Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Gun owners and Target shooters must read this.
#11
Doc wrote:
BTW: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/ar...mbers.html

Despite the urgent tone of this widely forwarded message, which we have been asked about dozens of times, the "Ammunition Accountability Act" so far has shown few signs of life. The National Research Council last year, in a report requested by the Department of Justice, called the technology "promising" but stopped short of recommending any requirement, and instead called for more research and competition.

The idea is being pushed mainly by a single company that holds a patent on bullet-coding technology, so far without much success. Last year lawmakers in 18 states proposed legislation that would require handgun ammunition to be coded, but not one of those bills came to a vote or even made it out of committee. In 2005 the California state Senate approved a so-called "Ammunition Accountability" measure by a vote of 21 to 18, but the proposal then died in the Assembly without coming to a vote there.




While that may be the current status of the bill, let us not forget that anti-smoking bans were once fighting a losing battle only now to have eclipsed our right to choose on how to live.
Reply
#12
Mac-A-Matic wrote:
[quote=Doc]
BTW: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/ar...mbers.html

Despite the urgent tone of this widely forwarded message, which we have been asked about dozens of times, the "Ammunition Accountability Act" so far has shown few signs of life. The National Research Council last year, in a report requested by the Department of Justice, called the technology "promising" but stopped short of recommending any requirement, and instead called for more research and competition.

The idea is being pushed mainly by a single company that holds a patent on bullet-coding technology, so far without much success. Last year lawmakers in 18 states proposed legislation that would require handgun ammunition to be coded, but not one of those bills came to a vote or even made it out of committee. In 2005 the California state Senate approved a so-called "Ammunition Accountability" measure by a vote of 21 to 18, but the proposal then died in the Assembly without coming to a vote there.




While that may be the current status of the bill, let us not forget that anti-smoking bans were once fighting a losing battle only now to have eclipsed our right to choose on how to live.
All drug laws do this. And yes, cigarettes are a drug as much as alcohol or marijuana. Not saying it's right, but considering he precedents, it shouldn't be surprising that smoking is treated this way.

I'm not a smoker, but I hope that smoking is eventually outlawed. Not because I think it should be. Not because I want to treat smokers as social pariahs, but because I think the backlash against such a legal action would be so great that it would cause us all to re-examine the prohibition of other drugs.

I think the pendulum needs to swing to one extreme before it can come back the other way. Then maybe we could end this War on Drugs and put cartels out of business.

Sorry for the threadjacking. Back to the regularly scheduled political hysteria...
Reply
#13
Non-smokers have a right to decide how to live as well, and for them that includes going to smoke-free restaurants and bars. I used to smoke myself, and I wish that some bars could remain for smokers, but I also think that when you have two opposing groups like smokers and non-smokers, you must give preference to the folks who are not doing harm—in this case the non-smokers.
Reply
#14
I listen to the show the man was on this A.m. and he had not posted the article yet online. I admit I did not read the online article thoroughly but when the program on the radio ended and and got the info the problem had not been solved....AND....Saturday there were men talking about this in a group I was in....so if the problem has been solved great but at the time I posted it had not been solved

This is RELOADS not regular ammo....I don't know if there is some confusion on this... The gov paper the man just received said from now on no more reload brass can be sold unless it is shreded and sold as SCRAP.
Reply
#15
samintx wrote:
I listen to the show the man was on this A.m. and he had not posted the article yet online. I admit I did not read the online article thoroughly but when the program on the radio ended and and got the info the problem had not been solved....AND....Saturday there were men talking about this in a group I was in....so if the problem has been solved great but at the time I posted it had not been solved

The date on the blog post that you linked to -- which says that there's no more threat -- is March 18th.
Reply
#16
Doc wrote:
> If they are going to do something like that to trace
> who fired the shot they should require the number
> to be on the bullet.

You do realize that's usually made of soft lead?


Reply
#17
RgrF wrote: ...

Umm... that's a pellet-gun pellet.
Reply
#18
This just in.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/20...-poli.html

Kill or be killed.

Oakland sniper cops killed.
Reply
#19
Go to- not related to the issue, and most gun owners honor and appreciate police officers. Oakland PD took the shooter all the way out- good for them.

Back to the issue-
I'm ignoring the FUD. I have enough legal weapons and ammo to satisfy my personal security needs. Perhaps 50 rounds for each weapon. Locked in the gun safe, trigger locks on each of the guns. I'm not planning on going to war with my neighborhood or anyone. I haven't been shot at ( in this country, anyway) for over two decades, and haven't been threatened with violence for over a year now.

I would, however, NOT wish to register my legally owned and obtained weapons. They were my father's, and my mother gave them to me when he died.
Reply
#20
waiting for the unwashed masses:

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)