Weapons are not the answer

Weapons from the Potomac.

In the old days of early America there were very few gun laws.  Why?  First of all they were needed for hunting your supper.  Second of all there were even fewer towns.  Finally there was this thing called the Right to bear arms floating about.  Seems that the boys in that town by the Patomac River had at least thought about it.  Kind of made sense when you needed a pistol just to visit the latrine.

Currently there are all kinds of laws on what you can purchase to where you can live.  The problem with many people living in a small area is that tempers tend to flare as often as the weather changes.  If everybody owned a weapon there might be more shootings or less depending upon the weather.  However if you truely want to control something then take away the fuel for the problem.

Fighting a fire you take away wood to stop the fire from spreading.  In fighting a war you take away the ammunition and the weapons stop working.  More laws on who owns what will cause a black market to erupt and there goes good intentions.  Instead create limits on amounts owned and you put a stop on the problem.  For example if you limit a person to 200 rounds of owned ammo and require that person to turn in their brass for a count then they can only buy 200 rounds with 200 brass shells.  Make a data base to monitor purchases and they can only own 200 rounds no matter where they buy from.  Ban weapons and the balck market springs up and all kinds of weapons start showing up.


This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Cunninglinguest September 07, 2013 at 02:30 PM
Faulty and simplistic logic. "Ban weapons and the black market springs up. Instead create limits on amounts of ammunition owned and you put a stop on the problem." If limits on ammo was legislated, a black market for ammo would also spring up to address the difference between supply and demand. Banning or limiting anything always creates a black market for said items.
Philip September 08, 2013 at 04:22 PM
Agreed however if there is a data base to limit your ammo then no matter how you got the ammo if you pass the limit you will get caught. Think about it.
Cunninglinguest September 08, 2013 at 07:56 PM
Okay I've thought about it. What you said makes no sense. If you buy black market ammo you're not going to take the spent brass in to buy ammo legally. Nonsense. Buying black market ammo allows you to by pass the entire system. You've also got the option to reload your own. It's easy. Think about it. I would suggest you use your energy to come up with a way to deal with alcohol related traffic fatalities which is a far bigger problem. Check the stats yourself. You'll be blown away. Now let's apply your logic. How about setting up a data base to track alcohol purchases and limit a person to 1 six pack a week. History tells us that's doomed to failure. But what the heck, pass legislation to do it any way. Feel good legislation which doesn't change a thing. At best it punishes the people who ARE responsible and are NOT the problem and who ARE the majority.
Philip September 08, 2013 at 09:23 PM
As long as people are emotional then yes nothing will get done. It is just as easy to set a data base for the amount of powder a person purchases. The only ones not caught will be the ones who make it from scratch. Then I suppose there will be a black market on the chemicals, and all related equipment. Not everyone reloads, not everyone disobeys the law. Not everyone is willing to just lay back and cry poor abused me. Yes some people will find ways but just as often as ways are found there will be someone who is willing to enact the new laws to stop things. Orwellian society is possible but likely? Would you like to be held accountable for every gram of chemicals you use? Most people will not like the result if taking the weapons away is not the answer. However the next step for any government is to control the source. Black market not withstanding if they cannot get the chemicals they need at a reasonable rate then there will be loss of liberty. Black Markets are only so good then the supply runs out. Most people would rather count their ammo than give up their weapons.
Cunninglinguest September 09, 2013 at 10:46 PM
Most gun owners won't stand for their firearms to be taken or to have to count their ammo. Why do you think it's so tough to pass gun control legislation? It's because the people don't want it in spit of what POTUS says. The NRA represents the people. The NRA is the people. And the people let their money speak for them. That's why the NRA is so powerful. Gun control legislation/ammo control legislation only punishes law abiding citizens. It does nothing to curb crime. And that's exactly why the government's motive is suspect. Are you aware of POTUS's last executive order? Banning the import of vintage single shot military rifles, including the M1 Garand which the U.S. sold to allies. When's the last time you heard of a vintage single shot military rifle being used in the commission of a crime? Never! When laws are enacted that are unjust, ineffective, and violates our constitutional rights, we have a right to resist. We have a right to privacy correct? But look what the government (NSA) has been doing. If they'll violate one right, they'll violate another, and another, and another. Where does it stop? When we've been stripped of them all? If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
Philip September 10, 2013 at 09:08 AM
The military has been counting ammo since Vietnam era. As far as your "Right" to bear arms and arm bears goes it ends where your neighbor's begins. Yes I have heard of M-1 Garand's being used for crimes. Just because they are not being used in the mid-west does not mean it does not happen. The same goes for any military grade weapon. It may not happen in the mid-west but it does happen. Look at Sandy Hook Elementary, that was a military grade weapon. I grant you denying the use of military weapons seems harsh but the reality is they are used quite frequently for their intended purpose. I do not see deer or squirrels out in body armour or carrying AK's around either. Does this mean I need an M-16 or it's variant to go hunting? Do I need the range of an M-1 Garand just to hunt deer? Do I need an M-60 just to hunt rabbits? How about an M-79/M203 for ducks? Think about what you are really saying. Most misinformation is being sent due to the people involved not wanting to "give-up" their beloved military weapon. Military weapons belong to the Military not the civilian population. If you want to hunt deer/elk/elephants/rabbits/squirrels then use the appropriate weapon not military spec weapons. I have seen no legislation regarding "Hunting" grade weapons. I have seen legislation regarding the use of "Military" grade weapons. All the legislation in the world means nothing if nothing can be enforced. So while I am in Support of banning military grade weapons I am not in support of banning hunting grade weapons. Is there a difference? Yes. Military weapons are assault weapons designed to take out multiple targets at differing ranges. A hunting weapon is designed to take out a single target at differing ranges. The second Amendment was put in place to protect hunting weapons not military spec weapons. If you cannot see the difference then you belong in the military and should join as soon as yesterday. What part of Military specification do you not understand? Military belongs to the Military.
Cunninglinguest September 10, 2013 at 10:58 PM
You sir are dangerous. You really don't know anything about guns or the military. The problem here is you're talking to some one who does. I'm a Vietnam era disabled veteran. And you? The problem here is you're not talking from a position of experience. The problem here is that people who don't know anything about guns, like you, might read your litany of misinformation and believe it. The military doesn't count bullets, they count bodies. My "right" to bear arms" does not end where my neighbor's begins. My "right" to bear arms" is also my neighbor's "right to bear arms" if they so choose. You haven't a clue as to what an assault rifle is. An assault rifle has a select fire capability, meaning it fires both automatic AND semi-automatic. Firing full auto means if you depress and hold the trigger back, the rifle will continue to fire until the ammo is gone, or you release the trigger. Semi-auto means that only ONE round will fire if you pull the trigger. To fire another round you must pull and release the trigger again. The public in general do not own full auto rifles. And why would you even mention the M-60 and M-79/M203? The public can't own a machine gun or a grenade launcher! The 30.06 M1 Garand is a very suitable deer hunting rifle. The only draw back is it's heavy as compared to other 30.06 sporting rifles. Let me tell you something. I don't believe you've ever served in the military. I believe you have no hunting experience. And I believe you've never owned a gun. Because if you had you'd know even a little something about this subject matter. You're just repeating the same crap that you've heard other people who don't know anything about this subject matter say. See how that works? Have you ever heard the saying that goes "the pen is mightier than the sword"? In your case your keyboard is more dangerous than my AR-15.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »