If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   If you're going to carry an illegal loaded semiautomatic firearm in NYC, it is probably best to not press your luck by trying to beat a $2 subway fare   (nypost.com) divider line 215
    More: Dumbass, semiautomatic firearms, Smith & Wesson, 14th Street  
•       •       •

5777 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Feb 2013 at 12:42 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



215 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-12 12:43:31 PM

it is probably best to not press your luck


BIG BUCKS!
NO WHAMMIES!
 
2013-02-12 12:45:12 PM
Poor bastard.  Too stupid to leave that pit.
 
2013-02-12 12:45:27 PM
PATH train isn't the subway subby.
 
2013-02-12 12:45:36 PM
Cue Chris Rock "How Not To Get Your Ass Beat By The Cops" sketch.
 
2013-02-12 12:45:44 PM
That's so gangsta'
 
2013-02-12 12:45:49 PM
In any sane locale cheating the fare would be a far bigger crime than carrying a constitutionally protected tool.
 
2013-02-12 12:46:31 PM
Do illegal things 1 at a time
 
2013-02-12 12:46:42 PM
Why should I follow the law?  That's why I got the gun.
 
2013-02-12 12:46:51 PM
Idiot subby - guy was packing heat to fend off the tyrannical jackbooted thugs of the MTA.
 
2013-02-12 12:47:14 PM
$2.25, subster.
 
2013-02-12 12:47:15 PM

JesseL: In any sane locale cheating the fare would be a far bigger crime than carrying a constitutionally protected tool.


In any sane locale you wouldn't have Sheriff Arpaio wiping his ass with the constitution.
 
2013-02-12 12:47:42 PM
But he's a responsible, law-obiding, NRA member! What are you, commie??
 
2013-02-12 12:48:53 PM
Question: Anyone know if the guy had any priors?

If he is the kinda guy with felonies to his name, I would be applauding New York.

If he is just a citizen who was carrying to protect himself for whatever reason, I find this story incredibly sad.
 
2013-02-12 12:49:07 PM
Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.  If you carry one long enough you tend to figure out that its not there making you feel bigger than you are, its there to remind you that your involved in something that having a gun was a good idea.  Then you start thinking about where you life choices went wrong and you hopefully get the fark out of that life.  I have known pleanty of idiots who thought having a couple guns strapped to them meant they were the king of the block.

Also IMHO if you have a CCL and you have a habit of telling random people that you have a CCL for no discernible reason, then you probably shouldn't have a CCL.
 
2013-02-12 12:49:21 PM

downtownkid: JesseL: In any sane locale cheating the fare would be a far bigger crime than carrying a constitutionally protected tool.

In any sane locale you wouldn't have Sheriff Arpaio wiping his ass with the constitution.


You may be surprised to know that I agree with you. Lucky for me, I don't live in Maricopa county.
 
2013-02-12 12:49:47 PM
How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.
 
2013-02-12 12:50:40 PM
we need to ban NYC, subways, luck, probability, arms
 
2013-02-12 12:50:42 PM

JesseL: downtownkid: JesseL: In any sane locale cheating the fare would be a far bigger crime than carrying a constitutionally protected tool.

In any sane locale you wouldn't have Sheriff Arpaio wiping his ass with the constitution.

You may be surprised to know that I agree with you. Lucky for me, I don't live in Maricopa county.


Fair enough.
 
2013-02-12 12:51:44 PM

atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.


Do you have any idea how stupid you make yourself look when you say things like that?
 
2013-02-12 12:53:26 PM

downtownkid: In any sane locale you wouldn't have Sheriff Arpaio wiping his ass with the constitution.


Very true. I'm especially not fond of his jackbooted tactics for intimidating political enemies.

JesseL: In any sane locale cheating the fare would be a far bigger crime than carrying a constitutionally protected tool.


Also true
 
2013-02-12 12:53:50 PM
dr-shotgun  Question: Anyone know if the guy had any priors?

If he is the kinda guy with felonies to his name, I would be applauding New York.

If he is just a citizen who was carrying to protect himself for whatever reason, I find this story incredibly sad.



7 years for possession of an illegal firearm?  Sort of stiff.  Yeah, I'd also like to know more details about this.
 
2013-02-12 12:54:37 PM

downtownkid: JesseL: In any sane locale cheating the fare would be a far bigger crime than carrying a constitutionally protected tool.

In any sane locale you wouldn't have Sheriff Arpaio wiping his ass with the constitution.


Neither of these is mutually exclusive.
 
2013-02-12 12:55:24 PM

qorkfiend: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Do you have any idea how stupid you make yourself look when you say things like that?


Certainly no more stupid than the people who wrote those laws.
 
2013-02-12 12:55:33 PM
To be fair, submitter, the subway costs $2.25 per ride. That extra quarter make the difference
 
2013-02-12 12:56:18 PM
i.imgur.com

"Again?"
 
2013-02-12 12:56:32 PM

qorkfiend: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Do you have any idea how stupid you make yourself look when you say things like that?


Do you have any idea how stupid "gun free zones" are? They are just as dumb as open prison doors with signs that say "As a favor to us, don't leave this prison"
 
2013-02-12 12:56:51 PM
Freedom isn't free
No, there's a hefty f*ckin' fee
And if you don't throw in your buck o' five
Who will?

This guy is a moron but can we get the short list of what IS still legal in New York?
Did he have a concealed beverage as well?
 
2013-02-12 12:57:19 PM
I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?
 
2013-02-12 12:58:50 PM

downtownkid: PATH train isn't the subway subby.


Not "the subway" but it is undergroudn there, and most people call an underground train a subway in the US.


/not subby
 
2013-02-12 01:00:07 PM

orclover: Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.  If you carry one long enough you tend to figure out that its not there making you feel bigger than you are, its there to remind you that your involved in something that having a gun was a good idea.  Then you start thinking about where you life choices went wrong and you hopefully get the fark out of that life.  I have known pleanty of idiots who thought having a couple guns strapped to them meant they were the king of the block.


Since this is an anonymous forum, I feel that I can say that I have a CHL without appearing to be going for tough guy points.

Funny enough, carrying has had the exact opposite effect on me. I was never a hugely confrontational guy to begin with, but I've become extraordinarily passive and excessively polite when I'm out and about, ever since I started carrying.

Outside of my military service and my time as a paramedic, I've never been in a fight or direct violent confrontation in my life. I don't plan on that ever happening either. Having said that, I am *extremely* conscious of the fact that I am carrying and that if someone were to start up with me (physically), my firearm would likely become involved. In that scenario, I want the timeline to be  astoundingly clear that I was not the one to begin, to extend or to egg on the confrontation in  any way.
 
2013-02-12 01:01:38 PM

dr-shotgun: If he is the kinda guy with felonies to his name, I would be applauding New York.


Don't know if it's the same one, but a google for "Ruben Sanabria" shows a conviction for drug charges in Jersey City, NJ,  with an appeal in 2006.
 
2013-02-12 01:02:51 PM

SirEattonHogg: 7 years for possession of an illegal firearm? Sort of stiff. Yeah, I'd also like to know more details about this.


Either he got one of those "max penalty all the time" judges, or there were other things going on.  7 years is the max penalty for the Class D felony version of the crime.

My guess is he got snippy with the transit authority and/or had a history of douchebaggery.
 
2013-02-12 01:03:54 PM

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


Well, Duh.  Make having a gun illegal, as NYC pretty much does except for the politically well-connected, and of course people will be arrested.

Having said that, this guy may have been a convicted drug dealer, which would be "felon in possession".
 
2013-02-12 01:04:18 PM

dr-shotgun: Outside of my military service and my time as a paramedic, I've never been in a fight or direct violent confrontation in my life. I don't plan on that ever happening either. Having said that, I am *extremely* conscious of the fact that I am carrying and that if someone were to start up with me (physically), my firearm would likely become involved. In that scenario, I want the timeline to be astoundingly clear that I was not the one to begin, to extend or to egg on the confrontation in any way.


So "an armed society is a polite society" actually has something to it?
 
2013-02-12 01:04:33 PM
So he's probably got priors.  Nice (lack of) reporting there New York Post.
 
2013-02-12 01:05:28 PM

Mirrorz: Did he have a concealed beverage as well?


High capacity assault cups are banned in NYC.
 
2013-02-12 01:06:56 PM

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


wat
 
2013-02-12 01:08:00 PM
Before people start whining about guns not being allowed on the subway, keep in mind that it's, you know, a subway.

Ever hear the expression fish in a barrel?

Plus the whole thing's covered in signs telling you carrying a firearm is 7 years in prison.
 
2013-02-12 01:11:10 PM

qorkfiend: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Do you have any idea how stupid you make yourself look when you say things like that?


As stupid as the people who like to say "another responsible gun owner" look?
 
2013-02-12 01:11:29 PM
semiautomatic? What do people still carry around muskets and flintlock pistols?
 
2013-02-12 01:11:34 PM

Here'sJohnny: Before people start whining about guns not being allowed on the subway, keep in mind that it's, you know, a subway.

Ever hear the expression fish in a barrel?


So the transit cops don't carry?
 
2013-02-12 01:12:59 PM

Stomponfoot: semiautomatic? What do people still carry around muskets and flintlock pistols?


As a matter of fact....

oi39.tinypic.com
 
2013-02-12 01:14:12 PM

atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.


Dear moron:

Although our gun-related death rate is lower than almost every other city in the country, with a total chance to be murdered per year equal to .005%, guns from jurisdictions that still enable straw purchases and gun shows do still sometimes make their way into the city. This is one of the side effects of allowing unfettered traffic of goods across state lines, which is why New York representatives and senators are supportive of anti-trafficking measures. On top of that, you can absolutely get a permit for a gun in New York City if you can show you're not likely to go shoot up a school. I know several people who own firearms, perfectly legally, and nobody cares and it wasn't a big hassle because they aren't criminals.
 
2013-02-12 01:16:33 PM
blogs.amctv.com

This is what the subway is like.  All of New York is like this actually.
 
2013-02-12 01:17:47 PM

captainktainer: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Dear moron:

Although our gun-related death rate is lower than almost every other city in the country, with a total chance to be murdered per year equal to .005%, guns from jurisdictions that still enable straw purchases and gun shows do still sometimes make their way into the city. This is one of the side effects of allowing unfettered traffic of goods across state lines, which is why New York representatives and senators are supportive of anti-trafficking measures. On top of that, you can absolutely get a permit for a gun in New York City if you can show you're not likely to go shoot up a school. I know several people who own firearms, perfectly legally, and nobody cares and it wasn't a big hassle because they aren't criminals.


TYRANNY!
 
2013-02-12 01:18:14 PM

orclover: Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.


And it has the opposite effect on a lot of people. When the neighborhood I lived in was worse than it is now I had a CCW and carried sometimes. What I noticed was how it made me more likely to cross the street or avoid conflict. Any confrontation could turn into a deadly force encounter, so the stakes were much higher
 
2013-02-12 01:18:32 PM

Here'sJohnny: Before people start whining about guns not being allowed on the subway, keep in mind that it's, you know, a subway.

Ever hear the expression fish in a barrel?

Plus the whole thing's covered in signs telling you carrying a firearm is 7 years in prison.


Yea, it's the subway...

The scuzzy station with limited exits and poor sight lines, where criminals are more comfortable to commit their acts against people. Time them well enough and you can mug/rob someone and hop onto the train as the doors close!

Or the subway car. The place with zero sight lines, limited police presence and downgraded cellular service.

Yea, I can't imagine why a good citizen might possibly wish to carry the most reliable means of self defense and protection in that kind of environment....
 
2013-02-12 01:19:00 PM
dittybopper:   semiautomatic? What do people still carry around muskets and flintlock pistols?

As a matter of fact....


How much of a recoil does a musket have?  I would love to fire one... and then spend the next couple of minutes reloading it.
 
2013-02-12 01:21:01 PM

captainktainer: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Dear moron:

Although our gun-related death rate is lower than almost every other city in the country, with a total chance to be murdered per year equal to .005%,


Dear other moron:  The total chance to be murdered in my city is equal to 0.0021%.  And that's by all causes, and we have more guns than you do.
 
2013-02-12 01:21:06 PM

Molavian: Poor bastard.  Too stupid to leave that pit.


Please. Don't give them any ideas.
 
2013-02-12 01:21:16 PM

qorkfiend: $2.25, subster.


victrin: To be fair, submitter, the subway costs $2.25 per ride. That extra quarter make the difference


Though it is $2.25 now, the PATH fare on March 30, 2012 was $2.00.

/Keep your MetroCards: A new one will cost you $1, starting March 3.
 
2013-02-12 01:21:47 PM

orclover: Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.  If you carry one long enough you tend to figure out that its not there making you feel bigger than you are, its there to remind you that your involved in something that having a gun was a good idea.  Then you start thinking about where you life choices went wrong and you hopefully get the fark out of that life.  I have known pleanty of idiots who thought having a couple guns strapped to them meant they were the king of the block.

Also IMHO if you have a CCL and you have a habit of telling random people that you have a CCL for no discernible reason, then you probably shouldn't have a CCL.


Most CCW permit holders tend to be less aggressive. Your entire post is a straw.an against what you think they are.
 
2013-02-12 01:22:34 PM

atomicmask: qorkfiend: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Do you have any idea how stupid you make yourself look when you say things like that?

Do you have any idea how stupid "gun free zones" are? They are just as dumb as open prison doors with signs that say "As a favor to us, don't leave this prison"


You're really kind of getting tied-up in semantics and missing what it SHOULD be called:

"ENHANCED GUN SENTENCING ZONE"

/NYC isn't a gun-free zone - it requires registration
 
2013-02-12 01:23:02 PM

SirEattonHogg: How much of a recoil does a musket have? I would love to fire one... and then spend the next couple of minutes reloading it.


Minutes? Don't you know, a skilled marksman can reload and fire that weapon as fast at one can bump fire an AR-15 (which is completely legal).
 
2013-02-12 01:24:04 PM

Rapmaster2000: On top of that, you can absolutely get a permit for a gun in New York City if you can show you're not likely to go shoot up a school. I know several people who own firearms, perfectly legally, and nobody cares and it wasn't a big hassle because they aren't criminals.



Yes, but if you want to actually  carry that weapon, you are SOL.

No matter how responsible you are, no matter how much training you've got, no matter if you live or work in a rough part of town, no matter if you are subject to a direct threat from a stalker or former spouse... as far as New York City is concerned, you are given absolutely no path to be able to defend yourself outside your home.

Unless you are very wealthy or politically connected. Those folks can get CCW permits...
 
2013-02-12 01:25:43 PM

Mrbogey: Most CCW permit holders tend to be less aggressive. Your entire post is a straw.an against what you think they are.


And yours is a response to something he didn't say.  If this guy was a CCW holder, the article doesn't say, and most people who are CCW holders don't spend all day talking about it (except on the internet).
 
2013-02-12 01:26:08 PM

Rapmaster2000: [blogs.amctv.com image 560x330]

This is what the subway is like.  All of New York is like this actually.


Well, no. Fuhrer Bloomberg would have Charles Bronson hauled off to prison for 45 years for smoking on the subway.
 
2013-02-12 01:26:12 PM

Stomponfoot: semiautomatic? What do people still carry around muskets and flintlock pistols?


Yeah - that kind of headline always irritated me.  That the gun was loaded is really kind of the default.  The difference between a double-action revolver and a semiautomatic is really kind of minimal.  Unless it was something like a sawed-off shotgun or highly unusual, like an AR-15 pistol, then really, "loaded" and "semi-automatic" are really there just to be inflammatory.
 
2013-02-12 01:28:34 PM

dr-shotgun: Rapmaster2000: On top of that, you can absolutely get a permit for a gun in New York City if you can show you're not likely to go shoot up a school. I know several people who own firearms, perfectly legally, and nobody cares and it wasn't a big hassle because they aren't criminals.


Yes, but if you want to actually  carry that weapon, you are SOL.

No matter how responsible you are, no matter how much training you've got, no matter if you live or work in a rough part of town, no matter if you are subject to a direct threat from a stalker or former spouse... as far as New York City is concerned, you are given absolutely no path to be able to defend yourself outside your home.

Unless you are very wealthy or politically connected. Those folks can get CCW permits...


Maybe you are.  Not me.  I'm proficient in judo, karate, and a bunch of other martial arts that I learned back in Nam.  When you're looking for your gun, I've already taken out the perp with my fists of fury, my knees of knowledge, and my elbows of elbowing.
 
2013-02-12 01:29:25 PM

vygramul: Stomponfoot: semiautomatic? What do people still carry around muskets and flintlock pistols?

Yeah - that kind of headline always irritated me.  That the gun was loaded is really kind of the default.  The difference between a double-action revolver and a semiautomatic is really kind of minimal.  Unless it was something like a sawed-off shotgun or highly unusual, like an AR-15 pistol, then really, "loaded" and "semi-automatic" are really there just to be inflammatory.


Gotta get those page clicks somehow.
 
2013-02-12 01:30:09 PM
Rapmaster2000

This is what the subway is like. All of New York is like this actually.

It's really not.  Even late at night the subway is pretty tame these days.  What you do see is the occasional shoving match getting on and off the train, and someone yelling because someone won't get out of their way.  And, sometimes, you get a ranty crazy person who lectures the car about terrorists or not having a job or how we're all going to Hell or whatever, but it isn't a big deal, and it happens pretty infrequently.

Still, it would be a bad idea to carry a gun on the subway--sometimes I get these red-mist rages over someone who keeps bumping into me with their purse or who won't take their backpack off when we're packed together during rush hour (I'm actually feeling my heart rate go up writing about it).  I never do anything about it, but I think the temptation might be to much for someone who was unbalanced.
 
2013-02-12 01:31:48 PM

SirEattonHogg: dittybopper:   semiautomatic? What do people still carry around muskets and flintlock pistols?

As a matter of fact....

How much of a recoil does a musket have?  I would love to fire one... and then spend the next couple of minutes reloading it.


Well, first off, that's technically a rifle, not a musket.

Typically a musket or rifle isn't going to have all that much recoil, and what recoil they do have is more like a "shove" than the kick of a modern gun.  Certainly, it's lower than a 12 gauge or a .30'06.

Also, it doesn't take 2 minutes to load.  I shoot "primitive biathlons", where speed is of the essence:  You score is your time, so the amount of time it takes to load and fire the 9 shots you take over the course is a factor in how well you do.  Using pre-made paper powder charges, a loading block (that thing with 8 holes in it dangling from my neck), and a pan primer (also around my neck), I can get to a shooting station, load and fire my 2 shots, and be out of there in less than a minute.  That's with a rifle, a smoothbore musket would be even quicker, albeit less accurate.

All it takes is a bit of practice.  I think with a bit more practice, I might be able to get it close to 40 seconds to load and fire two shots.
 
2013-02-12 01:33:22 PM

dr-shotgun: Yea, it's the subway...

The scuzzy station with limited exits and poor sight lines, where criminals are more comfortable to commit their acts against people. Time them well enough and you can mug/rob someone and hop onto the train as the doors close!

Or the subway car. The place with zero sight lines, limited police presence and downgraded cellular service.

Yea, I can't imagine why a good citizen might possibly wish to carry the most reliable means of self defense and protection in that kind of environment....


In the midst of a subway crime wave in 2011, there was a grand total of 7 crimes - *all* crimes, including property damage - per day on the subways. There were a grand total of two murders by crazy people on the subways in 2012, both of which were on platforms, not on the subway, and involved ambushers suddenly pushing people onto the tracks, which guns don't help with. Meanwhile, the penalties for carrying guns on the subway are very high because of the tremendous risk of collateral damage. Bullets can and will penetrate from one car to another, and the ones that don't will ricochet within the car, and the other passengers are packed in close quarters with you. It is an absolutely inappropriate environment for anyone to be firing a gun, even in self-defense.
 
2013-02-12 01:33:45 PM
captainktainer:
Although our gun-related death rate is lower than almost every other city in the country, with a total chance to be murdered per year equal to .005%, guns from jurisdictions that still enable straw purchases and gun shows do still sometimes make their way into the city. This is one of the side effects of allowing unfettered traffic of goods across state lines, which is why New York representatives and senators are supportive of anti-trafficking measures.

Dear Moron, please list jurisdictions where "Straw purchases" are legal.  (Hint see 27 CFR  § 478.29)
 
2013-02-12 01:34:40 PM

dittybopper: captainktainer: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Dear moron:

Although our gun-related death rate is lower than almost every other city in the country, with a total chance to be murdered per year equal to .005%,

Dear other moron:  The total chance to be murdered in my city is equal to 0.0021%.  And that's by all causes, and we have more guns than you do.


Congratulations on your podunk town in the middle of nowhere?
 
2013-02-12 01:34:51 PM
captainktainer:
guns from jurisdictions that still enable straw purchases and gun shows do still sometimes make their way into the city.

That's the funny thing, though - the places that "enable" those sales, despite having many more firearms available per capita, have much, much lower firearm related crime rates - and lower murder rates.

It's almost like heavy restrictions on weapons causes the law abiding people to not carry them - and allows the violent criminal types to acquire them and use them against the rest of the population.

How strange.
 
2013-02-12 01:36:03 PM

dr-shotgun: Question: Anyone know if the guy had any priors?


How about this one, or rather, several:

STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RUBEN SANABRIA (2006)

That's his felony convictions being upheld on appeal.

Hope the Federal DA prosecutes for Felon In Possession.  Not holding out too much hope, though, considering that those prosecutions have dropped 40%.  C;mon guys, go get the boring low hanging fruit AND the cool complicated ones.
 
2013-02-12 01:38:01 PM

kmark: Rapmaster2000

This is what the subway is like. All of New York is like this actually.

It's really not.  Even late at night the subway is pretty tame these days.  What you do see is the occasional shoving match getting on and off the train, and someone yelling because someone won't get out of their way.


Don't forget the-

And, sometimes, you get a ranty crazy person


Oh you have that covered. Ok smart guy what about the silent crazies who stare at me goggle eyed on an empty train making me think I'm about to get my face eaten off but then nothing happens and I make it home safely? Sounds harmless but I need a CC just thinking about it.
 
2013-02-12 01:38:05 PM

Oldiron_79: Do illegal things 1 at a time


This is why i either murder OR rape...never both.
 
2013-02-12 01:41:26 PM

qorkfiend: $2.25, subster.


Until March 1st
 
2013-02-12 01:41:37 PM

orclover: Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.  If you carry one long enough you tend to figure out that its not there making you feel bigger than you are, its there to remind you that your involved in something that having a gun was a good idea.  Then you start thinking about where you life choices went wrong and you hopefully get the fark out of that life.  I have known pleanty of idiots who thought having a couple guns strapped to them meant they were the king of the block.

Also IMHO if you have a CCL and you have a habit of telling random people that you have a CCL for no discernible reason, then you probably shouldn't have a CCL.


That's true in many cases.

However, I know a LOT of people who got a permit and carry and started to avoid confrontation. I'm one of them.

I have drawn a gun once in my life when some manic started pounding on the glass door at a beach house I was renting. At 2:30am. No matter what I said he just wouldn't stop. Drew, aimed, he saw it, and left. It turned out he was just really drunk and at the wrong house and I'm VERY glad he didn't break the door because at that point I would have shot him. I really hope I never shoot anyone.
 
2013-02-12 01:41:47 PM

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


Yes, that is not true, and therefore the second amendment is no longer an individual right and it requires a person to join a government-back militia.  Your side won!
 
2013-02-12 01:42:22 PM

Big_Fat_Liar: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Yes, that is not true, and therefore the second amendment is no longer an individual right and it requires a person to join a government-back militia.  Your side won!


or gov-backed, whatever it takes...
 
2013-02-12 01:42:35 PM

kmark: Rapmaster2000

This is what the subway is like. All of New York is like this actually.

It's really not.  Even late at night the subway is pretty tame these days.  What you do see is the occasional shoving match getting on and off the train, and someone yelling because someone won't get out of their way.  And, sometimes, you get a ranty crazy person who lectures the car about terrorists or not having a job or how we're all going to Hell or whatever, but it isn't a big deal, and it happens pretty infrequently.

Still, it would be a bad idea to carry a gun on the subway--sometimes I get these red-mist rages over someone who keeps bumping into me with their purse or who won't take their backpack off when we're packed together during rush hour (I'm actually feeling my heart rate go up writing about it).  I never do anything about it, but I think the temptation might be to much for someone who was unbalanced.


Nope, I've seen all of the Death Wish movies.  New York is entirely populated by multi-cultural, break-dancing, punk rock gangs and the retired Jewish people that they prey upon.

i463.photobucket.com

It's just bullets whizzing all over the place all day.

Also, everyone cuts their hair like that.
 
2013-02-12 01:43:24 PM

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


No gun nut said any such thing. Not seriously, anyhow
 
2013-02-12 01:44:28 PM

blunttrauma: Dear Moron, please list jurisdictions where "Straw purchases" are legal. (Hint see 27 CFR § 478.29)


Every jurisdiction without gun registration and gun shows without background checks. Without that, the legislation is toothless. Straw purchases are not federally illegal for used guns.
 
2013-02-12 01:45:23 PM

dittybopper: Mirrorz: Did he have a concealed beverage as well?

High capacity assault cups are banned in NYC.


That cracked me up
 
2013-02-12 01:51:55 PM
dittybopper: semiautomatic? What do people still carry around muskets and flintlock pistols?

As a matter of fact....

How much of a recoil does a musket have?  I would love to fire one... and then spend the next couple of minutes reloading it.



Well, first off, that's technically a rifle, not a musket.

Typically a musket or rifle isn't going to have all that much recoil, and what recoil they do have is more like a "shove" than the kick of a modern gun.  Certainly, it's lower than a 12 gauge or a .30'06.

Also, it doesn't take 2 minutes to load.  I shoot "primitive biathlons", where speed is of the essence:  You score is your time, so the amount of time it takes to load and fire the 9 shots you take over the course is a factor in how well you do.  Using pre-made paper powder charges, a loading block (that thing with 8 holes in it dangling from my neck), and a pan primer (also around my neck), I can get to a shooting station, load and fire my 2 shots, and be out of there in less than a minute.  That's with a rifle, a smoothbore musket would be even quicker, albeit less accurate.

All it takes is a bit of practice.  I think with a bit more practice, I might be able to get it close to 40 seconds to load and fire two shots.



Very interesting.  Thanks.  Always thought about maybe getting a Civil War era rifled musket (like a Springfield 1861) for the novelty of firing one.
 
2013-02-12 01:56:18 PM

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


no.  and no you weren't.
 
2013-02-12 01:56:26 PM

cirby: That's the funny thing, though - the places that "enable" those sales, despite having many more firearms available per capita, have much, much lower firearm related crime rates - and lower murder rates.

It's almost like heavy restrictions on weapons causes the law abiding people to not carry them - and allows the violent criminal types to acquire them and use them against the rest of the population.

How strange.


Nope.
 
2013-02-12 01:59:17 PM
 
2013-02-12 01:59:36 PM

SirEattonHogg: Very interesting. Thanks. Always thought about maybe getting a Civil War era rifled musket (like a Springfield 1861) for the novelty of firing one.


Do it. They are fun as hell.
 
2013-02-12 02:01:47 PM

JesseL: In any sane locale cheating the fare would be a far bigger crime than carrying a constitutionally protected tool.


We aint talkn' Montana son.  Montana with it's 6.9/sq mi is no match for NY's

HERE -

Montana = 6.9 people / SQ MI VS NYC = 26,402 people/ SQ MI
So what makes sense in NYC doesn't in Montana.  In Montana there are regularly Bears, Moose, a stray Elk or two and drunken bandits and cowboys on main street (so I'm told - no direct experience)

In New York you have celebrities, the insanely rich, cab drivers trying to make a buck, CEO's, Politicians of every stripe from every country, shop owners, Graphic Artists and waitresses cops and more than a few hustlers.

In short there is no comparison - which if you ask me, makes it nearly impossible to develop an intelligent weapons policy to fit the whole nation.
While NY doesn't try to make rules for the whole place, only for NY, what passes for reasonably intelligent in Montana can't realistically be applied to NYC -

In theory the very same type of slug you fire in Montana, if it misses it's target will fall to the ground, in NYC it'd go across the island to the atlantic after hitting an untold number of people and houses, factories, cars, you name it.

Good luck to any congress trying to figure this out with their limited intellect.
 
2013-02-12 02:02:34 PM
FTFA: "Skipping out on a $2.25 subway fare cost this guy 10 years of his life. "

Actually it should say "Illegally carrying a firearm, cost this guy 10 years of his life"
 
2013-02-12 02:02:38 PM
Fark Rye For Many Whores

Oh you have that covered. Ok smart guy what about the silent crazies who stare at me goggle eyed on an empty train making me think I'm about to get my face eaten off but then nothing happens and I make it home safely? Sounds harmless but I need a CC just thinking about it.

Think of it as character building.  But, if it really bugs you, start acting extra friendly toward the person--that freaks out New Yorkers--he won't be able to get away from you fast enough.  He might even change cars while the train is in motion--the NYC subway version of the cut direct.

Rapmaster2000
Also, everyone cuts their hair like that.

Yep, it's all like a mash-up between The Warriors and The Wiz.  And everyone talks like Bugs Bunny.
 
2013-02-12 02:04:21 PM
They need to ban subway fares, that would have resolved this problem.
 
2013-02-12 02:04:58 PM

captainktainer: blunttrauma: Dear Moron, please list jurisdictions where "Straw purchases" are legal. (Hint see 27 CFR § 478.29)

Every jurisdiction without gun registration and gun shows without background checks. Without that, the legislation is toothless. Straw purchases are not federally illegal for used guns.


Wrong.  You need to stop listening to your mayor, he is an idiot.

It is a federal crime for a non-licensee, that is someone without a Federal Firearms License, to go to a neighboring state and buy a handgun.  I even cited the relevant federal code.  A FFL holder will not sell you a handgun if you are not a resident of the state where the FFL is licensed.  If he does, he and you are committing a crime.  He may sell you a rifle, but you must fill out a 4473 and pass a NICS check (or the local equivalent) and the transaction must be legal in both states.  I don't know if NY allows it, but I doubt it, I know California doesn't, and there may be others.

A firearms transaction that crosses a state line has to have a FFL involved, otherwise it is a federal crime.  If you lie and say you are a local resident and buy from an individual in a neighboring state, you have committed a federal crime, and the guy who sold it to you is a moron for not exercising due diligence in verifying residence, and if he know you were not a resident, he committed a crime as well.

A straw purchase is actually different, that is where a non-prohibited person buys a firearm for someone else.  It is also a federal crime.
 
2013-02-12 02:04:58 PM

ethics-gradient: Cue Chris Rock "How Not To Get Your Ass Beat By The Cops" sketch.


Exactly the first thing that popped into my head -  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gCCjFbFXn8 - about 1:00 in.
 
2013-02-12 02:05:30 PM
SirEattonHogg:
7 years for possession of an illegal firearm?  Sort of stiff.  Yeah, I'd also like to know more details about this.

Note "Possession of an illegal firearm", it's "Illegal possession of a firearm".

The gun itself was not illegal, carrying it in public is illegal.
 
2013-02-12 02:05:55 PM
Wonder if the founding fathers would approve of a guy getting 10 years in jail for carrying a pistol.
 
2013-02-12 02:12:42 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: SirEattonHogg: Very interesting. Thanks. Always thought about maybe getting a Civil War era rifled musket (like a Springfield 1861) for the novelty of firing one.

Do it. They are fun as hell.


Yes, and because you wouldn't be stupid like me and use a flintlock, you could use a black powder substitute like Triple7 that is much easier to clean up.
 
2013-02-12 02:12:52 PM

you have pee hands: Mrbogey: Most CCW permit holders tend to be less aggressive. Your entire post is a straw.an against what you think they are.

And yours is a response to something he didn't say.  If this guy was a CCW holder, the article doesn't say, and most people who are CCW holders don't spend all day talking about it (except on the internet).


His response is about what I expected.  I have had waaaay too many conversations with way too many different people about the scenarios they envision (practically wet dreams for them)  in which they will likely use their CCW.  Many of them living in a state of perpetual fear and a few of them (relatives included) who are drooling over the day when they can finally, righteously take out that darkie who they know is going to try to car jack them.  Often going into great detail in how they are going to complete the scenario with their choice of weapons.  Did I mention I live in Texas?  Splains a lot.   These are not rare or isolated conversations, sadly.
 
2013-02-12 02:13:32 PM
captainktainer:
Every jurisdiction without gun registration and gun shows without background checks. Without that, the legislation is toothless. Straw purchases are not federally illegal for used guns.

Further reference, ATF's FAQ on the matter:

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html
 
2013-02-12 02:16:02 PM

plausdeny: How about this one, or rather, several:

STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RUBEN SANABRIA (2006)

That's his felony convictions being upheld on appeal.

Hope the Federal DA prosecutes for Felon In Possession.  Not holding out too much hope, though, considering that those prosecutions have dropped 40%.  C;mon guys, go get the boring low hanging fruit AND the cool complicated ones.


Well, we need to make sure that this convicted Ruben Sanabria is the same Rubin Sanabria.

If he is - fark him.

Odd though. If he was a convicted felon, why wouldn't the NYPD and DA's office be trumpeting the fact that they are doing what  everyone in the gun debate agrees with - catching bad guys with guns and locking them up.
 
2013-02-12 02:23:44 PM

Englebert Slaptyback: it is probably best to not press your luck


BIG BUCKS!
NO WHAMMIES!


Done in one.
 
2013-02-12 02:29:00 PM
Marcintosh:
In short there is no comparison - which if you ask me, makes it nearly impossible to develop an intelligent weapons policy to fit the whole nation.
While NY doesn't try to make rules for the whole place, only for NY, what passes for reasonably intelligent in Montana can't realistically be applied to NYC -


That's news to me. NY politicians seem rather fond of trying to bend the nation to fit their political and social ideals.
 
2013-02-12 02:30:49 PM

Thunderpipes: Wonder if the founding fathers would approve of a guy getting 10 years in jail for carrying a pistol.


They would be too confused and amazed by computers, automobiles, mobile phones and the like to even begin considering how stupid your post is.
 
2013-02-12 02:32:18 PM

captainktainer: dittybopper: captainktainer: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Dear moron:

Although our gun-related death rate is lower than almost every other city in the country, with a total chance to be murdered per year equal to .005%,

Dear other moron:  The total chance to be murdered in my city is equal to 0.0021%.  And that's by all causes, and we have more guns than you do.

Congratulations on your podunk town in the middle of nowhere?


Heh.  I laugh every time someone from NYC says something like this.  There really isn't very much you can do in NYC that I can't do in my podunk town in the middle of nowhere, and an awful lot of things I can do that you can't.  Like order something with trans fats, or a 32 ounce soda, or hell, buy a gun without spending hundreds of dollars and waiting months just for the privilege

For those few things where NYC actually does have an advantage that can't be satisfied by some sort of telepresense, I can take the train and visit.

I mean, the monthly rent on a studio apartment in Manhattan costs more than the mortgage on my house, plus my utilities, plus a car payment, plus my car insurance, and gas to travel to work.  And if I want to visit NYC, I can buy a round trip train ticket for a relative pittance.

Why would I live there?  Pretty much all the culture, arts, and all of the positives can be experienced either with a short visit, or remotely (we got this thing called the Intarwebs, you should check it out).  There really isn't any incentive for me to live there.  Even if you were to double my current salary, my standard of living would actually go *DOWN* by moving there.
 
2013-02-12 02:32:33 PM

JesseL: Marcintosh:
In short there is no comparison - which if you ask me, makes it nearly impossible to develop an intelligent weapons policy to fit the whole nation.
While NY doesn't try to make rules for the whole place, only for NY, what passes for reasonably intelligent in Montana can't realistically be applied to NYC -

That's news to me. NY politicians seem rather fond of trying to bend the nation to fit their political and social ideals.


WHAAAAAAAAT? The biggest city in the country, the place that drives the nations economy and culture, has influence that stretches beyond it's geographic boundaries?  I'm shocked.  Must be the Jews behind this huh?
 
2013-02-12 02:34:42 PM
A Manhattan PATH rider was sentenced yesterday to seven years in prison - and another 3 1/2 years' parole - after cops stopped him for fare-beating and discovered an illegal handgun.
Ruben Sanabria, 37, was caught with a loaded .40-caliber Smith & Wesson at the 14th Street station March 30.



/sighs, if only we had stricter gun laws totally preventing law abiding gun owners from doing this, things would be much better.  Oh wait...he wasnt a lawful owner, and didn't give a shiat about existing laws nor any gun law they can come up with.  But please, target the "scary" guns, and make it so those of us who DO obey the law suffer by your derpy pulled out of your ass legislation.
 
2013-02-12 02:35:13 PM

dittybopper: captainktainer: dittybopper: captainktainer: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

Dear moron:

Although our gun-related death rate is lower than almost every other city in the country, with a total chance to be murdered per year equal to .005%,

Dear other moron:  The total chance to be murdered in my city is equal to 0.0021%.  And that's by all causes, and we have more guns than you do.

Congratulations on your podunk town in the middle of nowhere?

Heh.  I laugh every time someone from NYC says something like this.  There really isn't very much you can do in NYC that I can't do in my podunk town in the middle of nowhere, and an awful lot of things I can do that you can't.  Like order something with trans fats, or a 32 ounce soda, or hell, buy a gun without spending hundreds of dollars and waiting months just for the privilege

For those few things where NYC actually does have an advantage that can't be satisfied by some sort of telepresense, I can take the train and visit.

I mean, the monthly rent on a studio apartment in Manhattan costs more than the mortgage on my house, plus my utilities, plus a car payment, plus my car insurance, and gas to travel to work.  And if I want to visit NYC, I can buy a round trip train ticket for a relative pittance.

Why would I live there?  Pretty much all the culture, arts, and all of the positives can be experienced either with a short visit, or remotely (we got this thing called the Intarwebs, you should check it out).  There really isn't any incentive for me to live there.  Even if you were to double my current salary, my standard of living would actually go *DOWN* by moving there.



Maybe if you were smart enough to understand that he pointed out that you were living in the sticks to demonstrate why your comparison of death rates between your hillrat burg and New York City is an invalid one you could make enough to live here.
 
2013-02-12 02:37:13 PM

dittybopper: Heh. I laugh every time someone from NYC says something like this. There really isn't very much you can do in NYC that I can't do in my podunk town in the middle of nowhere, and an awful lot of things I can do that you can't. Like order something with trans fats, or a 32 ounce soda, or hell, buy a gun without spending hundreds of dollars and waiting months just for the privilege


You could eat out at a nice restaurant and get drinks at a nice bar every day for the rest of the decade in Manhattan without ever going to the same place twice.  You can also walk home instead of DUIing it.  It's just different strokes for different folks.  Clearly, living in Manhattan is in higher demand because living in podunk towns is cheap.
 
2013-02-12 02:38:37 PM

blunttrauma: A straw purchase is actually different, that is where a non-prohibited person buys a firearm for someone else. It is also a federal crime.


Close, unless things have changed while I wasn't looking (which is entirely possible). If you are buying it for them because they are prohibited from buying it themselves, that's a crime. It's still legal to give guns as a gift, and it's still legal to buy a gun for the purpose of giving it as a gift.

dittybopper: Yes, and because you wouldn't be stupid like me and use a flintlock, you could use a black powder substitute like Triple7 that is much easier to clean up.


I haven't tried it on mine just yet (haven't gotten around to it), but if you aren't opposed to using modren stuff in your gun, try Frog Lube. I put it on just about everything else I own, and I can't hardly get fouling to stick to it anymore. I'm willing to run it through my muzzleloader (again, the only reason I haven't is that it's been sitting in my cabinet for too long), I don't like using the usual solvents but this stuff smells about like the bore butter I generally use and it's not petroleum based.
 
2013-02-12 02:39:51 PM

downtownkid: JesseL: Marcintosh:
In short there is no comparison - which if you ask me, makes it nearly impossible to develop an intelligent weapons policy to fit the whole nation.
While NY doesn't try to make rules for the whole place, only for NY, what passes for reasonably intelligent in Montana can't realistically be applied to NYC -


That's news to me. NY politicians seem rather fond of trying to bend the nation to fit their political and social ideals.

WHAAAAAAAAT? The biggest city in the country, the place that drives the nations economy and culture, has influence that stretches beyond it's geographic boundaries?  I'm shocked.  Must be the Jews behind this huh?


I think you've confused coasts -

When California mandates a change in the autos offered for sale there, generally those changes become national. That's why I think you have your coasts mixed.  just a thought.
 
2013-02-12 02:41:16 PM

downtownkid: They would be too confused and amazed by computers, automobiles, mobile phones and the like


I'll give you amazed, but I doubt there would be as much confusion as you might think. They were some very smart men. Hell, Franklin was probably noodling over some ideas for things we still haven't invented.
 
2013-02-12 02:44:16 PM
Clearly this patriot was only trying to keep us safe from New York's notorious and feared wild pigs. God bless and god speed, you great American who was noble enough to break the law in order to defend our freedom *sniff*
 
2013-02-12 02:49:37 PM

downtownkid: Thunderpipes: Wonder if the founding fathers would approve of a guy getting 10 years in jail for carrying a pistol.

They would be too confused and amazed by computers, automobiles, mobile phones and the like to even begin considering how stupid your post is.


And yet liberals like you are the ones who are so angry about people getting harsh sentences for drugs.....

Hippiecrits.
 
2013-02-12 02:51:37 PM

downtownkid: JesseL: Marcintosh:
In short there is no comparison - which if you ask me, makes it nearly impossible to develop an intelligent weapons policy to fit the whole nation.
While NY doesn't try to make rules for the whole place, only for NY, what passes for reasonably intelligent in Montana can't realistically be applied to NYC -

That's news to me. NY politicians seem rather fond of trying to bend the nation to fit their political and social ideals.

WHAAAAAAAAT? The biggest city in the country, the place that drives the nations economy and culture, has influence that stretches beyond it's geographic boundaries?  I'm shocked.  Must be the Jews behind this huh?


No I don't think Jews have anything to do with it, and I don't resent NYC having a strong cultural and economic influence on the rest of the nation and world.

What I do object to is when NY politicos try to hammer the rest of the nation into the NYC mold, whether we like it or not. It's the difference between an inspirational leader and a thug with a bayonet at your back.
 
2013-02-12 02:53:52 PM

orclover: Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.  If you carry one long enough you tend to figure out that its not there making you feel bigger than you are, its there to remind you that your involved in something that having a gun was a good idea.  Then you start thinking about where you life choices went wrong and you hopefully get the fark out of that life.  I have known pleanty of idiots who thought having a couple guns strapped to them meant they were the king of the block.

Also IMHO if you have a CCL and you have a habit of telling random people that you have a CCL for no discernible reason, then you probably shouldn't have a CCL.


I've found most people I know and interact with feel just the opposite.  Carrying a firearm is a big, BIG responsibility and a lot of people find themselves AVOIDing possible confrontations, etc...   

My favorite tactic for avoiding road rage is pretending that the person tailgating me or cutting me off is taking their pregnant wife to the ER or has some other medical emergency, so I pull over and let them by.  In the past, I may have egged them on just to be a dick.  Matching wits with an idiot doesn't prove very effective

If things get dicey when I'm out and perhaps someone thinks I looked at their GF or something petty and wants to fight, I simply apologize and leave.  In the past, I probably would have gotten sucked into a pissing match to "prove my manhood" but at this point, I just don't want to have to shoot someone.  It's when someone attacks me from behind or refuses to let me disengage/de-escalate that we're going to have problems.

I certainly don't walk around talking trash to anyone/everyone like Billy Badass knowing I have Smith & Wesson to back me up, nor do the many gun owners I know and associate with.
 
2013-02-12 02:53:55 PM
 
2013-02-12 02:55:53 PM
I hope this was a technical issue, where he scanned the card the gate didn't open, but debited his account (for prepay) or locked him out from rescanning for 5 minutes (commuter pass) and he had to get to the train.
 
2013-02-12 02:57:03 PM

dr-shotgun: orclover: Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.  If you carry one long enough you tend to figure out that its not there making you feel bigger than you are, its there to remind you that your involved in something that having a gun was a good idea.  Then you start thinking about where you life choices went wrong and you hopefully get the fark out of that life.  I have known pleanty of idiots who thought having a couple guns strapped to them meant they were the king of the block.

Since this is an anonymous forum, I feel that I can say that I have a CHL without appearing to be going for tough guy points.

Funny enough, carrying has had the exact opposite effect on me. I was never a hugely confrontational guy to begin with, but I've become extraordinarily passive and excessively polite when I'm out and about, ever since I started carrying.

Outside of my military service and my time as a paramedic, I've never been in a fight or direct violent confrontation in my life. I don't plan on that ever happening either. Having said that, I am *extremely* conscious of the fact that I am carrying and that if someone were to start up with me (physically), my firearm would likely become involved. In that scenario, I want the timeline to be  astoundingly clear that I was not the one to begin, to extend or to egg on the confrontation in  any way.


Yep... read my post a couple above this one...       Carrying, and being acutely aware you are carryin gives you the carte blanche to walk out of any situation without egg on your face because you know you weren't backing down out of fear.  You were backing down because it's the right thing to do.  That, and shooting someone would seriously ruin your week.
 
2013-02-12 02:59:02 PM

downtownkid: Maybe if you were smart enough to understand that he pointed out that you were living in the sticks to demonstrate why your comparison of death rates between your hillrat burg and New York City is an invalid one you could make enough to live here.


Umm, so living near a whole lot of other people would double my risk of dying of a homicide, and I'm the stupid one?
 
2013-02-12 03:02:51 PM

you have pee hands: dittybopper: Heh. I laugh every time someone from NYC says something like this. There really isn't very much you can do in NYC that I can't do in my podunk town in the middle of nowhere, and an awful lot of things I can do that you can't. Like order something with trans fats, or a 32 ounce soda, or hell, buy a gun without spending hundreds of dollars and waiting months just for the privilege

You could eat out at a nice restaurant and get drinks at a nice bar every day for the rest of the decade in Manhattan without ever going to the same place twice.  You can also walk home instead of DUIing it.  It's just different strokes for different folks.  Clearly, living in Manhattan is in higher demand because living in podunk towns is cheap.


I could do that, but that would, what, more than quadruple what I spend on food?

I can go to some decent bars in my town and walk home, but quite frankly, I haven't really done too much of that, at least not since my mid-twenties.  Grew up and grew out of it.

Living in podunk towns is cheap because along with all the nice things in NYC, you get all the bad things too, and both have significant dollar costs.
 
2013-02-12 03:03:40 PM

kmark: Rapmaster2000

This is what the subway is like. All of New York is like this actually.

It's really not.  Even late at night the subway is pretty tame these days.  What you do see is the occasional shoving match getting on and off the train, and someone yelling because someone won't get out of their way.  And, sometimes, you get a ranty crazy person who lectures the car about terrorists or not having a job or how we're all going to Hell or whatever, but it isn't a big deal, and it happens pretty infrequently.

Still, it would be a bad idea to carry a gun on the subway--sometimes I get these red-mist rages over someone who keeps bumping into me with their purse or who won't take their backpack off when we're packed together during rush hour (I'm actually feeling my heart rate go up writing about it).  I never do anything about it, but I think the temptation might be to much for someone who was unbalanced.


This is called projection.  You don't trust YOURSELF with a gun so you can't possibly comprehend how someone else could be.  This "red mist rage" you refer to is a phenomenon I have never experienced.  

Just because YOU can't handle the responsibility of a firearm shouldn't mean NO one can.
 
2013-02-12 03:05:46 PM

Mr.BobDobalita: My favorite tactic for avoiding road rage is pretending that the person tailgating me or cutting me off is taking their pregnant wife to the ER or has some other medical emergency, so I pull over and let them by. In the past, I may have egged them on just to be a dick. Matching wits with an idiot doesn't prove very effective


Is that the CCW or just growing up?  I don't have a gun but I've noticed the same change.  When I was 18 if someone cut me off I might turn on my high beams and tailgate them for miles.  Now, fark it.  I'll let them pass just so when they do hit someone or something it's not me.  I don't even need to care where they're going and my angry response isn't going to make them suddenly realize that they're bad drivers.
 
2013-02-12 03:06:53 PM

Thunderpipes: downtownkid: Thunderpipes: Wonder if the founding fathers would approve of a guy getting 10 years in jail for carrying a pistol.

They would be too confused and amazed by computers, automobiles, mobile phones and the like to even begin considering how stupid your post is.

And yet liberals like you are the ones who are so angry about people getting harsh sentences for drugs.....

Hippiecrits.



That's rich. It's much more often that Farkers accuse me of being a conservative.
 
2013-02-12 03:11:08 PM
7 years is not long enough.  Having an illegal firearm is the worst of all firearm related things, next to trafficking and shooting people anyways
 
2013-02-12 03:15:03 PM
"I jump the turnstile, never pay the toll
And then you Doo Wa Diddy, and bust in with the pre-roll"
 
2013-02-12 03:15:56 PM
In the wild west days the penalty for illegally possesing a firearm in some western cities was being shot by the sheriff.

Right?
 
2013-02-12 03:18:50 PM

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


I don't know what gun nut told you that.
 
2013-02-12 03:19:23 PM

you have pee hands: Mr.BobDobalita: My favorite tactic for avoiding road rage is pretending that the person tailgating me or cutting me off is taking their pregnant wife to the ER or has some other medical emergency, so I pull over and let them by. In the past, I may have egged them on just to be a dick. Matching wits with an idiot doesn't prove very effective

Is that the CCW or just growing up?  I don't have a gun but I've noticed the same change.  When I was 18 if someone cut me off I might turn on my high beams and tailgate them for miles.  Now, fark it.  I'll let them pass just so when they do hit someone or something it's not me.  I don't even need to care where they're going and my angry response isn't going to make them suddenly realize that they're bad drivers.


Knowing that you might put yourself into a situation where you have to use deadly force, and having to account and answer questions of how you got there and the role you may or may not have had in that situation is quite a deterrent.  

I'm not saying I was a hot head, but occasionally would get suckered into doing something stupid on a bad day or whatever....    I certainly think 2wice about that now.  It's because of the 2lbs of metal in my pocket.
 
2013-02-12 03:21:19 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: dittybopper: Yes, and because you wouldn't be stupid like me and use a flintlock, you could use a black powder substitute like Triple7 that is much easier to clean up.

I haven't tried it on mine just yet (haven't gotten around to it), but if you aren't opposed to using modren stuff in your gun, try Frog Lube. I put it on just about everything else I own, and I can't hardly get fouling to stick to it anymore. I'm willing to run it through my muzzleloader (again, the only reason I haven't is that it's been sitting in my cabinet for too long), I don't like using the usual solvents but this stuff smells about like the bore butter I generally use and it's not petroleum based.


I use "moose milk".  It's a 10 to 1 mixture of water and water-soluble oil.  Looks like milk, and it works fine.  Another thing that works well is plain old Dawn detergent in hot water.

I actually had two "flash in the pans" on my last competition:  I fired the 9 shots first go around, and then fired another 7 before I got them.  I hadn't really done much to clean the gun between runs except to run a single spit patch down the bore.  All the fouling from the shots kept getting rammed back down the bore and building up around the touch-hole.  Finally, it was enough that it obstructed the path to the powder.

Next year, when I do 2 runs, I'll be sure to clean the gun decently, or at least remember to pick a bit of priming powder into the touch-hole to make it go off.
 
2013-02-12 03:26:10 PM

meanmutton: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

I don't know what gun nut told you that.


The same person that told me that strawmen arguments were no longer allowed on Fark.
 
2013-02-12 03:26:19 PM

atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.




He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.
 
2013-02-12 03:29:53 PM
He got one year for the gun possession and 6 years for having an oversized coke on him.
 
2013-02-12 03:41:07 PM

dittybopper: Another thing that works well is plain old Dawn detergent in hot water.


That's what I've always used for cleaning. It works, but it's a bit of a PITA. That's why I'm going to try this stuff, hopefully it'll keep everything from sticking in the first place. If I'm lucky it'll work while I'm shooting as well, so I don't have to swab the bastard out as often as I do at the moment.
 
2013-02-12 03:58:55 PM

Rapmaster2000: [blogs.amctv.com image 560x330]

This is what the subway is like.  All of New York is like this actually.


When that film was made, you didn't have to ride around long to find someone who willing to pull a knife on you if you rode on the wrong line.  Rudy Giuliani spoiled you.  Don't worry though, those times are coming back.  Enjoy.  Meanwhile, I'll be over here, not visiting or spending my tourist dollars in Singapore New York City.
 
2013-02-12 04:00:03 PM

SirEattonHogg: So he's probably got priors.  Nice (lack of) reporting there New York Post.



www.holidayscalendar.com

Scarecrow article.
 
2013-02-12 04:13:54 PM

yukichigai: SirEattonHogg: 7 years for possession of an illegal firearm? Sort of stiff. Yeah, I'd also like to know more details about this.

Either he got one of those "max penalty all the time" judges, or there were other things going on.  7 years is the max penalty for the Class D felony version of the crime.

My guess is he got snippy with the transit authority and/or had a history of douchebaggery.


No the gun was loaded so it's a class C felony which has a range of a minimum of 3 1/2 years and a max of 15 (the article said he faced up to 15 years).  So his sentence was closer to the minimum than the maximum.  In NY you do 6/7 of the sentence so he'll be out in 6 with 3 1/2 years of parole.
 
2013-02-12 04:14:18 PM

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


Well, if you want to be technical about it, this guy was arrested for illegal possession of a legal gun... but antis think "illegal gun" better suits their cause. Sort of like how they call scary-looking guns "assault weapons."
 
2013-02-12 04:21:22 PM

hdhale: Rapmaster2000: [blogs.amctv.com image 560x330]

This is what the subway is like.  All of New York is like this actually.

When that film was made, you didn't have to ride around long to find someone who willing to pull a knife on you if you rode on the wrong line.  Rudy Giuliani spoiled you.  Don't worry though, those times are coming back.  Enjoy.  Meanwhile, I'll be over here, not visiting or spending my tourist dollars in Singapore New York City.


I really doubt those times are coming back when those times can't afford to live in New York.
 
2013-02-12 04:27:12 PM
Sanabria was also carrying extra bullets and a holster.

I'm sorry, what does carrying a holster have to do with anything? Extra bullets? Sure, I can see where it's pertinent to the story, but a holster?
 
2013-02-12 04:28:23 PM
"This defendant illegally carried a loaded semiautomatic firearm into a public transportation system used by thousands of people every day," Vance said.
"Preventing gun violence is one of my top priorities as district attorney, and I will make sure that this office continues to seek strong sentences for crimes involving firearms."


That is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Lots of people carry weapons near thousands of people every day in my state, sometimes even (gasp!) on public transportation. Furthermore, it is only a crime involving firearms because the government deems it so in that particular area. He wouldn't even have been noted where I live. But in New York City? OMG GUN HURRDURR!

Every time I see something like this I am reminded of why I have no interest in living in cities. It's not even a liberal-conservative thing, it's a "common-sense" thing. You know, the thing that allegedly governs the desire of gun-control people and is, ironically, the one thing that they lack. They put a man away for 7 years for not shooting someone with a gun that nobody even knew he had until he jumped a turnstile over $2.25. I'd rather pay his $2.25 than the $20,000 per year per the next 7 it's going to take to incarcerate him. THAT is "common sense".

You could argue that he broke the law and therefore got what he had coming to him, and you'd be right. I won't argue against you. I will, however, argue that the law is stupid, and the same people that push laws like this to put people in jail for extended periods of time also rail against prison overcrowding and the incarceration of non-violent drug offenders. It's amazing how when it comes to things like drugs, guns, and other hot-button issues, so many people can be wrong about so many things.

But keep fighting the good fight, Mr. Vance. You and the rest of the leadership of New York City are setting a strong example for the country. Why, by putting this guy away you might have saved... nobody. Amazing, I'm doing that right now, and it costs the taxpayer nothing. I've done just as much as Cyrus Vance has.
 
2013-02-12 04:30:17 PM

Fark Rye For Many Whores: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

wat


I've been told many many times in these threads that buying guns illegal will not do anything to detour criminals from having guns. I hear this time and time again.
 
2013-02-12 04:32:25 PM

meanmutton: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

I don't know what gun nut told you that.


Really? They never say making some guns illegal won't slow don't criminals from having guns and using them? They say it in every thread.
 
2013-02-12 04:33:59 PM

dr-shotgun: plausdeny: How about this one, or rather, several:

STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RUBEN SANABRIA (2006)

That's his felony convictions being upheld on appeal.

Hope the Federal DA prosecutes for Felon In Possession.  Not holding out too much hope, though, considering that those prosecutions have dropped 40%.  C;mon guys, go get the boring low hanging fruit AND the cool complicated ones.

Well, we need to make sure that this convicted Ruben Sanabria is the same Rubin Sanabria.

If he is - fark him.

Odd though. If he was a convicted felon, why wouldn't the NYPD and DA's office be trumpeting the fact that they are doing what  everyone in the gun debate agrees with - catching bad guys with guns and locking them up.


Such a statement does not itself lend support to arguments for imposing prohibitive regulation upon civilian firearm ownership.
 
2013-02-12 04:34:12 PM

KidneyStone: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

No gun nut said any such thing. Not seriously, anyhow


So they never say that making guns illegal will do nothing to deter gun crime or criminal with gun ownership? They never say that?
 
2013-02-12 04:34:38 PM

Corvus: meanmutton: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

I don't know what gun nut told you that.

Really? They never say making some guns illegal won't slow don't criminals from having guns and using them? They say it in every thread.


It's because you don't know the difference between illegal possession of guns and illegal guns. It didn't matter if he had a simple handgun, as in this case, or if he were packing a 3 uzis and a airsoft rifle. You're comparing apples and oranges.
 
2013-02-12 04:35:20 PM

Rapmaster2000: [blogs.amctv.com image 560x330]

This is what the subway is like.  All of New York is like this actually.


It's not nearly that clean.
 
2013-02-12 04:36:54 PM

Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.

woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com
1.bp.blogspot.com
www.rightwingnews.com

Umm they pretend it all the time.
 
2013-02-12 04:38:32 PM

redmid17: Corvus: meanmutton: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

I don't know what gun nut told you that.

Really? They never say making some guns illegal won't slow don't criminals from having guns and using them? They say it in every thread.

It's because you don't know the difference between illegal possession of guns and illegal guns. It didn't matter if he had a simple handgun, as in this case, or if he were packing a 3 uzis and a airsoft rifle. You're comparing apples and oranges.


Ok so one no one gets arrested and the other they do? Please explain which one is the one that never stop any criminal ever in it's history for me please.
 
2013-02-12 04:40:27 PM

OwnTheRide: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Well, if you want to be technical about it, this guy was arrested for illegal possession of a legal gun... but antis think "illegal gun" better suits their cause. Sort of like how they call scary-looking guns "assault weapons."


To provide fair consideration: gun control advocates have recently been classifying more traditional-looking rifles as "assault weapons" as well.
 
2013-02-12 04:41:25 PM
woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com

I love this bit. Substitute the word "Guns" for words like "murder" or "Rape" to show you how stupid it is.

Basic it says "Because a law is not 100% effective we should get rid of it". Which is retarded.
 
2013-02-12 04:41:37 PM

Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.


You may wish to actually read the captions on the images that you have posted. None state nor imply that no one is ever arrested for "possession of illegal firearms".
 
2013-02-12 04:42:20 PM
Holy Cr@p I'm tired of people using the word "semiautomatic" with every gun reference! The vast majority of guns are semi-auto and references like this are extremely misleading. This is the reason morons think you can go in any gun shop and buy an automatic weapon. Do you also say you drive a "four-wheeled" car?

/rant over, sigh.
 
2013-02-12 04:42:42 PM

Corvus: redmid17: Corvus: meanmutton: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

I don't know what gun nut told you that.

Really? They never say making some guns illegal won't slow don't criminals from having guns and using them? They say it in every thread.

It's because you don't know the difference between illegal possession of guns and illegal guns. It didn't matter if he had a simple handgun, as in this case, or if he were packing a 3 uzis and a airsoft rifle. You're comparing apples and oranges.

Ok so one no one gets arrested and the other they do? Please explain which one is the one that never stop any criminal ever in it's history for me please.


You are conflating possession with the acts. I'm not going to explain it any more. You're just being a troll.
 
2013-02-12 04:42:44 PM

Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.


Kinda sounds like the "gun nuts" have a valid point there, Corvus.
 
2013-02-12 04:43:48 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.

You may wish to actually read the captions on the images that you have posted. None state nor imply that no one is ever arrested for "possession of illegal firearms".


So what is it implying then if it's not implying that these laws do nothing to actually make any change of getting weapons off the street?

Please tell me.
 
2013-02-12 04:44:50 PM

Amos Quito: Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.

Kinda sounds like the "gun nuts" have a valid point there, Corvus.


What that is a law is not 100% effective we shouldn't have it? That makes sense to you?
 
2013-02-12 04:46:09 PM

Amos Quito: Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.

Kinda sounds like the "gun nuts" have a valid point there, Corvus.


You know I can't argue with you. You are the person I showed the exact wording of a law (which you had never read) and it said exactly what I said it said and you said that was not proof enough for you. You are someone who's mind is impossible to change with any amount of facts.
 
2013-02-12 04:47:42 PM

Dimensio: You may wish to actually read the captions on the images that you have posted. None state nor imply that no one is ever arrested for "possession of illegal firearms".


That is not "taking them off the streets"? Do they give those illegal firearms back then?
 
2013-02-12 04:47:47 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.

You may wish to actually read the captions on the images that you have posted. None state nor imply that no one is ever arrested for "possession of illegal firearms".

So what is it implying then if it's not implying that these laws do nothing to actually make any change of getting weapons off the street?

Please tell me.


The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.
 
2013-02-12 04:49:16 PM

Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.


So they have possession of fire arms when the go to jail for illegal gun possesion?
 
2013-02-12 04:49:38 PM
dr-shotgun as far as New York City is concerned, you are given absolutely no path to be able to defend yourself outside your home.
Unless you are very wealthy or politically connected. Those folks can get CCW permits...


So guns are the ONLY possible way to defend yourself?
 
2013-02-12 04:49:56 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So they have possession of fire arms when the go to jail for illegal gun possesion?


Absolutely no possible rational nor honest interpretation of my statement could allow for such a conclusion.
 
2013-02-12 04:50:48 PM

Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.


So when you against arrested for illegal gun possession and you are in jail for years they let you have access to guns while you are there?

And they also give you guns back? (because it also says it doesn't get guns off the street)
 
2013-02-12 04:52:09 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So when you against arrested for illegal gun possession and you are in jail for years they let you have access to guns while you are there?

And they also give you guns back? (because it also says it doesn't get guns off the street)


No. Absolutely no sane and intelligent individual could derive such a conclusion from any statement that I have issued.
 
2013-02-12 04:52:24 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So they have possession of fire arms when the go to jail for illegal gun possesion?

Absolutely no possible rational nor honest interpretation of my statement could allow for such a conclusion.


THAT'S WHAT THE CAPITATION SAID YOU ASS.

woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com
That's what the caption said you are now defending.

So when they arrest people for illegal gun possession, does it take the weapon off the street or not?
 
2013-02-12 04:52:28 PM

Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.


wtf does any of that have to do with the claim that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns?
 
2013-02-12 04:53:00 PM

BradleyUffner: dr-shotgun as far as New York City is concerned, you are given absolutely no path to be able to defend yourself outside your home.
Unless you are very wealthy or politically connected. Those folks can get CCW permits...

So guns are the ONLY possible way to defend yourself?


No but you can and will get popped for carrying other things used to commonly defend yourself. One can learn a martial art and take self defense classes,  but those are of limited utility to someone who is outnumbered  or outsized. I got lucky when I was mugged by 3 guys. They took the "bad guy from the movie' send one guy in at a time approach. I scrapped, ran, scrapped, et al till I was far enough I could dial 911. It's not always clear cut.
 
2013-02-12 04:53:28 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So they have possession of fire arms when the go to jail for illegal gun possesion?

Absolutely no possible rational nor honest interpretation of my statement could allow for such a conclusion.

THAT'S WHAT THE CAPITATION SAID YOU ASS.

[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
That's what the caption said you are now defending.

So when they arrest people for illegal gun possession, does it take the weapon off the street or not?


No rational individual could derive the conclusion "felons would be allowed to possess firearms while in prison" from the image caption.
 
2013-02-12 04:54:08 PM

Pathman: Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.

wtf does any of that have to do with the claim that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns?


I am beginning to suspect that Corvus is dishonest, irrational, or both. Those are the only conditions under which his claims would make sense.
 
2013-02-12 04:54:14 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So when you against arrested for illegal gun possession and you are in jail for years they let you have access to guns while you are there?

And they also give you guns back? (because it also says it doesn't get guns off the street)

No. Absolutely no sane and intelligent individual could derive such a conclusion from any statement that I have issued.


Does being arrested and in jail for having an illegal gun "cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them."?

Yes or No? Those are the words you used.
 
2013-02-12 04:56:53 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So they have possession of fire arms when the go to jail for illegal gun possesion?

Absolutely no possible rational nor honest interpretation of my statement could allow for such a conclusion.

THAT'S WHAT THE CAPITATION SAID YOU ASS.

[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
That's what the caption said you are now defending.

So when they arrest people for illegal gun possession, does it take the weapon off the street or not?

No rational individual could derive the conclusion "felons would be allowed to possess firearms while in prison" from the image caption.


Is this guy who is going to jail now while in jail "physically incapable of possessing them[guns]. " now?


Yes or No?

Did he get arrested before he could cause more crime to be committed using these guns?
 
2013-02-12 04:57:45 PM

Dimensio: Pathman: Corvus: Pathman: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

no.  and no you weren't.
[woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 441x316]
[www.rightwingnews.com image 333x374]

Umm they pretend it all the time.

wtf does any of that have to do with the claim that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns?

I am beginning to suspect that Corvus is dishonest, irrational, or both. Those are the only conditions under which his claims would make sense.


Irrational you keep pretending someone who goes to jail still has the same access to guns and the ability to commit crime as someone who isn't in jail. You keep dodging that point.
 
2013-02-12 04:58:25 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So when you against arrested for illegal gun possession and you are in jail for years they let you have access to guns while you are there?

And they also give you guns back? (because it also says it doesn't get guns off the street)

No. Absolutely no sane and intelligent individual could derive such a conclusion from any statement that I have issued.

Does being arrested and in jail for having an illegal gun "cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them."?

Yes or No? Those are the words you used.


While difficult to obtain, an incarcerated individual is still typically not physically incapable of possessing a firearm. However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.
 
2013-02-12 04:59:08 PM

Dimensio: No rational individual could derive the conclusion "felons would be allowed to possess firearms while in prison" from the image caption.


Well doesn't that take guns off the street? (which the caption implies will not happen)

Doesn't someone stopping someone and taking their illegal guns away "taking guns of the street"?
 
2013-02-12 05:01:16 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: The image captions state that prohibiting possession of firearms does not cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them. Only an individual of sub-par mental capability would conclude that the captions state that criminals are never arrested for possession of an illegal firearm.

So when you against arrested for illegal gun possession and you are in jail for years they let you have access to guns while you are there?

And they also give you guns back? (because it also says it doesn't get guns off the street)

No. Absolutely no sane and intelligent individual could derive such a conclusion from any statement that I have issued.

Does being arrested and in jail for having an illegal gun "cause criminals to be physically incapable of possessing them."?

Yes or No? Those are the words you used.

While difficult to obtain, an incarcerated individual is still typically not physically incapable of possessing a firearm. However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.


So you are saying no one ever gets incarcerated for illegal gun possession? (which is what you originally argued no one actually is saying).
 
2013-02-12 05:03:46 PM

Dimensio: While difficult to obtain, an incarcerated individual is still typically not physically incapable of possessing a firearm. However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.


But they are STILL not given their "illegal" guns back right? So it is "taking gun off the street".

Also even if 1 is it is still stopping criminals from possessing guns. OR are you trying to say NONE get incarcerated (which is what you said no one was saying in the first place).
 
2013-02-12 05:04:47 PM

Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.


Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?


Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.
 
2013-02-12 05:04:55 PM

Corvus: So you are saying no one ever gets incarcerated for illegal gun possession? (which is what you originally argued no one actually is saying).


No possible rational nor honest interpretation of my statement could allow for such a conclusion.
 
2013-02-12 05:06:43 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.

Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.


Only an irrational or a dishonest individual would claim the two statements to be expressing the same sentiment.
 
2013-02-12 05:09:35 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.

Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.

Only an irrational or a dishonest individual would claim the two statements to be expressing the same sentiment.


Do gun laws ever get "guns off the street"? Yes or No?

When someone is arrested for gun laws do those guns get off the street? Yes or NO?
 
2013-02-12 05:11:08 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.

Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.

Only an irrational or a dishonest individual would claim the two statements to be expressing the same sentiment.


That sending someone to jail is the same as sending someone to jail? Yeah those are very different.

Are you then admitting that gun laws DOES arrest criminals (who no longer have access to guns?) and gets guns off the streets then (because they don't give them back)?

Or you still being dishonest a flipping back and forth?
 
2013-02-12 05:11:59 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.

Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.

Only an irrational or a dishonest individual would claim the two statements to be expressing the same sentiment.

Do gun laws ever get "guns off the street"? Yes or No?


No. Laws themselves do not remove firearms.


When someone is arrested for gun laws do those guns get off the street? Yes or NO?

To which "guns" do you refer?
 
2013-02-12 05:12:28 PM

Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.

Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.

Only an irrational or a dishonest individual would claim the two statements to be expressing the same sentiment.

Do gun laws ever get "guns off the street"? Yes or No?

No. Laws themselves do not remove firearms.


When someone is arrested for gun laws do those guns get off the street? Yes or NO?

To which "guns" do you refer?


You're a farking troll.
 
2013-02-12 05:13:42 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.

Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.

Only an irrational or a dishonest individual would claim the two statements to be expressing the same sentiment.

That sending someone to jail is the same as sending someone to jail? Yeah those are very different.

Are you then admitting that gun laws DOES arrest criminals (who no longer have access to guns?) and gets guns off the streets then (because they don't give them back)?

Or you still being dishonest a flipping back and forth?


You claimed that "gun nuts" assert that "no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns". Your claim, thus far, remains unsubstantiated. Nothing that you have stated constitutes substantiation of this claim.

I have "flipped" regarding no issue. Your assertion that I have is inconsistent with reality.
 
2013-02-12 05:13:49 PM

Dimensio: Do gun laws ever get "guns off the street"? Yes or No?

No. Laws themselves do not remove firearms.


Cool. Then you have no problem with banning firearms because they won't remove anyones weapons.
 
2013-02-12 05:15:23 PM

Dimensio: You claimed that "gun nuts" assert that "no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns". Your claim, thus far, remains unsubstantiated.


Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.


Right there you said my point was irrelevant because I couldn't show that people go to jail for possessing illegal firearms (which they do).
 
2013-02-12 05:56:21 PM

Corvus: Dimensio: Corvus: Dimensio: However, as not all criminals are incarcerated, the answer to the question is of no relevance to the validity of the statement that prohibiting firearm possession does not render criminals physically incapable of possessing firearms.

Hmm I wonder what that sounds like:

Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

Wow it sounds very close to the comment people have been saying no one ever says.

Only an irrational or a dishonest individual would claim the two statements to be expressing the same sentiment.

That sending someone to jail is the same as sending someone to jail? Yeah those are very different.

Are you then admitting that gun laws DOES arrest criminals (who no longer have access to guns?) and gets guns off the streets then (because they don't give them back)?

Or you still being dishonest a flipping back and forth?


You claimed that "gun nuts" assert that "no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns". Your claim, thus far, remains unsubstantiated. Nothing that you have stated constitutes substantiation of this claim.

I have "flipped" regarding no issue. Your assertion that I have is inconsistent with reality.

Corvus: Dimensio: Do gun laws ever get "guns off the street"? Yes or No?

No. Laws themselves do not remove firearms.

Cool. Then you have no problem with banning firearms because they won't remove anyones weapons.


You are continuing to derive non-sequitur conclusions from my statements. I am able to conclude only that you are either dishonest or irrational.
 
2013-02-12 06:13:57 PM
Adolf Oliver Nipples:

Every time I see something like this I am reminded of why I have no interest in living in cities. It's not even a liberal-conservative thing, it's a "common-sense" thing. You know, the thing that allegedly governs the desire of gun-control people and is, ironically, the one thing that they lack. They put a man away for 7 years for not shooting someone with a gun that nobody even knew he had until he jumped a turnstile over $2.25. I'd rather pay his $2.25 than the $20,000 per year per the next 7 it's going to take to incarcerate him. THAT is "common sense".

You could argue that he broke the law and therefore got what he had coming to him, and you'd be right. I won't argue against you. I will, however, argue that the law is stupid, and the same people that push laws like this to put people in jail for extended periods of time also rail against prison overcrowding and the incarceration of non-violent drug offenders. It's amazing how when it comes to things like drugs, guns, and other hot-button issues, so many people can be wrong about so many things.


I read an article years ago about the results of crackdowns on so called minor offenders, particularly turnstile jumpers (although I can't remember if it was the subway in NY or the El in Chicago, doesn't really matter though).  The police learned, amazingly, that criminals commit crimes, and relatively "big" criminals had no problem committing relatively minor crimes.  When they started cracking down on turnstile jumpers, they found a high number (like ~30% IIRC) had warrants, or were on probation/parole for more serious crimes, and cracking down on minor crimes lowered the rate of more serious crimes significantly.

This guy, according to another article when it happened almost a year ago, was also charged with Resisting arrest, and if the Google searches of other Farkers is correct was a felon in possession of a firearm, which I have no problem  him going away for.

If he was a normal person, carrying for self defense, then yeah, the law is stupid.  Then again, guys like that probably wouldn't jump the turnstile.
 
2013-02-12 06:34:39 PM

Corvus: KidneyStone: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

No gun nut said any such thing. Not seriously, anyhow

So they never say that making guns illegal will do nothing to deter gun crime or criminal with gun ownership? They never say that?


You are debating two entirely different points.

A) nobody with an illegal gun ever gets arrested. False.

B) making guns illegal won't slow down criminals who want a gun. True. If they already buy them illegally then how is any law going to change that? It's like making a school a gun free zone to prevent mass killings. If the shooter doesn't care about laws against murder then why would they care about gun laws?

It's OK to put the pipe down once in a while.
 
2013-02-12 06:42:26 PM

Corvus: KidneyStone: Corvus: I was told by gun nuts that no one ever gets arrested for possessing illegal guns. Is that not true?

No gun nut said any such thing. Not seriously, anyhow

So they never say that making guns illegal will do nothing to deter gun crime or criminal with gun ownership? They never say that?


Dude, this is from your own profile:

After being on Fark for a few years, I now understand there are people who don't use facts to come to their conclusions. No matter how many facts you give, they just jump to a new talking point or just make stuff up. They are not uninformed, they are just crazy. I have come to the conclusion that these people need to be ridiculed and to be shown to be wrong so others do not give validity to their made up arguments. I was wrong to think these people were just uninformed.

You need to read your own ramblings
 
2013-02-12 06:50:38 PM

dr-shotgun: orclover: Sadly, hand cannons tend to make some people extra cocky.  If you carry one long enough you tend to figure out that its not there making you feel bigger than you are, its there to remind you that your involved in something that having a gun was a good idea.  Then you start thinking about where you life choices went wrong and you hopefully get the fark out of that life.  I have known pleanty of idiots who thought having a couple guns strapped to them meant they were the king of the block.

Since this is an anonymous forum, I feel that I can say that I have a CHL without appearing to be going for tough guy points.

Funny enough, carrying has had the exact opposite effect on me. I was never a hugely confrontational guy to begin with, but I've become extraordinarily passive and excessively polite when I'm out and about, ever since I started carrying.

Outside of my military service and my time as a paramedic, I've never been in a fight or direct violent confrontation in my life. I don't plan on that ever happening either. Having said that, I am *extremely* conscious of the fact that I am carrying and that if someone were to start up with me (physically), my firearm would likely become involved. In that scenario, I want the timeline to be  astoundingly clear that I was not the one to begin, to extend or to egg on the confrontation in  any way.


Same here.
 
2013-02-12 07:47:26 PM

dr-shotgun: I want the timeline to be astoundingly clear that I was not the one to begin, to extend or to egg on the confrontation in any way.




This!
 
2013-02-12 08:19:01 PM

orclover: you have pee hands: Mrbogey: Most CCW permit holders tend to be less aggressive. Your entire post is a straw.an against what you think they are.

And yours is a response to something he didn't say.  If this guy was a CCW holder, the article doesn't say, and most people who are CCW holders don't spend all day talking about it (except on the internet).

His response is about what I expected.  I have had waaaay too many conversations with way too many different people about the scenarios they envision (practically wet dreams for them)  in which they will likely use their CCW.  Many of them living in a state of perpetual fear and a few of them (relatives included) who are drooling over the day when they can finally, righteously take out that darkie who they know is going to try to car jack them.  Often going into great detail in how they are going to complete the scenario with their choice of weapons.  Did I mention I live in Texas?  Splains a lot.   These are not rare or isolated conversations, sadly.


Of course my response was what you expected. When you say something dumb, after a while you keep getting the same response from people about it.
 
2013-02-12 09:43:24 PM
I see the big city douche bag patrol is out tonight.
 
Rat
2013-02-12 11:30:20 PM
Let's get down to brass tacks here people and look at the real crime.  $2.25 to ride the subway???  Good lord...

© BTW I just bought a nice new 1911 Ultra Carry, so if anything ever happens and one of you libs need someone to hide behind, I'm not prejudice, just ask!
 
2013-02-13 12:10:36 AM

Corvus: I've been told many many times in these threads that buying guns illegal will not do anything to detour criminals from having guns. I hear this time and time again.


English mother farker. Start speaking it.
 
2013-02-13 07:54:18 AM

Corvus: [woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]

I love this bit. Substitute the word "Guns" for words like "murder" or "Rape" to show you how stupid it is.

Basic it says "Because a law is not 100% effective we should get rid of it". Which is retarded.


A "gun" is an object that has no will of it's own.  Murder and rape are actions committed by humans.

Showing that you can't distinguish between the two completely separate and distinct categories marks you as singularly unintelligent.
 
2013-02-13 07:55:22 AM

dittybopper: A "gun" is an object that has no will of it's its own.


FTFM.  Damn, those apostrophes slip in when you least expect them.
 
2013-02-13 08:04:58 AM

Noticeably F.A.T.: dittybopper: Another thing that works well is plain old Dawn detergent in hot water.

That's what I've always used for cleaning. It works, but it's a bit of a PITA. That's why I'm going to try this stuff, hopefully it'll keep everything from sticking in the first place. If I'm lucky it'll work while I'm shooting as well, so I don't have to swab the bastard out as often as I do at the moment.


Have you tried Triple Seven powder?  I've shot it a few times in non-flintlock guns, and it does indeed have much less fouling.  My dad swears by it for his percussion guns, and he's been building guns since the late 1960's.  Company claims it cleans up with just water, and it is measurably more powerful than either black powder or Pyrodex:  We chronographed a bunch of guns with "equivalent loads", and the T7 always had an edge velocity-wise, sometimes a quite significant one depending on the gun.

Anyway, if you use that, your clean up will be much easier from the get-go, especially if you've been using black powder.  I have to use BP because I have a flintlock, and neither Pyrodex or T7 is sensitive enough to reliably ignite in a flintlock.  I could use a duplex load (~10 grains of BP, with 80 or 90 grains of T7 on top of it), but that's a real pain in the ass to load, especially if you are doing it for time.
 
2013-02-13 08:40:42 AM

heavymetal: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.


You do realize that dealers at shows have to run background checks through the NCIS system?  The "gun show loophole" is not existent.  What people refer to the "loophole" is a private sale.  Person to person.  Yes, some people acquire them this way, but to say it's from a gun show is rather ignorant.  It's still illegal on a federal level to sell a firearm to a felon or other person who shouldn't have one.  There's just no way for private citizens to check.  There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

That's the REAL reason there's the loophole. There's NO WAY they're going to let joe public into that database.  

The solution could be to force all sales to go through a FFL, but I don't know if people would go for that.
 
2013-02-13 08:46:33 AM

Corvus: [woodgatesview.files.wordpress.com image 245x324]

I love this bit. Substitute the word "Guns" for words like "murder" or "Rape" to show you how stupid it is.

Basic it says "Because a law is not 100% effective we should get rid of it". Which is retarded.


The difference is, there are legal guns.  There isn't legal murder/rape.  Limiting the firearms also takes them away from law abiding people, turning people into criminals with the stroke of a pen.  Making murder illegal doesn't exactly have an effect on law abiding citizens.  

I don't think the point is we should have NO laws....  but we shouldn't have STUPID laws that only limit law abiding people.  

As other people have said, why was it illegal for this guy to have a gun?  If he was a felon, ok, but otherwise, the law is dumb.  He didn't shoot anyone.  He didn't harm anyone.  Who knows.  I think it's pretty lame for him to goto jail for something I do legally every day.
 
2013-02-13 08:47:19 AM

Corvus: You'reI'm a farking troll.


FTFY.
 
2013-02-13 09:51:12 AM

Mr.BobDobalita: heavymetal: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.

You do realize that dealers at shows have to run background checks through the NCIS system?  The "gun show loophole" is not existent. What people refer to the "loophole" is a private sale.  Person to person.  Yes, some people acquire them this way, but to say it's from a gun show is rather ignorant.  It's still illegal on a federal level to sell a firearm to a felon or other person who shouldn't have one.  There's just no way for private citizens to check.  There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

That's the REAL reason there's the loophole. There's NO WAY they're going to let joe public into that database.  

The solution could be to force all sales to go through a FFL, but I don't know if people would go for that.



You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.
 
2013-02-13 10:58:24 AM

downtownkid: Mr.BobDobalita: heavymetal: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.

You do realize that dealers at shows have to run background checks through the NCIS system?  The "gun show loophole" is not existent. What people refer to the "loophole" is a private sale.  Person to person.  Yes, some people acquire them this way, but to say it's from a gun show is rather ignorant.  It's still illegal on a federal level to sell a firearm to a felon or other person who shouldn't have one.  There's just no way for private citizens to check.  There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

That's the REAL reason there's the loophole. There's NO WAY they're going to let joe public into that database.  

The solution could be to force all sales to go through a FFL, but I don't know if people would go for that.


You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.


So you have done this?   Have you seen this done?   I'm curious as to where you are getting your information from.  All the gun shows I"ve been to require you to be a firearms dealer (FFL) to sell guns there.  You can get a table and hock your wares that are related to guns, rednecks, etc....   but you can't sell guns there unless you are a private individual.  I'm not saying there aren't people around trying to sell grandpa's rifle or something, but as I said, I"m curious where you're getting your info from, or if you're just trumpeting anti-gun talking points.
 
2013-02-13 12:52:38 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: SirEattonHogg: Very interesting. Thanks. Always thought about maybe getting a Civil War era rifled musket (like a Springfield 1861) for the novelty of firing one.

Do it. They are fun as hell.


Yes, Do it!!  This is what I harvested my first deer with at the ripe old age of 10 years old.
www.lymanproducts.com
.54 Cal Great Plains Rifle Flintlock Muzzle loader.
32" barrel and heavy but to this day Flintlock season remains my favorite season, and even got my best friend into it and got him the exact same rifle although in .50cal.
nothing like filling up the bath tub with hot soapy water to clean them after firing them off.  MY wife just loves that part.
 
2013-02-13 01:10:56 PM

downtownkid: You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.


Then let's be honest and call it the "private sales loophole".
 
2013-02-13 03:46:50 PM

dittybopper: downtownkid: You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

Then let's be honest and call it the "private sales loophole".


I was just going to say that exact same thing but you beat me to it.
 
2013-02-13 03:53:31 PM

PanzerPants: Noticeably F.A.T.: SirEattonHogg: Very interesting. Thanks. Always thought about maybe getting a Civil War era rifled musket (like a Springfield 1861) for the novelty of firing one.

Do it. They are fun as hell.

Yes, Do it!!  This is what I harvested my first deer with at the ripe old age of 10 years old.
[www.lymanproducts.com image 500x150]
.54 Cal Great Plains Rifle Flintlock Muzzle loader.
32" barrel and heavy but to this day Flintlock season remains my favorite season, and even got my best friend into it and got him the exact same rifle although in .50cal.
nothing like filling up the bath tub with hot soapy water to clean them after firing them off.  MY wife just loves that part.


Crap, late to the party.  I'm building a Traditions Hawken Flint 50 from a kit (figured I'd start on the less expensive end to see if I like it and maybe move up to Track of the Wolf later).
What's the best way to clean out a flintlock after firing?  Remove the barrel and go to town with hot soapy water, or is there a cleaner you can recommend?
 
2013-02-13 03:55:59 PM

dittybopper: downtownkid: You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

Then let's be honest and call it the "private sales loophole".


How about the "private sales at gun shows loophole"?
 
2013-02-13 04:00:43 PM

Mr.BobDobalita: downtownkid: Mr.BobDobalita: heavymetal: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.

You do realize that dealers at shows have to run background checks through the NCIS system?  The "gun show loophole" is not existent. What people refer to the "loophole" is a private sale.  Person to person.  Yes, some people acquire them this way, but to say it's from a gun show is rather ignorant.  It's still illegal on a federal level to sell a firearm to a felon or other person who shouldn't have one.  There's just no way for private citizens to check.  There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

That's the REAL reason there's the loophole. There's NO WAY they're going to let joe public into that database.  

The solution could be to force all sales to go through a FFL, but I don't know if people would go for that.


You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

So you have done this?   Have you seen this done?   I'm curious as to where you are getting your information from.  All the gun shows I"ve been to require you to be a firearms dealer (FFL) to sell guns there.  You can get a table and hock your wares that are related to guns, rednecks, etc....   but you can't sell guns there unless you are a private individual.  I'm not saying there aren't people around trying to sell grandpa's rifle or something, but as I said, I"m curious where you're getting your info from, or if you're just trumpeting a ...


I have both done this and seen it done.  Bought a Starfire .380 at a show in Ohio and  a Smith and Wesson .357 from a Louisiana State Policeman at a show down there.  Not sure what shows you go to but every one I've attended is packed with private sellers.  As a matter of fact, although gun shows have been around forever it was illegal for anyone holding an FFL to sell at a show prior to the FOPA being enected in 1986.  Prior to that it was exclusively private dealers.  Now they generally run about 50/50 Private sellers and licensed dealers.
 
2013-02-13 04:16:09 PM

Mr.BobDobalita: downtownkid: Mr.BobDobalita: heavymetal: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.

You do realize that dealers at shows have to run background checks through the NCIS system?  The "gun show loophole" is not existent. What people refer to the "loophole" is a private sale.  Person to person.  Yes, some people acquire them this way, but to say it's from a gun show is rather ignorant.  It's still illegal on a federal level to sell a firearm to a felon or other person who shouldn't have one.  There's just no way for private citizens to check.  There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

That's the REAL reason there's the loophole. There's NO WAY they're going to let joe public into that database.  

The solution could be to force all sales to go through a FFL, but I don't know if people would go for that.


You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

So you have done this?   Have you seen this done?   I'm curious as to where you are getting your information from.  All the gun shows I"ve been to require you to be a firearms dealer (FFL) to sell guns there.  You can get a table and hock your wares that are related to guns, rednecks, etc....   but you can't sell guns there unless you are a private individual.  I'm not saying there aren't people around trying to sell grandpa's rifle or something, but as I said, I"m curious where you're getting your info from, or if you're just trumpeting a ...



A quick search indicates that there are 33 States where it is possible to buy guns from private individuals at gun shows with no background check.  I'm the furthest thing from being anti-gun, and am actually a bit of an aficionado.  However the gun show loophole makes a joke out of the notion of all other gun regulation.
 
2013-02-13 04:16:18 PM

downtownkid: dittybopper: downtownkid: You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

Then let's be honest and call it the "private sales loophole".

How about the "private sales at gun shows loophole"?


What happens when, as happened in New York years ago, that particular "loophole" gets closed?

You'll then eventually be arguing what New York recently passed:  Ban all private sales without a background check, which means all sales *MUST* go through an FFL.

Fark you.  I've been lied to for years about this.
 
2013-02-13 04:17:45 PM

dittybopper: downtownkid: dittybopper: downtownkid: You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

Then let's be honest and call it the "private sales loophole".

How about the "private sales at gun shows loophole"?

What happens when, as happened in New York years ago, that particular "loophole" gets closed?

You'll then eventually be arguing what New York recently passed:  Ban all private sales without a background check, which means all sales *MUST* go through an FFL.

Fark you.  I've been lied to for years about this.



If your stance is that private sales must be allowed with no paperwork or regulation then we are fundamentally opposed on the issue.
 
2013-02-13 05:31:21 PM

dittybopper: Have you tried Triple Seven powder?


I haven't, but I'll look into it, thanks.

Mr.BobDobalita: There's just no way for private citizens to check. There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.


Not entirely true. You can take your private transaction to someone with an FFL and pay to have them run the check (basically the same thing you have to do to ship a gun). That's still not your average joe having direct access to the system, but a private sale can still include a BG check.

downtownkid: How about the "private sales at gun shows loophole"?


Often not allowed, or at least not without a BG check. There are no shows here in CO you can go to and legally buy/sell a gun without a check (not even out in the parking lot). I suppose you could make a deal at the show then drive somewhere else, but how is that any different than finding a gun in a classified ad, fire sale, auction, bumping into someone at Starbucks, etc.? I suppose you could make private sales (or private sales without a check) illegal, bot how in the fark would you ever enforce it? These are transactions that by their very nature are untraceable unless the people involved want to make it traceable, and those are the people you don't need to worry about.
 
2013-02-13 05:42:31 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: dittybopper: Have you tried Triple Seven powder?

I haven't, but I'll look into it, thanks.

Mr.BobDobalita: There's just no way for private citizens to check. There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

Not entirely true. You can take your private transaction to someone with an FFL and pay to have them run the check (basically the same thing you have to do to ship a gun). That's still not your average joe having direct access to the system, but a private sale can still include a BG check.

downtownkid: How about the "private sales at gun shows loophole"?

Often not allowed, or at least not without a BG check. There are no shows here in CO you can go to and legally buy/sell a gun without a check (not even out in the parking lot). I suppose you could make a deal at the show then drive somewhere else, but how is that any different than finding a gun in a classified ad, fire sale, auction, bumping into someone at Starbucks, etc.? I suppose you could make private sales (or private sales without a check) illegal, bot how in the fark would you ever enforce it? These are transactions that by their very nature are untraceable unless the people involved want to make it traceable, and those are the people you don't need to worry about.


If you check the link I posted above, there are 33 states where there is no regulation on private sales at gun shows. I'm surprised to hear that private sales are not common at gun shows because my experience has been entirely the opposite.

I think guns should be registered and insured just like an automobile is.
 
2013-02-14 08:26:17 AM

downtownkid: If your stance is that private sales must be allowed with no paperwork or regulation then we are fundamentally opposed on the issue.


Yes, we are.

I'll tell you my reasons why.

First, I see no pressing reason why private sales need to be regulated.  Crime, and especially violent crime, is at historically low levels.  There is no need for private sales to be regulated, because crime is lower now than it's been since before even dealer sales were regulated at the federal level in 1968.

Second, the federal government doesn't have the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate sales of personal property between two private individuals.

Third, requiring that all guns sales, from a dealer or from a private individual, get prior government approval effectively shifts something that is an enumerated constitutional right to a government granted privilege.   That alone is a non-starter.

Fourth, it increases the amount of money and paperwork that a person must go through to purchase a gun, and that will have chilling effects on the exercise of that right.  The fees might seem small and reasonable at first, but they have a way of going up over time, and more than the cost of inflation can justify.

Fifth, it's a de-facto registration scheme.   You will undoubtedly have to fill out a Form 4473 or it's equivalent to do the NICS check (where else would you write the NICS Transaction Number (NTN) to prove it was a valid sale?), and that makes the records of all gun transfers available to the government upon request.  Registration of all firearms is against federal law.

To tie that all together, one of the main purposes of the Second Amendment is to act as a kind of "Mutually Assured Destruction" between the government and the citizenry:  To assure that should the government become too powerful and not responsive to the citizenry, the citizens have the ability to overthrow the government by force, if necessary.   It's a kind of "reset button" that was written into the Constitution based upon their own experience and their knowledge of their own history, tracing back through the experiences of their ancestors in Britain.

It's an ultimate manifestation of the checks and balances that define how our government was set up:  The people have little to fear from a government that protects a robust right to keep and bear arms, as they then hold the power to overthrow it, and a government has little to fear from the people when they protect a robust right to keep and bear arms, because while they do so, there is no incentive for the people to rebel.

That's not to say that registration of all guns, or licensing of all gun owners (and universal background checks are de facto registration, as I point out above) will ultimate lead to confiscation of all, or even some, guns.  It's not inevitable, but registration and/or licensing is a necessary precondition to the efficient confiscation of guns.  It makes it much easier to accomplish.

Now do you see why I'm not too thrilled at the prospect?  I'm not asking you to necessarily *AGREE*, just to understand why I might have some deep concerns on the issue.
 
2013-02-14 10:04:04 AM

downtownkid: Mr.BobDobalita: downtownkid: Mr.BobDobalita: heavymetal: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.

You do realize that dealers at shows have to run background checks through the NCIS system?  The "gun show loophole" is not existent. What people refer to the "loophole" is a private sale.  Person to person.  Yes, some people acquire them this way, but to say it's from a gun show is rather ignorant.  It's still illegal on a federal level to sell a firearm to a felon or other person who shouldn't have one.  There's just no way for private citizens to check.  There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

That's the REAL reason there's the loophole. There's NO WAY they're going to let joe public into that database.  

The solution could be to force all sales to go through a FFL, but I don't know if people would go for that.


You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

So you have done this?   Have you seen this done?   I'm curious as to where you are getting your information from.  All the gun shows I"ve been to require you to be a firearms dealer (FFL) to sell guns there.  You can get a table and hock your wares that are related to guns, rednecks, etc....   but you can't sell guns there unless you are a private individual.  I'm not saying there aren't people around trying to sell grandpa's rifle or something, but as I said, I"m curious where you're getting your info from, or if you're j ...


I never meant to say it wasn't possible, I was just saying that the vast majority of the sales at gun shows were via licensed dealers.
 
2013-02-14 11:19:42 AM

Mr.BobDobalita: downtownkid: Mr.BobDobalita: downtownkid: Mr.BobDobalita: heavymetal: atomicmask: How did that gun get by the gun free zone bubble around wonderful liberal utopia NYC? That seems impossible.

He bought it at a gun show so he could avoid the background check due to him being a felon.

You do realize that dealers at shows have to run background checks through the NCIS system?  The "gun show loophole" is not existent. What people refer to the "loophole" is a private sale.  Person to person.  Yes, some people acquire them this way, but to say it's from a gun show is rather ignorant.  It's still illegal on a federal level to sell a firearm to a felon or other person who shouldn't have one.  There's just no way for private citizens to check.  There is no way they could be allowed access to the NCIS database.

That's the REAL reason there's the loophole. There's NO WAY they're going to let joe public into that database.  

The solution could be to force all sales to go through a FFL, but I don't know if people would go for that.


You're playing with semantics here.  The fact is that in many states you can go to a gun show and very easily purchase a gun with no background check whatsoever.  Yes, the licensed dealers there are required to do background checks but there are great numbers of private sellers at these events.  It could not possibly be simpler to do.  The whole "there is no gun show loophole" idea is an NRA talking point that is dishonest and misleading.

So you have done this?   Have you seen this done?   I'm curious as to where you are getting your information from.  All the gun shows I"ve been to require you to be a firearms dealer (FFL) to sell guns there.  You can get a table and hock your wares that are related to guns, rednecks, etc....   but you can't sell guns there unless you are a private individual.  I'm not saying there aren't people around trying to sell grandpa's rifle or something, but as I said, I"m curious where you're getting your info from, o ...


The ones you have been to perhaps, but certainly not the case at the ones I have attended.
 
2013-02-14 11:25:49 AM

dittybopper: downtownkid: If your stance is that private sales must be allowed with no paperwork or regulation then we are fundamentally opposed on the issue.

Yes, we are.

I'll tell you my reasons why.

First, I see no pressing reason why private sales need to be regulated.  Crime, and especially violent crime, is at historically low levels.  There is no need for private sales to be regulated, because crime is lower now than it's been since before even dealer sales were regulated at the federal level in 1968.

Second, the federal government doesn't have the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate sales of personal property between two private individuals.

Third, requiring that all guns sales, from a dealer or from a private individual, get prior government approval effectively shifts something that is an enumerated constitutional right to a government granted privilege.   That alone is a non-starter.

Fourth, it increases the amount of money and paperwork that a person must go through to purchase a gun, and that will have chilling effects on the exercise of that right.  The fees might seem small and reasonable at first, but they have a way of going up over time, and more than the cost of inflation can justify.

Fifth, it's a de-facto registration scheme.   You will undoubtedly have to fill out a Form 4473 or it's equivalent to do the NICS check (where else would you write the NICS Transaction Number (NTN) to prove it was a valid sale?), and that makes the records of all gun transfers available to the government upon request.  Registration of all firearms is against federal law.

To tie that all together, one of the main purposes of the Second Amendment is to act as a kind of "Mutually Assured Destruction" between the government and the citizenry:  To assure that should the government become too powerful and not responsive to the citizenry, the citizens have the ability to overthrow the government by force, if necessary.   It's a kind of "reset button" that was written int ...


Hey, I absolutely understand your position and respect it.  We will have to agree to disagree though.  The constitution is a living document and one that can be changed.  I just fundamentally believe that guns should be regulated similar to the way cars are.  The second amendment was written in a vastly different world than the one we live in today, and if people need to take up arms against the government owning licensed or unlicensed guns is not going to make a difference.
 
2013-02-15 02:50:50 PM

Farkage: PanzerPants: Noticeably F.A.T.: SirEattonHogg: Very interesting. Thanks. Always thought about maybe getting a Civil War era rifled musket (like a Springfield 1861) for the novelty of firing one.

Do it. They are fun as hell.

Yes, Do it!!  This is what I harvested my first deer with at the ripe old age of 10 years old.
[www.lymanproducts.com image 500x150]
.54 Cal Great Plains Rifle Flintlock Muzzle loader.
32" barrel and heavy but to this day Flintlock season remains my favorite season, and even got my best friend into it and got him the exact same rifle although in .50cal.
nothing like filling up the bath tub with hot soapy water to clean them after firing them off.  MY wife just loves that part.

Crap, late to the party.  I'm building a Traditions Hawken Flint 50 from a kit (figured I'd start on the less expensive end to see if I like it and maybe move up to Track of the Wolf later).
What's the best way to clean out a flintlock after firing?  Remove the barrel and go to town with hot soapy water, or is there a cleaner you can recommend?


There are cleaners out there that work well but a couple of things that I have been told are
1.) always use a water based cleaner as any petroleum based will leave residue that can foul the powder by absorbing into it

I will use a BP solvent as an intermediate cleaner like between cleanings run a few wet patches and then dry to clean the powder fouling but for real cleaning before any prolonged storage I fill the tub with hit soapy water and scrub away with brush and patches until it is as clean as I can get it then run some bore butter down the pipe to protect it. Like a heavy dose of butter. Then be sure to run a dry patch to clean it out before I shoot again.

I'm not as hardcore as dittybopper is but am a traditionalist when it comes to BP season. Old skool powder horn, leather possible pouch and measure my charges in a drilled Antler section that holds the exact charge.
I picked up a Lyman Deerstalker flintlock as a temporary rifle to use while I was waiting for my brother to ship the other one out from Missouri and it is a great little brush gun and easy to handle.
Ditty may have other input but feel free to email me if you want any info pointers or experience.

Oh and for the thread, my experience forthe loophole issue is that anyone can walk into a show and sell a firearm to a fellow attendee. Guys will walk around with a flag advertising the gun for sale sticking out of the muzzle. As a fervent supporter of gun rights, I truthfully do not have a problem with closing the loophole. It is just that a loophole. I cannot muste a reason why it would be opposed by someone who can legally purchase a gun to begin with.
 
2013-02-15 04:29:31 PM

PanzerPants: There are cleaners out there that work well but a couple of things that I have been told are
1.) always use a water based cleaner as any petroleum based will leave residue that can foul the powder by absorbing into it

I will use a BP solvent as an intermediate cleaner like between cleanings run a few wet patches and then dry to clean the powder fouling but for real cleaning before any prolonged storage I fill the tub with hit soapy water and scrub away with brush and patches until it is as clean as I can get it then run some bore butter down the pipe to protect it. Like a heavy dose of butter. Then be sure to run a dry patch to clean it out before I shoot again.

I'm not as hardcore as dittybopper is but am a traditionalist when it comes to BP season. Old skool powder horn, leather possible pouch and measure my charges in a drilled Antler section that holds the exact charge.
I picked up a Lyman Deerstalker flintlock as a temporary rifle to use while I was waiting for my brother to ship the other one out from Missouri and it is a great little brush gun and easy to handle.
Ditty may have other input but feel free to email me if you want any info pointers or experience.


I may take you up on that offer!  Thanks for the advice!  I'm really looking forward to getting this thing done and trying it out.  Only eleventy billion hours of sanding the stock and bluing the barrel and I should be all set...
 
Displayed 215 of 215 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report