• 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
Goshin said:
They can; they can start fires if they're near something flammable. I'm not suggesting we sell them in the toy department at Wal-Mart... sell them as a weapon at a dealership, along with NICS check/etc.

Clothes irons and hair curlers can inflict severe burns or start fires too. :)

The world ain't a safe place...
Click to expand...

They are used for breaching rooms. This means they temporarily blind your victim. So, say I'm sitting in my living room and I hear my front door open. The first thin I would think would be, "who is that?". Next thing I know is I have a bunch of bullets in my chest.
 
Jryan said:
They are used for breaching rooms. This means they temporarily blind your victim. So, say I'm sitting in my living room and I hear my front door open. The first thin I would think would be, "who is that?". Next thing I know is I have a bunch of bullets in my chest.
Click to expand...

Well given your scenario, the flash wouldn't make much of a difference would it? You'd hear the door open, think "who is that?," and then bullets in your chest. Whether you were flashed or not is impertinent. The only possible difference would be "what color mask was my killer wearing?"
 
Jryan said:
They are used for breaching rooms. This means they temporarily blind your victim. So, say I'm sitting in my living room and I hear my front door open. The first thin I would think would be, "who is that?". Next thing I know is I have a bunch of bullets in my chest.
Click to expand...


Flip the scenario around the other way.


Your wife is a pacifist, of sorts. She won't use guns or anything likely to kill.

One night you're not home and two thugs kick in the front door.

Your wife throws a flash-bang or a teargas grenade at them to keep them busy while she and your little daughter run out the back door and over to the neighbor's house.

See my point?
 
Goshin said:
Flip the scenario around the other way.


Your wife is a pacifist, of sorts. She won't use guns or anything likely to kill.

One night you're not home and two thugs kick in the front door.

Your wife throws a flash-bang or a teargas grenade at them to keep them busy while she and your little daughter run out the back door and over to the neighbor's house.

See my point?
Click to expand...

Seems we have entered the grey area.
 
Jryan said:
If you think drunken idiots with guns are bad now, I think it would be terrible if they had flash bangs. I've also read they can give sever burns.
Click to expand...

Well yeah, but a gun can kill you.
 
Jryan said:
They are used for breaching rooms. This means they temporarily blind your victim. So, say I'm sitting in my living room and I hear my front door open. The first thin I would think would be, "who is that?". Next thing I know is I have a bunch of bullets in my chest.
Click to expand...

That's only relevant if you think there are guys with guns behind the door you're opening. If not, just head right in.
 
Jryan said:
Okay, fine, HP's shouldn't be banned. How about tracer rounds? This would give a person in a night fight the advantage over the cops (Especially if they are using an automatic weapon :))
Click to expand...
Tracers work both ways.
 
Jryan said:
Okay, so, I don't think they should be banned. SMG's should stay banned, as it has been pointed out before, Rifles (Deer hunting) can't be concealed, SMG's can. I think that is the main difference, you don't buy an SMG to hunt, you buy an SMG for an assault mission. You don't buy an SMG for defense, there are better weapons for that I think.
Click to expand...

Sure you can hide an automatic SMG or pistol but ammo is the key issue. You can only hold so much of it and automatic weapons waste it while semi auto weapons tend to be just as deadly even at close range and save ammo. Even the military teaches keeping your weapon on semi automatic when clearing a room instead of burst.
 
Jryan said:
Okay, fine, HP's shouldn't be banned. How about tracer rounds? This would give a person in a night fight the advantage over the cops (Especially if they are using an automatic weapon :))
Click to expand...

Tracers point both ways. Bad guys usually aren't set up in bunkered defensive positions at night waiting to be attacked. I with Gosh, when is the last time you heard of a gang of bad guys ambushing police? I don't have the stats, but 99% of the time the bad guys are doing all they can to avoid and/or put distance between themselves and police.
 
Goshin said:
You have a VERY active imagination.
Click to expand...

So do lawyers. If we passed a law that said any gun-owning citizen has the right to own any kind of ammunition, a creative lawyer could find ways to define numerous weapons that no one should own as ammo -- a grenade can be launched; therefore it's ammo. A pipe bomb could conceivably be hurled with a launching device; therefore it's ammo.

Goshin said:
I'd also guess you may not be up to speed on how complex and difficult nukes are to make... and to maintain.
Click to expand...

I was only thinking up the kind of weapon that would be most ridiculous to allow people to own.
 
Luna Tick said:
I was only thinking up the kind of weapon that would be most ridiculous to allow people to own.
Click to expand...

I would say attack dragons. unlike even nukes, they can act on their own and go around burning up valuable crops, cornfields, stadiums and hordes of peasant laborers.

so I would draw the line at such weapons
 
Luna Tick said:
So do lawyers. If we passed a law that said any gun-owning citizen has the right to own any kind of ammunition, a creative lawyer could find ways to define numerous weapons that no one should own as ammo -- a grenade can be launched; therefore it's ammo. A pipe bomb could conceivably be hurled with a launching device; therefore it's ammo.



I was only thinking up the kind of weapon that would be most ridiculous to allow people to own.
Click to expand...

Just ban military explosives and you're good.
 
TurtleDude said:
well I could see drawing the line on say cyanide tipped bullets or the things the Mobile Infantry Had in Starship Troopers
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. I'm not nearly enough of an expert with guns and ammo to know every single kind of exotic ammunition that is manufactured everywhere in the world. There might be some that I would think should be illegal if I knew of them, but off the top of my head I don't.
 
Ive heard of a shotgun round that basically has two projectiles that are connected by a chain. That probably can be banned.
 
Omgitsme said:
Ive heard of a shotgun round that basically has two projectiles that are connected by a chain. That probably can be banned.
Click to expand...

why, you never know when Pirate sloops may pounce on your yacht and you need something to take out their masts and rigging
 
TurtleDude said:
why, you never know when Pirate sloops may pounce on your yacht and you need something to take out their masts and rigging
Click to expand...

Lol yeah. To be honest im not sure what the point of that round is. But im pretty sure its something we dont need.
 
Jryan said:
Should all ammunition be legal?
Click to expand...

Anthrax, check.
Nukes, check.
Incendiary cluster bombs, check.
White phosphorous, check.
Land mines, check.
All sorts of other lovely stuff, check.

I guess that's what diehard Second-Amendment supporters want legalized to the general public, anyway. Guess they aren't really concerned after all that terrorists might get a hold of those munitions.
 
Phys251 said:
Anthrax, check.
Nukes, check.
Incendiary cluster bombs, check.
White phosphorous, check.
Land mines, check.
All sorts of other lovely stuff, check.

I guess that's what diehard Second-Amendment supporters want legalized to the general public, anyway. Guess they aren't really concerned after all that terrorists might get a hold of those munitions.
Click to expand...

First off I dont think many people are advocating that we need to legalize all of those. Second off i dont think thats what was meant by ammunition.
 
Phys251 said:
Anthrax, check.
Nukes, check.
Incendiary cluster bombs, check.
White phosphorous, check.
Land mines, check.
All sorts of other lovely stuff, check.

I guess that's what diehard Second-Amendment supporters want legalized to the general public, anyway. Guess they aren't really concerned after all that terrorists might get a hold of those munitions.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure you can't fire a nuke out of a gun, even a .50 caliber. We're only discussing ammunition for guns that are already legal.
 
Phys251 said:
Anthrax, check.
Nukes, check.
Incendiary cluster bombs, check.
White phosphorous, check.
Land mines, check.
All sorts of other lovely stuff, check.

I guess that's what diehard Second-Amendment supporters want legalized to the general public, anyway. Guess they aren't really concerned after all that terrorists might get a hold of those munitions.
Click to expand...


If you're going to jump into the middle of a thread with a bunch of ridiculous nonsense that almost no one is advocating, you could at least have made an attempt to be amusing about it.
 
Omgitsme said:
First off I dont think many people are advocating that we need to legalize all of those. Second off i dont think thats what was meant by ammunition.
Click to expand...

Um. Did you see the poll results?

atrasicarius said:
Pretty sure you can't fire a nuke out of a gun, even a .50 caliber. We're only discussing ammunition for guns that are already legal.
Click to expand...

And I was discussing the OP. Umadbro?

Goshin said:
If you're going to jump into the middle of a thread with a bunch of ridiculous nonsense that almost no one is advocating, you could at least have made an attempt to be amusing about it.
Click to expand...

Please take the childish insults elsewhere. kthxbai
 
Phys251 said:
Anthrax, check.
Nukes, check.
Incendiary cluster bombs, check.
White phosphorous, check.
Land mines, check.
All sorts of other lovely stuff, check.

I guess that's what diehard Second-Amendment supporters want legalized to the general public, anyway. Guess they aren't really concerned after all that terrorists might get a hold of those munitions.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom