Apparently, remanufacturers of military brass will no longer be able to buy surplus brass from the Department of Defense. Now, all brass ammunition will have to be shredded and sold as scrap. Some ammunition manufacturers say this will really reduce their output, and lots of gun enthusiasts see it as the Obama administration's first volley in the war against the Second Amendment:
It is an end-run around Congress. They don't need to try to ban guns--they don't need to fight a massive battle to attempt gun registration, or limit "assault" weapon sales.
Nope. All they have to do is limit the amount of ammunition available to the civilian market, and when bullets dry up, guns will be useles.
[. . .]
You can expect this to affect every bullet you purchase in the future--with no reloaded ammunition available, the already strained new manufacturers will be unable to meet demand. They are already turning out everything they can build for the military market. The civilian market is stressed to the point even reloading components have become hard to find.
I'm not into the gun culture enough to know what, if anything, this all means. But my brother in Texas, who sent me the link, is a gun enthusiast and says it is already getting "harder and harder to get ammo for the guns we do own." Something to watch, anyway.
Comments
Chris Rock has a bit where he suggests that, instead of banning guns, you tax the hell out of bullets. Would-be drive by shooters would probably be more careful with $1,000 bullets.
...Or you might get hit in the head when the shooter tosses his *9* at you...cheaper to replace THAT...!
;)
Why was the second amendment created as part of the original ten? If it were more important than the first which guarantees five very precious rights, why was it not first? It was placed in there by revolutionaries who knew firsthand the importance of
The word "infringe" has always been perfectly clear to all good Americans.
My folks well remember the old, old pop song called "Surrey with the Fringe on Top," which identified every American's mental picture of a sublime horse-and-carriage, a carriage whose rooftop fringe, by definition, hung from the very edges of the covering that shaded the riders. Only the most belligerent mis-characterizers will need more convincing, as to where the fringe of a thing lies.
In short, to "infringe" a basic human right, such as that to keep and bear the arms sufficient to our own defense, is to run afoul of our liberty as affirmed in our Bill of Rights.
Even fringe-nibbling, our Bill of Rights assures, will be treated as unquestionably illegal. Infringement does not allow for encroachment by any governmental body which might limit the People's power to defend against any aggressor carrying any and every current armament.
In short, the Founding Fathers guaranteed in black & white text that all average Americans maintain into perpetuity their God-given liberty to defend themselves and to win any armed conflict against any and every aggressor whether from without or from within. In short, we have the inalienable right to hold arms and to prevail against the minions of over-reaching government regardless of origin.