Two Democratic congressman want to raises taxes on guns and ammo. The way I look at this will make guns only affordable by the rich. Should only the rich afford to protect themselves? http://www.guns.com/2013/08/27/two-house-dems-introduce-bill-raise-taxes-handguns-ammo-video/
No surprise, really. Banning them trough legislature has been a failure, so they will make it economically improbable for people to purchase a firearm and ample ammunition. The DHS bought up over a billion rounds of ammunition, the EPA is shutting down lead processing plants, and its going to be highly taxed.
Then I need like a chain gun or something.... Well, if that one is a Senator from California, you might want to rethink that answer.
I never said anything about "magazine clips" rofl - - - Updated - - - Then you have no clue what you are talking about.
You can't have it both ways. One of your complaints is that people aren't trained in the use and handling of a gun. To stay well trained you should go to the range at least once a year or more. You don't want people walking around with guns that don't know to use them do you? By you I mean the left wing
I don't recall complaining that people aren't trained--I just acknowledge that some people are idiots with guns and could benefit from some structured activity. I am indifferent to training these days, just as I am indifferent to taxing ammo by the round. A 300% tax is fine with me; a 500% tax is fine with me. I am just curious as to how many rounds one feels they need in any given year to properly defend themselves.
Absolutely! Maybe that will even up the odds when Obama's class warfare breaks out. The wealthy may be outnumbered by the Obamabots but they'll have the advantage when the 99%'ers start to get low on ammo.
1,000,000 per gun per year sounds about right to me. As a training supply. For actual defense? Oh, that could run the numbers up a bit.
Now if your talking self defense. Let see I was in Katrina and seen that mad house. And I know this could happen again. How many looter did they have there? Double that number
Up until recently I competed a American Skeet. Shot between 12,500 and 13,000 shotgun shell each year. I now shoot 200-300 handgun rounds per month. I have a carry permit, and because I have nothing to hide, I voluntarily underwent a background check to get that permit. Practice makes me more competent and safer, and the people around me safer. I would think those who call for background checks would be happy in the explosive increase in the number of carry permits being issued, because every one of them required a background check.
It is up to the individual on the amount of ammunition required. There really is no precise amount, nor should there be.
Sounds expensive, but man I wish I could do that. I am short of cash for ammo at the moment, but I usually buy a box once a week or every other week just to have an ample amount on hand. How much was that costing you on average?
1,000,000 It is a gross violation of property and privacy rights to attempt to regulate people out of as much ammo as they wish. Why should the government have millions of rounds while I am limited to six or 100. It is nothing more than a blatent attempt to make an end run around the human right to be armed as protected by the second amendment
You need glasses, to check your sites, or some serious range instruction if you need 1,000,000 rounds to defend yourself, unless of course you are a drug king pin.
Per month bud. - - - Updated - - - I would suugest participating in a firearms based self-defense course before pretending to be an authority on the subject.
