Would you be willing to give up some of your rights

[havegunjoe]

Giving up your rights is not the way to fight crime/terrorism. Besides it has done nothing in the past to make us safer. I hate hearing the sheep bleat “yes I would if it will make me safer”. I want to scream in their ear, “wake up you idiot, it does nothing to make you safer. It just gives the government more control over you”.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[762]

the govt. wont just come out and take them all away at once...they will errode them away little by little by little until one day the wake up and they have no more rights. a great number of people in this country will actually find that feeling comforting.

[kpw]

No way! What next? Register your reloaders? How about ID for gasoline? That way we can be sure the terrorists aren't going to make molotov cocktails. And then lets talk about propane tanks...

If we could save just one life... NONSENSE!

[sniper58]

No here too for the aforementioned reasons.

[HotGuns]

I just wanna know who the yahoo is that voted YES...




somebody get a rope !

[titleist]

I must be reading the poll different than y'all. I'm reading it as "If it DID stop BG's from buying bullets, would you be okay to submit to a background check?"
Seems like everyone else is reading it as "Do you think a background check would stop BG's from buying ammo?" Two entirely different questions, IMO.

[Redneck Repairs]

I have cans of powder , and boxes of brass that easily can be stacked to the celing . I have moulds and have a source for tire weights as well as a bunch of old batterys ( yes i know to wear a resperator if needed ) .

To answer the op , the feds and states allready have enough of my rights , i will not surrender one more unless and untill they give some back .

[rottkeeper]

Just another hook for us fish and I'm not biting. Why must the law abiding give up anything because of those who don't. It stars a slow erosion of our civil liberties one piece at a time. Like here in New York before you can buy a new handgun it has to be sent to Albany where they fire a round to retain the casing to keep in the database. It has yet to solve a single crime, and we can thank Hillery. By the way would anyone care to have her in your state.

[762]

so if ammo registration was instituted nationwide, would everyone continue to buy?

[Redneck Repairs]

Just another hook for us fish and I'm not biting. Why must the law abiding give up anything because of those who don't.

because we allways do on one point or another , we dont mention that " gun control laws " dont fix anything , they restrict us .

[Skygod]

The results of this FBI study really don't surprise me as I've been saying this same thing for years regarding the "mindset" and "Training" of bad guy's on the street.

The average gang banger has shot on a two way range not once, not twice, but mulitiple time and he or she knows that speed, surprise and violence of action are paramount to their objectives, which is survive the gunfight and walk away from being apprehended.

Police Officers should be funded to attend multiple pistol and carbine courses from the highest tier instructors during their careers and to continue sustainment training each year with similar courses.

Way too man LEO's take their skill sets for granted, which aren't that damn good in the first place. Add in a bad decision, increased heart rate, increased respiratory rate, loss of fine motor skills and you've got your self and out gunned patrolman carrying the latest greatest Sig or H&K pistol.

Additional mindset training is what seems to be lacking, especially in society that so determined to be PC correct and that less than lethal options should alway's be their first course of action.

As a carry concealed permit you have the right to determine when your life is threatened and you are not bound by a departments use of force continuim with maze, tasers and then firearms.

Good read.

[Thanis]

Make that a yes for me in theory, but a big HELL NO in RL.

I am concerned they want to regulate to the point of prohibition. The "criminals will get ammo" argument is a little weak when it comes to regulation. It is a stronger argument vs prohibition.

Stacked deck on this forum. Almost everyone will answer no. I voted yes (on a website poll) because:

I would like to hinder the bad guy from aquiring ammo.

I don't see a problem (AT ALL) with the ID check. If it is done for beer, smokes, and NC-17 movies, then a check for ammo should not be a big deal.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the back ground check. Question, yes or no, do you want to stop the bad guy from getting ammo? I answer a crazy & nieve yes! Please stop the bad guy. I don't want the bad guy from getting AMMO, even if he could get the gun & ammo from the criminal market. I would like there to be a way to stop a felon from being able to go to a retail shop and get ammo.

Fact: the whole "criminals will get guns anyway argument" does not work well with regulating firearms. It is flawed logic.

However, is a sound and logical argument against prohibition arguments (e.g. Washington DC).

Maybe once you let the anti-gun crowd require a back ground check for ammo, they could demand serial numbered ammo (increasing cost). Then they will increase taxes on ammo (to pay for all the gun related social ills to society). Then require people who reload to pay a fee to document to the ATF serial numbered cases that have been reloaded. Knock, knock. Who's there? ATF!

Then make it mandatory that you have to qualify for every fire arm you own on a monthly basis (more costs). Then they will show pictures of the children and say “We have to save the children!” Score 100% on your shooting and better not have anything close to over-penetrating rounds.

Finally you get to a point where a right (not a privilege, but a Constitutional right) costs too much and / or can not be maintained by the lawful citizen.

Then you go to jail for practicing your God given right to protect yourself. While you are in jail, the criminal get to know your wife during the trial, they fall in love, marry, your kids are calling him dad, your doing unspeakable acts to stay alive, and he is watching your big screen TV. I’ve seen it a hundred times.

So, yes or no, do you like performing unspeakable acts? If you answer no, then you should also answer no to ammo back ground regulations. The socially advanced and elite intellectuals (who are the only ones who really should have guns) will trick you using Jedi mind tricks.

So the only way I would vote for a proposal that required a back ground check for ammo is if the proposal included a clause that would state, in detail….

On second thought, having read many confusing proposals, I don’t think this could be done “clearly” beyond, “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms…” Now that’s clear. So until I get arms like a bear, I want a gun and cases of ammo!

Make that a yes for me in theory, but a big HELL NO in RL.

[FN1910]

Let me expound on my original answer. If doing away with 2A altogether and the banning of firearms from the face of the earth etc. was possible and eliminate crime I would have no problem with giving those rights up. However we know that isn't going to work and registration or ID checks of ammo isn't going to work so there is no use making a poll for it. David killed Goliath with a rock and a gun is just the modern equivalent. Banning guns is just going to make everyone turn to rocks for weapons.

[Paco]

Since the poll was asking a hypothetical scenario, but the Govt. doesn't get that and we all know what it would really mean, I voted NO. I don't like giving them what I have to now, to buy a car, house, gun, etc I don't want to add to the list.

[Hopyard]

My question is this: In an effort to make it hard for convicted felons to purchase ammo, would you be willing to give up some of your rights to allow the Government to require ID and a background check prior to buying ammo?

No. It would necessarily cause the price to increase (more than it has already) as someone would have to pay the cost of the background check---and that would be, the purchaser of course.

Besides, there would be a new black market in ammo to go along with the black market in guns.

These things just don't work well to solve real problems.