doublegunshop.com - home
Posted By: keith Off Topic- Time to Raise the Legal Driving Age - 02/22/18 03:48 PM
In the wake of the most recent Florida school shooting, many of the nation's teens are pressing legislators to pass new Gun Control Legislation. They are asking for Universal Background Checks, bans on AR-15 type semi-auto rifles, bans on large capacity magazines, raising the legal age to buy rifles, etc.

Naturally, they are concerned, as we all are, about the relatively recent phenomena of violent school shootings. We are hearing the inevitable cries for "Common Sense Gun Laws" and the reasoning that such restrictions are necessary if they will save even one life.

Something to consider is the facts: Over the past 25 years, an average of 10 students per years have been fatally shot in schools. That is obviously unacceptable, but in 2016, 4689 teens were killed in fatal automobile accidents, up from 4272 in 2014. A good number of these fatal automobile accidents involving teens have been due to distracted driving due to texting and cell phone usage.

Fatalities in teen crashes spike after steady decline, studies find

School shootings are not the new normal

Obviously, since many teens now seem quite willing to give up rights in exchange for safety, it would be much more practical and beneficial for us to raise the legal driving age to at least 21, and also place strict age limits on the possession and use of cell phones.

These common sense changes will save over 400 times as many teens lives as the 2nd Amendment restrictions that are being proposed.

It is not surprising to find that the recent teen anti-gun protest movement and the town hall meetings are being funded and organized by anti-gun Democrats and anti-gun News Organizations like CNN. Once again, it seems likely that the shooter in Parkland, Florida had been under treatment for depression and ADHD, and was likely on SSRI anti-depressant drugs which have the severe side effect of causing suicidal and homicidal tendencies. I hope gun owners will be contacting their elected representatives to relate their opposition to restrictions on law abiding gun owners when there are much better ways to save teens lives.
Here's something no one wants to talk about....

http://www.cchrflorida.org/antidepressants-are-a-prescription-for-mass-shootings/
A good argument. Similar to my counter to people who propose further gun control over here by their use of the 'well if it will save one child's life it will be worth it' by my suggestion of a return to the 'Red Flag Act' which required vehicles not to exceed 4 miles per hour and have someone walk in front with a red flag to warn of its approach. That will save hundreds every year. Being car owners they soon shut up. Lagopus.....
Even the Liberal Left anti-gunner Michael Moore is beginning to understand that the presence of guns and mental illness in our society is not new, and something else must be responsible for these senseless school shootings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpinCRaAQOk



You don't have to be terribly old to recall a time when students brought guns to school for participation in Shooting Teams and Clubs, or to go hunting after classes. Pharmaceutical Companies and doctors are raking in billions prescribing and producing nightmare drugs, while our Constitutional Rights are being threatened once again. Many of the deaths that are blamed on firearms are suicides, and these drugs are a driving force behind that epidemic too.

https://ssristories.org/
There were so many flags with this knucklehead, when will the time come that there is accountability for letting this type slip through the cracks. If there was some limitation about looking at situations when he was a minor, then simply lower the age to unseal records of a minor, for this type of background check. But, that didn't seem to be an issue.

I caught a little of Wayne L. speaking to CPAC earlier today. Interesting, he said under the last administration, if an elderly person gave power of attorney to someone else for medical decisions, they were flagged. All of these tactics, including parading snowflake minors in front of cameras are targeted at the law abiding.
My two friends who I've been hunting with since 1984 were both killed by a teenager who was using her cell phone while driving. Her Chevy Blazer rolled up over Bill's car and through the windshield. Bill died at the scene, Bob died at the hospital. The teenager hardly had a scratch on her.

We were planning to go to South Dakota in 2009, I went alone.
We are on the verge of a single tragedy erase more than just our rights to own guns. The sheriff on CNN's "town hall" last night was demanding that police be given more powers to rip people from their homes.

As an attorney, I can tell you first hand that was is being suggested are some very dangerous proposals that will result in a lot of suffering for a lot of people. My colleagues are very concerned. The purpose behind a written constitution is to prevent a lone assassin's trigger finger from rewriting our society's fundamental guarantees.
Lapierre's speech today considered so newsworthy it was broadcast within hours, in part, on our national public radio network.
Possibly we could dispense with the evil AMA, Big Pharma, depraved doctors conspiracy thing.
Dana Loesch's comments are relevant

“We have resources available at anyone’s disposal if they want to reinforce their schools, but I’ll say it again loud and clear: We’re parents too.”

Mental illness IS an increasing public health crisis.
OUR families are affected by post-partum depression, eating disorders, PTSD, Autism Spectrum Disorder, bi-polar disorder, and substance abuse.
OUR families understand the pain of suicide and intra-family violence.
Very few of us are so evil, or stupid, that we wouldn't give anything to help those we love.

Anti-depressants save lives
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0087089/
and like every medicine have side-effects.

The failure to adequately evaluate and treat mental illness is a major contributor to violence in our society, in addition to the breakdown of families (boys raised without fathers feeling lost, abandoned and angry) and the violent fantasy world of internet pornography and video games into which mentally ill young men descend ie Adam Lanza, Nikolas Cruz and the rest.
About 15 years ago I was stunned by all the 11-15 year old Boy Scouts coming to summer camp on 5 psychoactive medications, primarily for behavioral control. I must agree that inappropriate multi-drug treatment regimens are a terrible problem. The solution is more and better mental health providers, not blaming every act of violence on SSRIs.
I didn't see a discussion about the effects of suddenly stopping some of these drugs; there have been many shootings linked to this rather than side effects experienced white taking them.
Mike
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
....Very few of us are so evil, or stupid, that we wouldn't give anything to help those we love....

You make a ton of great points Doc Drew. I notice more and more parents that want the easy way out of spending quality time with their kids. They are happy when kids are quietly occupied by there electronic devices. These parents demand medications for the smallest of growing pains. Many of them are functional recreational drug addicts, yet will turn around and go on about the problems of prescription opioid addiction. Many teens have very little restrictions on the company or hours that they keep.

I think we're creating a good amount of the problems, because some parents like the village concept of passing the notion of responsibility on to others. Tell them the truth that their evil or stupid, and one's likely to get an earful. Not for the kid, but for the parent that got their feelings bent a little out of shape.
How about the copy cat aspect of it. Many of the perps are looking for fame and notoriety, especially the teenagers. Not to say they aren't unbalanced in some way but the publicity is clearly a factor for many of them.

How about a complete ban on any identifying information about the shooter in the press? That would likely cut down on the frequency, saving lives in the process. However, the press would freak out about their "free speech" rights.

It's all so self serving.
Being from a screwed up country as Canada why you think anyone would care what you have to say ?
Keith you raise an intellectually defensible point, which of course the emotion based argument made by teens for gun control would choke on. Which I assume is your point

The reality is this question, increased gun control measures, the left has no intention of actually reasoning over. The left lives in emotion and is not seeking where common solutions in part might be made.

The fight for them is about winning elections, not saving humans. If saving humans were a concern there is actually some common ground that could reduce risks.

Reference today’s youth and their issues, it is to easy to criticize the young, just as people want to blame teachers. If anyone is guilty to a point it is First parents then kids.
Kind of pointless post on forum frequented by people who enjoy guns. I suspect 2016 was the high water mark for pro-gun voting, there will be fewer such votes in coming elections as demographics of this country change.

Dziadu would be better served if he took few people not familiar with guns or hunting shooting. The only long-term hope is to find new people to enjoy sport shooting or hunting. Preaching to the quire is a f waste of time.
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
Being from a screwed up country as Canada why you think anyone would care what you have to say ?


Take it easy on our Canadian contributors. Once you get away from Toronto, Ottawa & Vancouver I find a lot in common with our Canadian neighbors & it's interesting to have their perspective.
If someone wants to help preserve what we enjoy they should take Dilip, Ari, Yun, Jozetta, Aya, Ahmed, Tyrone, .......hunting or shooting.
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
Being from a screwed up country as Canada why you think anyone would care what you have to say ?


jOe, somewhere there is a tree working tirelessly to produce enough oxygen for you to breathe. I think you owe it an apology.
In Buffalo, New York we have an excellent African-American gun rights organization named the Dorie Miller Gun Club. Wonderful people.
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
Kind of pointless post on forum frequented by people who enjoy guns. I suspect 2016 was the high water mark for pro-gun voting, there will be fewer such votes in coming elections as demographics of this country change.

Dziadu would be better served if he took few people not familiar with guns or hunting shooting. The only long-term hope is to find new people to enjoy sport shooting or hunting. Preaching to the quire is a f waste of time.


I'm not sure that this is true. Our firm handles a lot of gun related issues in New York State. We see a lot of gun owners. You would be surprised who supports the Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms. They aren't vocal about it. It's a private decision for many.
Originally Posted By: Brittany Man
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
Being from a screwed up country as Canada why you think anyone would care what you have to say ?


Take it easy on our Canadian contributors. Once you get away from Toronto, Ottawa & Vancouver I find a lot in common with our Canadian neighbors & it's interesting to have their perspective.


Thank you for defending me Brittany Man but jOe is just pissed at me for calling out his BS on another thread.
Originally Posted By: old colonel
The fight for them is about winning elections, not saving humans. If saving humans were a concern there is actually some common ground that could reduce risks.


Your point about the left - or to be more precise, the establishment-left DNC - has been proven beyond a doubt on many occasions. They are interested in high-stakes emotional issues that feel good and drive people out of their homes to the polling places. They don't really care about people. Look at how they treated their most sincere base - Bernie Sanders voters - like trash when it was certain that Hillary would be a deal breaker for 5-10% of them.

If you know establishment Democrats on the inside, you will privately see them lament the difficulty in which they have mobilizing their base to polling places. Demographics aren't destiny, and the political map by no means makes the Democratic Party's "blue wave" inevitable. They tried that psychological technique when they asserted the existence of a fictitious "blue wall."
Originally Posted By: Brittany Man
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
Being from a screwed up country as Canada why you think anyone would care what you have to say ?


Take it easy on our Canadian contributors. Once you get away from Toronto, Ottawa & Vancouver I find a lot in common with our Canadian neighbors & it's interesting to have their perspective.


My experience with Canadian soldiers has always been good. I have no experience with Canadian politics nor am I interested.
Originally Posted By: Paradox
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
Kind of pointless post on forum frequented by people who enjoy guns....

....Preaching to the quire is a f waste of time.


I'm not sure that this is true. Our firm handles a lot of gun related issues in New York State. We see a lot of gun owners. You would be surprised who supports the Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms. They aren't vocal about it. It's a private decision for many.

Thanks Paradox for the perspective, along with your other comments. Definitely, I don't intend to drag you into anything, other than to note that non supporters show up, and I don't believe it's a waste of time to let them know that the path they choose will not be met with apathy.
Originally Posted By: craigd
Originally Posted By: Paradox
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
Kind of pointless post on forum frequented by people who enjoy guns....

....Preaching to the quire is a f waste of time.


I'm not sure that this is true. Our firm handles a lot of gun related issues in New York State. We see a lot of gun owners. You would be surprised who supports the Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms. They aren't vocal about it. It's a private decision for many.

Thanks Paradox for the perspective, along with your other comments. Definitely, I don't intend to drag you into anything, other than to note that non supporters show up, and I don't believe it's a waste of time to let them know that the path they choose will not be met with apathy.


Thank you. I'm sorry, for some reason I hit the quote button on the wrong text. But I agree, we need to stand up for our rights. There are a lot of powerful individuals in government who want to take them away and they will not stop at the Second Amendment. We are dealing with some malevolent individuals.
I seem to have struck a nerve with my observations about the deleterious and dangerous side effects of SSRI anti-depressants. However, these side-effects are well known, and even though they are rarely severe enough to cause a kid to go off the deep end with an AR-15 and kill his classmates, we know it does indeed happen. And while these isolated incidents grab all the headlines, many more kids are dying one at a time due to the epidemic of suicides that are often caused by these drugs. And when the depressed person commits suicide with a firearm, the blame is again directed at the availability of guns. The side effects of anti-depressants is rarely mentioned.

Some of the most informative testimonials about the side-effects of SSRI anti-depressants comes from actually talking with people who have used them. Since I became interested and naturally began talking about it with friends and co-workers, I am astounded at the number of people who feel they were given prescriptions incorrectly and inappropriately. And a good number have confided to me about their own suicidal thought or feelings of complete emptiness and inner rage while on them.

To be sure, there are other probable contributors, but guns of all kinds were readily available long before this mass shooting phenomena. Some people who look deeper than knee-jerk restrictions that wouldn't do a thing to stop demented killers who obviously passed background checks are recognizing other possible causes. Among those are the breakdown of strong families, and the removal of God, prayer, and the Ten Commandments from our schools. And once again, those societal sea-changes were driven by the same Liberal Left that now wants to place all of the blame on an inanimate object and a 230 year old Constitutional Right.

old colonel, you are absolutely correct that what I propose to save over 400 times as many teenager's lives as gun control is designed to make them understand that they are being manipulated and used. The vast majority of them will lose far more friends to auto or motorcycle accidents than to gun fire. But they wouldn't even consider Common Sense Driving Restrictions. Their raw emotions are being exploited in a manner that is causing them to voluntarily give up pieces of the freedom that made this country the envy of the world. The Left isn't about saving lives. If they were, they be concentrating upon bigger things like medical mistakes and the opioid epidemic instead of their incessant obsession with firearms.
Now we find out there was a cop/deputy there with a gun that was afraid to confront the shooter.

Most likely a liberal on Prozac...

He should face charges as stiff as manslaughter.
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
He should face charges as stiff as manslaughter.


What facts do you believe exist that establish the elements of manslaughter? There are none.
Thomas Keller of the Peter Cartridge Co. committed suicide before any effective treatment for depression or bipolar disorder was available
https://books.google.com/books?id=sVEZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA387&lpg

"Shell shock" came long before the diagnosis of PTSD

A bit of humility in presuming to understand or direct treatment for another person's struggles would be prudent.
The problem is inadequate evaluation and inappropriate treatment, for what is a life threatening illness.
Mental health is a tough issue, which I doubt could be clearly legislated. So, I suspect it would be regulated by folks with an agenda. It seems like most recent headline grabbing situations have behavior linked to suspected mental health issues, and that behavior could have easily flagged lawful purchase under current law if it wasn't for cracks to slip through.
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause


A bit of humility in presuming to understand or direct treatment for another person's struggles would be prudent.
The problem is inadequate evaluation and inappropriate treatment, for what is a life threatening illness.


Bolding of type in second sentence in the statement above was added by me.

On this, I totally agree. It sure as hell isn't the NRA, or the Firearms Industry, or law abiding gun owners who are responsible for providing "inadequate evaluation and inappropriate treatment" for mental illness, PTSD, or ADHD.

And yes, depression and suicide is nothing new. Nor is PTSD, Shell Shock, Battle Fatigue, or Soldier's Heart. These combat related psychological disorders have probably existed as long as men have experienced the horrors of war. Same goes for ADHD which used to be called Hyperactivity. What is new is the way these illnesses or disorders are treated.

When the so-called cure or treatment has an unacceptably high incidence of side-effects that are often more severe than the underlying illness... and when the tragic consequences result in blame being completely misdirected toward totally innocent law abiding citizens, it is prudent and proper to debate the issue. It is also a time to demand appropriate responses rather than simplistic knee-jerk reactions that will not solve the problem, and also diminish our rights and freedoms.

It is also time to remind our elected representative that we still will not accept any infringements on our Constitutional 2nd Amendment Rights.
Keith, I found your stats on teen deaths and corollary measures with respect to gun control a valid point worth discussion. Two things came to mind, both employed in the arena of ideas: to wit, emotion/vocal violence, and consistency. With the former, I am reminded of the old saying among some in the legal profession: when you have the law, argue the law; when you have the facts, argue the facts. When you have neither, pound the table.

As to the latter, I consider consistency crucial, and it is so often ignored by those on "the other side." A few quotes that are among my faves:

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." - Emerson

“Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead.” - Huxley

“Consistency is the hallmark of the unimaginative.” - Oscar Wilde

Thank you for your thoughts,

Mike
Scholarly debate requires some scholarship Keith. And suicide would be a fairly severe consequence of untreated depression or PTSD; witness the crisis among veterans today.
Are you proposing government mandated SSRI control? Or would you leave the choice of therapy up to well informed patients and adequately trained health care professionals?
Yes; I had some patients tell me "for the first time in my life I feel normal" after starting a SSRI, and others "for the first time in my life I felt like hurting myself".
I get it, as does anyone else paying attention, or who cares enough to do so.
And please spare us the (true) VA psychiatric horror stories; I live in Phoenix, home of the "waiting list until they die first" and I get that too. And it is a national disgrace.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/...port-finds.html
I still think it's important to distinguish between a prescription medicine and treatment. One is an inanimate object, the other is subjective. It can be argued that the subjectivity of medical treatment is represented by a large anti second national organization. I think if we successfully blame an inanimate object, then it's logical to blame other inanimate objects. Maybe, adequate diagnosis and appropriate treatment should include assessing results and non use of inappropriate therapies. An adverse reaction is like blood in the water for legal types. That's at least one check-n-balance that can be highly motivated.
any federal involvement with the civilian possession of firearms that infringes on their rights is a direct violation of the second amendment, which clearly forbids federal involvement with firearms that would infringe in the right of the people to keep and bear arms...

however, the second amendment also clearly reserves to the states, the power to regulate civilian possession of firearms, in order to provide for a well regulated militia, which is necessary to the security of a free state...

so, it is really up to the states to solve the public shooting
problem, be it in a school, sports arena, concert venue or where ever there is a public gathering...and the solutions practiced by various states is as diverse as our society...for example, what works for new york state, may not necessaraily apply to georgia, etc...
Two points:1)The idea that schools are targeted because they are "gun-free zones" is simply wrong. They are targeted because they represent to deranged shooters the center of their sense of failure and humiliation.2) The cost of training and arming teachers would be much better invested in school's counseling services so that potential shooters can be better identified and treated before they do something irrevocable.
Bill,
Bullshit. If that were the case, there would never have been anything but school shootings, and mass shootings, predictably, happen where people on site can not respond in kind. Like, a movie theatre, with a "No Guns Allowed" sign, in Aurora Colarado.

Since so many of the perps of these events have multiple run-ins with the law, why don't they take their humiliation and failure out on police stations?

I'll remind everyone that 40 years ago, Israel had a similar problem, for different reasons, but, similar, none the less. They answered the problem. One need only look at the issue of the so called "dreamers" to see that the left in this country is not interested in solving any problem that can be used to curry favor with voters. And school shootings fall into that group of problems that are far too valuable to them to solve before an election.

How else can one explain the "NO GUNS" signs that went up on so many schools across the nation, but, never appeared on any school administrators home?

I have maintained all along that the signs on the schools were a calculated, understood, and executed evil ploy used by the left to advance a particular agenda.
An agenda they had no prayer of advancing in any other fashion.

The end always justifies the means.


Ted
I wasn't supporting any partisan agenda, something I'm fully capable of when I choose. I worked in public education from 1962 to 1999. I know something about the problems students and schools confront. Almost no one goes into education as a profession with the notion that they must kill one student in order to prevent him from killing another. Those willing to do that go into law enforcement, a fully honorable profession but not interchangeable with teaching. I knew several cops who became teachers. I never knew a teacher who became a cop.
PS: They do sometimes take their frustrations out on police. But most school shooters have had no police contact. They're too young to have reached that stage. What they do have is a history of friction with school. They hate teachers or they hate other students for reasons that only make sense to them.
BIll,
Perfect. Give me an example of a police station that was targeted in a mass shooting.

Here was one just for you:

http://www.fox5dc.com/news/local-news/dc-native-leaves-job-as-teacher-to-become-police-officer

Teachers can and do become cops, Bill.

More important to the discussion than what set of skills are interchangable, is where an individual falls on the "wolves, sheep, or sheepdogs" profile. Kids can be wolves, as can, unfortunately, teachers, or cops. But, everyone falls somewhere in that set, including the cop who was suspended and later resigned at Parkland. He was a sheep.
I will never believe that all people employed in a profession fall into a single group. There are teachers who would make very capable sheepdogs, Bill. Not likely you, since you have already made the argument that it isn't possible for a teacher, but, I have known a few that I would trust my life with.
I care not in the least about "treatment" of an individual who can or would take arms up against innocents. Much like the Israelis, I want the potential target hardened, and clear thinking about protection and survival of the potential victims to be the main consideration. The bad guy can go to hell, or, to go meet his virgins. I don't care if he is 14, or 40. Nobody can save you when you are at the point of shooting up a school.
Nipping a problem in the bud only works when it is a bud, not a full bloom problem.
The bad actors on the left made a point of making sure schools were very clearly unarmed and helpless until help arrived, and that that fact was broadcast and recognized.

None of this was unpredictable.

Ted
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Two points....

....The cost of training and arming teachers would be much better invested in school's counseling services so that potential shooters can be better identified and treated before they do something irrevocable.

I suppose it would beg the question, do you think this would work? I think there have been many examples of throwing money at projects to feel a bit better about things, but how can this prevent sensationalizing the next shooting?

It's safe to say that there will be multiple school related shooting fatalities in Chicago in the coming week, but it won't be splashed on tv to further an agenda, nor will there be a call for extra counselors. Maybe, the money would be best spent countering the divisive 'news' outlets? If there are hundreds of millions of firearms in the country and only one was capable of making the evening news, shame on us for helping them profit from it?
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
....important to the discussion than what set of skills are interchangable, is where an individual falls on the "wolves, sheep, or sheepdogs" profile. Kids can be wolves, as can, unfortunately, teachers, or cops. But, everyone falls somewhere in that set, including the cop who was suspended and later resigned at Parkland. He was a sheep.
I will never believe that all people employed in a profession fall into a single group. There are teachers who would make very capable sheepdogs....

A few bucks identifying the sheepdogs would've been money well spent. I think it would be tough to make a case against the football coach having a weapon and using it. But, in today's world there would be ideological critics and mountains of legal expenses if the shooter were the only one killed.
I'm sure it's more accurate where I taught high school (rural/small town Iowa), but there were several teachers, both places I taught, who were either vets or hunters or target shooters--or all of the above. So they had a certain amount of training and experience already. I had Iowa CC and would have been willing to carry in school. Would have worked harder on my handgun skills, as I think most would if they were to accept that responsibility.

And I've known high school counselors, both good and bad. The good ones do a great job of identifying problems. But the issue is, laws would have to be changed in order to keep the student in question from owning guns, or perhaps accessing guns owned by others in his home. Right now, the only way you can keep guns away from them is by committing them to a mental institution. If that information is reported to the FBI, then it would stop them from purchasing a gun when the background check is made. However, they could get around that by purchasing from a private seller. Hard to plug all the loopholes, and even the best counselors and the most observant parents aren't always going to catch the warning signs. There is no foolproof way to make the world 100% safe.
A doctor recommended my younger friend put his juvenile son on riddling...I talked him out of it by explaining that his son was just a kid being a kid. His son grew up lost his bad habits and grew up to be a fine young man. Had he listened to the doctor who knows where his son would be now.

A simple solution...no kid on prescription anti depressants should have access to a firearm in the home or other wise.

Holding the parent/parents accountable for putting them on drugs then allowing access to firearms makes more sense than punishing the general population.
Originally Posted By: Paradox
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
He should face charges as stiff as manslaughter.


What facts do you believe exist that establish the elements of manslaughter? There are none.


If the guy had did his duty less kids might have died.
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
Thomas Keller of the Peter Cartridge Co. committed suicide before any effective treatment for depression or bipolar disorder was available
https://books.google.com/books?id=sVEZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA387&lpg

"Shell shock" came long before the diagnosis of PTSD

A bit of humility in presuming to understand or direct treatment for another person's struggles would be prudent.
The problem is inadequate evaluation and inappropriate treatment, for what is a life threatening illness.


My great grandfather fought with the South and lived through the Civil War and lived a fruitful life.

I knew a man that landed on the beaches at Normandy and walked on dead bodies to get to the shore....his son told me some nights he jumped straight out of bed but he was a man and lived a normal fruitful life.

I knew another man that went down on two ships in the Pacific another that had his lower teeth shot out by machine gun fire on a Japanese island...they both lived fruitful lives. I'm sure others have known real men.

I had two uncles in Germany and another in North Africa...they also lived fruitful PTSD free lives.

I know some of these vets have had a ruff time but none endured what men did in the Civil War, World War I or II.

A lot of this modern day PTSD has to be drummed up.
Tragic failures on every level
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/23/flo...kolas-cruz.html

and this
A visit by a mental health clinician at Henderson Behavioral Health ended with a determination Cruz “was not at risk to harm himself or others,” and the teen was instructed to sign a safety contract.

(The qualifications of the "clinician" are not mentioned.)

He told police that voices in his head -- called “demons” by law enforcement sources -- told him to carry out the attack.

And we're all way to sophisticated today to believe self-mutilation (he was a cutter) and homicidal violence could have anything to do with demonic possession. His Public Defender says he is "just a child with poor impulse control."
You being a man of the cloth should know you can't fix evil....
Amen jOe. I can't do a thing, but the Holy Spirit can.

But God expects us to be providers, protectors, and priests (intercessors and teachers) for our families, and for widows and orphans (single moms and parentless kids - James 1:27).
Our church has a well armed and well trained security team for that reason.
Ted, I'm fine with the fact you've demonstrated. My point has no sympathy for shooters. It's not their treatment I care about. It's their identification and their being prevented from arming themselves. School shooters aren't intimidated by armed resistance. They expect to die. They shoot themselves.
The prescribing of certain drugs has increased in many developed countries yet incidence of mass shootings is much less then here, therefore, the drugs themselves can not be blamed. The poor supervision due to breakdown of family unit system poor values along with easy access to firearms will continue to take toll on innocent human lives.
People are fallible, they fail. In this latest school shooting, it seems the FBI failed to do what we expect it to do. The local deputy simply chose his own life over doing his duty. That doesn't mean that the system fails; it means the system must improve itself and get rid of the people in it who were responsible for the failure.

When a killer goes to a school to kill with a gun, he probably will until stopped. The same applies to a killer who goes to a school with a dynamite vest. Or one who decides to use arson as his weapon. Or a truck. Or poison. Evil has way more faces than an AR-15.

The common thread is preparedness and the will to institute systemic rules which will protect the innocent. Its become clear to me that safe zones where guns are prohibited do not serve the purpose of protecting people, but instead just invite tragedy.

Schools and other public gathering places can be protected by actual security teams and systems (not the assignment of some deputy who won't do his job when the need arises). We can spend the money to have protection or not.

I remember the school security debate when Newtown happened. The politicians kids attended some school in Washington with an armed security team. Yet they believed they were special cases because of their position and our kids needed no such protection.

The current gun control assault will fail and likely finish tanking the democrat party in America. The second amendment and the NRA are our protection in this country. The gun lobby's position that a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy seems to me to be the most sensible guidance I've heard from anyone...Geo
Not to make any less of this tragedy, but school attacks are not exclusively a modern thing. The worst, if measured by lives lost, was this one..................... in 1927.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

SRH
I hope that Geo Newbern is correct and that Democrat anti-gunners will fail and the 2nd Amendment will remain as a bedrock principle. But that will not happen if we don't continue to act with resolve and determination. Hope alone will not sustain us. But millions of gun owners will blame the NRA if we end up going down the same path as Great Britain or Australia. I urge gun owners who are smart enough to see that we are under a continuous assault by anti-gun Democrats to step up and fight back.

I hope those who understand take a few minutes to call, write, or email their Congressmen and Senators, and join or renew membership in the NRA. Above all, don't be a FUDD who thinks they won't continue to go after all guns if they have their way with us now.

I do think it is time to press our legislators to take a hard look at the sometimes horrific side effects of SSRI Anti-depressants.The fact that many patients are helped by them does not excuse the fact that far too many end up suicidal, homicidal, or both.

I thank Ted for brilliantly shredding the totally inaccurate excuses that rocky mtn bill put forth for wacked-out students attempting to beat some body count record from a previous attack on another soft target of unarmed people. I too instantly doubted that shooters were retaliating when they choose to shoot up schools, movie theatres, churhes, country music concerts, or malls. There is a very good reason they don't attack Police Stations or gun shows. Those of us who aren't DNC parrots know that.

Jagermeister continues to show his inability to comprehend simple things. I have previously emphasised that the problem of mass shootings goes far beyond simple one-faceted solutions like banning AR-15's or SSRI's. But he is too agenda driven to see that other contributing factors I've mentioned such as the breakdown of the family unit, the rise of dependency on government Wefare programs, and the relentless movement to eliminate God and religion from society has been largely due to the same anti-gun politicians he worships. But his narrative is not surprising when you understand that this internet pretender with thousands of posts on a double gun forum doesn't even own one. He continues to place blame on easy access to guns, but has steadfastly refused to even comment on the 2016 Muslim terrorist attack in Nice, France where 86 people died and 456 were injured by a truck intentionally driven into a crowd. No AR-15's needed.

His fellow anti-gun troll friend Ed Good continues to preach the false narrative that the 10th Amendment supersedes the 2nd Amendment. Fighting a battle when you are being sabotaged by people who pretend to be on your side makes things much more difficult. And that is why I feel it is important to be relentless in exposing them for what they are.
Apparently, there was not one but four cowards in the Broward sheriff's department.

https://nypost.com/2018/02/23/four-sheriffs-deputies-hid-during-florida-school-shooting/
heard the gov of florida on the radio today...he wants at least one uniformed and armed police officer in every school in the state...and the pres has suggested that teachers be trained and authorized to carry concealed handguns while in the class room...both good ideas...like uniformed officers at airports and air marshals on planes, these are known and unknown deterients that work...they should also work in schools...
I want to believe that we can get out in front of this problem by diagnosing nut cases and limiting the dosing of medications. We cannot depend upon insane asylums because we have as a society decided they are too expensive so we do not have them anymore.

I don't however believe that we are presently able to predict the behavior that causes school shootings. It seems to me anyway that direct planning to quickly and with deadly force nullify the problem when it arises is our best course...Geo
So the Libertarian (not) idea is to ask the same government that failed the Stoneman Douglas kids at every point to now decide who should and should not receive SSRIs? Set up a SSRI background check for pharmacies? Require pharmacists to obtain a signed release "No, I don't hear voices telling me to shoot school kids today" before dispensing the Rx? Maybe ask the person with the Rx if they have tried "Medical Marijuana" first to get the tax revenue in order to finance the "SSRI Control Act of 2018"? This all sounds like "reasonable SSRI restrictions" to me frown

This BTW is the same government that told docs 20 years ago that "pain" was a public health crisis and if someone said they were in "pain" and the "pain" was not treated we were failing to adequately treat with safe and effective medicine...with a very low risk of addiction or abuse. Didn't work out so good. 90% of primary care docs KNEW this was BS, didn't want to mess with the drug addicts, who then went to a "Pain Clinic" where 1% of docs gave Rxs for 90% of the narcs. Most have now lost their licenses, and some are in prison for manslaughter.
The government changed it's mind about all that in 2017, and now some folks with legitimate need for long term narcs so they can have a life (not my life is taking narcs) can't get them.
But the cartels are filling the need, with fentanyl from China; enough to kill most of Mass.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/09/33-...-in-boston.html

There will no doubt soon be a class action suit against the SSRI makers, just like the suits against the narc makers, and that's how things get sorted out in our country. Very messily.
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
The prescribing of certain drugs has increased in many developed countries yet incidence of mass shootings is much less then here, therefore, the drugs themselves can not be blamed. The poor supervision due to breakdown of family unit system poor values along with easy access to firearms will continue to take toll on innocent human lives.


Pardon my Hungarian...but you are a damn idiOt.
Originally Posted By: Geo. Newbern
I want to believe that we can get out in front of this problem by diagnosing nut cases and limiting the dosing of medications. We cannot depend upon insane asylums because we have as a society decided they are too expensive so we do not have them anymore.

I don't however believe that we are presently able to predict the behavior that causes school shootings. It seems to me anyway that direct planning to quickly and with deadly force nullify the problem when it arises is our best course...Geo


No way to predict evil....it's in all of us.

Most can control it....these drugs are known to let the evil take over.

Drew these drugs you speak so highly of weren't given to us by God....

God gave us who we are not what some pharmaceutical company wants us to be.
Dr.Drew the more I read your defense of these drugs the more I ask myself has Dr.Drew given up on God ?
jOe: God helps the hopeless and helpless. Those with miraculous resources like MRI machines and Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) He expects to help themselves.
In His sovereignty He could heal major depressive disorder, but He usually uses us, and medicines, to do so.

BTW: You might keep some anti-venom around next time the snake handlers are at it wink
I’m generally fine with God when left to myself but when folks start talking about how He does or doesn’t work I wish I was an atheist.


______________________
RIP Billy.
So it seems we are left with the question of which is the better or more "Libertarian" choice...

...to ask the government to look at the risks associated with the use of SSRI Anti-depressant drugs... or to stand idly by while anti-gunners and anti-gun politicians once again blame the gun and press the government to restrict Constitutional Gun Rights of law abiding citizens.

I suppose it could be a matter of empathy for the sick, or apathy about guns we may not own or use. Or it could even be due to seeking an easy solution to a complicated problem. Or it could be a matter of personal enrichment, i.e., follow the money. I might not be so down on SSRI's if I was in the business of making or prescribing them. It might be a matter of me thinking that my paycheck was more important than the rights of people to own a class of firearms I don't personally care for.

What we know is this: Something or some things have changed within our society that is resulting in mentally defective people deciding to pick up a gun and kill as many unarmed people as they can. Since guns have always been readily available, it must be something else. And we never hear after these school shootings that the perpetrator consciously targeted only those who may have bullied or tormented him, which further refutes rocky mtn bill's DNC agenda driven assertions.

Should the government be looking into these drugs? Well when you consider recent reports from JAMA that these drugs may be over-prescribed and in many cases no more effective than a placebo, while still carrying the risk of suicidal or homicidal side effects...

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/185157?redirect=true

... and when you also consider that the Pharmaceutical Industry has been found to suppress or falsify the risks associated with these drugs...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/...est-ever-revie/

... then we have something of a cover-up similar to what corporations did to hide the risks of tobacco use or asbestos. And it did indeed take both government intervention and messy lawsuits to address a serious problem. But perhaps some here feel that intervention was wrong too.

However, not all Doctors or Psychologists are buying into the idea that these drugs are a miraculous and indispensable panacea...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/obsessively-yours/201001/five-reasons-not-take-ssris

Newtown Shootings: A Caution About Violence and SSRIs

But I have my own selfish motives. I started this thread because I am actually passionate about preserving my gun rights, and I am willing to expend time, money, and energy to prevent anti-gunners from incrementally eating away at them. It ain't preaching to the choir when some in the choir are busy undermining the church.
OK.
More feel good congressional hearings telling us what we all already know about the risk and benefits of SSRIs; they are inappropriately prescribed, they work for some, don't for others (esp. long term), and have serious potential side effects.
https://www.webmd.com/depression/features/are-antidepressants-effective#1 (click on view all at the bottom)

But who wouldn't give up their SSRI to save the life of one child?
It's the drugs (and guns) not the evil.

BTW: the Las Vegas shooter had nordiazepam, oxazepam and temazepam on board. Better add Benzos to the hearings.
That's the problem. The anti-gunners and the students who are petitioning Congress and the President to do something about AR-15's, large cap magazines, and even Background Checks, (which shooter after shooter pass with flying colors) aren't really interested in saving lives of school kids.

If they were all about saving lives of school kids, they would be pressing to increase the driving age which would save over 400 times as many kids as banning and confiscating every AR-15 in the U.S. And they would be holding protests and marching on Congress to ban the use and possession of cell phones which kill an average of 9 people every day and injure over 1000 more:

https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/distracted_driving/index.html

If we don't stand up to this, history has proven the anti-gunners will be back for handguns, semi-automatic hunting rifles and shotguns, and more. They don't like our doubles either. But Jagermeister doesn't have to worry because he doesn't own any double shotguns.
I've always suspected the increment that the antis want is de facto registration, likely as part of 'strengthening' our background checks. Then, they can target, regulate, apply prohibitive fees, and criminalize down the road, as long as they can get that foot in the door.
I want to see end to these mass shootings. Stronger back ground checks make good sense to me. Bump stocks can go the way of the Dodo as far as I am concerned. Hardly a 2nd amendment issue in my mind. The non-sense coming out of the NRA currently is going to be its downfall and I am a paying member. Saying that people really do not care about the lives lost in these tragedies does a disservice to all gun owners. Comparing road accidents which we will always have to mass shootings is a sad state of affairs. I do not think banning the AR is practical or will help but I think the country is starting to reach its limit for this mess. We now have a whole bunch of prominent GOP politicians who are calling for a change. I agree but do not have the answer. I'm not sure how we got to a place where we have so little value for another human beings life. I am not in support of the gun grabbing platform of the left but I can clearly see the status quo is not sustainable. A friend who is very pro-gun and an NRA member made a suggestion to me yesterday I thought may have some merit. He suggested requiring firearms to be locked in a safe when not in use as many other countries require. Would it stop all of this? No, but it could be a step in the right direction. I am in no way interested in giving up my guns but you would need to be blind and in complete denial not to see we have a big problem in this country and something needs to be done. Something needs to be done so we can KEEP our guns and that means finding a way to stop this mess.
this aint bout drugs...it is about certain individuals getting so pissed at whatever or whoever, that they take their anger and revenge out on others...in the middle east they use suicide vests..in this country they use high cap, semi auto firearms...the results are usually the same...lots of dead and maimed victims and one dead wacko...
The Sandy Hook shooter took his Mother's guns from her safe after he killed her. When you are at the point that an individual will kill his Mother in order to visit mayhem on a school full of children, another law on gun storage isn't going to help.
Hardening the school would have a better chance than another layer of laws that will be used to harass legal gun owners rather than eliminating a sick perp.
That won't stop the left from trying to pass as many laws that do just that-it is never about ending the mayhem, it is about whittling the rights down a little bit at a time.
Nobody here seems to understand-this was all by design. It was totally predictable, and foisted on a willing minority that could be emotionally swayed by symbolism over substance.

Best,
Ted
The evil and crazy will always fall through the cracks and they will always find a method of destruction. The worst mass school murder happened in 1927 when a disgruntled school board member blew up a school in Bath,MI Over 18yrs old, no gun, no drugs just crazy. We need to harden the schools. The best way should be debated by folks that know a lot more about schools and security than I do. Keeping the crazy and evil out makes more sense than making restrictions on the sane and law abiding in my opinion.

I don't care if bump stocks go away but I think it will be tough to wright a law that is narrow enough scope to out law them and not other add ons and modifications.

I think the existing background laws are good but the data base needs work to be more complete so it can work better and when someone fails a check they need to be charged.

I have mixed feelings about the age change. Does it make sense that at 18 you can't buy a single shot 22lr pistol but you can buy an AR? On the other hand does it make sense that a 20yr old that has been shooting shotguns for 11yrs can't buy one?

It's never as easy as it seems.
We got Obama and Eric Holder to thank for bump stocks....

Being they are anti gun I think them allowing bump stocks to become legal was a calculated plan by them for a mass shooting.
How you "understand" school shootings depends a lot on how closely it has impacted you. When a deranged student shot up a classroom at Umpqua Community College, he chose a class he was a member of. The instructor he killed was a friend and colleague who had been my student teacher. The student had a history off-kilter behavior. I think every secondary teacher with a few year's experience gets some students they see could be dangerous. It's become a tradition now among the deranged to study the course of school shoot-ups. They want to join the club. As for the Sandy Hook shooter, his mother would nor have bought an AR-15 if the Assault Rifle ban had not been allowed to lapse. She was monumentally stupid, but not a law-breaker. Note, too, the Assault Rifle ban was fully supported By Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford.It was not just some wacko-Democrat feel good effort.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
As for the Sandy Hook shooter, his mother would nor have bought an AR-15 if the Assault Rifle ban had not been allowed to lapse. She was monumentally stupid, but not a law-breaker. Note, too, the Assault Rifle ban was fully supported By Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford.It was not just some wacko-Democrat feel good effort.


George Bush Sr. also signed some kind of firearm control law. The situation with terror shootings isn't going to go away. It's only a matter of time before high cap semi-auto firearms will be on banned list.
Originally Posted By: ed good
this aint bout drugs...it is about certain individuals getting so pissed at whatever or whoever, that they take their anger and revenge out on others...in the middle east they use suicide vests..in this country they use high cap, semi auto firearms...the results are usually the same...lots of dead and maimed victims and one dead wacko...


Yes, we have Christian terrorists and they have Muslim ones. Different means are used, but death toll per terrorist can be great as we have seen in Nevada.
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein

Nobody here seems to understand-this was all by design. It was totally predictable, and foisted on a willing minority that could be emotionally swayed by symbolism over substance.

Best,
Ted


Actually Ted, I do understand that this was all by design. That was my whole point in proposing restrictions on teen driving and cell phone usage. We all know that the teens who are so willing to give up our Gun Rights would squeal like little pigs at the mere mention of giving up their drivers license or cell phones. We should all understand by now that the Liberal Left is always at the ready to blame guns immediately after a shooting, while totally ignoring "Real Common Sense" legislation that will save many more lives.

SKB has once again shown his true pro-Democrat position in his post where he asserted, " Comparing road accidents which we will always have to mass shootings is a sad state of affairs." With thinking like that, GM would still be building the Corvair, and vehicles still wouldn't have seat belts or air bags. Teen driving is not a Constitutional Right, it is a privilege. Thousands of teens die every year because they are obviously not yet ready for the huge responsibility of driving a car or motorcycle.

Of course, we could always start incrementally by first raising the driving age to 19 instead of 21. And we could certainly prohibit driving for any purpose other than to go to school ( only where school busses or public transit was unavailable) or strictly for travel to and from work, with no non-adult passengers. If there were more tragic and fatal accidents after this, we could be ready to pounce with even tighter restrictions. Faced with this line of perfectly rational logic, I'd bet 999 out of 1000 anti-gun teens would stop to consider the ramifications of giving up rights and privileges.

I note how SKB conveniently forgot to mention restrictions on cell phones and texting by teens even though many more teens die in a month due to being distracted by that than die from school shootings in an average year. Most of us went all through school and college without owning a cell phone. It is not a necessity, and doesn't provide the same level of personal safety as firearms ownership. And once again, it isn't a Constitutional Right.

SKB's suggestion of mandatory storage is exactly what Jagermeister frequently suggests. Ted was quite correct about Newtown shooter Adam Lanza, and the futility of that idea. And like Jagermeister, SKB seems to want to ignore those little incidents like the terrorist attack in Nice, France that killed 86 and injured 458 with not an AR-15, but a rented truck. Where are his cries for mandatory restrictions on locking large trucks in secure storage facilities and using fingerprint scanners to even start them?

And I do understand his interest in Universal Background Checks, since as an FFL licensee, he stands to profit from the kind of checks that virtually all of these shooters easily pass before they become murderers. There is no damn good reason the government needs to get involved in the transfer of your guns to your friends or family other than to create a database of gun owners. None of these shooters inherited their guns from grandpa.

This is the time to take a few moments to contact your elected representatives to tell them you are not in favor of giving up any Constitutional Firearms Rights, and to also join the NRA and/or send them a donation to help counter to latest assault on freedom. Now is not the time to be a FUDD who is ignorantly wondering what we should give up to temporarily appease the anti-gunners.
You assume far too much you mental midget. I do not support universal back ground checks nor do I offer transfers for a fee. I make exactly nothing for completing a 4473 and only do so for good clients.....for free. My interest is in not losing a business I have spent years building and the guns I cherish. The current system is broken and if you can not see that you are blind. The database used is full of holes and needs improved reporting. Notice the whack job in Texas who the Air force failed to report. I am fully aware that you can kill someone with out a firearm and know the history of terrorist using other methods well. That does not mean we as gun owners do not have a huge problem on our hands with our image with the general public. This can not continue as noted by our President, Senator Rubio, Governor Scott and others. no these guns did not jump up and kill those kids by themselves. Making schools a harder target as Ted mentioned makes good sense but I fear it will take much more than that. Not a simple problem and I do not claim to have the answer.
But we do address automobile carnage in a thousand ways. It's worth pointing out that accidental hiway deaths are not the same as deliberate murder. Both are severe issues and deserve attention. The answer to mass shootings by adolescents is to keep AR-15's out of their hands.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
But we do address automobile carnage in a thousand ways. It's worth pointing out that accidental hiway deaths are not the same as deliberate murder. Both are severe issues and deserve attention. The answer to mass shootings by adolescents is to keep AR-15's out of their hands.


A death is a death, accidental or not... especially where they are preventable. Have you ever been to the funeral of a teen who was killed in a vehicular accident? Accidental highway deaths aren't the same as school shooting deaths because there are on average, over 400 times as many deaths resulting from teen driving. Other than that, there is still a grieving family and a dead body in a casket. If you seriously feel that the key to stopping school shootings is keeping AR-15's out of their hands, then we can save thousands more live annually by keeping vehicles and cell phones out of their hands.

But it is no surprise to see either SKB or rocky mtn bill jumping to support the knee jerk solution of blaming the gun, because both of them are reliable supporters of anti-gun Democrats. The only difference between them is that Bill can admit it, and Steve is in denial of the obvious.

There is no question that gun owners and the NRA have an image problem. That is because the Left and guys like Steve and Bill support politicians and a News Media that relentlessly attacks the 2nd Amendment while hypocritically ignoring things like SSRI side effects, and things that kill far more people such as auto accidents, drug overdoses, and medical mistakes.

And I simply LOVE how SKB has me on IGNORE and doesn't see my posts! If nothing else, threads such as this tend to flush out those who continually help the Liberal Left Democrats who work so tirelessly to erode our rights. When Conservatives finally do relent and offer up some support for gun control, those on the Left always act as if it is something they really wanted. And when they do concede some ground, the anti-gunners always return for more restrictions. Reagan did not pass any bans on semi-auto AR-15 type guns. That was done after he left office. The Firearms owners Protection Act did ban future transfer of unregistered FULL AUTO firearms when the Democrat Hughes Amendment was added to the bill at the last minute, and the Left twists that by saying he signed a ban on assault weapons. That is a lie. It was Bill Clinton who signed the 10 year ban on many semi-automatic assault style firearms. The law had a 10 year sunset provision that was allowed to expire under George W. Bush, and there is NO EVIDENCE that either Reagan or George H.W. Bush would have supported extending the 10 year ban that was shown to be ineffective in deterring violent crime. In fact, Michael Reagan has said that his father's 1994 support in a letter to Congress was due to the onset of his Altzheimer's disease. When rocky mtn bill or King Brown offer statistics or so-called facts about gun control, it is always best to check them. Their "facts" about gun control come from anti-gunners and the DNC.
You know you may be on to something lil k.......maybe ar-15s should be class three items. Then we would not need to ban them. I have not cast a vote for a Democrat in years. Convenient how you avoid admitting that now GOP politicians are calling for a change. Better avoid that one at all costs and head on over to infowars where you will not need to think.
Again I think it makes more sense to keep evil and crazy folks out of schools than make restrictions on the sane and law abiding. If you could wave a magic wand and remove all the black guns from the country does any one think the attacks would stop? Crazy and evil folks would use bombs or shot guns with buck shot or things normal folks have not even thought of yet. Colombine shooters used 9mms , shotguns and bombs . The cause is the decline of our society and a lack of respect for life. It is not something that can be fixed by legislation but sadly it is the county we now live in. We need to harden our schools to protect our children.
Originally Posted By: SKB
You know you may be on to something lil k.......maybe ar-15s should be class three items. Then we would not need to ban them. I have not cast a vote for a Democrat in years. Convenient how you avoid admitting that now GOP politicians are calling for a change. Better avoid that one at all costs and head on over to infowars where you will not need to think.


There were 10 million AR-15's in the U.S. in 2013, and certainly a couple million more have been produced since then when demand skyrocketed under Obama's threats to ban them. Then we have millions more AK-47's and their variants, SKS's, Mini 14's, etc. If production was banned today, how soon could we expect the supply to dry up? If guns are the problem, one would expect that Gun Shows would be the most dangerous place on the planet.

I'm not at all surprised to see you suggesting that semi-automatic AR-15 style firearms should be regulated as Class III. Your support for anti-gunners and their solutions always surfaces, doesn't it?

I have no idea how you vote or if you vote. All we have to counter what you say now is your consistent support for anti-gun Democrats here in this forum, and your very reliable denigrations of pro-gun Republicans, as with your many recent attacks and criticisms of Trump. I think they call that circumstantial evidence. Very strong circumstantial evidence in your case Stevie.

I am not avoiding admitting anything about GOP politicians calling for change. I actually support some change, such as better reporting by the states to make NICS more accurate and effective, and to actually enforce the laws we already have on the books such as prosecuting criminals who attempt to buy guns and fail the NICS check. Your boy Obama ignored tens of thousands of those crimes while pressing for more restrictions on law abiding gun owners. Enforcement of existing laws would have prevented the shooting in Parkland, Florida. What good are more laws if we don't enforce the ones we have now?

And you may recall me roundly criticizing my own Republican Senator and several others like John McCain when they backed Obama and Biden's anti-gun legislation after Newtown. I have always been critical of any Republicans who support anti-2nd Amendment legislation, but I know that won't stop you from posting falsehoods and showing your ignorance. And we all know how much it bothers the hell out of you whenever anyone points out the extreme anti-gun fervor of the Liberal Left Democrats... even though you say you don't vote for them and don't like them... Yeah, you're fooling everyone Stevie... We believe you...

Stevie never fooled me...
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
But we do address automobile carnage in a thousand ways. It's worth pointing out that accidental hiway deaths are not the same as deliberate murder....

Why is that worth pointing out. When a dem calls for gun control, why don't they remove accidental death and suicide from their 'stats'. Maybe, it's better to peddle in a lot of misery, instead of just a little?
Originally Posted By: SKB
...A friend who is very pro-gun and an NRA member made a suggestion to me yesterday I thought may have some merit. He suggested requiring firearms to be locked in a safe when not in use as many other countries require....

I think your comments are all over the place, but this is a possible solution with merit? Would this knucklehead's safe have been at the school? If not, isn't it legal to transport the rifle?
Originally Posted By: SKB
You know you may be on to something lil k.......maybe ar-15s should be class three items. Then we would not need to ban them. I have not cast a vote for a Democrat in years. Convenient how you avoid admitting that now GOP politicians are calling for a change. Better avoid that one at all costs and head on over to infowars where you will not need to think.


1. AR-15s should not be a Class III item. There is no difference between an AR and any other semiautomatic rifle.

2. The GOP is not going to call for an AWB.
Hard for a liberal mind to understand that...him being gun ethusiest he should know that a person with a single shot shotgun with an ejector and a bag of buck shot could do just as much if not more damage than a person with a semi auto rifle.
Some people might not have the money for a gun safe...that requirement is just another way for the anti gun advocates to get control.
I agree with both your points. Notice my first comment regarding ARs....I said I did not think they should be banned and it would not help. I was just rattling the cage of lil k. The GOP is not calling for an AWB. I would rather see that than raising the age to buy a long gun which they are considering. Some form of increased gun control is coming and the GOP is going to help. Just look at Florida. You now have Rubio and Scott on board, both with A ratings from the NRA. Trump is suggesting several options. These are not liberal making these suggestions folks. I do not have the answer but this is not sustainable. We can not continue to have these mass shootings and keep the laws at status quo. Things are changing, you may not like it but that is the reality of the situation. Was the possibility of raising the long age even a thought before this? Could you imagine the President or Rubio saying what they have said before this? Just look at the corporate partners the NRA lost this week alone. We are losing the battle of public perception and in a big way.
Evidently the media has you believing we are losing....Are the elected idiots proposing raising the legal age limit for purchasing a long gun from 18 willing to raise the legal age for people going in the US military ?
No but they are saying that military members would be exempt.
What you think comes after an exemption....are those the ones saying X military suffering from PTSD should have their right to own a weapon revoked ?
I'm betting they're the same idiots that made the hippa laws to protect the mentally ills medical history during a back ground check.
I did not make this proposal. Trump and Govoner Scott did. You seem quite confused this morning.
Did not, typo
Originally Posted By: SKB
We can not continue to have these mass shootings and keep the laws at status quo.
And what law would you propose?
I do not have the answer but something needs to change. You are completely wrong saying that a guy with a single shot and buckshot can cause the same damage as with an AR. No way the Vegas killer was going to that with a shotgun. I will say if the AR went away I would not miss it. The rapid fire rifle I own is a 98 mauser and it has all the firepower I require.
You are a gunsmith and best be careful what you say about gun control, even the AR-15.......remember Jim Zumbo? He got fired from the Outdoor network AND Outdoor Life magazine for his statements about the AR-15.
Originally Posted By: SKB
I do not have the answer but something needs to change. You are completely wrong saying that a guy with a single shot and buckshot can cause the same damage as with an AR. No way the Vegas killer was going to that with a shotgun. I will say if the AR went away I would not miss it. The rapid fire rifle I own is a 98 mauser and it has all the firepower I require.


I know you don't have an answer with a law...because there is no law that would've made a bit of difference.

Truth is if the AR was banned you're Mauser a weapon of destructive force a lot greater than a little AR could be next...

No one mentioned the Las Vegas shooter.

But since you mentioned him....

Would it really have made a difference if he had a bolt action rifle with a high powdered scope and just selectively popped peoples heads off ?

You think either is more or less evil...

Is just one life not worth as much as many ?
I have not said it should be banned, please read what I said. I would not miss them. I have no need for one and do not own or work on them. They could disappear and I would be unaware. They have no value in my world or for my needs. What others shoot is not my concern. If you enjoy them that is your right but I fail the see them as something desirable. You could not give me one. The day we learned about them in school I was bored stiff. When I ran my own General gunsmithing shop I turned away
business rather than buy the tools to service them.
The Vegas shooter shot over four hundred people.....yeah I think that would have been impossible with a mauser in the time it took to subdue him.
Zumbo only wanted them banned from the prairies and woods. Gunsmiths for gun control.....idk quite what to think about that.
I felt like you did for a long time...then I realized this isn't about mine or your needs it's about our rights and the protection of our country.

I grew up shooting bolt actions I got my first 7mm 95' Mauser when I was 13 or 14. Over the years I've been accused a few times of shooting a semi-auto in the deer woods...and I'm left handed.

If you don't like black they come in all colors...After shooting an AR I was really surprised by their accuracy.
How do you feel about GOP politicians with an NRA a rating for gun control?
Originally Posted By: SKB
The Vegas shooter shot over four hundred people.....yeah I think that would have been impossible with a mauser in the time it took to subdue him.


If he killed only one person it would've been just as tragic.....tragic has nothing to do with bag limits.

Why have they not released his autopsy ?
I have no interest in seeing you loose your rights. The fact you enjoy your rifle is fine by me.

My point is that thngs are changing....even with Republicans in power positions
Originally Posted By: SKB
I have no interest in seeing you loose your rights. The fact you enjoy your rifle is fine by me.

My point is that thngs are changing....even with Republicans in power positions


But in the same breath you admit you don't really care for your rights ?

I do enjoy S&Ws, Colt 1911's and semi auto shotguns.
It does matter to the general public. We need those people on our side if we are going to keep our rights.
No, I said I would not miss something I do not own.

I am not for taking your guns away. I am for keeping our guns and some increased restrictions may be required for us the maintain our rights. See the new proposals by Republicans. I do not think being in denial helps us.
We have more than enough restrictions...

The problem is background checks are hobbled by hippa laws blocking mental health evaluations and faulty state background check systems missing felons.
That is part of the problem for sure. I do not think it is all of it, but I do not disagree with you on that point.
I'm still waiting to hear a legitimate restriction that would've made a difference in any of the shootings ?
Well I think better reporting to the NICS system would have possibly caught the TX church shooter. That is not another restriction but an improvement most everyone seems to be behind.

I am not saying more laws will fix this mess. I am saying we are losing the battle of public perception and even the GOP seems to be now seeing that. We need to win the middle, we already have the right.
The battle of public perception you keep referring to is false....don't let your perception be controlled by what some idiOt news caster says.

Originally Posted By: buzz
Zumbo only wanted them banned from the prairies and woods. Gunsmiths for gun control.....idk quite what to think about that.


I once stood with Dumbo Zumbo....then Keith opened my eyes.
An enormous part of the problem
"Cruz has been shown to suffer from autism, depression and other significant psychological problems, according to his legal team. News of the 'demon voices' that plagued Cruz' mind has also come as it also yesterday emerged that police were called to the home of Florida school killer 39 times since 2010."
And he passed a background check despite being expelled from school, stalking and violence toward a girl friend, and assaulting her new boyfriend
https://www.christianpost.com/news/nikol...-school-218177/

We all agree the "mentally ill" should not have access to guns.
The ACLU will protect the rights of the mentally ill to privacy.

Do we want the government to decide who is mentally ill, and what medicines they should or should not take? And when law enforcement has the authority to remove their weapons? Progressive already believe evangelical Christians are mentally ill, and teaching children about Jesus is a form of child abuse.

I'm afraid it is hopeless. States locked in a progressive ideology will continue to remove gun rights while sacrificing their children to that ideology by refusing to make schools safe.

EVERY school that is not in some little aldea in Central America is behind a 12' wall topped with razor wire and with one metal door for entrance and exit manned by a guard with a SMG or 2 guys with Mossberg pumps. Add metal detectors and problem solved.

Economic punishment for "wrong thinking" will worsen. Gun owners will migrate to the Midwest, South, Mountain West and SW while the NE and much of CA devolves into "A Clockwork Orange" dystopia. Pray for our nation and our grandchildren, and vote in your local elections.
A mentally ill person cant decide for themselves...

If a person is mentally ill what rights to privacy should they have...the right to hide the fact on a background check ?

It sounds like you're willing to make our schools into prisons to defend the rights of the mentally I'll.

Are you willing to proclaim a mentally ill person a species of man like they've basically done with mother natures queers ?
Drew, I respect your concern for ways to address gun violence. but I have to ask if you would be willing to live in a United States where our schools are fenced with razor wire. Such measures may be necessary in South America, but we should demand more of our society than that it become an armed fortification. Arming teachers is a fantasy and an admission that we can't find better solutions. SKB is right. Things are going to change. If all gun owners do is double down, then we'll have no influence on the outcomes. Instead of throwing money away on the Wall, we could invest in better screening. No kid needs a high- capacity semi-auto. Anyone seeking to buy should be subjected to a waiting period and enhanced background check.Keith may have a point about medication, but it doesn't have any bearing on many cases of mass shooting.
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause

Do we want the government to decide who is mentally ill, and what medicines they should or should not take? And when law enforcement has the authority to remove their weapons? Progressive already believe evangelical Christians are mentally ill, and teaching children about Jesus is a form of child abuse.


There is argument that religion is a way to control and dominate people...been like that for ages.

Without the 10 commandments where are we as a society ?

We're where we are now.

Bill: we already live in a society where, this morning, our well trained and well armed security team will be guarding the children at our church, and (being AZ) many church members are carrying concealed. Are somebody else's kids less important?
We have the Holy Spirit to help us deal with reality, not escape reality.
Yes, Drew, It makes sense to guard our children. However, that isn't all it makes sense to do. Why should we settle for hunkering down? That's got to be a temporary measure. On another topic, the AR-15 is our worst enemy as gun owners. It has come to represent everything about firearms that the general public won't tolerate. It appeals precisely to those people who should never get their hands on a gun. Granted most owners are responsible people, but deranged shooters know it is the weapon of choice. Make them Class III.
I am not for restrictions on the sane and law abiding.

I am for restrictions on the evil and crazy.

This discussion is why we will not see a major change in gun laws, if a group of gun enthusiast can't agree on the issue how the hell will a group of politicians .

What I think everyone can and should support is more secure schools. This can and must be done!
Bill: the world is what it is. Humanistic post-millennialism (through education, enlightenment and world-wide evangelism we're going to make heaven on earth) started dying with WWI, and did die with the Atomic Age and the formation of the State of Israel. There is nothing in the Bible about things getting better and better. We must deal with it. And be prepared for the day the "Failure to register your Class III AR confiscation police" hit the streets. It'll take them a LONG time to make it through AZ and Idaho.
Off to church.
Drew, the world is what it is because this is what we made it. It doesn't have to get crazier and crazier. We are certainly fallible creatures, but we aren't completely helpless. If religion offers some help here, it is surely in its message of love and compassion. Those of us who aren't criminally insane ought to be able to find ways to accomodate each other and find the grounds that we share, rather than let what divides us be the only focus.PS: Lots of things are better-- less poverty, better health, more opportunity, less illiteracy.
dis aint bout drugs an hit aint bout guns...watt hits really bout is wacko people...like da nra man keep sayin...

"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Drew, the world is what it is because this is what we made it.....

....Those of us who aren't criminally insane ought to be able to find ways to accomodate each other and find the grounds that we share, rather than let what divides us....

If we made it, shouldn't we be asking how we made it? Are we teaching our kids to think and reason, or do we cheer for them on tv when the media gobbles up their knee jerk emotional divisive talking points?

Bill, the second point I highlighted amazes me. A thought Doc Drew made was, do we want the gov. determining mental health. Why did you use the word 'criminally'? I'd still bet this latest loser will be determined to be 'sane'. Why can't, as you describe, legal access be determined based on behavior, rather than the subjectivity of a potentially agenda influenced counselor?

Criminal is already illegal. Maybe, it should be criminal to create cracks to slip through when those cracks are against the law? There's pretty good evidence that criminals are unlikely to abide by the law. When law abiding folks do respect a possible new restriction law, will they be rewarded with appreciation, or will more divisive calls come for more to be done? Why, because the other 300 million of us just can't keep going on abiding by the law? Criminal behavior should be deterred to the point that it is not perceived as a path to mental or financial satisfaction, and our kids should not be taught to feel emotional pleasure in allowing selective criminality.
Craig, I used the phrase "criminally insane" to distinguish school shooters from crazy students who don't commit violent acts and to say that we as a class on this forum are not criminally insane. A question for you: 'Based on behavior" by whom? Of course criminal behavior should be deterred. That's the whole point here. The problem to be addressed is how in hell to do it. Whoever taught our kids to feel emotional pleasure in allowing selective criminality??? What does any of this verbage possibly mean?
Craig, It won't work to resent students speaking out. They have the best reason in the world to feel badly served. They don't run the world;they should reasonably expect adults to do a better job. That is our duty to them. And, when they do speak out eloquently and persuasively that is news and must be reported. The notion that they are being exploited is the BS we expect from Rush, a man who lies for a living. Gun violence is the Civil Rights issue of our time. It will be addressed and lessened by the same means that worked last time, people in the streets demanding that those in power do their duty. Our grandchildren deserve our doing what it takes.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Craig....

....A question for you: 'Based on behavior" by whom? Of course criminal behavior should be deterred. That's the whole point here. The problem to be addressed is how in hell to do it. Whoever taught our kids to feel emotional pleasure in allowing selective criminality??? What does any of this verbage possibly mean?

Behavior by whom? Criminals. The thirty-nine visits to the place of residence were for reports of possible criminal behavior. The school disciplinary file must be as thick as an old phone book. Why isn't there the will to see the signs of criminal behavior, and why didn't it flag the legal purchase of a firearm? Of course, there were many more indications of criminal type behavior. But, do law abiding citizens have to pay for the likelihood that a criminal will not follow firearm acquisition or use laws? According to you, they must?

Verbage? Who taught our children to use the term 'dreamers' when the law says they are illegal aliens? Didn't you see the tv videos last week of a walk through a sanfrancisco tent city with flows of human excrement and all manor of criminal behavior? Do our kids see criminal behavior, or are they conditioned to see a righteous statement and yet another program to throw money at? How come our kids are conditioned, taught, to imagine rights for criminals and not our Constitution?

That second note you posted shifts back to more of that divisiveness that comes as no surprise. I never said I resent the kids. But, if they want, or more importantly are given a voice, by media exploitation, for antigun policy, should they retain the protection of their age? Our children should not be taught that illegal use of a firearm is a civil rights issue. It's extremely offensive to equivocate that with true civil rights accomplishments. Our grandchildren deserve much better, and make no mistake about it, inaction is much better for them than to feed ideological egos with the knee jerk flavor of the week.
Craig, We don't have any difference of opinion on what should have happened with shooter Cruz. How he got by, especially by the FBI, needs a lot of attention and some serious changes to the system. We need a seriously larger investment in background checks, and when we err, it should be on the side of caution.
A larger investment?
I'm going to guess if the local cops showed up at my house half a dozen times, someone would be incarcerated, likely me. The program that keeps police from arresting black and hispanic kids pretty much kept Cruz out of the clink.
Epic fail number one.

The county cops couldn't be bothered to enter the school and end the bloodshed.
Epic fail number two.

The FBI, warned several times about this little [censored], completely dropped the ball in spite of crystal clear intent displayed by Cruz for many others to see.
Epic fail number three.

Where do you want to thow money to fix this, BIll? Local, county, or federal level?


Best,
Ted
That's always the Dems' answer.............. throw more money at it.

Why? ............ it buys votes, that's why.

SRH
It also works sometimes. We have a state back ground system here in CO and have a much higher rate of catching problem people trying to illegally purchase guns than states who use the FBI. We do pay a fee on each 4473 run. It started out at 10$ and went steadily down to 6$ but we just had a big increase in the fee which is now at 15$. Our system is also much, much faster than using the FBI. I typically get an answer in less than 5 minutes. Added costs? Yes there are but as someone in business it is worth it to me for the increased speed and accuracy.
and then there is the theory that gun confiscation advocates dont want the mass murder via firearms syndrome to be mitigated, because then there is less popular support for their agenda...

some say that the evidence that bummer did little or nothing to address the mass murder via firearms syndrome is proof that his agenda did not include saving lives, but instead was geared more toward the eventual confiscation of certain classes of firearms by federal authorities...

like his stooge declared "never let a good crisis go to waste".
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
A larger investment?
I'm going to guess if the local cops showed up at my house half a dozen times, someone would be incarcerated, likely me. The program that keeps police from arresting black and hispanic kids pretty much kept Cruz out of the clink.
Epic fail number one
.

The county cops couldn't be bothered to enter the school and end the bloodshed.
Epic fail number two.


The FBI, warned several times about this little [censored], completely dropped the ball in spite of crystal clear intent displayed by Cruz for many others to see.
Epic fail number three.

Where do you want to thow money to fix this, BIll? Local, county, or federal level?


Best,
Ted


100% correct.Add Epic fail no four:
The security camera's are on a 20 min delay-they were monitoring recordings instead if live !

The government,more laws and throwing money at it will fail like they always do!




The notion that government can never be made to work is as self=defeating as Drew's acceptance of razor wire. It you aren't willing to spend more money to make background checks work, you're just telling terrorists to go ahead and arm themselves. Ed Good just uttered the stupidest remark ever, by him or any other hominid.
Originally Posted By: SKB
It also works sometimes. We have a state back ground system here in CO and have a much higher rate of catching problem people trying to illegally purchase guns than states who use the FBI. We do pay a fee on each 4473 run. It started out at 10$ and went steadily down to 6$ but we just had a big increase in the fee which is now at 15$. Our system is also much, much faster than using the FBI. I typically get an answer in less than 5 minutes. Added costs? Yes there are but as someone in business it is worth it to me for the increased speed and accuracy.


Steve, if it worked great at $10, then it continued to work at $6, why raise it to $15? Possible answer ............. to further discourage the buying of more guns in the first place.

Hey, don't laugh. It worked when Bill Clinton raised the annual fee for a FFL from $10/yr. to $200/yr. Licensees dropped from 282,00 to barely over 100,000 in just a short time span. I was one of them who, due to moving a small number of guns, could not justify the increase.

Follow the $$$$.

SRH
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
....We need a seriously larger investment in background checks, and when we err, it should be on the side of caution.

Wouldn't it be wise to discuss what this means? Doesn't this mean a de facto registration? Wouldn't it require a buyer background check, a seller background check, and documentation of a unique firearm? A member here kindly explained to me about at least one state that makes this process quick and easy, a pilot program for the nation if you will. And, of course, let's not forget the 'fee'.

Let's say you have a seventeen year old grandkid when the law is passed. Four years later, at age twenty-one, they want to sell a starter .22 or generic deer rifle they were given at twelve years old. They are a good lawful citizen, but the quick and easy background check flags them for not ever having that firearm legally transferred to them.

Are they a felon on the spot, or do they have some special exemption? Should they be flagged in the future for attempting an illegal firearm transfer that's in the database? Would this be the equivalent of a sale out of a car trunk on the south side of chicago, and why not? But hey, I got to enjoy that little front that came through your neck of the woods early last week. Brrr, but much more pleasant than the thought what an untruthful ideologue would do with a registry.
It goes up, it goes down. I cannot worry about what amounts to pennies for a valuable service. Happy to pay for the convenience. First time is has been ever raised.
My god no not at all. By Federal law any Government body associated with your back ground check is prohibited from entering the information into a searchable database. When you buy a gun they have no idea what you except if it is a long gun or a handgun. Not the make, model, serial# or caliber. Those records stay with the FFL holder for 20 years or until he closes shop. As stated above, I do not mind the fee nor does it seem that the folks planning to shell out for a gun do. I have never once been told that the fee would make or break a deal. I usually have enough profit in sale that adjusting the total by 10$ is a no brainer.
Originally Posted By: Stan
Originally Posted By: SKB
It also works sometimes. We have a state back ground system here in CO and have a much higher rate of catching problem people trying to illegally purchase guns than states who use the FBI. We do pay a fee on each 4473 run. It started out at 10$ and went steadily down to 6$ but we just had a big increase in the fee which is now at 15$. Our system is also much, much faster than using the FBI. I typically get an answer in less than 5 minutes. Added costs? Yes there are but as someone in business it is worth it to me for the increased speed and accuracy.


Steve, if it worked great at $10, then it continued to work at $6, why raise it to $15? Possible answer ............. to further discourage the buying of more guns in the first place.

Hey, don't laugh. It worked when Bill Clinton raised the annual fee for a FFL from $10/yr. to $200/yr. Licensees dropped from 282,00 to barely over 100,000 in just a short time span. I was one of them who, due to moving a small number of guns, could not justify the increase.

Follow the $$$$.

SRH


We do both here,both no charge, FBI NICS for long guns-95% if time immediate reply of proceed-delay or deny,you can even go on line no wait there either.The handguns go through State PD NICS, 20 min average call back.
What percentage of denied NICS checks are prosecuted ?
Out of 556,496.............254 a .04% prosecution rate

http://freebeacon.com/issues/prosecutions-lying-gun-background-checks-fall-new-low/



Originally Posted By: SKB
My god no not at all. By Federal law any Government body associated with your back ground check is prohibited from entering the information into a searchable database. When you buy a gun they have no idea what you except if it is a long gun or a handgun. Not the make, model, serial# or caliber. Those records stay with the FFL holder for 20 years or until he closes shop....

I thought you said the status quo was no good? The ideologues calling for more gun control do not care about the established practices of an FFL holder. I don't intend to put words into his mouth, but Bill is hinting at all firearms transfers going through a background check. Maybe, exactly like how it's done in Oregon? A background check for a private transfer does not assume the seller is held to the same standards as an FFL holder, nor can it be assumed that an e-background check that includes make, model and serial number will somehow be unpreserved and not available for instant search. Isn't your point to stop criminals?

As to fees, you do not have the protection of the law against punitive amounts. In truth you're describing luck. There are so many examples of fees and taxes to do business in other fields besides yours that have mushroomed. I wouldn't assume being immune from them.
federal background checks are a gross abuse of federal power and are generally ineffective...the more local the police authority that performs background checks, the more effective the information actually revealed becomes...this fact is no better illustrated than new york state's sullivan law, which regulates civilian possession of handguns...in order to possess a handgun in new york state, one submits a permit application to ones local police authority, where the background check process begins...it is a bottom up process that ends at the federal level...whereas the present federal based system is ass backwards and only reveals that information that has been uploaded to the fbi data base...just imagine if the parkland murderer would have first had to have the approval of his local police authority before taking possession of his ar or any other firearm...
Ed, what makes them an abuse? Why not do state, local, and federal? The point is to prevent the misuse of guns, something that will bite us hard if we don't find ways of counteracting it.
You are mixing apples and oranges. We need better reporting to NICS or in cases like my state, our CBI. We require all guns, even private transfers to get a back ground check through an FFl, same as if it was a retail purchase. I do not offer that service. It is up to the buyer and seller to find a FFL who does. I do all my 4473's online, or an e-back ground check as you say. I never transmit to our CBI what you are buying other than checking the appropriate box for long gun or hand gun. The paper records stay with me and the CBI or in most cases the FBI never sees what you buy.

I can not be too upset that someday the fee may become too high. Really? These are your worries? Sounds like a bunch of hand wringing over problems that do not exist to me. If the cost of a 15$ background check is too much for you to bare maybe the gun game is not for you.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Ed, what makes them an abuse? Why not do state, local, and federal? The point is to prevent the misuse of guns, something that will bite us hard if we don't find ways of counteracting it.


Our firm has one of the few dedicated firearms law practice groups in our state.
Quite honestly, the federal background check system has jammed up more innocent people who don't belong in the database than it has prevented any "prohibited possessor" from obtaining a firearm. Most truly dangerous people do not bother purchasing their weapons from an FFL, anyway.
Originally Posted By: Paradox

Most truly dangerous people do not bother purchasing their weapons from an FFL, anyway.


The gun(s) used will probably be stolen because previous owner did not secure them properly taken from relatives or friends because they were not stored securely or purchased in state w/o background check where no such check on private gun sales is required. Don't worry if we don't secure our guns as responsible gun owners they will secure them for us.
Universal backround check in both CO and WA are a failure and waste of time.If my state or federal law goes to it I will not do them either.Without a gun registry they are useless and the left knows that is the first step they need to confiscation.

http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2...aws-co-wa-fail/

"Notice, the citizenry and law enforcement alike expressed little desire to comply with laws, which have now proven a waste of time.

The failure of these laws actually goes to the fact that universal background checks are unenforceable without a gun registry, and neither Colorado nor Washington state enacted such a registry. This is not lost on the researchers who studied the failure of gun control in Colorado and Washington state.
Originally Posted By: keith
[quote=rocky mtn bill]Yes, Drew, It makes sense to guard our children. However, that isn't all it makes sense to do. Why should we settle for hunkering down? That's got to be a temporary measure. On another topic, the AR-15 is our worst enemy as gun owners. It has come to represent everything about firearms that the general public won't tolerate. It appeals precisely to those people who should never get their hands on a gun. Granted most owners are responsible people, but deranged shooters know it is the weapon of choice. Make them Class III.


I owned semi-auto version of Chinese AKM with high capacity magazines. I sold mine when the prices were high. They are f useless.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Yes, Drew, It makes sense to guard our children. However, that isn't all it makes sense to do. Why should we settle for hunkering down? That's got to be a temporary measure. On another topic, the AR-15 is our worst enemy as gun owners. It has come to represent everything about firearms that the general public won't tolerate. It appeals precisely to those people who should never get their hands on a gun. Granted most owners are responsible people, but deranged shooters know it is the weapon of choice. Make them Class III.


Wow, some good points have been made since last night, and some incredibly stupid ones such as Bill's predictable suggestion to get rid of AR-15 or to make them Class III.

Public perception is important, to be sure. Once again, that's why I keep saying that we as gun owners need to counteract the lying media and the lying Liberal Left with the facts that dangers from AR-15's are minuscule compared to seemingly benign things like teen driving and texting while driving. Not that many years ago, the Left and the media advanced and nurtured the perception that handguns were the big evil. If they ever succeed at banning AR-15's, you can bet handguns will become their target once again.

Stevie's comment about the Las Vegas shooter hitting over 400 people once again ignorantly ignores the Nice, France attack where a rented truck was used to kill and injure even more people. So using his AR-15 versus Mauser argument, is he also suggesting that we should eliminate large trucks from our country because they can do much more damage than small trucks?

Oh wait... Stevie says he doesn't wish to ban AR-15's. But he did say they should be classified as Class III firearms and he did say wouldn't care if they became as extinct as the dodo bird. Well, that should certainly make us all feel that he's the reincarnation of Charleton Heston!

And once again, Jagermeister insists we should be required to secure all of our guns in a safe... even though he doesn't do that. And he is another Libtard who must run like a coward from the fact that killers don't need an AR-15 to kill and injure large numbers of people.

This morning, there was a spokesperson for Handgun Control Inc. on Fox News and she was asked the reasons that anti-gunners want a ban on the AR-15, and what the difference was between them and millions of other semi-auto rifles and shotguns. One of her points was that the .223 or 5.56 m/m round is so needlessly powerful because it has a velocity 3 times faster than most handgun rounds, and does so much damage to flesh. By that logic, almost all bolt action deer, elk, or varmint rifles are much worse in terms of velocity and energy.

I like Drew's idea of really securing the perimeter of our schools like they do in Central America until we can find better ways to keep mentally ill killers from targeting them. It's sad to think that adults in those countries are intelligent enough to protect their kids in a way most Liberals resist. Most of us are smart enough to understand that a total ban on AR-15's, AK-47's, SKS's, Mini 14's and other hi-capacity semi auto rifles is still going to leave tens of millions of them out there. The owner of my local gun shop said he has sold a dozen AR-15's just in the last week in response to the latest calls to ban them. I'd guess that same scenario is playing out in almost every gun store in the U.S right now. We have armed security and metal detectors at our Courthouses, Government Buildings, and Airports, etc., so why would people like rocky mtn bill be stupid enough to resist the same for our schools? And especially when their predictable Liberal Left anti-gun solutions would be useless other than helping the anti-gunners get closer to their goal of eventually eliminating our gun rights and our guns.

Remember folks, the dishonest polling organizations that are telling you that 93% of Americans want these AR-15 bans, Universal Background Checks, etc. are the same Polls that said Trump was going to lose in a landslide of historic proportions. Gun owners who are not weak, fearful, or stupid should stand and fight... not crumble. We should never be afraid or ashamed to protect our Civil Rights, and the RKBA is a fundamental Civil Right.
and that has exactly zero to do with the fact that our CBI conducts a more thorough back ground check that catches more people trying to break the law.

For the record, I do not support universal back ground checks but a strengthened reporting system which prevents more convicts from obtaining firearms through licensed sellers I fully support.
Lil k try to follow along....we all know you are not too bright. I said bump stocks can go the way of the dodo...fine by me. My first comment regarding AR's stated I do not think a ban would work or is the answer. Then I pulled a trick out of your bag and twisted your words, claiming the class III was your grand idea, fully knowing you did not think that way. Same crap you pull constantly. Then I told Ol j0e I would not miss ARs if they were gone tomorrow and explained I do not have or want one....Can't lose what ya never done had as the song goes. Yes you can kill someone with a truck or a bomb.....that does not mean we do not have a huge problem with our image as gun owners with the general public. Look around and see what is happening. The stance of the NRA and the right wing conspiracies being spread over the last week were shameful. Calling the victims actors? Just sad it what it is.
Originally Posted By: SKB
....that does not mean we do not have a huge problem with our image....

....Look around and see what is happening. The stance of the NRA and the right wing conspiracies being spread over the last week were shameful. Calling the victims actors? Just sad it what it is.

Don't you think if it's just an image problem, then we should be calling for image control, not gun control?

I think you're spinning a little here for gun control. It's clearly the activists who're actors, not the victims that're being referred to. It really is a shame that the message of your activists clouds the ability to see an opposing point of view, and choose demonization. If a high school kid was passionate about disliking gunsmiths, would they have credibility to you? Or, would you welcome them, and their parents and media prodding them, because some gunsmiths are shameful? Geez.
Nobody can twist a situation like you Craig....you are work of art. Nope....not spinning for gun control, sick of seeing the senseless death and would appreciate a bit more honesty out of our side. Plenty of BS on social media last week with pictures of the victims and claiming they were at multiple tragedies. Not at all talking about activists clearly. Look around......we are becoming the enemy to a large portion the population. You can not even see the value of paying a few dollars for a better back ground check. You have no interest in seeing a solution to what is huge problem for all gun owners.
Why do you continue to prove your are and ignorant prick little stevie ?
Show us the the proof-your CBI is no better then any NICS.04% have they prosecuted for filling out a 4473 and getting denied ,how many in CO ?

Backround checks,FAIL,Resource officers FAIL,Cowardly Sheriffs waiting outside FAIL.FBI FAIL

Secure the "Gun Free Zones" and that will stop it !


No Dave you only crawl out of your hole to prove you are a lil prick. So everything is a fail. That is your answer. Go back Brietbart you nutter.

3.6% fail in CO Dave you small minded twat.

https://www.denverpost.com/2013/01/31/fe...ightest-in-u-s/
Originally Posted By: SKB
....You can not even see the value of paying a few dollars for a better back ground check. You have no interest in seeing a solution to what is huge problem for all gun owners.

Okay Steve, I cut out the part where you poked fun at me about the fifteen dollars, but would you care to expand on what we get for a few more dollars. As best I can piece together, you said all private transfers should go through an FFL, because that's the way you do it and I'm full of beans. Then, correct me if I'm wrong, you won't do a transfer for me because, I'm not your friend. Did I spin, lie, or distort?

You say I have no interest in a solution, but I have asked you about all of yours going back a few pages. Not much, eh? You repeat on and on about an image problem, but you refuse to agree that the solution is image control. Please explain, how does losing chunks of the gun control battle strengthen the image of the law abiding gun community?

Now, more specifically, why don't you acknowledge the example I gave from the state of Oregon? Why do you insist on returning to the current procedures of an FFL holder in good standing? Does spending more money on background checks mean mandatory digitizing of all FFL records? Can I ask, who would care about the professionalism of an FFL transfer, when all transfers would be subject to criminal penalty if it's not in a de facto registry like my example from Oregon? I admit, it doesn't seem like it, but I try to snip out some of the spin in your comments and try to highlight the apparent points of substance.

Thanks for reading. As you've told me in the past about yourself, how you possibly judge my values and interests?
Hey you keep proving your support for libtard ways-3.6% are allegedly prosecuted,wow that something to be proud of !
Your acting like cowardly a-hole,as usual, on the internet,maybe you can try it at SHOT or NRA one time when we meet in person,let me know ?
So happy I rattled you deranged cage-I knew it would work,keep digging your hole you prick!




Vote with your dollars. Why support Omaha bank,Delta, United, Hertz and Liberal Gun Dealers like "lefty" Steve Bertram and CO- SKB and give them any of your money ?
Lefty Stevie, I humbly and publicly apologize for my error in saying you felt AR-15 could go the way of the dodo bird. That was an honest mistake, but not too far off the mark considering you said this:

Originally Posted By: SKB
I do not have the answer but something needs to change. You are completely wrong saying that a guy with a single shot and buckshot can cause the same damage as with an AR. No way the Vegas killer was going to that with a shotgun. I will say if the AR went away I would not miss it. The rapid fire rifle I own is a 98 mauser and it has all the firepower I require.


Originally Posted By: SKB
I agree with both your points. Notice my first comment regarding ARs....I said I did not think they should be banned and it would not help. I was just rattling the cage of lil k. The GOP is not calling for an AWB. I would rather see that than raising the age to buy a long gun which they are considering.


Yeah, you keep repeatedly making that point about not caring if AR-15's went away and that you wouldn't miss them. And just what was that little comment about how you'd rather see an AWB (assault weapons ban) than raising the age to buy a long gun? I guess you could pull a King Brown "craft of journalism" trick and try to tell us that AWB is "Average White Band". So I can see how you'd get all bent out of shape when I mistakenly confused those comments denigrating the AR-15 with your comment about bump stocks going the way of the dodo. When you're all over the map, and dissing the NRA and repeating crap from your precious anti-gun media, it does get a bit hard to pin you down. But I think anyone with a brain knows where you're coming from Stevie.

I'm sorry that you won't see this sincere public apology since we all know that we can trust you to always tell the truth, and one of your oft repeated "truths" is that you IGNORE my posts.

Since you IGNORE my posts, I hope Bill or Jagermeister tells you that I said it was nice of you to come clean and admit that you twisted my words when you seemed to suggest that I had said that AR-15's being classified as Class III firearms was my idea. I did mean to call you out on that one, and the fact that you did it demonstrates who really does the intentional twisting of words around here.

While we're on the subject of "twisting" the truth, can you show us exactly where the NRA made a statement that the victims were actors Stevie?
Originally Posted By: SKB
No Dave you only crawl out of your hole to prove you are a lil prick. So everything is a fail. That is your answer. Go back Brietbart you nutter.

3.6% fail in CO Dave you small minded twat.

https://www.denverpost.com/2013/01/31/fe...ightest-in-u-s/


Do all liberal gunsmiths have such potty mouths ?
Lefty stevie has always had a potty mouth on the interent-in person I hear is acts like a little girl even thou he got rid of the pony tails.

Originally Posted By: SKB
You know you may be on to something lil k.......maybe ar-15s should be class three items. Then we would not need to ban them. I have not cast a vote for a Democrat in years. Convenient how you avoid admitting that now GOP politicians are calling for a change. Better avoid that one at all costs and head on over to infowars where you will not need to think.


Kind like saying I have not beat my wife recently no ?
Not his pony tail....say it ain't so.
we got ah problem with mass murder in public places...so, in order to minimize it, we gotta secure those places with visible and invisible deterrents...a visible deterrent could be armed uniformed officers of the law, with firearms, exposed for all to see...an invisible deterrent could be trained and deputized civilians with concealed firearms...

as it is now, we care more about protecting airplanes and other high value assets than we do people...
Better get to pack'n more than a tOrched up SxS Ed....

Just saying
jOe, this thread is too important for you to trash it with superfluous nonsense...
and as for classifying hi cap semi auto firearms as class III weapons, i once thought that concept had merit...not anymore...consider, a killer with a bag containing a dozen six shot 38's...that gives him the fire power of 72 short range lethal rounds...

when all is said and done, a good guy with a gun is the best defense against a bad guy with a gun.
Keith finally got through to you...
jOe: the reason our second amendment rights are threatened is because extremist from opposite ends of the political spectrum are scaring the rest of us who are somewhere closer to the middle...so long as reason, common sense and respect for the values of those we disagree with are ignored, serious threats to our safety and security will continue to plague us...
Craig you are paranoid. Digitizing of FFL records is against federal law. Get that through your head. That has not changed o r is it even proposed currently but anyone but the far left. I do not and would support that. I do not know how they do in the state of Oregon, we do not have registration or a database here. I am not sure how a better reporting system is chipping away at your gun rights. We still fill out a 4473 but our state does a better job with the info. How is that a bad thing?

Craig, how Do you feel about the very real loss of gun rights being proposed the Florida GOP? Raising the long gun age is much worse than a solid back ground check to me. Getting youth involved to our sport is key to its survival and that does nothing to help. Concerned? Not a big deal?

We have an image problem Craig. We do not need the NRA saying"white mothers crying on TV is ratings gold" could she have said something more stupid? I do not think so.
Dave your are nothing but an idiot pure and simple, .04% or 3.6%, which is the stronger system? Am I proud of it? No but it is far better than the FBI NICS system, by many fold. The fact is you hate the government and all back ground checks. I do not love it but it is the system we have and a strong system benefits all gun owners. I am a moderate who usually votes straight Republican but have no use for extremist such as yourself. Now go piss up a rope you total POS.
Your to dumb to continue on with lil k.
Dave happy to meet in person. I am not much of a show guy but come to the Denver and I will be happy to tell you to your face what spineless POS you are. I will even buy lunch for you. I like to do that for trash occasionally. You have not rattled my cage.if you come to lunch be sure you wear your big girl panties.
Don't get your panties in a bunch sweetheart....the pony tail is back. Taken last Spring with my mauser.

The NRA did not say the victims were actors, that was said by that idiot Alex Jones and repeated by other idiots like you

http://fortune.com/2018/02/24/youtube-pulls-alex-jones-infowars-video/

The NRA was behind this gem:

"Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back.” while on CNN

Just sad........
SKB you think you're mentally competant enough to be in possession of a firearm ?
I pass the test sweetness. Gee I thought you and I were bonding.
Me too...

Years ago I was almost bit by a friendly German Shepard and had to fight it off with chair.
Sounds like a dog that could judge charter well. Too bad to pooch missed.
Originally Posted By: SKB
The NRA did not say the victims were actors, that was said by that idiot Alex Jones and repeated by other idiots like you

http://fortune.com/2018/02/24/youtube-pulls-alex-jones-infowars-video/

The NRA was behind this gem:

"Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back.” while on CNN

Just sad........


You don't think there are bad actors controlling these Kids and filming these grieving people ?

You want to attack someone attack the 4 law enforcement people that stood idly by and were too scared to go in and kill the mentally deranged shooter or the sorry azz FBI that did nothing because it's basically been hamstrung by the liberals.

Bottom line is the liberals and their attempts to undermine our society are more to blame for this than anyone.
Originally Posted By: SKB
Sounds like a dog that could judge charter well. Too bad to pooch missed.


Actually he was mentally deranged...the owner was most likely a sick in the head liberal.

I didn't figure our bOnd would last long...I'm sorry for the pony tail comments I've made over the years.













if'n that pOny tail makes you feel more like a wOmen I say go for it girl....
Those are kids who experienced something awful which I hope to never experience myself. It was not actors but Alex Jones exploiting the situation. Come back to reality for just a moment.
I thought it was a friendly dog.....gee how fast things change. I grew it just for you sweety p1e.
Originally Posted By: SKB
Those are kids who experienced something awful which I hope to never experience myself. It was not actors but Alex Jones exploiting the situation. Come back to reality for just a moment.


You are wrong...
How so?
Originally Posted By: SKB
Craig you are paranoid.....

....I do not know how they do in the state of Oregon....

.....Craig, how Do you feel about the very real loss of gun rights being proposed....

....We have an image problem Craig. We do not need the NRA saying"white mothers crying on TV is ratings gold" could she have said something more stupid? I do not think so.

Okay, I'll just sit around and be paranoid, fair enough?

What again do we have to spend money on to strengthen background checks? I mentioned digitizing not because it's law, but strengthening to you means everything is a-okay. Isn't that a great image builder. I believe we're both thinking that law may be changing, if it's in regard to 'strengthening' background checks, wouldn't that have to do with searchable data bases, not thumbing through old forms?

I think you and I are on the same page. You won't explain what strengthen means, and I am opposed to knee jerk reactions based on ratings gold. You want a better image, but won't explain how to get there, while I'm stuck with being paranoid enough to know that you won't be able to explain how throwing money at background checks will fix the image. Didn't the background check work perfectly, but the will to do a decent job wasn't there?

Sure, there are stupid statements. Why do you bother going through your various explanations and reasonings, when all that matters is a simple statement? There are many stupid statements made by the gun control crowd, why don't they create an image problem for the grabbers? Me, I wouldn't discount what a difficult and vital roll the NRA plays and is effective at.
Think about it. Every American courthouse, every airport, and most governmental offices of any size have metal detector screening with security guards present. Shouldnt the money be better spent on the same level of security for schools? Second, putting AR's on the Class III list is not an inherently bad idea. Nobody disputes that full auto on the list is a reasonable restriction. Problem is , how do you handle the million or so AR's already in the public domain? Not an easy answer for that. Last, I wish some forum members would stop with the ad hominem attacks. It is childish and counterproductive. Just sayin'.
We have better reporting on crimes than most states and that database is searchable. That is where our money goes in Colorado. They put more resources towards tracking the bad guys and making sure they do not buy through legal dealers.

Not into a database of gun buyers and the guns they purchase. That does not exist. How is that a bad thing? A few bucks for a transfer is not the end of my world.

That is what I mean by strengthen. The church shooter in TX was convicted and prohibited by law from owning firearms but passed his back ground check because the Air force did not report his crime. All I am suggesting is more accuracy and through reviews.

I appreciate the job the NRA does I do not appreciate the way they do it. Totally inappropriate comments on CNN as well as by Lapierre at CPAC. I want him to fight for my gun rights not talk about socialist conspiracy theories.
background checks mandated and originated at the federal level is the reason why the current system is so ineffectual...for background checks to be really valuable, they need to originate at the local level, move next to the state level and then finally to the federal level...the present system as it is now configured is ass backwards...

and yes, metal detector screening in all public places where mass murders may strike is an obvious, common sense and proven effective means of increasing public security...
THE OTHER DAY I NEEDED SOME QUICK ADVICE ON A TRICKY CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION!!! So I reasoned I could do one of the following:
a). Get on a city bus going through the working class district, sit in the back and ask the cleaning ladies.
b). Walk into a bar at midnight on Friday night and ask the local drunk.
c). Post the question on DGS for the local political ranters who somehow, on a website dedicated to technical issues, feel compelled to destroy every line with ad hominem attacks and poorly thought out BLATHER.

Well, I chose a and b because at least I'd get a coherent answer in relatively polite form from people who stayed on topic..and I can end the conversation - by getting ff the bus, or buy the drunk another drink.
Originally Posted By: Argo44
THE OTHER DAY I NEEDED SOME QUICK ADVICE ON A TRICKY CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION!!! So I reasoned I could do one of the following:
a). Get on a city bus going through the working class district, sit in the back and ask the cleaning ladies.
b). Walk into a bar at midnight on Friday night and ask the local drunk.
c). Post the question on DGS for the local political ranters who somehow, on a website dedicated to technical issues, feel compelled to destroy every line with ad hominem attacks and poorly thought out BLATHER.

Well, I chose a and b because at least I'd get a coherent answer in relatively polite form from people who stayed on topic.


A simple “This isn’t ‘Nam, there are rules” would have sufficed.


______________________________
p.s. you need to upgrade the bars you go to.
Hey Lonesome, knowing your love for great music, I figured you'd want to hear this one:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALGkQq3RJ7k>

About as useful as anything we're going to get on this subject from a group as diverse as we are...Geo
Originally Posted By: Geo. Newbern
Hey Lonesome, knowing your love for great music, I figured you'd want to hear this one:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALGkQq3RJ7k>

About as useful as anything we're going to get on this subject from a group as diverse as we are...Geo


I like it, Geo.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Throw in a bird from the turkey thread and a couple gallons of Irish whiskey and vodka and it’s called Thanksgiving dinner at my house. Minus the knives!


__________________________
Let me forget about today until tomorrow. Bob Dylan
Yes but which one is Walter? I have my pick.
Originally Posted By: SKB
....Not into a database of gun buyers and the guns they purchase. That does not exist. How is that a bad thing?...

....I appreciate the job the NRA does I do not appreciate the way they do it. Totally inappropriate comments on CNN as well as by Lapierre at CPAC. I want him to fight for my gun rights not talk about socialist conspiracy theories.

Fair enough, thanks for the follow up. The database that I was thinking could be model for the entire country, doesn't stop at the buyer and one particular firearm at a time, it also includes the seller. My understanding is it is quick and easy, convenient, and something that's sellable as reasonable. My point has consistently been, it's the beginnings of a registry, just ineffective to this point because it's not national. I'm not sure why any money would be better spent on your proposal, isn't it just up to folks now to be held to doing their jobs?

It's absolutely none of my business, but my guessing opinion is that the time and extent of taking concerns privately to the NRA would likely be tiny compared to the effort and optics of 'pro' folks criticizing their nearly lone voice in public. It might be seen by some as hugely contributing to the image problem.
Originally Posted By: SKB
Your to dumb to continue on with lil k.


Very good Stevie... here we have someone who doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you"re" calling ME dumb! And this one shows us the problem with Colorado's legalization of marijuana:

Originally Posted By: SKB
Sounds like a dog that could judge charter well. Too bad to pooch missed.


And we have someone who says he IGNORES all of my posts once again responding to me. And then after telling us that you do not wish to continue with me, you go on to dishonestly respond to your twisting and lies about the NRA...

Originally Posted By: SKB
The stance of the NRA and the right wing conspiracies being spread over the last week were shameful. Calling the victims actors? Just sad it what it is.


... when after saying you would not continue with me, you said this:

Originally Posted By: SKB
The NRA did not say the victims were actors, that was said by that idiot Alex Jones and repeated by other idiots like you

http://fortune.com/2018/02/24/youtube-pulls-alex-jones-infowars-video/

The NRA was behind this gem:

"Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back.” while on CNN

Just sad........


Well, I've got news for you Stevie. I never said the victims were actors. But that won't stop you from being dishonest. A lot of ignorant things are being said on both sides of this issue. People on your Liberal Left are lying about the numbers of people who want severe 2nd Amendment restrictions. They are calling members and leadership of the NRA murderers for the huge sin of being protective of our Constitutional Rights, They are actually saying that gun owners should be rounded up and imprisoned. But we can't help noticing that you, strong NRA backer that you pretend to be, are only criticizing and denigrating the NRA again and again.

There is no question that the legacy media is exploiting crying white mothers in order to advance their anti-gun agenda. Where is their outrage about the hundreds of times as many teens who die because they are not mature enough to drive carefully and without texting? Where is their continuous outrage about the suicidal and homicidal side effects of SSRI's. Why don't we see CNN organizing protests and importing speakers about the massive quantities of illegal drugs that are killing thousands of teens?

I'm saying that it is high time that gun owners start asking these questions in order to expose the dishonesty and hypocrisy of the Liberal Left and their anti-gun agenda.

And it is high time that we expose FUDD's and closet Liberal Left guys like you who pretend to be on the side of the 2nd Amendment, but are continually attacking those who really are.
I believe in standing with my friends Craig. I also believe in speaking up when they error. a time and a place for everything and that was not the time or the place.
If you are looking for hypocrisy start in the mirror.
Argo44, I saw your post, and have seen similar comments from you in the past.

The more I see them, the more I wonder why you don't have anything constructive to offer other than criticism of occasional ad hominem attacks? There are a lot of nasty things being said about this matter from both sides on the News, in newspapers, and in social media. You and I both know this isn't unique to this website.

Passions run pretty high among many law abiding gun owners when people start blaming them for the actions of a madman. You can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater, and you can't claim that the 2nd Amendment permits you to shoot people in a crowded theater either. Either act will justifiably get you a prison sentence. We already have laws dealing with criminal use or procurement of firearms by mentally ill killers. Those laws were ignored for many months and after a multitude of warning signs in Parkland. So we are being told that we need still more laws that will only infringe upon he rights of those who would never do such acts.

Is it OK to be both defensive and suspicious of that?

I don't think it is mere coincidence that this thread started degenerating after Lefty Stevie SKB entered the fray. He and a number of other closet anti-NRA types have done all they can to disrupt 2nd Amendment type threads many times in the past. I keep wondering why we haven't yet heard the usual whining and bitching from SKB's pal Last Dollar. I personally feel that the best way to deal with Stevie's trolling is not calling him a "small minded twat" and a "lil prick" as he did when he said this:

Originally Posted By: SKB
No Dave you only crawl out of your hole to prove you are a lil prick. So everything is a fail. That is your answer. Go back Brietbart you nutter.

3.6% fail in CO Dave you small minded twat.

https://www.denverpost.com/2013/01/31/fe...ightest-in-u-s/


Gee, I wonder why things went downhill from there? I think the best way of dealing with SKB aka Lefty Stevie is by illuminating his hypocrisy, his twisting, his disdain for the Conservatives he pretends to support, and his long standing anti-NRA bent. I recognize that he and his kind do what they do in the hopes of causing enough disruption that the thread finally gets locked. I'll admit, it took me awhile to recognize that's what they were doing. They have a lot of people fooled around here, and they hate it when you uncover their dishonesty. It takes huge restraint to not respond in kind to their crap.

We need to have this discussion. Our Constitutional Rights are once again under attack. Putting our heads in the sand will only bring us to a day when discussing the technical aspects of old guns is all we are permitted to do... if that isn't banned as well.

So what are your solutions or ideas? Do you agree with me that while this is a serious problem that needs to be addressed, there are many other things that demand attention that would save far more lives than banning semi-auto AR-15's?
Originally Posted By: SKB
If you are looking for hypocrisy start in the mirror.


Do you have something to back up that statement Stevie, or are you just trying more of your dishonest Liberal Left twisting in the hopes of getting this thread locked?

And once again, you show us what you really are when you get riled up about me pointing out the hypocrisy of the Liberal Left. Pretty easy to see what side you are really on. The question is why you can't be courageous enough to finally admit it, and why you feel it is necessary to attempt to hide it. Maybe you are sensible enough to realize that an anti-gun gunsmith might chase away some business if those attitudes ever got out.

I sure wish you would go back to pretending to IGNORE me since you have nothing to offer but twisting and criticism of the NRA.

By the way, your statements about the safety and security of the present system of Background Checks isn't completely accurate. Why don't you tell the nice folks what happens to the FFL's Bound Ledger Books when someone like Stan gives up his FFL or retires? And why don't you tell them about the ATF Agents who were demanding and photocopying Bound Ledger Books from gun shop owners in Alaska a few years ago during the Obama Administration. If you were really an NRA member, you might be aware of such things.

If you'd rather not answer, you could always fall back on pretending to IGNORE me. I don't do anything to damage your credibility, but you sure do.
And here's a question for the Liberals who keep telling us that a huge majority of of the population wants more gun control...

If it is true that a large percentage of the population... a huge majority as high as 93% really wants that... then why do politicians who turn their backs on us and vote for more gun laws so frequently get voted out of office?

We were told the same lies in 2013 after the Newtown shootings, but many of those who sided with the anti-gunners got their asses handed to them in the 2014 mid-term elections and in special elections. The NRA doesn't go into the voting booth and force huge majorities to vote against their beliefs.

Are the Liberals really trying to tell us that the huge majorities of the public that supposedly are demanding more gun laws are then voting against the politicians who try to pass more gun laws? Does that even make sense to anyone but guys like Stevie?

This is just more proof that you really shouldn't trust anything that a Liberal says. To them, any lie that advances their Leftist Socialist agenda is perfectly OK.
I'll tell you exactly what happens when you retire or close shop like Stan did. You send your bound books to the ATF and the put them in one of the many semi-trailers they and someday when they catch they hope to put those records on microfiche. I believe are somewhere in the neighborhood of 35 years behind give or take. You can not search Microfiche in its normal format and most records are hand written.

In Alaska(Walter Earl's shop I believe) The ATF agents wanted to take his books from his shop and make copies. He fought them and I think he won.

In my shop my books had pictures taken of them.

Is the back ground check anywhere near perfect? Heck no. I still do not see why we should abandon it. We should improve it.

If you think you can prove the ATF has a searchable gun data base you should fully pursue it. You could become a rich man. Would be the biggest story in years.....only true in your dreams though. What you fail to understand is a whole bunch of the ATF and other Federal agents are very conservative. They would never keep something like that quiet. I did some contract work at the US Marshall's office in Cheyenne in the 90's. Those guys had pictures of Clinton, who was the President at the time, on the wall with a target super imposed on his face. It would impossible to pull that off at the ATF. I don't love those guys but I have to work with them. They are just people and I find if you treat them with some respect they are fine. All business but very professional and just doing a job for the most part. I'm sure some have an axe to grind but I have not encountered that as of yet.
"first, the police came for the guns...then they came for the communists, jews, gypsies and catholic priests...then they came for me...but, i was helpless...because i had given up my gun"...
I didn't say that the ATF has a searchable database Stevie. I hope all of those Bound Ledger Books are molding away in semi-trailers as you suggest. And I want to make sure it stays that way. So why would they bother to eventually put those Bound Book records which contain name, address, and details about the gun that was purchased on microfiche if it would not be searchable and of no use to them? And how do you know for certain that there is no program to digitize them going on? Do you work there? Haven't we all heard that the NSA records every phone call made in this country? That's a whole lot more data than the number of guns that have been sold since the GCA of 1968. By the way, one gun shop in Alaska refused to hand over his Bound Books to be copied, but others complied with the illegal demand.

Interesting to hear that your own books had pictures taken of them. And very disturbing if it was pictures of anything but the front covers.

I support the present system and feel it is much better than the old system of waiting periods. But I also recognize that it has serious flaws that are permitting felons and mentally ill people to get firearms. And I have many times complained about the fact that tens of thousands of buyers who failed the NICS checks walk out without any repercussions, and then go on to either steal a gun or get a straw buyer to purchase it for them.

Because of that, I understand that Universal Background Checks are only a road to a National Gun Registry, and it will still permit criminals to get guns just as they do now when they cannot pass a NICS check. It will also impose needless costs upon law abiding gun owners when they give or otherwise transfer guns to their kids or grand-kids. Have we heard about even one of these mass shooters who got their guns from private sources other than Adam Lanza who killed his own mother to steal her guns?

And I think we all know how all of those hard nosed Conservatives in government jobs were jumping up to report the IRS targeting of Conservatives under Obama or the FBI spying on a Republican Presidential candidate (also under Obama)when they should have been gathering up and arresting Nikolas Cruz and tens of thousands of people who illegally attempted to buy a firearm. Those failures only lead us to more shootings and more cries for restrictions on the rights of law abiding citizens.

Considering how upset you get if anyone here says anything negative about Liberal Left Democrats, and how frequently you have jumped up to attack pro-gun Republicans, I think if you really saw a picture of Bill Clinton with a target superimposed upon his face in the Cheyenne U.S. Marshall's Office, you would have reported them to the Secret Service. I can't prove that. But it is my opinion based entirely on what you post here.
What is your opinion of the now the 2nd Trump in a week calling to raise the age to purchase a long gun? A bunch lefties don't ya think?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...g-a8229551.html


I think I can the hypocrisy already....
Originally Posted By: SKB
What is your opinion of the now the 2nd Trump in a week calling to raise the age to purchase a long gun?....

....I think I can the hypocrisy already....

Personally, I don't like it. But, if it can be equivocated with bump stocks or ar's, then what's the big deal? Since I'm already 22yrs. old, it would bother me. Hmmm, doesn't work. Maybe, if a bill is drafted, we would have to read the fine print. I can promise one thing with a hundred and ten percent certainty, not an ounce of image will be improved. The waterworks on cnn is not about our humanism, it's a tactic.
state law should determine firearms purchase criteria...the feds have no business infringing on the right of citizens to keep and bear arms...
Originally Posted By: SKB
What is your opinion of the now the 2nd Trump in a week calling to raise the age to purchase a long gun? A bunch lefties don't ya think?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...g-a8229551.html


I think I can the hypocrisy already....


No, I don't think the Trumps are a bunch of Lefties. And no, I don't think they should even be suggesting such an idea until other avenues are explored, (such as SSRI's side effects and not enforcing laws which are already on the books) and until we address other serious issues that kill far more people than the small number killed by AR-15's.

You and I both know that your gal, the Liberal Left Democrat Hillary Clinton, had she won the election, would be pushing for far more restrictions than an increase in the legal age to purchase a long gun. She wouldn't even be talking to the NRA or attempting to balance the rights of gun owners with the totally unrelated problem of mentally disturbed teens engaging in mass shootings.

If you could be honest for a moment, you would also admit that Trump is under extreme attack and enormous pressure to do something. He is in the classic no-win situation. If he stands totally firm with the NRA, he will be called a murderer and unfit for office. Liberals like you would tear him down even more than you do now. If he were to turn totally against the people who elected him, he would be seen as a turncoat, and Liberals like you would still be trying every hour of every day to find some reason to impeach him. And if he searches for some middle ground and shows a willingness to try bipartisan compromise, he will be criticized for going against campaign promises to his base, and he will be pilloried by Liberals for not doing enough. And any concession, no matter how slight, will be exploited by Lefties like you in an attempt to say there is no difference between the Parties when it comes to attacking the gun rights of law abiding citizens.

Personally, I hope he comes to his senses and understands that Liberals like you cannot be trusted. If he gives an inch on gun control, history proves to us that your kind, the Liberal Left, will only be hungry for more and more restrictions. I will certainly contact the White House to voice this concern.

No matter what you'd like us to believe Stevie, there is still a huge difference between your precious Liberal Left Democrats and Conservatives when it comes to preserving our 2nd Amendment Rights. But you will never be honest enough to admit that fact.

P.S.-- How you make all of these replies after you tell us you are done debating me and that you IGNORE my posts is simply amazing. But please keep 'em coming. I want your potential customers to see the real you. Personally, I feel there are too many good pro-2nd Amendment gunsmith's to ever consider dealing with one who supports those politicians who relentlessly work to take away my right to keep and bear arms.
So back to the devolution of Southern California.
As noted, even 3rd world schools protect the children

https://www.dailynews.com/2018/02/16/in-...licy-heightens/
From July 1, 2014, to June 30, 2017, 70 handguns, 16 rifles/shotguns and 1,196 knives were confiscated at LAUSD schools.

The United Teachers Los Angeles want to end random searches, and "some activists" want to remove Resource Officers from the schools. They must really hate the kids.
http://www.newsweek.com/school-security-guard-helped-thwart-shooting-police-816854
You are not only a hypocrite but a Moron as well. I voted for Trump. I have have mixed feelings about his performance but would love to see him succeed. I fully understand the position he is in and I do not feel he is a lefty either. His proposal on raising the long gun is the definition of a poorly thought out gun law. Something I would like Republicans to refrain from since I tend to vote for them. I do not support Liberal Democrats and never have. I have no issues with moderates of either party. Extremist like yourself, and those on the Left I have no tolerance for. I do not buy in to this culture war crap you thrive on. I have friends with a wide variety of viewpoints and can happily discuss issues with them. You may try it sometime. You could find the world is not near as black and white as you paint it to be. Try opening that closed tiny mind you have.
That's almost unbelievable... or it should be. I hope everyone takes a moment to click on Drew's link. But I'll bet we can all guess which side of the political spectrum wishes to stop the obviously very effective program of random metal detector searches of Los Angeles students.

And I'll bet it isn't from Donald Trump's side of the aisle.
Yeah sure Stevie, I believe you voted for Trump, and I believe Jagermeister voted for Trump, and I believe in the tooth fairy too, after all the time and effort you guys expended bashing him prior to the election.

Hell, if it will make you feel better, I'll even say I believe that King Brown became a U.S. citizen prior to the election just so he could vote for Trump.

But I'll bet if I told you that I voted for Obama and Hillary Clinton after all of the time I spent criticizing them, you wouldn't believe me either. And you'd be justified in that.

Again, if you could just be honest for once... you might say that Trump did not propose ANY new gun laws until he was relentlessly pressured to do something to stop school shootings. But you won't. You haven't told us what you want him to do. You have only been critical of him and the NRA, or have been attempting to hold him up as being just as bad as the Democrats because of some of the proposals he's made. And I'll bet you won't be donating any of your gunsmithing income to the NRA so they can help pro-gun candidates win in the mid-tern elections.

Keep up with the name-calling, and you can expect a stern lecture from some of the guys who think faux manners and civility is more important than the truth Stevie!
What you know of the truth? Nothing from what you post on here. You live in a fantasy land pure and simple. I do not know a single person with a manufacturing FFL that could bring themselves to cast a vote for anyone but Trump. Math even a simpleton such as yourself should be able to understand.
Uh-huh, sure Stevie. That's why you spent so much time bashing him prior to the election, and even after the election. And you say I live in a fantasy land!

If you were really a moderate Republican, as you claim, one would think you would have been very supportive of Trump just prior to the election when the choice was down to him or Hillary. If you were really supportive of the extremely successful programs and tactics of the NRA that preserved our rights, secured the Heller and McDonald victories, quadrupled membership since the Clinton onslaught, and helped elect a solidly pro-gun President and Congress, one would think you could go back and produce proof of that from your thousands of posts here. But all we get is lip service and wild claims.

We have quite a few guys here who have every excuse under the sun for voting for anti-gun Democrats. Some of them actually admit it and don't think a vote for an anti-gun Democrat makes them personally in any way anti-gun themselves. Many of them say they have me on IGNORE because they needed a way to hide from their own words and actions. Some of them actually do a pretty good job of pretending to IGNORE me. But I still address all of them because they have repeatedly shown me that they all peek... just like you.
A fantasy land perpetuated by the right wing conspiracy theories you thrive upon is where you reside.


With the campaign Trump ran lots of people bashed him then voted for him. See most of his cabinet for examples. He is an easy guy to bash. Brash and narcissistic as they come but that does not mean he was not the best choice on offer election night. I do not need to support everything Trump does to vote for him. That is blindly following, you know, being a useful idiot as they saying goes. You come to mind....not able to think for yourself and a party dupe.
Still twisting away, huh Stevie? It is true that a lot of people who eventually voted for Trump were bashing him during a long campaign until he whittled the field down. He wasn't my first choice until I went to hear him speak in the spring of 2016. But you were still bashing him when the choice was down to two people... him and Hillary.

You wisely didn't come right out and endorse Hillary. But real live actual pro-gun guys were not bashing Trump like you were at a time when all of the dishonest polls had many believing that we were going to probably have an extreme anti-gunner in the White House.

And that is what is bothering the hell out of you... the notion that I can indeed think for myself, read between the lines, and don't fall for bullshit.

But instead of continuing your efforts to get this thread locked by name calling, perhaps you could do something productive and tell us your brilliant solutions to this latest anti-gun onslaught. I've given mine, but you seem to be more concerned with the fake polls by CNN and providing links to show that some Republicans are reluctantly supporting some restrictions than getting our lawmakers to see that there are issues far more serious that kill hundreds of times more teens than the status quo of our gun rights.

Debating whether I will ever believe that you are a moderate Republican who supports the NRA and pro-gun candidates is simply a waste of time. My opinions are totally based upon what you have posted here in the past. Flailing and making lame excuses isn't going to change my mind, or the mind of anyone else who has been paying attention to what you have posted over the years. Or perhaps you'd like everyone to believe that me, jOe, Dave K, craigd, etc. are in a wicked Right Wing conspiracy to unfairly depict you for no good reason.

Ever the useful tool you are. Somethings never change. You have been exposed for the fraud you are. Bad gun control bills from a Republican are fine.....tough spot don't ya know? Bad gun bill from a Democrat well what an assault on the Constitution. The truth is a bad gun bill is a bad bill no matter who puts out the idea. You are nothing more than a follower. M

I love how now you are all sensitive and name calling deeply offends you now. Your a typical bully who cries when someone stands up to him. If only you would call me Libtard one more time.......
Originally Posted By: SKB
....Bad gun control bills from a Republican are fine.....tough spot don't ya know? Bad gun bill from a Democrat well what an assault on the Constitution. The truth is a bad gun bill is a bad bill no matter who puts out the idea. You are nothing more than a follower....

It's very possible that the bad thing is equivocating. Do you think it's possible for a Republican to put out a bad gun control bill that's a tenth as bad as a 'good' dem gun control bill?

Remember, you are the one here that is saying that 'something' is going to have to happen, we just can't go on like this. Kind of like the NRA thing, there's nothing wrong with having some convictions, but with friends like you, who needs enemies?
In the previous page you mentioned about how worldly and enlightened you are to have friends on the left. Here's a thought, don't look to a President, because you are looking for a friend. Look at and support his policy, not his enemies in the name of feelings.
So who's crying Stevie? And what are you doing to keep the Republicans you pretend to support from making the mistake of passing any bad gun bills? Your sole purpose here has been to hurl insults, bash the NRA, and to post links to try to show that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to infringing upon the 2nd Amendment. But if you were honest, you'd admit that the baby steps taken by some Republicans are a small fraction of what is being advanced by your Democrats.

Nothing has been passed yet. They are still very early in the discussion phase. Have you contacted your Representatives or the White House? Have you cut a check to help the NRA? You can call me a fraud all you want, but I have always been critical of any politician, Republican or Democrat, who has infringed upon our 2nd Amendment Rights. Unfortunately, we have sometimes had to choose between the lesser of two evils. When my own Republican Senator came up for re-election last year, I simply didn't vote for either candidate for U.S. Senator, and I e-mailed my Republican Senator to tell him why he would never get a vote from me after he supported the Obama/Biden proposals in 2013.

I don't think that's simply being a follower or a useful tool. That is using my vote as intelligently as I can. And by the way Stevie, your name calling has never offended me. I know you'd never do it to my face, and I'm not as thin skinned as you. But I have noticed that many here are offended by the name calling that often occurred in political and gun right threads. And I also noticed that it seemed as though people like you and guys like the other self described moderate Republican, your pal Last Dollar, liked to start the pissing contest ball rolling in the hopes of getting these important discussions locked. If you have a dumb idea such as requiring gun owners to keep all of their guns locked in safes, just say so. But I'm not going to take your trolling bait, and I hope others won't either.
Look Craig I call it like I see it. Crap ideas from Republicans currently. Sorry but it is what I see. I expect that from Democrats. Yes something does need to happen. How about the Republicans come up with some actual common sense suggestions. I would far prefer seeing money go to a better database of convicts than our President suggesting to raise the age limit for long guns.A terrible idea and not one I can support. Crap, crap, crap is what that is. Do you feel the policy Trump is currently suggesting is one to support? I do not. Not at all.
Come to The Denver show, happy to tell you what I think of you to your face. Believe me, it is not much.

I'm sorry I must have missed your criticism of current Republican gun control proposals. You are so good at quoting things, would you mind showing me? Oh that is right you can not due to being a fraud.

Useful idiot and a follower who has never had an original thought.
Originally Posted By: SKB
Look Craig I call it like I see it....

....How about the Republicans come up with some actual common sense suggestions....

....Crap, crap, crap is what that is. Do you feel the policy Trump is currently suggesting is one to support? I do not. Not at all.

I see absolutely no value in any common sense suggestions, based on the fact that for one dem to vote for it, it'll be laced with mountains of true crap. I am extremely confident that this President knows exactly the buttons to push, to have everyone walk away and get absolutely nothing done on the issue. I also believe that though it will fall on deaf ears, he has the bully pulpit to pass some blame to the gun control legislators.
I do not put a smoke and mirrors maneuver past him.

Loyal as always I see. At times I find that an admirable trait. Other times, not so much.
You don't have to go very far back in today's posts to find where I disagreed with Trump's ideas to concede some ground to the anti-gunners Stevie. But you never were very good at reading with comprehension. Does it really bother you that I still think his proposals are only a fraction of what your Liberal Left Democrats would pass if they could? Or is it more important for you to try to paint me as the same kind of fraud you are?

If you really are too agenda driven to find it, I'll QUOTE it for you. Let me know if you can't find it since it was only several hours ago. Hint: It was in post #506500. I hope that narrows it down enough for you. I haven't criticized Republican Marco Rubio in this thread yet, but I haven't attacked Democrat Chuck Schumer either. I'm sure you can find something wrong with that in your vain and disingenuous attempt to portray yourself as a strong pro-gun rights Republican.

I still don't think you'd do your name calling to my face, but as I said, I really don't care. I've seen your picture, and you look pretty small and frail to me. I used to call your behavior "beer muscles" when I worked as a bartender. But in your case, it might be "bong muscles", which would be unusual since most stoners are pretty peaceful. But none of that changes who and what you've supported and who and what you've attacked over the years here Stevie. None of your insults or trolling is going to change that.

By the way, Trump initially proposed little more than tightening up the background check system and also doing more about preventing the mentally ill from getting guns. He was met with howls of inaction and being a tool of the NRA who didn't care about our kids. Yet when he proposes something more to assuage those horrific public opinion polls, you want to try to equate him with Democrats or say he may be worse since he is a Republican. Like all the other talking heads on CNN and MSNBC, he could do no right in your eyes if he cured cancer, and eliminated world hunger and war. So tell us what you think he should do that would preserve our rights AND also bolster that horrible image problem you say we have.

We all see where you're coming from, and it ain't Moderate Republican-ville.
Originally Posted By: SKB
....Loyal as always I see. At times I find that an admirable trait. Other times, not so much.

Look, I can't stand your crap! Just kidding Steve. If there are only two candidates for a position that's important to me, you absolutely can bet that I'll pick the lesser of two evils if it comes to that. What matters to me is I think this fellow is easily the most conservative President of my voting lifetime, including Reagan. And, I can't think of another office holder that's ever been so transparent.

That doesn't mean I have the slightest bit of interest to hang out with him, nor want him to be my friend. Criticize away, it's okay, like you I just have opinions, but puhleez don't say you're voting for sanders next time because he has admirable traits.
this pissing contest is boring...
Happy to buy you lunch tough guy. I am 6'2", 195 lbs. Your typical waif. I have told much bigger men than myself what I think of them.
I'm glad I have some time this morning. I've been largely ignoring this thread but I think it's time to read it start to finish.
Originally Posted By: SKB
Happy to buy you lunch tough guy. I am 6'2", 195 lbs. Your typical waif. I have told much bigger men than myself what I think of them.


I am very unimpressed Stevie. By the looks of things, those bigger men you mouthed off to already rearranged your face. But I do respect what damage you might do to me with your fingernails and ponytail.

When James takes the time to read this entire post, I'm pretty sure he'll notice, along with others, how you tried and failed to disrupt it with trolling and name calling, and how your last several posts moved to avoidance of questions, and morphed into twisting, and shifting, and attempting to change the subject rather than accurately address fallacious charges you made about me. Even the questions you answered about FFL's Bound Record Books didn't do anything to bolster your excuse as to why we shouldn't be concerned with what is being done with them... especially the part about ATF agents photographing your own books.

Wow! Nothing to be concerned about there! At least that FFL in Alaska refused and fought back. You... not so much.

And I'm still amused by your cock-and-bull story about the U.S. Marshall's office that openly displayed pictures of then-President Bill Clinton with bulls-eyes superimposed on his face. Let's just say I'm skeptical that you would tolerate something like that, to put it mildly.

Now that Trump appears to be backing away from earlier suggestions that he might consider raising the legal age to purchase a long gun, you are silent, as you've always been when he has been on our side. But yesterday, you were most gleeful to put up hot links to support your contention that he is bad for us... maybe even worse than an anti-gun Democrat. Same thing goes for today's news that Speaker Paul Ryan doesn't seem near as willing to infringe upon the 2nd Amendment Rights of law abiding gun owners as your Liberal Left Democrats.

That's what was especially amusing about your repeated and frantic attempts to portray yourself as a big bad kick-ass moderate Republican. It wasn't quite as disingenuous as one of your Liberal friend's oft repeated lines that he has never once seen any anti-gun sentiment posted on this board. But it was close. I suppose it is all my fault for paying attention to what you've posted over the years. I guess that's how the term "Shoot the messenger" came to pass. I'd like to think the reason you've been so quiet today is because you've been busy writing or e-mailing the White House and your elected representatives, and making a donation to the NRA. But more likely you've been busy searching for links to denigrate them and equate them with Democrats... again.

Me? I sent another e-mail to the White House, my Congressman, and both of my Senators to ask them once again to look into the link between SSRI Anti-depressant side effects, and these mentally ill teens. Why? Because I saw on the news that there have been over 500 more threats nationwide by teens to shoot up or blow up their schools just since the shooting in Parkland. This problem isn't going away anytime soon, and it isn't happening because AR-15's are whispering in their ears. If gun owners choose to sit on their hands at a time like this, they shouldn't be surprised when the day comes that they are turning their semi-auto guns in as in Australia... and not just AR-15's.

Here's the Liberal Left Democrat's idea of "Common Sense" gun legislation... or what Stevie call a Right Wing conspiracy theory:





Another victim of the progressive agenda; this time N.J. in a school with unarmed non-law enforcement "safety officers"
An Iraq war vet devoted to his students forced to have a psychiatric exam for wanting to protect the kids, and even the teens see past the PC BS
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaki...e-20180227.html

Does anyone really want the government, with all the competence and compassion of the VA, deciding who is mentally ill and what medicines they should take? It really didn't work out so well under the Soviet system
https://academic.oup.com/schizophreniabulletin/article/36/1/33/1871265

More frightening reading on what our Public Schools are doing to our children
http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/21/13-ways-public-schools-incubate-mental-instability-kids/
I will still buy you lunch and tell you what I think of you sweet heart. Don't run now.......you fraud.

I have known for a very long time not to poke the bear when it comes to law enforcement. Did not bother me in least. Do you remember the first amendment? What do I care? I got a good laugh out of it. You might try that yourself.
Can you post more about how gun control is fine if comes from Republicans? Love that....you fraud.

You are the one with the threats. I offered to buy you lunch and tell you off. I'm not scared.
Dumba$$ you are the one threatening. I am offering you lunch......chillax as the kids would say.
Not running from you sweet heart. Can you please explain why Republican gun control is fine? Inquiring minds want to know.

I will still buy you lunch and tell you what I think of you....on my dime.
Is this all because I showed you for the fraud you are Princess?

I answered the AR-15 questions pages back. Don't want one, don't need one. Would never know they were gone until someone told me. Won't work on them or touch any plastic gun. Happy?

I'll still buy lunch.
You are too funny sweetness. Must have been really upsetting for you to be caught promoting gun control. You FRAUD!!!!



I'll still buy lunch darling.
Originally Posted By: SKB
....Can you please explain why Republican gun control is fine? Inquiring minds want to know....

In case you haven't noticed, the age raising that you were all worried about has slipped off the consideration list. Our President has signaled a shift from the previous, maybe because one difference is that he listens?

Also note too, his NRA comments. He can see the bigger picture, and called for his colleagues not to do the knee jerk jump ship and distance themselves. Did you notice, he was able to give a subtle general criticism of the NRA, but didn't go on and on, sensationalize and nit pic? Did you notice how he didn't waffle on his support for the NRA, and had clarity that no other politician would?

How would your favorite dem be handling this situation?
Love your fraudulent ways sweetness.

Happy to buy you lunch.
Is this supposed to scare me? It does not. I did not build my business by catering to wingnuts like yourself. How is life in the bunker lil k? Get all your provisions buried for Armageddon?

Still happy to buy you lunch and tell you what I think of you to your face.

You are getting repetitive though. Why don't you just quote my words? I stand by them.




When I chose to surround my self with things like this why would ever care to touch an AR? Junk that I will never miss.

Sure seems like someone has her panties in bunch over being caught being a fraud.......

OK Dummy I'll play






When I chose to surround my self with things like this why would ever care to touch an AR? Junk that I will never miss.

Sure seems like someone has her panties in bunch over being caught being a fraud.......
Let me help lil k.









When I chose to surround my self with things like this why would ever care to touch an AR? Junk that I will never miss.

Sure seems like someone has her panties in bunch over being caught being a fraud.......

Happy to buy you lunch sweetness. It may make up for proving you to be the fraud you.
My oh my, what big keyboard muscles you have Stevie. Did I say you were running from me? Or just that you were running your mouth? And please show us where I said that Republican gun control was fine. And just where did I get caught promoting gun control? How does you attempting to put words in my mouth make me a fraud Stevie? You still have severe reading comprehension problems... such as seeing a threat from me.

Pretty pathetic to see you expending so much energy attempting to get this thread locked Stevie. Why don't you try doing something constructive for gun rights for a change? I'll bet you wouldn't have been so frantic about attempting to portray yourself as a big-time Trump supporter if buzz hadn't mentioned what comments like yours did to Zumbo's career. I'm hardly the only one to see the real SKB:

Originally Posted By: buzz
You are a gunsmith and best be careful what you say about gun control, even the AR-15.......remember Jim Zumbo? He got fired from the Outdoor network AND Outdoor Life magazine for his statements about the AR-15.


Does it really look like I'm running away from you Stevie? Or are you still trying to do as you and your pal Last Dollar did so many times, and disrupt any gun rights threads in the hopes of getting it locked? Or are you just trying to be funny?

I must say, you are doing a great job of showing potential customers how sincere you are about preserving gun rights Stevie. I hope folks understand that your repetitive frantic nonsense is just the old tactic of attempting to disrupt any gun rights thread with off-topic Bullshit and attempts to start a shit-storm in the hopes of getting it locked.

You could always resort to the old fallback position of crying to Dave Weber. Hopefully he'll read the thread before locking it, to see the sad and immature little game you're playing. Too bad you couldn't expend as much energy doing something to preserve gun rights Stevie.

It is making me nervous to have some little fairy with a ponytail calling me sweetheart, sweetness, and darling...
The funny thing is, I don’t have an AR-15 and didn’t ever want one....that is until now. Now that they want to take my constitutional right to own one, I now want one and I’m going to buy one even though I have no need. I bet AR-15 sales will now go up because there will be other folks who feel just like me. Abolishing Americans constitutional rights is a criminal act by our legislature , in my opinion. Constitutional rights are sacred and legislating them away will do nothing to stop evil or the mentally unsound. That’s the bottom line, punishing the law abiding citizen by chipping away constitutional rights for something that will have no return.....that’s gun control.
They still bore me to tears but I am perfectly fine with you owning one Buzz. I also find raising the age limit to buy a gun to be gun control, do you?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-says-trump-still-backs-raising-age-194000489.html


Today the White House says it still backs 21 YO age limit to buy long a gun. I do not support this change. I would like to see better ideas from Republicans myself.
I am against any form of gun control, including increasing the age limit. If the government will send an 18 yo to war, as they did sending those young men to the jungles of Vietnam, as well as to many other battlefields, before and since, then they should allow that same age group to purchase firearms. This N. Cruz is clearly of unsound mind. He could have just as easily have committed his heinous crime at age 21. As I said earlier, the government cannot legislate away mental illness or evil and that’s what they are trying to do with gun control. It won’t work.
Yes, exactly.
Originally Posted By: SKB
....I would like to see better ideas from Republicans myself.

Maybe, the only idea that would improve their image would be to turn dem?
It appears from your last 20-some posts that your own "better idea" is denigrating Trump, Republicans, and the NRA... along with childish trolling and attempts to disrupt this thread by starting a shit-storm.

It hasn't worked like it used to, did it Stevie? You could have spent all that time e-mailing your concerns to the White House and your elected representatives, but you chose another path today. I surely hope your customers pay close attention to the little charade you played here today. Very educational and revealing!

I'm not making any excuses for ANY Republican who gives up ANY ground to the anti-gunners. But if Trump stands firm in the end, those dishonest polls and public sentiment you are so concerned about only get worse in YOUR eyes. And if he gives up any ground at all, we will have you gleefully posting your links to show what a bad guy he is... as you just did once again.

But in all this time, we have not seen one single link from you to show the much more extreme measures your Liberal Left Democrats are pushing. Those are things you mock as conspiracy theories... even as you admit to allowing ATF Agents to photograph your FFL Bound Ledger Books.

Originally Posted By: SKB
In Alaska(Walter Earl's shop I believe) The ATF agents wanted to take his books from his shop and make copies. He fought them and I think he won.

In my shop my books had pictures taken of them.


Originally Posted By: SKB
I did not build my business by catering to wingnuts like yourself. How is life in the bunker lil k? Get all your provisions buried for Armageddon?


You could help by providing some better ideas, contacting Trump and your representatives, and donating to the NRA. But we can all see that you'd rather play this childish game of attempting to disrupt another gun rights thread. That's not any fraud or twisting from me. Your last 20-some posts here betray you Stevie.

Thank you for proving my point. Here's another evil right wing conspiracy theory-- Advertising for the 2017 Australian National Firearms Amnesty. That's not an AR-15 in the ad Stevie. The anti-gunners are playing the long game too!



Did you notice that part of the CC reciprocity the Republican house passed included better back ground checks? Seems smart to me. Part of this is playing the long game Craig. That sells......
Still loyal as ever Craig....even for a bad idea. It is not about attacking Trump, I really do not want to see young people wait to be able to join our sport.
Originally Posted By: buzz
I am against any form of gun control, including increasing the age limit. If the government will send an 18 yo to war, as they did sending those young men to the jungles of Vietnam, as well as to many other battlefields, before and since, then they should allow that same age group to purchase firearms. This N. Cruz is clearly of unsound mind. He could have just as easily have committed his heinous crime at age 21. As I said earlier, the government cannot legislate away mental illness or evil and that’s what they are trying to do with gun control. It won’t work.


If you want to get back at members of government insist on age 21 before military enlistment. If you tie this requirement to any gun control the politicians will shit their pants and quickly retreat. What would be even more frightening to them is replacement of enlisted service by compulsory military service for all young people. Boy that would really send them packing.
Take your eye off this BBS for a little while, it sure can go sideways. Careful Steve, remember when Amarillo went nuts. It is just a chat room...Geo
Buzz, There are federal regulations against buying heroin. Does that make you want to go out and lay in a supply?
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Buzz, There are federal regulations against buying heroin. Does that make you want to go out and lay in a supply?
Let me ask you this, what does heroin have to do with gun control and the 2nd Amendment?? I think that’s what we have been talking about for 26 pages unless I missed something. crazy
Originally Posted By: SKB
Still loyal as ever Craig....even for a bad idea. It is not about attacking Trump, I really do not want to see young people wait to be able to join our sport.

You made this comment immediately after your cc smart long game sells comment.

If I'm not mistaken, that cc reciprocity act has an age minimum of 21yrs. I understand the reciprocity act argument fits your position about 'strengthening' background checks, but does it help your young people argument? Is it helpful to frame the discussion of restricting a Constitutional Right to things 'we want to see' and 'our sport'? It may be better to defend a right rather than have dueling wants, and be handicapped by an unaddressed image problem?

Did you catch that comment on the 'gunbroker' thread? Seems there is some requirement to use leadsonline to transfer. Is that yet another model for establishing a de facto registry, in the name of 'strengthening' the background check?
Originally Posted By: buzz
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Buzz, There are federal regulations against buying heroin. Does that make you want to go out and lay in a supply?
Let me ask you this, what does heroin have to do with gun control and the 2nd Amendment?? I think that’s what we have been talking about for 26 pages unless I missed something. crazy

I think what was meant was that if Colorado said they were ending their pot experiment on April 1st., there would be a run on pot too. I bet even if it was an April fool joke, the snowflakes would make a run on pot just on the rumor.
Federal law has not changed Craig, must be 21 to posses a handgun. Can not make the reciprocity law with a lower age than the age of possession. So are you saying reciprocity should have included lowering the handgun possession age? That would have been awful tough to get through even the House.

The Fix NICS attachment has no registry provision I know of. I can not imagine a registry getting past Paul Ryan, but then maybe he is a deep under cover liberal.
Originally Posted By: Geo. Newbern
Take your eye off this BBS for a little while, it sure can go sideways. Careful Steve, remember when Amarillo went nuts. It is just a chat room...Geo


Big difference between this one and that one Geo. That was two guys who had a disagreement that escalated to extremes. I can respect the notion that neither guy was willing to blink or back down. They weren't attempting to disrupt any gun rights threads in the hopes of causing a shit-storm and getting it locked, as Stevie, Last Dollar, and other Liberal Left trolls did so many times in the past. I'm sorry I took their bait so many times. And they weren't posting a bunch of off-topic fluff and baseless twisting in order to drive their previous denigrating of the NRA and other crap off the front page after it was pointed out that they might be hurting their own future business. Considering the importance of preserving our 2nd Amendment Rights, didn't you also feel that he would have been better off not posting anything at all if he couldn't make any positive contributions?

By the way, what did you think of Stevie's admission that he permitted the ATF Agents to photograph his Bound Ledger Books? As a lawyer, do you think they had the legal right to do that? And do you feel he should have refused their totally inappropriate request or demand?

Originally Posted By: SKB
In Alaska(Walter Earl's shop I believe) The ATF agents wanted to take his books from his shop and make copies. He fought them and I think he won.

In my shop my books had pictures taken of them.


I think that's big and very disturbing news, and it should make us wonder just how widespread that practice is or was. Of course, noticing things like that, and those huge piles of sporting firearms that suddenly became illegal in Australia will get you branded as a conspiracy nut by Stevie. Here's a full page ad (or conspiracy theory) that appeared in Australian newspapers in 2017. Schindler's List anyone?

Originally Posted By: SKB
....So are you saying reciprocity should have included lowering the handgun possession age?....

....The Fix NICS attachment has no registry provision I know of....

Naw, all I was pointing out was that you used the example to sell your long game. Since it's a long game, it would seem nice to have some dots connected. How does the ole image get improved by splitting hairs between inaction and non action?

I don't believe I have mentioned NICS, fixed or unfixed. I just think there're different models for a universal registry being trialled at this time, and think of what we could do with a registry if we could only get a non narcissist in place that makes us feel better. Isn't mentioning an image problem exactly the same as saying the other side has a long game, and a short game, and a medium game? I'll bet they'll happily hand out participation trophies.
You do not understand the issue as usual. Mr. Earle fought the ATF over them REMOVING the books from he shop. He did not stop them from accessing the information in them. The law states the books must remain on premises. That is the issue. The ATF can spend all the time they want in your shop looking over your books and pretty much anything else they want to look at. Pictures? No law against that I know of. I think you should open a shop lil k and challenge the ATF at every turn. You will not have the doors open for long.

When does the bid story you broke come out over on info-wars?
Improved back ground checks is the same as the fix NICS bill and was attached to the bill House Republicans passed. Good stuff I thought.
So then small Stevie, it appears that you are telling us that your earlier assertions that the only information the ATF has on a gun purchase is whether it was a handgun or long gun is wrong.

Originally Posted By: SKB
By Federal law any Government body associated with your back ground check is prohibited from entering the information into a searchable database. When you buy a gun they have no idea what you except if it is a long gun or a handgun. Not the make, model, serial# or caliber. Those records stay with the FFL holder for 20 years or until he closes shop.


If, as you say, there is nothing preventing them from photographing your books, then compiling a registry would be pretty simple. We already have the technology to scan handwriting and convert it into searchable digital records. Why would they even want photographs of your books if you weren't doing anything illegal... and I assume you weren't? Apparently, data and ownership of even pre-1968 guns owned by your customers has been removed from your shop in the form of photographs.

So much for the notion that the government could never know who owned the guns sold prior to 1968. I didn't break any big stories... but I think you did.

What exactly is the difference, in your little mind, between removing those Bound Ledger Books from a gun shop to photocopy them, and photographing them inside the shop while the owner stands by and permits it without question or protest? Walter Earl had the courage to stand up and challenge them in Alaska. Did they shut him down for it? And did you bother to call the NRA to see if their legal team thinks any of this is kosher?
Originally Posted By: SKB
Improved back ground checks is the same as the fix NICS bill and was attached to the bill House Republicans passed. Good stuff I thought.

I can't really follow along with it, but I noticed at the time I write this, there is a 'meeting' moderated by the President discussing largely 'strengthening' background checks and 'closing loopholes'. I hope that means critical review and understanding, before allowing a potential irreversible shift down a path to giving antis more tools.
Are you really this stupid? Apparently so. The 4473 stays with the FFL holder for 20 years or until he closes. The ATF can audit the books of an FFL holder once every 12 months. That audit includes the books. They can not enter the information from the books into a database which can be searched per Federal law. In my state I do not send anything other than long gun or handgun to them regarding the gun. Pretty simple. As stated before, I treat the ATF agents I have had in my shop with respect and they have returned the respect. I do not challenge them at every turn. Open your own shop and try that crap with them.
Does it really seem to you that Paul Ryan would allow a bill that was a tool for the anti's to pass? I trust him on gun rights. Do you?
Originally Posted By: SKB
Does it really seem to you that Paul Ryan would allow a bill that was a tool for the anti's to pass? I trust him on gun rights. Do you?

I'll play along. I trust him on the topic a whole bunch more than the gal from california that was sitting next to the President. The jury is still out on which side a knee jerk bill will be kinder and gentler to. But, to what I thought was the point, is this alone good enough to be considered a better idea and is it enough to counter the trust of the gal's base that she will use any means to maintain the optics of an image advantage?
Originally Posted By: SKB
Are you really this stupid? Apparently so. The 4473 stays with the FFL holder for 20 years or until he closes.


It appears that you are the stupid one here Stevie. I know very well that the 4473's stay with the FFL holder for 20 years or until he closes. I even took the time to QUOTE you on that matter.

But if ATF Agents are entering your shop and leaving with photographs of your books, then those records are not just remaining with the FFL holder for 20 years or until he closes. They are now also in the possession of the ATF contrary to what the law was intended to be, and contrary to what you say.

You asserted that when a we buy a gun, they have no idea what it is other than if it is a handgun or long gun. That simply isn't true in your case, unless an agent doing an inspection could memorize all of your records without taking any photographs.

You might as well say that it would be perfectly OK for them to take those records and photocopy them. A copy is a copy is a copy. And a photograph is every bit as useful as the original form or Ledger Book.

In my opinion, that is pretty much what you are telling us.

And if anyone seriously thinks that the anti-gunners would be satisfied if we gave up AR-15's, large cap magazines, and permitted Universal Background Checks, think again...

You are truly clueless. Please show me where the law stops the ATF from taking photos of the bound books. It does not. They have regulatory authority and the right to document an audit how they see fit. The law does prohibit them from putting that information in a searchable database.

Are you gentleman enough to cut me a percentage of your royalties once your big story breaks? I would be happy with a mere 10%.

Guess you won't mind me calling you Deepthroat now.
OK Stevie, if they have the regulatory authority to conduct an audit any way they see fit, how could the Alaska gun shop owner have successfully prevented them from removing his books to make photocopies?

Are you telling us that after he prevailed against their unreasonable and illegal request, that they could have simply returned and accomplished the very same thing by taking photographs? Are you really that dumb and agenda driven?

Pray tell Stevie, what is the difference between a photocopy of records that are supposed to remain solely in your possession for 20 years, or until you retire, and a photograph of those same records? With the present technology available to scan a photograph of handwriting and convert it to a searchable digital format, would you concede that the potential for misuse of those records you permitted to leave your premises exists?

By the way Stevie, the type of inspection you permitted is prohibited under Federal law. The prohibition is in 18 USC 923(g)(1)(D) which specifically prohibits anyone in the Justice Department from ‘seiz[ing] any records or other documents other than those records or documents constituting material evidence of a violation of law. You weren't in violation of the law, were you?

I'd like to thank the FFL who provided this link to me. He obviously knows a lot more than small Stevie:

https://www.gunowners.org/news02042013c.htm
I thought recent months have shown notes, pictures, audio recordings, phone and texts, etc. generated by a gov. worker while on duty or related to their duty are the property of the US gov. Regardless of what actually happens or is supposed to happen to the forms or books, isn't it amazing how quickly thirty or fifty thousand 'lost' emails can be scanned for classified material? Some folks seem to get a lot of mileage out of incidentally collected info.
Deepthroat.....yes potential for abuse exists. Write the story and become a rich lady. I want my cut though....all jokes aside.

That fact you can not understand the difference between the bound books staying at the shop or leaving says just how dumb you are. Yes they could have photographed them but they chose to try to take them and he objected. When they come in, the ask for your books and you hand them to the agent. You do not at that point tell the agent what he can and can not do with them. Mr. Earle has a great deal more wealth than myself and I'm sure he just called his lawyer when the agents walked in. Audits take hours if not days. I'm sure he had legal representation on sight. I do not have the budget for that, I just show them respect and we get on with the audit.

How very brave of you to tell someone else who actually risks their lively hood in the gun business that they should handle an audit differently. I suggest you go through a few and make some comments backed up with real world knowledge.
I 100% acknowledge the potential for abuse Craig....it is exists.

I do not think a clandestine gun registry exists though. That I truly believe.
But Stevie, you engaged in name calling and insults when you mocked me and said there is no law preventing them from conducting the type of illegal inspection you describe.

Now you are telling us that you simply rolled over and never said a word to anyone about this until you tripped on your ponytail here, and admitted allowing this abuse. You said there was no law... and I provided you the law which applies. If you read the link I provided, there is no new expose story for me to write. The story is already out there except for ostriches and FUDD's who have their heads in the sand or their asses. There have been and are illegal registries and databases containing the information you assured us is the sole providence of the FFL. I know you want to sincerely believe there is no clandestine database or registry, but it has already happened and your inaction only helps it along. Read the link from the Gun Owners of America:

https://www.gunowners.org/news02042013c.htm

You told us that you are an NRA member, but you are totally in the dark about something you have been trying to ridicule me about. If you had really been an active and engaged NRA Member, none of this would be news to you. I don't mind your name calling and trolling one bit though. It all just proves my point about your intentions in this thread. And it has the bonus of proving the hypocrisy of the Manners and Thread Police who only speak up when Conservatives engage in the same behavior. Thanks.

You were wrong again. And once again, you have gone out of your way to defend the actions of devout anti-gunners while you busily search for hot links to show any possible Republican support for new gun laws.
Deepthroat you should go public with your big story. It is HUGE....but I want my cut. 10%, no joke.


I read the link. Interesting opinion but not something I plan on running with. He mentions they are prohibited from Seizing records. They did not seize mine, they photographed them.

You have spent the last day trying for a gottcha moment and failed miserably.

Why don't you just agree with me and say gun control is bad no matter whose idea it is? It is not that hard. Just stop being a partisan sheep for a moment.

Or maybe you think raising the age limit on a long gun is a good idea. It can only be one though. Gun control or we agree?
That's quite a sound argument you make there Stevie. It seems that what you are saying is that the government can come in to your home or business and copy your financial records, your computer hard drive, and any other confidential personal records you have, and that would be permissible as long as all they take is a copy. That would not be an unreasonable search or seizure in your eyes.

I can understand that for someone as agenda driven as you, the article in the link would be nothing more than mere opinion. I never thought for a moment that you would accept it or consider that your rights and the privacy of your customers has been violated.

I have already said on many occasions that gun control is a bad idea no matter where it comes from. And I've already done more than say raising the age on the purchase of a long gun is a bad idea. I have actually contacted the White House and my elected Representatives to voice that concern. But I can understand how you may have missed that fact when you are too busy looking for hot links to attempt to equate generally pro-gun Republicans with vehemently anti-gun Democrats... and rolling over like a whipped puppy when the Feds violate the law.
Deepthroat,



I'm glad we can agree. I thought you would end up seeing it my way.


You have no right against unreasonable search and seizure of your bound books. Your FFL is a privilege not a right.
Stevie, I would have to put my head up my ass in order to see things your way. That's not going to happen.

Stay warm up there!
Deepthroat,
Gee I just thought you were against gun control....must be you changed your mind and now want the age limit raised.

Gun control or we both agree.....uncomfortable yet?
Originally Posted By: SKB
Deepthroat,
Gee I just thought you were against gun control....must be you changed your mind and now want the age limit raised.

Gun control or we both agree.....uncomfortable yet?


OK Stevie, you've played your immature trolling game long enough. Please show us where I changed my mind about gun control, and where I said I want the age limit to purchase a firearm raised.

How much more proof do we need to see that you are still more interested in disrupting any gun rights thread than making a positive contribution?

You've made numerous baseless charges in this thread, and haven't responded to any of my requests to prove them. And it is obvious that when you cannot come up with an intelligent answer to something like my question about the government making copies of your hard drive, financial records, etc., you resort to the old King Brown tactic of ignoring the tough questions and changing the subject.

I don't know how you manage to do all that trolling with your head so far up your rectum. I am getting uncomfortable. I keep wishing that someone more intelligent and intellectually challenging such as Ed Good would take over for you.
Ok, so we agree that raising the age limit for buying a long gun is a bad idea. I thought you would come around to seeing it my way.
Since you weren't bright enough to catch it all of the other times I said the same thing, I'll just move my post from a few minutes ago down here so you can see it again. And you can also take a stab at the other questions you ran away from---

That's quite a sound argument you make there Stevie. It seems that what you are saying is that the government can come in to your home or business and copy your financial records, your computer hard drive, and any other confidential personal records you have, and that would be permissible as long as all they take is a copy. That would not be an unreasonable search or seizure in your eyes.

I can understand that for someone as agenda driven as you, the article in the link would be nothing more than mere opinion. I never thought for a moment that you would accept it or consider that your rights and the privacy of your customers has been violated.

I have already said on many occasions that gun control is a bad idea no matter where it comes from. And I've already done more than say raising the age on the purchase of a long gun is a bad idea. I have actually contacted the White House and my elected Representatives to voice that concern. But I can understand how you may have missed that fact when you are too busy looking for hot links to attempt to equate generally pro-gun Republicans with vehemently anti-gun Democrats... and rolling over like a whipped puppy when the Feds violate the law.


One other thing Stevie... can you prove this ridiculous statement?

Originally Posted By: SKB

You have no right against unreasonable search and seizure of your bound books. Your FFL is a privilege not a right.
Keith he talks all this FFL knowledge but truth is I've never saw a gun that he had for sale that required an FFL...
Well jOe, in my opinion, his FFL knowledge is obviously pretty weak from what I can see. But as a gunsmith, I believe he'd have to enter make, model, caliber or gauge, serial number, and owners name in his Bound Ledger Books for any gunsmithing customer's gun that was built after 1898. If I was a customer, I wouldn't be very happy to know that my gunsmith permitted agents to photograph that information when it is supposed to remain with the FFL for 20 years or until he retires. In fairness to Stevie, it appears that he isn't the only FFL who has had this happen to him. But in my opinion, he should have contacted the NRA or a pro-gun Congressman or Senator to report illegal and illicit collection of confidential records. You can't stop abuses if you don't even try. Mr. Keyboard Muscles was apparently afraid to do that.

Pre-1899 Antiques would be exempt, but there are a lot of FFL's who feel they must enter those guns into their books too. I don't claim to know it all, but you can see from the answers Stevie gave here, and those that he and SDH-MT gave in the "Do gunbroker or FFL's check NCIC ?" thread, FFL license holders aren't necessarily the experts they'd like us to think they are.

He says I "have spent the last day trying for a gottcha moment and failed miserably." I think he's like one of those dumb birds that keeps crashing into a closed window. Geo Newbern tried to stop him, but you can't fix stupid.
Still failing I see. Well at least you have admitted you agree with me. I knew you would come around. How do you feel about last night's talk which new ideas were offered up? Like the police taking guns then going to court. Being pushed pretty hard by certain people. Do you think that is a good idea? Try not to be a sheep.
Originally Posted By: keith

He says I "have spent the last day trying for a gottcha moment and failed miserably." I think he's like one of those dumb birds that keeps crashing into a closed window. Geo Newbern tried to stop him, but you can't fix stupid.
Hard to get a gotcha moment when they keep cotching themselves..
So do you support taking guns away with no due process j0e? I do not. Trump seems behind it. You are not a sheep are you?
I support talkin guns away from people on drugs without due process...
Sounds like gun control to me. Any other time you feel the second amendment does not apply?
You on drugs ?
Nope, not even aspirin.

You think people on mind altering drugs...prescription or illegal...should have guns ?
I’m disappointed in Trump’s knee jerk reaction to the recent tragedy in FL in terms of sparring with the NRA.
I believe that is a very slippery slope. We have due process for a reason. I believe constitutionally protected rights should not be violated with out very good cause. So all drugs? Just antidepressants? How about steroids? Alcohol?
So jOe's reasonable gun control act of 2018 will include a UDS before every purchase? Random UDS for gun owners? How about anti-seizure meds jOe? All those pills that come from the pharmacy with the sticker "May cause drowsiness. Use caution while operating heavy machinery"?

But it sure seems reasonable to let the government decide who can be trusted with a firearm to save the life of one kid. Since we're trashing the 2nd we might as well as throw in the 4th Amendment also. Maybe add a data base so helpful folks can anonymously report gun owners suspected of being impaired or on drugs? And Evangelical Christians who hear from God?
Originally Posted By: buzz
I’m disappointed in Trump’s knee jerk reaction to the recent tragedy in FL in terms of sparring with the NRA.


'Allow due process so no one's rights are trampled, but the ability to go to court, obtain an order and then collect not only the firearms but any weapons,' Pence said.

'or Mike, take the firearms first, and then go to court'
https://news.americanewscentral.com/2018...ing-guns-video/
https://news.americanewscentral.com/2018...need-see-today/


Thanks. One minor complaint. The popup stated "Would you like to receive important news updates? Select your preference Liberal Conservative" I just want to obtain the real news w/o filtering and comments or discussions by experts, so called.
We need to stop fighting among our selves and concentrate on the liberals. Why should a woman or girl under 21 not be able to buy a gun to defend herself, yet be able to kill her unborn baby, even 12 year old girls.
I just saw Joe Manchin talking up his "comprehensive background check" bill. We read this bill before, it's terrible. "Comprehensive background check" is liberal code for registration.
I also just watched the news of San Francisco Police in a shoot out with a suspect. Police fired 65 rounds and no one on either side was hit. To you trust them to protect your family?
Mike
Originally Posted By: SKB
I believe that is a very slippery slope. We have due process for a reason. I believe constitutionally protected rights should not be violated with out very good cause. So....

So, now you're sounding like the NRA?

For about twenty-five pages you've commenting about how the time has come. Remember, progunners gunners have a huge image problem, remember R's have to provide 'good' ideas, something HAS to be done. Careful what you you wish for, huh? But wait, manchin likes this one so it's bipartisan. We'll just pretend fienstine-n-company doesn't ratchet up any traction they can get on negative image front.

What does slippery slope mean? Some slippery slopes are real and some slippery slopes can be excused away with enthusiasm? A tiny few dems will score a reelection win for 'taking action', while the majority will have media fire up the base antigun rhetoric on steroids. And every now and then, they'll tone it down, appear reasonable and calmly say, look even gun folks are criticizing the NRA, and the President, and Ryan, and ole Mitch.

If you really think we're on a slippery slope, maybe next time, don't give 'em public sentiment ammo to grab that next increment and certainly anti tool that will be aggressively tweeked by the next narcissist with a regulatory pen that happen to be a progressive. If you really think we reached a slippery slope point, was it worth taking the 'high road', and criticizing and pressuring the only folks in the entire world that could've helped you. If there is no lopsided outcry, there would be no slippery slope.
I was horrified last night when my wife looking perfectly serious up and said "she thought making people wait until they were 21 to buy a gun sounded like a great idea to her!" But, but, but owning a gun is a constitutional RIGHT I responded. "Oh quit being silly she replied, all we'd be doing is extending the age by three years to let them grow up a little more and at least get out of high school."

Hmmm, we raised five pretty good children together and not a one of them got good sense until they were thirty IMHO. There is more support for this idea than we wish to admit...Geo

We were still married as of 7:30 this morning when she went to babysit two of our grandchildren. We're gonna have to talk more about this!
"Teacher fired shot, barricaded self inside high school classroom, police say...." crazy

"Concealed-carry permit holder flips the script, shoots and kills alleged carjacker..." Depending on facts of the case this could be a good outcome.
Something must change, I would like it to be the best law the R's can come up with not another piece of bad legislation like we all complain about coming from the D's.

I just do not buy in to the culture war sorry. I think a better approach than the combative stance the NRA has taken would be to win over the middle. Less talk of Socialist conspiracy and media bias and more talk of protecting your rights and your family. Simply less abrasive.

Slippery slope? It gets real slippery when we skip due process.

Sometimes your friends need to be criticized. I must have got that from my Grandmother. She use to say "just because your friends are doing it does not mean it is right."
Originally Posted By: SKB
Something must change....

....I just do not buy in to the culture war sorry. I think a better approach than the combative stance the NRA has taken....

....Sometimes your friends need to be criticized. I must have got that from my Grandmother. She use to say "just because your friends are doing it does not mean it is right."

Does it matter what adjectives are used? If the NRA has to be described as combative, aren't you at cultural odds with them? Or, don't like them, or consider them divisive, or think alt right, or on and on? Your preferences are no business of mine, but you do seem to buy into differences, some might say cultural.

I had a Grandma too, actually two of them. Her version was slightly different, "just because your friends are doing it, doesn't mean you have to DO it too". I think the path is clear. If something really has to change, it's the rhetoric and the education of our kids. Not the law.

You made fun of our President pulling a fast one a few pages back. Since the middle is squishy on the topic, maybe we can hope, as in the past, congress can't come together. And, as a fail safe, possibly this President understands current politics and will use his position to shift the blame image to progressives, in not just the political sense, but also cultural.

I think due process is a huge problem, but I wouldn't ignore the vagueness of tightening background checks and closing loopholes. Asked earlier of someone else, if in a couple of years from now a twenty-one year old walks into the shop and needs work done on his long gone grandpa's beautiful sxs, because he cherishes the gun, loves pheasant hunting, and has been using it since high school. Do you look over the gun and say you can help, or is your first thought, I ran it and there's no record that the gun was legally transferred to you? And, yes I know, not in Colorado.

edit to add, interesting back and forth
Crazy can't be legislated
I left out the part about my Grandmother following that up with "or that you are going to do it to."


I support the gun related mission of the NRA. I do not support them in the culture war they are so deeply invested in. If being a moderate puts me at cultural odds with the NRA the so be it. I can not support extremists on either side of the political divide in this country. It is not that I do not like the NRA, I am a member by choice, no one forces me to pay my dues. I do not like the the tactics they employ at times.


No one is talking about gun registration except you. I see you are very concerned about that, understandable but I do not see that coming on a national level at all. Some states have that but as you pointed out.......not Colorado.
"We raised five pretty good children and not one of them got good sense until they were thirty..." is a pretty good assessment of the current state of society. Perhaps no one should be allowed to have firearms until they're 30. Kids nowadays are nor maturing at the age we did. They've been insulated from all the harsher realities that were taken for granted when we were young, except the realization that they could be murdered in their schools.
Okay, now that I've read the whole thread and watched it devolve into a silly war of words between two factions of gun owners on this site, I have the following comment.

Keith is brilliantly spot on in his OP and it puts the lie to the idea that this larger battle is about saving lives. It's clearly not. The deaths of these poor kids and every other victim of a mass shooter get used by the centre/left anti gun faction to further their political agenda, not to save lives. And that agenda is the end of the 2cd Amendment and the disarming of all civilians.

THEY PLAY THE LONG GAME. GENERATIONAL! THERE IS NO LEVEL OF GUN CONTROL THEY WILL BE SATISFIED WITH. EVERY REGULATION IS A STEP TOWARDS DISARMAMENT.

Where was the incessant coverage of Sutherland Springs from a few months ago? More dead but the shooter was stopped by a guy with an AR-15. CNN and the rest sure dropped that story like a hot potato Because it could not be used to make progress against gun ownership.
Originally Posted By: SKB
I left out the part about my Grandmother following that up with "or that you are going to do it to."....

Smart Grandmother. Just because it can be done, doesn't mean it has to be done. Maybe, it's right to discuss the facts about cancer in one setting, but is it right to keep reminding a buddy who's battling it?

Of course, I'm commenting because I sense more conviction not supporting the pro side, and not a peep about extremists on the other side. Or, in other words, who will take your message of grace, reason, intellect and decorum to the left and make them respect it? I understand I'm the only one hung up on my hang ups, but you brought up the slippery slope, but not how to stop it. You kind of sound like if you were in charge of negotiations, you'd throw the other forty-nine states under the bus, and do a little business friendly carve out for Co.
Originally Posted By: SKB
You are not a sheep are you?


Stevie, you keep asking this same stupid question, but still can't man up and answer my questions. You're a fine one to ask if jOe or I are sheep when you've admitted to standing by like a sheep while ATF agents photographed your 4473's and Ledger Books. You told us they can legally do that, but have refused to show us where they have that right.

That is so typical and predictable from you Liberals... just drop a load of bullshit and ignore any follow-up questions that would show your ignorance or dishonesty.

craigd certainly picked up on how you suddenly found pro-gun religion. No atheists in foxholes, right? I don't believe it when King does it, and I sure as he'll don't believe it coming from you.

Canvasback is also right about this thread devolving into a pissing contest between two factions of gun owners. One of those factions, the FUDD's, has mostly been represented by none other than you. But you were never here with the intention of offering anything of substance, were you?

You don't have to answer that question either Stevie. A simple Liberal bleat will do.
"Every regulation is a step toward disarmament," is the basic lie that makes sensible regulations impossible. Fully automatic weapons are legal to own. A tax must be paid; they must be registered. However, federal agents do not appear in the night to kick down doors and confiscate these weapons. The fraction of US society that would ban gun possession if they could is very small. They will never prevail. But , if we do not adequately address the on-going gun slaughter, we will end up losing more than if we'd made some reasonable suggestions ourselves.
'I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man's case that just took place in Florida...to go to court would have taken a long time,...'

'Take the guns first, go through due process second,'
How do you know that Billy? The last time pro-gunners reluctantly conceded and didn't strongly resist the onslaught by the anti-gunners, it only made them keep trying to take more. That was the GCA of 1968. They came back for "Saturday Night Specials, for all handguns, and for so-called Assault rifles. They also tried to get ammunition bans and "Smart Guns" that could only be fired by the owner. They never stopped coming at us, trying to get more and more. And through it all, FUDD's like you kept saying that it would never happen and that your Liberal Left Democrats were no threat to us.

They are now calling for strict regulations on "weapons of war" that were designed only for killing people on the battlefield. They are saying that these guns have bullets that travel 3 times the velocity of most handgun ammo, and expand violently in flesh. They are saying that guns with such devastating firepower have no place on our streets.

You know what Billy? That sounds a lot like Stevies Mauser or your Springfield rifles.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
"Every regulation is a step toward disarmament," is the basic lie that makes sensible regulations impossible. Fully automatic weapons are legal to own. A tax must be paid; they must be registered. However, federal agents do not appear in the night to kick down doors and confiscate these weapons. The fraction of US society that would ban gun possession if they could is very small. They will never prevail. But , if we do not adequately address the on-going gun slaughter, we will end up losing more than if we'd made some reasonable suggestions ourselves.


Bill, I live in a country with far more firearms restrictions than yours. We also have far fewer mass shootings than yours, or far less per capita gun crime than you. But essentially the same rate of teenage death by vehicular misadventure that the US does. But right now, as a result of your latest school shooting, the anti gun forces are back at it, saying it's time for more gun bans, more regulations.

So tell me again how its the basic lie that makes sensible regs impossible. If you really believe that, then you don't understand the objective of those you support.

Oops, just hit the nail on the head.
Bill, here's another example of what I'm talking about.

Here's what will happen after a pile of new gun regs. NOTHING! NO REDUCTION IN GUN CRIME!

The rate (or trend) of gun crime will be essentially the same. Because gun regs are ineffectual at preventing crime. So the anti gun people will be out, saying "we haven't enacted enough regs....we need more....because gun crime is so bad!".


How do I know this? Because the rate (or trend) of gun crime remained the same in Australia and their gun confiscation. NO CHANGE!

But even more importantly....go back to Keith's first post. About driving licenses. If we wanted to save young lives, why isn't this in the national headlines every night and on the lips of every lawmaker and CNN talking head in the land.
Deep Throat,
Good to see you have come around to my way of seeing things. Raising the age limit on long guns is simply bad policy no matter who had the idea. Glad you finally agree with me. Too bad it took you so long.
Originally Posted By: keith
I actually support some change, such as better reporting by the states to make NICS more accurate and effective, and to actually enforce the laws we already have on the books such as prosecuting criminals who attempt to buy guns and fail the NICS check.



Well look at that back on page 9 you agreed with me about better reporting to the states for more accurate back ground checks. Looks like you are starting to see things more my way all time.
I have no dog is this fight. None of this secrete database/registration/disarmament stuff affects me, as most of my guns sunk in an unfortunate fishing accident.

I shall now make the post that pisses off everyone.

First, keith, you've got a serious cognitive bias in the form of negative transference. You have feelings that seem to be about one person, when they’re really about someone else. You think SKB, King Brown, or whomever is anit-gun. Really it is other people who are anti-gun and you transfer those feelings onto people on this board. It’s not so different from the progressive who blames the NRA for a school shooting. Seek help.

Second, I don’t think there is a solution because people will not talk about the fact that public high schools are shitty places and many teachers are stupid assholes. Architecturally a modern school is nearly indistinguishable from a minimum security prison, which makes sense because they are essentially day jails.

Worse yet, in the old day’s school was a small part of a young person’s life. They went to school for 6 hours and came home to their real lives. Over time schooling evolved into the totality of a young person’s life. What could be more depressing than that? If for whatever reason you’re any type of social outcast or loner, it is a life of constant torture in an unpleasant environment. With smart phones and social media there is no disconnecting. Kids are stuck in school when they aren’t even physically on campus. No wonder they need antidepressants. I would too. It’s a testament to human decency that there aren’t more school shootings.

Finally, the folks who say, “No one needs an assault rifle” have a lot more faith in humanity than I do.
Thanks for all the commentary. Different completely here during the previous administration. Remember Nixon the Communist hater was the only president who could go to China to find a friend in the Cold War, and similarly pro-gun Trump to the NRA because "something has to be done" toward gun reform. Second Amendment inviolate rights scarcely mentioned while members seem to be looking for something reasonable instead of yelling at each other. All good. Bless America.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
"Every regulation is a step toward disarmament," is the basic lie that makes sensible regulations impossible....

Isn't it a lie to use the word sensible? Do we need sensible gun control regulations because criminals are sensible, or do you want to impose something you're calling sensible on law abiding US citizens? An important distinction because illegal violent felons have exemptions from firearm law and regulation.

The problem is how you define sensible. If it means calm dialog, but then voting for a maxy waters or a finestien, who's gonna find that sensible? Other than just for the sake of doing something, what assurances are there that your side will acknowledge the problem is solved and not keep demanding more sensible gun control by pushing emotional division? The problem with regulation is I highly doubt you would want me to regulate your morality, why don't look at it from that point of view?
Originally Posted By: King Brown
....Second Amendment inviolate rights scarcely mentioned while members seem to be looking for something reasonable instead of yelling at each other....

Huh? Remember Clinton, the violator of interns, no yelling just one heck of a party. Sorry about that, just throwing in a little balance.
Craig can say with confidence that no additional regulations could have an effect on gun slaughter. My question to him is how can he possibly know that since it has not been tried? I heard the former ethics adviser to George Bush Sr., a life -long Republican, say of Bill Clinton that he'd trade Trump for him in a minute. This is a good conversation. This country needs more conversation and less mutual antagonism.
How could anyone know whether or not they think the same as you Stevie?

You have shown us that you have more positions than the Kama Sutra.

You still can't answer a few simple questions. But we can all see that answering would only provide proof that you are a fool and a troll.

And Billy also thinks that a conversation is absolute avoidance of questions that would show he is still an agenda driven follower of anti-gun Democrats.

Can you come up with some more gutless excuses for allowing ATF Agents to photograph your Bound Ledger Books? Who knew that jellyfish had ponytails?

Wait... I think I heard bleating. Was that you Stevie, or was it Billy, the DNC mouthpiece?
And less mutual antagonism..
So this so called life long republican would trade the guy who gave us Gorsuch for the guy who gave us the AWB?

They never know or knew when to just shut up.
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Craig can say with confidence that no additional regulations could have an effect on gun slaughter. My question to him is how can he possibly know that since it has not been tried?....

I think it has been tried Bill. I thought firearms crimes have been decreasing for many years, yet the folks who use words like slaughter are on a sharp increase. Am I wrong? You know there are fed firearm laws that apply to the entire country. Then, you know there are cities that have imposed much stricter gun laws and regulations. The rate of slaughter goes up, and there is a competition for murder capital of the nation. But, if dem leadership tries increasing gun regulations and it doesn't work, we have to pretend like it 'has not been tried', right?

Can't I have at least as much confidence in my position as you certainly do with yours. What regulations would you like to see?
Bill, it has been tried. Look at the results in England and Australia.
When I was 18-21, the thing that prevented me from buying guns was lack of money.
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Bill, it has been tried. Look at the results in England and Australia.


Billy is perfectly aware of the results in Australia and England, and so is Stevie. They don't care.

As long as it doesn't immediately affect the old classics they prefer, they just don't care. As Stevie has repeated numerous times, if the type of guns they personally don't like were to disappear tomorrow, it would be fine.


They are too dense and too agenda driven to listen to the anti-gunners who say we need to ban "weapons of war" that shoot high velocity bullets that expand in flesh. They refuse to understand that perfectly describes their Mausers, Springfields, etc. And they are too busy looking for ways to denigrate Trump and the NRA. Stevie says he is a moderate Republican who doesn't like extremists from either end of the political spectrum. But he sure spends a he'll of a lot more time criticizing Conservatives. And he calls me a fraud!!!
Give it a rest how about it.
In the fight for freedom we can never rest

You don't like truth go stick your head back in the sand.
Originally Posted By: keith
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Bill, it has been tried. Look at the results in England and Australia.


Billy is perfectly aware of the results in Australia and England, and so is Stevie. They don't care.

As long as it doesn't immediately affect the old classics they prefer, they just don't care. As Stevie has repeated numerous times, if the type of guns they personally don't like sere to disappear tomorrow, it would be fine.


They are too dense and too agenda driven to listen to the anti-gunners who say we need to ban "weapons of war" that shoot high velocity bullets that expand in flesh. They refuse to understand that perfectly describes their Mausers, Springfields, etc. And they are too busy looking for ways to denigrate Trump and the NRA. Stevie says he is a moderate Republican who doesn't like extremists from either end of the political spectrum. But he sure spends a he'll of a lot more time criticizing Conservatives. And he calls me a fraud!!!


Dziadu, it's time to take your crusade to places where the "Brady Bunch" and "Gun Control Inc." folks hang around. You can explain your need to own AR-15, AKM with 20, 30, 40 round magazines (they call clips) or handguns with magazine capacity of 10 rounds or more (the 33 rounders are affectionately called canes),....

Their response will be something like this: "Insecure (otherwise known as paranoid) Americans need guns to make themselves feel protected and important (powerful and controlling). Normal Americans do not. Grow up pussy".
It's time for you to take your azz back to the comunist country you crawled out of....

Lucky for your sorry know nothing foreigner azz I don't run things here or I would've booted your azz off here as soon as I figured out what you are.

A pussy is someone that abandons his native land.
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
It's time for you to take your azz back to the comunist country you crawled out of....

Lucky for your sorry know nothing foreigner azz I don't run things here or I would've booted your azz off here as soon as I figured out what you are.

A pussy is someone that abandons his native land.


That quote came from Dallee in General Discussion section of another gun forum under topic titled "Enough". That is why I put the phrase in quotes. Are you aware of the fact that originally this continent had zero human population?

Dziadu should apply for position of NRA spokesperson. After seeing performance of current title holder in interview with Stephanopoulos it appears we need someone more passionate about firearms to represent us or perhaps if she is passionate at least someone well prepared to represent us in an interview or media discussion.
It's hard for me to communicate with a foreigner....

Tell us how gun confiscation or gun laws in general helped the European country you came from ?
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
Are you aware of the fact that originally this continent had zero human population?


Are you aware that no one really knows...

I can assure yOu my rOOts nor my religion is out of the Sands of the Sahara.

If'n I was going to get me some more religion that Muzlim chit sounds tempting....

I think gAys are an abomination to the human race and those 72 virgins cool ....
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
Are you aware of the fact that originally this continent had zero human population?


Are you aware that no one really knows...

I can assure yOu my rOOts nor my religion is out of the Sands of the Sahara.

If'n I was going to get me some more religion that Muzlim chit sounds tempting....

I think gAys are an abomination to the human race and those 72 virgins cool ....


If you go back far enough your roots are from great Rift Valley of East Africa in what is today Ethiopia. Your religion probably arouse out of Protestant Revolution (often misnamed Reformation) initiated by Martin Luther.
Here yOu gO jOe. What cOuld pOssibly gO wrOng?
https://everytownresearch.org/red-flag-laws-helping-prevent-mass-shooting/
Red Flag Laws coming soon to a state near you.

We've had Involuntary Commitment laws since the 50s, but this should be a lot better frown
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3392176/
The hipa laws basically tie an investagators hands when dealing with a mentally ill person.
Not entirely jOe. Most states, including TN have "Duty to Warn" laws
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/mental-health-professionals-duty-to-warn.aspx

The problem of course is in interpretation of the threat. "I'd like to kill that b@@tch" is quite different than "I'm going to meet my x-wife after she gets off work Thursday and shoot her and her new boyfriend".

Cruz made numerous threats against both individuals and the school.

I guess we could ask Leonard Pitts who believes 4 out of 10 Republicans are "crazy"
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/leonard-pitts-jr/article201577229.html
Why do we need hipaa laws now anyway. I thought it was enacted to protect gay guys from being outed due to aids...Geo
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Bill, it has been tried. Look at the results in England and Australia.


Look up some info on the Martin Place incident in Sydney Australia.
Particularly,
Who was the perp ?
Where his gun came from.
Was it a gun previously in the registration system ?
Was he a licensed shooter ?
What type of gun it was ?
Who got shot ?
Who shot them ?
O.M
Originally Posted By: Geo. Newbern
Why do we need hipaa laws now anyway. I thought it was enacted to protect gay guys from being outed due to aids...Geo


You're probably right...I was told a normal warrent can't get investagators into a suspects medical history.
Wrong jOe

"Medical Privacy" rules enacted under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) came long after State laws requiring written permission to test for HIV and penalties for disclosing the results

Getting access to your medical records is not hard for "the government" if the NSA is interested
https://www.aclu.org/other/faq-government-access-medical-records

https://www.eff.org/issues/law-enforcement-access
HIPAA permits the police to use an administrative subpoena or other written request with no court involvement, as long as police include a written statement that the information they want is relevant, material, and limited in scope, and that de-identified information is insufficient.
The laws pertaining to access of confidential records mean nothing to corrupt officials. Just look at what SKB small Stevie told us about his FFL audit inspections where he stood by like a sheep while agents photographed his Bound Ledger Books, in violation of the laws that say those records are to remain in the sole possession of the FFL for 20 years or until he retires.

If those agents were not involved in an active criminal investigation, those records should not have left his shop in any form or manner. Isn't that right Stevie? Bleat once for yes and bleat twice for no.

Still, we know that the shooter at Virginia Tech had been on anti-depressants, as was at least one of the Columbine killers. We know Joseph Wesbecker of the San Ysidro, California McDonalds restaurant shooting had heavy metals poisoning. We know the SSRI usage status of quite a few of these shooters, but I've noticed much less willingness for such medical disclosures since the Newtown shooting.

I don't have a problem with the government studying the severe side-effects of SSRI's or even regulating their use if it serves to stop the shifting of blame for these acts onto law abiding gun owners. The government already regulates many drugs that are far less dangerous. And they already stop or prevent Medicare patients from getting many prescription drugs that are not approved on their formulary by refusing to cover the cost.

And poor pathetic Jagermeister still does not own a single solitary double shotgun. He did claim that he owned one of those AKM's, but considering how many lies he has told about gun purchases, I personally wouldn't believe any of his bullshit.
The government is the FDA, which issued an advisory on pediatric & adolescent use of SSRIs in 2003
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791100/

A black box warning regarding risk of suicide in adults was issued in 2009

This fact sheet came out in 2013
https://www.cms.gov/Medicare-Medicaid-Co...t-factsheet.pdf
Check out the black box warning on Zyban

This came out in 2006
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18690915
2015
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4570770/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/abc...in-search-cause

What we need is providers paying attention...but government hearings are always nice and a chance for showboating, and another opportunity to blame the drugs (or guns) instead of human evil


Originally Posted By: keith

And poor pathetic Jagermeister still does not own a single solitary double shotgun. He did claim that he owned one of those AKM's, but considering how many lies he has told about gun purchases, I personally wouldn't believe any of his bullshit.


I'm looking for 16ga Darne made post 1964 (don't mind honest field wear with some scratches and blue wear but must be in very good to excellent mechanical condition and no recoil pad) if you know where there is one for sale bleat once and bleat twice for no. PM of where one is available will be appreciated.
Another piece of the puzzle - Toxic Stress in Childhood

https://developingchild.harvard.edu/science/key-concepts/toxic-stress/

https://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-p...xic-Stress.aspx

Messed up parental substitutes making messed up kids
Originally Posted By: moses

Look up some info on the Martin Place incident in Sydney Australia.
Particularly,
Who was the perp ?
Where his gun came from.
Was it a gun previously in the registration system ?
Was he a licensed shooter ?
What type of gun it was ?
Who got shot ?
Who shot them ?
O.M


I thought I had responded to this post yesterday moses, using my cell phone... but it must have gotten lost in cyberspace.

I took a little look at the particulars of the Martin Place hostage crisis and shooting which your anti-gunners exploited to advance further gun control.

Wow!

It was not reported by our media that the shooter was affiliated with ISIS, or that he had been under psychiatric care (SSRI's anyone?). Like the Parkland, Florida shooting, there were warning sign that were ignored by authorities. And when the hostage crisis began, it seems that there was hesitation by the police, and delays by them to go in and end it.

http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/...25bed2b94f85dda

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/what...518-gw7taz.html

The shooter had multiple criminal charges against him, and there are legitimate questions why he was even on the streets.

Does any of this sound familiar???

Last, but certainly not least... his weapon was a sawed-off shotgun.

That's right "mental illy billy" aka rocky mtm bill... when bad guys can no longer buy the semi-automatic firearms you personally dislike, they will turn to using the kind of gun that you do approve of. The difference between our doubles that you FUDD's think are not threatened, and a prohibited "Any Other Weapon" as defined by the NFA of 1934 is five minutes and a hacksaw. And the anti-gunners you love and support will come after our pumps, doubles. and single shots too.
Raise the legal driving age.
What ? Then that might have slowed down that other wacko in Melbourne Australia who used his car to mow people down in front of Flinders Street train station on December 21 2017. 18 injured 1 dead.
Saeed Noori came from the ghan in 2004 & had a history of assault, drug use & mental illness. He is reported to have been on a mental health plan. whatever that means.

Maybe should have taken his car from him & deregistered it & then took his drivers license off him & tore that up.
Cars are evil & no one needs one because there is public transport. Look, right outside a train station.
This is the same as an anti gun sentiment, which is the reason for it sounding silly.

The gun & the car are not the problem & if the next attack is with chopsticks then the Chinese restaurant is also not the problem.
O.M
Problem is we have elected stupid people to try and solve problems.
I don't think it's electing stupid people. Most start off wanting to make it better in their communities. It's what they have to do to get the money to be re-elected that separates them from the people.
Originally Posted By: King Brown
I don't think it's electing stupid people. Most start off wanting to make it better in their communities. It's what they have to do to get the money to be re-elected that separates them from the people.


So they’re disloyal. Which makes them stupid.


___________________________
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (use your imagination)
Originally Posted By: King Brown
I don't think it's electing stupid people. Most start off wanting to make it better in their communities. It's what they have to do to get the money to be re-elected that separates them from the people.


Wrong again King. It isn't political donations or PAC's that cause people to become like you or Hillary Clinton, and blame these crimes on the availability of an inanimate object like a gun.


Originally Posted By: King Brown
Pew Research has a good reputation, Jim. It's a source in the link Ed posted. Crime is declining in Canada, too, although our tougher-on-crime federal government can't build jails and penitentiaries fast enough.

Misfires seems near unanimous that there's no correlation between the number of guns and surpassing US gun violence, and that more guns lowers a homicide rate experienced nowhere else in the developed world.

I believe there is a connection---as most liberals do--- and that those conservative and liberal countries with exceedingly lower rates are a result of their democratically chosen, more-onerous, freedom-restricting regulations, common-sense or not.

I commented earlier on the cultural differences between the US and other countries in this respect, including how differently the US and Canada developed. Why do Americans dismiss the graphs and statistics?


Most American Gun Owners do not dismiss the graphs and statistics King. But we have learned that we should not trust data provided by anti-gun Liberal Left Progressive Socialists like you.



The U.S. has over 300 million guns and a 2012 murder rate of 4.7 per 100,000. Russia has only 13 million guns, and a 2012 murder rate of 9.2 per 100,000. So we have over 23 times as many guns and a murder rate about half as high as Russia. It would seem that the problem is cultural rather than due to the availability of guns. But King Brown will never admit that because he is here to undermine our gun rights.
Originally Posted By: keith
Originally Posted By: King Brown
I don't think it's electing stupid people. Most start off wanting to make it better in their communities. It's what they have to do to get the money to be re-elected that separates them from the people.


Wrong again King....

Hang on Keith, maybe he has a good point or two here. I think he's explaining about one way to hatch an elite. Then, they get to decide what's better for all us commoners. I bet, when it comes to communities, how better to use them than to claim to be an organizer.
yawn...
Hope posting this is not against Board rules.

The Lazy Fantasies of Foreign Gun Laws

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/gun-control-foreign-countries-folk-wisdom/
Excellent posting 1cdog
Another thing to remember when you all call your elected representatives is that the total number of people who are killed in the U.S. by all rifles... not just AR-15's... is quite small compared to the number of people who are killed in the U.S. by illegal immigrants.

The very same Liberal Left Democrats who are pressing hard for more restrictive gun laws and complete bans on AR-15 type semi-automatic rifles are at the same time actively fighting any efforts to build a border wall and reverse illegal immigration.

If they were really concerned about saving lives, they wouldn't be howling about the Trump administration's recent lawsuit against California's Sanctuary City laws.

The truth about crime, illegal immigrants and sanctuary cities

The Small Numbers of People Killed by Assault-style Rifles

It isn't about saving lives folks. It's about the eventual end of the 2nd Amendment. The anti-gunners who are applauding new anti-gun measure passed by the Florida Legislature are already saying that it is a good first step. If the Governor signs the bill, they will keep coming back for more.
Originally Posted By: keith
....the total number of people who are killed in the U.S. by all rifles... not just AR-15's... is quite small compared to the number of people who are killed in the U.S. by illegal immigrants....

....It isn't about saving lives folks. It's about the eventual end of the 2nd Amendment....

Another way to look at it is that the primary cause of firearm death is suicide. Of course, there are many methods of suicide, that the anti's couldn't care less about. The same folks who're all for assisted suicide, are trying to sell that it's about saving lives. Not likely. It's like them saying that illegal aliens are just doing a job that no one else wants to do.
I cannot understand how a mind can bend so far left that the eyes can no longer focus & see the problem.
The illegals are illegal. In rebellion, no respect for the legal system put in place to ensure the rights of the legal.
So , to make something illegal is to throw that ball onto their court. What do they care, already illegal anyhow.
Make those pointed shoes illegal & see if they stop wearing them.
No; The illegal attitude existed before leaving the home land.
O.M
I know what I'm getting tired of seeing is a bunch of local, state and federal officials and politicians standing at a podium crying their little eyes out over how they missed all the red flags and failed to connect the dots yet saying we must control guns in order to solve this problem.

No we don't. What we need is for you idiots to finally do your job you were hired to do.

Take our guns and leave us defenseless so you idiots can protect us? Your track record of protection doesn't inspire much confidence.
Naw
Another populous state lost. Republican Governor of Florida Rick Scott signs landmark anti-gun bill. Still looking for post 1964 sixteen gauge Darne shotgun.
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
Another populous state lost. Republican Governor of Florida Rick Scott signs landmark anti-gun bill....

Dramatic and poignant, yet goofy.
Agree. Fake news. More than 300,000 NRA members in Florida.
Originally Posted By: King Brown
Agree. Fake news. More than 300,000 NRA members in Florida.


Once a troll, always a troll, eh King?

As we all know... all too well... most infringements upon our 2nd Amendment Rights come from the Liberal Left Democrats that King so ardently supports and defends. And this anti-gun legislation signed by Republican Florida Governor Rick Scott certainly did not go nearly as far as most Democrats, or King would have liked. The NRA has filed a lawsuit over the new law, and time will tell how Governor Scott's choice to go along with blaming law abiding gun owners for the acts of a mentally ill killer whose blatant threats were ignored by authorities will fly.

The way to deal with a Republican who infringes upon our Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms is exactly the same as a Democrat who infringes upon our rights. You simply vote them out and replace them with someone who respects the U.S. Constitution. My own Republican Senator sided with Obama and Biden after Newtown. That was the end of any vote or support he will ever get from me. Any gun owners or firearms enthusiasts who support anti-gun politicians are undermining the rights of all gun owners, and shooting themselves in the foot.

You can't support abortion and call yourself pro-life. And you sure as hell can't support anti-gunners and call yourself pro-gun or pro 2nd Amendment... unless you are totally dishonest.

As craig said, it's goofy. Almost without exception, these things are overturned. The individual American citizen has literally no voice in making public policy. Economic elites and narrow-based interests have nearly all the clout. In the case of stopping legislation to which they are opposed, almost 100 per cent.
Originally Posted By: King Brown
As craig said, it's goofy....

I don't want you to appear insensitive, consider he's, not it's? I like that you're using 'fake news' in your conversations. It looks like the new guy is scratching back little bits of the culture war ground that the last fellow tried to colonize, eh?
NRA's in on this one. Easier to make the 2nd Amendment stand against the State of Florida than in Washington. The age issue will be an interesting fight...Geo
I don't know where colonizing comes in with gun control, craig, except there doesn't seem much to choose from when it comes to draining the swamp. If the other guy appropriated the office for his party's use (colonizing), he didn't lay a hand on guns (as I forecast at the time) and the new guy doesn't appear to have found the plug. Money, money, craig: $1.2 billion last round by the Dems alone, no sign anywhere of devolving power to the people.
It is entertaining to see King using the term Fake News. Especially considering all of the Fake News he has posted here over the years in his never ending efforts to undermine our 2nd Amendment.

King has persistently rehashed his totally incorrect opinions about the Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms... even after the 2008 Heller and McDonald U.S. Supreme Court decisions affirmed that right:

Originally Posted By: King Brown
The Court departed from the original understanding of the Second. The NRA and other groups rejected the original interpretation. Even as late as 1991, the jurist Burger appointed by Nixon said "the Second Amendment has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word 'fraud,' on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime." In 2008, in the District of Columbia v. Heller, what Burger said was fraud was accepted by the court. Interesting stuff.



Originally Posted By: King Brown
Ed, historically the individual "right" to bear arms is relatively new. I believe John Ashcroft in 2002 became the first federal attorney-general to proclaim that individuals should be able to own guns. The Supreme Court in 2008 overturned all mainstream legal and historical scholarship by ruling that there is an individual right to own firearms although with some limits. Obama said it again last week.

I believe that during the previous 218 years the Second meant what it said: firearms shall be held by "the People"---a collective and not individual right---insofar they are in the service of "a well-regulated militia." Was an individual right even mentioned at the Constitutional Convention or in the House when it ratified the Amendment or when debated in state legislatures? I don't think so.



Originally Posted By: King Brown
Dave, Dave, Dave: you're like those fundamentalists who claim Jesus walked with the dinosaurs. There was no NRA at time of the Founding Fathers. The change was recent to what the Second is today. You acknowledge as "infringements" all those jurisdictions making the Second what they want it to be. But still the law.

Whether Americans carry because they can or have to is not the issue. They democratically make decisions on how they want to live. Their homicide record is not edifying among modern societies. It is a violent country.


Yes, King presents this same Fake News and would have us all believe that the NRA twisted and perverted the Original Intent of the Framers, and that our individual right was only invented in recent years. Mounds of evidence to the contrary has never stopped King from presenting his Fake News and false assertions. I've always wondered whether King wasn't the Father of Fake News, and whether such dishonest reporting is what led to his premature departure from journalism after a relatively short career.

Originally Posted By: King Brown
The Court in 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller changed the 200-year-old narrowly interpreted Second from serving in the militia to an individual right. Do you favour democratic processes over justice of stacked courts?

Why I ask, as I mentioned earlier, is that there is no political will to change regulations; Obama talked about it but did nothing. What party would commit suicide by taking away what a majority considers a sacred right?


And there's some more of King's Fake News about the 2nd Amendment, and his repeated lie that Liberal Left Democrat Barack Hussein Obama did nothing but talk about advancing more gun control legislation. We all know that Obama tried to do much more, and considered his failure to pass sweeping anti-gun legislation as his greatest defeat... a defeat by the millions of gun owners who took the time to join the NRA, and call their Congressmen, and vote out the legislators who sided with him.

Of course, my opinion is totally and completely based upon what King posts here. It is his own words which betray him. And I've learned that much of what he posts as facts is nothing but falsehoods, anti-gun dogma, and DNC talking points. The purpose of this thread was to explore rational "common sense" alternatives to new gun laws that would save many more lives... if the intent of all of the hysterics is really a concern with saving lives. Since King obviously isn't here to help, he ought to partner with Ed, Jagermeister, SKB, and rocky mtn bill, and they could start their own pro-gun control thread.
well, florida's new gun purchase law raizes the legal age to purchase a long gun to 21...it is a restriction, not a prohibition...the state is well within it's right to regulate arms sales...
Wrong again Ed.

If you are a 20 year old female who lives on her own and desires a long gun for personal protection, it is a prohibition... plain and simple... which means you won't be able to comprehend.

It was only a matter of time before your long standing support for more restrictive gun laws came back out. You never disappoint Ed. Why don't you and King go do your trolling someplace else?

Originally Posted By: ed good
as for the gun control issue...we are the only country in the world that seems to tolerate mass murder, in the name of an individual right...its about time that we as a society realize that we are over gunned with too many super dangerous weapons in the hands of too many super dangerous people... it is long past time to do as the rest of the civilized world has done and simply, disarm...
Originally Posted By: ed good
well, florida's new gun purchase law raizes the legal age to purchase a long gun to 21...it is a restriction, not a prohibition...the state is well within it's right to regulate arms sales...


Its a prohibition if the citizen is 18 to 21. If the courts have to decide it might as well be the conservative Florida district court within the 11th circuit appeals court.

I predict a similar case in one of the more liberal jurisdictions of the country with a decision opposite what I expect the Florida case will be. Then the Supremes can settle the difference between the appellate circuits...Geo
as i understand the new law, florida residents under the age of 21 are not prohibited from possessing long guns...they are only restricted from purchasing long guns from ffl dealers...no florida law prohibits the gifting of long guns by others...nor are there new restrictions on non dealer transactions...



an keet, why not just simply disarm?
"President Trump signs an executive order that instructed Jeff Sessions to regulate bump stocks".
'President Trump is absolutely committed to ensuring the safety & security of every American and he has directed us to pursue a regulation addressing bump stocks'.
'We must do more to protect our children'.
Originally Posted By: Jagermeister
"President Trump signs an executive order that instructed Jeff Sessions to regulate bump stocks".
'President Trump is absolutely committed to ensuring the safety & security of every American and he has directed us to pursue a regulation addressing bump stocks'.


Mere window dressing intended to satisfy wannabes fake internet pretenders like you. There are numerous legal methods of increasing the rate of fire of semi-automatics as innocuous as simply holding the gun loosely.

So are you praising Trump or are you back to knocking him as you did for months prior to then claiming that you voted for him? And what is it really like being a pathetic tire-kicker who still doesn't own any doubles... But feels the need to troll like King and Ed?
"There are numerous legal methods of increasing the rate of fire of semi-automatics as innocuous as simply holding the gun loosely."...if this is in fact true, then keet you are making the case for adding certain semi autos to the class 3 list, with all of the restrictions that apply...
Originally Posted By: ed good
....if this is in fact true, then....you are making the case for adding certain semi autos to the class 3 list, with all of the restrictions that apply...

Probably not. Maybe, your confusion comes from how inept the last admin. was. Besides, it flies in the face of your contention that this is a state autonomy issue.
Originally Posted By: ed good
"There are numerous legal methods of increasing the rate of fire of semi-automatics as innocuous as simply holding the gun loosely."...if this is in fact true, then keet you are making the case for adding certain semi autos to the class 3 list, with all of the restrictions that apply...


No Ed, I am not making any case for adding any semi-auto to the Class 3 firearms list. Cases like that are made by anti-gunners like you and King.

You should know that John Browning easily converted an 1873 Winchester lever gun to fire full automatic. Do you also think lever action rifles should be Class 3? There were also several devices to convert bolt action rifles to full-auto including the Pederson Device for the Springfield rifle. As 3-D printing becomes more accessible, it will become quite easy to "print" fully functional actions in spite of any attempt to ban them.

Did you know that Ed McGivern could fire double action revolvers at a cyclic rate of 750 rounds per minute which is faster than a full auto AK-47, and faster than an AR-15 with a bump-fire stock?

http://www.edmcgivern.com/didyouknow.html

Like most anti-gunners Ed, you are obsessed with banning guns in the name of saving lives when there are many other things that are killing many more people. But there is no reason for us to expect guys like you, Jagermeister, or King to be honest with us about your anti-gun attitudes when you can't even be honest with yourselves.
'We need to stop dangerous people before they act, so Congress should provide funding for states to adopt risk protection orders. This can help prevent violent behavior before it turns into a tragedy. These laws allow a court to intervene and temporarily remove firearms when a person threatens violence to themselves or others.'
Raising the driving age would prevent more deaths than raising the age you can buy a gun. Back in my day, 18-20 year olds were too broke to buy guns. Guess the current generation is more flush than mine.

So sick of seeing nothing but gun control on the news . . .
© The DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com