Gun Control Forum on Facebook Gun Control Forum on Google Plus Gun Control Forum on Twitter

Greetings Gun Control Debater

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Facebook Sign In with OpenID Sign In with Twitter

Popular Gun Control Forum Categories

In this Discussion

Gun Control or Bullet Control?

edited February 2016 in Gun Control Debates Posts: 5
Guns are not all that scary. If you actually take some time to think about it guns do not kill. BULLETS do. That is why my opinion would be to restrict the amount of ammunition a single person can purchase throughout the year. Make bullets less available. Only sell bullets to people with will a permit. Think about it

Tagged:

Comments

  • Posts: 49
    It only takes one round to kill.  It takes a LOT of rounds for people, law enforcement and the military to become and maintain their proficiency with firearms.  

    I can load and reload my own ammunition...in fact I cast my own bullets and shot from salvaged lead. You would have to pretty much ban lead, copper, bismuth, steel, brass, primers, powder, the ingredients required to make powder, etc, etc, etc...putting a lot of companies and honest people out of business. Good luck with that.

    But it's all a moot point...SCOTUS has already ruled that banning and restricting ammunition is protected under the 2nd Amendment.  

    Finally, I am a free man...I don't need government permission to keep and bear arms.  Even if you managed to repeal the 2nd Amendment, which we both know you can't, all you would do is start a bloody civil war.  Is that what you want?
  • Posts: 234
    I see it still isn't understood about guns and ammo and what they can do on it's own, I know they try and make fun of us for saying guns don't kill but people do, but no one has proved otherwise. They continue to play the same blame game over and over and they call us nuts. Then they want to say if there wasn't as many guns there would be less gun deaths, and I say how would that be the ones that shouldn't have them would still have them. The ones that should won't, now what would that accomplish but maybe adding to the number of deaths, because the power to stop any of it would be lost. I know you will say look at the other countries with stricter gun laws and you say gun deaths are down, but you fail to say of all the other crimes that are up like rape,robbery,assault,to mention a few. I say again what was accomplished, they made a trade off.
    TommiGunn31
  • I would just like to add on to what rbower is saying.  There are so many other ways to kill a person than by shooting them.  One that can kill more people than guns are bombs.  You can get plans to make a bomb on the internet.  Should we ban the internet?   There are many bombs that can be made with household products.  So I propose this.  If it is really the intention to get rid of guns to reduce death tolls, then the same precautions need to be taken with anything else that can kill people.  So, you cannot own rags and liquor at the same time.  These can be made to make a Molotov Cocktail.    

  • Posts: 21
    I will agree that the bullets are part of the problem in the wrong hands.  This is one of the main reasons I don't like those machine guns with those catalogs that give off around twenty rounds at once.  What is the reasoning for allowing such a thing to be sold to the general public.  These sort of weapons and ammo should be restricted to only those in combat situations and certainly not made accessible to the public.We can say guns don't kill people that people do and this is true, but the wrong kind of guns are getting into the wrong kind of hands. 
  • Yeah, the guns get into the wrong hands, but they can get into the wrong hands even if they are made illegal.  There are arms dealers who specialize in these kinds of things.  There are foreign countries with different laws.  Look at Prohibition; alcohol was outlawed and people still got ahold of it.  I think instead of focusing on trying (and I do stress the word "trying" because I don't think it will work) to get rid of guns and ammunition, we should focus on making the punishments harsher.  Get the cable TV and any other luxury out of prison.  There are many people who commit gun crimes because life on the inside is easier than life on the outside.  I mean, other than the obvious prison stories you hear about.  Most of the time they are exaggerated.  I knew two people who were actually in prison.  That doesn't actually happen as often as you think.   
  • Posts: 234
    I don't understand why there is so much focus on the number of bullets a gun can hold or shoot, the lower the count is the more guns they carry if that is their content to see how many they can kill. If they would remove and keep more criminals of the street then that would lower the amount of illegal guns and shooters. I think this where a solution can be found or at least a reduction.I think otherwise as they say you are barking up the wrong tree. Instead they keep fighting a loosing battle that would do no good even if they did win.
  • I agree.  There shouldn't be a focus on how many bullets or guns someone owns.  Honestly, one bullet is all it takes to kill someone.  If you trust someone to buy guns, why can't you trust them to buy bullets?  Also, guns can be used to beat someone to death, so they aren't really useless without bullets, anyway.
  • The flaw in that argument is that all a person would have to do is save up the bullets. These people that do these horrible crimes plan for years before they actually carry them out. I don't think that would be a perfect solution, though it may help for a while anyway. It's not the guns or the bullets that kill people, it's the people that we have to figure out what to do with.
  • I completely agree nailah.  I saw something that I agree with, "we don't need gun control, what we need is child control" meaning to teach our children respect.  Not everyone does that.  Well, sometimes people take that too far and that can cause problems, too.
  • Posts: 234
    When you educate children of such things I think you have to make it interesting to learn something, by just telling them it is a gun and it is a bad thing so don't touch.That way is counterproductive and just cause more couriosity then any learning as soon as you tell a kid something is bad and don't touch the more they want to.Almost as much counterproductive then trying to do a gun control or ammo control you see what has happened to gun sales with all this talk of gun control it has went up.
  • We used cap guns and squirt guns to learn.  That is how my mother taught us to respect guns.  She also told us stories where people got hurt.  She told us if we wanted to play with guns to use toy guns and taught us the difference.  She made it more fun to play with the toys than to try to play with the "mean guns".  She only used that phrase to show us that guns could hurt you, she explained it more as we grew older; she taught us differently as our education level changed.  Step 1 was basically, don't touch, play with this instead, Step 2 was explaining to us the dangers of guns, Step 3 was teaching us that guns aren't completely evil and how to respect and care for them.  By the time we were in late elementary school, we knew what to do and how to use them.
  • Hm I'm not so sure about restricting access to how many bullets someone can buy just because things happen. It's still not fair to law abiding citizens who just want to be prepared.
  • I agree, harpazo.  Restricting bullets won't do anything anyway.  If someone wants to hurt someone else, they will find a way to do it.
  • Posts: 234
    They are grasping at straws and hope that sooner or later they will pull out a winner.There is no winning straw when it comes to nonsense.Until they start working on the real issues at hand nothing will be settled.It has nothing to do with a gun or type of gun or bullets or ammo it is about the people and the reasons they choose to do what they do with the weapons of choice and the targets they choose.This is where the true problems lay.
    TommiGunn31
  • I agree with your initial argument. Bullets are the ones that should be rationed. But I also agree that that would be impossible. Just like with guns, people would find ways to make them themselves or there would become an underground market for it. And you'd have to ban even more resources than it's worth to even try to get rid of bullets.
  • I have to agree with this.  Although I don't think either one should be controlled.  On another note, people can always make bullets so that may not be the problem.  There are already bullets being ratioed as you can not buy too much 22 if you find it in my area.  They have only allowed on box to be sold a day.
  • One box per day isn't bad, though. I can't imagine going through 30 boxes a month. Although maybe there are some people who use it more than I would, I still don't see even a hunter using that much unless all he literally does is hunt all day every day. 
  • You don't know Prairie-dog shooters then do you, they can burn out a barrel and loads of ammo in one day !!!
  • I don't understand how limiting bullets will limit killing. It takes one bullet to end a life. As I've mentioned in other posts, criminals aren't law abiding citizens. They will obtain what they need however they have to. Hunters and those defending farm land might go through more ammunition than the average Joe.
  • Posts: 5
    It is an interesting concept but don't see how could work.
    If you restrict bullets, you could also restrict guns, right? I mean the two is practically the same thing. Also maybe bullet restrictions may lead to illegal bullet making businesses? (I dont know if its possible)
  • This is silly in my opinion. Limiting bullets would not do anything as only one bullet can end someones life. Criminals do not follow the law which leads the discussion of gun control a difficult one... 
  • Posts: 75
    Its not necessary to allude to other forms of violence with respect to gun control. The fact remains that guns are weapons of slow mass destruction having killed more people in history than any other weapon. Restricting availability of bullets is a good strategy. People should access gun powder but a small bullet count. This would however be rendered ineffective if purchases and availability of bullets from the black market prevail.
  • Bullet control is a great idea to minimize illegal shooting or firing. Well, gun control is a good thing but ubdeniably hurting the gun enthusiast and collector. So it's much better to just regulate the production of bullets.
  • It is just the same because if the gun is being controlled there is no way for the gun owners to buy bullets. Here in my country you can buy home made bullets and guns that is why I do believe that the crime rate here in my country will grow and grow unless our government will make a way to in prison those people who made guns and bullets illegally. The only way to stop gun violence is to stop gun production period. 
  • Posts: 34
    I thinks its more safety if both is prohibited to prevent life loss for inproper use of gun its more effective if both are less because gun is verry danger in 1 click people dies even inocent people die because gun not use in agood way
  • Posts: 14
    This is not a bad idea. I think another solution would also be to make plastic bullets or bullets that don't kill, they just knock you out for a few minutes or so.Does it make sense for criminals to kill someone because they are stealing a mobile phone? Or for the police to kill a robber who robs a store or a bank? It doesn't make sense for these deeds to warrant death,especially from the judgement of someone that is not qualified to make it or does not have all the facts.
Sign In or Register to comment.