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.

(WTAE)   Gun shop owner killed in shooting at store on New Year's Eve. If only he'd had a gu-... wait, what? A gun store and taxidermy shop out of a house? What is this, I don't even. I'm hung over and need a drink now. Happy new year   (wtae.com) divider line 158
    More: Weird, New Year's Eve, Indiana counties, owner killed, firearms  
•       •       •

4049 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Jan 2014 at 8:00 AM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



158 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-01-01 04:09:26 AM
Guns make holes in your body,
Through which you can't potty,
Just your blood and guts spill out,
Bambi's mom could still munch grass,
Tupac would be tapping ass,
If you hate guns,
Scream and shout!
So (repeat top verse)
 
2014-01-01 04:40:15 AM
Uh, Subby? Saltsburg has a population of 873 as of the last census. Does that help you out?
 
2014-01-01 04:44:03 AM
Edmundson was charged with impersonating an officer after he detained juveniles he said were throwing corn at passing vehicles.

In sad truth, nothing was lost with the passing of Edmundson. In passing, may we please respect the lawn of which he has so reverently protected from the youth. In which we pray oh white Christ Santa FoxNews.....Herp Derp.
 
2014-01-01 04:48:31 AM
My bad. In the not so soon passing of Edmundson ;)
 
2014-01-01 08:04:29 AM
If only he'd had a phased plasma rifle.
 
2014-01-01 08:04:55 AM
Location is typical of small towns here in flyover country. You operate where your customers are.
 
2014-01-01 08:14:32 AM
I think in this moment of tragedy we should remember the rules when discussing this or any other gun tragedy:

Rule 1: It is "ghoulish" to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.
Rule 2: Gun crime in the president's hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.
Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else
Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is "political." Allowing them to continue is"non-political."
Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.


Carry on with your non political discussion, fellow militia member.
 
2014-01-01 08:21:34 AM
"The only thing that will not stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun store."

- Rand Paul
 
2014-01-01 08:27:00 AM
FTA: In November, Edmundson was charged with impersonating an officer after he detained juveniles he said were throwing corn at passing vehicles. Sources also said Edmunson used to work in law enforcement but he was let go.

Sounds like this guy might have had some issues, I'd like to hear why he was let go from the police force. Was he fired or laid-off?
 
2014-01-01 08:29:05 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: Uh, Subby? Saltsburg has a population of 873 872 as of the last census night. Does that help you out?

 
2014-01-01 08:33:51 AM

pyrotek85: FTA: In November, Edmundson was charged with impersonating an officer after he detained juveniles he said were throwing corn at passing vehicles. Sources also said Edmunson used to work in law enforcement but he was let go.

Sounds like this guy might have had some issues, I'd like to hear why he was let go from the police force. Was he fired or laid-off?


It's a good thing those mental health reforms that Republicans posted up as an alternative to gun control are working out.

/Know it's a joke
//GOTP wouldn't do a goddamned thing about mental health in this country
///they'd lose half their vote.
 
2014-01-01 08:37:37 AM
starcasm.net
lol, wut?
 
2014-01-01 08:59:50 AM

pueblonative: I think in this moment of tragedy we should remember the rules when discussing this or any other gun tragedy:

Rule 1: It is "ghoulish" to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.
Rule 2: Gun crime in the president's hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.
Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else
Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is "political." Allowing them to continue is"non-political."
Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.

Carry on with your non political discussion, fellow militia member.


Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

You guys would be much less terrified of gun owners if you would just go out and enjoy life a little.  It kind of looks like obsession.
 
2014-01-01 09:08:10 AM
where's Tunnelton? OH! Near Saltsburg. That helps.
 
2014-01-01 09:12:26 AM

AngryDragon: pueblonative: I think in this moment of tragedy we should remember the rules when discussing this or any other gun tragedy:

Rule 1: It is "ghoulish" to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.
Rule 2: Gun crime in the president's hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.
Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else
Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is "political." Allowing them to continue is"non-political."
Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.

Carry on with your non political discussion, fellow militia member.

Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

You guys would be much less terrified of gun owners if you would just go out and enjoy life a little.  It kind of looks like obsession.


Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie.
 
2014-01-01 09:16:54 AM
Oh this whole story is BULLshiat! There's only one way these things go down...

Every-farking-time.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-01-01 09:19:22 AM

pueblonative: I think in this moment of tragedy we should remember the rules when discussing this or any other gun tragedy:

Rule 1: It is "ghoulish" to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.
Rule 2: Gun crime in the president's hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.
Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else
Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is "political." Allowing them to continue is"non-political."
Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.

Carry on with your non political discussion, fellow militia member.


I just want to know if Frank wanted a head mount, or his whole body stuffed
 
2014-01-01 09:20:04 AM

RectalFury: Oh this whole story is BULLshiat! There's only one way these things go down...

Every-farking-time.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 532x324]


Reverse angle of that famous movie shot:

i.imgur.com
 
2014-01-01 09:22:17 AM
If it wasn't for the strong-arm lobbying tactics of the National Corn Throwers Association, that guy would have doing hard time instead of being out murdering innocent gun owners.
 
2014-01-01 09:22:55 AM
And over here, the "shoot-out in the gun store" diorama... "Oh, they look so life-like!"
 
2014-01-01 09:24:45 AM
Subby sounds urban.
 
2014-01-01 09:26:19 AM
i44.tinypic.com
 
2014-01-01 09:32:03 AM
This is why I have a loaded, cocked gun in each hand at all times. Always ready to fire at a second's notice.

No need to thank me for protecting America.
 
2014-01-01 09:34:02 AM

Kibbler: This is why I have a loaded, cocked gun in each hand at all times. Always ready to fire at a second's notice.

No need to thank me for protecting America.


Guess the police always know when your surfing pornhub, eh?
 
2014-01-01 09:35:05 AM

pueblonative: Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie


Tell you what.  We'll let you kill em before they're born, we get to kill em when they become criminals.  Deal?
 
2014-01-01 09:40:23 AM

AngryDragon: pueblonative: Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie

Tell you what.  We'll let you kill em before they're born, we get to kill em when they become criminals.  Deal?


You gonna give them a cookie with that hot shot, clown?

Counter deal: if you want to go play soldier, you can sign up with the Armed Forces where they'll teach you responsible gun ownership and how owning the latest Bushmaster "man card" does not turn you into a Red Dawn Wolverine.  They'll even pay you.
 
2014-01-01 09:42:34 AM

AngryDragon: pueblonative: I think in this moment of tragedy we should remember the rules when discussing this or any other gun tragedy:

Rule 1: It is "ghoulish" to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.
Rule 2: Gun crime in the president's hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.
Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else
Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is "political." Allowing them to continue is"non-political."
Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.

Carry on with your non political discussion, fellow militia member.

Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

You guys would be much less terrified of gun owners if you would just go out and enjoy life a little.  It kind of looks like obsession.


You'd be a lot more rooted in reality if you didn't think that everyone who holds you in contempt fears you.
 
2014-01-01 09:45:40 AM
Ugh. These threads always bring out the most embarrassing assclowns of gun owners.
 
2014-01-01 09:47:26 AM
Was the thief looking for a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range?
 
2014-01-01 09:47:33 AM
Back before the government invented zoning laws, running a business out of your home was common. Typically they would have the store/business in the front and the home portion in the rear or upstairs. If you drive down main street of any older town you'll see the stores all have a residence above them where the owners would live.
 
2014-01-01 09:49:12 AM

some_beer_drinker: [starcasm.net image 850x610]
lol, wut?


My hung-over morning:  You have made it.
 
2014-01-01 09:52:47 AM
ReapTheChaos: Back before the government invented zoning laws, running a business out of your home was common. Typically they would have the store/business in the front and the home portion in the rear or upstairs. If you drive down main street of any older town you'll see the stores all have a residence above them where the owners would live.

THIS
 
2014-01-01 09:54:25 AM
Another Darwin Celebration for the loss of human life? Why are they always held in basements where it's safe?
 
2014-01-01 09:54:40 AM
Sadly this gun store owner isn't at the next level of home protection that the industry is moving towards. "Man Traps" are revolutionizing the home protection business. The NRA doesn't want you knowing about all the various ways you can rig your house and your property to defend yourself, your family, your freedom, your country and Christ Almighty.

The NRA writes the legislation that makes protecting your property with anything other than a gun a crime for the sake of their corporate profits. Isnt it time somebody told the NRA that there are other ways?

Visit the ManTrapsForFreedom.com site to make your voice heard in the NRAs Washington, because when you run out of bullets and the tears of liberals to lubricate your guns, you're going to have to resort to Man Traps.
 
2014-01-01 09:55:31 AM

ReapTheChaos: Back before the government invented zoning laws, running a business out of your home was common. Typically they would have the store/business in the front and the home portion in the rear or upstairs. If you drive down main street of any older town you'll see the stores all have a residence above them where the owners would live.


So, mullets?
 
2014-01-01 10:00:58 AM

InterruptingQuirk: Another Darwin Celebration for the loss of human life? Why are they always held in basements where it's safe?


i18.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-01 10:02:06 AM

pueblonative: AngryDragon: pueblonative: Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie

Tell you what.  We'll let you kill em before they're born, we get to kill em when they become criminals.  Deal?

You gonna give them a cookie with that hot shot, clown?

Counter deal: if you want to go play soldier, you can sign up with the Armed Forces where they'll teach you responsible gun ownership and how owning the latest Bushmaster "man card" does not turn you into a Red Dawn Wolverine.  They'll even pay you.


A man was murdered.


What does this have to do with responsible gun ownership?

And he was murdered by a former law enforcement officer....the kind of guys who enforce gun grabbing legislation.

They guy was murdered by someone like you.
 
2014-01-01 10:05:09 AM

Giltric: And he was murdered by a former law enforcement officer....the kind of guys who enforce gun grabbing legislation.

They guy was murdered by someone like you.


Yeah, because cops are the libbies libruls that ever libbed.

Troll better or go home.
 
2014-01-01 10:06:28 AM

Giltric: A man was murdered.


What does this have to do with responsible gun ownership?


And he was murdered by a former law enforcement officer....the kind of guys who enforce gun grabbing legislation.


They guy was murdered by someone like you.


The man made a living perpetuating the slaughter of countless other.


www.quickmeme.com

 
2014-01-01 10:11:45 AM

pueblonative: AngryDragon: pueblonative: Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie

Tell you what.  We'll let you kill em before they're born, we get to kill em when they become criminals.  Deal?

You gonna give them a cookie with that hot shot, clown?

Counter deal: if you want to go play soldier, you can sign up with the Armed Forces where they'll teach you responsible gun ownership and how owning the latest Bushmaster "man card" does not turn you into a Red Dawn Wolverine.  They'll even pay you.


Already done.  Four years in the Army, 3 years as a Sheriff's deputy.

I know what's out there because I've had to clean up the aftermath.  I've had more exposure to firearms than the average person by an exponential measure.  I carry.  A .38 snubnose revolver.  I don't even own a long rifle, just a 12 gauge for sporting clays and home defense.  My firearm isn't a penis extension, an Internet tough guy statement, or a a defense against tyranny.  My firearm is with me at all times because I've seen the bad guys up close and personal and there is no way that I will let my family or any other innocent person be put at risk if I happen to be in a position to do something about it.

If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.
 
2014-01-01 10:14:02 AM
Subby, in Kensington, MD I know there's a gun shop combined with a model train store. And Kensington isn't even a small town, it's the suburbs just outside Washington DC.

http://silverspringdailyphoto.com/2008/08/07/trains-guns/
 
2014-01-01 10:16:15 AM

BumpInTheNight: Giltric: A man was murdered.

What does this have to do with responsible gun ownership?
And he was murdered by a former law enforcement officer....the kind of guys who enforce gun grabbing legislation.
They guy was murdered by someone like you.
The man made a living perpetuating the slaughter of countless other.
[www.quickmeme.com image 280x320]


Did he?
You have cites?
 
2014-01-01 10:18:13 AM

AngryDragon: pueblonative: AngryDragon: pueblonative: Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie

Tell you what.  We'll let you kill em before they're born, we get to kill em when they become criminals.  Deal?

You gonna give them a cookie with that hot shot, clown?

Counter deal: if you want to go play soldier, you can sign up with the Armed Forces where they'll teach you responsible gun ownership and how owning the latest Bushmaster "man card" does not turn you into a Red Dawn Wolverine.  They'll even pay you.

Already done.  Four years in the Army, 3 years as a Sheriff's deputy.

I know what's out there because I've had to clean up the aftermath.  I've had more exposure to firearms than the average person by an exponential measure.  I carry.  A .38 snubnose revolver.  I don't even own a long rifle, just a 12 gauge for sporting clays and home defense.  My firearm isn't a penis extension, an Internet tough guy statement, or a a defense against tyranny.  My firearm is with me at all times because I've seen the bad guys up close and personal and there is no way that I will let my family or any other innocent person be put at risk if I happen to be in a position to do something about it.

If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.


So stupid AND thuggish.

Got it.
 
2014-01-01 10:19:17 AM

AngryDragon: If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.


I've managed to live 35 years without being the victim of a violent crime, so that's one heck of a delusion.  I have no desire to have a gun or use a gun.  They're costly and I have better things to spend my time and money on.  But if I did, I'd want to make sure that the system made sure I was properly checked out and trained on how to use that weapon.  They made sure I had training before I got my driver's license, and a car isn't designed to kill anybody on purpose.  I'd also want to make sure that if somebody was mentally ill or considered a threat that the law could at least remove the danger that he or she is to other people in society with those guns.  Yeah, yeah, I know; he'll get his gun anyway by stealing it from a responsible gun owner who left it outside of the safe or he'll just use a lawnmower or a hammer to kill people.
 
2014-01-01 10:21:56 AM

Giltric: Did he?
You have cites?


A)  Sold guns.
B)  Taxidermist.

Death merchant:  There is no clearer evidence of being except if he also had another side business selling tobacco products.
 
2014-01-01 10:23:36 AM

BumpInTheNight: Giltric: Did he?
You have cites?

A)  Sold guns.
B)  Taxidermist.

Death merchant:  There is no clearer evidence of being except if he also had another side business selling tobacco products.


Those aren't cites.


That's like saying a criminal is obviously guilty because he is black.
 
2014-01-01 10:24:08 AM

Giltric: That's like saying a criminal is obviously guilty because he is black.


And?
 
2014-01-01 10:25:55 AM

pueblonative: I'd also want to make sure that if somebody was mentally ill or considered a threat that the law could at least remove the danger that he or she is to other people in society with those guns.


So you aren't really aware of the current laws that exist and you insist on even more laws that do the same thing that other laws do simply because you are ignorant of the law.


Is that a decent summation?

Because that is like 90% of the pro gun control crowd.
 
2014-01-01 10:27:09 AM

Giltric: pueblonative: I'd also want to make sure that if somebody was mentally ill or considered a threat that the law could at least remove the danger that he or she is to other people in society with those guns.

So you aren't really aware of the current laws that exist and you insist on even more laws that do the same thing that other laws do simply because you are ignorant of the law.


Is that a decent summation?

Because that is like 90% of the pro gun control crowd.


Yeah, it worked so well with James Holmes, didn't it.
 
2014-01-01 10:28:03 AM

BumpInTheNight: Giltric: That's like saying a criminal is obviously guilty because he is black.

And?


It is not a citation.


It is a bias, bigotry, foolishness....maybe even trolling.

Your call.

pick your own epithet....
 
2014-01-01 10:31:20 AM

Giltric: It is not a citation.


It is a bias, bigotry, foolishness....maybe even trolling.

Your call.

pick your own epithet....


Said the man defending a guy who's livelyhood was selling killing devices and then ghoolishly creating trophies from the bodies of those slain.  You asked for cites and yet you can't even prove this isn't what he did, even after reading the article where the journalist confirmed these things.  Death merchant:  Nothing of value was lost.
 
2014-01-01 10:32:27 AM

pueblonative: AngryDragon: If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.

I've managed to live 35 years without being the victim of a violent crime, so that's one heck of a delusion.  I have no desire to have a gun or use a gun.  They're costly and I have better things to spend my time and money on.  But if I did, I'd want to make sure that the system made sure I was properly checked out and trained on how to use that weapon.  They made sure I had training before I got my driver's license, and a car isn't designed to kill anybody on purpose.  I'd also want to make sure that if somebody was mentally ill or considered a threat that the law could at least remove the danger that he or she is to other people in society with those guns.  Yeah, yeah, I know; he'll get his gun anyway by stealing it from a responsible gun owner who left it outside of the safe or he'll just use a lawnmower or a hammer to kill people.


Look, I agree that a background check is necessary for the legal purchase of a firearm.  The VAST majority of firearm crime is committed by people who acquired it illegally which means that additional restrictions on law abiding citizens are pointless.  You acknowledge that as well.  In the last 10 years, MILLIONS of civilians have started to carry firearms.  The violent crime rate has not gone up.  The simple fact is that law abiding citizens carrying firearms is simply not a problem.

Treat mental illness, address education and poverty, make people who commit crimes with firearms sit in jail forever, then you will do something about gun violence.
 
2014-01-01 10:32:46 AM

pueblonative: Giltric: pueblonative: I'd also want to make sure that if somebody was mentally ill or considered a threat that the law could at least remove the danger that he or she is to other people in society with those guns.

So you aren't really aware of the current laws that exist and you insist on even more laws that do the same thing that other laws do simply because you are ignorant of the law.


Is that a decent summation?

Because that is like 90% of the pro gun control crowd.

Yeah, it worked so well with James Holmes, didn't it.


His shrink was aware of what was going on, there were warning signs....but they never took the proper steps to report them....same with Cho..same with Laughner....Lanzas mom was trying to do something about her crazy kid but she did not do enough.

Who do you feel should have been responsible for reporting his behavior to the proper authorities?  Do we need a tank with empaths and Tom Cruise saving the day?

You don't even know the story other than he shot people....do you?
 
2014-01-01 10:34:19 AM

BumpInTheNight: Giltric: It is not a citation.


It is a bias, bigotry, foolishness....maybe even trolling.

Your call.

pick your own epithet....

Said the man defending a guy who's livelyhood was selling killing devices and then ghoolishly creating trophies from the bodies of those slain.  You asked for cites and yet you can't even prove this isn't what he did, even after reading the article where the journalist confirmed these things.  Death merchant:  Nothing of value was lost.



I can't prove he didn't do something?

Where have I heard that one before....oh yeah...from trolls.
 
2014-01-01 10:38:28 AM

AngryDragon: Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.


The word you are using is not found in the dictionary.

No word found in any dictionaries.

Well. We can certainly dismiss anyone who disagrees with your narrow world view with an imaginary word, can't we, Derpstegio.
 
2014-01-01 10:38:52 AM

Giltric: I can't prove he didn't do something?

Where have I heard that one before....oh yeah...from trolls.


Let's switch gears then since neither of us can prove our case with cold facts apart from a news story backing mine up and fairy dust for yours.  Let's ask ourselves this:  What is more believeable - a man who owned a gun & skinning shop have a many prosperous years without even once cutting up a corpse or selling a lethal weapon to someone with the intention of using it on other living things.  Or a man who gleefully sold these weapons and as a bonus offered discounts on creating the perfect cadaver souvenir of the murder's conquests?

Only an idiot would go with the first one, like morbidly stupid.  Sooo stupid they'd have to be an active fox news viewer.
 
2014-01-01 10:41:42 AM

pueblonative: AngryDragon: pueblonative: I think in this moment of tragedy we should remember the rules when discussing this or any other gun tragedy:

Rule 1: It is "ghoulish" to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.
Rule 2: Gun crime in the president's hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.
Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else
Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is "political." Allowing them to continue is"non-political."
Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.

Carry on with your non political discussion, fellow militia member.

Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

You guys would be much less terrified of gun owners if you would just go out and enjoy life a little.  It kind of looks like obsession.

Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie.


Can you name a word that isn't made up?
 
2014-01-01 10:41:55 AM

BumpInTheNight: Or a man who gleefully sold these weapons and as a bonus offered discounts on creating the perfect cadaver souvenir of the murder's conquests?


So hunting is murder? That's just as stupid as AngryDragon using a made up word to dismiss people who advocate reform in gun control.
 
2014-01-01 10:42:36 AM

AngryDragon: Already done. Four years in the Army, 3 years as a Sheriff's deputy.


Don't you have to carry a gun when you're an off duty police/sheriff?
 
2014-01-01 10:45:04 AM

hardinparamedic: BumpInTheNight: Or a man who gleefully sold these weapons and as a bonus offered discounts on creating the perfect cadaver souvenir of the murder's conquests?

So hunting is murder? That's just as stupid as AngryDragon using a made up word to dismiss people who advocate reform in gun control.


Shush man, I'm just trolling a moron here.  Lemmie do this.
 
2014-01-01 10:47:00 AM

hardinparamedic: AngryDragon: Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

The word you are using is not found in the dictionary.

No word found in any dictionaries.

Well. We can certainly dismiss anyone who disagrees with your narrow world view with an imaginary word, can't we, Derpstegio.


It's a neologism coined by a gun nut to project his insecurities on to people who don't wank to firearms. It's thrown around by knuckle-draggers who want to appear intelligent.
 
2014-01-01 10:47:48 AM
 
2014-01-01 10:50:55 AM
Pro 2nd Peoples: Stop trying to change their minds, just set a good example and demonstrate responsibility through action and reasonable discourse.

Anti 2nd Peoples: You will never change the mind of those who believe the 2nd amendment is necessary for the security of a free state. Wiser folks than you decided this was best. I don't care if you are afraid. You should be more afraid of the car you drive or the air you breathe. My neighbor is an idiot. I'd prefer he didn't have guns or a drivers license, however I have no right to take that away just because it makes me uncomfortable.

Everyone: Stop being such a bunch of coonts, bickering about minor details while the country circles the drain, the economy is raped by the elite, and your children turn into self centered monsters. Focus on something more substantial than whether it is safer to have 30 rounds in a magazine or just 5.

Happy New Years!
 
2014-01-01 10:51:14 AM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Sources say when he was questioned about what happened, Edmundson said he was shot and wounded by Petro, but he was able to get Petro's gun and then allegedly returned fire fatally wounding the gun shop owner.

I'm sure in his final moments Petro wished he'd gone into the fleshlight business.


Actually he sold an entire line of animal hide Fleshlights. I prefer the squirrel.
 
2014-01-01 10:53:49 AM
Subby, I grew up in a town of ~1000. We had a gun shop that was attached to the back of a house in the community. It also was the local station for deer check-ins and state outlet for fishing licenses. The house/shop was on 25 acres that once a month held skeet shoots. What's hard to wrap your head around this idea?
 
2014-01-01 10:55:29 AM

HooskerDoo: hardinparamedic: AngryDragon: Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

The word you are using is not found in the dictionary.

No word found in any dictionaries.

Well. We can certainly dismiss anyone who disagrees with your narrow world view with an imaginary word, can't we, Derpstegio.

It's a neologism coined by a gun nut to project his insecurities on to people who don't wank to firearms. It's thrown around by knuckle-draggers who want to appear intelligent.


Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.
 
2014-01-01 10:55:31 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplophobia

Hoplophobia is a neologism (newly coined word or expression), originally coined to describe an "irrational aversion to firearms, as opposed to justified apprehension about those who may wield them."

I think most people are in the Justified Apprehension category and not the 'phobia' one. Most people aren't paralyzed in their homes in fear of going out in the world due to gun owners. Most people are however really farking concerned that you can buy a gun without a background check or waiting period, or that you can buy 100 guns and NEVER HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THEM AGAIN, or that a Straw Purchaser is buying guns for convicted felons or people with restraining orders. The 'rational' stuff is much more realistic.
 
2014-01-01 10:56:04 AM

jayphat: Subby, I grew up in a town of ~1000. We had a gun shop that was attached to the back of a house in the community. It also was the local station for deer check-ins and state outlet for fishing licenses. The house/shop was on 25 acres that once a month held skeet shoots. What's hard to wrap your head around this idea?


Blinding intolerance of that type of person.
 
2014-01-01 11:00:39 AM

AngryDragon: The VAST majority of firearm crime is committed by people who acquired it illegally which means that additional restrictions on law abiding citizens are pointless.


Like, say, requiring proper reporting of stolen guns within 24 hours of discovery and/or subjecting the firearm owner to civil and criminal liability in the event that the gun was used in the commission of the crime and he neglectfully secured his weapon or failed to report its theft?  Requiring private gun sales to go through background checks and subjecting those who do not to the same sorts of liability?  Or requiring people buying ammo and weapons to meet the dealer face to face and banning anonymous online purchases?  You mean the type of stuff we had to wait until after James Holmes shot up that theater to even discuss?

Mental health is a red herring.  The NRA has no plans to do anything to address mental health. One, they're the part of the party that dismantled the nation's mental health system in the first place.  More importantly, they know as anybody else that the link between people diagnosed as mentally ill and criminals is laughably low.

Education and poverty:  hmm, didn't know that Adam Lanza  would be considered either poor or uneducated.  Same goes with Dylan Klebold, Eric Harris and James Holmes.  Oh, and one other thing: none of them had committed a gun crime prior to their blaze of glory so the jail sentences don't work that well.  Oh I know, they all played video games so we should ban those and ignore the guns.  Any other herrings you care to drag across the trail, or did I steal your final thunderbolt.

Party of personal responsibility my ass.
 
2014-01-01 11:01:27 AM

InterruptingQuirk: Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.


But it is a real word.
 
2014-01-01 11:01:36 AM

FnkyTwn: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplophobia

Most people are however really farking concerned that you can buy a gun without a background check or waiting period, or that you can buy 100 guns and NEVER HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THEM AGAIN, or that a Straw Purchaser is buying guns for convicted felons or people with restraining orders. The 'rational' stuff is much more realistic.


Lets go point by point here, shall we?
1.) You can? If you're referring to gun shows, perhaps people shouldn't be YELLING OUT THEIR FARKING MOUTH that this is a problem since these sales account for less that 1% of all crimes committed with a gun.
2.) Why does there need to be a waiting period?
3.) What accounting needs to be made for a gun after its purchase?
4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.

So tell me, what justified fear is there other than the fact we have zero connection between background checks and mental health records, because I'm all for linking the two.
 
2014-01-01 11:02:28 AM
"Hoplophobe" is only a thing in the minds of fetishists.

http://mediamatters.org/print/blog/2013/05/02/daily-caller-pushes-inv e nted-psychological-diso/193867

/take out the spaces and paste in address bar
//mediamatters don't like to link
 
2014-01-01 11:02:44 AM

InterruptingQuirk: HooskerDoo: hardinparamedic: AngryDragon: Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

The word you are using is not found in the dictionary.

No word found in any dictionaries.

Well. We can certainly dismiss anyone who disagrees with your narrow world view with an imaginary word, can't we, Derpstegio.

It's a neologism coined by a gun nut to project his insecurities on to people who don't wank to firearms. It's thrown around by knuckle-draggers who want to appear intelligent.

Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.


No, homophobia is not a mental illness, but religion arguably is
 
2014-01-01 11:03:28 AM

HooskerDoo: InterruptingQuirk: Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.

But it is a real word.


Then so is any word that we make up if we understand it's meaning and usage.
 
2014-01-01 11:03:56 AM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "Hoplophobe" is only a thing in the minds of fetishists.

http://mediamatters.org/print/blog/2013/05/02/daily-caller-pushes-inv e nted-psychological-diso/193867

/take out the spaces and paste in address bar
//mediamatters don't like to link


Because no-one should visit media matters. Ever.
 
2014-01-01 11:04:20 AM

ParaHandy: InterruptingQuirk: HooskerDoo: hardinparamedic: AngryDragon: Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

The word you are using is not found in the dictionary.

No word found in any dictionaries.

Well. We can certainly dismiss anyone who disagrees with your narrow world view with an imaginary word, can't we, Derpstegio.

It's a neologism coined by a gun nut to project his insecurities on to people who don't wank to firearms. It's thrown around by knuckle-draggers who want to appear intelligent.

Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.

No, homophobia is not a mental illness, but religion arguably is


Don't start more shiat please, lets keep this a little relevant
 
2014-01-01 11:04:51 AM

born_yesterday: Ugh. These threads always bring out the most embarrassing assclowns of gun owners.


Gun owners? It's the pants-wetting gun control supporters going from 0 to asshat in this thread.
 
2014-01-01 11:05:01 AM

InterruptingQuirk: HooskerDoo: InterruptingQuirk: Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.

But it is a real word.

Then so is any word that we make up if we understand it's meaning and usage.


So what are we disagreeing on here?
 
2014-01-01 11:05:45 AM

hardinparamedic: BumpInTheNight: Or a man who gleefully sold these weapons and as a bonus offered discounts on creating the perfect cadaver souvenir of the murder's conquests?

So hunting is murder? That's just as stupid as AngryDragon using a made up word to dismiss people who advocate reform in gun control.


Made up word? Like gay?
 
2014-01-01 11:06:33 AM

jayphat: 4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.


And it's a good thing we fully fund the ATF to track and enforce these laws.  Right?
 
2014-01-01 11:10:02 AM

pueblonative: jayphat: 4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.

And it's a good thing we fully fund the ATF to track and enforce these laws.  Right?


Then fund them more? I have no issue with this. Fark, give me the federal budget. I'll get that biatch cleaned up in three hours.
 
2014-01-01 11:13:14 AM

jayphat: pueblonative: jayphat: 4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.

And it's a good thing we fully fund the ATF to track and enforce these laws.  Right?

Then fund them more? I have no issue with this. Fark, give me the federal budget. I'll get that biatch cleaned up in three hours.


Of course you'll get increased funding of the ATF past the teatards, dear.  Just like all those world class economists who could balance the budget and pay off the debt in 10 years if they weren't busy driving taxis and cutting hair.
 
2014-01-01 11:15:57 AM

AngryDragon: pueblonative: AngryDragon: pueblonative: Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie

Tell you what.  We'll let you kill em before they're born, we get to kill em when they become criminals.  Deal?

You gonna give them a cookie with that hot shot, clown?

Counter deal: if you want to go play soldier, you can sign up with the Armed Forces where they'll teach you responsible gun ownership and how owning the latest Bushmaster "man card" does not turn you into a Red Dawn Wolverine.  They'll even pay you.

Already done.  Four years in the Army, 3 years as a Sheriff's deputy.

I know what's out there because I've had to clean up the aftermath.  I've had more exposure to firearms than the average person by an exponential measure.  I carry.  A .38 snubnose revolver.  I don't even own a long rifle, just a 12 gauge for sporting clays and home defense.  My firearm isn't a penis extension, an Internet tough guy statement, or a a defense against tyranny.  My firearm is with me at all times because I've seen the bad guys up close and personal and there is no way that I will let my family or any other innocent person be put at risk if I happen to be in a position to do something about it.

If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.


It's not about delusions..........its about having a fundamental understanding of risk and statistics.

Owning a gun and more specifically carrying a loaded gun on your person is about making tradeoffs.  You cut down slightly (An attacker almost always has the upper hand due to the element of surprise) the risk that you will be able to use your gun to defend yourself while greatly increasing the risk that you will just shoot yourself or someone else accidentally.  And before you claim that you are a safe, responsible gun owner..........note that probably everyone who accidentally shoots themselves or someone else has made the same claim.

So those of us who don't carry a gun everywhere don't face the risk that we will accidentally shoot ourselves or someone else.............the tradeoff is we are at risk for a violent crime.  Of course, random violent crime is extremely rare and on the decline.  So for the majority of the population this risk is acceptable.

One of the risks gun advocates never seem to contemplate is the escalation factor.  George Zimmerman is a perfect example.  Ignore for a moment the politics of the case and think about this........if GZ wasn't armed would he have gotten out of the car?  The answer is almost certainly "no". If he doesn't get out of the car he doesn't get into a fight and he doesn't kill TM.  The presence of his gun gave him the "courage" to take a risk he wouldn't not have taken otherwise.  What is the point of gun if it causes you to take on more risk than is necessary?  But even if he did get out of the car and followed TM and got into a fight that he lost the most he would have gotten was an butt kicking and TM would have most likely been arrested.  However, because GZ was armed a simple whooping turned into a shooting.  I'm sure GZ didn't want to get beat up, but I'm betting in hindsight he would have preferred that over his current situation.  You can find stories like this almost every day in the US...........a simple argument or fight turns deadly because one or more of the people were armed.

There are exceptions where carrying a gun makes sense.............such as if you are in a risky profession.  Cops fall into this category, of course.  But there are a number of other professions that do as well. If you work in some kind of field where you can ruin someones life (ie.....divorce attorney, process server, etc) you would be wise to carry a gun.  Other than that............you are just trading one slight risk for a greater risk.  Makes no sense.
 
2014-01-01 11:19:41 AM

InterruptingQuirk: ParaHandy: InterruptingQuirk: HooskerDoo: hardinparamedic: AngryDragon: Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

The word you are using is not found in the dictionary.

No word found in any dictionaries.

Well. We can certainly dismiss anyone who disagrees with your narrow world view with an imaginary word, can't we, Derpstegio.

It's a neologism coined by a gun nut to project his insecurities on to people who don't wank to firearms. It's thrown around by knuckle-draggers who want to appear intelligent.

Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.

No, homophobia is not a mental illness, but religion arguably is

Don't start more shiat please, lets keep this a little relevant


WelcomeToFark.jpg

Seriously, much as I enjoy a good intellectual debate that is on point, if that's your preference you're definitely in the wrong place :)
 
2014-01-01 11:25:12 AM

Born_Again_Bavarian: Owning a gun and more specifically carrying a loaded gun on your person is about making tradeoffs. You cut down slightly (An attacker almost always has the upper hand due to the element of surprise) the risk that you will be able to use your gun to defend yourself while greatly increasing the risk that you will just shoot yourself or someone else accidentally. And before you claim that you are a safe, responsible gun owner..........note that probably everyone who accidentally shoots themselves or someone else has made the same claim.


This argument is fallacious. The guy who was in his own gun store surrounded by firearms greatly decreased his vulnerability to being the victim of a violent crime.

[reads article again]

Okay, nevermind.
 
2014-01-01 11:32:53 AM

HooskerDoo: InterruptingQuirk: HooskerDoo: InterruptingQuirk: Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.

But it is a real word.

Then so is any word that we make up if we understand it's meaning and usage.

So what are we disagreeing on here?


IDK, Happy New Years!
 
2014-01-01 11:33:55 AM

InterruptingQuirk: HooskerDoo: InterruptingQuirk: HooskerDoo: InterruptingQuirk: Homophobia doesn't appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) either, but people toss that one around like it's a real word and disorder.

But it is a real word.

Then so is any word that we make up if we understand it's meaning and usage.

So what are we disagreeing on here?

IDK, Happy New Years!


Cheers!
 
2014-01-01 11:38:09 AM

AngryDragon: Already done.  Four years in the Army, 3 years as a Sheriff's deputy.

I know what's out there because I've had to clean up the aftermath.  I've had more exposure to firearms than the average person by an exponential measure.  I carry.  A .38 snubnose revolver.  I don't even own a long rifle, just a 12 gauge for sporting clays and home defense.  My firearm isn't a penis extension, an Internet tough guy statement, or a a defense against tyranny.  My firearm is with me at all times because I've seen the bad guys up close and personal and there is no way that I will let my family or any other innocent person be put at risk if I happen to be in a position to do something about it.

If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.


Hmm.
I pay careful attention to my surroundings, move with a purpose, and avoid bad places.

I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.

So far, 100% effective at not being victimized. Not being threatened. Not approached by youths up to no good. Not even receiving rude gestures.

I must be doing something wrong to have missed out on violent victimization for so many decades.
 
2014-01-01 11:40:19 AM

demaL-demaL-yeH: I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.


You, sir have just made a VERY powerful enemy. *squints menacingly*
 
2014-01-01 11:44:11 AM

StoPPeRmobile: pueblonative: AngryDragon: pueblonative: I think in this moment of tragedy we should remember the rules when discussing this or any other gun tragedy:

Rule 1: It is "ghoulish" to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.
Rule 2: Gun crime in the president's hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.
Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else
Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is "political." Allowing them to continue is"non-political."
Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.

Carry on with your non political discussion, fellow militia member.

Already?  I see the hoplophobes are up early.

You guys would be much less terrified of gun owners if you would just go out and enjoy life a little.  It kind of looks like obsession.

Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie.

Can you name a word that isn't made up?


Onomatopoeia is pretty much a language universal. Although there are language differences, simply pronouncing it works most of the time*.
Waahhh!
Baaa.
Ha-ha-ha-ha.
Moo.

*Imitations of animal sounds are most likely to cause difficulty.
 
2014-01-01 11:46:45 AM

HooskerDoo: demaL-demaL-yeH: I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.

You, sir have just made a VERY powerful enemy. *squints menacingly*


Dragons don't exist. Pure mythology.
/They're like gnomes.
//But not fairies. Fairies are real.
///Hang in there, Tink.
 
2014-01-01 11:48:38 AM
Aaaahhhh, the old "wait, what." The intellectual crutch for Fark wiberals....
 
2014-01-01 11:49:57 AM

demaL-demaL-yeH: AngryDragon: Already done.  Four years in the Army, 3 years as a Sheriff's deputy.

I know what's out there because I've had to clean up the aftermath.  I've had more exposure to firearms than the average person by an exponential measure.  I carry.  A .38 snubnose revolver.  I don't even own a long rifle, just a 12 gauge for sporting clays and home defense.  My firearm isn't a penis extension, an Internet tough guy statement, or a a defense against tyranny.  My firearm is with me at all times because I've seen the bad guys up close and personal and there is no way that I will let my family or any other innocent person be put at risk if I happen to be in a position to do something about it.

If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.

Hmm.
I pay careful attention to my surroundings, move with a purpose, and avoid bad places.

I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.

So far, 100% effective at not being victimized. Not being threatened. Not approached by youths up to no good. Not even receiving rude gestures.

I must be doing something wrong to have missed out on violent victimization for so many decades.


I am amused by the fact that everyone who I know that carries a gun always/often  (white suburbanites)  will ALL claim that the gun has saved them at some point.  Meanwhile all the people I know who don't carry have never been the victim of any kind of violent act where a gun would have been useful.  I know one unarmed person who was the victim of a armed robbery, but a gun would have just gotten him killed because he got jumped.  Instead he just got shoved to the ground and got his wallet stolen.

Shocking conclusion:  If you carry a gun, everything becomes a threat
 
2014-01-01 11:54:46 AM

InterruptingQuirk: Blinding intolerance of that type of person.


It's ignorance on both parts really.

City-Folk: tend to fear guns because they don't skeet shoot or hunt, and they don't live 30 minutes from society.
Country-Folk: tend to have a gun because they tend to need guns on occasion.

Now these lines are blurred a bit by nutjobs on both sides. Some city-folk want to outlaw all guns, and some country-folk think it's just fine for lots of guns to be in the "big city" because cities are full of brown people and government.

Background Checks, Magazine Size Limits (you don't need 30+ bullets per clip) yes clip is the proper word), Waiting Periods, Mental Health Checks (sadly this seems impossible), Private Seller Loopholes.. all of these things are reasonable and none of them 'ban' guns. There should probably be mental health screening for concealed-carry and you should have to renew your CCW like every 4 years nationwide, to include mental health screening. And I would personally like a law that makes people account for the guns they've purchased like once every 5-10 years. I just want to know that you still have the 50 AKs you purchased, and if you don't have them, then I want clear documentation showing who you sold them to or if they were "stolen".

Currently though we can't even have a conversation about guns because every time the subject comes up some people put their fingers in their ears, shut their eyes and start screaming (those people probably shouldn't own guns), and the rest of us are pissed off that the NRA drapes itself in the American flag and pretends that they're protecting our national virginity, when really all they are is just a lobbying group for gun manufacturers. Some of us get pissed off that the NRA makes it seem like our elected government is constantly trying to enslave us just so they can sell more guns to idiots.. idiots who probably shouldn't own guns in the first place.

And then most of us should recognize that 9-11 hurt us a lot more than just the twin towers or financially. 9-11 put a fresh fear of the world back into our culture and the subsequent wars generated enough isolationism that the sons of the founder of the John Birch Society (Koch Brothers) are now the major funders behind the GOP/TeaParty. It turned Islam against Christianity and Christianity against Islam. It's just too bad that we don't have national healthcare that would handle all the therapy we need, or the legalized marijuana to mellow people the fark out. And the NRA isn't helping.
 
2014-01-01 11:55:17 AM

pueblonative: hmm, didn't know that Adam Lanza  would be considered either poor or uneducated.  Same goes with Dylan Klebold, Eric Harris and James Holmes.  Oh, and one other thing: none of them had committed a gun crime prior to their blaze of glory so the jail sentences don't work that well


The gun homicide rate is down 50%.  Most of those are committed in urban, high-poverty areas.  For every one Lanza or Klebold, there are 11,000 individual criminal acts committed with firearms resulting in homicide.  Almost none of those are with "assault rifles", almost all with illegal firearms, and most with repeat offenders.  Additionally, the vast majority are black-on-black.

Go ahead, pass a law that would have stopped Lanza.  It's spitting in the ocean and the only real restriction that will be in effect is on law abiding citizens.  Do something about the other 11,000 incidents by dealing with the root causes and you will have a positive effect.

Rolling out the memories of dead children due to a lunatic to further a political and ultimately ineffective set of laws is abhorrent.
 
2014-01-01 11:56:34 AM

ReapTheChaos: Back before the government invented zoning laws, running a business out of your home was common. Typically they would have the store/business in the front and the home portion in the rear or upstairs. If you drive down main street of any older town you'll see the stores all have a residence above them where the owners would live.


What's even weirder to me, a child of the suburbs, is to drive through a residential area of an old industrial town and see a bar or a grocery store suddenly appear among the houses.
 
2014-01-01 11:58:37 AM

Born_Again_Bavarian: I am amused by the fact that everyone who I know that carries a gun always/often  (white suburbanites)  will ALL claim that the gun has saved them at some point.  Meanwhile all the people I know who don't carry have never been the victim of any kind of violent act where a gun would have been useful.  I know one unarmed person who was the victim of a armed robbery, but a gun would have just gotten him killed because he got jumped.  Instead he just got shoved to the ground and got his wallet stolen.

Shocking conclusion:   If you carry a gun, everything becomes a threat


Military training fosters that mindset. And it is a rational, utilitarian mindset, since, in fact, you are walking/riding around armed looking for trouble.

It's a rational mindset for an active combat zone.
And for training.
But not for the streets of the United States, where it is a liability.

That mindset naturally leads to escalation and is prejudicial to public safety.
 
2014-01-01 12:03:30 PM

AngryDragon: Rolling out the memories of dead children due to a lunatic to further a political and ultimately ineffective set of laws is abhorrent.


it's the easiest way to distract from the fact that alcohol was once again the culprit.
 
2014-01-01 12:06:24 PM

AngryDragon: Rolling out the memories of dead children due to a lunatic to further a political and ultimately ineffective set of laws is abhorrent.


wpmedia.fullcomment.nationalpost.com


Think you need to go have a talk with these fine, rational people.
 
2014-01-01 12:13:45 PM

pueblonative: AngryDragon: Rolling out the memories of dead children due to a lunatic to further a political and ultimately ineffective set of laws is abhorrent.

[wpmedia.fullcomment.nationalpost.com image 619x464]


Think you need to go have a talk with these fine, rational people.


Why?  I think they're just as serious lunatics and in exactly the same way.  Arguing against the symptom, not the root cause.  That's one's even easier too.  Availability of sex education and contraception yields fewer abortions.  But just like gun control, where the best solution is education and economic opportunity,  the real answer isn't very sexy and doesn't win votes.
 
2014-01-01 12:13:54 PM
jayphat:
3.) What accounting needs to be made for a gun after its purchase?
4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.


How are we to know if you were a Straw Purchaser if we never get to see the gun again? Hell, let the NRA verify it, just as long as it's verified. That you don't want a simple check every 10 years to verify that you still have a gun seems sketchy as fark to me. Your "freedom" should end if you're just buying and selling guns illegally. Most guns used in crime were originally purchased through Straw Purchasers.

My experience with this is personal. Growing up we had a neighbor who got into a bad financial situation and then mysteriously one evening all his guns were stolen out of his unsecured garage. We lived in a nice neighborhood and nothing else was stolen. The garage door was simply opened, it wasn't even 'broken' into so as not to cost him any more money. Everybody kinda knew what he had done, and of course he had insurance on his gun collection. This was in Arizona, so there's a well-known quick pipeline for sales to Mexico.. the same is true with car insurance fraud.

Then maybe we enact a law that 'once you've had 10+ guns stolen from you, you then have a 2 year wait period on your next gun purchase'.
 
2014-01-01 12:23:14 PM

FnkyTwn: jayphat:
3.) What accounting needs to be made for a gun after its purchase?
4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.

How are we to know if you were a Straw Purchaser if we never get to see the gun again? Hell, let the NRA verify it, just as long as it's verified. That you don't want a simple check every 10 years to verify that you still have a gun seems sketchy as fark to me. Your "freedom" should end if you're just buying and selling guns illegally. Most guns used in crime were originally purchased through Straw Purchasers.

My experience with this is personal. Growing up we had a neighbor who got into a bad financial situation and then mysteriously one evening all his guns were stolen out of his unsecured garage. We lived in a nice neighborhood and nothing else was stolen. The garage door was simply opened, it wasn't even 'broken' into so as not to cost him any more money. Everybody kinda knew what he had done, and of course he had insurance on his gun collection. This was in Arizona, so there's a well-known quick pipeline for sales to Mexico.. the same is true with car insurance fraud.

Then maybe we enact a law that 'once you've had 10+ guns stolen from you, you then have a 2 year wait period on your next gun purchase'.


It wasn't used in a crime then. Here's a quick thought. How many crimes have you committed today? The answer isn't zero. It may have been a straw purchase, and sadly, until it's used illegally we won't know. However, we can't be mind readers with every single purchase made in the United States. We can't know if someone buying prescription narcotics for illegal sales until they've done it.

I understand what you're trying to say here. You want to enact something meaningful, lets go with stronger penalties for straw purchases. Lets include mental health records in background checks.  But it's nobodies farking business as to if I still have the guns I purchased, anymore than it is the business of the government to know about any other purchases I have made in the last ten years.
 
2014-01-01 12:25:55 PM
These threads are so awesome.

Too bad there's no women within 1000 miles of them, but you can't have everything I guess.

BTW, I'm going to start carrying too.  I don't like the look of a lot of the people I see.
 
Rat
2014-01-01 12:27:55 PM

FnkyTwn: InterruptingQuirk: Blinding intolerance of that type of person.

(you don't need 30+ bullets per clip) yes clip is the proper word)


I'm almost sure that a 30+ bullet clip would be difficult to use.  Clips are usually 4 and 10 round capable, and for revolvers 5 and 6 round, although I've seen some 8 rounds clips.  The clips feeds the magazine, or the rifle, and are smaller than the magazine itself for portability.  I'm not discounting that there are huge clips out there, but that anything larger then 10 is unfeasible and you might break a nail trying to use it.

Perhaps you're thinking of a belt fed device, and in that case never mind.

™ you may now carry on arguing amongst yourselves
 
2014-01-01 12:43:20 PM
Here's the article from November, 2013 regarding Edmundson's previous run-in with the police. He went after a couple of teenage boys who were throwing corn at passing vehicles. Tackled one of the teens and handcuffed him so tightly the boy's hands were turning blue. Edmundson got charged with unlawful restraint, false imprisonment, simple assault, disorderly conduct and harassment.

And if this is the same Jack O. Edmundson, Jr. that got sent to prison in 1999, then it was for stealing items seized when he was a detective for the Drug Task Force.
 
2014-01-01 12:46:50 PM

Hüsker Dü: demaL-demaL-yeH: I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.You, sir have just made a VERY powerful enemy. *squints menacingly*

Are we good now?/I even gave you umlauts.
 
2014-01-01 12:53:43 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Hüsker Dü: demaL-demaL-yeH: I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.You, sir have just made a VERY powerful enemy. *squints menacingly*Are we good now?/I even gave you umlauts.


Only if they can be Rock and Roll umlauts!
 
2014-01-01 12:54:19 PM
"wait, what? A gun store and taxidermy shop out of a house?"

How come I know that subby has never been to Pennsylvania?
 
2014-01-01 12:56:59 PM

Rat: I'm almost sure that a 30+ bullet clip would be difficult to use. Clips are usually 4 and 10 round capable, and for revolvers 5 and 6 round, although I've seen some 8 rounds clips. The clips feeds the magazine, or the rifle, and are smaller than the magazine itself for portability. I'm not discounting that there are huge clips out there, but that anything larger then 10 is unfeasible and you might break a nail trying to use it.



If we call the people who correct Grammar over the internet "Grammar Nazis", I think it's okay to call people who feel the need to correct gun vernacular "Gun Nazis". It has a nice ring to it.
 
2014-01-01 12:57:16 PM

jayphat: FnkyTwn: jayphat:
3.) What accounting needs to be made for a gun after its purchase?
4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.

How are we to know if you were a Straw Purchaser if we never get to see the gun again? Hell, let the NRA verify it, just as long as it's verified. That you don't want a simple check every 10 years to verify that you still have a gun seems sketchy as fark to me. Your "freedom" should end if you're just buying and selling guns illegally. Most guns used in crime were originally purchased through Straw Purchasers.

...

I understand what you're trying to say here. You want to enact something meaningful, lets go with stronger penalties for straw purchases. Lets include mental health records in background checks.  But it's nobodies farking business as to if I still have the guns I purchased, anymore than it is the business of the government to know about any other purchases I have made in the last ten years.



Except your car (and any other vehicle you own).

And your house (and any other property you own).

All part of growing up and becoming a big boy.
 
2014-01-01 01:01:28 PM

FnkyTwn: How are we to know if you were a Straw Purchaser if we never get to see the gun again? Hell, let the NRA verify it, just as long as it's verified. That you don't want a simple check every 10 years to verify that you still have a gun seems sketchy as fark to me. Your "freedom" should end if you're just buying and selling guns illegally. Most guns used in crime were originally purchased through Straw Purchasers.


===========

I've seen straw purchased go down at a gun shop.  Gang-banger type guy walked in with a young woman.  He pointed out the gun and she filled out the 4473 and did the NIC.  I knew what was going on, the sports shop owner knew what was going on, but there was nothing he could do about it.
 
2014-01-01 01:08:28 PM

Hüsker Dü: demaL-demaL-yeH: Hüsker Dü: demaL-demaL-yeH: I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.You, sir have just made a VERY powerful enemy. *squints menacingly*

Are we good now?/I even gave you umlauts.

Only if they can be Rock and Roll umlauts!


Is there any other kind?
/Sorry. These were a little mouldy.
 
2014-01-01 01:09:29 PM

AngryDragon: the vast majority are black-on-black


You sound concerned
 
2014-01-01 01:10:32 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Hüsker Dü: demaL-demaL-yeH: Hüsker Dü: demaL-demaL-yeH: I also avoid people with obvious mental issues, and those idiots with insufficient unarmed combatives practice, unrealistic beliefs about their reaction times, and movie-level fantasy estimates of their marksmanship skills, who walk around armed and afraid in public, but I repeat myself.You, sir have just made a VERY powerful enemy. *squints menacingly*

Are we good now?/I even gave you umlauts.

Only if they can be Rock and Roll umlauts!

Is there any other kind?
/Sorry. These were a little mouldy.


What you did there. I seed it.
 
Rat
2014-01-01 01:10:44 PM

FnkyTwn: Rat: I'm almost sure that a 30+ bullet clip would be difficult to use. Clips are usually 4 and 10 round capable, and for revolvers 5 and 6 round, although I've seen some 8 rounds clips. The clips feeds the magazine, or the rifle, and are smaller than the magazine itself for portability. I'm not discounting that there are huge clips out there, but that anything larger then 10 is unfeasible and you might break a nail trying to use it.


If we call the people who correct Grammar over the internet "Grammar Nazis", I think it's okay to call people who feel the need to correct gun vernacular "Gun Nazis". It has a nice ring to it.


Nice!  I tried to help you sound more plausible with your diatribe, and you rebut by comparing the Jewish guy to a Nazi.  Good for you.

©
 
2014-01-01 01:12:39 PM

Fissile: I've seen straw purchased go down at a gun shop. Gang-banger type guy walked in with a young woman. He pointed out the gun and she filled out the 4473 and did the NIC. I knew what was going on, the sports shop owner knew what was going on, but there was nothing he could do about it.


That's bizarre. The ONE time this actually happens and you were there to see it.
 
2014-01-01 01:14:13 PM

Rat: Nice! I tried to help you sound more plausible with your diatribe, and you rebut by comparing the Jewish guy to a Nazi. Good for you.


A Jewish guy with the username 'Rat'? "Gun Nazi" is too good a term for you.
 
2014-01-01 01:16:36 PM

FnkyTwn: Rat: Nice! I tried to help you sound more plausible with your diatribe, and you rebut by comparing the Jewish guy to a Nazi. Good for you.

A Jewish guy with the username 'Rat'? "Gun Nazi" is too good a term for you.


img.fark.net
 
2014-01-01 01:20:04 PM
Hate to break up the Derp fest, but...

This happened in a rural Pennsyltucky town.

I'm guessing Cletus (dead guy) took April Mae June to bed and Bubba didn't like it none.  After stewing in the honky tonk a couple of hours, Bubba decided to slip-slide over and make his 'pinion known. And after short, thoughtful discussion the world is down two rednecks.
 
2014-01-01 01:20:19 PM

Rat: FnkyTwn: Rat: I'm almost sure that a 30+ bullet clip would be difficult to use. Clips are usually 4 and 10 round capable, and for revolvers 5 and 6 round, although I've seen some 8 rounds clips. The clips feeds the magazine, or the rifle, and are smaller than the magazine itself for portability. I'm not discounting that there are huge clips out there, but that anything larger then 10 is unfeasible and you might break a nail trying to use it.


If we call the people who correct Grammar over the internet "Grammar Nazis", I think it's okay to call people who feel the need to correct gun vernacular "Gun Nazis". It has a nice ring to it.

Nice!  I tried to help you sound more plausible with your diatribe, and you rebut by comparing the Jewish guy to a Nazi.  Good for you.

©


Descriptive and prescriptive grammar.

*clicks profile*
You should pull that bolt and check your firing pin retaining pin - you do not want that thing nailing you in the face.
And check to make sure that the spring and pad on the extractor aren't too worn and are aligned correctly.
 
Rat
2014-01-01 01:34:57 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: FnkyTwn: Rat:

Descriptive and prescriptive grammar.

*clicks profile*
You should pull that bolt and check your firing pin retaining pin - you do not want that thing nailing you in the face.
And check to make sure that the spring and pad on the extractor aren't too worn and are aligned correctly.


I wasn't too worried about the true description, just trying to help out, and I usually don't care, except that he made quite the nice argument and I hate a good argument spoiled by something so trivial.  I was hoping it would lead to a nice back and forth, but he went all name calling and I lost interest.

Funny you should mention about the firing pin, I don't think people check it enough.  Its what, a .49 piece of metal and a .29 spring?  My drill sergeant carried a few extras in his pockets during basic, since they are like dammit pins and you can never find them in the dirt.

Happy New Year!
 
2014-01-01 01:43:20 PM

noitsnot: jayphat: FnkyTwn: jayphat:
3.) What accounting needs to be made for a gun after its purchase?
4) Straw purchases are illegal. It's a felony. If you do so, and the gun is used in a crime, you yourself become a felon.

How are we to know if you were a Straw Purchaser if we never get to see the gun again? Hell, let the NRA verify it, just as long as it's verified. That you don't want a simple check every 10 years to verify that you still have a gun seems sketchy as fark to me. Your "freedom" should end if you're just buying and selling guns illegally. Most guns used in crime were originally purchased through Straw Purchasers.

...

I understand what you're trying to say here. You want to enact something meaningful, lets go with stronger penalties for straw purchases. Lets include mental health records in background checks.  But it's nobodies farking business as to if I still have the guns I purchased, anymore than it is the business of the government to know about any other purchases I have made in the last ten years.


Except your car (and any other vehicle you own).

And your house (and any other property you own).

All part of growing up and becoming a big boy.


Except your car and house are for tax purposes. Go ahead and try and propose an annual tax on firearms. That's got the chance of a snow cone vendor in outdoor Alaska.
 
2014-01-01 01:45:58 PM

HooskerDoo: Fissile: I've seen straw purchased go down at a gun shop. Gang-banger type guy walked in with a young woman. He pointed out the gun and she filled out the 4473 and did the NIC. I knew what was going on, the sports shop owner knew what was going on, but there was nothing he could do about it.

That's bizarre. The ONE time this actually happens and you were there to see it.


Notice how he never called the ATF either to report what he saw? Just posted about it on Fark.
 
2014-01-01 01:48:38 PM
 A gun store and taxidermy shop out of a house?

I take it you've never been to Indiana County...or any place in rural PA for that matter.
 
2014-01-01 01:56:55 PM
I would like to be the first to point out that taxidermy and gun stores being run out of one's home are not unusual in rural areas.
 
2014-01-01 02:21:43 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: AngryDragon: the vast majority are black-on-black

You sound concerned


I am actually.  Human beings are human beings.  Since some of my black girlfriend's relatives are 10X as likely to  be killed in a random shooting, I am very concerned.

As a gun owner, I am less likely to be subjected to additional pointless legislation if the firearms crime rate goes gown.  A 10% reduction in "mass shootings" might stop one in a year, if new gun laws would even have an effect, which they won't.  A 10% reduction in urban gun fatalities would save over 1,000 lives.  Every year.

Besides the fact that it's not politically correct, how can everyone not see this?
 
2014-01-01 02:29:47 PM

HooskerDoo: I would like to be the first to point out that taxidermy and gun stores being run out of one's home are not unusual in rural areas.


We used to have a Denny's that had a liquor-serving bar attached to it. It was a Denny's Lounge. Get drunk as hell, stumble across the hall into the restaurant. Profit.
 
2014-01-01 02:40:49 PM

Another Government Employee: Hate to break up the Derp fest, but...

This happened in a rural Pennsyltucky town.

I'm guessing Cletus (dead guy) took April Mae June to bed and Bubba didn't like it none.  After stewing in the honky tonk a couple of hours, Bubba decided to slip-slide over and make his 'pinion known. And after short, thoughtful discussion the world is down two rednecks.




static.fjcdn.com
 
2014-01-01 02:56:03 PM

Rat: demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: FnkyTwn: Rat:

Descriptive and prescriptive grammar.

*clicks profile*
You should pull that bolt and check your firing pin retaining pin - you do not want that thing nailing you in the face.
And check to make sure that the spring and pad on the extractor aren't too worn and are aligned correctly.

I wasn't too worried about the true description, just trying to help out, and I usually don't care, except that he made quite the nice argument and I hate a good argument spoiled by something so trivial.  I was hoping it would lead to a nice back and forth, but he went all name calling and I lost interest.

Funny you should mention about the firing pin, I don't think people check it enough.  Its what, a .49 piece of metal and a .29 spring?  My drill sergeant carried a few extras in his pockets during basic, since they are like dammit pins and you can never find them in the dirt.

Happy New Year!


Four months late, but thanks, and the same to you.

The part I hate about these threads tends to be when the idjits start telling me I know nothing about guns (cut my teeth, figuratively speaking, on the M110A2 when I went Army), self-defense (taught both small arms and unarmed combatives for years), or pistols (I graduated from a closely-supervised Ruger Mk.I to an even more closely-supervised M1911 at the age of 9).
I get to see various theories about how I'm afraid of firearms, that I'm insane to advocate using manual safeties and Condition 3 carry due to "response time", even after I point out that 1) your holster choice makes a bigger difference, and 2) I was taught both shooting and unarmed combatives by a master firearms instructor trained by Fairbairn and Sykes (yes, those guys) to keep the chamber empty and my eyes open.

When you point out that walking around unarmed is really strong evidence that you aren't, in fact, afraid, the typical response is either silence or loud and strident denial, accompanied by personal insults.
Admittedly, it's not as strident or loud and the response when you point out that walking around armed outside a war zone, absent a specific and personal threat, a job requirement, and outside hunting season, is very strong evidence: In short, arming yourself against an undefined threat is highly indicative of a fearful mindset. The squalls of indignation remind me of the squeals when the farmers down the road castrated their annual bacon boar.

Then, when you point out that the intent of Amendment II, encapsulated in its first six words, was enacted and implemented by Congress immediately after its ratification. Bearing arms, for crying out loud, is the only right in the Constitution that names its concomitant responsibility. I'm met with disbelief when I say that we should reimplement the Militia the way the Founders did and require mandatory firearm training and proficiency for all residents 16 and over, subject their arms and ammunition to regular inspections and report their numbers and condition to the State and Federal governments, just like the Founders did, and subject all members of the Milita of the United States to military discipline, especially where it concerns the use of their arms, just like the Founders did. The mental and physical screening, increased physical fitness levels, forging real connections within communities, and the ability to reduce the size of our active military and the train-up required for active members, are gravy, from my point of view. Yet they persist in calling me a "gun-grabber".

They deny that well regulated means, well, regulated, even when you link to the actual farking Regulations prescribed by Congress, and point out that regulated has meant governed by rules since the Middle farking English of Geoffrey Chaucer.

The Heller decision was very clear that local, state and federal laws may, in fact, constitutionally regulate firearms. (p 54) And it seems to me that the public interest is best served when criminals and the mentally ill do not have access to firearms, and that the background checks that apply to firearms sales by licensed dealers ought to be done for all firearms transfers so we aren't privately giving or selling weapons to people who are prohibited by law from having them.

You'd have to be fug-buck delusional, as in a raving paranoiac, to believe that mandatory background checks, mandatory training and proficiency-building, and safety inspections of arms and ammunition, is in any way a path to mass confiscation, since it guarantees that any attempt would be met with effective, trained armed resistance by organized units.
 
2014-01-01 02:57:03 PM

AngryDragon: PC LOAD LETTER: AngryDragon: the vast majority are black-on-black

You sound concerned

I am actually.  Human beings are human beings.  Since some of my black girlfriend's relatives are 10X as likely to  be killed in a random shooting, I am very concerned.

As a gun owner, I am less likely to be subjected to additional pointless legislation if the firearms crime rate goes gown.  A 10% reduction in "mass shootings" might stop one in a year, if new gun laws would even have an effect, which they won't.  A 10% reduction in urban gun fatalities would save over 1,000 lives.  Every year.

Besides the fact that it's not politically correct, how can everyone not see this?


Do you think we should allow the mentally ill to have access to guns?
 
2014-01-01 03:22:27 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: Do you think we should allow the mentally ill to have access to guns?


We do.
 
2014-01-01 03:37:45 PM
...

The part I hate about these threads tends to be when the idjits start telling me I know nothing about guns (cut my teeth, figuratively speaking, on the M110A2 when I went Army), self-defense (taught both small arms and unarmed combatives for years), or pistols (I graduated from a closely-supervised Ruger Mk.I to an even more closely-supervised M1911 at the age of 9).
I get to see various theories about how I'm afraid of firearms, that I'm insane to advocate using manual safeties and Condition 3 carry due to "response time", even after I point out that 1) your holster choice makes a bigger difference, and 2) I was taught both shooting and unarmed combatives by a master firearms instructor trained by Fairbairn and Sykes (yes, those guys) to keep the chamber empty and my eyes open.

When you point out that walking around unarmed is really strong evidence that you aren't, in fact, afraid, the typical response is either silence or loud and strident denial, accompanied by personal insults.
Admittedly, it's not as strident or loud and the response when you point out that walking around armed outside a war zone, absent a specific and personal threat, a job requirement, and outside hunting season, is very strong evidence: In short, arming yourself against an undefined threat is highly indicative of a fearful mindset. The squalls of indignation remind me of the squeals when the farmers down the road castrated their annual bacon boar.

Then, when you point out that the intent of Amendment II, encapsulated in its first six words, was enacted and implemented by Congress immediately after its ratification. Bearing arms, for crying out loud, is the only right in the Constitution that names its concomitant responsibility. I'm met with disbelief when I say that we should reimplement the Militia the way the Founders did and require mandatory firearm training and proficiency for all residents 16 and over, subject their arms and ammunition to regular inspections and report their numbers and condition to the State and Federal governments, just like the Founders did, and subject all members of the Milita of the United States to military discipline, especially where it concerns the use of their arms, just like the Founders did. The mental and physical screening, increased physical fitness levels, forging real connections within communities, and the ability to reduce the size of our active military and the train-up required for active members, are gravy, from my point of view. Yet they persist in calling me a "gun-grabber".

They deny that well regulated means, well, regulated, even when you link tohttp://books.google.com/books?id=vTJFAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v= on epage&q&f=false" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(61, 61, 255); text-decoration: none; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgb(255, 94, 153); line-height: 17px;"> the actual farking Regulations prescribed by Congress, and point out that regulated has meant governed by rules since the Middle farking English of Geoffrey Chaucer.

The Heller decision was very clear that local, state and federal laws may, in fact, constitutionally regulate firearms. (p 54) And it seems to me that the public interest is best served when criminals and the mentally ill do not have access to firearms, and that the background checks that apply to firearms sales by licensed dealers ought to be done for all firearms transfers so we aren't privately giving or selling weapons to people who are prohibited by law from having them.

You'd have to be fug-buck delusional, as in a raving paranoiac, to believe that mandatory background checks, mandatory training and proficiency-building, and safety inspections of arms and ammunition, is in any way a path to mass confiscation, since it guarantees that any attempt would be met with effective, trained armed resistance by organized units.



I think you win.
 
2014-01-01 03:45:40 PM

AngryDragon: pueblonative: AngryDragon: pueblonative: Aww cute, conservatards using made up words to describe gun control and thinking they scored a killshot because it has a -phobe suffix.

Here's a cookie

Tell you what.  We'll let you kill em before they're born, we get to kill em when they become criminals.  Deal?

You gonna give them a cookie with that hot shot, clown?

Counter deal: if you want to go play soldier, you can sign up with the Armed Forces where they'll teach you responsible gun ownership and how owning the latest Bushmaster "man card" does not turn you into a Red Dawn Wolverine.  They'll even pay you.

Already done.  Four years in the Army, 3 years as a Sheriff's deputy.

I know what's out there because I've had to clean up the aftermath.  I've had more exposure to firearms than the average person by an exponential measure.  I carry.  A .38 snubnose revolver.  I don't even own a long rifle, just a 12 gauge for sporting clays and home defense.  My firearm isn't a penis extension, an Internet tough guy statement, or a a defense against tyranny.  My firearm is with me at all times because I've seen the bad guys up close and personal and there is no way that I will let my family or any other innocent person be put at risk if I happen to be in a position to do something about it.

If you think that you can't be a victim of violent crime anywhere at anytime, or that law enforcement can protect you, you're delusional.


Glad to hear you have some experience with your firearms.  Other than being a law enforcement officer or a soldier, have you ever felt the need for a gun in a regular, everyday situation?  I only ask this because I've been alive 57 years and I've never been in a situation where I wished I had a gun.  So, if I were a person so inclined to carry (with a permit), I would have been doing so for the last 40 years without an incident in which to bring it out.  Would I actually be ready if something were to actually to happen? (I guess that's where the training comes in)   I guess I've been lucky!  (I have a friend who's had a gun pulled on her twice and that's what she says about me - you're just lucky - she's out in public a lot so that could account for her bad luck, I guess.  However, could she have done anything if she'd been armed?  She says no.)
 
2014-01-01 03:47:07 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: Do you think we should allow the mentally ill to have access to guns?


No, I do not.  And how are you going to provide that assurance?  Mental health, indeed all medical information is guaranteed private by HIPPA laws.  There is no central database or repository of mental health information.  Where do you draw the line?  If someone goes to a therapist because they feel stressed does that mean they have a mental illness for the purpose of owning firearms?

I'm not against it, how do you do it?
 
2014-01-01 03:53:31 PM

FnkyTwn: The NRA writes the legislation that makes protecting your property with anything other than a gun a crime for the sake of their corporate profits.


To what specific legislation do you refer?
 
2014-01-01 04:03:54 PM

PaulRB: Glad to hear you have some experience with your firearms.  Other than being a law enforcement officer or a soldier, have you ever felt the need for a gun in a regular, everyday situation?  I only ask this because I've been alive 57 years and I've never been in a situation where I wished I had a gun.  So, if I were a person so inclined to carry (with a permit), I would have been doing so for the last 40 years without an incident in which to bring it out.  Would I actually be ready if something were to actually to happen? (I guess that's where the training comes in)   I guess I've been lucky!  (I have a friend who's had a gun pulled on her twice and that's what she says about me - you're just lucky - she's out in public a lot so that could account for her bad luck, I guess.  However, could she have done anything if she'd been armed?  She says no.)


Just because you or I or anyone else may not have had the need.  Someone out there has.  It is wrong to dictate the rights of another individual because you don't think you have a need for it.

It's like the climate change deniers think.  "It snowed at my house today so global warming is fake."

Incidentally, I have had to protect my family with a firearm, during a home invasion, in an upper middle class neighborhood.
 
2014-01-01 04:10:48 PM

AngryDragon: PC LOAD LETTER: Do you think we should allow the mentally ill to have access to guns?

No, I do not.  And how are you going to provide that assurance?  Mental health, indeed all medical information is guaranteed private by HIPPA laws.  There is no central database or repository of mental health information.  Where do you draw the line?  If someone goes to a therapist because they feel stressed does that mean they have a mental illness for the purpose of owning firearms?

I'm not against it, how do you do it?


Your doctor rats you out to the state - just like he does if you develop a seizure condition, and then your drivers license gets suspended.

Doctors have been required by law to do that since before HIPAA, so there must be a provision in HIPAA that allows it.
 
2014-01-01 04:33:03 PM

AngryDragon: PC LOAD LETTER: Do you think we should allow the mentally ill to have access to guns?

No, I do not.  And how are you going to provide that assurance?  Mental health, indeed all medical information is guaranteed private by HIPPA laws.  There is no central database or repository of mental health information.  Where do you draw the line?  If someone goes to a therapist because they feel stressed does that mean they have a mental illness for the purpose of owning firearms?

I'm not against it, how do you do it?


"Assurance" isn't the goal. And someone pointed out exactly how you do it. Make it a requirement that if you are deemed potentially violent due to mental illness, you don't get to own a legal firearm. This isn't hard. And it does not need to be perfect.
 
2014-01-01 04:44:59 PM
Not sure if this was covered anywhere, but you are allowed to run a gun store out of your home if you have a dedicated place to sell out of and have to keep your personal guns from the ones for sale.  A lot of areas have guys which just order guns, run the background check and then do the deal.  Probably someone who was pissed because he didn't pass the stringent background check that is required to purchase a firearm.
 
2014-01-01 04:46:50 PM

Bigdogdaddy: Not sure if this was covered anywhere, but you are allowed to run a gun store out of your home if you have a dedicated place to sell out of and have to keep your personal guns from the ones for sale.  A lot of areas have guys which just order guns, run the background check and then do the deal.  Probably someone who was pissed because he didn't pass the stringent background check that is required to purchase a firearm.


If you have your FFL.  I left that out of course, but didn't want to get hammered on that fact.
 
Rat
2014-01-01 04:56:39 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: FnkyTwn: Rat:

Four months late, but thanks, and the same to you.

The part I hate about these threads tends to be when the idjits start telling me I know nothing about guns (cut my teeth, figuratively speaking, on the M110A2 when I went Army), self-defense (taught both small arms and unarmed combatives for years), or pistols (I graduated from a closely-supervised Ruger Mk.I to an even more closely-supervised M1911 at the age of 9).
I get to see various theories about how I'm afraid of firearms, that I'm insane to advocate using manual safeties and Condition 3 carry due to "response time", even after I point out that 1) your holster choice makes a bigger difference, and 2) I was taught both shooting and unarmed combatives by a master firearms instructor trained by Fairbairn and Sykes (yes, those guys) to keep the chamber empty and my eyes open.

When you point out that walking around unarmed is really strong evidence that you aren't, in fact, afraid, the typical response is either silence or loud and strident denial, accompanied by personal insults.
Admittedly, it's no ...


I'm pretty sure that wasn't directed at me, I just can't figure out what you're referring to, since you say 'you' quite a bit.  I don't have your email addy to ask in a lower key setting, sorry.

 
2014-01-01 05:05:14 PM
LOL, I lived not far from there for a few years.  Tunnelton is red-necky even by Pennsylvania's standards.
 
2014-01-01 05:05:39 PM

AngryDragon: PaulRB: Glad to hear you have some experience with your firearms.  Other than being a law enforcement officer or a soldier, have you ever felt the need for a gun in a regular, everyday situation?  I only ask this because I've been alive 57 years and I've never been in a situation where I wished I had a gun.  So, if I were a person so inclined to carry (with a permit), I would have been doing so for the last 40 years without an incident in which to bring it out.  Would I actually be ready if something were to actually to happen? (I guess that's where the training comes in)   I guess I've been lucky!  (I have a friend who's had a gun pulled on her twice and that's what she says about me - you're just lucky - she's out in public a lot so that could account for her bad luck, I guess.  However, could she have done anything if she'd been armed?  She says no.)

Just because you or I or anyone else may not have had the need.  Someone out there has.  It is wrong to dictate the rights of another individual because you don't think you have a need for it.

It's like the climate change deniers think.  "It snowed at my house today so global warming is fake."

Incidentally, I have had to protect my family with a firearm, during a home invasion, in an upper middle class neighborhood.


I'm sorry you had a home invasion and I'm glad you were able to do something about it. I'm not anti-gun.  However, I do feel that there are some laws that would be helpful regarding guns (like bullet-tagging, making all bullets traceable so if they get used in a crime you can find out who purchased the bullets - why is this something the NRA is against?)  - Why is it a radical gun rights group like the NRA is controlling the conversation on gun issues?  Supposedly lots of sensible gun owners believe in sensible gun-related laws.  Yet, no sensible gun-related legislation even get close to passing because of the NRA.  You sensible gun owners need to form a more logical gun rights group (or fire the entire leadership of the NRA).
 
2014-01-01 05:13:43 PM
Rat: demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: FnkyTwn: Rat:

Addressed directly to you, RAT:

Four months late, but thanks, and the same to you.

Stuff not addressed to you follows, more of a frustrated commentary on this kind of thread.

I'm pretty sure that wasn't directed at me, I just can't figure out what you're referring to, since you say 'you' quite a bit.  I don't have your email addy to ask in a lower key setting, sorry.

 
Rat
2014-01-01 05:23:34 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: FnkyTwn: Rat:

Addressed directly to you, RAT:

Four months late, but thanks, and the same to you.

Stuff not addressed to you follows, more of a frustrated commentary on this kind of thread.

I'm pretty sure that wasn't directed at me, I just can't figure out what you're referring to, since you say 'you' quite a bit.  I don't have your email addy to ask in a lower key setting, sorry.



I thought that was the case, I just couldn't find anyone that had gone totally gun-nut to link it to, but I know what you mean.  Even on the gun forums, they exist and we all kind of shake our heads (like I'm assuming you do as well).

A belated L'shanah tovah  to you, fellow farker.
 
2014-01-01 05:30:35 PM

PaulRB: I'm sorry you had a home invasion and I'm glad you were able to do something about it. I'm not anti-gun.  However, I do feel that there are some laws that would be helpful regarding guns (like bullet-tagging, making all bullets traceable so if they get used in a crime you can find out who purchased the bullets - why is this something the NRA is against?)  - Why is it a radical gun rights group like the NRA is controlling the conversation on gun issues?  Supposedly lots of sensible gun owners believe in sensible gun-related laws.  Yet, no sensible gun-related legislation even get close to passing because of the NRA.  You sensible gun owners need to form a more logical gun rights group (or fire the entire leadership of the NRA)


Bullet tagging is a solution without a problem.  First of all it's easy to counterfeit by a criminal and thus would only affect law abiding citizens.  Second, using a revolver negates a casing stamp and using frangible ammunition negates a slug stamp.

The reason most of us rely on the NRA as the only influential organization that defends the 2nd amendment is because the organization that SHOULD be doing it, the ACLU, won't.  Their public position is that the 2nd is not an individual right, despite the Supreme Court ruling otherwise decisively.   If the ACLU championed the 2nd amendment as vigorously as it does the others, the NRA would lose power almost overnight.
 
2014-01-01 05:38:15 PM
Not enough guns I guess.
 
2014-01-01 05:42:52 PM
Just like driving cars:

- Registration for the equipment
- Licensure for the users
- Taxation and Fees on both of the above
 
2014-01-01 05:49:52 PM

AngryDragon: PaulRB: I'm sorry you had a home invasion and I'm glad you were able to do something about it. I'm not anti-gun.  However, I do feel that there are some laws that would be helpful regarding guns (like bullet-tagging, making all bullets traceable so if they get used in a crime you can find out who purchased the bullets - why is this something the NRA is against?)  - Why is it a radical gun rights group like the NRA is controlling the conversation on gun issues?  Supposedly lots of sensible gun owners believe in sensible gun-related laws.  Yet, no sensible gun-related legislation even get close to passing because of the NRA.  You sensible gun owners need to form a more logical gun rights group (or fire the entire leadership of the NRA)

Bullet tagging is a solution without a problem.  First of all it's easy to counterfeit by a criminal and thus would only affect law abiding citizens.  Second, using a revolver negates a casing stamp and using frangible ammunition negates a slug stamp.

The reason most of us rely on the NRA as the only influential organization that defends the 2nd amendment is because the organization that SHOULD be doing it, the ACLU, won't.  Their public position is that the 2nd is not an individual right, despite the Supreme Court ruling otherwise decisively.   If the ACLU championed the 2nd amendment as vigorously as it does the others, the NRA would lose power almost overnight.


First, how is there not a problem?  (are we low on gun-related crime in this country and I'm just somehow unaware?)  Second of all, you are giving the average criminal way too much credit.  Most of 'em would be likely unaware of such bullet nuances.  And, if it only catches some criminals, how is that NOT helpful?  Sometimes, baby steps are needed to gain control of a situation. (like all the gun crime we have in this country, does any other first world country even come close?)

I'm all for the ACLU championing gun rights.  However, I don't think the NRA would disappear because, unless the ACLU acted exactly like the NRA in their attitude to gun laws, then the NRA would continue to exist (because they would claim that they were protecting rights harder than the ACLU).  Maybe, if they did it in such a manner, that the NRA membership dwindled dramatically - but that seems like a pipe dream.
 
2014-01-01 06:01:02 PM

PaulRB: First, how is there not a problem?  (are we low on gun-related crime in this country and I'm just somehow unaware?)  Second of all, you are giving the average criminal way too much credit.  Most of 'em would be likely unaware of such bullet nuances.  And, if it only catches some criminals, how is that NOT helpful?  Sometimes, baby steps are needed to gain control of a situation. (like all the gun crime we have in this country, does any other first world country even come close?)


Yes, we are.  You are apparently NOT aware.

Rate Of U.S. Gun Violence Has Fallen Since 1993, Study Says - Almost 50%

And this is with the mass proliferation of concealed carry permits and the expiration of the Clinton era assault weapons ban.  It's estimated there are twice as many AR-15s in civilian hands now as there were in 1993.  There are 10x as many people with permits to carry in public.

The problem is not the existence of firearms.
 
2014-01-01 06:12:32 PM

Rat: I just can't figure out what you're referring to, since you say 'you' quite a bit.


Thanks for pointing that out. Here's a clarification:

The part I hate about these threads has to be when the idjits start telling me I know nothing about guns (cut my teeth, figuratively speaking, on the M110A2 when I went Army), self-defense (taught both small arms and unarmed combatives for years), or pistols (I graduated from a closely-supervised Ruger Mk.I to an even more closely-supervised M1911 at the age of 9).

I get to read various theories about how I'm afraid of firearms.

Then I'm told that I'm insane to advocate using manual safeties and Condition 3 carry due to "response time", even after I point out that 1) holster choice makes a bigger difference, and 2) I was taught both shooting and unarmed combatives by a master firearms instructor trained by Fairbairn and Sykes (yes, those guys) to keep the chamber empty and the eyes and ears open.

When I point out that walking around unarmed is really strong evidence that I am not, in fact, afraid, the typical response is either silence or loud and strident denial, accompanied by personal insults.

Admittedly, it's not as strident or loud as the response when I point out that walking around armed outside a war zone, absent a specific and personal threat, a job requirement, and outside hunting season is very strong evidence of fear. In short, arming yourself against an undefined and nonspecific threat is highly indicative of a fearful mindset. The squalls of indignation remind me of the squeals when the farmers down the road castrated their annual bacon boar.

Then, I point out that the intent of Amendment II is encapsulated in its first six words, and that that intent was enacted and implemented by Congress immediately after its ratification. Bearing arms, for crying out loud, is the only right in the Constitution that names its concomitant responsibility. I'm met with disbelief when I say that we should reimplement the Militia the way the Founders did, and require mandatory firearm training, qualification and proficiency for all residents 16 and over, subject their arms and ammunition to regular inspections and report their numbers and condition to the State and Federal governments, like the Founders did, and subject all members of the Milita of the United States to military discipline, especially where it concerns the use of their arms, just like the Founders did.

There is no constitutional impediment preventing this, since the Militia Powers of Congress are enumerated in the Constitution in Article I Section 8. The mental and physical screening, increased physical fitness levels, forging real connections within communities, and the ability to reduce the size of our active military and the train-up time required for active members, are gravy, from my point of view. I want us to have an armed, safe, well-regulated and regularly trained and evaluated militia that encompasses most of the population, yet the idjits persist in calling me a "gun-grabber".

They deny that well regulated means, well,  regulated, even when I link to  the actual farking Regulations prescribed by Congress, and point out that  regulatedhas meant controlled by rules since the Middle English of Geoffrey Chaucer.

The Heller decision was very clear that local, state and federal laws may, in fact, constitutionally regulate firearms. (p 54) And it seems to me that the public interest is best served when criminals and the mentally ill do not have access to firearms, and that the background checks that apply to firearms sales by licensed dealers ought to be done for all firearms transfers so we aren't privately giving or selling weapons to people who are prohibited by law from having them. (Especially since laws denying access to firearms from criminals and the mentally ill are specifically named as constitutional in the decision on that very page.)

A person would have to be fug-buck delusional, as in a raving paranoiac, to believe that mandatory background checks, mandatory training and proficiency-building, and safety inspections of arms and ammunition, is in any way a path to mass confiscation, since it guarantees that any attempt would be met with effective, trained armed resistance by organized units.
 
2014-01-01 06:26:00 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Rat: I just can't figure out what you're referring to, since you say 'you' quite a bit.

Thanks for pointing that out. Here's a clarification:

The part I hate about these threads has to be when the idjits start telling me I know nothing about guns (cut my teeth, figuratively speaking, on the M110A2 when I went Army), self-defense (taught both small arms and unarmed combatives for years), or pistols (I graduated from a closely-supervised Ruger Mk.I to an even more closely-supervised M1911 at the age of 9).

I get to read various theories about how I'm afraid of firearms.

Then I'm told that I'm insane to advocate using manual safeties and Condition 3 carry due to "response time", even after I point out that 1) holster choice makes a bigger difference, and 2) I was taught both shooting and unarmed combatives by a master firearms instructor trained by Fairbairn and Sykes (yes, those guys) to keep the chamber empty and the eyes and ears open.

When I point out that walking around unarmed is really strong evidence that I am not, in fact, afraid, the typical response is either silence or loud and strident denial, accompanied by personal insults.

Admittedly, it's not as strident or loud as the response when I point out that walking around armed outside a war zone, absent a specific and personal threat, a job requirement, and outside hunting season is very strong evidence of fear. In short, arming yourself against an undefined and nonspecific threat is highly indicative of a fearful mindset. The squalls of indignation remind me of the squeals when the farmers down the road castrated their annual bacon boar.

Then, I point out that the intent of Amendment II is encapsulated in its first six words, and that that intent was enacted and implemented by Congress immediately after its ratification. Bearing arms, for crying out loud, is the only right in the Constitution that names its concomitant responsibility. I'm met with disbelief when I say that we should reimplement the Mi ...



CITATIONS NOT NEEDED THANKS! You see, the Constitution is a lot like the Bible. Real American's are smart enough to read between the lines and divine its true meaning as it was left to us by our Founding Fathers and Duck Dynasty stars. Liberals always try and include that pesky part of the 2nd Amendment in an effort to trick and confuse the American public just like they try and pick apart the Bible to try and make us look like big fools.
 
2014-01-01 07:02:05 PM

FnkyTwn: CITATIONS NOT NEEDED THANKS! You see, the Constitution is a lot like the Bible. Real American's are smart enough to read between the lines and divine its true meaning as it was left to us by our Founding Fathers and Duck Dynasty stars. Liberals always try and include that pesky part of the 2nd Amendment in an effort to trick and confuse the American public just like they try and pick apart the Bible to try and make us look like big fools.


Bravo.
 
2014-01-01 07:12:56 PM

pyrotek85: FTA: In November, Edmundson was charged with impersonating an officer after he detained juveniles he said were throwing corn at passing vehicles. Sources also said Edmunson used to work in law enforcement but he was let go.

Sounds like this guy might have had some issues, I'd like to hear why he was let go from the police force. Was he fired or laid-off?


Also FTA: Officials confirm Edmundson was a detective in the Lancaster County area in the 1990s but was fired for stealing from evidence.
 
2014-01-01 07:25:07 PM

squirrelflavoredyogurt: pyrotek85: FTA: In November, Edmundson was charged with impersonating an officer after he detained juveniles he said were throwing corn at passing vehicles. Sources also said Edmunson used to work in law enforcement but he was let go.

Sounds like this guy might have had some issues, I'd like to hear why he was let go from the police force. Was he fired or laid-off?

Also FTA: Officials confirm Edmundson was a detective in the Lancaster County area in the 1990s but was fired for stealing from evidence.


Ah they updated, thanks. I've heard evidence room thefts can be pretty common on some forces, it's good he got fired for it.
 
2014-01-01 09:25:10 PM

pyrotek85: squirrelflavoredyogurt: pyrotek85: FTA: In November, Edmundson was charged with impersonating an officer after he detained juveniles he said were throwing corn at passing vehicles. Sources also said Edmunson used to work in law enforcement but he was let go.

Sounds like this guy might have had some issues, I'd like to hear why he was let go from the police force. Was he fired or laid-off?

Also FTA: Officials confirm Edmundson was a detective in the Lancaster County area in the 1990s but was fired for stealing from evidence.

Ah they updated, thanks. I've heard evidence room thefts can be pretty common on some forces, it's good he got fired for it.


And, if they had prosecuted him and he'd gotten a felony, then he never would have been able to get his FFL
 
2014-01-01 09:35:02 PM

Bigdogdaddy: pyrotek85: squirrelflavoredyogurt: pyrotek85: FTA: In November, Edmundson was charged with impersonating an officer after he detained juveniles he said were throwing corn at passing vehicles. Sources also said Edmunson used to work in law enforcement but he was let go.

Sounds like this guy might have had some issues, I'd like to hear why he was let go from the police force. Was he fired or laid-off?

Also FTA: Officials confirm Edmundson was a detective in the Lancaster County area in the 1990s but was fired for stealing from evidence.

Ah they updated, thanks. I've heard evidence room thefts can be pretty common on some forces, it's good he got fired for it.

And, if they had prosecuted him and he'd gotten a felony, then he never would have been able to get his FFL


Wait what? Edmundson was the suspect. The gun shop owner was Petro, the one who was killed. It doesn't appear that Petro did anything to warrant Edmundson's actions. But yes maybe the guy should have had a felony and some prison time even.
 
2014-01-02 12:27:16 AM
No need to ban guns. Just put so much red tape in place that it becomes prohibitively regulated and/or expensive to own or transfer one short of surrendering it to law enforcement officials. It's working in New York and California!

/Californian
 
Displayed 158 of 158 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report