Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

'Avid gun enthusiast,' indeed

Courtesy of Keep and Bear Arms, we learn of a gun owner with some concerns about the difficulty of obtaining handgun ammunition. That's entirely understandable--I'm concerned about that myself. It's the specific reason for his concern, as outlined in a letter to the editor of the Erie Times-News, that has me shaking my head.

As an avid gun enthusiast, I, like many others, have recently found it harder to find handgun ammunition. Every time I walk into a local supercenter, I ask if they have ammunition, and the answer is always "no."


I recently discovered the reason. The woman working in the firearms department of the supercenter said she had already sold out that morning. In fact, she sold all 40 cases (2,000 rounds) to one man.

Again, I am a gun lover and support the Second Amendment, but in this day of mass shootings, I find it irresponsible and unnerving that this store would put that much firepower into one person's hands.
Never mind his confusion about the difference between boxes and cases of ammunition. The bigger issue is the nervousness of a self-proclaimed "gun lover and support[er of the] Second Amendment" who is "unnerved" not by the unavailability of ammo, but what he apparently thinks of as excessive availability of it to one person.

If he had expressed unhappiness because he thought the store should limit purchases in order to give other customers a chance, I'd have a bit more sympathy for him. Not a lot of sympathy, because that's a decision for the store to make, but I could understand him wanting the store to make an effort to make ammo available to a wider swath of its customer base.

Instead, he sounds just like the Brady Campaign, which apparently wants laws to ban "private arsenals" (my emphasis).
The president should make it clear that efforts to disrupt trafficking in illegal guns and stockpiling of private arsenals are not a threat to law-abiding gun owners.
With "gun lovers" like Dave Roberts, who needs gun grabbers?

8 comments:

Bob S. said...

Could someone define a "private arsenal" for me?

I need to set a target and I figure exceeding the that definition would be a good start.

45superman said...

I've seen as little as a couple hundred rounds referred to as an "arsenal."

But maybe the "official definition" of an "arsenal" would be in the Brady Campaign's (never realized) dream bill, S. 1878, the "Gun Violence Prevention Act of 1994" (also known as "Brady II").

SEC. 204. FEDERAL ARSENAL LICENSE.

(a) Offense.--Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by
section 203(a), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

"(x) It shall be unlawful for a person to possess more than 20 firearms
or more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition
unless the person--

"(1) is a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed
dealer; or

"(2) has been issued an arsenal license pursuant to section 923(m).".

(b) Arsenal License.--Section 923 of title 18, United States Code, as
amended by section 203(b), is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:

"(m)(1) The Secretary shall issue an arsenal license if--

"(A) the applicant has--

"(i) filed a sworn application with the Secretary, stating--

"(I) the applicant's name, address, and date of birth;

"(II) that the applicant is at least 21 years of age; and

"(III) that the applicant is not prohibited from possessing
or receiving a firearm under Federal, State, or local law;

"(ii) filed with the Secretary a certificate, dated within the
previous 60 days, from the chief law enforcement officer of the
applicant's State of residence, stating that the applicant has not
exhibited such a propensity for violence, instability, or disregard
of the law as may render the applicant's possession of an arsenal a
danger to the community; and

"(iii) paid an arsenal license fee of $300 for a 3-year license
period; and

"(B) the Secretary has determined that the information in the
application is accurate, based in part upon name- and fingerprint-based
research in all available Federal, State, and local recordkeeping
systems.

"(2) The holder of an arsenal license shall be subject to all obligations
and requirements pertaining to licensed dealers under this chapter.".

(c) Penalty.--Section 924(a)(5) of title 18, United States Code, as
amended by section 203(c), is amended by striking "or (w)" and inserting
"(w), or (x)".

(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by section shall become
effective on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this
Act.

I'm still short of the 20 firearms, but if I got down to 1000 rounds of ammo, I'd consider that a shortage of crisis proportions.

Bob S. said...

Hmm, definitely short of arsenal status on firearms.



I meet the ammo requirement on just .22LR only. I would say that it is amazing how little they know, but I suspect that it is an informed and knowledgeable act to set the limit so low. 2 Bulk packs (550) of .22LR puts a person over the 1,000 round limit.


Wonder if I can convince the wife to let me go on an immediate buying spree to get arsenal status?

word verification -- unmarked - what I want the package containing my order of 450 rounds of .45ACP to be delivered in :)

James A. Zachary Jr. said...

I am sure that was a typo ... they meant to say "1,000 POUNDS of ammunition"

45superman said...

I am sure that was a typo ... they meant to say "1,000 POUNDS of ammunition"

Ah--now that, while still offensive and blatantly unconstitutional, is at least somewhat less oppressive.

Thirdpower said...

Bob S.,

I bet you would fall under the category of firearms:

Section 312 -
Expands the definition of a "firearm" to include its component parts.

I have more magazines than that nevermind spare parts or the firearms themselves.

45superman said...

Ooh--thanks, Third--I'd forgotten all about that, and your reminder is quite timely.

Bob S. said...

Uhmm Third......HUSH! :)

Right now my wife isn't happy with the anti-freedom gun grabbers.

She's more likely to approve purchases to meet a standard like their "arsenal" now then ever.

Let's not ruin it ok?

Even with magazines, I still don't qualify. Just getting into the collecting / arsenal building.