I'm sure many readers have heard of the proposal to tightly regulate ammunition sales in New York state.
The legislation would place a strict limit on the number of bullets a gun owner could purchase over a 90-day time period, and prevent gun dealers from selling ammunition for a firearm to anyone unauthorized to have such a weapon.
. . .
While the measure is aimed at owners of assault rifles, the language contained in the draft legislation would also affect owners of handguns with much smaller capacities, such as six-shooters.
Since the measure would cap the amount of ammunition to no more than twice the amount of the capacity of the weapon every 90 days, these gun owners would be limited to buying a dozen bullets every three months.
. . .
While the practicality of limiting small-capacity gun owners to a less than a box of bullets is unexplored, those familiar with the legislation say the lawmakers look upon the language as a starting point in negotiations.
There's more at the link. The proposal is accompanied by all the usual whingeing, hand-wringing and emotional appeals we've come to expect from moonbats of this ilk.
Quite apart from its impracticality (you're going to restrict the owner of a 5-shot snubnose revolver to ten rounds of ammo for it every three months? Really?), this illustrates the depths to which anti-gunners will sink in their efforts to impose their will on the rest of us. They've already abandoned logic and rational thought, as we discussed after the San Bernardino terrorist attack. Now they've decided that if they can't ban the instrument itself, they'll do their best to ban its fuel. It's like trying to combat drunk drivers by controlling how much gasoline every driver can buy over a given period, whether they're drunk or not. The idea is nonsensical . . . not least because there are literally millions of gun-owners out there who reload their own ammunition. It will be child's play for gang-bangers and criminals to obtain more ammunition than the proposed legislation allows. All they have to do is buy it out of state, or buy it privately from those who've built up stocks, or have someone reload it for them, or reload their own. It couldn't be easier.
Nevertheless, this is yet another important wake-up call to those of us who take self-defense and personal security seriously. Check your ammo stocks, friends. I've written before about "How much ammunition is 'enough'?" I suggest you take a look at that article, and also make sure you have enough for ongoing practice. In the light of idiotic proposals such as this, you might want to double or triple your stocks, just in case. (I don't need to. I did so long ago, because I've run into fools like these before.)
Peter
13 comments:
...a starting point in negotiations.
Well, since we are all starting with our throw-away options, I suggest that the law includes provisions for authorizing free guns and ammunition for all in state citizens who are not presently locked behind bars or in mental hospitals. Add to that a generous stipend from Bloomberg to support the NRA "outreach" efforts to children.
Let's find the middle ground from there.
I try to buy some everytime I go to Wal Mart.
As this would limit Joe Biden with his over/under shotgun to 4 rounds every 3 month I suppose it's not ALL bad but still... Note that the law also outright bans the sale of .223 and 5.56 calibers. I have not heard of a ban on 7.62 in any length possibly because that is also a popular hunting caliber so while your .308 is protected, there's a Kalashnikov loophole built in.
Counter proposal: Lets limit everyone not currently in detention to 2000 rounds/month in each caliber with no caliber off the list and no records of any sort kept. Since the buyers are not in detention, we presume their honesty and will accept a verbal statement that they're not buying extra bricks of .22 over the allowed limit.
I recall years ago how my LDS cousins in Utah would about once a month make a beer run over to the Colorado line coming back home with cases of cheap beer.
Were this proposal actually put into practice I predict much the same is done, at least until NY residents can arrange to move out of state.
Couldn't help but think, trap and skeet shooters? Either exempt shotgun ammo or see that sport effectively banned to all New York residents. And much the same for target shooters.
For myself, a few hundred rounds of hunting ammo is sufficient. For everything else, I consider a thousand rounds a good start. For rimfire I get anxious anytime the stock falls below a case of 5,000.
But then I have kids, grandkids, and good friends who expect me to keep them shooting.
NY residents already go out of state for everything else they get taxed or restricted on. Alcohol, cigarettes and fireworks, just to name a few. And, if you can believe Bloomberg, guns.
I read these stories and I can't help but think of someone I know who's had 100K rounds of .22lr put away for years. I suspect he watches ammo market fluctuations with some detachment. Imagine the heart attacks among down state politicians if he lived in New York.
Mr Adams the proponent of this bill is supposedly one of the principle drafters of the NY "SAFE act", and here he is duplicating provisions of that act (ID to purchase ammo) that are:
A) Already Law in the state.
B) Not yet enforced because even after lo-these-many-years the state is incompetent to set up the system to do such checks.
He is also a 22 year veteran of the NYPD, but has set the limit so low that if NYPD officers had to provide their own ammunition they would have to accumulate it over several years just to have enough for the qualification test, let alone any practice.
And I shot just over 300 rounds of 9mm and 45 yesterday afternoon. Half of the brass is currently in the tumbler and the other half has been through the case prep to be reloaded. Yesterday I shot about twice what I normally shoot every week - my mother-in-law came to visit and I needed to work off some additional stress.
I am a casual shooter. Some of the people I know average 500 rounds per week. I can't afford to shoot that much and I can only realistically reload about 300 per week with the equipment I have.
Glad I don't live in a anti-Constitution state like NY.
Add one provision, then put it to vote as written. No exemption for law enforcement from any state gun laws.
It will fail. Even if it doesn't, Between pissed off citizens and cops who cannot qualify or carry a firearm because of lack of ammo, the whole scheme should collapse in about 6 months.
Sometimes, the best negotiating stance is, "F you, do what you want, I won't participate."
FormerFlyer
So...now they want us NOT to practice and become competent? I foresee Supreme Court cases. Or, lots of upstate politicians losing their jobs.
NYC, maybe. Where I am it's four hours in any direction to cross a border. :(
This is why you need "high-Capacity magazines", at least then you can buy enough ammo out of Joey Fingers trunk to do a few drive-by's a quarter. Do you ever wonder how people so stupid are able to go to the bathroom on their own?
I wonder what Mr. Adams will say if he figures out people reload? Or is he trying to limit components, too?
Post a Comment