459
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A California Superior Court judge arrested last week has now been charged with killing his wife in front of their adult son at their home. Court filings reveal the judge had over 47 weapons and 26,000 rounds of ammunition in his home.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I recall some recent study that said most mass shooters follow a predictable pattern of buying guns, then amassing guns and ammo.

Nobody needs 26,000 rounds. There is no problem that any American can legitimately solve with 26,000 rounds. It's a threat to everyone.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.one 14 points 1 year ago

If you are a hobbyist shooter then it is common to buy ammo in bulk. And if you've never done competitive shooting or even just going to the range once a month, you may not realize how fast the ammo is used up.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago

How much ammo does it usually take to kill your wife?

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

I wouldn't know.

No problem that exists today. Stocking up on ammo is for the unpredictable future. You only need one bullet for a regular murder right?

[-] Jerkface@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Right? I mean, why would someone who shot their spouse do anything irrational?

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

Bud get it in your brain: you will not solve the sort of problem that might require 26,000 rounds, as you are not a regimented militia or national guard. If we get invaded by ground troops from Canada or something, and we actually needed to call up militias, the government already has the guns and ammo stockpiled and will drop them off at your door, probably after seizing Amazon under the Defense Production Act.

Again, the problem you think you're solving with 26,000 rounds isn't legitimate. You've imagined it. You're not Rick Grimes, you're "unamed screaming guy 7."

Well, I wasn’t talking about myself. I do have a moderate quantity of ammo but its a “better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it” philosophy for me.

Also I have some surplus stuff that was super cheap at the time and unobtainable today.

I certainly don’t like the idea of waiting for someone to drop off tools to defend myself as you suggested.

[-] oatscoop@midwest.social 6 points 1 year ago

26,000 is a lot, but with no other context it's not an indicator of "crazy".

As others have said: ammo is cheaper in bulk. It doesn't "go bad" if stored properly, and you need different rounds for different guns. And for a while it was hard to find -- you stocked up when you found it because you didn't know when it was going to be available again.

1000 shells of 12 ga -- that's two cases, I have to drive a long way to find them, and I shoot trap every other week. 20ish shells, 12 ga slugs -- left over from hunting I have 1050 rounds of 9mm, because I bought 3 cheap boxes of Blazer Brass on sale and that's what I shoot at the range. 800ish of 7.62x54r -- 2 spam cans, for the same reason. Probably 1500ish rounds of .22lr -- 3 boxes of 500 rounds... same reason.

I'm not a nut, but if the cops raided my house the headline would be "found with over 4000 rounds of ammunition!!!!"

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

The other indicator is that he murdered his wife.

[-] Matt_Shatt@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Completely irrelevant

[-] FireTower@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Ammunition prices fluctuate drastically with global and national events. In 2021 when COVID hit 9mm cost roughly 70 cents a round. Today it's around 19 cents a round. There's a buy cheap stack deep philosophy practiced when buying ammo.

A competition shooter or someone attending a class can easily shoot 1,000 rounds over a weekend. Buying in large volume when prices are low means that weekend costs $190 not $700.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Get a new hobby? One that doesn't threaten everyone around you, maybe? Maybe one that's just overall cheaper.

I have zero problem with hunting, target shooting, collecting. One poster here says they have 4,000 rounds; shoots trap every weekend, buys them on sale. Fine.

This dude had 26,000. That is a compulsion. He thought amassing ammo would solve something for him. Would provide him something he lacked. Probably something subconscious. Some deep-seated fear.

As to the rest of us, it solves nothing legitimate, certainly nothing the Second Amendment was directed toward.

[-] FireTower@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

What harm can practically be done by one man with 26,000 that couldn't be done with 4,000 or half that? If we stick with the 9mm metrics 4,000 rounds would weigh just past 100lb (45 kilos) @ 115g rds. 26,000 rounds of it would be 3-4x the weight of the average man at about 650lbs (294 kilos).

That volume only benefits consistent use over weeks/months/years, something fortunately not found in the cases where people abuse firearms to harm others.

[-] qaz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

What if you have to wage a war against emu’s?

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

You'll be swarmed. Only the Samurai survive that war.

this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
459 points (95.3% liked)

News

23305 readers
3731 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS