arma virumque cano (et alia)
Its sort of a shame that I don't have cable. While I can see where it would be nice to see what's out there, like shoes, I like to try them on for size in person when I can. It does seem to speak to the growing popularity of the gun culture and shooting sports."According to Gun TV, regulations mean that once an order is placed, a gun wholesaler will dispatch the item to the customer’s nearest federally licensed gun retailer, where mandated background checks and paperwork will be completed." And as we can see, all applicable laws will be followed.“Our broadcast setting is going to demonstrate the products and we’re going to tell the backstory on the manufacturer, on the materials used to make these products, what kind of wood has gone into the making of the rifle, for example, how it feels to hold it,” Castle said. She also promised “stunning” sets.Gun TV will feature shooting demonstrations by former law enforcement personnel, former members of the military and sharpshooters with a profile among the fanbase, such as ex-Olympic marksmen and season winners of the reality TV show Top Shot, Castle said." This might be interesting, and educational I imagine. "According to Gun TV, regulations mean that once an order is placed, a gun wholesaler will dispatch the item to the customer’s nearest federally licensed gun retailer, where mandated background checks and paperwork will be completed."
Don't you just hate it when businesses sell legal products? orlin sellers
I take it you don't approve? Say . . . here's an idea: given your rather . . . novel ideas about what constitutes the "filthiest pornography," maybe you can get the channel shut down through the mechanism of obscenity laws. Perhaps you'll get the judge to agree with your apparent view that ads for guns are worse than child porn.;-)
I don't know if any of your readers have ever known someone with a television shopping addiction. The big retailer is CVN? Cable Value Network or something like that. They sell a sort of fantasy All-American lifestyle miraculously packaged in simple household items. Replete with lovely models, cute kids, happy fathers, contented grandparents. But what happens with lonely Americans is they turn it into an addiction. Their houses and apartments fill up with fish tanks and warming plates and blankets, sweaters, etc. And their bank accounts are constantly being emptied out, credit card balances maxed out, etc. What will be the impact of such a predatory business model on gun ownership in the U.S.A?Hopefully sensible government officials will be able to shut down this scourge before it ever gets off the ground. I guess it's only a couple of steps further than internet gun sales. Maybe we can outlaw that at the same time. The net effect will only be to increase the stockpiles of sick bitches like Nancy Lanza, more guns laying around the homes of mentally unstable people for their children to find.We don't have to be this fucking stupid.
Hopefully sensible government officials will be able to shut down this scourge before it ever gets off the ground.So on what grounds would these "sensible" tyrants shut down a perfectly legal commerce operation?
Sooooo......you want the State to shut down a media outlet engaged in the business of selling a lawful item.When did the left morph from radical liberals to submissive sheep of the State?
I care about the constitution. I don't consider myself a submissive sheep. I will submit to a traffic safety stop from a peace officer. I even open my door when the police knock. But I don't think that I have given up any important freedoms that matter to me.Of course, it is perfectly legal to start something like GUNTV. I'm just saying it might be wise to do something to put a stop to it. We do live in a democratic republic. The people are directly responsible for who we choose to elect to represent us. Sometimes they do get the will of the people right.You guys seem to think that freedoms associated with guns are some type of inviolable holy law. I recall ssg being very hopeful that the Supreme Court would reverse the erroneous decision of a liberal-leaning lower court. Yesterday's refusal by the court to hear the case against the assault weapons ban in the City of Highland Park proves that isn't always going to happen.Well-regulated, right? Enshrined in the amendment itself.
"I recall ssg being very hopeful that the Supreme Court would reverse the erroneous decision of a liberal-leaning lower court. Yesterday's refusal by the court to hear the case against the assault weapons ban in the City of Highland Park proves that isn't always going to happen." Howdy FJ, everyone seems to have their "favorite" freedom which they are happy to fight tooth and nail against any encroachment, no matter how small. You have but to look at the response to proposed restrictions on, for example, voting rights, or abortion rights to see examples of people behaving like gun rights advocates. As for my hopes for a particular outcome from the Supreme Court, such wishes are also present from others. In fact, Mike has often stated that he is looking forward to the appointment of properly inclined judged to SCOTUS so that Heller can be reversed, thereby returning balance to the universe. What would you suggest be done to put a stop to lawful sales of products on a shopping channel?
Flying Junior, has it ever occurred to you that it just might be just a bit tyrannical to ban a TV show, just because you don't like it? Has it ever occurred to you that you could, I don't know, change the friggin' channel?The show would make no material changes in how guns are regulated. Every buyer would go through the precious background checks that "gun control" advocates are so in love with, and no one who is prohibited from gun ownership now will suddenly become legal when the TV show starts up.All this does is help prospective sellers link up with prospective buyers. Really, I would think that the tyrannical notion of "shut[ting] down," or "put[ting] a stop to," the programming is blocked more by the First Amendment than by the Second.Funny--I always thought it was only the Second Amendment that you so loved to stomp on with your jackboots. Expanding your Big Brother horizons, Junior?
Actually I'm okay with the second amendment as far as I know. I don't think that it means that congress can't enact laws regulating guns. What do you suppose well-regulated means? Marching in a tight formation?The simplest way to explain my point of view is that we don't need a bunch of dumbasses buying guns for no other reason than they are bored, desperate or otherwise exhibiting addictive behavior. I think that we can all agree that this country has an enormous problem with people that are in way over their heads as far as gun ownership. They don't seem to have the mental capability or motivation to store their weapons safely. Shit happens. Shit like Sandy Hook.
What do you suppose well-regulated means? Marching in a tight formation?That was a big part of it, I believe. I think "well regulated" meant as capable, to the degree practical, as regular troops.The simplest way to explain my point of view is that we don't need a bunch of dumbasses buying guns for no other reason than they are bored, desperate or otherwise exhibiting addictive behavior.What we "need" is immaterial in a discussion about other people's rights, except that we need to refrain from interfering with the exercise of those rights, no matter what we think of the wisdom of those rights being exercised by the people in question. I think that we can all agree that this country has an enormous problem with people that are in way over their heads as far as gun ownership.Wrong--unless I'm somehow excluded from "we [ . . . ] all."The bottom line is that there is absolutely no legal mechanism for preventing that show going on air, and advancing the commerce of life and liberty preserving firepower to the American people in these times of trouble.Anyone who tries to do so should die screaming, and in so doing put a smile on my face and a song in my heart.
The principal difference between Gun TV and other home shopping channels is that a Gun TV viewer’s order will not be shipped directly to their home.According to Gun TV, regulations mean that once an order is placed, a gun wholesaler will dispatch the item to the customer’s nearest federally licensed gun retailer, where mandated background checks and paperwork will be completed.Hmm, I guess the guns aren't exactly "for everyone".The gun control advocate on record is quoted as saying "this is the last thing that we need". Remember that as they claim they just want background checks. Apparently qualified people buying guns with a federal background check is "the last thing that they need".
If they require a background check then they're not the gross violation that takes place every day on the internet and elsewhere. But, the mainstreaming of guns is what I object to. The open carry movement has failed to accomplish what a channel like this might very well do. It's bad news.
It's bad news.It's joyous news, and the even better news is that none of you authority-worshiping zombies, and none of your government heroes, can do a damned thing to stop it ;-).
Well, that remains to be seen.
It would be a stretch considering that its on a cable channel which has been greatly deregulated. I believe there are no restrictions that would apply here.
Well, that remains to be seen.Er . . . what "remains to be seen"--the utter impossibility of you crybaby fanatics shutting it down? It might fade quickly because the guns don't sell as well as expected, but as for the government stomping it down to protect FJ's tender sensibilities--it ain't happening. There exists no legal mechanism for it to happen.
The gun loons will never leave their TV again. If a person buys 100 toasters they say they have a hoarding, or buying problem, but gun loons who have 100's of killing weapons (guns) are just fine. HA HA HA HA HA