The conclusions I came to are as follows:
- You immediately resorted to name calling when you didn’t like what I said… like some kind of petulant child.
- You make claims that we just need to “try” and then once a problem with your half-baked idea is presented, it became my fault
- I outright told you the point and you still missed it like a fucking moron.
Assuming the thought experiment is reaching a system such as exists in many parts of the world including the UK and Canada, what do you think the best approach to achieve that, would be?
I honestly do not have a solution; that’s why I asked the question. Limiting ammunition sales significantly would help, that’s only part of it though.
There’s a second amendment to allow the right to bear arms, but I missed the part in the second amendment that makes any mention of a right to purchase ammo.
Ban the sale of all forms of gunpowder that can be used to remanufacture used rounds.
As far as solving the problem of getting semi automatic rifles out of the hands of people that should not have them goes, there’s only one method to do it, but busting into peoples’ homes and taking their stuff when they aren’t around isn’t likely to have 100% fantastic results either.
Fair enough. I agree with your comment that at some point there’s going to be a shootout with SWAT if this happened, regardless of approach. Financial disincentives perhaps? Make it prohibitively expensive to buy ammunition?
The name calling was to one person; and in response to name calling.
Care to point out the hypocrisy?
