Obama Proposes No New Gun Control, But Pretends To
Having just pointed out that Obama didn’t seem to propose new gun control legislation after Aurora, it’s incumbent on me to point that, well, he’s still not. But he’s trying to sound like he is:
Acknowledging sensitivity of the issue, he said Wednesday he believed that even gun owners would agree “that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of children.”
Very clever, Mr. President. You just made it sound like a situation that a) isn’t happening and b) will never happen is somehow a live issue. That’s like the NRA saying: “even gun control advocates would agree that guns should not be confiscated wholesale from every U.S. citizen, including members of the police and military.” Uh, yeah, we’d agree with that — but so what? Do we have laws allowing children to walk around with AK-47s that I’m unaware of somehow?
Maybe he’s talking about 24-year-old adults with AR-15s, like James Holmes. If so, that’s what he should say.
So what is Obama proposing, specifically?
He offered no specific proposals but referred to background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, fugitives and the mentally unbalanced. . Previous efforts to do the same have been thwarted by political opposition and the reluctance of elected officials who endorse the idea to take on the National Rifle Assn., among the nation’s most potent lobbying forces.
(That’s their extra period, by the way.)
So if I understand the L.A. Times, there are currently no “background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, fugitives and the mentally unbalanced” because “efforts to do the same have been thwarted” by the NRA and other gun nuts. I could have sworn we had such background checks already (18 U.S.C. 922(g)) but I’m not an expert on the matter and welcome comment from such experts. Is Obama talking about “gun show loopholes” even though Holmes didn’t buy his guns at a gun show?
How about a little clarity on this, L.A. Times? Maybe Obama isn’t specific because there is no law he could propose that would both a) prevent shootings like this and b) be popular and constitutional.
A country where adults can order AR-15s and there are background checks is different from a country with no background checks where children have “AK-47s.” Obama seems to be implying that we live in the latter country, and the L.A. Times is letting him get away with it.
Category error, as grave as ‘we didn’t do this on our own’
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/07/25/Obama-Thinks-US-Soldiers-Use-AK-47s
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/26/2012 @ 7:52 amWhen you combine someone as dishonest as Obama with something as dishonest as the Los Angeles Times, you get this combination of incoherent misrepresentations.
Indeed, all sales by firearms dealers are done with background checks. Federal law requires no background check for transactions between individuals neither of whom is a licensed dealer.
Neither the NRA nor anyone else “thwarted” that.
The “gun show loophole” is an intentional misrepresentation. There is nothing special about gun shows, there is no exception for sales at a “gun show”, every transaction there follows the same laws.
Some states require transactions between individuals to go through dealers w/ background checks – there is no evidence that this changes anything with respect to criminal access to firearms.
Colorado has a silly law that requires that individuals who conduct a transaction at a gun show obtain a background check for the buyer.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 7:54 amI used to work in a pawn shop.. We had to background check everyone that left with a gun (no matter if they bought it from us or it was their gun they had pawned and were picking it back up). Don’t tell me this was not a law š
(notice I put an extra period in there to represent!)
Lord Nazh (821ae1) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:02 amChildren should not have access to AK-47s. No law will remedy illegal activity since such access will never be passed. Thus there is this dilemma that gun control laws doesn’t stop the crime. They are crimes because they are illegal.
MyOpinion (ea4bfa) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:06 amMyOpinion, if by AK47s, you mean semi-auto rifles designed by Kalashnikov, I know a lot of “children” who have “access” to such and are perfectly safe.
General pronouncements like that are just silly.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:08 amSPQR: Perfectly safe to who? Previously, I was making a logical argument. The laws are such that children cannot purchase them.
You’re making a general pronoucement about gun safety with regard to children that just seems silly.
MyOpinion (ea4bfa) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:14 amHow about tweaking the involuntary commitment restrictions?
Of course, the LAT would never support that! They were the ones that dedicated a Sunday magazine cover story to some idiot therapist who posits that an insane person is just a victim of capitalist oppression. He is the sane one in an insane society.
Right in the LAT’s wheelhouse.
Patricia (e1d89d) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:14 amWell, who can disagree with that? I would not let my 10-year old have an AK-47. They are illegal, hard to find, not all that accurate, and the cartridge still has a lot of kick. A suppressed MP5, I think.
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:14 amMyOpinion, safe entirely. It is your comment that is silly. “Access” does not mean purchase.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:16 amnk, I like the cut of your jib.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:16 amSPQR: “Access” does not mean trained either.
MyOpinion (ea4bfa) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:19 amMyOpinion, 14 year old boy has “access” to firearm … thankfully.
You don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:21 amWhy do you haters want children going into schools with loaded AK47’s?!
JD (b31c02) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:21 amJD, we don’t. nk is right, an MP5 would be a better choice.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:23 amPresident Obama thinks all bitter, clingy, gun-supporting Americans are like children who need guidance. Thus, he probably believes what he said.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:23 amSPQR: Neither do you. The 14 year boy had a gun, not an AK-47 (“designed by Kalashnikov”). You don’t know if he was trained or whether you care if he was trained.
MyOpinion (ea4bfa) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:24 amMyOpinion, to the contrary, I do know what I’m talking about. I teach hunter safety. I personally have trained thousands of “children” to handle firearms. And I’ve trained, range officer’d and competed with many “children” in practical pistol and multi-gun competitions.
Your “Opinion” is what is silly.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:27 amI made a comment in another thread about a couple of commenters who only knew guns from TV and the movies. The sad thing is that movie and TV fiction portrays guns more truthfully and accurately than the media.
BTW, was the AK-47 the first generation with the failed stamped receiver, or the second generation with the machined receiver?
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:27 amnk, the other way ’round. The AK47 had the machined receiver, the AKM was the next version with the stamped receiver. Far more AKM’s than AK47’s were built.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:29 amPresident Obama thinks all bitter, clingy, gun-supporting Americans are like children who need guidance
DRJ – not just any old guidance. Obama’s guidance.
JD (b31c02) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:32 am“I personally have trained thousands of āchildrenā ”
Seriously, this is quite unbelievable.
MyOpinion (ea4bfa) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:46 amTeh Doublespeaker-in-Chief strikes again!
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:51 amMyOpinion, if you think SPQR should have said “hundreds” instead of “thousands,” you might be right.
If you think that changes the point he was making, you might be wrong.
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:55 amMyOpinion, I’ve taught hunter education for nearly two decades. Your lack of belief is meaningless.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:57 amC’mon guys. We just need to face the fact that if we had more strict laws like Norway, there would never be any massacres.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:00 amTrick or treat- said in a James Cagney gangster voice is vundebar!
pdbuttons (1ad69e) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:01 amI’d like to teach the children of some world to sing
but no matter how much sweet candy offered-
they will not get ‘snatch’ close to my van
{I denounce myself]
“If you think that changes the point he was making, you might be wrong”
With regard to access in general with children, I am quite right. With regard to access to trained children, to each parent’s discretion and authority. This trainer can never vouch for another’s child’s character.
BTW: I am trained myself. I seldom seen kids at the range.
MyOpinion (ea4bfa) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:02 amI think it’s frikken hilarious that all my pot smoking friends think that new laws will keep people from getting guns. Because laws obviously stop them from obtaining the things they want.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:05 amKids seldom go hunting with their dads?
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:05 amMyOpinion, your claim was that “Children should not have access to AK-47s.” Not “untrained children”.
“Children” have access to firearms every day in this country and the actual rate of accidents and misuse is quite low.
But silly panty-wetting crap like yours and the Presidents sounds good to the uninformed and unthinking.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:06 amUntrained children just remind me of
pdbuttons (1ad69e) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:11 amsome lord of the flies runaround willy-nilly
poopin and giggling but they would certainly grow up fast if you’d strap some-my favorite 2 words-astronaut diapers- on them and say-“Listen kid-I’m gonna give u a what’s up- in space-no one can hear you scream”
Obama is an idiot when it comes to the Constitution and rights.
If you want gun misinformation, ask a Democrat.
I used to live in Anaheim. I would have loved to have an AK or an AR, especially during the “Rodney King” riots. Sidebar: When protesters bring rocks to the protest, they are going to use them. When people have a CCW, they generally don’t use them except as a last resort.
I propose Liberal control and Border control before gun con(fiscation)trol.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:15 amSPQR: “āChildren should not have access to AK-47s.ā
Yes, this is a general statement that I stand by. I repeated the general statement again SEVERAL TIMES over and over again.
“āChildrenā have access to firearms every day in this country and the actual rate of accidents and misuse is quite low.”
How do you know? Whenever I visit friends with their arms lockers and some have 2 or 3 large safes with a vast collection, their children don’t have access to them. They only have access if they parents allow them and never unsupervised. Few bring them to the shooting range. Most of their kids are not trained. I would say a low percentage train their kids. They don’t even train their wives.
MyOpinion (ea4bfa) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:22 amPCD wrote:
Sounds good, but I am concerned with how one might write an effective liberal control law. After all, conservatives are (frequently) liberals who’ve grown up — or been mugged — so it’s clear that there are some liberals who can be saved, and I have to wonder how we can construct a good liberal control law which would only control the irredeemable liberals, the ones whom no amount of maturity, persuasion or muggings can salvage.
The concerned Dana (3e4784) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:26 amMyOpinion, I know that the rate of accidents and misuse is low because I look at the actual statistics.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:27 am32- what is the update on Obama and your prediction that he was going to prison? Has he been arrested yet? I haven’t had a chance to catch up on my fox news.
tye (92e6f9) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:31 amSounds good, but I am concerned with how one might write an effective liberal control law.
— Invite them to an Obama rally and then tell them they can’t leave the stadium until they obtain a photo ID and a job.
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:38 amTrollbot, this thread is about the hypocrisy of how Obama is “concerned” about gun possession, but is not going to lift a finger to do anything about it.
Either talk about that or bugger off.
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:42 amAnyone with more knowledge than I interested in comparing with the situation in Israel? I heard “Yoni” on Hewett the other night and it sounded like most grandma’s could handle a firearm if the need arose.
Of course, I think the general public there is much more motivated to not only do the training but pay attention and become competent.
But I mainly know what little I know from what I hear and read, though I did once shoot something referred to as an “AK-44”.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:45 amPatterico, I’m sure you’re taking the President out of context. I don’t know how you’re doing it, but I’m pretty sure you are.
Joe Miller (00407a) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:31 amJoe Miller, was that a sarcastic reference to the “You didn’t build that” speech?
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:33 amIcy wrote:
Won’t work; they need that photo ID to get into the Obama rally in the first place.
The Dana who spotted the problem (3e4784) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:34 amMD in Philly wrote:
Oh, that’s a legitmate weapon. That’s when you take an AK-47 configured for rock’n’roll, and convert it’s full auto setting down to the three-round bursts used by modern M-16s. 47-3=44. š
Always glad to be of assistance.
The NRA Dana (3e4784) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:38 amComment by Joe Miller ā 7/26/2012 @ 10:31 am
Patterico, Iām sure youāre taking the President out of context. I donāt know how youāre doing it, but Iām pretty sure you are.
No, he’s absolutely right. He hot the nail on the head and everything.
Obama Proposes No New Gun Control, But Pretends To
Sammy Finkelman (f560b6) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:42 amMD in Philly, you’ll enjoy this.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:44 amSPQR and MyOpinion,
The fact is, we aren’t even talking about children with AK’s. This clown is in his 20’s. I know Obama considers anyone under 26 a child (who can stay on daddy’s insurance until then), but in the real world, he’s an adult.
So we should stop talking about it like a kid is walking into a gun store and picking out his new assault rifle with his paper boy money.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:50 amPresident Obama thinks all
bitter, clingy, gun-supportingAmericans are like childrenwhoand need guidance.Thus, he probably believes what he said at the moment he said it.
Comment by DRJ ā 7/26/2012 @ 8:23 am
FTFY!
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:57 amBTW: I am trained myself. I seldom seen kids at the range.
I work is done?
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 10:59 amIsn’t it strange that school massacres never occur in Israel, at least not since they required the staff to be proficient in the use of pistols and selective-fire weapons, and to carry them, after a series of terrorist incidents back in the Early-’50’s.
Someone had the basic intelligence there and then to realize that “Gun Free Zones” don’t work – a level of intelligence that seems to have escaped our Intelligentsia.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 11:09 amSPQR–
Sarcastic? Me? Surely not.
Joe Miller (00407a) — 7/26/2012 @ 11:12 amhttp://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob81.html
is a great article from Massad Ayoob from 2003 about the state of firearms in Israel and what it teaches.
luagha (5cbe06) — 7/26/2012 @ 11:28 amWhat a leader! Another vote: “present.”
AZ Bob (5daf3f) — 7/26/2012 @ 11:46 amWonāt work; they need that photo ID to get into the Obama rally in the first place.
— Funny, I thought all you needed to gain entrance for an Obama event was your wife’s dowry š
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 11:54 amIcy, stop being such a sexist.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 11:55 amWhole lotta straw men marching around here today.
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:02 pmGhost, its the essence of gun control advocates to distract, introduce non sequiturs and outright lie. Nick Kristof’ ridiculous column in NYT is an example. At one point he uses a line about people accepting restrictions on dog poop why not on guns. Only a New York Times reader would be so utterly ignorant as to believe dog droppings are more regulated than firearms. Its the kind of off the cuff lie we get from them (e.g. Jason Alexander tweet falsely claiming 100,000 gun deaths annually in US).
SPQR (cbdc5c) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:07 pmAD, guess how much credence I give “MyOpinion”s odd claims.
SPQR (cbdc5c) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:08 pmSpqr,
Ghost (6f9de7) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:15 pmAin’t that the truth. Like how 90% of guns used by Mexican drug cartels originate in American gun stores. And, if it isn’t true yet, they’ll make it true. I wouldn’t put it past them to regulate what type of bag you used to clean up dog poop and where and when to dispose of it just to make it true. If 300 dead Mexicans are worth it…
(ahem) Someone over the age of 18 can purchase a semi auto rifle, and there is one that is often miscalled “AK-47”.
Drug gangs in LA used to (don’t know if they still do) arm drug runners with true AK-47s (machine guns), which the drug runners would discard for the trip back south. Probably some of those still down along the southern border, and no telling who is going to find one.
A true AK-47 (machine gun) that has legal papers is very difficult to find, and very expensive. Few owners are going to risk letting just any minor mess with one. They cost to darn much.
Phillep Harding (1b8b26) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:17 pmIcy, stop being such a sexist.
Comment by AD-RtR/OS! ā 7/26/2012 @ 11:55 am
— So sorry. Here, let me try again:
ā Funny, I thought all you needed to gain entrance for an Obama event was to sign over your and your life-partner’s wedding registry.
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:23 pmI’ve been told that in your avg 3rd-world arms bazaar, an AK goes for about $100US (or less, depending on condition), an M16, FAL, G-3, or Galil about $50US more.
That same gun, with NFA-34 paperwork, in the U.S., is $25K+++.
What the Left does not know about arms is boundless.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:29 pmComment by Icy ā 7/26/2012 @ 12:23 pm
Very good, Icy.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:30 pmIn the words of Don Rickels:
You may have a cookie!
“MyOpinion”…
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:32 pmI’m imposing a huge barrier of self-restraint upon myself – but, the day’s not over.
So, what do we think of the gun show loopholes – since we’re on the topic of gun control. Seems like that might be something liberals and conservatives could get behind, right? Why is there a gun show loophole, again?
I love guns, by the way. Think they’re great, and the more I see of government the more I understand (some) conservative arguments about the 2nd Amendment. Planning on buying one to take camping when I can spare a few hundred bucks (my uncle recommends a five-shot .38 with a shrouded hammer as a starter, if anyone has thoughts on that).
But regardless, the gun show loophole seems… ill-considered.
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:35 pmChildren should not have access to AK-47, or AK-50 or AK-54?
Richard Aubrey (0aac79) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:38 pmIt’s taking the business away from Stoner, Remington, Winchester, and a number of other domestic producers.
Buy American!
What, in your mind, is the gun show loophole?
Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:49 pmChuck,
Where private individuals (i.e. folks not engaged in the regular business of selling guns) can go to a gun show and sell their guns to other parties without being required to run a background check on those parties.
Is that a misguided impression?
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:54 pmLeviticus, there is no such thing as a “gun show loophole”. Its a fabrication.
Federal law requires all interstate transfers of firearms to go through FFL’s (Federal Firearms Licensees – ie., licensed gun dealers). Within a state, residents of the same state can transfer firearms between themselves without restriction under Federal law (a few states do restrict to varying degrees).
So if two individuals are neighbors, and one admires the other’s nice Glock, and gives him $400 for it – no violation of Federal law. If two individuals, residing in the same state, find each other via an online forum, admire the Glock, and pays $400 for it – no violation of Federal law. But if those same individuals find each other in a parking lot of a gun show – OHMYGOD!
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:57 pmAddendum to my comment above, Federal law requires people who deal guns regularly for their livelihood ( and yes, there is some vagueness in the ATF regulation ) to be licensed as FFL’s.
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 12:59 pmLeviticus:
As I just replied in a response to an inquiry from PP on this matter, there is (really) no gun-show loophole, unless you’re talking about a Private-Party Sale between two adults not involving an FFL (Federal Firearms Licensee – a Gun Dealer).
In any state that does not regulate PP sales, that sale could be made anywhere:
After Bingo at the American Legion Hall;
At a Church Social;
Anywhere.
All sales involving an FFL must have a background check conducted.
In most states that is done by using the FBI maintained NICS (National InstaCheck System) which has access to National data-bases on criminal, mental-health, and restraining-order data.
You get an answer back, in most cases, in no more than 30-minutes.
In states that impose a waiting period, such as CA (10-days, but by rule 240-hours, as the transfer can not be made until that time has elapsed), their will/can be a system run by that state, especially when as in CA, the handgun will be registered to the buyer. CA also imposes a requirement that all PP sales be conducted through an FFL, with the info on both the buyer and seller entered into the system. If the buyer is declined, then they run the seller to make sure that he is OK too. If they both are declined, the firearm is surrendered to LE by the FFL, who is mandated to hold the weapon for the 10-day (CA) waiting period.
The next time you hear someone ranting about the Gun Show Loophole, you can rest assured that they are most likely on Frank Lautenberg’s mailing list, as this is one of his many dementia’s.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:07 pmaddendum….
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:10 pmI should have, in the above comment, included the following after the first mention of a Private-Party Sale: (PP); since I used that abbreviation subsequently.
I was not, at that subsequent use, referring to our host.
My Bad!
Leviticus, what exactly is the gun show loophole?
And, no, a five-shot .38 with a shrouded hammer is not an ideal starter gun (although loaded with blanks it could be a starter’s gun). You should start with a .22LR, with full size grips and about a four inch barrel, whether revolver or automatic. If nothing else, you will avoid a flinch and save a ton of money practicing (.22 is about 1/4th the price of .38s). And for camping/plinking it’s the drug of choice unless you’re in grizzly country. A .38 snubbie, shrouded hammer or not, is really kind of specialized, last-ditch defense. I had one for many years, in the heavier steel frame. I liked it because it fit into my back pocket. Cops like them as backups or off-duty weapons, up here. They usually carry them in inside the waistband holsters, partly or entirely under a shirt, wherefore the shrouded hammer.
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:14 pmI type slow. AD nailed it.
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:18 pmIn Colorado, there is a specific law on gun shows requiring all sales to be with a background check. Some excerpts from the statute CRS 12-26/1-101 et seq:
So say my private gun club with a membership of over 1,000 has a yearly fun shoot and BBQ for all the members at the range, and at least three members admire each others’ rifles. One of the Are there more than three people there with firearms? Yep. Were there are least 25 firearms? Are you kidding? Hell yes. Are they “offering” for sale? Possibly. So if two of them agree to a swap, or buy one of the rifles from each other – bang – misdemeanor.
So my club had to put in a rule that there was to be no firearm sales at the range.
The law is just silly crap.
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:20 pmLeviticus, if you want a nice centerfire handgun, then a medium frame 4 inch barreled revolver by Smith & Wesson, Ruger, etc. is good. As nk mentions a snubnosed lightweight .38 is a bit light and not fun to shoot.
But a nice .22 rimfire is the best “first” gun. Semi-auto or revolver as you prefer. Smith & Wesson, Ruger, Walther, and a host of other brands.
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:22 pmSPQR, too. It’s really shorthand for no private party sales.
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:24 pmA nice step-up from a .22 in a revolver is the Ruger GP100 in .327Federal. A 7-shooter that is easy to control, and with the same pop as the .38Special.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:29 pmOf course, all of this talk about further restrictions on the private ownership of arms is just “pissing into the wind” when Bloomie’s cops go on strike.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:31 pm16- my opinion: this is what they do. They make up jobs that they either held or once held so as to represent expertise. When that doesn’t work they use anecdotes. They won’t accept your expertise or anecdotes. When none of the above work they insult you or use their “liberal” sock puppet leviticus to invariably agree with them.
tye (92e6f9) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:40 pmOh, look at the cute little troll!
Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:41 pmA proven liar calls me a liar. How droll.
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 1:44 pmAnd for camping/plinking itās the drug of choice unless youāre in grizzly country.
Comment by nk ā 7/26/2012 @ 1:14 pm
My boys and some friends will be hiking in some national forest (not park) in Montana in a month. They do plan to be “loaded for bear” in case of emergency. Not sure what they will get, but as the older is police and has trained with shotgun, rifle, and several handguns, I think they’ll have a clue (SPQR- probably a “Daisy AK-47” ;-))
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:00 pmMD in Philly, bears are very shy creatures, and really work hard to avoid confrontations with people. As a result, injuries from bears are very rare – especially in the lower 48 – despite a growing black bear population. But they are very powerful creatures and so it can be a good idea to have a backup.
We tell a joke in HE class:
In bear country, it is often recommended that one carry bear pepper spray and put bells in ones boot laces to warn a bear of your approach. It can be fun when outdoors to learn how to track animals. Both through their tracks and the scat they leave (scat — droppings). Its easy to tell the difference between black bear scat and grizzly bear scat. Grizzly bear scat smells of pepper spray and has bells in it.
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:08 pm16- my opinion: this is what they do. They make up jobs that they either held or once held so as to represent expertise. When that doesnāt work they use anecdotes. They wonāt accept your expertise or anecdotes. When none of the above work they insult you or use their āliberalā sock puppet leviticus to invariably agree with them.
Comment by tye ā 7/26/2012 @ 1:40 pm
— Oy, that’s confusing! For a moment there I actually thought the troll was voicing an original opinion. BUT it was more of the same: Bloviating about everything except the subject of the thread.
Icy (f7bae5) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:08 pmComment by SPQR ā 7/26/2012 @ 2:08 pm
I always heard the way to tell the difference between a grizzly and a black bear was to climb a tree; if it follows you up, it’s a black bear, if it knocks the tree over, it’s a grizzly.
Certainly bear-grizzly attacks are rare, but nearly 100% are fatal, and no one wants to be part of the 100% if it can be avoided.
Comment by luagha ā 7/26/2012 @ 11:28 am
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:14 pmfrom the link:
Israel began the program of armed citizen guards in the schools after the Maalot massacre in the 1970s, when a large number of children were slain in a terrorist incident. The volunteer parents work in plain clothes, armed with concealed semi-automatic pistols, and are trained by Israel’s home guard. It is significant that in the more than a quarter century between Maalot and the incident mentioned above when the citizen guards shot down the terrorist in the school in 2002, not a single child was murdered in an Israeli school!
The reason is that Israel wisely publicized the fact that the civilian volunteer guards, indistinguishable from the regular teaching and administrative staff, would be in place. It served as a tremendously effective deterrent. No Moslem fanatic who wants to go to Allah as a successful warrior who has slain many infidels visualizes himself making the trip after having been shot down by some geriatric with a gun before completing his mission.
I always heard that the reason to carry a .22 in b’ar country when in a group is not to kill the bear, but to slow-up your companion(s).
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:21 pmSadly, you are wrong. Obama just signed the UN small arms treaty thus destroying our second amendment rights, that the world could supercede our constitution. Treasonous, and yet another treasonous act on a long list.
Kendra (9a4b22) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:21 pmI know its only Razzie but he has Willard on top of Urkel outside the margin.
Dog is rat food with the blood still to be let.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:22 pmKendra, a treaty can’t affect our rights. And I suspect he won’t even bother to submit it to the Senate for ratification.
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:23 pmGood news, Hizb’allah has just offered Baby Assad asylum.
Target rich environment just sweetened a bit more.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:25 pmWhen Barky finally gets serious he’ll ban rope.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:28 pmKendra, to paraphrase Kaiser Wilhelm II (or was it Bismark?):
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:29 pmMr. Obama has his treaty, and I’m sure it was printed on a very nice piece of paper – for that is all it is.
even here in the People’s Republic of California where hating firearms is the state religion, there are no restriction on private party transfer’s of Curio & Relic long guns.
all you need is a bill of sale between two consenting adults.
anything else, you need to do a DROS transfer through an FFL, even at a gun show.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:30 pmgary, what country does Hizb’allah offer this asylum in?
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:30 pmIsn’t it neat that Garand’s are C&R?
U.S. Rifle M1, .30caliber, gas-operated, semi-automatic, 8-rd enbloc clip magazine, effective range to 600+meters.
What’s not to like?
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:34 pmLebanon, client state of Syria, client state of Iran.
We’re going for a three fer. The Stennis is returning to the Persian gulf leaving five carrier groups in theatre.
I like butter and salt on my popcorn.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:40 pmLebanon, client state of Syria, client state of Iran.
We’re going for a three fer. The Stennis is returning to the Persian gulf leaving five carrier groups in theatre.
I like butter and salt on my popcorn.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:40 pmDrat, apologies for the double, all.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:41 pmYes, one must pass a background check everytime you buy a gun. In Texas if you are a Concealed Carry licensee, that is considered a “pre-check” and you can buy immediately. Yes, this applies at gun shows. What the “gun-show-loophole” means is PRIVATE sales, me to you , it has nothing to do with gun shows.
Susan Harms (1b8469) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:45 pmThe only thing they need the Stennis and her sisters for is to fly high-cover for the IAF.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 2:47 pmThe Bekaa Valley will not be a nice place to visit the rest of this year.
87- you should look up the definition of “treason”. It doesn’t mean what you apparently think it does. š
tye (92e6f9) — 7/26/2012 @ 3:11 pmSusan Harms, you are mixing Federal and state law up a bit. Background checks are only required by Federal law when the firearm is transfered by a dealer ie., an FFL. Some states require background checks for private sales.
SPQR (32a911) — 7/26/2012 @ 3:13 pm“AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of children.ā
Gee… last time I checked, AK-47s weren’t a part of our military’s arsenal. Perhaps 0bama was speaking of another country… one he feels more kinship with?
Colonel Haiku (2a5679) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:11 pmsame ol’ tyena… same clown squeezin’s…
Colonel Haiku (2a5679) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:12 pmThey do seem to have a lot of Children’s Armies, don’t they Col., in the area of our President’s father’s ancestral home?
I denounce my Racism!
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:21 pmAD… 0bama has unexpectedly grown more trite and banal… on any given day, he’s either pushing the envelope or screwing the pooch.
The first Tuesday in November can’t come soon enough for me.
Colonel Haiku (2a5679) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:25 pm“So if two individuals are neighbors, and one admires the otherās nice Glock, and gives him $400 for it ā no violation of Federal law. If two individuals, residing in the same state, find each other via an online forum, admire the Glock, and pays $400 for it ā no violation of Federal law. But if those same individuals find each other in a parking lot of a gun show ā OHMYGOD!”
– SPQR
It makes a difference, doesn’t it? Presumably, you know the neighbor to whom you’re selling your Glock. He’s been over to your place enough times to come to admire it, he seems like a nice guy, you know how he talks to his wife and kids, etc. He’s not a complete stranger. People go to gun shows expressly to avoid the background checks that go with buying guns from FFL. They’re selling to (and buying from) complete strangers. In the gun-show setting, you lose the valuable safeguard of interpersonal familiarity.
As AD pinpoints in #70, I am talking about “a Private-Party Sale between two adults not involving an FFL (Federal Firearms Licensee ā a Gun Dealer).” Is it not worrisome that there are ways for people to buy guns of all sorts without any kind of background check?
Thanks to everyone for the starter gun advice, by the way. The suggestions for the .22 are well taken (for the purposes of learning the ropes with an accurate, economical gun and whatnot), but if my uncle meant (and I intend) for the thing to serve as a personal defense tool, wouldn’t it be better to have something with a little more stopping power than a .22?
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:33 pmOne must aim for the head when using a .22. The slug tends to bounce around, which is fatal for all but leftwingers. But since most criminals are leftwing reprobates, perhaps a larger bore is in order.
Colonel Haiku (2a5679) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:37 pm“…referred to background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, fugitives and the mentally unbalanced. .”
In other words if you want to own a gun then you’re “mentally unbalanced.”
Not Anonymous (53144e) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:39 pmLeviticus, you can’t stop individuals from selling guns to each other. In California, which tries to, I’m constantly hearing of ordinary, lawabiding citizens doing so without even realizing its a violation of state law. US firearms law is already extraordinarily complex and full of irrational traps for ordinary citizens.
SPQR (6c3cf5) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:40 pmAs for gun advice, for the casual shooter, Leviticus, check out a 4 inch barreled revolver in. 38 special or. 357 Magnum (which can shoot. 38 spcl as well)
SPQR (6c3cf5) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:43 pm107-
Even an FFL who “knows” his customer (they could be members of the same “social” club, and neighbors, or even related, must jump through a number of hoops in ascertaining the identity of his customer in case his books get audited by the ATF.
“Trust Me” just doesn’t work with those folks.
But, your beef is with the States, as they are the ones who can take jurisdiction over PP sales what with their inherent “police power”.
Remember, the FFL regimen is a creation of the Gun Control Act of 1968 – there was no Federal involvement (absent machineguns/etc under NFA-34) prior to that act. There was not even a requirement that all firearms have serial numbers.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:44 pmOops…should be a “closed parens” not a “comma” following “related” above.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 7/26/2012 @ 4:46 pm“Leviticus, you canāt stop individuals from selling guns to each other.”
– SPQR
I mean… you can make laws against it, the same way you make laws against individuals selling drugs to each other. The question is whether or not you want to.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/26/2012 @ 5:30 pmI would think that in one way a person would want an official documentation of selling a firearm. I think if a gun was used in a crime and the last known owner was John Doe, maybe John Doe would like some evidence he really sold it to Jim Smith last year.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/26/2012 @ 5:36 pmLeviticus, as far as pistols go, my Ruger Mark II was my first, and it was my home defense gun until I got my Rock Island Arsenal .45ACP. A .22 is a tool. You have to practice and practice. I shot IDPA locally until they banned .22s (me) partly because some of the judges had trouble seeing my .22 holes among the .40, .45, 9mm holes.
One of these days I’ll take out the RIA using Zombie Max and my hand loads of 200gr jacked hollow points and 6 grains of Bullseye.
PCD (89480b) — 7/26/2012 @ 5:51 pmComment by Leviticus ā 7/26/2012 @ 5:30 pm
Your analogy fails. People know that drugs are illegal to possess and sell. California criminalizes the sale of things in a particular manner, when the possession, purchase and sale in a slightly different way is legal, that does not make sense. The ordinary person does not understand that and that law gets violated a lot by otherwise innocent people.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:17 pmExisting firearms law is full of silly traps for people that make no sense at all.
If I buy an AR15 receiver, that’s never been assembled into a firearm, and put a short barrelled (less than 16″) upper on it and leave off the stock, I’ve made what Federal law calls a pistol. And that’s perfectly legal.
I take an identical AR 15 receiver, that had been made into a full size rifle previously, pull off the stock and put on the same short barrelled upper, such that it ends up being identical to the first example, I’ve committed a Federal felony worth 10 years on prison.
Henry makes what’s called a “mare’s leg” – its a lever action rifle cut down. If you saw the old “Wanted: Dead or Alive” with Steve McQueen, he carried one in the tv show.
Here it is advertised for sale.
A brand new one, made from the start to be a “mare’s leg” is legal. But take the Henry rifle and cut it down, creating exactly the same firearm, and you’ve committed a Federal felony worth 10 years.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:24 pmshe could kokomo
Colonel Haiku (2a5679) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:29 pmyeah in a china cup teh
kinda love I need
don’t it always seem
Colonel Haiku (2a5679) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:33 pmya got one foot on platform
and other on train?
salt baths don’t kill people, teh bath salts do.
Colonel Haiku (2a5679) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:34 pmMyopinion — I wouldn’t try to train my wife or children. Neighbors, their wives, and children, yes; the close family psychology thing gets in the way of such training.
htom (412a17) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:46 pmOHMYGOD children with guns!
11 year old.
A teen aged young man winning B class run! Run for your lives! Children with guns!
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:50 pmThe young man in the second link above, was 16 in that video. He’s since represented the US on the Juniors team in the World Shoot IPSC in Greece last year.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 6:55 pmStart with a semi-auto .22, Rutger or Browning.
Rutger SP-101, 4″, .357 for first self-defense firearm.
Bear, well, .450 Marlin is good Browning BLR.
Magnum Research still makes the BFR in .450 Marlin (and some other giant rounds) but the rifle is a better idea.
htom (412a17) — 7/26/2012 @ 7:18 pmA .357 revolver would make a great trail gun. It’s versatile and powerful and rock solid reliable.
However, I respectfully suggest .45 acp in a semiauto for a self defense firearm that may be needed for defense in a building, due to penetration issues, both for walls and for targets. I also think .45 is the most comfortable to shoot, but this is pure preference.
There are so many great pistols. 92fs, XDsc, Glocks, USPs, Sig 229s, and on and on. Someone really should handle all the major pistols and pick what feels right for them, perhaps after enjoying the 22 semiauto mentioned above, which I agree is a great first firearm choice.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/26/2012 @ 7:46 pmLeviticus, stopping power is a much debated topic when it comes to handgun cartridges but shot placement is not. You do need to put your bullet in its target, and for that you need to acquire the skill and keep it honed with practice which is why I keep nagging about the price of ammunition. The .380s I load in my Beretta cost $1.00 each, the .22s for my Walther less than $0.25 (and they are good quality, no misfeeds, jams etc.).
If you want to start off at the deep end of the pool, I second the advice already given: A decent quality, .357/.38 revolver, four inch barrel, good hand-filling grips. S&W, Ruger, or even Taurus are lifetime guns. You can load them with cartridges of varying velocity and bullet weight, starting with target rounds before settling on a defense load. (I, for some reason, liked the 158 grain lead semi-wadcutter for my .38. Recoil is a very subjective thing.)
There are also psychological components — you have to like and trust your gun. Which goes with the most practical of all considerations — no matter what kind it is, have it when you need it, which, I believe, is the basis of your uncle’s recommendation. He’s thinking of portability and concealibility. I understand that, having lived all my life where carry is very restricted.
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 7:56 pmOuch, nk, you are overpaying for ammo.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:00 pmRemington Golden Hornets (.380) and Remington Match (.22)?
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:08 pmGolden Saber. I’m losing it.
nk (875f57) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:14 pmhtom,
I got a chance to try a 45/70 Marlin once. Really fun to shoot.
re: .357s, my (limited) experience with them was that they kicked more than a .44 Ruger Redhawk, which was a little disconcerting. I had better luck with a .45.
I don’t see anyone talking about 9mm, at least in a way that I recognize.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/26/2012 @ 8:50 pmLeviticus —
.450 Marlin and 45/70 are … adopted brothers, maybe. You can handload 45/70 to .450 Marlin performance blah, blah, … it’s complicated.
.44 Redhawk would probably be heavier than a typical .357; I’d expect it to be gentler. I shoot 1911s better than most revolvers, practice practice practice. Revolver is better for starters, no limp-wrist problem, .357 can load .38 for practice.
The wonder nine, sigh. Same bullets as the .38 and .357, different brass, loadings, … Browning Hi-Power made the cartridge and is still one of the best for it, especially with the push-the-hammer decocker modification.
htom (412a17) — 7/26/2012 @ 9:24 pmLeviticus, I’ve fired revolvers and I love the semi-autos.
My short barreled Ruger is concealable, but really accurate. In IDPA I had the problem of putting 2 rounds in the same hole. I always got dinged for a miss.
I’m getting used to my 1911. I’ve loaded ammunition for it and changed the recoil spring. Next will be the trigger assembly as there is too much take up for my taste out of the box. I may only keep a supply of 230 grain ball for street needs, like shooting thru a windshield, otherwise I’ll be using the 185 grain Zombie Max in house and my 200 grain JHP hand loads for in between.
PCD (89480b) — 7/27/2012 @ 4:58 amMy brother suggested I may like this website. He was once totally right. This put up truly made my day. You cann’t believe simply how so much time I had spent for this information! Thank you!
So it is very crucial that you not compromise using the high quality of any products and companies that could hazardous to you. Multi-award successful ceramic mind of hair straighteners cheap ghd is so made that it is applicable to all types of mind of ha (691444) — 7/27/2012 @ 6:47 am