Encoded Ammunition: Scant Faith

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: m hoiriis
>
> Jerry,
>
> Please God tell me that I am just not following the posts on your blog properly... You cannot seriously be in favor of ammo encoding.....please assure me that I am mistaken....
>
> Mike

--------------- Geek Response ---------------

Hi Mike!


I have no idea what I ever said which could possibly have given you the impression that I was supportive of the Encoded Ammunitions bills which lately have been (egregiously) promulgated by Political Hoors in this great nation, but I want to assure you that I am not ... that is not Not NOT NOT! encouraged by these perfidious politickings!

!!!!!!!

The "Encoded Ammunition" bills would, if enacted, be the ruination of the Second Amendment protection which allows us, Citizens of these United States, to own and carry and use firearms for their many benign purposes: hunting, plinking, competition, self-defense, and protection against a tyrannical government are only the beginning.

One of my personal concerns is that those of us who choose to use firearms for ANY purpose must necessarily practice to maintain our gun-handling skills. The Encoded Ammunition bills would cause the financial burden of practicing with our firearms to become unbearable, resulting in a decrease in practice, and the atrophy of gun-handling and accuracy skills.

This is obviously not a benefit to us, and not a benefit to society. "Society" reasonably expects that if we choose to own, store or carry defensive firearms, we should at least maintain a minimum level of expertise, and these bills would obviate the practice necessary to that purpose.

In point of fact, given that Law Enforcement Units are or may be subject to these same restrictions, departmental budgets for LEO's may preclude even the minimal annual qualification of Law Enforcement Officers, with a resultant degradation of the already marginal skill levels of cops ... perhaps even the Military.

What's the "up-side" of this? There is none. There is, in fact, no benefit to society in these bills.

Indeed, despite protestations to the contrary, there is no benefit to "Crime Prevention", or even "Crime Solving", in these bills.

The Encoded Ammunition bills are (ipso facto) nothing more or less than a patent attempt to obviate the Second Amendment by imposing an unbearable financial burden on anyone who would use a firearm for any legal purpose.

Those who would use firearms for non-legal purposes, of course, are not handicapped by these bills. They are already, by definition, criminals; they are currently acquiring firearms by extra-legal means; they will only be required to spend another couple of minutes in their Home Burglaries to pick up ammunition as well as firearms, with the minimal consequence of ... nothing. The criminals have the guns, they have the ammunition, and neither acquisition imposes a financial burden, nor a legal risk above that which they have already accepted when they decide to steal a gun.

So: What have I written which suggests to you that I support the "Encoded Ammunition" bills which have been sponsored by immoral, perfidious (but I repeat myself) politicians?

I would really like to know. IF I have so poorly expressed myself to suggest such a bizarre impression of support, I need to know where I have failed to make myself clear, so I can go back and rewrite.

Thank you for bringing this unfortunate miss-statement (what ever it is) to my attention.

I obviously need to be more aware of the way in which I express myself.

Jerry the Geek

PS: Have I made myself more clear?