Earlier today, I mentioned that anti-gunners seem to be starting to push for an ammo ban. Their idea is that if they can’t keep guns out of the hands of bad guys, then maybe they can keep ammo out of their hands. It doesn’t work that way, of course, but that’s what some anti-gunners seem to believe.
Some likely believe it to be easier to restrict ammo than guns. After all, gun control hasn’t exactly gone like anti-gunners hoped.
However, they might want to hold their horses a bit.
Question: If the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevents banning firearms, can we ban bullets?
Answer: Probably not.
While bullets are not specifically mentioned in the Second Amendment, it is likely that the Court would find that a prohibition on bullets would prevent the exercise of the individual right that was recognized in the Amendment. If requiring trigger-locks was too far for the Court, I suspect the prohibition of bullets would be as well. While a state could make bullets more expensive through taxation, even that would probably face Constitutional challenge if the tax made the cost of purchasing bullets prohibitive.
Further, even if it were not Constitutionally infirm, there are some issues to consider. Banning bullets would likely create an underground market for bullets, and probably even a bullet- smuggling industry. Homemade bullets may even be dangerous, if not manufactured properly. The solution would create new and difficult issues.
There’s a lot more to that explanation, of course, but this is the meat of the issue. What’s more, I agree on both counts.
See, these ideas of controlling ammunition since they can’t control guns is nothing more than a feeble attempt at an end-around. They can’t do what they want, so they’re going to try and restrict your rights in a completely new and different way.
The thing is, the Founding Fathers didn’t seek to preserve our right to keep and bear arms simply because they thought guns were cool. They wanted us to be able to use them to defend this country, even from our own government if need be.
In order to do that, we also need ammunition.
Even the most idiotic anti-gunner knows this. Of course, that’s why they’re looking to restrict our access to ammunition and that’s why this kind of thing really irks me. It’s like they know what they’re trying to do is unconstitutional, so they’re trying to find a way around the Second Amendment.
Yet it doesn’t work that way.
Luckily, there’s no chance at all of a federal ammunition ban happening at the federal level–I suspect a number of Democrats would vote against something like that–and it’s only going to happen in the most anti-gun states there are. Unfortunately, if you’re in one of those states, you’re screwed. Then again, you may already be dealing with this nonsense.
In time, though, we need to start looking at how to remove these idiotic restrictions in those states that already have them, but for now, we probably need to figure out how to put the kibosh on this nonsense elsewhere.