Ammo For Sale

« « Kids and guns | Home | For Sale » »

In NY

Trendy designer makes bullet proof clothes.

I love the last line:

Unlike Southern states that let anybody buy firearms at gun shows – thousands of which end up in New York City – “We do background checks,” Greer said.

Yes, because it’s not like background checks are federal law or anything. Of course, we in the southern states aren’t going out buying bullet proof clothes either.

11 Responses to “In NY”

  1. comatus Says:

    “…the southern states arenít going out buying bullet proof clothes either.” Not at them durn Nieuw York prices, anyhow.

    Man, you could spend the rest of the day unpacking the BS in that article. Two things leapt out. The “journalist” let the designer shoot him. When you demonstrate your product, isn’t it supposed to go the other way around? And, the high level protection will stop a “fusillade” from an Uzi. Hollywood ballistics, right there. I’ll take a medium, then.

    As a wise guy once said, we are blessed to have opponents such as these.

  2. Weer'd Beard Says:

    Even if it was true (and the ATF trace data shows it isn’t) If criminals are constantly migrating south to buy guns and return them to Marxist Cities, its rather telling that they appear to be on their best behavior down south, and suddenly turn murderous once they are in the victim disarmament zone.

    Sorry guys, but even if it were TRUE it makes you look HORRIBLE.

  3. John Smith. Says:

    I love the incongruity of the article. It states the clothes designer started making the cloths for wealthy drug dealers in Columbia. Then at the end condemns southern states for lack of background checks…. Why did they not condemn the designer/facilitator who knowingly sold to drug dealers and knew the purpose of the clothing’s use????

  4. Jake Says:

    @ Weer’d: You just made the Quote of the Day.

  5. Jack Says:

    Note that their whine underscores the failure of their gun control. “Sure the criminals ignore the laws we have; we just need to make things double secret illegal!”

    Heaven forbid they ask why the criminals aren’t staying where the weapons are “freeer” or what happens when you make it deny arms to only the law abiding.

    It’s not wise to take anti-vitimization advice from the guild of victims.

  6. Bubblehead Les Says:

    But do they make a bulletproof Kilt?

  7. Chas Says:

    “Background checks” are a joke. Ask a “straw purchaser” how effective they are. More “security theater”. Life in “Obamaland” is becoming a “joke”. I’m ready to just put “everything” in “sneer quotes”.

  8. kay.ess. Says:

    Did I misread or did you say that background checks are federal law? I think that the instance the article was referring to was that of a private transfer. The Gubment hasn’t stuck their nose in there yet, have they?

  9. Diomed Says:

    “The Gubment hasnít stuck their nose in there yet, have they?”

    If one of the parties to the private sale isn’t a resident of the state where the sale is happening, then yes, the feds have “stuck their nose in” already. If someone is coming from (for example) New York to any other state to buy a handgun, from a FFL or not, that’s a federal crime. They would have to have the gun sent to a licensed dealer in NY in order to be legal.

    This part of the law was originally designed to keep uppity negroes from travelling north, buying guns, and coming back down south to use them. Times change, apparently.

  10. Ian Argent Says:

    Side note: technically one can obtain a handgun from an out of state FFL, and the felony doesn’t occur until one returns home with the handgun, yes?

  11. Diomed Says:

    Well, the person doing the receiving would either violate 922(a)(6) – lying on the 4473 – or the dealer would knowingly violate 922(b)(3) – providing a firearm other than a rifle or shotgun to someone who does not reside in the dealer’s state – so either the buyer racks up two felonies or the dealer scores one and the buyer one.