The Rude Pundit - Gun Nuts Losing Their Goddamned Minds Over Proposed Bullet Ban

[meegbear]

It all starts with bureaucracy, of course. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, which has "Firearms" right there in its name, regulates ammunition based on laws passed by Congress. One of those laws, the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1986, which passed 400-21 in the House and 97-1 in the Senate and was signed by God Reagan, says that any ammunition that "may be used in a handgun," is made of certain materials, like steel, and can pierce body armor can be banned. That's in the actual law. In fact, if the ATF didn't seek to ban those kinds of bullets, it would be violating the law. Pretty simple, no? Pretty cut and dried, no? If Congress doesn't like it, it can change the law.

So now there's this ammo, 5.56mm constituent projectiles of SS109 and M855 cartridges, which had been exempt from the law because they weren't used in handguns. This was the "sporting purposes" exception to the law. But now there are handguns that can fire these steel-tipped, armor-piercing bullets. The ATF is proposing banning the manufacture, sale and import of them. You can keep all the ones you have or will buy in your hording frenzy. But after that, the law says, the safety of police officers comes before your desire to hunt deer wearing bulletproof vests.

Of course, the gun-fellating right has lost its mind over this proposal because the ATF is part of the executive branch and that means the Negro communist Muslim president who hates America must want to kill all the white people and take their guns in order to burn the Constitution and install a Sharia law caliphate in the country. Or something like that.

"Obama to ban bullets by executive action," says the headline at the Washington Examiner (motto: "If you think the Washington Times is batshit crazy, you haven't met us&quot . "It's starting," the paper warns, "As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters." Which would be true except for the part where President Obama is not involved at all in this decision and has signed no executive action on it.

Yes, the ammo is used by the AR-15 rifle, the one beloved by mass shooters and men with tiny penises (sometimes one and the same). The NRA gets all folksy about the threat: "If they can’t ban the pie, so the thinking apparently goes, they might at least get the apples." That metaphor would work if there were only one kind of bullet or apple. If it turns out Macouns were poisonous when baked in a pie, you'd probably just say, "Well, screw it. Time to use Cortlands." You wouldn't gripe, "I'll never be able to make pie again."

The attitude of the gun-huffers is best exemplified by obvious sportsman Rush Limbaugh, who said on his show, Flabby the Deaf Clown's Masturbatorium of Hate, "It's the first. It's the beginning. You don't think all bullets except those held by the military and the cops are the objective? This is how we end up losing these...(Obama) wants to take guns out of everybody's hands, and if he can't do that, he's gonna take the bullets that go in the guns out of everybody's hands, and he's just begun that process today." Anyone who believes that deserves to be a shut-in with only one station available on his tiny radio.

The Rude Pundit's favorite comments came from a lackadaisical gun store owner in Springfield, Missouri, who is a former cop. He doesn't think the ban will happen; however, "Gun people tend to create their own drama," he said. "If we freaked out every time BATF discusses something we'd be freaking out on this all the time. Sometimes gun owners are their own worst enemy."

As for the usefulness of the ammo? While you'll hear a bunch about how popular the bullets are, this Springfield store owner said that "most of the target ranges his customers use have steel targets that can be damaged by the steel-tipped rounds so they don't buy that kind of ammunition."

They do like using it for "plinking," which is shooting bottles and crap, although unless those bottles have vests on, you could probably use something else. Also, they like it for home defense. What's more likely? Your home being invaded by murderers wearing body armor? Or some criminal using the bullets in an AR pistol to take out a cop?

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2015/02/gun-nuts-losing-their-goddamned-minds.html

[Wounded Bear]

1. K & R...for exposure...nt

[Katashi_itto]

89. I would like to see a $5-10 a bullet tax

Although a $100 a bullet would be even better. I'd settle for the 5-10 a bullet.

[NaturalHigh]

131. Cool story bro.

[marym625]

2. Perfect!

"Negro communist Muslim president who hates America must want to kill all the white people and take their guns in order to burn the Constitution and install a Sharia law caliphate in the country. Or something like that."

[arcane1]

53. Puts them in prison for what? Being a dumb-ass is still legal.

[marym625]

55. a very weird little troll?

First post.

[Duckhunter935]

60. very nice person

wonder what other legal activities he wants to jail people over?

[marym625]

64. I'm going out on a limb here

And going to guess, liberals, people of color, anyone in the LGBT community, teachers, atheists, Muslims, buhud

[Duckhunter935]

65. MIRT is good, MIRT is strong

that poster is gone!

[marym625]

71. MIRT! my favs!

[marym625]

54. uhm. what?

[onehandle]

3. Pesky negro infringing on Constitutionally protected rednecks' rights. nt

[dhill926]

4. K & R....

as the Rude One nails it again. Especially the description of Rush's show…"Flabby the Deaf Clown's Masturbatorium of Hate"

[cyberswede]

5. K&R for RP, as usual

[appal_jack]

6. It's a bad law, being overly-broadly implemented.

If the 'logic' used by the ATF holds, this policy would ban all .308, 7.62x39, 45-70, etc.

Rifle-caliber 'handguns' (despite their legal classification as pistols, they all pretty much require two hands to operate) are a novelty more than a common item. Gun owners are right to oppose the ATF using this small class fo firearms to ban whole categories of very common and economical ammunition options.

One thing that the Rude One omits is that NATO countries are switching from m855 to m855A1. This means that a lot of cheap, surplus ammunition was about to become available. The gun grabbers hate shooting sports being affordable, it seems.

The 1986 law is clearly unconstitutional. Ronald Reagan liked those kinds of laws as a rule...

-app

[gratuitous]

7. Unconstitutional?

How does it infringe on the right to keep and bear arms not to have a particular bullet?

If it's unconstitutional, the NRA or some other group should bring a case. But they haven't in nearly 30 years. I wonder why? Perhaps because they'd lose? Is that why instead of getting a court ruling, they're going to just use their bought-and-paid-for stooges in Congress to repeal the law?

[nichomachus]

8. Constitution says you can have guns. Doesn't say anything about bullets.

Strict interpretation. Strict interpretation.

[hack89]

9. No - it says you can have arms

ammunition is included in the definition of arms.

[mikeysnot]

33. I con't see the term "armor piercing" in the definition

arms
ärmz/
noun
1.
weapons and ammunition; armaments.
"they were subjugated by force of arms"
synonyms: weapons, weaponry, firearms, guns, ordnance, artillery, armaments, munitions, matériel
"the illegal export of arms"
2.
distinctive emblems or devices, originally borne on shields in battle and now forming the heraldic insignia of families, corporations, or countries.
synonyms: crest, emblem, coat of arms, heraldic device, insignia, escutcheon, shield
"the family arms"

[hack89]

36. I don't have a real problem with this ban - it is political stupidity and ineffective but legal

My comments were directed to the mistake belief that the 2A does not cover ammunition.

[mikeysnot]

97. My comments were directed to the mistake belief that the 2A does not cover ammunition.

The 2nd was written when we had muskets not the guns we have now, it needs to be updated. IMO.

And yes, some ammunition should not be in the hands of american citizens, no matter how many knots they twist themselves into trying to convince everyone they should be able to own them.

[Duckhunter935]

99. and what ammunition would that be? (warning pictures of ammunition) NSFW

Is this OK?

Or this one?

Or this one?

Or this one?

Or these?


Jurors, have to show the pictures to make a point.

[hack89]

101. As long as your choices are informed

and not based on the typical gun controller mix of enthusiastic ignorance.


So what ammo should be banned and why?

[blueridge3210]

103. Shhh...don't tell them ATF has walked this back.

"On Feb. 13, 2015, ATF released for public comment a proposed framework to guide its determination on what ammunition is "primarily intended for sporting purposes" for purposes of granting exemptions to the Gun Control Act’s prohibition on armor piecing ammunition. The posted framework is only a proposal, posted for the purpose of receiving public comment, and no final determinations have been made.
Media reports have noted that the 2014 ATF Regulation Guide published online does not contain a listing of the exemptions for armor piercing ammunition, and conclude that the absence of this listing indicates these exemptions have been rescinded. This is not the case.
Please be advised that ATF has not rescinded any armor piercing ammunition exemption, and the fact they are not listed in the 2014 online edition of the regulations was an error which has no legal impact on the validity of the exemptions. The existing exemptions for armor piercing ammunition, which apply to 5.56 mm (.223) SS 109 and M855 projectiles (identified by a green coating on the projectile tip), and the U.S .30-06 M2AP projectile (identified by a black coating on the projectile tip), remain in effect.
The listing of Armor Piercing Ammunition exemptions can be found in the 2005 ATF Regulation Guide on page 166, which is posted here.
The 2014 Regulation Guide will be corrected in PDF format to include the listing of armor piercing ammunition exemptions and posted shortly. The e-book/iBook version of the Regulation Guide will be corrected in the near future. ATF apologizes for any confusion caused by this publishing error. "

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Publications/notice_of_publishing_error.pdf

[Duckhunter935]

68. "(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means"

(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means—
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium; or
(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.



http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Notices/atf_framework_for_determining_whether_certain_projectiles_are_primarily_intended_for_sporting_purposes.pdf


They love to ignore or even outright omit that very important word.


They're the ones ignoring what the law actually says, up to and including the ATF.

Can not take credit for this but here is the link to the post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6289833

Since you are into definitions, this round does not meet the definition of armor piercing either. It has lead in its construction and it has not been designed for use in a pistol but for a rifle and may be used in a pistol.

http://www.combatsimulations.com/ar15/cartridges.html

[mikeysnot]

96. Se it can be used in a pistol...

but does it pierce bullet proof vests?

[Duckhunter935]

98. All 5.56 MM or .223

ammo will penetrate the soft vests worn by police officers. Those vests are not rated for any rifle caliber.

[mikeysnot]

105. So it is body armor piercing...

Thanks for clarifying.

[metalbot]

106. Let me clarify further

Almost ALL centerfire rifle ammunition (the type of ammunition generally used for hunting mammals larger than squirrels) is "armor piercing". Trying to ban rifle ammunition for its "armor piercing" capabilities in insane (and it's also an attempt to solve a problem that doesn't really exist - how many police officers were killed in the last decade by centerfire rifles piercing their body armor? Hint: it's a very low number).

There are reasonable gun control measures (including simple enforcement of existing law) that we could implement that would have NO resistance from either party. Why not try those before we go down the route of more restrictive laws?

[hack89]

11. It doesn't. It is just stupid to focus on this particular bullet.

It does nothing for public safety and hands the NRA another fundraising opportunity.

[frylock]

18. seems like the manufacturers shot themselves in the foot when they produced these novelty guns..

surely they knew the current laws prior to releasing these models.

[appal_jack]

24. Many shooting enthusiasts have indeed been wary of the possibility.

Over at the AK Forum (theakforum.net), even discussion of the possibility of 5.45x39 (i.e.- AK-74) pistols was forbidden for a number of years. Then, from what I hear, one manufacturer imported a 5.45 prototype pistol, and the ATF used that pretext as part of why they banned the very affordable Russian 7n6 surplus ammunition. Absolute nonsense on the part of the ATF, but the AK community was being as cautious as they could.

The greed of one or two firearms manufacturers shuld not be used as a reason to infringe upon the rights of all citizens. Nor should this law, which was passed to prevent the sale of tungsten 9mm rounds, and has been perverted into a ban on 7n6 and now possibly m855.

-app

[Skittles]

28. WTF is wrong with gun humpers?

seriously, WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THEM

[mikeysnot]

34. Your wasting your time...

[Skittles]

35. my English relatives have asked me that question

I tell them there are a lot of cowards in the "home of the brave"

[mikeysnot]

37. Sad isn't it

they live in upside down and backwardsville..

[Skittles]

38. what kills me (is that a pun?)

is what it means to be in love with an INSTRUMENT OF DEATH - it's disgusting and pathetic

[sir pball]

42. 308/7.62 AP is already banned.

The Remington XP-100 is a pistol, in 308, therefore 308 ammo "can be" used in a pistol and therefore "armor piercing" (steel/WC/DU cored) projectiles are illegal to manufacture or import (but not buy, sell, own or use).

Of course, a perfectly innocuous 165-grain Partition softpoint won't even be slowed down by a IIIA vest, but the actual capabilities of body armor seem to be pretty universally misunderstood.

[hack89]

10. Sometimes you have to wonder if the ATF works for the NRA. nt

[hifiguy]

12. Having a beer with the Rude One is on my bucket list.

The ammosexuals are pitiful, laughable examples of humanity.

[Taitertots]

13. Is this supposed to make us feel better when we lose more elections?

Banning the most popular ammo is going to cost us votes and do almost nothing to stop crime.

[appal_jack]

14. It's a win-win for the Turd Way-ers.

They will get to patronizingly lambast the electorate for 'voting against their own interests' AND the 1%-er policies that Hillary would have implemented with hand-wringing, sturm and drang will just sail through a Repub Congress and White House.

Pardon my cynicism, but certain Democrats seem to love using the highest-power ammo possible, but only when aiming at their own feet and/or organizing circular firing squads.

-app

[frylock]

19. should the current law simply be ignored to appease people that likely will NEVER vote for a dem?

did you overlook this part?

...the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1986, which passed 400-21 in the House and 97-1 in the Senate and was signed by God Reagan, says that any ammunition that "may be used in a handgun," is made of certain materials, like steel, and can pierce body armor can be banned. That's in the actual law. In fact, if the ATF didn't seek to ban those kinds of bullets, it would be violating the law.

[appal_jack]

41. The law should be dismissed as unconstitutional.

This law, which was passed to prevent the sale of tungsten or steel 9mm rounds, has been perverted into a ban on 7n6 and now possibly m855. But, it's still a bad law, passed in hyped-up hysteria, and signed by a Republican President who never let the Constitution get in the way of his agenda. Why ostensible Democrats celebrate this fact is beyond me.

The fact remains that a sensiible reading of the 2nd Amendment's text does not (and should not) allow this sort of government over reach and infringement. Were I a lawyer, I'd be taking-on this case.

-app

[Skittles]

78. LOL "a sensible reading of the 2nd Amendment"

OMG

[appal_jack]

80. How do you read it?

Or are you so busy rofl'ing that parsing ''shall not be infringed" is beyond your capabilities?

-app

[Skittles]

87. you poor thing

really hard to empathize with your "issues"

[appal_jack]

88. Whatever issues I may have, at least I'm not a condescending asshole. nt

[Skittles]

90. actually, you are

[appal_jack]

95. You didn't finish your thought there...

Was it:

"actually, you are brilliant, appaljack"
(why, thank you)

"actually, you are in line with all Democrats prior to the 1980's, appaljack - we need to return to these roots of freedom"
(why, yes, indeed)

???

-app

[LanternWaste]

107. You're half right.

"I'm not a condescending asshole..."


You're half right.

[appal_jack]

108. Guess you'll just have to empathize with defeat instead.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=162936

[Skittles]

118. I have long conceded that gun humping paranoid assholes have won

my English brother asked me why so many Americans needed so many guns - I told him there are lots of cowards in the "home of the brave"

done here, GUN HUMPERS BORE ME

[beevul]

43. The actual law says this:

(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means—
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium; or
(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.
The ammo in question meets neither of those threshholds.

So the question becomes this:

Should the current law simply be ignored to appease people that likely hate guns?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

48. Well of course it should

This is mostly about what the pro-control folk want after carefully considering the facts with their glands rather than their brains. It won't really do squat about crime, children being shot, domestic violence or global warming.

: <CanWeGetASmileyOfSomeoneShootingHimselfInTheFoot> :

[Electric Monk]

81. re: <CanWeGetASmileyOfSomeoneShootingHimselfInTheFoot>

Close enough?

[Matrosov]

15. Highly amusing

People around where I live are flipping out about it because other ammo for their beloved assault rifles isn't exactly cheap or easy to find. It's hilarious.

Ammo bans are a great idea, by the way. The Second Amendment says nothing about specific types of ammunition.

[hack89]

16. Limited bans with specific purposes are constitutional

sweeping bans are not.

[frylock]

20. it's the law..

..the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1986, which passed 400-21 in the House and 97-1 in the Senate and was signed by God Reagan, says that any ammunition that "may be used in a handgun," is made of certain materials, like steel, and can pierce body armor can be banned. That's in the actual law. In fact, if the ATF didn't seek to ban those kinds of bullets, it would be violating the law.

[hack89]

21. That is why banning this particular bullet is fine.

politically stupid and ineffective but legal.

There are many here that think that ammunition in general is not covered by the 2A and can be limited by sweeping bans or extremely high taxes. I just like to point out that that is not the case.

[appal_jack]

45. On this, I respectfully disagree.

As Savannahmann & I have already pointed out in this thread, the ATF's current interpretation of this law could ban all .223, all .308, and any other rifle caliber for which a hand gun model exists.

I'd prefer to stay far from the edge of this slippery slope. And more and more, I am thinking that the whole NFA and GCA are incompatible with the Second Amendment.



-app

[beevul]

47. They like to claim "its the law"...but they're ignoring what the actual law says.

(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means—
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium; or
(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.



http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Notices/atf_framework_for_determining_whether_certain_projectiles_are_primarily_intended_for_sporting_purposes.pdf


They love to ignore or even outright omit that very important word.


They're the ones ignoring what the law actually says, up to and including the ATF.

[sir pball]

50. It's actually quite intriguing, given the recent rise of lead-free hunting bullets..

I, and many other hunters, quite appreciate X-Bullets and their ilk; not only are they entirely enviro-friendly but they're also some of the most accurate and reliable bullets I've ever used.

But, in a strict reading of the law, all of the 30-caliber varieties I buy would clearly be banned as "AP" even though the design would probably just splatter off of a steel plate, not to mention there's no body armor in the world that could tell the difference between an X and a lead Accubond coming out of a 300Mag.

Of course this all could be a subtle test balloon to look at potentially changing some details of the law, like the "can be" instead of "commonly is", and the exact scope of the "sporting exemption".

[Savannahmann]

29. What .223 ammo or 5.56 ammo can't penetrate a vest?

The vests are Class IIIA vests which are rated for pistol ammunition. They won't stop any rifle round.

[Aldo Leopold]

23. Limited declarations with specific statements are rational.

Sweeping declarations are not.

[NickB79]

31. They have M855 where you live, but nothing else?

Are you sure you aren't confusing all the 5.56mm ammos in general with this one particular type of 5.56mm ammo?

Hell, here in Minnesota all the gun stores have PALLETS of M193 (the cheaper, non-armor-piercing stuff, made here in the Twin Cities). Prices are $350/1000 rounds, which is cheaper than it was a few years ago.

If the ban does go forward, the Federal/ATK plant that makes both types of ammo will simply convert it's M855 line to another M193 line with conventional lead bullets, and since it's cheaper to make and sell, the gun nuts will likely end up saving money to buy more ammo with.

[frylock]

17. knr

[Aldo Leopold]

22. Flabby the Deaf Clown's Masturbatorium of Hate

Rude, you're brilliant!

[NuttyFluffers]

46. & now i can never read the name rush limbaugh again without it echoing in mine ears:

Flabby the Deaf Clown's Masturbatorium of Hate.

[47of74]

93. I hope Rude will understand that I have already stolen that for my own twisted purposes.

Flabby the Deaf Clown's Masturbatorium of Hate

[shenmue]

102. Yah!

[Savannahmann]

25. Silly question

Is there any ammunition that is 5.56 or .223 that does not penetrate a Class IIIA vest? If your answer is no, because all of the aforementioned ammunition can penetrate a vest designed to stop pistol ammunition, then you see what the gun nuts are upset about.

[billh58]

26. K&R! n/t

[NickB79]

27. Except ALL commercial 5.56mm ammo will also penetrate police officer's vests

Just as smoothly as the steel-cored M855 would. Police body armor is designed to stop HANDGUN bullets, ie large-diameter and low velocity. A vest that will stop a .45 slug at 900 fps will be needled through and through by a 5.56mm bullet at 3000 fps, regardless of whether the 5.56mm bullet has a steel core or just plain jacketed lead.

So, while the ATF's enforcement is perfectly legal (frankly, I'm amazed it took as long as it did), it's effect on public safety is frankly nothing.

Wait, no, it doesn't do nothing. What it does do is give the NRA a massive donation payday.

[mwrguy]

30. These delicate little flowers are always in a panic

[notadmblnd]

32. Fear. It's how they live their lives

It's why they need their guns.

[Skittles]

39. DU's resident gun humpers in particular are pathetic beyond belief

[hack89]

49. Pro gun Dems exist. Get use to it. Nt

[Duckhunter935]

57. this just shows again how firarms owners are treated here.

And the pro-controller side with their "safe haven" that allows insults like above is fine.

Foe the record to juror #5, the RKBA group is not a "safe haven" and allows all viewpoints. The other gun group is a "safe haven" and censors any discussion that does not agree with their viewpoint. Just for kicks, see how many are blocked in each group.

YOUR COMMENTS

Calling other DU members gun humpers and pathetic should not be tolerated here. Lets just be civil in our posts please.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Fri Feb 27, 2015, 09:01 PM, and voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What do we call gunhumpers now? Gun romancers? I wish somebody would decide.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Guns are against the GD SOP.

This is why.

Either enforce the SOP or this is what one gets.
Leave it.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: But DU does have gun humpers, and they are pathetic.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: DU gun humpers have their own protected forum. They should complain amongst themselves.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Over the line.

Can we not have a civil discussion without the name calling and insults please?

[MH1]

67. Not all firearms owners are "gun humpers". Not by a long shot.

Many firearms owners WANT reasonable gun controls, for several reasons, including that reasonable laws cutting down on the abuse of freedom by the irresponsible and incompetent will help prevent a backlash of irrational laws that really do inhibit the freedom of the responsible and competent.

But hey, if the shoe fits ...

[Duckhunter935]

72. does not fit me

I just think we should be above the name calling, insults and childish penis references.

[Electric Monk]

82. There are waaaaaay more DUers not blocked from GCRA than there are those blocked from it. nt

[Duckhunter935]

84. most DU not go to your "safe haven"

you censor any discussion you do not like and allow open insults to DU members who are unable to respond. You say it is for SOP violations but you allow your few regular posters to violate the same SOP and continue to post. Why is that? I see you are almost up to 50. It is painful for most to enter and if they try and contribute some factual information you block them. You only have a couple of regular posters and RKBA is your favorite group, not the group you host. The group you host is a "safe haven" that you block any dissenting views. The RKBA group is not and I say it again, it is your favorite group. All viewpoints are allowed in the RKBA group.

Now compare the number of blocks of your group to the RKBA group.
Gun Control Reform Activism

Blocked members
1 hack89
2 Eleanors38
3 Crepuscular
4 Bay Boy
5 ManiacJoe
6 bossy22
7 Straw Man
8 oneshooter
9 Duckhunter935
10 friendly_iconoclast
11 rrneck
12 customerserviceguy
13 ProgressiveProfessor
14 sarisataka
15 appal_jack
16 Travis_0004
17 geckosfeet
18 Hangingon
19 NYC_SKP
20 Jenoch
21 spin
22 shedevil69taz
23 SoutherDem
24 Lurks Often
25 ileus
26 Recursion
27 SQUEE
28 MO_Moderate
29 S_B_Jackson
30 HALO141
31 Jgarrick
32 Valakut
33 arst1
34 Nuclear Unicorn
35 TupperHappy
36 pipoman
37 yeoman6987
38 Laelth
39 IronGate
40 VScott
41 GGJohn
42 Shamash
43 libvoter87
44 kcci
45 clffrdjk
46 WDIM

RKBA group

Number Blocked members
1 Hoyt

Now compare the traffic of the RKBA group to your group

Gun Control Reform Activism
Number of posts, 30 days: 401
Number of posts, All time: 8,355

Number of subscribers: 150
Number of people trashing: 32

RKBA Group

Number of posts, 30 days: 2,099
Number of posts, All time: 162,160

Number of subscribers: 297
Number of people trashing: 189

I hope this educates many of the DU members that do not frequent any of the gun related groups.

[Duckhunter935]

51. How nice and civil of you

I guess you have nothing else to add to the topic except insults.

[bravenak]

56. And somebody like alerting. I'm number one.

On Fri Feb 27, 2015, 08:56 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

DU's resident gun humpers in particular are pathetic beyond belief
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6289351

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling other DU members gun humpers and pathetic should not be tolerated here. Lets just be civil in our posts please.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Feb 27, 2015, 09:01 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What do we call gunhumpers now? Gun romancers? I wish somebody would decide.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Guns are against the GD SOP.

This is why.

Either enforce the SOP or this is what one gets.
Leave it.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: But DU does have gun humpers, and they are pathetic.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: DU gun humpers have their own protected forum. They should complain amongst themselves.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Over the line.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Duckhunter935]

58. so insults to fellow DU members are OK

that is great for nice civil discussion.

I alert very few times. Insults to DU members fall into that category.

[bravenak]

59. Did we ban that word?

We need a list.

[Duckhunter935]

61. Nope, but it just sinks to a low level

to insult fellow DU members and I thought we were above that and could allow polite discussion. I guess I was wrong and that is a sad thing in my opinion.

[bravenak]

62. I think that you have a good point and that I need to keep that in mind in the future.

This might merit a discussion. I don't really have a catch phrase for gun owners myself. But I do like gun romancers. Sorry. We can avoid that one too. I have quite a few things I don't like to be called myself.

[Duckhunter935]

63. Thank you

It is very few people that will admit that and I truly do appreciate that. The host of the anti-gun group is happy to host the insults in his group knowing he has blocked all firearms owners from that group so they can not respond to the insults. He posts regularly in the RKBA group and will not apologize for those insults and even posts insults to firearms owners in the RKBA group. At least we can respond and he generally runs away when called out on those things.

We may differ on the right to own firearms but I am sure we all agree on trying to come up with ways to limit the deaths of a legal product. I really could care less if they ban this one particular bullet. most any rifle round will penetrate soft body armor as it is not designed or tested against rifle rounds of any type. My rifle likes the 55 grain bullet better anyway. This is more feel good rules that will have no real impact except to get the far right wing fired up against the democratic party.

[bravenak]

74. I think the fact that I live in a rural state like Alaska makes me not as anti gun.

I just don't want certain people having them. I don't think banning will be effective, just like prohibition. My main problem with some legal gun owners is when they have the proper training and still act irresponsibly. I think we need to raise awareness of neglectful gun ownership. I also don't think we will ever get rid of guns. They are technology. Societies don't gonback to sticks and stones if they can help it. I hope gun owners can teach other gun owners to be more aware.
Illegal gun owners on the other hand. I have no solution because you cannot find them to talk about safety. People will make their own guns if they can't buy what they want.
I hope bith of your groups can find away to mend fences and work together on things you can accomplish together. May not be possible. But maybe.

[Duckhunter935]

75. I feel very much the same way

But if you bring up the fact that the NRA actually has a very robust gun safety program you are trashed. They miss the part where we also call out the NRA's legislative body as being just totally nuts. The "gun safety" groups do no gun safety training but it has been poll tested to sound better than "gun control". We need to get better information into NICS and I would hope to open it up to all private sales and give some king of receipt of a "go" for a sale to be held by the seller. Safe gun storage is another thing that can be helped by discounted gun cabinets or safes. Most pistols already come with free locks, use them if they are being stored.

[bravenak]

77. Free/discounted safety gear actually makes sense.

And yes. The nra has gone nuts in the political arena. Makes it toxic. Be nice if they went back to the way they were. Less about worry about gun sales and Obama, and more about the safety of people. This is by no means the only thing in politics that are problematic. But I think that things have gotten very strange in the last few years.

[appal_jack]

66. Funny, how you call people caring about their rights "delicate little fowers."

I call them citizens & patriots.

To each his own.

-app

[Duckhunter935]

73. well I guess what ever floats their boat

[Electric Monk]

83. It's a This Modern World reference

[Duckhunter935]

85. another childish insult

is what Firearms owners see. Shows the level of civility on the controller side.

[appal_jack]

86. Yup. No doubt this is a funny cartoon, but...

Last edited Sat Feb 28, 2015, 03:31 PM - Edit history (1)

... Tom T & I just happen to disagree about whether the Second Amendment and the 'occasional massacres' are inevitably linked. Tom & I agree that people should be able to have dangerous ideas despite the very real consequences of perverting ideas via propaganda, hate, etc. OTOH, Tom & I diverge when it comes to dangerous hardware such as guns...

Regardless, I consider calling someone a 'delicate flower' because they care about Second Amendment rights to be about on the same level as Rush Limbaugh calling women 'sluts' because they care about reproductive freedom (another right I also care about). Both insults are low, mean-spirited, and do nothing to address the substance of the debate. It's one thing for Tom Tomorrow to use the phrase once in a comic, and quite another for every gun-grabbing DU'er to trot it out in every discussion of gun rights.

-app

[Skittles]

119. dup

[greatlaurel]

40. Brilliant marketing strategy by the bullet manufacturers to get people to buy up junk.

The whole gun culture has been captured by the most devious and effective marketing strategy ever invented. They convince people, someone is coming for their guns and ammo, then these poor fools go out in droves to buy up stuff they do not need and most likely will never use more than a few times shooting at targets in their backyards while annoying the neighbors. Since the numbers of people who are interested in owning guns is shrinking, the marketing strategists know they must create panic buying for the gun manufacturers and gun sellers to maintain their massive profits from an ever shrinking number of people. Sadly, separating fools from their money is not too difficult, especially in gun culture.

[sir pball]

69. I'm pretty sure you're actually quite right..

NATO and by extension the US armed forces have recently changed to a newer type of bullet, which leaves mindbogglingly huge stocks of M855 on their hands with no real use for it - what better way to get rid of it than make rumbles of a "ban", ???, profit!

I say this because the ATF action is preliminary, no bans issued yet, and the bullets in question literally do not meet the definition in the law the ATF is citing...they have a very large lead slug behind the steel tip, while the law explicitly says a bullet must first and foremost be made entirely of non-lead material to even be considered " armor piercing." If I were prone to flights of fancy, I'd almost say somebody at ATK (owners of most of the US military ammo manufacturers) had the ear of somebody at the ATF..

[greatlaurel]

79. Brilliant strategy to get rid of useless ammo and jacking the price up all out of reason to boot.

Just put out there, the government is thinking about regulating it in some "sinister" way. Be sure to mention Obama in the mix and you are golden. It is straight out of the "Merchants of Death" playbook.

Thanks for the information. It is important to understand the what is going on. Follow the money, as they say.

[Skittles]

76. you have to BE stupid to be a gun humper

pathetic people

[EX500rider]

130. If you say so...

Not.

[spanone]

44. k&r...

don't worry they'll blame Obama and not god reagan

[LiberalElite]

70. "gun fellating right" -

I love it.

[Skittles]

109. cowards, every one of them

[friendly_iconoclast]

112. The 'cowards' wrote to ATF and got the ban stopped. Your sort largely did nothing.

While you were occupying yourselves insulting, laughing at, and making sexual references about gun owners, the gun owners mobilized:

https://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2015-03-021015-advisory-notice-those-commenting-armor-piercing-ammunition-exemption-framework.html

Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework

[Skittles]

115. "YOUR SORT"

you mean, the kind more offended by dead kids than by PRICEY AMMO or PENIS ANALOGIES


DONE HERE - GUN HUMPERS BORE ME

[friendly_iconoclast]

132. Yes, your sort. What did *your* email to the ATF say? How many others did you get to write them?

[Skittles]

116. dup

[NaturalHigh]

91. Why do pro-gun control types always make tiny penis references?

[hack89]

92. They are always thinking about my genitalia

A little creepy when you think about it.

[Duckhunter935]

100. they have nothing else

insults and sexual references

[linuxman]

111. It's twofold

1. It's an infantile way to demean the opposition and get a few hits in.

2. It serves to stroke the egos of the ones spouting it. "People who have guns have tiny penises. I don't have guns, therefore I got a big ole' cock!". It's the internet equivalent of bragging about what you got as you adjust the sock in your pants.

Man, this amateur psychoanalysis is fun. No wonder the grabbers like it so much.

[NaturalHigh]

114. Awesome! You win this thread.

I'm going to put on my asbestos suit, though, for some people think that when we see a thread about the Rude Pundit we're supposed to simply turn toward the OP and bow.

[anotojefiremnesuka]

122. When the shoe fits....................

In my experience the vast majority of 'people' who own guns should not own them because they lack the emotional maturity too own them in the first place.

If one thinks that they need a gun to keep the Gov in check that is a whole bunch of paranoia reason enough to ban them ownership.

As of now we have about 1/3 of American households who own gunz, about 350 million guns and growing with the vast majority of em Conservatives/Republicans, which also makes me question the loyalty of gunners who claim to be Democrats.

[NaturalHigh]

123. Well, I see you got all the talking points.

Standard insults too. Do you have them on a little sticky note next to your computer?

Oh, and the 'people' in quotation marks - that was good.

It must really bother you to know that your little pet issue is such a political loser. BTW, who here have you seen saying "they need a gun to keep the Gov in check"? Name three.

You're not very good at this yet. Keep trying.

[anotojefiremnesuka]

124. Whatever

Enjoy your Precious

[beevul]

128. "my experience the vast majority of 'people' who own guns"

What could your experience with 80 to 100 million people possibly be?

And thus, how meaningful could it possibly be?

Those questions tend to answer themselves.

[Cha]

94. Wah! I want my

bullets!

[ileus]

104. Wonder if they know almost all centerfire rifle rounds are "armor piercing"

or if they're too dumb to understand past the mommy propaganda?

[Cha]

117. They're not the ones who are "dumb".

[NaturalHigh]

113. LOL...cool story Cha.

Wah! I want the ATF to ban bullets!

Is that how it works.

[Cha]

120. Rude Pundit: "Of course, the gun-fellating right has lost its mind over this proposal.."

"The Rude Pundit's favorite comments came from a lackadaisical gun store owner in Springfield, Missouri, who is a former cop. He doesn't think the ban will happen; however, "Gun people tend to create their own drama," he said. "If we freaked out every time BATF discusses something we'd be freaking out on this all the time. Sometimes gun owners are their own worst enemy."

[NaturalHigh]

121. "He doesn't think the ban will happen; however"...

Good man, there. I'm glad he was right.

[NaturalHigh]

110. I wonder if the Rude Pundit...

will now blog about the defeat of the ammo ban and ponder who is losing whose mind.

[meegbear]

126. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026348844

[NaturalHigh]

129. Thanks.

He sure seems disgruntled that the ATF allowed the "little people" to speak up on this issue.

[benEzra]

125. For those who are curious *why* the ban didn't fly

the issues both opposing and supporting it are covered pretty well in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172161113

To summarize, the ammo in question was misclassified as AP to start with, and poses no more threat to law enforcement than other rifle rounds. The Dems who wrote the AP handgun ammo ban specifically excluded rifle rounds with lead or partial lead cores, and M855 is 80% lead. It is stopped by the lowest level of body armor rated to stop rifle rounds (NIJ Level III).

[KamaAina]

127. "Flabby the Deaf Clown's Masturbatorium of Hate" FTW!