The Second Amendment

Everything that doesn't fit anywhere else!

Postby LMM » October 26th, 2008, 8:54 pm

DemoDick wrote:
I like your solution to keep them in jail but that's never going to happen is it? Time and time again we hear about stories where someone murders someone and you look back at their criminal history and wonder how in the H E L L they got out.


Mandatory minimum sentences for criminals who are convicted of gun crimes would be a BIG step in the right direction.

BTW, your ex sounds like the type of person that shouldn't own a car, let alone a gun. And there are many ways to keep a loaded (yes, LOADED) firearm in the home safely with children and yet keep it accessible to adults who might need it in an emergency.

Demo Dick


Mandatory minimums for criminals convicted of gun crimes are a great idea, we don't have them now?

My ex is a boob. And when I say I am not comfortable, I realize there are ways to keep a loaded firearm safely in the home. I also know I can educate my daughter on gun safety, or rather I will. She will play at someone else's house one day and although I will be making the effort to know who my daughter is with and what type of people they are, shyt happens. I'm just not comfortable with the idea. I'm not a pacifist or anything like that, I can't really explain it.

I still would be interested to know your ideas for how to safely do that though.
User avatar
LMM
I'll Kick Your Ass
 
Posts: 1834
Location: Bitch please....

Postby LMM » October 26th, 2008, 8:58 pm

DemoDick wrote:
I'd still rather look up a voting record and call it a day. Like I said, all the ammunition one needs is in his voting record, yes?


No. The problem is that the voting record doesn't examine what the laws would have actually done if enacted, only whether a candidate voted yes or no.

For example, if a piece of legislation is drafted that would outlaw "armor piercing ammunition", and that was defined as any cartridge that, when fired, could penetrate a bullet resistant vest, most people would call that reasonable. Obama supported just such a piece of legislation. Here's the problem, nearly every commonly available big-game hunting round, fired from a handgun or rifle, will zip right through soft body armor. So that law, if enacted, would effectively outlaw the majority of ammunition produced and sold in the U.S. (and most of the ammo in my own supply).

But if you look at it on the surface, it looks like a good law designed to protect police officers from "cop-killer" bullets. In reality, EVERY bullet is a "cop killer" when it is fired at a police officer.

So unfortunately we have to dig deeper than a candidate's voting record and examine why they voted the way they did and question if they really understand the subject matter.

This is what is so frustrating about politics. Legislators do not have to have expert knowledge in any field to draft legislation that directly affects it. They only need to understand how to write the law and convince other legislators to vote for it. The most despicable way to do this, in my opinion, is to appeal to people's emotional response to tragedy, potential or otherwise.

I'll bet I could get you over that anticipation problem in one session.

Demo Dick



That makes a lot of sense. Like I said earlier, this isn't a hot button for me but I know it is important to so many people. I appreciate the explanation. So why can't they make the law to be more specific? Or something, shyt.

You have a lot of confidence, I might even make a wager on that lol
User avatar
LMM
I'll Kick Your Ass
 
Posts: 1834
Location: Bitch please....

Postby DemoDick » October 27th, 2008, 11:31 am

Mandatory minimums for criminals convicted of gun crimes are a great idea, we don't have them now?


Nope.

I still would be interested to know your ideas for how to safely do that though.


Keep the firearm in an instant-access electronic safe. Also, if a child is going to be in the home with a firearm you MUST take them shooting regularly and demystify the gun. When they know that it's not a "strictly forbidden" thing and that they can use it under Mom and Dad's supervision and rules, they won't become a statistic because they wanted to play with it when Mom and Dad aren't home. They also get a healthy appreciation for the destructive potential of a misused firearm.

Demo Dick
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge
User avatar
DemoDick
They Like to Fondle My Gun
 
Posts: 1910
Location: New York

Postby SvcDogSawyer » October 27th, 2008, 5:01 pm

What's wrong with a Mandatory waiting period? What's the hurry to go home with a handgun that day?

When I bought my last handgun, I didn't have a problem waiting 7 days, I had other guns to go out shooting/hunting with to keep me occupied.

I don't agree with a lot of the current gun control laws, but I do think there should be better laws. Yes the mandatory sentencing thing is a good idea, but why not go a step furthur and make it a federal crime? If you commit a crime with a gun you go to federal prison, if someone is killed during that crime, then you are put to death. I think they should bring back the Firing Squad, if a person likes to hurt people with guns, then they should die by a bullet. Not instantly though, no, it should be somewhere that causes the most pain and where they will eventuallyt bleed out.

Why are gun crimes any less than hate crimes? I have a friend who's son was with a group a teens who decided to burn a cross, he was just there in the background and he got 7 years in a federal prison.

As far as the "I need a gun to protect my family and home" that's an ok reason, but should they be required to go through some sort a training course before they are allowed to own a gun? I don't if this is correct but isn't there a high percentage of people who are injured or killed by there own gun or a family member?

How much protection is gun going to be if you can't even use it right? Not everyone knows the rule that you pull it out you better be ready to use it. I hear people say that they would have no problem shooting someone if they threatened their family or broke into their house and I think that is just utter crap. Unless you have been trained in law enforcement or military I don't think anyone could know what they would do if they were in that type of situation until it happens.
John & Sawyer

"Damn Walkies"
User avatar
SvcDogSawyer
Not Patrick's Nipple
 
Posts: 166
Location: Sykesville, MD

Postby Marinepits » October 30th, 2008, 9:44 pm

From my favorite blog http://mausersandmuffins.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Concealed Consumers

The Chief Executive of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Dan Cooper, likes Obama's general policies so much that he's redistributed $3,300 to the Obama presidential campaign. Thanks to Downright Dusty via Days of our Trailers for the heads up.


I was happy to inform them via their website that in the future I will redistribute MY wealth to a couple of those Illinois firearms manufacturers.

I HATE shopping. Truly. I own more guns than pairs of shoes. Guns and ammo, books, music, now those are things I'm happy to shop for. But shopping for the stuff some women seem to want to amass and collect bores me to tears. And I hate stores and crowds. Clauswitz would be proud. I have my list, I do a field study, the layout of the place. Then I dive in unexpectedly, averting near collision with someone spraying samples of perfume by going for a flank position. There they are. Boots. Brown. Size 7, I'm out the door with my spoils in five minutes.

THIS IS HOW MOST WOMEN VIEW SHOPPING

Image

THIS IS HOW I VIEW SHOPPING

Image

The difference though, is unlike these Celtic guys I'm not allowed to shop armed. The mall is a "gun free zone". So I avoid it like the black death and hit locally owned places, smaller stores that appreciate my business, concealed or not. Malls are scary enough as it is, sale racks of ugly ties, teenagers with credit cards, tacos at the food court. Go there without a gun? No thank you.


Gun free. Think about it. Think about some famous gun free places.
Columbine High School.
New York City pizza shop.
Pearl Mississippi High School.
Luby's Cafeteria.
New York pizza shop.
The Amish school in Pennsylvania.
Virginia Tech University.
and more. . . .


Heller is a step in the right direction but we still have a long ways to go, and need to continue to educate and inform. Guns aren't the evil here, people are the evil.

Certainly the media didn't fault Ryder truck regulations or ammonia nitrate restrictions, or a "cult of agriculture fertilizer" following Timothy McVeigh's horrific crime in Oklahoma City.
No one debated the societal danger of kitchen utensils or other hardware of choice after Jeffery Dahmer drugged, mutilated and cannibalized his victims.


I believe it was Albert Einstein who said- "The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."


Nobel Economist Friedrich Hayek termed it a "fatal conceit" and some politicians have had a bad case of it, believing they can change the world with their God- like legal attestation as to what THEY think our rights are. But the fatal conceit is not metaphoric, it's literal. People die because social-control laws do not stop criminals but simply prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves and those under their care.


So until the next step is taken, I will not shop in gun free malls or gun free stores. I will not buy any products from Cooper Firearms if their leader supports a candidate who is on the record with a wish to remove Second Amendment rights. I may be one lone woman, but I'm a lone woman with a single six figure income and a platinum credit card. Businesses may not care for my views, but they DO care about my buying power. Cooper may not care if they lose the business of one, but I am one of many. I won't take my money any place that has the audacity to demand unarmed helplessness. I won't spend my money for businesses that support, even if indirectly, those that would take those rights from us. Guns themselves in the malls aren't going to cause my demise, any more than Ryder trucks cause terrorism, water causes drowning and forks cause obesity. Guns in the malls, guns in a store, only make me a victim when I'm the one that doesn't have one. They're not "gun free" they are "good-guy gun free" zones.

I have a profession where I've studied the insanity of fate and the methodology of greed and evil. It has a profile, a plan and a preferred environment where its prey can not fight back. Embrace the facts and spread the word, take your business elsewhere. And tell them why.


Due to the backlash from Mr Cooper's campaign contribution, here's an email sent out by Cooper Firearm's Board of Directors:

In response to the recent article highlighting Dan Cooper's personal
political donations, the board of directors, shareholders and employees
of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc would like to issue the following
statement.

The employees, shareholders and board of directors of Cooper Firearms of
Montana do not share the personal political views of Dan Cooper.

Although we all believe everyone has a right to vote and donate as they
see fit, it has become apparent that the fallout may affect more than
just Mr. Cooper. It may also affect the employees and the shareholders
of Cooper Firearms.

The board of directors has asked Mr. Cooper to resign as President of
Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc.

Daily operations will continue with the competent staff currently in
place in Stevensville, MT producing the finest, most accurate rifles
money can buy.

Dan Cooper has spent all of his working life producing the highest
quality rifles built here in the USA. He started with nothing but the
American Dream and built that into firearms company anyone would be
proud of. We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.
We wish him all of the best in his future pursuits.
Never make someone a priority in your life when that someone treats you like an option.
User avatar
Marinepits
Proud Infidel
 
Posts: 15621
Location: New England

Postby DemoDick » November 8th, 2008, 11:29 pm

What's wrong with a Mandatory waiting period? What's the hurry to go home with a handgun that day?


I paid for it, it's mine. I want to take it home, detail strip it and shoot it. That's my right. When I buy a car, no one tells me "come back in a week and pick it up because we want to make sure you're not going to run down a bunch of schoolkids in the heat of passion." Think about this as well: what if the purchaser was a woman who was being actively stalked by a pyschopath? "It's okay, he probably won't hurt you for a few days." No thanks. Some people need that gun NOW.

A more relevant question is why have the waiting period? We don't pass laws because they "do no harm," we pass laws because we believe they do some good. Waiting periods don't. They are inane, pointless, and in some cases render law abiding citizens helpless against deadly physical force attacks. Waiting periods have gotten people killed while they were biding by whatever arbitrarily decided time period a few politicians decided was prudent to pick up a weapon they have already paid for and been approved to purchase and carry.

Demo Dick
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge
User avatar
DemoDick
They Like to Fondle My Gun
 
Posts: 1910
Location: New York

Postby airwalk » November 8th, 2008, 11:37 pm

I have exactly the opposite position, I think every gun purchase should have a mandatory waiting period and a records check. Gun show, neighbor to neighbor, retail store..makes no never mind to me.

Yes I do realize that it is virtually impossible - but doesn't stop me from wishing.
User avatar
airwalk
I live here
 
Posts: 3791
Location: Oregon

Postby cheekymunkee » November 8th, 2008, 11:55 pm

Oh no. IMO it is NONE Of the governments business how many or what type of guns I , as a law abiding citizen, have in my home. If they knew they would probably have my house surrounded Waco style. And lets face it. If I am buying a gun to shoot your ass, I am going to shoot your ass if I have to wait until I get to my car or if I have to wait a week. Of course, a waiting period MIGHT deter some shootings but it may not save someones life like Demo described. Besides, the street HAS no waiting period. If getting one legally is too much hassle I can always get one on the street. Bad people are going to do bad things whether there are laws in place or not.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby DemoDick » November 9th, 2008, 10:30 am

airwalk wrote:I have exactly the opposite position, I think every gun purchase should have a mandatory waiting period and a records check. Gun show, neighbor to neighbor, retail store..makes no never mind to me.

Yes I do realize that it is virtually impossible - but doesn't stop me from wishing.


Every gun purchase from a Federal Firearms dealer already has an instant check. Private sales are just that: private commerce.

I will repeat my question. What good do waiting periods do? What's the point?

Demo Dick
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge
User avatar
DemoDick
They Like to Fondle My Gun
 
Posts: 1910
Location: New York

Postby amazincc » November 9th, 2008, 10:59 am

Marinepits wrote:
THIS IS HOW MOST WOMEN VIEW SHOPPING

Image

THIS IS HOW I VIEW SHOPPING

Image



Well... obviously this is me on my way to Walmart. :| :wink:

Image
User avatar
amazincc
Jessica & Mick
 
Posts: 9814
Location: Holding them both in my heart.

Postby SassyCassie » November 9th, 2008, 11:10 am

Here's a question for you Demo.

I am fine with stationary targets - archery, bb guns, but tried a few times to do 'clay pigeons' and never hit a single one. (this was at boy scout camp, the instructor was great, but i could just not track the stupid things) Is this something I just need more practice at, or is it a genetic fault?
The root of ALL evil at dotcorny
User avatar
SassyCassie
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 49
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby DemoDick » November 9th, 2008, 2:40 pm

SassyCassie wrote:Here's a question for you Demo.

I am fine with stationary targets - archery, bb guns, but tried a few times to do 'clay pigeons' and never hit a single one. (this was at boy scout camp, the instructor was great, but i could just not track the stupid things) Is this something I just need more practice at, or is it a genetic fault?


Could be both.

Breaking clays requires that you lead them appropriately given the distance and speed, as well as factor in choke, shot type, and guage. Also, you use a different style of trigger pull for a shotgun. It takes practice.

Also, many women are cross-eye dominant which presents a whole other list of challenges when shooting, especially a long-barrelled shotgun. I could explain an easy way to figure out if this applies to you.

It's like hitting a car whizzing by with a rock. Throw it at the car and your rock will fly behind it. Throw the rock far enough ahead and the two will meet.

Demo Dick
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge
User avatar
DemoDick
They Like to Fondle My Gun
 
Posts: 1910
Location: New York

Postby cheekymunkee » November 9th, 2008, 2:49 pm

Are you calling us cross eyed?
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby pitbullmamaliz » November 9th, 2008, 2:51 pm

I'm cross-eye dominant. Probably part of the reason I have trouble with long guns. I tried clay pigeon shooting once. It was embarrassing - I didn't even hit one. Which pissed me off because I'm a damned good shot with my Glock.
"Remember - every time your dog gets somewhere on a tight leash *a fairy dies and it's all your fault.* Think of the fairies." http://www.positivepetzine.com"

http://www.pitbullzen.com
http://inaradog.wordpress.com
User avatar
pitbullmamaliz
Working out in the buff causes chafing
 
Posts: 15437
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby airwalk » November 9th, 2008, 4:08 pm

When I used to shoot a lot, I was better with a long gun than a hand gun!
User avatar
airwalk
I live here
 
Posts: 3791
Location: Oregon

Postby Marinepits » November 9th, 2008, 4:21 pm

Cross-eye dominant here, too, but I have one near-sighted eye and one far-sighted eye, so I shoot REALLY well regardless of gun. :dance:
Never make someone a priority in your life when that someone treats you like an option.
User avatar
Marinepits
Proud Infidel
 
Posts: 15621
Location: New England

Postby LMM » November 9th, 2008, 7:13 pm

I guess I must be cross-eyed dominant. Or something.
User avatar
LMM
I'll Kick Your Ass
 
Posts: 1834
Location: Bitch please....

Postby DemoDick » November 10th, 2008, 3:34 am

pitbullmamaliz wrote:I'm cross-eye dominant. Probably part of the reason I have trouble with long guns. I tried clay pigeon shooting once. It was embarrassing - I didn't even hit one. Which pissed me off because I'm a damned good shot with my Glock.


Ding Ding! We have a winner. A few from the looks of it.

A lot of women that are decent shots with a pistol are horrendous with a rifle or shotgun due to cross-eye dominance. Despite what the feel-good PC crowd has to say, men and women DO have genetic predispositions. Shocking, I know.

If it makes you ladies feel any better, men tend to have trouble shooting guns with heavy recoil, because they try to muscle the weapon under control rather than aborb the recoil. This leads to flinching and "scope eye."

Demo Dick
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge
User avatar
DemoDick
They Like to Fondle My Gun
 
Posts: 1910
Location: New York

Postby pitbullmamaliz » November 10th, 2008, 9:31 am

That may be why I shot the .50 Desert Eagle better than the boys did. Scared the piss out of me and I'll never shoot it again, but dammit I was better than the boys! lol
"Remember - every time your dog gets somewhere on a tight leash *a fairy dies and it's all your fault.* Think of the fairies." http://www.positivepetzine.com"

http://www.pitbullzen.com
http://inaradog.wordpress.com
User avatar
pitbullmamaliz
Working out in the buff causes chafing
 
Posts: 15437
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby Marinepits » November 10th, 2008, 9:39 am

:highfive:
Never make someone a priority in your life when that someone treats you like an option.
User avatar
Marinepits
Proud Infidel
 
Posts: 15621
Location: New England

PreviousNext

Return to Off-Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron