I would permit the anti-gunner to make any laws he wants as long as it has been proven to take guns out of the hands of criminals.

ex-fucking-zactly.

Show me where anything freedomwriter has mentioned will stop the criminally insane or just the average bad guy from plying his craft and I will kiss his ass. I would gladly give up every gun I own, and a hobby I hold dear, if it could be guaranteed to get every one. Since that is a non-starter, it holds that I must use every means at my disposal to protect me and mine and possibly a few others. To do otherwise is foolish.

This whole discussion is a moot point. Any reasonable person understands that only the law abiding follow the laws, hell it is in the name for pete’s sake. Criminals by definition are breaking the law and will continue to do so no matter what freedomwriter does or wants or thinks or whatever. His reasoning that it will add another charge is an exercise in futility since if we prosecuted the existing laws even partially, prison terms would be in decades not single years. So there must first be a sea-change in the prosecutorial system of this country and then, and only then, will gun laws be of any deterrent.

Until then, I will continue to protect those I hold dear with whatever the best means available to me up to and including a 50 caliber rifle if I so choose. I will also silently protect those around me on a daily basis. Even those who would deprive me of that very right.

You might need to go wash your hands again, and again, and again.

Excuse me for not trusting you.

It’s just that every other piece of unConstitutional gun-control law, to date, has ONLY affected our “type”, a.k.a. the law abiding.

Criminals continue to find the tools they need to do whatever damage they want. And, because of following all of your past idiotic gun-control laws, now violent criminals are free to attack unarmed civilians. When victims are unarmed it matters little if criminals choose to use a handgun to kill a couple dozen or a box-cutter to kill a couple of thousand.

When laws you support hindered the victims ability to remain armed,
the blood
falls
on
you.

which states in this union demand you run a background check on somebody who wants to buy your car ?

Was wondering that myself. Freedonian is amazingly brazen in his mendacity.

Uncle–are you tolerating his stupid antics for a reason? I must admit…I’m pretty tolerant of trolls on my site too…but there’s a limit. This guy will probably argue the sky is red in a minute.

Hard to say. I know of at least one shady dealer that made at least 900 illegal sales in a seven-year period. To hear him tell it, over a quarter of his inventory was “missing”. Gun advocacy groups were so outraged at his irresponsibility that they put him on the NRA 2005 board of directors

Freedonian, you’re a wealth of misinformation

Abrams didn’t make illegal sales, he failed to keep adequate records. If the BATF had any evidence of him actually selling to people he shouldn’t have, he’d have been in handcuffs quickly.

What actually got him in trouble was poor record keeping; there are forms that you have to keep multiple copies of, and for some firearms there are multiple forms.

Every time BATF finds him missing a copy of a document he’s supposed to have four copies of but only has three…it’s added to the number. Every time he crosses a T when he should have dotted an I…it’s added to the number. To my knowledge he’s never been shown to have sold a firearm to a prohibited person. I’d like to see you demonstrate otherwise.

An anecdote: back in 2003 my Glock broke. I sent it back to Glock USA, while living in VA for a couple months. After a couple months I moved back to MD. In the meantime…Glock finished the repair on my gun and asked where to ship it. I told them to ship it to Abrams’ shop as that’s where I’d originally bought it. When my Glock arrived at his shop, he noticed that the address info for where it was shipped to Glock from was my VA address (not my MD address).

While living in VA, technically I should have gotten a VA drivers license, but didn’t.

Abrams broke my balls about it pretty damn hard. Even though I’d only lived in VA for a couple months…he pointed out that I’d broken the law by not x-ferring my drivers license. My Glock had been shipped to Glock USA from a VA gun dealer…and in the time it took to get fixed (a couple months), it was returned to a MD gun dealer (where, BTW, I had to undergo another 7 day waiting period to get my own property back).

Use your brain, shithead–if he was going to break my balls about my drivers license, what makes you think Abrams actually sold 900 firearms he shouldn’t have?

Gimme a fuckin break.

I could not sell my car to you as easily as you can sell a gun to me— Without a background check in many states.

which states in this union demand you run a background check on somebody who wants to buy your car ?

I have never defended myself with my penis. I have defended myself with my gun. Neither of them have ever taken a life. But I would have lost mine without the gun, and the other has created a lot of life, with help of course. Alas, it was unregistered and of large caliber.

You register yours first. Then we can talk compromise.

What could be more fair?

Freedonians story stills smells. Sebastians date is right on
Tennessee CCW. Passed in May 1994 and I think first issued in October 1994.

Previous to that time you could carry if the sheriff made you an aux deputy, but it wasn’t a CCW.

ADW???? Where I’m from in Tennessee, shooting at someone would be attempted murder. You didn’t even mention the breaking and entering with an illegal weapon.

Things were a little more lax in the old days, but if you beat the cr@p out of anybody in 1994, even while bouncing, you would have probably been arrested.

I would post more guys, but the group here always has the facts covered and always seem to be better informed than Me.

We are in agreement on prosecuting those who commit straw purchases and unscrupulous gun dealers.

I will take one minor issue with the Maryland dealer you refer to. He did not get to sell his inventory off as a private seller. That is against the law. Private individuals are limited as to the number of firearms they can sell from their own collections without having to transfer them through a dealer before they are considered by the BATFE as “engaging in the business of selling firearms”. General consensus in those I’ve spoken to on this issue as part of my research indicates 3-4 guns in a year is acceptable. Admittedly, the longer you go on doing such a thing, the far more likely you are going to draw scrutiny. It is not an act you can do privately forever.

I could not sell my car to you as easily as you can sell a gun to me— Without a background check in many states. What could possibly be right about that?

I am not liable under Federal law for anything you do with the car. All you need to do is fill out the title, write a bill of sale and let money exchange hands. That’s it. You don’t need to even have a driver’s license to buy the car. But if I sell a gun to a criminal, I could be held liable for that. The same would not apply in your car scenario.

It isn’t the ease; it’s the responsibility. The rules for a private firearm sale is far more restrictive than a car sale. I think you are just appalled at the idea that two people can exchange guns amongst themselves and the Government doesn’t need to be involved.

If you feel a background check is necessary for all private firearms sales, then work to see the law changed to enable that. I promise that I will fight you on that. I have never bought or sold a firearm privately that wasn’t done in accordance with the law. These were from people I knew, we had valid ID for our states and I had a Virginia CCW. The law says I was qualified and allowed to do so. Why should that bother you?

In exchange, I ask for responsibility in dispersing weapons. I ask that they be handled responsibly. I ask that all due diligence be taken to make sure they don’t end up in the wrong hands. And yes, there are some guns that I feel have no legitimate self defense purposes. I think law enforcement should be able to serve a legitimate warrant without having to worry about being outgunned.

Nothing on your list will be an improvement in that responsibility over what we have today.

I will take issue with two areas, one from your blog and one you list here.

You claim that someone should have to show training in order to get a gun. Who offers the training and who gets to decide what qualifies? Before you answer, consider this carefully: the various programs offered by the NRA are considered the primary standard in this country when it comes to training requirements for States that require it in whatever area they need whether it be for concealed carry or hunting.

I tell you that so you can be aware of where most of the training in this country for purposes of competency already comes from. Will you argue the NRA gun lobby power as a result?

But to my point, by demanding training, you are applying a “poll tax” to the exercise of a right by tying conditions to that right that result in denying that right to those who can’t afford the training. We can’t charge a fee to register a voter because it acts as a restriction and discriminates against the poor. Such actions are considered to be Unconstitutional. (I won’t wade into the arena that our existing 20,000 gun laws essentially serve the same purpose).

The second point is about outgunning police. If I own that hunting rifle, I already outgun them. And do. No pistols or “assault weapons” needed. Unless the police are wearing Class III or higher armor, my hunting round is going to tear right through it. That’s a fact. My lowly 6.5mm hunting rifle is capable of a headshot on a human sized target at 800 meters with an expert level shooter on the trigger. It is easily capable of it at 300 meters with a moderately skilled shooter. Should this hunting rifle be banned too?

My sole interest is in making the streets safe again. After this week, there have been discussions about making sure students can carry guns on campus. Yes, I’m certain it would have stopped this asshole sometiume before the body count hit 32— Just as I’m certain that there would be enough incidents where one or two are killed after a fight to more than make up for that body count.

Then we don’t need your restrictions. You acknowledge the solution was to have allowed legal CCW by students. Your follow-up on incidents elsewhere that would exceed the body count saved do not hold water. You need to study the issue of citizen CCW to understand why.

By virtue of having police not chase their tails running down everyone that has a certain caliber of weapon, probable cause would be established well before checking the list. If the victim was killed by a .38, you would start off with a list of suspects and find out who owns a .38. You wouldn’t just run around randomly checking all households in the metro area with a .38. I’m looking to speed up investigations– Not bog them down hopelessly

This presumes you have a list of suspects. What if you just have a gun? Is that enough for you? It isn’t for me. It also assumes you have a complete registry for guns AND a gun with a usable serial number. If it is filed off, you’re at square one. Without a complete registry, you can still not get anywhere. And the presence of the registry sends the message that gun owners need to be watched and are considered to be guilty of “something” without having done anything. They are guilty for simply owning guns.

Which proves my point. Maryland has more responsible gun legislation than Virginia does. Like I said— Some states are more diligent than others.

And Maryland is still not diligent enough for the gun controllers. They still want more. They will demand more even when they get it. Maryland is the 4th most violent state in the USA. Maryland denies the lawful carry of firearms by the law-abiding, has draconian restrictions on firearms transport and so on. And yet, it does not affect the gun crime here. Virginia has much more lower incidents of gun crime and is much less violent overall. There are correlations here.

Actually, I probably wouldn’t do a confiscation at all. Dealers would be compensated for existing stock at cost, and further sale would be prohibited. As you guys say— There aren’t just a shitload out there, and none have ben used for nefarious purposes so far. But that doesn’t mean that the continued proliferation wouldn’t be a threat.

You didn’t answer the question about civilian possession so I will assume they would be grandfathered in.

Since that is the case and .50s are your target, I am going to assume a .490 caliber weapon with virtually identical performance will be ok with you. If not, then you need to learn a little about ballistics and find out why your arguments are not tenable.

Finally, on the militia item, USC Title 10 Sec 311 uses the term “unorganized militia”. It is not my term. The “well regulated” phrase refers to discipline, not regulation in the layman’s sense. It is assume if I as a member of the unorganized militia were called, the commanders would instill the necessary discipline in order for us to be effective.

It is clear you are not a lawyer. Assault is way beyond “appropriate force” and it is chargeable.

I am having trouble with the 100 feet story. A man who is near the same size and weight as you fires threes shots from 100 feet away from his car with the door open. Why? Why not drive away? There is no way you could have caught him.

The idea that a CCW holder would break into a home is also far fetched. Especially in 1993/1994. From your story he would be one of the first CCW holders.

Why would someone risk their CCW? Why risk going to jail? Why risk a breaking and entering charge?

Something doesn’t add up. Until I see something that does you seem to be the teller of yarns and tall tales.

And, you mentioned, yet again, hunting. The 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing, at all, to do with hunting. Hunting is a pastime; the 2nd Amendment is all about an individual’s right to bear arms, for his/her own protection, as well as protection from other sources. Whatever souce might desire to trample rights, in conflict with the laws of the land, which are based on our original documented constitution. It bends, but it won’t break without some resistance.

(I just posted a new target, from Cho’s between-killings photo shoot…that should make for some good hole-punching…)

was a bouncer. Once he refuses to leave (And he did refuse), I was legally entitled to use appropriate force to make him leave.

And the story changes again?

So, you’ve come on the Internets and admitted to assaulting someone? No wonder you don’t trust people with guns, you can’t be trusted yourself. I think that sums it up. And, as sebastian said, TN did not pass shall issue CCW until 1994. I don’t think memphis was keen on sheriff approval before that. Another lie?

Not significantly smaller. I had, at most, 20 pounds on him. And yes. He just wasn’t that good.

That should be a short enough list to deal with.

You did not write that he swung first, that he assaulted you and you defended yourself. You wrote, “He gave me an excuse, and yes, I beat the holy hell out of him”.

Was this man significantly smaller than you? Did he strike you first?

No, but nice try. Thankfully, most people can read for themselves, so even if they disagree with me on what measures I want to take, they are at least bright enough to realize you just put up a straw man. For I have stated nothing that comes close to a total ban on firearms.

PS: If Ashley and Scarlett are up for it, I’ll post pictures.

Actually, it’s pretty specific.

Check out figure 2.4 on this page. Family is 12.8%. “Other known” is 30.1%, further broken down into wife, husband, son, daughter, etc. in the chart below. 12.9% are confirmed as strangers. The rest are “un known”, as in unsolved.

Indeed. And the world is safer without a gun in that idiot’s hands.

Remember, many people who need a gun for protection don’t go to the gym and work out with their towel-snapping buddies. You might be perfectly capable of taking care of yourself, but what about that 65-year old woman who’s husband’s died and left her alone in a flat, in a bad neighborhood? You, and your cape, might not be there when she need you.

That’s a bit of a straw man, as I have advocated absolutely nothing that would keep a gun out of her wrinkled hands unless she’s a felon.

Hard to say. I know of at least one shady dealer that made at least 900 illegal sales in a seven-year period. To hear him tell it, over a quarter of his inventory was “missing”. Gun advocacy groups were so outraged at his irresponsibility that they put him on the NRA 2005 board of directors.

This is a felony. Why aren’t we prosecuting these girlfriends, wives, friends or family?

Far as I’m concerned, we should.

I’m not disputing its difficulty. I am disputing whether it is legimate to regulate the transfer of private property between individuals. The law says I can sell a gun privately as long as I follow the rules and be responsible for the transaction. I’ve outlined the rules to you.

I could not sell my car to you as easily as you can sell a gun to me— Without a background check in many states. What could possibly be right about that?

Fine, call me paranoid.

It is paranoid. Know what happened to the dealer I talked about that had 900 violations in his store? Nothing. When the state tried to shut down his shop, the Bush DOJ filed an amicus brief on his behalf when Maryland took away his license to sell, saying he could continue as a “private seller”.

So how hard do you think the government is going to bust ass trying to round up every .38 snubnose?

Believe it or not, Freedonian, I do consider myself a member of the unorganized militia. USC Title 10 Section 311 defines me as such and if I was asked to serve in some capacity, I would do so with my own equipment and arms.

Unorganized? As in not “well regulated?

If you hope to bear witness to some shady backroom deal, I predict you will be sorely disappointed. For help, look for the rifles being carried over people’s shoulders with little flag-like signs sticking out of them. Those are the guns being sold privately. Get back to me afterwards and we can discuss your impressions then.

Very well. We’ll see.

Thanks for being honest. But your dislike and experiences should not serve as a justification to impose even more draconian restrictions than those that already exist.

I don’t know what restrictions exist that could be termed “Draconian”.

Would you stop at your “reasonable gun control”? If you got all the controls you wanted and a crime of gun violence still occurred without reason, would you throw up your hands and say “We’ve done all we can! No more laws or restrictions can change this! We have to live with the system we have.”. Because if you do, you will be a rare breed of gun controller.

I have never made, nor will I ever make, a secret of my distaste for firearms. But I genuinely have no interest in leaving Americans incapable of protecting themselves, their homes, and their family.

In exchange, I ask for responsibility in dispersing weapons. I ask that they be handled responsibly. I ask that all due diligence be taken to make sure they don’t end up in the wrong hands. And yes, there are some guns that I feel have no legitimate self defense purposes. I think law enforcement should be able to serve a legitimate warrant without having to worry about being outgunned.

But I don’t want anyone’s life to be in jeopardy if an outlaw comes into their homes. Do what you’ve got to do to protect your family. While it’s certainly true that if I could make all guns go away with the wave of my hand, I would do it in a heartbeat— But I know very well that I cannot.

I also have a strong distaste for hunting, but I do not condemn those who enjoy it, nor do I want to take their rifles.

My sole interest is in making the streets safe again. After this week, there have been discussions about making sure students can carry guns on campus. Yes, I’m certain it would have stopped this asshole sometiume before the body count hit 32— Just as I’m certain that there would be enough incidents where one or two are killed after a fight to more than make up for that body count.

It still does not remove the issue of probable cause.

By virtue of having police not chase their tails running down everyone that has a certain caliber of weapon, probable cause would be established well before checking the list. If the victim was killed by a .38, you would start off with a list of suspects and find out who owns a .38. You wouldn’t just run around randomly checking all households in the metro area with a .38. I’m looking to speed up investigations– Not bog them down hopelessly.

Here in Maryland, only non-regulated long guns can be transferred privately. Handguns and “assault weapons” require a background check. Virginia permits private sales of all types of arms.

Which proves my point. Maryland has more responsible gun legislation than Virginia does. Like I said— Some states are more diligent than others.

Would you be honest and fair in that process or would you surround yourself with the people who are giving you the information you are using at the moment?

I’m interested in being fair. I don’t think I’ve suggested anything unreasonable. But if someone I know and trust that has more firearms expertise than me (And I’ve never said it was hard to find someone with more firearms expertise than me), I’m willing to listen.

I will not listen to complete abolitionists, nor will I listen to the “I should be allowed to have a Howitzer in a machine gun nest in my front yard” crowd either. I’m interested in solving problems and preventing unnecessary slaughter.

If you ban .50 caliber firearms (all types), for example, and require them to be turned in since they have no legitimate purpose, how do you propose to get them? Door to door confiscations?

Actually, I probably wouldn’t do a confiscation at all. Dealers would be compensated for existing stock at cost, and further sale would be prohibited. As you guys say— There aren’t just a shitload out there, and none have ben used for nefarious purposes so far. But that doesn’t mean that the continued proliferation wouldn’t be a threat.

You mean like insisting that I was trying to ban all weapons?

No, I asked at which point you were lying based on the premise that you first stated an end and then a means. Not an unreasonable conclusion based on the rest of your comments.

About 75% of murderers already have adult criminal records.

Oh, and I have to admit I find it odd that the dude had a CCW when TN didn’t pass shall-issue until 1994, which isn’t quite 14 years ago. But maybe TN was like Delaware and Iowa, and did generally issue. I’ll leave it to the folks here who live there to comment on that.