What's the difference between this operation and a gun show?

Those firearms include revolvers, semiautomatic handguns, sawed-off shotguns and rifles, and military-style semiautomatic rifles, he said, adding that some of the guns were sold with obliterated serial numbers, making them difficult to trace by law-enforcement.


Holy correct terminology, Batman!

czei

What's the difference between this operation and a gun show?


I don't think you can drive into a gun show.


Farmer's market, yes. Gun show, no.

Not only that, but a well-regulated militia is now called, "the United States military."

JRoo: HotIgneous Intruder: Not only that, but a well-regulated militia is now called, "the United States military."


Those guys are heroes and also the reason we need guns.
Because they could take our guns away if they have guns and we don't.
Support the troops and our leader, patriots!

Hmm circular logic? That sounds like key talking points that the NRA would use...

Of course not.

You can't see the entire gun case throught that tiny window.

TheYeti: throught

What?

Smeggy Smurf: czei: What's the difference between this operation and a gun show?

Gunshows are well run fairs where decent people can make an honest buck

See, I always thought gun shows were occasional events, where once or twice a year the locals could come together and buy, sell, trade guns. Then I find out that there's one every weekend in the Dallas area. In fact there's one this weekend a short distance from my place that I might go to for shiats and giggles. I suspect it's more like a traveling flea market than anything.

/And it's air conditioned.

Here's a product all you treasonous subversives will like.

/Can't wait for you assholes to start demanding the government require Free Speech permits.

JRoo: HotIgneous Intruder: Not only that, but a well-regulated militia is now called, "the United States military."


Those guys are heroes and also the reason we need guns.
Because they could take our guns away if they have guns and we don't.
Support the troops and our leader, patriots!

How do I know you're ... oh crap, never mind.
If you don't get it by now, you never will.

/Go ahead and shoot the government.
//Let me know how that turns out for you.

HotIgneous Intruder: Not only that, but a well-regulated militia is now called, "the United States military."

actually, the militia in the constitution is the national guard (if you look at the grants of power to congress, which separately provides for the army and navy)

pute kisses like a man: HotIgneous Intruder: Not only that, but a well-regulated militia is now called, "the United States military."

actually, the militia in the constitution is the national guard (if you look at the grants of power to congress, which separately provides for the army and navy)

Yes, there is no constitutional provision for a permanent, standing US military.
[Congress just keeps shoveling the money to it every couple of years, keeping it alive.]
Just like there is no more need for yeoman farmers to keep a musket beside the door, ready to run out and meet King George's troops should the need arise.

The modern military IS the continental militia, writ large. Except that we're using it exactly like the Romans used their professional military, to maintain global imperial hegemony.

actually, the militia is the militia, and the NG is a federally-funded state-run army

a militia, by definition, is the able-bodied citizens willing to volunteer in an emergency, not an organized force getting suckered into fighting wars overseas

HotIgneous Intruder

Except that we're using it exactly like the Romans used their professional military, to maintain global imperial hegemony.


Well,THERE is a foolproof plan...

bigfatdave: actually, the militia is the militia, and the NG is a federally-funded state-run army

a militia, by definition, is the able-bodied citizens willing to volunteer in an emergency, not an organized force getting suckered into fighting wars overseas

article I of constitution allows congress... To provide for calling forth the Militia

This was the operative language that gave birth to the national guard. however a dictionary defines a militia is immaterial to the operative fact that, no matter what logic dictates, the national guard is the militia allowed in the constitution.

So . . . I can't drink and drive, but I can get booze through a drive-through;

I can carry a weapon in my car, but I can't buy a gun through a drive-through?

/see what NObama has done to America!

ITT: "I hate cops, and I hate guns, so only cops should have guns"?

pute kisses like a man: article I of constitution allows congress... To provide for calling forth the Militia

This was the operative language that gave birth to the national guard. however a dictionary defines a militia is immaterial to the operative fact that, no matter what logic dictates, the national guard is the militia allowed in the constitution.

Oh, that makes a lot more sense than the writers of the constitution writing about the militia that they just used to secede from the British empire.
What relevance could the militia in the battles of Lexington and Concord possibly have to the framers?

And then they turned around and wrote a little piece of frippery way back in the appendices or something about how "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Because they were including the right for the States to run a federally funded army in the middle of a bunch of other rights for citizens
yes, that makes sense

/"underline font" = "sarcastic font"
//in case you couldn't figure that out
///also, I couldn't find a condescending font

Trolljegeren: [www.sovereignman.com image 200x240]

Here's a product all you treasonous subversives will like.

/Can't wait for you assholes to start demanding the government require Free Speech permits.

Well we got the free speech zones that are back on the loading docks

bigfatdave: pute kisses like a man: article I of constitution allows congress... To provide for calling forth the Militia

This was the operative language that gave birth to the national guard. however a dictionary defines a militia is immaterial to the operative fact that, no matter what logic dictates, the national guard is the militia allowed in the constitution.

Oh, that makes a lot more sense than the writers of the constitution writing about the militia that they just used to secede from the British empire.
What relevance could the militia in the battles of Lexington and Concord possibly have to the framers?

And then they turned around and wrote a little piece of frippery way back in the appendices or something about how "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Because they were including the right for the States to run a federally funded army in the middle of a bunch of other rights for citizens
yes, that makes sense

/"underline font" = "sarcastic font"
//in case you couldn't figure that out
///also, I couldn't find a condescending font

I'm not sure if you're attacking me or the history of constitutional review.

all I meant to say is that nowadays, folks have decided that the article I "militia" section eventually resulted in the creation of the national guard. it also says that the states are supposed to be involved with the national guard, but I don't know anything about the national guard.... I just remember a quick sentence in a bar review class where the prof said, these are congress' enumerated powers... by the way, the militia is the national guard, but don't worry, that won't be one the bar.

personally, i don't care for constitutional law*, so I only remember the information necessary to pass the bar. I think law school takes the shininess off that piece of paper for 99% of people. However, though I don't like working in the arena of constitutional law, it is a well written grant of power and it's nice that it has held up, in some form or another, for so long.

* except for the constitutional provisions regarding article I and article III courts and how the bill of rights affects evidence/witnesses. because that stuff matters in my industry, but is very boring to talk about with most people.

HotIgneous Intruder: JRoo: HotIgneous Intruder: Not only that, but a well-regulated militia is now called, "the United States military."


Those guys are heroes and also the reason we need guns.
Because they could take our guns away if they have guns and we don't.
Support the troops and our leader, patriots!

How do I know you're ... oh crap, never mind.
If you don't get it by now, you never will.

/Go ahead and shoot the government.
//Let me know how that turns out for you.

What a bunch of crap. I don't trust those shifty privates. Who thought giving a machine gun to an easily impressionable 18 year old in a profession where he is legally obligated to obey any order from any superior was a good idea?

wildcardjack: Smeggy Smurf: czei: What's the difference between this operation and a gun show?

Gunshows are well run fairs where decent people can make an honest buck

See, I always thought gun shows were occasional events, where once or twice a year the locals could come together and buy, sell, trade guns. Then I find out that there's one every weekend in the Dallas area. In fact there's one this weekend a short distance from my place that I might go to for shiats and giggles. I suspect it's more like a traveling flea market than anything.

/And it's air conditioned.

Well, in northern Louisiana, we don't have gun shows except a couple of times a year, and I wish it were easier to find out about private gun sales. I just want some more variety on the range, and don't want to pay new retail. The pawn shops nearby want above new retail for used guns and won't negotiate because they want someone to come in and buy on layaway. I like gunbroker, but I also like holding the weapon in my hands before buying. Sigh.

/Gunshow in 2 weeks!

pute kisses like a man: I'm not sure if you're attacking me or the history of constitutional review.

all I meant to say is that nowadays, folks have decided that the article I "militia" section eventually resulted in the creation of the national guard¹. it also says that the states are supposed to be involved with the national guard, but I don't know anything about the national guard^1a.... I just remember a quick sentence in a bar review class² where the prof said, these are congress' enumerated powers... by the way, the militia is the national guard, but don't worry, that won't be one the bar.

personally, i don't care for constitutional law³*, so I only remember the information necessary to pass the bar. I think law school takes the shininess off that piece of paper for 99% of people.

Well, I wasn't attacking anything but your silly half-baked ideas, but now I'll have to fisk your post a bit:

1 - "folks have decided" isn't relevant to what the words mean, and the constitution is in pretty plain English, although it requires a bit of historical background at times
Such as the concept of "the militia is a semi-organized group of common citizens who arm themselves and discourage redcoats from moving about freely or accomplishing their goals"
... in modern terms, the militia makes it awfully hard to occupy the US (invading forces in armored vehicles with air support are hard to defend against with portable arms, but I can damn sure make it hard to take a dump on the occupying force's base, or to get supplies in, or to round up the population)

The Revolution was fought with privately owned ships, artillery, and small arms, as well as weaponry supplied by the treasonous rebels who dared to secede from Britain and their fledgling government. The founders recognized the value of having an armed citizenry, back in the days of limited government they couldn't just create an armed force out of thin air - and the one we have now is horrifically bloated and inefficient as a defensive force, and only severely inefficient as an instrument of US imperialism, which is NOT an enumerated power of government in the constitution.

1a - and that's OK, because the national guard has fark-all to do with the right of the people to keep and bear arms ... but saying "I don't know anything about {{subject I claim is relevant to the discussion}}" ... well, it doesn't help your credibility much, sport.

2 - if your knowledge is based on "a quick sentence in bar review class" ... you should have taken a better class or paid attention for the one you paid for, pal.

3 - if you don't care for constitutional law, keep your silly opinions about it to yourself, champ.

===

JonZoidberg
http://www.gunshows-usa.com/louisania.shtml
Also, Armslist.com
Also, your local gun rights forum probably has a buy&sell section

Wait, you man criminals don't buy guns from their local gun stores? Shocking!!!

bigfatdave: pute kisses like a man: ..

I guess I had deleted the sentence that expressly stated that I wasn't talking about the 2nd amendment. merely article I. whoops. I accidentally over-edited out substance from an originally verbose answer. sorry, that was a failure. now here comes longwinded insignificance.

at some point in time, congress decided to create the national guard. if it ever became an issue, they justified it by the enumerated power in Article I that lets them raise a militia. Whether they were semantically accurate in their application is relatively immaterial. Their creation of the national guard has not been determined by the judicial branch to be unconstitutional.

oh, and then I decided to leave my memory and search it

10 USC § 311:
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are-
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

now, they use the national guard in very elaborate and creative ways. i agree, this seems a stretch. I'm sure someone has sued on the issue, but I don't know of any outcomes. so, as far as I know, the use of the national guard has not yet been determined to be unconstitutional. if we had a current case or controversy, which I could take a look at, read about, then I'd offer my functionally insignificant opinion.

regarding the 2nd amendment, I'm not making an argument in either direction. but the supreme court has already weighed in on the issue. so, whatever they say goes for me, since it's not an issue that has invoked a significant sense of social injustice. now, if the issue was something like slavery, then I'd have a strong sense of social justice and think the law unjust and fight the law with tooth and claw. but, when the issue is not dear to me or my sense of justice, i merely seek the guidance that makes life in ordered liberty predictable.

and finally, i made mention that I don't study the constitution very closely so that my credibility on the subject would be called into question. I don't go to fark to hash out my dissertation theses. i treat this forum like a dialogue with people that I have no requirement to impress. these types of dialogues are more informal and occasionally, more beneficial. especially if someone else has more authority on the issue and cares to weigh in. being attacked for being incredible isn't necessarily interesting, especially where our statements are so divergent. you would like to say what things should be under this type of analysis. i'm merely saying, this is how congress/courts have decided that things are. I merely grant them the deference that is due: the law may be [insert any adjective here] but it is the law.

Mrbogey: czei: What's the difference between this operation and a gun show?

Pretty much everything.

Neither require a background check or report a sale to the government.

wildcardjack: I suspect it's more like a traveling flea market than anything.

I suspect it's more like a traveling museum where you can purchase the specimens.

/shows tend to be showcases whether they be for cars or comics or guns. Not the "back-alley underground poorly-lit gun smuggling" picture everyone likes to paint.

HotIgneous Intruder: Just like there is no more need for yeoman farmers to keep a musket beside the door, ready to run out and meet King George's troops should the need arise.

You really think the Second Amendment is to protect us from foreign armies?

Englebert Slaptyback: Those firearms include revolvers, semiautomatic handguns, sawed-off shotguns and rifles, and military-style semiautomatic rifles, he said, adding that some of the guns were sold with obliterated serial numbers, making them difficult to trace by law-enforcement.


Holy correct terminology, Batman!

Lol, you mean scary looking guns that should be banned so that nearly identicle but less scary looking guns can stay on the streets

/I don't know what to think anymore

pute kisses like a man:
RE: article
Obviously scumbags will continue to be scumbags. The existence of what is almost a drive-up gun shop just demonstrated the complete inability of the government to regulate the sale of weapons - I'm mostly amused at the method, shutting down one unlicensed weapon shop will hardly prevent scumbags from arming themselves as they please. And the actions of criminals hardly has any bearing on the right of citizens to arm themselves as they please, if the PTB want to control criminals' access to various tools they should do so through the courts, and stop bothering the law-abiding with ineffective & useless legislation.

RE: 10 USC § 311
And the unorginazed militia was there first. By the way, you're part of the unorginazed militia, unless you're on active duty, reserve/NG/NNG duty, or just a freedom sponge.


===

SharkTrager: You really think the Second Amendment is to protect us from foreign armies?

Among other things, yes. Just as important is the concept that an armed citizen is a threat to nobody but criminals and tyrants, if you can't trust someone with {weapon} then you surely can't trust them in public at all, or in the voting booth.

Look up the reason Japan never attempted to invade mainland US - the source in unknown (often misattributed to Yamamoto or a vague japanese officer post-war) ... but the concept is true:
You cannot invade the mainland United States.
There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.
Or at least it was true until the average US Citizen suscribed to the twaddle about "the second amendmant is about the national guard"

Mrbogey: czei: Mrbogey: czei: What's the difference between this operation and a gun show?

Pretty much everything.

Neither require a background check or report a sale to the government.

if you're a dealer at a gun show, you still have to run a background check. You're confusing the ability to sell a gun at a gun show as a private citizen with selling guns at a gunshow. You won't find unlicensed "dealers" there. Despite some claims to the contrary, the ATF does arrest people.

Aren't the people selling guns in the article private citizens? Say you're a private citizen with a large gun collection. Are you not allowed to sell all of your guns at a gun show?

threadjackistan

Englebert Slaptyback: Those firearms include revolvers, semiautomatic handguns, sawed-off shotguns and rifles, and military-style semiautomatic rifles, he said, adding that some of the guns were sold with obliterated serial numbers, making them difficult to trace by law-enforcement.


Holy correct terminology, Batman!

Lol, you mean scary looking guns that should be banned so that nearly identicle but less scary looking guns can stay on the streets


Not really. I was just happy not to see "assault rifle" in there for once.

PS "identical"

ITT: Ignorant people talking about guns and gun rights. Also, gun owners and freedom loving people banging their heads against a wall.

HotIgneous Intruder: pute kisses like a man: HotIgneous Intruder: Not only that, but a well-regulated militia is now called, "the United States military."

actually, the militia in the constitution is the national guard (if you look at the grants of power to congress, which separately provides for the army and navy)

Yes, there is no constitutional provision for a permanent, standing US military.
[Congress just keeps shoveling the money to it every couple of years, keeping it alive.]
Just like there is no more need for yeoman farmers to keep a musket beside the door, ready to run out and meet King George's troops should the need arise.

The modern military IS the continental militia, writ large. Except that we're using it exactly like the Romans used their professional military, to maintain global imperial hegemony.


I know that in my state the militia is defined as every able bodied man and woman living in the state. And the governor can call us to duty at any time. I also know that there is probably such a law in your state, heck it might just be in your state's constitution. I also know that there is a federal statute that states that the unorganized militia is every able bodied man over 17 years of age who is not in the national guard.

So, good try liberal. But you need to do better. This time, also try to talk about hegemony more, I love thats stuff.

czei: Aren't the people selling guns in the article private citizens? Say you're a private citizen with a large gun collection. Are you not allowed to sell all of your guns at a gun show?

1. Seemed to be at least partially 'disallowed persons', IE Felons,
2. Private Citizen disposing of his 'large gun collection' is indeed legal without him conducting background checks, but he'd better not be attempting to make a living off of it. Generally 'making a living' would mean that, in the case of used guns, you're buying low, selling high, and otherwise have a constant stream of product into and out of your possession. If you've collected firearms over the last 20 years and only sold like 5% of them, and only now are you disposing of them at a rate that far exceeds your purchases, you're probably not a dealer. If you're buying 120 guns a month and selling 119 of them while making a profit, you're probably a dealer.
3. Selling guns at a gun show - they're private events; depends on the state and event rules. Some require EVERYBODY to go through an FFL, even if the law doesn't require it, simply due to all the hoopla. Some you can go with your rifle on your back with a zip-tie through the action(for safety) with a 'for sale' sign on it. Some you could even rent a table to sell multiple pieces on it. Just be aware that in the 2nd two cases contact with police, probably plain-clothed, possibly in a straw-purchase sting(if you rent a table), is probably guaranteed. And if they see you at multiple shows with different guns for sale they're probably going to look into where you got them from, to see if they can get you for being an illegal dealer.
4. They were selling illegal guns(serials removed). About the only guns that don't need them are literally antiques - the law requiring serial numbers is ancient, and before that most manufacturers did serial numbers anyways just for warranty, inventory, and lot control purposes. You practically have to go back to black powder weapons to not have serial numbers as standard. Only cartridge exemptions I remember were cheap as heck even for the time.

I've heard that the only place with more guns than a gun show is a jewelry show. ;) Other than that, at most gun shows the question isn't whether the police are there, it's a question of how pervasive the police presence is. Cops tend to like guns even more than the general population, so they attend shows in their off time as well, and attending them on duty is hotly sought after.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Please to allow me the substitution of a few words:

Carpenters, being necessary to the construction of dwellings of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear hammers, shall not be infringed.

/ How is it I don't need permission from the government to buy a hammer?

// Discuss.