the arguments to disarm citizens just don't stop, and for every time I've heard that one or another solution is "common sense gun regulation", I hear of an attack on the opposite side of the spectrum to whittle away our rights. examples;
only highly trained individuals are capable and competent enough to use guns--- gung-ho vets with guns are scary, and/or cops who want to play rambo shouldn't be going after their own people and need to quit being gun freaks..... so no-one outside of government service is qualified to use them due to a lack of training and discipline OR those trained individuals are not "loose cannons" looking to go blast someone?
?
no "honest" man needs a high capacity magazine--- magazine capacity restrictions are easy to get around by just carrying more magazines..... so they just go after semi-auto instead. PS- real assault weapons usually are belt-fed, no magazine needed and not usually compatible as a back-up either (the m-249 s.a.w. can, but good luck getting one for under 20,000grand or so).
some ammunition is too powerful to be controllable and really risks too much collateral damage--- yet if you want to be able to hit and kill at range it has to REALLY hit hard up close right?! if it can't kill period- it's not of any martial use anyways, it's a gun not a taser!!!!
civilians don't need sniper rifles--- they talk about "sniping" and how scary it is, oooh, snipers
deer rifles are good to 300yds generally, and that is a LONG ways away, so if politicians need to be safe then you need to lose your ability to not only accurately reach but KILL a deer/critter at a good distance. of course, if the range of a reliable and humane kill is only 50yds, you need more than the bare minimum to do it. A .22lr could do in a squirrel but not likely a deer, so again you need a truely capable rifle, and with that much power and penetration comes REACH AND RANGE! The liberals cry about the ability to kill with precision at a distance but if you cannot hit what you aim at with a very small margin of error then you really are a retard that is "spraying bullets". there are really snipers and there are accurate rifles that are capable of serving a sniper but there are no real sniper rifles. some are just better than others, and a sniper would use a good one, as would any responsible person hunting. DUH!
ammo restrictions based on volume/stockpile, penetration, hollowpoints or whatever else THEY can think of; armor piercing bullets is kind of a joke- it's hard to stop bullets, armor doesn't cover everything, bullets that don't go through do damage anyways, armor doesn't accept too many hits in the same spot, armor can fail for a multitude of reasons, and by legislating penetraion or power THEY undercut their arguments against hollow points, sintered metal projectiles and other "gimmick" ammo. long story short, a piece of hard plastic fabric, even backed by ceramic plates, won't take that many hits before it fails IF IT CAN STOP THE PROJECTILE IN THE FIRST PLACE, IF THE PERSON SHOOTING DIDN'T JUST SHOOT AROUND IT! Arteries kill faster than all but brain shots.... lots of arteries to hit on the limbs.
Scary hollow points are only for killing.... then what are the other bullets for, poking and making a tickling sensation? Hollow points have the potential to not only deliver a more broad and therefore POSSIBLY more lethal wound in a SHALLOW target, but manage to damage a shallow target to the maximum instead of shooting through it with an intact, stabile and almost full-speed projectile hitting another target incidentally. Well what if the shooter (ccw civilian, cop, whoever) misses a perpetrator and hits an innocent with a "deadly, evil, malicious" hollow-point? well, cops and civilians that shoot persons other than perpetrators are in the wrong and subject to lawsuits and prison time already, those people can bleed to death with REGULAR, conventional ammo too, and are more likely to GET hit from a standard spitzer styled bullet because those ricochet more from misses, and go semi-straight through targets to hit something beyond. that's why shooting ranges have backstops, because REGUALR ammo goes right through stuff. the issue is to teach marksmanship, not argue wound characteristecs from specific projectiles in hypothetical scenarios, yet liberals think they can win by pushing an argument based on a logistical and technical concept non-shooter's don't get. us shooters do get it though, which is why hollow-points are good- because we don't want collateral damage (supposedly THEY don't either, but they gotta ban all the designer bullets before then ban conventional ones in the incrimental erosion process they so love). so we cannot have penetration, because that's SCARY! We cannot have evil/deadly/malicious hollow-points, because that's SCARY! We cannot have precision and/or range, because that gives a man unnatural reach and the power to pick off "important" people, oh how scary.... and if we want to get around the bullet and or range issues, we cannot compensate with more ammo or really hard hitting ammo of high caliber because that's freaky too?! Oh, let's not forget efforts to regulate/restrict concealable and affordable guns too.
can't hit hard, can't hit far, can't be accurate, can't miss and hit the wrong target, can't take ammo that isn't registered, accounted for after registration (microstamped in the future maybe), can't be on you, can't be in your car, can't go to certain places, can't be loaded at certain times, can't be too big if it's a pistol, can't be small and concealable, can't be a short barreled long gun, can't be auto, can't be semi-auto, can be a revolver-breech action-or something else but don't you dare compensate by using strong ammo, and you cannot compensate for the inherent lack of kinetic energy by using an aerodynamically efficient shape that allows it to pierce air in travel and flesh on contact, can't be made of too heavy a material (or matrix) or it's armor piercing, and GOD FORBID IT HAS LEAD IN IT BECAUSE LEAD KILLS, JUST LIKE GUNS ARE SUPPOSED TO DO WHEN USED TO INTENTIONALLY SHOOT SOMETHING. The only way I can get halfway close to meeting all these criteria, in my mind, is to make a one foot diameter log that is at least three feet long (a fat and heavy cylinder), drill out the center, screw in a barrel and have the cap for a twist breach exposed in the back/protruding, it can only use rimfire ammo under .30 cal so it's pathetic and not readily reloadable (no need to micro-stamp), can't shoot often, can't shoot quickly and wieldly because it's a log with single-shot capability, and shoots accurately because it's stable (if it doesn't roll away first) because a rimfire can't shake a log with recoil, defies pistol, rifle, shotgun or whatever status because it's a log, doesn't really take lasers and bipods and other scary things but if it did it would still suck anyways, and it would have to be shooting "green" ammo, bought with a thumbprint and a huge "sin" tax plus price hike due to all the regulation and loss of business.
oh crap, someone could saw the log open and just take out the reciever, and use the wood to make a stock!!!! and have a rifle again. sorry I failed guys.
