So yeah you can fire a bullet so many different ways, a rusty nail and hammer will do the trick. Isn’t the real problem the frickin bullet?
I swear in Sweden or something, you can take a gun home but ammo is only sold and consumed at the range and not for taking home.
Sure, you can make this a hollistic approach regulating guns and ammo, but the ammo seems to be the bigger issue here. You can make guns easy peasy, but ammo is much harder to manufacture and easier to regulate.
This is literally a Chris Rock joke from the bigger and blacker tour.
It’s not the gun that kills you.
It’s not the projectile that kills you, it’s the impact.
This is not how it works in Sweden, if you have a license for a gun you are allowed to buy the ammunition for the specific caliber and have at home.
That’s completely backwards. The people who use the most ammo are generally the responsible gun owners who practice regularly. Meanwhile, you only need a handful of bullets to kill a lot of people, and one is enough to cause an accident. It punishes the gun owners you least want to punish while doing absolutely nothing to address the actual problems.
No, the real problem is neither the gun nor the bullet.
Either one, by themselves or together, are harmless until someone with poor training, education, and/or mental health gets involved.
Just to have fun by being a bit pedantic, the a bullet is a possible source of toxic lead, and if you are using the colloquialist ‘bullet’ to mean a charged cartidge containing a bullet, the gunpowder charge makes it a tiny bomb, which can be dangerous as well, even without a gun, especially when exposed to idiots with hammers or fire.
Playing along…
If a lead bullet in a charged and primed casing sits undisturbed in a crowded room, it will neither poison people nor discharge itself
American detected
There are many countries with many guns and substantially less gun violence than America. The common thread is not the weapon.
“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary”
Duuur we need moar guns! Our society is the free-est! My little cousin shot his sister dead when he was five!
Narrator: There are more guns than people in the US.
I don’t think he said we need more. He said don’t give up what you have. I don’t like the number of people with guns… but I do have to admit, if noone but the gov had guns. I think we would be in trouble. Nature requires opposing forces to establish equilibrium. Maybe there is another opposing force, but I can’t think of it. Admittedly, people having guns isn’t really stopping ICE from it’s rampage. But I can imagine it would be a lot worse if they had no need to fear armed resistance at all.
We live in a fascist hell hole surrounded by mentally unstable people with guns. Guns are the fucking problem, they have not solved any of our issues. They support the abusive government, not keep it in check. I am so sick of violence and the reality that every pearl clutching gun nut is only one step away from killing someone.
As they say… violence is never the answer… looks at history… uh oh… oh shit… well maybe it is.
Sounds like what you are saying is that then issue isn’t people with guns, it’s the wrong people with guns. And I very much agree. But if you take them from “the people” and leave them in the hands of groups like ICE. You have just increased the percent of people who have guns that are the wrong people.
If I could snap my fingers and make them all go away, I would. But that just ain’t possible. I support requiring licenses to have guns, and training being required for those licenses. I also support safe storage laws. But bans and restrictions that don’t actually stop anyone from having the gun they claim to control access to are pointless theater that needs to be replaced with useful legislation.
Sounds like you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about. If you think violence and murder makes us better then maybe… just maybe… You should take your own advice.
If you ignore the 2nd amendment people are fighting for the government and guns are the oppressive force then you clearly are a gun nutter, no reason to talk with you anymore.
Please just stop with the nonsense about restricting rights and bans. They work, they always have. We can ban transgender but we can’t ban a gun highlights the stupidity we face.
Ok, I get it. Your mind is made up, don’t confuse you with facts. You aren’t even reading what I am typing.
How many people have you lost to gun violence? I have lost several. How many woman do you know who were raped by gunpoint? I know several. How many people that have guns don’t properly store them? Everyone I have ever met save a couple responsible ones. For every responsibile owner there are a hundred that keep their guns loaded under their pillow.
I have read what you are saying thousands of times. It gets old.
And?
Narrator: It didn’t solve the problem, it became the problem.
You can pack your own ammo pretty easily
You make your own powder? And primer?
No, but I feel like it’s easier to get those than a gun
People are working on it.
Gun nuts, totally freaked out when Obama won. They were convinced he would takr thier ammo…
Pretty easy to make bullets tbh. And honestly I’m pro-gun. Arm the homeless. Arm trans people. Arm migrants.
Everyone needs to arm now. I did 2 years ago as a gun hating leftist, if I can, you can too.
Unironically, Chris Rock said exactly this in his 1999 comedy special “Bigger and Blacker”.
Exactly the thing I was reminded of
the key is to put a bright beautiful future ahead of a person, that could be lost if they commit a crime. simple as that.
deleted by creator
good thing your in charge of very few things
Isn’t the real problem the frickin bullet?
Terminology is going to matter here. Modern ammunition that you’re probably thinking of is sold as a self contained cartridge with a bullet (the projectile part only) at one end, some powder inside a case (brass or steel or aluminum most of the time), and a primer at the other end. You poke the primer in a very specific way which lights the powder which builds up pressure which causes the bullet to leave the case and down a barrel. The terminology matters because in the past there have been attempts to regulate the bullets by giving them each an individual serial number, or by using “microstamping” on the firing pin of the firearm to mark the case. Those proposed technologies won’t work because just standard usage of the firearm would cause any marks or microstamping to become useless very quickly, and very often the first level of argument against such a law is that the person who wrote it didn’t know enough about the technology to be trying to legislate it.
So yeah you can fire a bullet so many different ways, a rusty nail and hammer will do the trick.
Please don’t try this. Firing a cartridge this way without the structure of the firearm around it will cause it to go off in a completely uncontrolled fashion. It’s a recipe for risking losing fingers or an eye, or worse.
ammo is much harder to manufacture and easier to regulate.
The person who assassinated the former PM of Japan assembled all of the gear he had from hardware store level parts, even making his own blackpowder. That’s in Japan where gun ownership isn’t common. Since he accomplished it there it’s unlikely to be able to prevented in the US.
The kinds of laws/regulations you’re proposing are currently being used in California with regards to 3D printers. They were unworkable crap that invited government insight into everyone’s home if that person happens to own a 3D printer, and they’ll create a lot of privacy issues without solving any gun problems (the laws mandated 3D printers reject printing anything that might be a “gun part”).
You’re really proposing mandating a firearms technology level at no better than sometime in the late 1800s which won’t work to solve any societal problems we’re having now, but will hamper people banking on having them around for self defense.
Maybe consider the problem from another perspective when considering firearms regulations? Also consider that the internet just estimated that there are at least several hundred billion rounds of ammunition in the US. You won’t design a process that effectively regulates them all without moving everyone into open air prisons devoid of their possessions, and you’d not be able to pull off something like that without a bunch of said ammo. You didn’t get rid of it; you just took it out of one group’s hands.
That’s pretty epic. Didn’t know the Japanese guy built everything from scratch
It’s not intended as an epic story, rather a story about how a lot of people seem to think there’s a huge moat to creating a firearm, but there really isn’t.
I mean I didn’t agree with the whole assassination deal, but the method is interesting
There seems to be some idea that firearm manufacturing is some version of witchcraft when the reality is that it’s closer to the professor with his coconuts on Gilligan’s Island. The arguments tend to go something like: “That’s impossible” when actually it really isn’t. “That’s illegal” when not only is it not, but it’s specifically protected. “You shouldn’t do that” when some people just like to tinker. “That should be banned” without understanding that the regulatory framework to truly ban it would require tracking everything and every one at all times.
That last one is where you get into a lot of very hairy issues. Apps to track women’s periods have been datamined, and some states propose using the data to look for possible pregnancies and termination of pregnancies. You can track every purchase of barstock, milling machines, routers, tampons, router bits, buckets, bags of salt, car batteries, and every web page access, and you’ll still not stop it, but the amount of privacy you lost in trade for the attempt is staggering.
The best comment in this thread, by far, is this one as a proposed solution to the problem, but of course nobody wants to try that. Instead we want to throw regulatory spaghetti against a wall and demand that people accept less durable materials to work with or demand that people be less innovative. History suggests those approaches won’t work.
There’s a pretty massive difference between “I managed to build a simile of a single-shot rifle from scrap and kill a person with it” and “This legal assault rifle allowed me to perform mass murder in a public space”.
You talk about arms for self defense, but the rest of us don’t go around worrying about not having a 9mm or rifle in our car or next to the front door. You guys have built a problem with arms over there, and until something radical is done you’ll keep having an arms problem.
From my perspective both should be regulated.
Its much harder to cobble together a decent zipgun or slamfire than it is to reload a casing, not that either are particularly hard.
The brass is going to be the hardest thing to manufacture in bulk. You can cast your own lead, mill your own powder, and refill primers at home in your kitchen.
So yeah you can fire a bullet so many different ways, a rusty nail and hammer will do the trick.
Well, there’s also the not-small matter of aiming, or firing again if the first shot didn’t put a satisfactory hole where you wanted. Or just getting the bullet going fast enough to do damage, without a barrel to channel and contain the blast.
It’s not like the whole history of firearms after the cartridge was invented was a waste of time.
You can make guns easy peasy
Ehhh… You can make guns. Metalworking in general is beyond most people, though. And, if you want to rifle a barrel, it’s not clear if standard machine shop equipment will be enough (that’s a pretty small, tight space for a lathe tool). Easy peasy is a bit of a stretch.
but ammo is much harder to manufacture and easier to regulate
People can and do reload their own ammo. I don’t know if anybody DIYs their own smokeless powder, and that would probably be highly illegal, but I’ve heard of people making their own black powder.
