arma virumque cano (et alia)
This is the article that Mike was exposing.http://www.lasvegasnow.com/news/8-year-old-who-shot-killed-himself-was-home-alone-with-younger-sisterAs far as I'm concerned, Las Vegas is the new Babylon.
Howdy FJ, I imagine it must be my dull lifestyle, but I also don't see anything in Vegas that attracts me. Nevada does have a safe storage law. The question is, will the prosecutor use it.http://smartgunlaws.org/child-access-prevention-in-nevada/
Because California is a bastion of moral civility right FJ
All my life I have I have looked down on the state of Nevada for allowing legal gambling. To me it's one of the most immoral and debasing industries imaginable. Of course, now there are casinos and slots all over California and New Mexico. It's probably all fifty states by now.I comforted myself with the fact that at least we didn't have a lottery. I remembered seeing the useless lottery tickets on the dirty streets of Madrid as a child in Franco's impoverished and oppressed Spain. Now the California lottery is here to stay. I shouldn't complain. It's a voluntary tax.To me, legalized prostitution is absolutely disgusting. I guess I'm just not a good little libertarian. It is degrading to women. It is against the teachings of Christ.
FJ says, "To me, legalized prostitution is absolutely disgusting. I guess I'm just not a good little libertarian. It is degrading to women."In other words, a woman should only have a right to her own body when it comes to stopping a beating heart. Nothing immoral about that?orlin sellers
So what the hell is Mikeb yammering about with "lost his older sister to an accidental shooting"?Or is that just a bit more of his amazing and entertaining fiction?
I guess you didn't read the story, huh Kurt?
I guess you didn't read the story, huh Kurt?If you're referring to the story to which Flying Junior provided a link, that "guess" of yours is as wildly and amusingly inaccurate as we've come to expect from you. If it's some other story, provide the link, and I'll read it, too.
Actually, I was referring to the story I read. I realize I didn't provide the link, but that shouldn't be much of an obstacle for a guy like you.
I realize I didn't provide the link . . . Wait a second--let me see if I've got this straight. When you said, "I guess you didn't read the story, huh Kurt?" you were referring to some unnamed and unlinked-to story, and implying criticism for my not having read it? And you still aren't managing to post a link to it? Please be kidding. It breaks my heart to see someone--even you--sinking to a level this pathetic. . . . but that shouldn't be much of an obstacle for a guy like you.And what kind of guy is that--the mind-reading kind? I keep telling you: I leave the claiming of such powers to you.
You're a guy with Google only a click away. That's what kind of guy you are. That could have provided you with dozens of choices with which to educate yourself prior to making a stupid remark that, as it happens, turned out to be wrong. What were you thinking anyway? Did you think I made up the part about the sister?It's funny, you're a guy who can provide an obscure quote of mine from years ago to win a petty argument, but this totally baffled you?
That could have provided you with dozens of choices with which to educate yourself prior to making a stupid remark that, as it happens, turned out to be wrong.And what "remark" was that?What were you thinking anyway?I was thinking you were utterly befuddled about the content of a story you, yourself posted. Again (still?).Did you think I made up the part about the sister?How the hell would I know. What I did know is that you didn't provide a link to corroborate your assertion--and still haven't.It's funny, you're a guy who can provide an obscure quote of mine from years ago to [demonstrate my fullness-to-the-brim-of-shit], but this totally baffled you?It's not my job to scour the internet looking for evidence that this time, you're not full of shit. Good thing, too, because that would be a depressingly futile occupation a great deal of the time.So . . . how 'bout that link, I ask yet again?
I'm sure the gun control lobby has high hopes that this sets some form of precedent, but it really doesn't. The PLCAA doesn't protect anyone from illegal actions of defective firearms. This case showed several rather obvious indicators that the person was making a straw purchase. By the way, the National Shooting Sports Foundation provides training to retailers to spot potential straw purchases,http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/strawPurchase.pdf
"The result is really pretty much what we thought was going to happen," he said. "The Second Circuit is not known for being in any way a pro-gun friendly court. We've been saying from day one this is going to be a Supreme Court case."King may not need to wait much longer. The high court could very soon take action on a closely watched case out of Illinois dealing with a similar ban as those upheld in New York and Connecticut." Might be interesting to see what might happen if this goes to SCOTUS before anyone has the chance to replace any justices as Mike keeps hoping will happen. The Remington 7615 looks like an interesting piece. A wooden stocked pump action rifle that seems to have drawn New York's ire solely because it can use evil magazines that also fit the AR series of rifles. While I'm really not in the market for another rifle that shoots 5.56mm, I think I'm going to at least try to have a look at one.
Why should a ,man like you care anything about high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons? Do you actually own such guns? You don't have to confess if you do. But those are designed for bank robbery shootouts, warfare and mass murder. Why would a normal person need something like that?It doesn't have to go before SCOTUS. My prediction is that the highest court will not deign to hear it, in particular because the lower court ruling went well.This is really good news. Not surprising since New York and Connecticut are close neighbors. God bless Governor Cuomo and his father before him."This case validates a simple, fundamental truth about gun control: that it is possible to have strong laws that keep our communities safe, while at the same time respecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners," Cuomo said. "New York has set the example – and it’s far past time for Washington to follow suit and pass a sensible national gun control policy."
"Why should a ,man like you care anything about high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons? Do you actually own such guns?" Howdy FJ, Well, the short answer is that I own such weapons to keep myself acceptably competent since in my opinion, I'm not getting adequate training from my unit. As for your belief as to their design, they aren't exactly a single purpose weapon. In fact, if middle daughter can shoot well enough, that is what she will be using for her first attempt at deer hunting. The reason she is using it is that it is the only rifle I own that fits her that is legal to hunt deer with. "Not surprising since New York and Connecticut are close neighbors. God bless Governor Cuomo and his father before him." Of course, from what I've been hearing, compliance with the laws affecting those firearms is right up there with compliance levels against the recreational use of marijuana. The main difference being that the firearms are legal in the vast majority of the states in the union compared with marijuana only being legal in what, two states? "This case validates a simple, fundamental truth about gun control: that it is possible to have strong laws that keep our communities safe, while at the same time respecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners," Here is a good question in regards to Mr. Cuomo, if he gets a gun law passed that is ignored by a large percentage of gun owners, and crimes committed by those firearms for instance falls, does he get to take credit for the drop in those crimes?
You don't have to confess if you do. But those are designed for bank robbery shootouts, warfare and mass murder. Why would a normal person need something like that?Wha?You can easily claim that every firearm since the Chinese Fire Lance, was designed for a military purpose, to include the bolt action hunting rifles that the "but I support the 2A" gun controllers claim to be fine with. "Designed for bank robberies"? Really? You're going to go with that?The modern sporting rifle is lightweight, ergonomic, customizable, accurate and generally affordable. Why wouldn't a normal person need something like that. I never fail to be entertained by the misnomered "assault weapon" argument that centers on the ergonomic and cosmetic features of a rifle. What the gun control industry seems to be saying with that line, is that they want gun owners to only have access to firearms that are unwieldy, inaccurate and uncomfortable to operate.Lost on them is that once one removes those ergonomic and cosmetic features [that contribute nothing to "lethality"] the rifle operates in exactly the same manner.
I will never give up my "high capacity" magazines--especially when there are more than eleven people who want them banned. What if I encounter all of them together?
I appreciate you guys weighing in. I respect both of you a great deal. But from what I have heard, you are more or less proving my point. Deer hunting rifles really aren't the problem today. SSG, if the only legal hunting rifle that you own is a high-capacity magazine model, I guess that may be okay. But isn't that sending your daughter the wrong message?Deer bolt after the first shot. The idea of attempting to kill them with semi-automatic, large magazine guns seems a little bit perverse to me. Stags and their does are beautiful and majestic animals. We can't condone killing them heartlessly like vermin.A good deer rifle can only load two cartridges at a time. I guess that high-capacity magazines are mostly for killing human beings. While it may be comforting to know that one can fire off ten or more rounds in less than one minute, is this really necessary for ordinary home or personal defense?I think you guys may have gone to far with this and maybe it is time to listen to reason. And yes, Liberas, I think it would make a great deal of sense to take one of these high-capacity rifles to a bank robbery. It is difficult to imagine another scenario where they would really be needed. Am I missing something?
Howdy FJ, "SSG, if the only legal hunting rifle that you own is a high-capacity magazine model, I guess that may be okay. But isn't that sending your daughter the wrong message?" It isn't the only one I own. I own two bolt action rifles and my son owns one. However, mine are of a caliber that is to much for her to handle at present, and while my son's rifle has a more reasonable caliber, the stock is too long for her. One of the features that often defines an evil "assault weapon" is a collapsible stock, which allows her to adjust it to where the rifle will fit her. What message is it sending? For me the first one that comes to mind is aptly put by Jeff Cooper,"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.""Deer bolt after the first shot. The idea of attempting to kill them with semi-automatic, large magazine guns seems a little bit perverse to me. Stags and their does are beautiful and majestic animals. We can't condone killing them heartlessly like vermin." You are correct FJ, and I tell my kids that they will only have one shot. So the other rounds in the magazine are essentially meaningless. In fact, I bought a sub-standard 10 round magazine for my daughter to use to save weight, and it likely wont be full."A good deer rifle can only load two cartridges at a time. I guess that high-capacity magazines are mostly for killing human beings." As we discussed above FJ, magazine capacity isn't terribly important when hunting, though in my state, hunters can only load three rounds in magazine of their shotgun when bird hunting. She is using it solely as a size issue, though there is the added benefit of the semi-automatic action reduces felt recoil compared to a bolt action. I did see a possible rifle for her and her sisters for next year at the local gun store as I was looking at the new shipment of suppressors. A nice .243 bolt action with a youth stock. Unfortunately, I don't have the money for it at present. Perhaps if the tax man is kind to me come spring.... "While it may be comforting to know that one can fire off ten or more rounds in less than one minute, is this really necessary for ordinary home or personal defense?" As for home or personal defense, I tend to go with what law enforcement prefers, handguns of an effective caliber and a large capacity magazine. For long arms, law enforcement has to a great degree replaces the venerable 12 gauge pump shotgun with AR pattern rifles with, you guessed it, large capacity magazines. Law enforcement has also done some renaming in this area also, referring to them as "patrol rifles".
And I think you as well, for engaging in reasoned debate, even though communicating through comment moderation s annoying. You realize that what the gun control lobby refers to as "high capacity" magazines, are the standard capacity magazines designed roughly at the time the semi-automatic rifle they accompany, were conceived right? It's a political ploy....to proffer that X is reasonable, while X+1 should be illegal. This is why the gun control industry cannot define "high capacity" with a metric. It's rhetoric.What are your qualifications - stacked against others - to mandate what constitutes an "good" hunting rifle? For the reasons I laid out previously, the AR and AK platforms have many benefits over a bolt action, irrespective of magazine capacity. And in fact, many people have long hunted with these, contrary to the political rhetoric.Regarding bank robberies, you didn't previously state that these rifles would merely be "a great deal of sense" to use in the commission of a criminal act.....you stated that these rifles were "designed for bank robbery shootouts". And again, I would point you back to my previous post, as to why these rifles would be preferred in a myriad of other scenarios.
Flying Junior: "While it may be comforting to know that one can fire off ten or more rounds in less than one minute, is this really necessary for ordinary home or personal defense?"Ten rounds in a minute? So 6 seconds between shots? Even single shot guns can accomplish that. You might want to think up a time increment that sounds scarier. But if you are asking if the ability to do quick follow up shots in important in a self-defense situation with your life on the line, then yes. Unequivocally yes.Flying Junior: “It is difficult to imagine another scenario where they would really be needed. Am I missing something?”When you call the cops, that’s what they bring to protect your ass.Look, no one who has ever survived a gun battle counts up the remaining ammo in the magazine and says, “look at this. I have six more cartridges that I didn’t need. What a waste. My gun could have been two and a half ounces lighter if I didn’t have all this useless extra ammo.”
Anon, this seems to be a common thread in the gun control community, when facts don't work, resort to what some refer to as comedy. It happens on both sides of the issue, though the majority seems to come from the gun control side. And guess what? Attempting to ridicule or shame gun owners isn't going to win you many friends. And the numbers of gun owners are indeed growing, in spite of attempts such as this to make fun of them.