Post by: seeker_two on August 18, 2008, 12:20:29 PM
Words mean specific things. Maybe we need to know what McCain means by his......
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 18, 2008, 12:22:56 PM
Making sure ALL private transfers go through NICS.
Post by: alan2 on August 18, 2008, 12:28:34 PM
A lot has been said about McCain and closing the "gun show loophole". But has anyone got him to state what he considers a "gun show"? Would a "hunter's expo" or a "self-defense seminar" count in that loophole? What about a "gun show" that just displays firearms and sends potential buyers to their storefront?
Words mean specific things. Maybe we need to know what McCain means by his......
Words mean specific things. Maybe we need to know what McCain means by his......
-----------------------------------------
Based on the results of a couple of phone conversations I've had with the senator's office people, "the best of British luck to you sir" re getting the desired clarification.
As to the meanig of the term "gun show", I can only offer what it means to me, this being a collection of individuals, some licensed dealers, mostly licensees, some not, who are offering legal firearms, ammunition, parts and components as well as "other stuff", to interested parties.
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on August 18, 2008, 12:34:09 PM
ETA: After some research, Colorado Amendment #22 from several years ago, endorsed by John McCain, defined a gun show as 3 or more people gathered around 1 or more guns.
You, your son and your brother in the living room discussing the sale of your deer rifle was technically a gun show according to this law.
While this is only one state's interpretation of closing the "gun show loophole," it is chilling that McCain endorses this tactic. He would almost certainly endorse closing the "gun forum loophole," the "classified gun loophole," the "work bulletin board loophole" and any other way you let folks know you have a gun you want to sell.
Post by: alan2 on August 18, 2008, 01:24:48 PM
Senator Obama has what might be a peculiar understanding of The Second Amendment, this from a guy who taught constitutional law, etc., etc.
Senator McCain, respecting what could be assumed from his comments re "closing the gun show loophole", might opt to outlaw three or more people sitting around, looking at a firearm, discussing same.
Senator Clinton, perhaps still a possible candidate would fit somewhere between the above mentioned, though she might be much worse than either regarding The Second Amendment and Civil Rights.
The really troubling part of all this is that respecting the most important elective office in the country, arguments to the contrary can enter here, the three persons above mentioned are the "best" that our political system can produce. Is it only me who shudders?
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on August 18, 2008, 01:40:29 PM
Quote
The really troubling part of all this is that respecting the most important elective office in the country, arguments to the contrary can enter here, the three persons above mentioned are the "best" that our political system can produce. Is it only me who shudders?
That's because to the majority of the populations, guns just aren't the big important issues of the day.
Seems to be, that people want security nowadays. That's why the three dominant candidates we have are all Statists of one color or another.
Paul's flash-in-the-pan popularity was due to his individualist streak and reverence for individual rights. Which worked well, until he opened his mouth and calvin-coolidged his way out of the race entirely.
We're now engaged in the debate over increased domestic security (welfare, health care, social security) by proxy of government intervention, versus increased international security (terrorism, energy production) by proxy of government intervention. There's nowhere for self-sufficient responsible people to proudly cast their vote, but our country has sunk so low now that self-sufficient responsible people make up such a small voting block that the major candidates don't care about us.
Hence, not even lip service to our issues.
Post by: Tallpine on August 18, 2008, 01:41:37 PM
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 18, 2008, 02:06:01 PM
We always knew around 10% of the population are libertarians to some extent. That's approximately the amount of votes he got. His failure was mostly on account of people being obsessed with foreign policy, and also many people being afraid to vote for an 'extreme' candidate.
If Paul's people are smart, they're going to form some form of long-term organisation based on their donor lists - like Goldwater's people did - and use it to organize future fundraising, donations, and activism of various kinds.
We'll see if they're smart.
Post by: freakazoid on August 18, 2008, 02:24:24 PM
Quote
ETA: After some research, Colorado Amendment #22 from several years ago, endorsed by John McCain, defined a gun show as 3 or more people gathered around 1 or more guns.
So as long as everybody agrees to wait in line to look at one, so as not to break the 3 or more rule, we should be fine?
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 18, 2008, 06:39:51 PM
A "gun show" would be any time you show your gun to another person
If you wanna bag a classy lady, you gotta get her two tickets to the gun show.
Post by: Silver Bullet on August 18, 2008, 07:06:56 PM
Quote
the three persons above mentioned are the "best" that our political system can produce.
There were several far better candidates in the primaries. The opportunities were there, but the voters chose poorly. I don't blame the parties.
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 18, 2008, 07:09:01 PM
Quote
the three persons above mentioned are the "best" that our political system can produce.
There were several far better candidates in the primaries. The opportunities were there, but the voters chose poorly. I don't blame the parties.
Doesn't local party leadership (organizers, etc.) have a large influence on who wins the primaries?
Post by: wmenorr67 on August 18, 2008, 07:53:21 PM
Quote
ETA: After some research, Colorado Amendment #22 from several years ago, endorsed by John McCain, defined a gun show as 3 or more people gathered around 1 or more guns.
So anytime the military shoots would be considered a gun show.
Post by: Silver Bullet on August 18, 2008, 07:56:58 PM
Quote
Doesn't local party leadership (organizers, etc.) have a large influence on who wins the primaries?
Maybe; I dunno.
Ultimately, it is the voter's responsibility to be informed and make the right choice.
Post by: seeker_two on August 19, 2008, 01:08:47 AM
A "gun show" would be any time you show your gun to another person
So much for the dating scene......
Post by: Manedwolf on August 19, 2008, 04:27:16 AM
I am not sure Paul's popularity was a flash in the pan.
We always knew around 10% of the population are libertarians to some extent. That's approximately the amount of votes he got. His failure was mostly on account of people being obsessed with foreign policy, and also many people being afraid to vote for an 'extreme' candidate.
If Paul's people are smart, they're going to form some form of long-term organisation based on their donor lists - like Goldwater's people did - and use it to organize future fundraising, donations, and activism of various kinds.
We'll see if they're smart.
We always knew around 10% of the population are libertarians to some extent. That's approximately the amount of votes he got. His failure was mostly on account of people being obsessed with foreign policy, and also many people being afraid to vote for an 'extreme' candidate.
If Paul's people are smart, they're going to form some form of long-term organisation based on their donor lists - like Goldwater's people did - and use it to organize future fundraising, donations, and activism of various kinds.
We'll see if they're smart.
No, they're not smart. Sorry, but a Ron Paul shirt, worn around here, makes people move away from the person as if they're the Unabomber.
Your brand is irrecoverably tainted by the kooks.
Post by: coppertales on August 19, 2008, 09:08:11 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on August 19, 2008, 09:19:06 AM
If I was in the men's room taking care of business and someone saw my johnson, would that be a gun show?
Only if it's the 30-06 semiauto one. In which case you could also auction it for $6000.
Post by: Jamisjockey on August 19, 2008, 09:24:31 AM
Post by: seeker_two on August 19, 2008, 11:03:51 AM
If I was in the men's room taking care of business and someone saw my johnson, would that be a gun show?
Only if it's the 30-06 semiauto one. In which case you could also auction it for $6000.
What about big-bore single-shots?........
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on August 19, 2008, 11:49:40 AM
Quote
What about big-bore single-shots?........
Sure it wouldn't be more of a short action rimfire?
Post by: Ex-MA Hole on August 19, 2008, 12:01:42 PM
That said, how many of these purchased guns have been used in crimes? One? Two?
Here's something that people seem to forget....criminals don't get their guns at gun shows....they buy them on the street.
Channel 5 out of Boston did a gun special a few months ago....they had two segments, one interviewing criminals who were behind bars, and how they got their guns...every single one of the said that they went up a block, or over a block, and knew which street corner to get a gun.
Most said they could get a gun for under $200.00.
The next segment covered the gun show loophole. They went up to VT and kept offering a VT dealer money until he sold them the gun. He finally said "I know I shouldn't do this, but the money is too good". They spent (if my memory is correct) over $5,000.00 for a Glock.
So let's review....a common street crimal, which statistically is responsible for the overwhelming majority of gun crimes, can walk two blocks and spend $200, or drive his beater 4 hours up to Burlington, VT and spend over $5,000, then drive 4 hours back....
Which, my somewhat educated friends, is more of the threat?
The commentary in the paper the next morning was a bunch of people screaming about closing the loophole.
Post by: Manedwolf on August 19, 2008, 12:11:03 PM
Channel 5 out of Boston did a gun special a few months ago....they had two segments, one interviewing criminals who were behind bars, and how they got their guns...every single one of the said that they went up a block, or over a block, and knew which street corner to get a gun.
Most said they could get a gun for under $200.00.
The next segment covered the gun show loophole. They went up to VT and kept offering a VT dealer money until he sold them the gun. He finally said "I know I shouldn't do this, but the money is too good". They spent (if my memory is correct) over $5,000.00 for a Glock.
And the reporter is not in federal prison for 10 years for buying a gun illegally, why?
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 19, 2008, 03:58:34 PM
If I was in the men's room taking care of business and someone saw my johnson, would that be a gun show?
Only if it's the 30-06 semiauto one. In which case you could also auction it for $6000.
Good one.
Post by: Silver Bullet on August 19, 2008, 05:48:49 PM
Quote
No, they're not smart. Sorry, but a Ron Paul shirt, worn around here, makes people move away from the person as if they're the Unabomber.
Your brand is irrecoverably tainted by the kooks.
Your brand is irrecoverably tainted by the kooks.
Not so much. Almost every TFL/THR poll I saw (after Thompson dropped out) had Ron Paul winning big a majority percentage. Since there is a large crossover of folks from TFL and especially THR here, my guess is that the majority of folks here favor Ron Paul over McCain/Obama/Barr.
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 19, 2008, 05:52:37 PM
Quote
Sorry, but a Ron Paul shirt, worn around here, makes people move away from the person as if they're the Unabomber.
That's a claim I see you making all the time. Unfortunately, I know multiple people who live in the same geographical area as you do [New Hampshire], who, let us say, disagree with your statement.
Post by: seeker_two on August 19, 2008, 06:00:11 PM
Quote
What about big-bore single-shots?........
Sure it wouldn't be more of a short action rimfire?
Just call me "Mr. Henry .44".....
Post by: Manedwolf on August 19, 2008, 06:03:18 PM
Quote
Sorry, but a Ron Paul shirt, worn around here, makes people move away from the person as if they're the Unabomber.
That's a claim I see you making all the time. Unfortunately, I know multiple people who live in the same geographical area as you do [New Hampshire], who, let us say, disagree with your statement.
Yup. They're the people being avoided.
Or arrested. Repeatedly. Usually for refusing to have a registration sticker on their car.
But it's fighting the maaaaaan...
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 19, 2008, 06:05:44 PM
Oh, and of course, you're right. Civil disobedients are precisely the same as child rapists and violent criminals, let's all cheer as they get beat on.
Post by: MrRezister on August 22, 2008, 05:07:27 AM
Your brand is irrecoverably tainted by the kooks.
Oh, dearie me, yes! We must be wary of those offending KOOKS!
Meanwhile, the Communist Party endorsement of Obama is just another notch in his belt.
But thank GAWD we've ostracized those deadly KOOKS who are so radical as to refuse to register their cars and such. Scary, scary folk, those kooks.
Post by: Manedwolf on August 22, 2008, 05:20:15 AM
But thank GAWD we've ostracized those deadly KOOKS who are so radical as to refuse to register their cars and such. Scary, scary folk, those kooks.
The second to most recent one arrested for not being registered also was doing 60 in a 35 zone in a residential area... and then they threw themselves to the ground and made the police drag them to the cruiser. Really mature, that.
The most recent, as mentioned in the local news, had also recently been under a court order for refusing to pay child support.
These were both Free Staters and Ron Paul disciples.
Real winners.
Post by: MrRezister on August 22, 2008, 05:29:38 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on August 22, 2008, 05:31:58 AM
I'm sure they were perfectly normal before that crazy mind-altering Ron Paul made the scene. Damn him! And to think that I visited his website! I'm sure it's just a matter of time before I start burning my driver's liscence and wearing my Wookie costume to the local Anarchist's Guild meetings.
Normal, well-adjusted people have accepted the fact that he is no longer in the race.
Post by: MrRezister on August 22, 2008, 05:57:05 AM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on August 22, 2008, 02:55:17 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 22, 2008, 03:15:11 PM
I'm sure it's just a matter of time before I start burning my driver's liscence and wearing my Wookie costume to the local Anarchist's Guild meetings.
Bah! True anarchists have no truck with that meddling bunch of busybodies in the guild. Ask yourself this: If they're such anarchists, why do they keep hassling their members for fees? Fascist pigs.
Post by: MrRezister on August 22, 2008, 04:37:40 PM
you just proved his point. hows the price on those liberty dollars?
You'll kindly note that I wasn't the first to mention Paul in this thread, and I haven't said anything at all about voting for him since he dropped out. But please, continue attempting to insult me, it's cool.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on August 22, 2008, 04:40:16 PM
you didn't post that then snivel about being insulted... did ya?
Post by: MrRezister on August 22, 2008, 06:34:31 PM
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 26, 2008, 05:52:47 PM
Quote
Normal, well-adjusted people have accepted the fact that he is no longer in the race.
McRezister didn't say he'll vote for him, did he?
you just proved his point. hows the price on those liberty dollars?
A copper $1 Ron Paul dollar brings $22 on Ebay.
Post by: GigaBuist on August 26, 2008, 07:52:18 PM
Quote
If Paul's people are smart, they're going to form some form of long-term organisation based on their donor lists - like Goldwater's people did - and use it to organize future fundraising, donations, and activism of various kinds.
We'll see if they're smart.
We'll see if they're smart.
They did all that about 2 months ago. http://www.campaignforliberty.com/
Quote
The second to most recent one arrested for not being registered also was doing 60 in a 35 zone in a residential area... and then they threw themselves to the ground and made the police drag them to the cruiser. Really mature, that.
The most recent, as mentioned in the local news, had also recently been under a court order for refusing to pay child support.
These were both Free Staters and Ron Paul disciples.
Real winners.
The most recent, as mentioned in the local news, had also recently been under a court order for refusing to pay child support.
These were both Free Staters and Ron Paul disciples.
Real winners.
I'm not much of a fan of this tactic. Individual incidents don't really mean a whole lot to me. In fact, if you're able to focus on individual incidents it just shows me that there's really no major problem within a specific demographic. The Brady Bunch tries to do this with gun owners. David Codrea tries doing this with police officers.
Now, if you could cite a study that said something like 60% of Free Staters or Ron Paul supporters had criminal records, that'd be interesting. Heck, even 1%.
The Brady Campaign uses this tactic in an attempt to paint 80,000,000 gun owners as being responsible for the roughly 30,000 gun related deaths every year. That's 0.03% of gun owners killing somebody. If you break it down by firearms (270 million) that's 0.01% of guns being involved in a death.
David, on average, posts about 4 "Only Ones" stories every working day. That's about 1280 a year. In a country where there's 1 policeman for every 300 people that's 0.12% of all police.
It's an interesting tactic, and it does work to some extent, but I'm of the opinion that it only works when you're just trying to reinforce a pre-existing bias or emotional response of those listening to you.
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 27, 2008, 06:07:34 AM
Quote
They did all that about 2 months ago. http://www.campaignforliberty.com/
You don't know that yet - I'm going to wait for Sep 2 to see Ron actually announce what the CFL will be doing.
Right now it's just a list of names.
While I agree with your general argument, I'd like to point out the following:
1. Lying on the ground and forcing law enforcement to drag you is a legitimate method of civil disobedience.
2. The Free State Project does not engage in any organizing or activism whatsoever in NH. It's goal is only to bring the FSPers to NH.
Post by: Tallpine on August 27, 2008, 08:20:45 AM
Quote
That's 0.03% of gun owners killing somebody.
And half of those killed themselves
Post by: Orange_Magnum on August 29, 2008, 05:06:10 PM
Post by: GigaBuist on August 29, 2008, 05:15:44 PM
I hope McCain declares the machingun ban unconstitutional.
It wouldn't matter if he did... the POTUS can't just change laws.
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 29, 2008, 05:21:35 PM
I hope McCain declares the machingun ban unconstitutional.
It wouldn't matter if he did... the POTUS can't just change laws.No, but he can do other, equally fun stuff about gun laws.
He can repeal the import bans - he won't, but he can.
He can also take guns off the NFA by executive order.