The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 18, 2018, 02:09 PM   #51
s3779m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2012
Posts: 273
Bit by bit we have been having our rights slowly taken away. We all know the saying,"if gun laws worked, Chicago would be a safe haven". Truth of the matter, as long as we look towards the government to provide for our safety, we will always have to give up rights. Sad to say, but giving up rights does not make anyone safer. Gun free zones only take away YOUR right to defend yourself and others. What were we thinking when we made places "gun free" and expected criminals to obey? As a society we go into businesses with our children and PEOPLE ARE ARMED and nobody goes crazy, there is no panic from knowing people have guns on them. So why are there gun free zones? Want to solve the problem, how about we stop talking about taking away rights and start talking about giving them back. I have no problem with teachers or coaches being armed. If we trust them with our children and grandchildren, then we should be able to trust them with defending them and their self.
s3779m is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 02:14 PM   #52
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,147
What prevents someone-the Government, e.g.-constantly lowering the bar as to what disqualifies one from firearms ownership-think of the Lautenberg Amendment. Or perhaps the girlfiriend you just dumped-or the now ex-wife accuses you of abuse. Remember, it's just her word...Kids running off at the mouth on social media ? What happend to free speech. Are we now free to only say approved things ?
"Ghost gun" ? To me that's the revolver registered to your long gone Great Uncle Fred, the one you inherited from your grandfather, the one you bought from the widow, the one you built in your basement during that long miserable winter reading "those books"-the M-16 you found on a military base, perhaps when you in the National Guard and had enough sense to keep quiet about. (The one you liberated from the smart aleck who always gave you lip and a hard time.)
SIGSHR is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 02:47 PM   #53
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,616
"
Quote:
Bit by bit we have been having our rights slowly taken away."
How so? Concealed carry laws have been loosened. Colorado wasted time legislating limits on magazine capacity. That was not smart. But the general statement about gun rights being impinged is difficult to validate. I would like to see how gun rights have been eroded.

Statement about kids dying in cars is true, but ignores the fact the many regulations and laws have improved automobile safety. Child car seat regulations are very strict, and as data provides opportunity to improve child safety in cars, laws are updated.

Improved and more detailed background checks, improved communication between agencies, and better coordination between states are things that I think could help decrease wing dings access to guns.
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 03:09 PM   #54
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 18,775
Quote:
The social security administration, during the Obama years, passed a regulation that if someone was on social security and they appointed another person to handle their financial matters they could (and were) reported to the NICS as being mentally incompetent to own a gun. This was without any due process of law, the person might not have been notified, there was no legal process to find out why the person transferred the financial ability to a third person.
While this is closer to reality than what the press generally reported, its still not quite accurate. In a nutshell, the Obama administration ordered the SSA (and other agencies) to report "mentally incompetent" people to NICS, which they did. NICS then placed them on the prohibited list. Sounds simple, and correct, but it wasn't.

It wasn't correct, because of the differing definitions of "mentally incompetent" used by different federal agencies. SSA did not, and does not have the authority to rule a person mentally incompetent for anything OTHER than receiving SSA benefits. This is NOT the same as the legal standard that governs possession of firearms.

NICS has, literally, only one box to put people in, if they are reported as mentally incompetent, and that is the prohibited person box. NICS does not, and cannot investigate the data it is given, to verify its accuracy. If they are given bad data (which they were) you get a bad result.

As to expanded, indepth background checks being the fix for mass shootings, or even just a "first step", I just don't see it.

Background checks have been sold to the public as the solution, one which will work, if only we dig deep enough into peoples pasts, and do a thorough enough job at it.

It is, sadly, a lie. But one too many people are all too willing to believe.

The first point against the claim that background checks will keep guns out of the hands of the crazies is that no background check can filter out someone who is not in the system. Period.

The next point is that the argument assumes that we (the potential crazies), are all first time gun buyers. AND that we would all use only legal means to get a gun. And, that if our intent is to break the highest moral laws (by committing murder), that we would be stopped by an NCIS check.

IF a person already has a gun, (or a dozen) what could an NCIS denial do to stop them from committing mayhem & murder? Nothing.

Another point, this one against the inclusion of social history, not just criminal history in determining prohibited person status.

We have legal standards, which, if not met, mean that no matter how weird, creepy, disgusting or dangerous seeming in your personal life, you cannot legally be denied your rights.

Quote:
#2 - We have FICO scores for credit, why not have a similar score for "community standing"? You get a complaint and a visit by police to your home, -CS score; get a DUI, -CS score; volunteer at homeless shelter +CS score; pay your bills on time +CS; BTW, all of this is PUBLIC info - some public records, some on social media.
This is so scary, its almost comical. The potential for abuse is tremendous. And just who would get all this information, and rate people??

Police visit to your home, you lose points? ok, any chance you would take into account WHY the police visited my home?? I doubt it. Most likely is just an arbitrary loss of points because there is a record of the visit, with nothing else taken into account.

Here's just one tiny example,
Do you know what a foundered horse is?
Basically the horse gets sick from eating too much of the wrong stuff, and it can die.
The treatment is to pen up the horse, and put it on a strict diet, until it recovers (if it does).

We had that happen, and the pen could be seen from the road. Someone who drove by regularly felt we were mistreating the horse (based on what they could see as they drove by) and called the sheriff. A deputy came by to check out the complaint. Once they learned the situation, they were satisfied we were not mistreating the horse, and left.

This happened about 4 times over the couple months we had the horse penned. Same complaint, from the same person. Each time a deputy had to come out and check. Because of the rotation, each time it was a different deputy, but eventually they all knew what was going on, and stopped responding to the inaccurate complaint.

Under your community standing score system, would I get 4 demerits because of 4 police visits??? When I had done nothing wrong?

And just how could you use such a score system, to meet actual legal standards to determine "suitability" for firearms possession?? And, who would do that, under the law??

Zum Befehl, Herr Obergruppenfuehrer!!

__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 03:51 PM   #55
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,196
Quote:
Quote:
#2 - We have FICO scores for credit, why not have a similar score for "community standing"? You get a complaint and a visit by police to your home, -CS score; get a DUI, -CS score; volunteer at homeless shelter +CS score; pay your bills on time +CS; BTW, all of this is PUBLIC info - some public records, some on social media.
This is so scary, its almost comical. The potential for abuse is tremendous. And just who would get all this information, and rate people??
No german came to mind for me. My reaction was in english, more or less.

Someone might have a good citizen score until being reported by a goodplus citizen to the Ministry of Virtue. Most ungood reports only lose a citizen a few points, but doubleunplusgood reports get you an appointment with someone from the Ministry of Health. Also, checking your own citizen score, an act of ungood mistrust, reduces the score.

All this on the infinitesimally small chance that Winston Smith will commit murder in a school.
zukiphile is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 04:17 PM   #56
s3779m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2012
Posts: 273
I see gun free zones as one example of giving up rights in order to gain the illusion of safety. There are also several states which do not allow the freedoms that we enjoy in Colorado and Texas, where some of the old bans are still in effect. Take a good look at Chicago and their laws to see where gun freedom is still suppressed. I also fail to see how having the law abiding citizen jump though more legal checks and background check would have prevented anything. However, had the F.B.I done it job, this probably would have not happened.


By the way, no idea what the statement about the car seats is about, I said nothing about it. If you are saying we need the government to tell us to buckle our kids up as a case for government intrusion being a positive, well to each his own.
s3779m is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 04:23 PM   #57
fredvon4
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2010
Location: Lampasas Texas
Posts: 154
44 AMP I like your analogy

We are county rural for last 23 years...all sorts of reasons Sheriffs deputies have been to my home

Errant call from neighbor of a fire...wrong house...mine was not a blaze
Dogs barking...wild pack in the neighbor hood...mine were all sound asleep in our big bed
Random explosions.... not me or my kids....other neighbors blowing up left over fire works late at night

I shot a possum at 2 pm... to shut up my dog...yep sheriff deputy came out

Suspected Burglary at a neighbor... came by to interview me and see if I saw anything

Bad guy chased onto my property to escape by a neighbor...yep another visit to see if I knew anything

Daughters boy friend pissed she dumped him.. he entered and trashed her car...yep sheriffs report

ON and on... probably 20 times I have helped or been interviewed by local dept...

How many demerits did I accumulate?

Do I get good guy points for the few times I alerted the Sharif to a suspected meth lab, bad accident, fire, suspicious person, robbery in progress, calf on road, horse on road, copper thief, on and on in my short 63 years

Never been arrested ever...never even cuffed....in fact I have never been in a police or sheriffs "interview room" always on the scene or my home...invited so many in for coffee while they asked questions to help- with some report

BUT the big kicker.... I was a soldier for 23 years with good clearances and a righteous American in all aspects.. I decide to grow long hair and get a few tattoos

I also bought a few desired sports cars... and Harley motorcycles---Texas state patrol figured I fit a "profile"

Truth is I did...

Yes real aggravating occasionally to be pulled over and demanded a search of my vehicle......

Each case I politely asked the trooper to have a sergeant or any other witness present so I could reasonably be assured YOU do not plant evidence in my vehicle

Twice I had to wait for the dogs (hours) and any warrant...nothing ever found...and no apology

For the record I do believe in "profiling" and ultimately as the police, sheriff's, and state patrol came to know me...I got hassled a lot less and even made a few friends of some of the older Troopers

I have met the very best of public servants and some of the arrogant a holes

To this day I do NOT lock step believe they are LEO ALL good righteous perfect law enforcement people... but I do understand human behavior and some of their biases

I am always polite and some what assertive...

any scheme that seeks to grade me on LEO contact is a non starter IMO
fredvon4 is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 04:24 PM   #58
Buzzcook
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 6,088
Social media is a scam, as we all know. On another board I said that our privacy was more in danger from Facebook than from an expanded NCIS.

But the OP made me think. Social media takes our private information and using sophisticated algorithms to comb through that data and tailor it for the customers willing to buy it.
In the US this is perfectly legal as opposed to Belgium for example.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0..._250000_a_day/

There are problems when government demands or requests information from scial media.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-g...-google-2013-6

But that is the same information that these companies willingly sell on the open market.
So could the government buy information that has been filtered to find potential mass shooters? Could they be just another Facebook customer?

I suspect a lot of people will reply with slippery slope arguments about what happens to the information after the government gets it. But if you would also address what happens before the slope gets slick.
Buzzcook is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 05:49 PM   #59
Danoobie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2017
Posts: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onward Allusion View Post

- Banning 80% kits from being sold w/o a background check. Sure, you want a ghost gun, you can have a ghost gun but not w/o a background check. You want to see if you can actually "build" a gun, go for it, but not w/o a background check.
The whole point of a "ghost gun" is that there is no background check. If it's reported,
checked, or bought thru a FFL, it's not a ghost gun.


This system of ours isn't going to get fixed. They want to have a heavy police presence, like they do now. They want every possible excuse to cause banning
and confiscation of guns. If they didn't, they would have been dealing with the crazies since way back when that nut-ball tried to kill President Reagan .

Last edited by Danoobie; February 18, 2018 at 05:58 PM.
Danoobie is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 05:55 PM   #60
Onward Allusion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Location: IN
Posts: 2,604
Yes. I know #2 is scary as hell. Unfortunately it is already being done at the consumer side. It's just that the guberment is too behind the times, currently. I don't agree or believe in such a scale but you did ask for a concrete idea. Concrete but damn scary from a gun owner, eh? Imagine what the other side is thinking.
__________________
"You haven't lived until you've died." - various
People . . . not a big fan . . .
Onward Allusion is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 06:38 PM   #61
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,662
Quote:
So could the government buy information that has been filtered to find potential mass shooters? Could they be just another Facebook customer?
The government is already a consumer of data compiled by outside commercial agencies. I don't think they are using it to filter mass shooters; but they certainly use it to assist in investigations and screen possible employees. For what it's worth, people still slip through that system.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 06:51 PM   #62
Prndll
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 24, 2017
Location: Texas
Posts: 112
There is certainly a problem. But that problem has NOTHING to do with guns at all. This is being made to 'look' like it is though.

This is about a person being driven to the point of killing other people. Guns are merely the tools with which those killings were carried out.

Gun control laws will not fix these things. They can't. It isn't possible. They never have. They never will. It is not about guns.

Deal with the real issues. Concentrating on guns means ignoring the issues.
Prndll is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 07:12 PM   #63
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,616
Well, so far it appears that status quo is the only path foreward. But there are many people that disagree.

Achieving perfection isn't going to happen. We have a big mess in this nation surrounding guns. The RTKBA has been championed at the expense of safety. Proliferation of firearm ownership has imbued us with 280 million guns. Attempting to oversee ownership of that many unregistered and untracked firearms is nigh impossible. Thus, places like Chicago that have strict gunlaws are unable to prevent black market sources for thugs and bangers. Erasing all gun laws would result in what?

It would seem that for some, if proposed actions, such as extensive background checks aren't 100 percent effective, then we shouldn't consider changing. Vetting gun ownership would be an uphill task, but it is not acceptable to me, that any deranged idiot can walk into a gun store and purchase a weapon capable of killing lots of people in a few moments. It also seems inappropriate that we have allowed sales of millions of said weapons as that proliferation has contributed immensely to the mess.
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 07:49 PM   #64
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,662
Quote:
Achieving perfection isn't going to happen.
Well, I don't think anybody expects perfection. I think 26 guilty pleas and 62 prosecutions out of 76,000 denials falls well short of even "This system works reasonably well enough that we should use it as the framework for a system that will do four or five times as many transaction." And of course, expanding that system to all private sales would be require registration of all firearms or it would be completely unenforceable.

Quote:
Vetting gun ownership would be an uphill task, but it is not acceptable to me, that any deranged idiot can walk into a gun store and purchase a weapon capable of killing lots of people in a few moments.
So, in your view the same system that allows "any deranged idiot" to purchase a firearm must be immediately expanded to all private sales because we can't expect perfection?

Quote:
It also seems inappropriate that we have allowed sales of millions of said weapons as that proliferation has contributed immensely to the mess.
I disagree; but regardless that horse left the barn long ago. This year had well over 11 million new firearms manufactured. If tomorrow you implemented 100% perfect weapons control over every new purchase, that's still more than one unregistered firearm per person already out there.

Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; February 18, 2018 at 07:56 PM.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 08:03 PM   #65
xandi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2015
Location: ga
Posts: 314
Have we found a Antigun sleeper Agent among us?
xandi is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 08:14 PM   #66
Onward Allusion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Location: IN
Posts: 2,604
Hmmm, referring to me? I've been here since '09. Read some of my posts. No. Not an anti gun sleeper. Just someone who knows that the hammer is coming down soon. If we do not come up with a compromise, a set of "solutions" will be rammed down our throats. I suspect those solutions will include a renewal of the AWB and then some. Better start thinking and coming up with some palatable compromises.

BTW, if I am an anti-gun sleeper, then I can be one of our worst enemies.
__________________
"You haven't lived until you've died." - various
People . . . not a big fan . . .
Onward Allusion is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 08:28 PM   #67
xandi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2015
Location: ga
Posts: 314
How about regulating hammers, don’t they kill more ppl then legally owned guns?
See the problem isn’t with guns, it’s with ppl
The antidepressants that most of the massshooters were on have sideffects of homocide thoughts and urges, maybe the gov should focus in on that
xandi is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 08:40 PM   #68
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 11,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado Redneck
Well, so far it appears that status quo is the only path foreward. But there are many people that disagree.
Why is status quo the only path forward? Why isn't fixing the broken existing system a path forward? The path forward should not be focused on guns. Guns are not the problem. Consider:

The worst school massacre in U.S. history was Bath Township, Michigan, in 1927. 44 dead, 58 injured. No guns involved. The weapon of choice was dynamite. The perp blew up half the school. The only reason the death toll wasn't much higher was that the charges he planted under the other wing of the school failed to explode.

Columbine: 15 dead and 21 injured. Did you know that the guns were not the primary weapons of choice? Plan A was propane bombs. When the bombs failed to detonate, the two losers resorted to Plan B, which was guns. If the bombs had gone off, the casualty count would have been much higher.

Look at all the truck and car attacks in Europe, and even in New York City.

Guns are not the problem, and that means focusing on guns is not the path forward. I'm sure you have heard or read that there are more than 20,000 gun laws in the U.S. I can't possibly verify or refute that statistic, but there are a lot. And yet we still have people killing other people. If 20,000 laws can't prevent it, what makes you think that 20,001 or even 20,003 will suddenly bring about a transformation of human nature and a miraculous cure for every nutcase in the United States who might wake up one morning thinking he wants to kill some people?

If you want the government to "do something," start demanding that they start fixing the system that's in place. Until we see it actually being used, nobody can honestly say it doesn't work.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 08:47 PM   #69
Psychedelic Bang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2009
Location: FL USA
Posts: 328
I have to tell you that I now avoid, "gun free zones," like the plague. I go out of my way to make sure I am never in one of these, "kill zones."

Anyplace you can think of where one cannot legally carry - I avoid as much as possible. Gun free zone = target for psycho killer

That being said - I live within 20 miles of Parkland. On the day of the shooting, around lunchtime, I was eating at a Brazillian BBQ joint with a friend of mine, a mere 3 miles up the road from the Stoneman Douglas School.

This is the first mass shooting, "in my backyard, close to home," and I've been indescribably depressed and heartbroken for the victims all weekend.

I blame: The FBI. The Broward County Sheriff's Office. The School System.

We are beginning to be able to profile these mass shooters. We can now extrapolate people at extreme risk; we know who may be in serious and immediate need of mental health intervention.

Gun control disarms the law-abiding average citizen. The gangs will still have guns. The mass shooters will still have guns. The criminals, the violent nihilists, the supremacists etc will all still have guns. The Politicians, Celebrities, Ultra-Wealthy, will still all be protected by guns.

The only people who will not have guns under gun control are the law abiding people who will have no way to protect themselves from those who refuse to disarm.
__________________
"Was always kinda partial to Roy Rogers actually. I really like those sequined shirts..."
Psychedelic Bang is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 08:57 PM   #70
brian33x51
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: Denver area
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado Redneck View Post
"
How so? Concealed carry laws have been loosened. Colorado wasted time legislating limits on magazine capacity. That was not smart. But the general statement about gun rights being impinged is difficult to validate. I would like to see how gun rights have been eroded.

Statement about kids dying in cars is true, but ignores the fact the many regulations and laws have improved automobile safety. Child car seat regulations are very strict, and as data provides opportunity to improve child safety in cars, laws are updated.

Improved and more detailed background checks, improved communication between agencies, and better coordination between states are things that I think could help decrease wing dings access to guns.
Colorado wasted time but we still can't get those laws pulled back because the Dims still run all three branches here. It's annoying I have to go to a local gunshop to get proper capacity mags.

My kids go to school and I go to pick them up every other day. Every time it makes me mad because legally I have to disarm to get out of my car. So beyond stupid...
brian33x51 is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 09:24 PM   #71
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onward Allusion
If we do not come up with a compromise, a set of "solutions" will be rammed down our throats.
Expanded background checks under the current system require registration. Without it, the expanded checks are toothless and unenforceable. Registration is a necessary first step for the very solutions they plan to ram down our throats whether we compromise or not.

After Sandy Hook, Sen. Tom Coburn tried to propose a background check that applied to all private sales and still protected gun owner privacy. That bill never even got a vote on the Senate floor. You think there can be compromise here. I think you are wrong. The day after your compromise, they'll be back for more.

On a related note, I found this video of all the past gun control compromises. I think it sums up our prospects on future conpromises nicely.

Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; February 18, 2018 at 09:30 PM.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 09:41 PM   #72
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,616
Xandi--if you think I am an antigunner, your wrong. I am anti stupid. That being said, if you want this forum to be an echo chamber, where all members agree with you, then put on the blinkers and quit reading controversial threads.

I agree with Aguila Blanca, we need to fix the broken aspects of our current system of backgroynd checks and mental illness recognition. That essentially is what I think we need to do.

As to advocating gun control, keeping guns out of the hands of evil people is the objective that makes sense. The way we do things now hasn't been successful. More detailed background checks that are similar to pre-employment scans might be effective.

And lastly, to really make a dent in gun violence in places like Chicago, neighboring states will have to implement some draconian laws. If an SUV with a bunch of black market guns can drive in from Indiana, sell to gang bangers, drive back out of state, how can the city government expect to do much to thwart the wholesale murder happening now?

I have learned a few things reading the posts here.
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 10:17 PM   #73
xandi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2015
Location: ga
Posts: 314
So even though illegal drugs easily to come by (not using a tor browser) you think it’ll work with guns?
Evil finds a way
xandi is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 10:19 PM   #74
xandi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2015
Location: ga
Posts: 314
Did they have problems like this in 19 century?
xandi is offline  
Old February 18, 2018, 10:26 PM   #75
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 18,775
Quote:
but it is not acceptable to me, that any deranged idiot can walk into a gun store and purchase a weapon capable of killing lots of people in a few moments.
Just like any deranged idiot can buy gasoline, or worse, a car or a truck???

And just who decides who is, and isn't a deranged idiot??

Is it because someone is scared by their Facebook posts?? There are LEO professionals who's job it is to evaluate threats. Do they always get it right? NO. And if they don't what makes you think you will?? (and "you" is meant for whomever makes that decision in your system).

Perhaps we would be better off if all the potential deranged idiots were required by law to wear some kind of identifying marking? Like a yellow star, or a pink triangle???

As I recall, when that was done, it was justified as a public safety measure, as well....

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but really, how is discriminating against a group of people based on an opinion, rather than actual fact, a just and proper thing to do??

And the fact is that these millions of weapons shot and killed NO ONE, yesterday, or the day before (and if you're going to be specific about the AR15 type, its been on the civilian market for over 50 years), and won't tomorrow. But that's not good enough for some people.

one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but expecting a different result. This seems to be the rut we are stuck in when it comes to gun control proposals.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12633 seconds with 8 queries