of Rights and Constitution had it right and meant exactly as it was written. You know the "Shall not be infringed part."

If ya ever want to get "hip" and are near the Lou send me a PM. I'll try and find the time to take you out and let ya shoot some real Homeland Security .

[RSBreth]

The "I don't like this or that type of firearm but mine are O.K. " is the type of thinking that divides all gun owners, much to the liking of people who really want to take away that right. Only by standing together will gun control be held back. There are no "reasonable restrictions" that will satisfy gun banners, only total confiscation. You can't be trusted, you know. Only the government is responsible enough, and knows what's best for you.

The other point is the 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting.

It says the right of us folks "the people", to keep and bear "Arms". Short for armaments. As in military.

I think we had just thrown of the yoke of an imperial government by force of arms, both with a cobbled together army and also a militia armed with their personal "Arms." The founding fathers thought it was important. It's the second amendment of the constitution, the first is the right of free speech.

It's a shame people will barter it (and other freedoms) away so easy now.

This topic always devolve into this type of debate, and I'll probably regret putting my two cents in here, but geez.

Shouldn't we be fishing right now?

[jdmidwest]

Why do we need assault rifles? You don't hunt with assault rifles... do you?

Also, you can't revolt over taxes. That would be dumb. We need taxes to pay for things. The national debt that has been largely inflated because of these wars needs to be paid for... they need taxes for that... among other things.

Do you read all of the posts or just the ones you try to comment on?

I hunt with Assault Rifles, alot of people hunt with Assault rifles.

As far as taxes and revolt, do you remember the part in America History where the American Revolution was started because the British over taxed us? The country was started in a revolt over taxes.