Lake City Ammo

Amps 13

Amps 13

Well-Known Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2017
Messages
5,983
Location
Jamestown
Rating - 100%
175   0   0
Good thing we can’t own F-15’s or they would be shutting that down too…

Bets Josh Stein signed onto this to close LC?
 
Walkabout Dan said:
Without ammo a gun is just an expensive rock or club . Fits right in with the democrat agenda.
Click to expand...
Dems are pretty smart. Although they still try to ban guns they find other ways to achieve their goals. Shutting down ammo plants, taxing bullets or extra regulation they go at it from all sides.
They know sooner or later some of that will stick.
 
Amps 13 said:
Dems are pretty smart. Although they still try to ban guns they find other ways to achieve their goals. Shutting down ammo plants, taxing bullets or extra regulation they go at it from all sides.
They know sooner or later some of that will stick.
Click to expand...
And they will continue to try until they get a violent response that puts them in their place. This behavior is as old as time, and so is the solution.
 
The democrat's letter shows they don't understand, or are trying to mislead people.
It says the govt/taxpayer should not be subsidizing the sale of "military" ammo to civilians. But it is actually the other way around. The contract(s) that allow the operator (Winchester right now) to make and sell ammo to the public if the military (govt) doesn't buy the capacity of the L.C. plant reduces the cost of the ammo to the military (govt) since the commercial sales subsidize the overhead of the plant.
 
Walkabout Dan said:
Without ammo a gun is just an expensive rock or club . Fits right in with the democrat agenda.
Click to expand...
That is one thing my dad taught me. “Son without ammo a gun useless” he would say. Guns were not taboo back then though. He kept everything but one revolver in a wooden coat/suit closet thing he had. I could go “play” with them whenever I wanted once I shown that I was nona danger.

This is their answer to gun control but they are too stupid to realize it or are playing dumb. Cut off the ammo. You can keep your gun but you can’t buy ammo for the guns. Maybe everyone should at least know how to reload and own the components to load calibers and be self sufficient.
 
Bigdave0924 said:
That is one thing my dad taught me. “Son without ammo a gun useless” he would say. Guns were not taboo back then though. He kept everything but one revolver in a wooden coat/suit closet thing he had. I could go “play” with them whenever I wanted once I shown that I was nona danger.

This is their answer to gun control but they are too stupid to realize it or are playing dumb. Cut off the ammo. You can keep your gun but you can’t buy ammo for the guns. Maybe everyone should at least know how to reload and own the components to load calibers and be self sufficient.
Click to expand...
Make sure you have plenty of ammo for the first fights and then battlefield replenishment will have to take over till the wars end. Only a person who wishes to rule you wants you unable to defend yourself. One of the first laws the British made against the colonies was they were not allowed to produce weapons and ammunition. Make sure you familiarize yourself with communist bloc weapons and ammunition as they will flood into this country.
 
Last edited:
Probably sounds ridiculous to many. Today I think one should have at least 1000 rounds for each firearm that they expect to use for there defense.
Some say if you can't carry it you don't need. I just don't believe that still stands today.
Heck if you can afford it follow that 1k rule with every firearm you own.
One day it might be worth more than the gun.;)
 
Amps 13 said:
Have they eroded our rights over the last 40 years? Dems play the long game. They don’t care if we lose our 2A rights today or if it take 100 years. As long as in the end we lose em.
Click to expand...

Exactly. They are evil, scheming bastards, but the ones pulling the strings are far from dumb. They know exactly what they are doing, and are succeeding. It wasn't an accident - it was a plan that they have pushed forward over decades.

If only "smart" republicans/conservatives/whatever were as effective at achieving goals as the liberals/communists/globalists.
 
Last edited:
Amps 13 said:
Have they eroded our rights over the last 40 years? Dems play the long game. They don’t care if we lose our 2A rights today or if it take 100 years. As long as in the end we lose em.
Click to expand...
The statement was mostly a joke, but...

While they have been persistent, I feel their attempts have been poorly developed and based on incorrect perception of how things work, including that thing that goes up and impossible rates of fire or the power of 9mm. While we have lost ground, heaven forbid someone on their side actually knew what they were talking about and mount a real argument.

By the same token, I feel that pro 2a side has also missed opportunities to leverage things like economic discrimination by applying fees to gun ownership and carry. The disadvantaged are deprived the right to self protection due to these fees.
 
Last edited:
georgel said:
The statement was mostly a joke, but...

While they have been persistent, I feel their attempts have been poorly developed and based on incorrect perception of how things work, including that thing that goes up and impossible rates of fire or the power of 9mm. While we have lost ground, heaven forbid someone on their side actually knew what they were talking about and mount a real argument.

By the same token, I feel that pro 2a side has also missed opportunities to leverage things like economic discrimination by applying fees to gun ownership and carry. The disadvantaged are deprived the right to self protection due to these fees.
Click to expand...
I've been paying attention to the mess of an AWB Illinois passed. That shows they still don't know what they are talking about, but with supermajorities were able to pass nonsensical and illegal law and thus far the courts allowed it. They don't need to know what they're doing, they just have to lock step their way through.
 
Last edited:
Why do you think they think are striving for technical accuracy and effectiveness at stopping crime when their goal is to expand the power of the gov and ATF with ambiguous laws to ensnare law abiding citizens?

They are playing the game a couple of moves ahead of you. Nothing is what it appears on the surface. That's what I would do if I was running things anyway, and all evidence I see seems compatible with that assumption.
 
LarrySr. said:
Probably sounds ridiculous to many. Today I think one should have at least 1000 rounds for each firearm that they expect to use for there defense.
Some say if you can't carry it you don't need. I just don't believe that still stands today.
Heck if you can afford it follow that 1k rule with every firearm you own.
One day it might be worth more than the gun.;)
Click to expand...

IMG_0725.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 92G
PO11
Oh, that's just a guideline not a rule I follow for the maximum amount.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom