• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ammunition

Should all ammunition be legal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 18 51.4%

  • No

    Votes: 17 48.6%
  • Total voters
    35
:rantoff: Only for a moment. For gun owners. Today at the range a retired FBI agent told me the FBI and military do not use Hoppes No. 9, which I use, because it leaves a residue that becomes tacky and can becoming gummy in the barrel and in the trigger housing. That's the first time I've ever heard that.

:ranton:
 
Risky Thicket said:
Here's what I recommend:

1. Place a sign on your mailbox and on your front door and have a similar one made for your car saying - "The occupant does not support the legal ownership of guns. The occupant does not own guns and is not armed." By doing this you might encourage others to follow suit. Put your money where you mouth is and walk the talk.

2. Move to Canada.



So, Phys251, will you stand up and be heard? Show the world you are a man of conviction? No, you won't. In the end you will hide behind people who do own guns. It's safer and you know it.
Click to expand...

What is up with the childish insults? Did your football team get smacked around this weekend or something?

Nowhere on this thread have I revealed my position on gun rights, which is actually quite moderate. But the list of munitions that I gave, I would rather not fall into just anyone's hands. Would you?
 
Phys251 said:
Um. Did you see the poll results?



And I was discussing the OP. Umadbro?



Please take the childish insults elsewhere. kthxbai
Click to expand...

Let me clarify this thread, since you're apparently confused. Ammunition means pieces of metal that you shoot out of a gun. That's all anyone means by it. No one is arguing that civilians should have access to grenades, shells, chemical weapons, or whatever else you can come up with. Saying otherwise is a straw man, plain and simple.
 
atrasicarius said:
Let me clarify this thread, since you're apparently confused. Ammunition means pieces of metal that you shoot out of a gun. That's all anyone means by it. No one is arguing that civilians should have access to grenades, shells, chemical weapons, or whatever else you can come up with. Saying otherwise is a straw man, plain and simple.
Click to expand...

Actually that's not true.


am·mu·ni·tion
   [am-yuh-nish-uhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the material fired, scattered, dropped, or detonated from any weapon, as bombs or rockets, and especially shot, shrapnel, bullets, or shells fired by guns.
2. the means of igniting or exploding such material, as primers, fuzes, and gunpowder.
3. any material, means, weapons, etc., used in any conflict: a crude ammunition of stones.
​


I'm just going by the definition here. If the OP meant to refer to the specific type of ammo that is used in a gun, it should have been more specific.
 
Phys251 said:
Actually that's not true.


am·mu·ni·tion
   [am-yuh-nish-uhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the material fired, scattered, dropped, or detonated from any weapon, as bombs or rockets, and especially shot, shrapnel, bullets, or shells fired by guns.
2. the means of igniting or exploding such material, as primers, fuzes, and gunpowder.
3. any material, means, weapons, etc., used in any conflict: a crude ammunition of stones.
​


I'm just going by the definition here. If the OP meant to refer to the specific type of ammo that is used in a gun, it should have been more specific.
Click to expand...

The meaning of what someone says is more important then what is actually said. So yes it is still a strawman argument.
 
Omgitsme said:
The meaning of what someone says is more important then what is actually said. So yes it is still a strawman argument.
Click to expand...

"Should all ammunition be legal?" That is the OP. Nothing more. It is a red herring to get into an exegesis of that statement, and I will not do so.

Seriously, I do not understand the point you guys are trying to make here. I gave a clear definition of "ammunition" and a partial statement on my position on the matter. Enough with these argumenta ad hominem already.
 
Phys251 said:
What is up with the childish insults? Did your football team get smacked around this weekend or something?

Nowhere on this thread have I revealed my position on gun rights, which is actually quite moderate. But the list of munitions that I gave, I would rather not fall into just anyone's hands. Would you?
Click to expand...

There was no insult intended. May we assume then that you don't mind people having guns you just don't want them to be able to obtain bullets?

My team won. We beat Tennessee.
 
Phys251 said:
"Should all ammunition be legal?" That is the OP. Nothing more. It is a red herring to get into an exegesis of that statement, and I will not do so.

Seriously, I do not understand the point you guys are trying to make here. I gave a clear definition of "ammunition" and a partial statement on my position on the matter. Enough with these argumenta ad hominem already.
Click to expand...

Ok then. What is your stance on ammunition that is fired out of a gun?
 
Risky Thicket said:
There was no insult intended. May we assume then that you don't mind people having guns you just don't want them to be able to obtain bullets?

My team won. We beat Tennessee.
Click to expand...

Dude.

We're talking about two separate things. I was talking about any conceivable munition known to man. You, and apparently most of the others here, are strictly talking about ammo that goes inside guns. That's where the difference lies

But since this thread has been hijacked, and it's all about me now, even though I didn't want it to be...I'm perfectly fine with law-abiding citizens keeping and bearing arms. Implied in that is that the guns can be armed. Most weapons up to and possibly including fully automatics, I think, should be permissible. I do think a line has to be drawn somewhere, but the Second Amendment IMO doesn't really clarify where that line is drawn.
 
Phys251 said:
Dude.

We're talking about two separate things. I was talking about any conceivable munition known to man. You, and apparently most of the others here, are strictly talking about ammo that goes inside guns. That's where the difference lies

But since this thread has been hijacked, and it's all about me now, even though I didn't want it to be...I'm perfectly fine with law-abiding citizens keeping and bearing arms. Implied in that is that the guns can be armed. Most weapons up to and possibly including fully automatics, I think, should be permissible. I do think a line has to be drawn somewhere, but the Second Amendment IMO doesn't really clarify where that line is drawn.
Click to expand...

Hey, you were the one who brought up all these other kinds of munitions.
 
Risky Thicket said:
:rantoff: Only for a moment. For gun owners. Today at the range a retired FBI agent told me the FBI and military do not use Hoppes No. 9, which I use, because it leaves a residue that becomes tacky and can becoming gummy in the barrel and in the trigger housing. That's the first time I've ever heard that.

:ranton:
Click to expand...

#9 is a SOLVENT--you use it to clean residue from firing and gummy lubricant. after the gun is CLEANED you then lubricate it with stuff designed for that like CLP.
 
TurtleDude said:
#9 is a SOLVENT--you use it to clean residue from firing and gummy lubricant. after the gun is CLEANED you then lubricate it with stuff designed for that like CLP.
Click to expand...
What scares me is that he heard that piece of advice from a retired field agent, these are the people that some in our society believe should be the only armed citizens. If a "professional" gun user doesn't know that beyond many of our fellow enthusiasts that speaks volumes about the issue at hand.
 
LaMidRighter said:
What scares me is that he heard that piece of advice from a retired field agent, these are the people that some in our society believe should be the only armed citizens. If a "professional" gun user doesn't know that beyond many of our fellow enthusiasts that speaks volumes about the issue at hand.
Click to expand...

My 13 year old son knows more about pistols and can out shoot 90% of the cops in this world. how do I know that-he shoots competitively and goes to a prominent training academy run by cops and they say the same thing
 
Phys251 said:
Please take the childish insults elsewhere. kthxbai
Click to expand...


Quit acting like a child interrupting an adult conversation with nonsense, and you won't get those kind of responses.
 
Goshin said:
"Armor piercing bullets" are more fantasy than reality. Carbide-tipped bullets are used for a variety of purposes... some competitors use them as match-grade bullets for some reason to do with extreme accuracy, I'm not really up on all that. The military used to use them for penetration of light cover or light armored vehicles IN RIFLES, I don't know if they still do, they're supposed to be really ****ty on stopping power in .223
Click to expand...

I wish they would legalize tracers, but I guess I understand why they don't. Hell not a single day at the range goes by without tracers starting a fire...and that's at every 5th round.

How about allowing civilians to have less-than-lethal rounds, like bean-bag, for the shot-gun, and pepper balls for paint guns?
 
Jerry said:
How about allowing civilians to have less-than-lethal rounds, like bean-bag, for the shot-gun, and pepper balls for paint guns?
Click to expand...
Having been peppered with rock salt via a shotgun once, I can attest to the effectiveness of non-lethal rounds. I never TPed a yard again.
 
Jerry said:
I wish they would legalize tracers, but I guess I understand why they don't. Hell not a single day at the range goes by without tracers starting a fire...and that's at every 5th round.

How about allowing civilians to have less-than-lethal rounds, like bean-bag, for the shot-gun, and pepper balls for paint guns?
Click to expand...

I think that would be a bad idea because people could take justice into there own hands when they don't need to. IE, some neighbor kid steals a 6 pack of beer out of their garage, they go over and shoot them with a bean bag shotgun.
 
Jryan said:
I think that would be a bad idea because people could take justice into there own hands when they don't need to. IE, some neighbor kid steals a 6 pack of beer out of their garage, they go over and shoot them with a bean bag shotgun.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a shot from a bean bag shotgun will be VERY lethal
 
Proud South Korean said:
Yeah, a shot from a bean bag shotgun will be VERY lethal
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it would be lethal, I'm merely claiming that people would start to take justice into their own hands when no REAL harm has been done. Hell, if you know the kid who did it, and you feel he deserves to be punished, we have the police for that.
 
Jryan said:
I'm not saying it would be lethal, I'm merely claiming that people would start to take justice into their own hands when no REAL harm has been done. Hell, if you know the kid who did it, and you feel he deserves to be punished, we have the police for that.
Click to expand...

Try calling your local police over a teenager stealing a six-pack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom