duh, but ammo depletes when used
and after a few years in storage it's going to be useless

so no matter how much of it there is it's going to become scrap soon

also, tracking ammo could be easier than tracking guns, so registered users could be easier identified by the shells. E.g., each bullet could have an id inside of the shell. When sold, they would be registered to the buyer in some database. And it would be way harder (if not impossible) to erase an id from the bullet while keeping it intact and useful, and shells are easily lost during the shootings so more clues for the police. Putting an ID inside a bullet shell is easy to incorporate into the manufacturing process.
Actually, there's nothing that prevents introducing this solution right now even without an ammo ban. You'd just have to force ammo manufacturers to do that.

and if guns are really so important for you for patriotic reasons (defending the borders) then you can have them - just without the ammo with local ammo depots (guarded by police or sth, you could even reorganize police stations a little for this purpose ) which would store and give away ammo in case of emergency

actually, if you enforced the idea of IDs on bullets, you could argue that the black market for the ammo without IDs could be made non existent if you allowed such ammo to be sold, but only to registered users (and correlated to them in some databases)
such ammo would be also insane to use in a crime

that wouldn't eliminate the problem of mass shootings though, but hey, whatever works

what do you mean IDs on bullets

Some number and when selling bullets you tie the number to a person buying

no such thing

the bullet wouldnt be intact enough to id it

probably lead to false postives

mabye you meant casings

yes, he meant casings

registries are illegal plus bullets are pretty simple to make

>registries are illegal
the point is to make them legal
>bullets are pretty simple to make
on a mass scale?

Yes

I meant it won't be easy to mass produce them in a garage

Of course an individual can't output the same As a factory but it's just metal and fun powder, and it woukdnt be feasible to stop people from casting their own bullets or making their own gun powder

Gun powder

It would be pretty simple to do if there was a reason

>fun powder
oh Freud, where are you when we need you

Yee

Even then if you had those serialized casings then you could still only need to make jist enough bullets to commit whatever crime

Just pull off the case empty the powder and put everything in a new case

You can get presses that will do that for like a hundred bucks

still, a few steps more, a few hurdles in the way which can save someones life

your logic is so fucked up

YAAAAAH DONT DO ANYTHING FREEDOM

Thahs a ridiculous statement to make, the entire basis of Pro second ammendment arguments is that yes you are going to save maybe a few lives meanwhile tens of millions if not hundreds will be negatively impacted after doing nothing wrong

Oh yeah ban them and we can stop the few hundred deaths a year from guns

its not like life matters to you so

Meanwhile 98% of people don't do anying bad

Well ppl would use illegal guns or melee weapons.

So it would not be like entire gun deaths will be gone

Still i dont deny that would reduce death (it would probably)

question is is the marginal decrease worth giving up something millions of people enjoy

>I enjoy guns, pew pew

gun supporters are mentally ill, they're notoriously fantasizing about provoking self-defence to actually shoot someone

like tell me whats so fun about guns, do you go out and shoot to targets or what?

is it fun in itself?

inanimate targets?

anon did you visit shooting range

no, tell me about it

guns are _fun_, come on

there's a reason why people buy motorcycles despite the existence of vastly superior modes of transport

(in terms of both comfort and safety)

the thrill is a non-negligible part of the fun

you ever see what a 44 magnum can do to a woman's pussy?

you talkin' to me?

make your move

>i need to kill other people for fun

<:brainlet:395711607554048000>

>polandniggers think weapon = kill

savages

ahhh yes

so answer me

what is fun to you about weapons?

do you just enjoy shooting to inanimate targets?

>polandniggers think weapon = kill
that's literally their only purpose

^

again, go look at /k/ how is it full of insecure manlets that fantasize about killing someone through provoked "self-defence"

also, poles with guns is the last thing I want to see over here

Just no. Bad combo.

any people with guns are bad idea

except security services and the army

I really what to know what is so great about guns to you, I can't imagine that shooting targets is such a great fun, is it feeling safe or in control or what?

guns are for shooting, if you use them you shoot something, if those aren't targets then what

hunting?

I see hunting as morally repulsive as well

I was to a shooting range a few times back in the day but I got bored of it pretty quick

yes

>I see hunting as morally repulsive as well
i hope you're vegan then

i find hunting much less morally repulsive than modern meat production

and i've been a veggie for 3 years now

yeah and I don't pay people to kill all those animals for fun

I need to eat thats why

hunting is for fun

no, you pay people to kill all those (force fed, held in abhorrent conditions to maximise profit) animals, often inhumanely (again - in order to maximise profit) because _they taste nice_

>people dont need to eat <:brainlet:395711607554048000>

unless you're one of the _very few_ people for whom it's impossible to live on a balanced meat-free diet for medical reasons, you don't actually need to eat animal flesh in order to live and stay healthy

granted, you may need to supplement two or three nutrients, but there's no _need_ to eat animal products at all

it's all for your culinary pleasure

how's that different from hunting?

both essentially amount to killing for pleasure, one directly, the other indirectly

>YAAAH collapse half of the agricultural sector right now because I dont like killing animals

and you get proteins most effectively from animals

none of this counters any of the points I made

no it doesn't but its not feasible for all population to switch to vegie diet

it'll be only viable with lab grown meat

it's only unfeasible due to personal preference (over empathy) and perhaps the perception of eating meat (to be more precise - being able to afford meat) being connected with socioeconomic status in some parts of the world

having said that, the feasibility of the world's population switching to a veggie diet has no bearing on whether _your_ personal choice (to eat meat) can in any way be morally justified

tbh i can see ghouls point

yeah sure animals die

but there is something to not doing it yourself

is it perhaps _cowardice_?

not really

its just i dont want to kill something once a week

out of sight out of mind

yet you do

just without the consequences