Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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
    More: Weird, New Year's Eve, Indiana counties, owner killed, firearms  
•       •       •

4102 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Jan 2014 at 8:00 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
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.
 
Displayed 50 of 158 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report