# Obama restrictions on Ammo, real? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 13, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289 "2009-08-13T14:31:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Kal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9de053/32.png) [@Kal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kal)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/21 "2009-08-13T17:07:41Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > What is so hard to understand about this? You’ve mistaken me for someone who stated an opinion on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/22 "2009-08-13T17:11:48Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Yes, and people aren’t waiting around for a President (who is on record as wanting hand guns banned) to try this end run around the Supreme Court. It’s not a function of current Federal legislation, it’s a fear of the potential legislation from a Democratic majority Congress/Presidency. Currently there is nothing standing in the way of a majority voting block. > > What is so hard to understand about this? No it’s just irrational fear spread by the right. Even if Obama said he’d favor a national ban on hand guns, that he’d never be able to get such legislation passed. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/23 "2009-08-13T17:12:46Z")
> [@simster](#): > > Obama has endorsed bans - even if so, I believe those bans were defeated. > > This is why we have checks and balances in our Govt - so that just because one person (even the President) believes it should be so, it does not follow that it will become so. Restrictive gun legislation is traditionally the domain of Democratic Party which, as I pointed out, has a majority block in both houses as well as the Presidency. It’s not Obama, it’s the whole package. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/24 "2009-08-13T17:13:53Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Yes, and people aren’t waiting around for a President (who is on record as wanting hand guns banned) to try this end run around the Supreme Court. It’s not a function of current Federal legislation, it’s a fear of the potential legislation from a Democratic majority Congress/Presidency. Currently there is nothing standing in the way of a majority voting block. > > What is so hard to understand about this? You’re basing you’re entire understanding on a FEAR that has yet to have any traction in any actionable way. Last I understood - Obama did not push for the extension of the “Assault Weapons Ban” - so, that seems to fly right in the face of your fear - if he wont even sign off on existing legislation, he’s even less likely to create new. Just becuase he may want it, may even campaign for it, may even push it - does not mean that it will happen. So, you can spend your days in fear, and push the fear, and help the ammo companies make even more money by having more people “buy it all up” - but at the end of TODAY, all you’ve got is a store house of ammo. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/25 "2009-08-13T17:16:02Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Restrictive gun legislation is traditionally the domain of Democratic Party which, as I pointed out, has a majority block in both houses as well as the Presidency. It’s not Obama, it’s the whole package. Well, at that point you have to fault the voters, since they put this party in power, and if they do manage to get it passed, then it seems that is the ‘will of the people’, is it not? Of course, I don’t believe for a second that it would get passed - if the state level stuff can get no traction to make it “more expensive and harder to get ammo” where it is undeniably easier to make that kind of thing happen, then I have even less fear of something at the federal level. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/26 "2009-08-13T17:17:45Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > No it’s just irrational fear spread by the right. > > Even if Obama said he’d favor a national ban on hand guns, that he’d never be able to get such legislation passed. Was it irrational fear in the UK? ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/27 "2009-08-13T17:23:17Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Was it irrational fear in the UK? We’re not talking about the U.K. We’re talking about the U.S. which has a strong, well supported and vocal opposition to anything seen as going against the 2nd amendment. I’m not even sure the U.K. has something equivalent to the 2nd amendment. ---
**Author:** ![Erasmus\_Darwin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c57346/32.png) [@Erasmus\_Darwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erasmus_Darwin)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/28 "2009-08-13T17:23:55Z")
> [@Zebra](#): > > I asked her about what kind of gun she owned because the military shell thing seems to cover spent US military rounds for ‘assault-rifles’. This statement is misleading since “assault rifle” ammo is also used by popular civilian firearms. In particular, the M16 fires 5.56mm NATO rounds. That same round is fired by the semi-automatic AR-15, which is a popular enthusiast rifle. So there’s definitely a civilian market that would pay for spent military brass. However, I have no knowledge of what the military actually does with their spent 5.56 brass. I do understand that there are a number of restrictions that the government has placed on .50 BMG via deals with ammunition manufacturers. That round is less popular in civilian circles, but it does enjoy civilian usage for distance shooting. However, those deals **predate the Obama administration**. I seem to recall hearing that there was a company that was buying surplus .50 BMG from the government, disassembling the rounds (i.e. removing the bullet from the brass and pouring out the powder), and then using the disassembled parts to create “reloads” to get around the government’s restrictions that prevented the rounds from being sold directly to the civilian market. I’m fuzzy on the exact details, though. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/29 "2009-08-13T17:27:00Z")
> [@simster](#): > > Well, at that point you have to fault the voters, since they put this party in power, and if they do manage to get it passed, then it seems that is the ‘will of the people’, is it not? > > Of course, I don’t believe for a second that it would get passed - if the state level stuff can get no traction to make it “more expensive and harder to get ammo” where it is undeniably easier to make that kind of thing happen, then I have even less fear of something at the federal level. None of what you said negates the reason people are buying ammunition. There has been real legislation proposed in multiple states and now there is a majority-voting block. People are reacting to it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/30 "2009-08-13T17:30:13Z")
Give it up, **Magiver**. You’re busted. You posted a link to a list of _state_ bills and implied it was a link to Federal legislation. Then, when somebody actually checked your link, you change your story- now it’s just the “fear” that Obama and/or the Democratic Congress will introduce it as federal legislation (evidence for which, of course, is strangely missing). I find the “end run around the Supreme Court” stuff amusing, too. The nerve of some people- appealing to the voters. How _dare_ they! > [@](#): > > I’m not even sure the U.K. has something equivalent to the 2nd amendment. It doesn’t have an equivalent to the Constitution at all, as the UK has no written Constitution. Instead, it has the body of common and statutory law, and although there is a right to bear arms mentioned in the (original) Bill of Rights, it has since been effectively repealed by numerous Acts of Parliament (which have equal “constitutional” standing, and are newer and therefore controlling). ETA: The EU Charter of Fundamental Human Rights serves as a sort of micro-constitution nowadays, since EU courts can overrule British ones on civil rights issues. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/31 "2009-08-13T17:32:36Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > We’re not talking about the U.K. We’re talking about the U.S. which has a strong, well supported and vocal opposition to anything seen as going against the 2nd amendment. I’m not even sure the U.K. has something equivalent to the 2nd amendment. We’re talking about the reaction to real legislation in conjunction to a party with a majority vote. This isn’t a one-time run on ammunition. People will continue to hoard it until a viable contingent is in place to block the legislation. It doesn’t matter if the probability of passing the law is 90% or 10%. That only affects the rate of hoarding. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/32 "2009-08-13T17:34:16Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Obama has endorsed bans on hand guns in the past and it’s just logical to assume his agenda would resurface in another form and act accordingly. So… we know he’s just achin’ to do it, so let’s assume he IS doing it? Don’t we need… I dunno… a bit more evidence than that? I mean, look: I’m a lifetime NRA member and a recreational shooter with a concealed handgun permit. I’m absolutely alert to efforts to restrict Second Amendment rights. There ain’t nuthin’ here. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/33 "2009-08-13T17:36:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So… we know he’s just achin’ to do it, so let’s assume he IS doing it? > > Don’t we need… I dunno… a bit more evidence than that? Since the OP’s friend is describing what “Obama is going to do” as a _fait accompli_, rather than just something she thinks might happen, I’d say so. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/34 "2009-08-13T17:36:53Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Give it up, **Magiver**. You’re busted. > > You posted a link to a list of _state_ bills and implied it was a link to Federal legislation. Then, when somebody actually checked your link, you change your story- now it’s just the “fear” that Obama and/or the Democratic Congress will introduce it as federal legislation (evidence for which, of course, is strangely missing). > > I find the “end run around the Supreme Court” stuff amusing, too. The nerve of some people- appealing to the voters. How _dare_ they! > > It doesn’t have an equivalent to the Constitution at all, as the UK has no written Constitution. Instead, it has the body of common and statutory law, and although there is a right to bear arms mentioned in the (original) Bill of Rights, it has since been effectively repealed by numerous Acts of Parliament (which have equal “constitutional” standing, and are newer and therefore controlling). > > ETA: The EU Charter of Fundamental Human Rights serves as a sort of micro-constitution nowadays, since EU courts can overrule British ones on civil rights issues. All good conservatives know that the Supreme Court is the U.S.'s supreme legislative body. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Teacake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Teacake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teacake)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/35 "2009-08-13T17:37:40Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Was it irrational fear in the UK? I wouldn’t recommend trying to use us as an example on your side. The ban on handguns was and continues to be very popular here. We don’t have the same… uh… “relationship” as you do with items whose sole use is to make living things become dead. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/36 "2009-08-13T17:39:04Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > All good conservatives know that the Supreme Court is the U.S.'s supreme legislative body. 😃 I didn’t even mention the irony of a conservative complaining about “an end run around the Supreme Court” when 90% of the time they’re complaining about how the Supremes are a bunch of [liberal] activists. And I won’t mention it. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/37 "2009-08-13T17:45:24Z")
> [@Zebra](#): > > I’ve been emailing a friend of mine and she has told me about “Obama’s Restrictions on Ammo”. Basically if Obama can’t outlaw guns he is outlawing ammo. There is a snopes article covering this. There is a germ of truth to the paranoid rant, but only a germ (and an out of date one at that): > [@](#): > > In March 2009, while reviewing a policy change issued by the DoD the previous year, the DLA halted or reclassified the sale of a broad category of items, a category which included spent cartridge cases. > The issue was quickly resolved, however: a week later the DLA issued a press release announcing that upon completion of their review, they had determined that cartridge cases “could be appropriately placed in a category of government property allowing for their release for sale”: > **[DoD Suspension of Brass Cartridge Casing Sales](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cartridge-case/)** > > Has the Department of Defense cut off sales of spent cartridge cases to U.S. ammunition manufacturers? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/38 "2009-08-13T17:45:40Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Give it up, **Magiver**. You’re busted. > > You posted a link to a list of _state_ bills and implied it was a link to Federal legislation. Then, when somebody actually checked your link, you change your story- now it’s just the “fear” that Obama and/or the Democratic Congress will introduce it as federal legislation (evidence for which, of course, is strangely missing). > > I find the “end run around the Supreme Court” stuff amusing, too. The nerve of some people- appealing to the voters. How _dare_ they! > > It doesn’t have an equivalent to the Constitution at all, as the UK has no written Constitution. Instead, it has the body of common and statutory law, and although there is a right to bear arms mentioned in the (original) Bill of Rights, it has since been effectively repealed by numerous Acts of Parliament (which have equal “constitutional” standing, and are newer and therefore controlling). > > ETA: The EU Charter of Fundamental Human Rights serves as a sort of micro-constitution nowadays, since EU courts can overrule British ones on civil rights issues. Your argument is that people are reacting to federal legislation. People are reacting to state legislation that can now be voted on nationally from a political party that has enough votes to pass it. This is not a ban on guns but an end run around it by making ammunition expensive. It has a very real chance of passing just as higher taxes were on cigarettes. If you want to argue that the probability is low that’s fine but people are reacting to legislation proposed on a state level from a party that currently holds all the federal votes. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/39 "2009-08-13T17:47:53Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I didn’t even mention the irony of a conservative complaining about “an end run around the Supreme Court” when 90% of the time they’re complaining about how the Supremes are a bunch of [liberal] activists. And I won’t mention it. 😉 That’s not irony. One is a legislative attempt around the court (by Democrats) and the other is a court attempt around legislation (by Democrats). ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2009, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289/40 "2009-08-13T17:50:25Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Your argument is that people are reacting to federal legislation. People are reacting to state legislation that can now be voted on nationally from a political party that has enough votes to pass it. This is not a ban on guns but an end run around it by making ammunition expensive. It has a very real chance of passing just as higher taxes were on cigarettes. People are reacting to state legislation that has repeatedly failed to pass… by panicking about federal legislation that doesn’t exist? The NRA scare machine must be _really_ effective. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-restrictions-on-ammo-real/506289.md?page=3)