5 accidentally shot at gun shows in North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Sounds like at least one of the incidents was at the check-in table where they were probably going to do just that.

I think putting a loaded firearm into a case (let alone with the safety in the fire position) regardless of where you're taking it is asking for an accident.

What happened to the old saying, 'Treat every gun as if it is loaded!' ?

You bet, it is.


Chuck

[billvon 2,998]

>It works because violating this law would take away the income that these legal
>firearms dealers enjoy.

. . . . and results in prison sentences.

> Requiring the same for all citizens who sell part of their collection can not be
> assumed to be followed to the same degree.

Hmm.

===================

ATF Investigation Ends With Former Georgia Gun Dealer Going to Prison

ATLANTA, June 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Special Agent in Charge Vanessa L. McLemore of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives(ATF) announced that a former federally licensed gun dealer from Athens, Ga.,reported to federal prison today following his conviction for the illegal sale of a gun and ammunition to a known criminal.

The start of a 37-month sentence for Michael Carl Oakley, 46, marks the final chapter in ATF's 10-month investigation into the illegal business practices of the northeast Georgia federal firearms licensee. . . . .

In January 2006, ATF used a confidential informant to determine if illegal gun sales were occurring at Oakley's business. Speaking with Oakley about purchasing a firearm, the informant stated that he/she was a convicted felon and did not want to execute any of the required paperwork. With this knowledge, Oakley nevertheless proceeded with the sale of a .38 caliber revolver and 50 rounds of matching ammunition, without completing a criminal history background check.
=====================


37 months in prison would seem like a pretty good deterrent to me, even if you weren't a dealer.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

No conspiracy, just your average everyday lazy incomplete article masquerading as journalism. First of all, there is no gun show loophole.

Semantic BS.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

No conspiracy, just your average everyday lazy incomplete article masquerading as journalism. First of all, there is no gun show loophole.

Semantic BS.

Nope, he is correct, there is no such thing as a Gun Show "Loophole". It is you who is incapable of calling it what it really is. As incorrect as the semi-automatic weapons you call "assault weapons".

[tkhayes 348]

tit for tat. If I can go to a gun show, which I can, and buy a gun without a background check, which I can, then there is a gun show loophole. Be there, done that.

That is the problem that 'we' want to see fixed. And that will likely be the first legislation passed. background checks for ALL gun sales, regardless of private or dealer or whatever. It is a start.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

tit for tat. If I can go to a gun show, which I can, and buy a gun without a background check, which I can, then there is a gun show loophole. Be there, done that.

That is the problem that 'we' want to see fixed. And that will likely be the first legislation passed. background checks for ALL gun sales, regardless of private or dealer or whatever. It is a start.

Then call is a private sale loophole if you want to be more accurate and pretend you aren't being spun.

How is the data for this mythical, left wing wet dream database going to be collected?

How is the "psychological profile" going to be compiled?

Hmmmm......?????

[rushmc 23]

Quote

tit for tat. If I can go to a gun show, which I can, and buy a gun without a background check, which I can, then there is a gun show loophole. Be there, done that.

That is the problem that 'we' want to see fixed. And that will likely be the first legislation passed. background checks for ALL gun sales, regardless of private or dealer or whatever. It is a start.

I then think you need a background check before you can open your mouth in public

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Gravitymaster 0]

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I think that all rights should be treated the same

But of course that is only for those who get to decide who gets checked and why

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

No conspiracy, just your average everyday lazy incomplete article masquerading as journalism. First of all, there is no gun show loophole.

Semantic BS.

from your side of the coin it's Semantic BS. From our side, it's not a loophole, nor does it have anything to do with gunshows.

A "gunshow loophole" would imply that somewhere it's stated "if you're selling that at a gunshow, you don't have to do a background check" when in actuality, it depends on the ATF status of the entity selling the firearm at the gunshow.

I've bought 3 guns at gunshows and gone through 2 background checks at the time of those purchases. The last purchase was a gentleman who was trying to sell off some of the duplicates in his collection to raise the funds to buy a specific piece. Not a dealer, didn't hold an FFL, and therefore no background check. Though I did fill out a firearms bill of sale and he did record my information for his records.

--
Rob

[champu 1]

Quote

Quote

No conspiracy, just your average everyday lazy incomplete article masquerading as journalism. First of all, there is no gun show loophole.

Semantic BS.

Precision in language is generally considered a good thing, unless you're trying to sell something. If you can't get public support for private sale background checks without "gun show loopholes" then maybe you shouldn't. If you can't get public support for banning types of stocks, barrel shrouds, or magazines over 10 rounds without calling them "assault weapons" or "high-capacity" then maybe you shouldn't.

[rushmc 23]

Here is another one who needs his head examined before he opens his mouth

Opps

Too late


Danny Glover Jan. 17 2013

Quote

I don't know if people know the genesis of the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect, for settlers to protect themselves from slave revolts and from uprisings by Native Americans. So, a revolt from people who were stolen from their lands or revolts from people whose land was stolen from. That was the genesis of the Second Amendment.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

No conspiracy, just your average everyday lazy incomplete article masquerading as journalism. First of all, there is no gun show loophole.

Semantic BS.

Nope, he is correct, there is no such thing as a Gun Show "Loophole". It is you who is incapable of calling it what it really is. As incorrect as the semi-automatic weapons you call "assault weapons".

Do I call them "assault weapons"?

There IS a loophole in the law requiring background checks on gun purchasers. It exists in 33 states, and is most apparent at gunshows.

Denying that it exists is just playing a semantic game to conceal your lame position on this.

And now we have YET ANOTHER mass shooting by someone who clearly should not have ever been given access to a gun.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Here is another one who needs his head examined before he opens his mouth

Opps

Too late


Danny Glover Jan. 17 2013

Quote

I don't know if people know the genesis of the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect, for settlers to protect themselves from slave revolts and from uprisings by Native Americans. So, a revolt from people who were stolen from their lands or revolts from people whose land was stolen from. That was the genesis of the Second Amendment.

In the times we live in, we have home invasions, threats of gangs, whackos looking to wipe-out large groups of people, personal assaults, in the part of the country I live in, drug runners who are armed and so-on. I believe, the 2nd. amendment covers these areas. We have the right to protect ourselves. We just have to do it responsibly, like all other rights.


Chuck

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Here is another one who needs his head examined before he opens his mouth

Opps

Too late


Danny Glover Jan. 17 2013

Quote

I don't know if people know the genesis of the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect, for settlers to protect themselves from slave revolts and from uprisings by Native Americans. So, a revolt from people who were stolen from their lands or revolts from people whose land was stolen from. That was the genesis of the Second Amendment.

n the times we live in, we have home invasions, threats of gangs, whackos looking to wipe-out large groups of people, personal assaults, in the part of the country I live in, drug runners who are armed and so-on. I believe, the 2nd. amendment covers these areas. We have the right to protect ourselves. We just have to do it responsibly, like all other rights.


Chuck

+1

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

How is the data for this mythical, left wing wet dream database going to be collected?

I never asked for a 'mythical dream database' nor do I believe that it is likely possible under many current structures of our healthcare or government systems. However that does not mean that a solution is not possible. We already have a system to vet 'security clearances' (just one example) for many parts of government or the military. I did not design those things, but I also have no trouble believing that they work at some level. To say that it cannot be done is simply denial.

In all likelihood, MANY changes will have to be made to make effective gun control that really works and likely it will take 2-3 generations to see the effectiveness of that. I am not under any illusion that there is a 'magic bullet' that will fix it all.

Why don't you and I stand aside and let smarter people figure that out?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

No conspiracy, just your average everyday lazy incomplete article masquerading as journalism. First of all, there is no gun show loophole.

Semantic BS.

Nope, he is correct, there is no such thing as a Gun Show "Loophole". It is you who is incapable of calling it what it really is. As incorrect as the semi-automatic weapons you call "assault weapons".

Do I call them "assault weapons"?

There IS a loophole in the law requiring background checks on gun purchasers. It exists in 33 states, and is most apparent at gunshows.

Denying that it exists is just playing a semantic game to conceal your lame position on this.

And now we have YET ANOTHER mass shooting by someone who clearly should not have ever been given access to a gun.

Its plainly obvious to most of us you are being spun and you can't see it. If you want to stay with that, be my guest.

[tkhayes 348]

We are advocating CHANGING those 'fundamental rights'. And I have no problem with that. The Constitution has been amended MANY times. A few more changes are in order, including your guns, Congress, health care, the electoral college, voter registration, I could go on.

Surely there are some Constitutional amendments you would like to see. What is your argument then for changing those and not the 2nd?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Here is another one who needs his head examined before he opens his mouth

Opps

Too late


Danny Glover Jan. 17 2013

Quote

I don't know if people know the genesis of the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect, for settlers to protect themselves from slave revolts and from uprisings by Native Americans. So, a revolt from people who were stolen from their lands or revolts from people whose land was stolen from. That was the genesis of the Second Amendment.

In the times we live in, we have home invasions, threats of gangs, whackos looking to wipe-out large groups of people, personal assaults, in the part of the country I live in, drug runners who are armed and so-on. I believe, the 2nd. amendment covers these areas. We have the right to protect ourselves. We just have to do it responsibly, like all other rights.


Chuck

So, Chuck.....when is your appointment with the government psychologist who will determine if you are mentally fit to own a gun?

[rushmc 23]

Quote

We are advocating CHANGING those 'fundamental rights'. And I have no problem with that. The Constitution has been amended MANY times. A few more changes are in order, including your guns, Congress, health care, the electoral college, voter registration, I could go on.

Surely there are some Constitutional amendments you would like to see. What is your argument then for changing those and not the 2nd?

I have no problem amending the Constitution if done as perscribed in said document

That NOT what is going on here

Want to change it

Go through the process

And NO

a few more are not in order

And those wishing to change the 2nd full well know they have no chance to get the changes you want ratified

Hence we get the crap that is happening today

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Here is another one who needs his head examined before he opens his mouth

Opps

Too late


Danny Glover Jan. 17 2013

Quote

I don't know if people know the genesis of the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect, for settlers to protect themselves from slave revolts and from uprisings by Native Americans. So, a revolt from people who were stolen from their lands or revolts from people whose land was stolen from. That was the genesis of the Second Amendment.

In the times we live in, we have home invasions, threats of gangs, whackos looking to wipe-out large groups of people, personal assaults, in the part of the country I live in, drug runners who are armed and so-on. I believe, the 2nd. amendment covers these areas. We have the right to protect ourselves. We just have to do it responsibly, like all other rights.


Chuck

So, Chuck.....when is your appointment with the government psychologist who will determine if you are mentally fit to own a gun?

So far, I haven't recieved a notice but I'm ready for them! I've been studying ink-blotches and readinga lot of Freud and old Dear Abby columns.


Chuck

[billvon 2,998]

>As incorrect as the semi-automatic weapons you call "assault weapons".

Uh, you do realize that the gun industry came up with that label, right?

==============
Even Defining ‘Assault Rifles’ Is Complicated
January 16, 2013

. . . .

In the end, said George Lakoff, a professor of cognitive science and linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, the arguments often come down to language. “No matter what language you use about guns, it’s going to be a problem because it’s not just about guns, it’s about personal identity,” he said.

Yet as Mr. Peterson noted in his buyer’s guide, it was the industry that adopted the term “assault weapon” to describe some types of semiautomatic firearms marketed to civilians.

“Assault rifle” was first used to describe a military weapon, the Sturmgewehr, produced by the Germans in World War II. The Sturmgewehr — literally “storm rifle,” a name chosen by Adolf Hitler — was capable of both semiautomatic and full-automatic fire. It was the progenitor for many modern military rifles.

But the term “assault rifle” was expanded and broadened when gun manufacturers began to sell firearms modeled after the new military rifles to civilians. In 1984, Guns & Ammo advertised a book called “Assault Firearms,” which it said was “full of the hottest hardware available today.”

“The popularly held idea that the term ‘assault weapon’ originated with antigun activists, media or politicians is wrong,” Mr. Peterson wrote. “The term was first adopted by the manufacturers, wholesalers, importers and dealers in the American firearms industry to stimulate sales of certain firearms that did not have an appearance that was familiar to many firearm owners. The manufacturers and gun writers of the day needed a catchy name to identify this new type of gun.”
================

So you'd have to ask them what they meant.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Right, and we all know that marketing people don't make up terms to sell products. I would classify a fully automatic weapon as a "military style assault weapon". Because the term itself is indicative of a non-defensive weapon. I would not describe a semi-automatic weapon as an "assault weapon" because it is more of a defensive weapon. The two weapons are not the same. Those who lump them together are either displaying gross ignorance or thy have an agenda. Either way, they are wrong.

[billvon 2,998]

>Right, and we all know that marketing people don't make up terms to sell products.

They absolutely do! Companies will often create new terms to sell their products. "Hemi engine" comes to mind. I do find it funny that those same companies are outraged - OUTRAGED! - that someone else might use the same term.

> I would classify a fully automatic weapon as a "military style assault weapon"

OK, so you have your own definition. Cool.

>I would not describe a semi-automatic weapon as an "assault weapon" because it is
>more of a defensive weapon. The two weapons are not the same. Those who lump
>them together are either displaying gross ignorance or thy have an agenda. Either
>way, they are wrong.

You'd have to take that up with Guns and Ammo.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Guns and Ammo have an agenda, as I said. Hopefully you're able to recognize that they do not represent gun owners nor even the NRA.