Top Menu

If Gun Control Fails, They’ll Try Ammo Next

Armscor ammunition

Left to Right – Remington 115gr, Armscor 115gr, Re-manufactured ammo ‘Brand X'

At some point, the attack on our guns will reach a tipping point. For now, they have to realize that they won't be able to do what they want with our guns, which is to restrict and regulate as much as possible. The new frontier is ammunition.

They've made it known a few different times that they'd like to come for the ammunition that feeds our hungry guns. In talks, it's usually about background checks for ammunition purchases, higher taxes, or banning internet sales. Often times saying that the ammo is the true agent of lethality when it comes to taking life–not the criminals pulling the trigger–as if they couldn't go find a bat or knife to inflict injury or death on another human being.

Much in the same way that they did with guns, they're beginning to demonize our ammo. That's the next logical step for them to take, just like they did with the AR-15.

I think the ammo fight is already here to some degree, but will get worse as time goes on. In some states, it's already very hard to just go to the store and buy ammunition. And you can forget about having ammo shipped to your front door in these areas.

California, usually the leader of the witch hunt, sets the stage for idiocy on all fronts of the gun control debate and it's no different for the freedom seeds we send downrange on a regular basis. Whatever happens in California will usually happen in at least 10 other states. And in the page where the following quote was taken, they sing the California praises.

But more than that, and to prove that your ammo's life is at stake —

The following drivel was taken from the Giffords' website:

The ammunition used in guns is what renders firearms truly lethal—yet ammunition sales are not subject to the same federal regulations as the firearms themselves, and in most states can be bought online or in person with zero oversight. Ammunition background checks and other commonsense policies regulating the sale and transfer of ammunition are important ways to keep deadly power away from those who threaten the safety of others.

You read that right, my friends … they want us to go through background checks or other “commonsense policies” just so we can go to the range and shoot our guns or protect our lives from the psychos out there. If they gain any ground on ammunition control, as ludicrous as that sounds, that will effectively halt the firearms industry. Because, without ammo, you can't shoot.

This nonsense is being spewed by the anti-gunners because it's on their radar. They're starting to realize that they may never gain enough ground to put a ban on guns in most areas. What's the next best thing? Controlling the ammo.

Can they go after our ammo, legally?

Let me go on record right now for any naysayers out there, the Second Amendment also protects ammunition. The ammo that feeds our guns is, much like the guns themselves, nothing more than a tool to make them work.

Much in the same way that we cannot regulate, tax (within reason, sure), or otherwise hurt the ink industry even though much of the news being printed these days is, well, you know … fake; they cannot tax, regulate, or hurt the ammunition industry, legally, without violating federal constitutional amendments.

In other words, just as the First Amendment protects certain rights and even tools, so does the Second Amendment. That doesn't mean that they won't try, as they have in other ways, for many years.

It is understood that we have a fundamental right to self-defense, and that right is protected by the Second Amendment. It is also therefore understood that in order to have the ability to effectively protect ourselves, we need certain tools. Tools like firearms and ammunition are absolutely essential for self-protection.

So I'll say it again: Ammunition is protected.

But that hasn't stopped states like California from enacting asinine regulations regarding the sale of ammunition. And, if they had their way, they'd prohibit the sale of ammo online across the entire country.

Of course, they can add a tax to ammunition sales, but that'll only get them so far, and anything can only be taxed so high before things start to get out of hand. Still, they will try and they are already giving us clues that they will. The question is, are we paying attention?

What we need to do is never let our guard down. We need to stay on top of our game so we can continue enjoying the freedoms we love so much. They will make the push, it's just a matter of when. They've warned us. Are we paying attention?

Here is the page to Giffords just in case you feel like burning a few of your brain cells at the stake. Am I right in my assessment? Is ammo the next frontier of gun control? Let us know in the comments below.

, , ,

15 Responses to If Gun Control Fails, They’ll Try Ammo Next

  1. BP October 18, 2018 at 4:48 pm #

    What’s really needed is for the online ammo retailers who are not under the jurisdiction of states like CA to grow a pair and take the same position as Buffalo Bore. As stated on their website, they comply with federal laws but refuse to be the enforcement arm for anti 2A laws in states such as CA. They will ship ammo to those states, and it is the resident who decides to take the risk of not following their state’s laws, much as they decide how far over the speed limit to drive.

  2. ROY October 18, 2018 at 5:01 pm #

    YES, some kind of ammo restriction is what the LEFT wants. The more the better.They can’t restrict guns like they want to, so ammo is the next best thing. Making it harder for the average American to obtain ammo will just let criminals have more of an upper hand.

  3. Tim October 18, 2018 at 5:19 pm #

    The stupidity that oozes out of California cannot be described in one memo. The alleged “leadership” in California is as deranged as a f _ _ _ ed monkey. The sheep there have been brainwashed for so long they no longer recognize the threats to their freedoms.

  4. Robert Culver October 18, 2018 at 5:57 pm #

    yep thats why im saving as much money as i can to buy reloaders to go with my guns

    they will only get my guns and ammo from my dead hands

    Robert Culver

    • Alan Kushner October 17, 2020 at 5:37 am #

      Amen to that my fellow pro 2A. I have been reloading for years now and cast my own bullets . I am well supplied and could hold my own for quite a while. We must never let the misinformed ill meaning anti freedom groups infringe on our rights just because of their personal opinions. They have a right to express , but not to impose their opinions on others and the constitution should never be denied. Both my wife and myself will NEVER SURRENDE OUR FIREARMS.

  5. William Strossman October 18, 2018 at 6:09 pm #

    Sen. Moynihan tried to levy a huge excise tax on any ammo that could be used in a pistol; according to BATF, that would have included .30-30 and .30-06. Also .45-70.

  6. Dave Cassacia October 18, 2018 at 6:44 pm #

    As a resident of Kommiefornia all I can say is keep your guard up and don’t let this happen to you. These laws are always disguised as a safety issue. I think this is a work around to get you to register your guns. Kommiefornia will be doing background checks for ammo in June of 2019. I’ll bet if I want to get some ammo for a gun that I inherited years ago they will deny me that ammo stating that I don’t have a weapon register to me in that caliber and will require me to register it in order to get ammo. I guess I’ll have to purchase a cheap throwaway gun in the same caliber to get my ammo. Then they will know I have it and when time comes for confiscation I can hand the throwaway over. These bastards are sneaky.

  7. Clark Lare Sr. October 19, 2018 at 7:57 am #

    The left may be surprised to find out how willingly may of us would “give” them our ammo should they attempt to take it.

    • Alan Kushner October 17, 2020 at 5:41 am #

      Yeh, just the front part.” Do ya feel lucky punk – do ya ” ?

  8. Jack Barker October 29, 2019 at 12:23 pm #

    Sorry fellas, but I think this article smells of paranoia, more of which we definitely do not need. Some states/municipalities may try, and state courts may back them up, but the Federal Courts will not. They will find that a citizen cannot “bear arms” without the ammunition to make them usable.

    And before you bring up the state “successes” in CA, MA, NY, NJ, et al, just remember that these restrictions have never been properly challenged in a Circuit Court of Appeal or Scotus.

    • Gary Coffman October 31, 2019 at 11:55 am #

      No paranoia if you live here in Ca. Took me 2 years to get a CCW…15 new restrictive laws just signed by Gov. Threat is (repeat, IS) REAL….Here’s how:…Red Flag law…no warrant, no due process…just a “threat warning” from a family member, teacher, fellow employee, employers, etc. Seize your property…remove any “legal” right to own or carry…adjudication may take up to a year…(at court’s options), and now, may last up to 5 years. No mechanism to recover property. Question for you’all:: How many in the education world are “left” leaning? How many are “anti-gun”??? How many would use this “Red Flag” law to harass or intimidate any who support the 2A???

    • Tim October 31, 2019 at 4:46 pm #

      In an ideal world, yes, the Federal courts would throw it out. However, in an ideal world, it would never be brought up. Any attorney will tell you that you can never tell what will happen in court. You can have a case nailed, no way it should lose, and you get your butt handed to you.
      Remember, obamacare had its day in the Supreme Court, there was no logical way for it to go the way it did.
      Its better to defang the snake, than to treat snakebite

  9. Terry Ivy October 31, 2019 at 12:06 pm #

    Ammo control and restriction has been a topic of the Left for decades. Way back in the 1970’s there was a period of time when purchasing ammo required a registration of the date of purchase, the purchasers name, address, and drivers license number plus the type and amount of ammo purchased. It was a paperwork nightmare, total waste of time and was eventually discontinued. It was ridiculous. Today, if you purchase ammo at Walmart (at least in some stores here in Houston) you are required to produce your drivers license which they scan into their system.

  10. Steve Gaines October 16, 2020 at 3:18 pm #

    If…..IF the US falls to anarchy, the demonrats may think they’ll come for our ammo. I’ll give them ALL they can handle. But (there’s always a but) they only get the projectiles. I’ll keep the brass for future uses.
    Patriot Kyle proved no one is willing to take a firearm from a person willing and able to use it. Come to my house trying the shit……

    Steve in Bama

  11. Gary Sackman October 16, 2020 at 4:05 pm #

    I live in the UP of Northern Michigan. We have been running out of ammo for two months. Dunhams and other sports stores get one shipment a week and it is gone as soon as it arrives. Pistol ammo and the popular plinker ammo (.223/5.56) were the first to go. They might have been used in combat, but they are not adequate combat rounds where you might only have one shot to stop a moving and attacking aggressor. Some may disagree, but I will take my 30-30 or larger to stay alive and my family to be safe. Gary, US Army Ret.

Leave a Reply

All comments are moderated to ensure compliance with our community guidelines