https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...08060088_n.jpg
Printable View
http://i.minus.com/iHhNVZA2YPpfc.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Iceaxe
Without one chambered is like tits on a bull, useless.
Just for fun... and for those that have never seen one. Here is a copy of Form 4473 that everyone must fill out and sign when purchasing a firearm from an FFL holder (gun store, pawn shop, any legitimate business, ect.).
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
When you hear gun owners say start with enforcing the laws already on the books this is one of the items they are talking about. Out of more than 76,000 firearms purchases denied by the federal instant check system (Part of Form 4473), only 62 were referred for prosecution, and only 44 were actually prosecuted. If you want to start cracking down on firearms in the hands of those that shouldn't have them this is where you need to start.
And lets start with that douche bag astronaut Mark Kelly who has admitted he was purchasing an AR-15 as a straw man and the firearm was intended for someone else, which is illegal. A nice high profile conviction might get folks to step up and take notice.
:soapbox:
The news tonight, is reporting that texting and driving kill 9 people per day in the USA.
This cannot be tolerated, all phones capable of texting should be banned.
If we can save just one life...........
It would be easy to make it so phones can't text when moving faster then 20 mph. But it will never happen because those making the laws are also offenders.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldno7
Tap'n on my Galaxy G3
But according to Mrs. Feinstein herself, there are an average 35 people in the U.S. killed each year by rifles with these characteristics.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz2OvvCj4JO
Now relate this to my texting while driving stat.
bloombergs fine, mayors against illegal guns(not sure what an "illegal gun" is though)
http://www.stopillegalmayors.com/
Armed(CC) Senior.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...;v=epZod2qyyN4
Hard to believe that people this ignorant makes decisions effecting millions...
Asked how a ban on magazines holding more than 15 rounds would be effective in reducing gun violence, Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) said: “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/...ey-work/93506/
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...19708037_n.jpg
Beretta Leaves Maryland Because Of Stricter Gun Laws
New legislation is forcing gun manufacturing company Beretta to uproot and take their business elsewhere.
Established in 1526, Beretta holds the distinction of being the oldest active firearms manufacturer in the world. The U.S. factory is located in Accokeek, Maryland, and has been a staple of the local economy for years.
Beretta warned that stricter gun control laws would push the company outside of state lines, but that didn’t stop Maryland legislators. Jeffrey Reh, a spokesman for Beretta who also serves as the President of Stoeger Industries under Beretta, announced that the company would begrudgingly uproot and take its business elsewhere. He said, “We don’t want to do this, we’re not willing to do this, but obviously this legislation has caused us a serious level of concern within our company.”
He added that Beretta paid approximately $31 million in taxes, employs 400 people, and had invested $73 million in the business over the past several decades. Despite being such a prominent player in the local economy, Beretta was unable to prevent legislators from passing tighter gun control laws. Ironically, Beretta manufactures some firearms that are now banned in Maryland.
Republican state Delegate Anthony J. O’Donnell lamented: “Losing [Beretta] would be a big disappointment. Maryland has a reputation for having a horrible business climate, and this would be one more nail in the coffin.”
Legislators had ample warning. Back in the ‘90s, when Maryland beefed up gun control laws, Beretta moved one of its warehouses a short drive away to Virginia.
Beretta’s bold move is regrettable but understandable. Reh told reporters, “Why expand in a place where the people who built the gun couldn’t buy it?”
All of Beretta’s pleas fell on deaf ears. Even as Reh lamented Beretta’s looming departure and emphasized the company’s centrality in the local economy during the hearing, Maryland legislators grilled Reh on self-defense.
One legislator stated: “Other than target shooting, the only other reason [for a semi-automic firearm] would be for self-defense… [Why would you need a] rifle that accommodates 20 rounds semi-automatic for deer hunting? … It’s only very infrequently that someone commits a crime with an assault weapon – why do you need one for self-defense?”
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...19708037_n.jpg
Beretta Leaves Maryland Because Of Stricter Gun Laws
New legislation is forcing gun manufacturing company Beretta to uproot and take their business elsewhere.
Established in 1526, Beretta holds the distinction of being the oldest active firearms manufacturer in the world. The U.S. factory is located in Accokeek, Maryland, and has been a staple of the local economy for years.
[COLOR=#333333][FONT=lucida grande]
Beretta warned that stricter gun control laws would push the company outside of state lines, but that didn
Tomorrow(Thurs.) is the beginning of the gun debate. Lots of posturing.
There will be many amendments attached to whatever bill comes forward.
A filibuster is possible and threatened but it is believed there are 60 votes for cloture, guess we'll see...........
Expanded Background checks was the ONE item gun-control advocates thought they could get passed, they figured this was the easiest of all the proposed gun-control laws to push through. If this didn't pass it doesn't currently look good for any of the other gun-control laws to pass. Two days ago this rejection would have been headline news, now it will be lucky to make page two.
Senate rejects gun amendment compromise
The Senate on Wednesday rejected a bipartisan amendment that would have expanded background checks on gun purchases, a blow to advocates calling for more strict firearm laws after the mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., late last year.
The measure, the product of intense negotiations between Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey and West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, would have extended background check requirements on gun owners. It needed 60 votes to pass, but failed 54-46.
Democratic Sens. Mark Begich of Alaska, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Max Baucus of Montana voted against it. (Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada switched his vote to no at the end, a procedural tactic that allows him to bring it up for a vote later.) In addition to Toomey, Republicans who supported the amendment were Sens. Mark Kirk of Illinois, Susan Collins of Maine and John McCain of Arizona.
Scores of onlookers filled the Senate gallery to watch the vote. When Vice President Joseph Biden read the final tally and announced the amendment had not passed, Patricia Maisch, who helped disarm the man who shot former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, yelled, "Shame on you!" before walking out
As late as Wednesday afternoon, the fate of the measure appeared dire for its supporters. Shortly before the vote, Biden tamped down expectations for it to pass.
Manchin-Toomey amendment #715. Failed 54-46
Grassley substitute amendment consistent with the summary which is at the desk; Failed 52-48
Leahy-Collins amendment #713 (trafficking) Failed 58-42
Cornyn amendment #719 (conceal carry) Failed 57-43
Feinstein amendment #711 (assault weapons/clip bans) FAILED FAILED FAILED(40-60)
Burr amendment #720 (veterans/guns) Failed 56-44
Lautenberg-Blumenthal amendment #714 (high capacity mag ban) FAILED 46-54
Obama's reaction, quite childish. Nothing new, it's what he does when he loses. And can we quit parading around these Newtown parents, enough is enough already. I'm also wondering if some of these parents are starting to like the limelight.
^^^THIS^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by JP
Freedom has never been free, it has always been paid for in blood.
Tap'n on my Galaxy G3
I'm sure they would rather have their kids alive and not have the limelight.Quote:
Originally Posted by JP
It should be noted some of the Sandy Hooks parents that lost children do not support tighter gun control and have not become part of the dog and pony show. I don't see them being used as a pawn to further an agenda.
This "it's for the kids" is bullshit. Not one of the proposed laws would have done anything to stop Sandy Hooks. The firearms were legally owned by the mother and were obtained by killing the mother and stealing the guns.
Tap'n on my Galaxy G3
Will the price of ammo come back to reality now?
Although I must admit, I went through my stockpile and sold 1340 rounds of Malaysian 5.56 mil spec (circa 1981) for $700 and 4000 rounds of American Eagle 22LR for $400. I couldn't believe it. I had people from New York to Cal calling me wanting me to ship it to them. No need to, plenty of people with cash right here.
Bomb goes off in Boston: BOMBER IS BLAMED
School shooting: GUNS ARE BLAMED
Prices have dropped some but not a lot. I have helped my grandpa sell a ton of ammo. Probably 15,000 rounds of 9mm, 5000 or .223 & 7.62. We just sold another case of .223 for $525. He still has a fair amount left of 9mm, 223, 7.62 & 22LR
Finally... some reasonable gun control measures I can support. :2thumbs:
Attachment 65671
Great video....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2fbF_vDKI4
Yesterday I went to go purchase ammo for my 0.45 auto.....ONE MONTH WAITING LIST!!! :roll:
How much you want?Quote:
Originally Posted by rockgremlin
liberal/progressives should read this but they won't.
http://m.iowastatedaily.com/mobile/o...a4bcf887a.html
Great article.
Tap'n on my Galaxy G3
Chris Kyles Wife (Taya)
http://home.nra.org/home/video/2013-...nnual-meetings
How much you got? Let's talk $$$. PM me.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldno7
hoplaphilics should read this, but they won't.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldno7
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/e...our-damn-guns/
:moses:
I read it... anther rant by someone that is clueless about firearms telling us what is the best way to weaken the Second Aamendment and say they are not actually attacking the Second Amendment. He also proposed nothing new or old that would have stopped the recent madmen.Quote:
Originally Posted by ratagonia
And what about the title of his entire argument? "Enough! Nobody Wants to Take Away Your Damn Guns!".... Does he mean "at least not yet?" Because many in the Democratic Party do want our guns. Senator Feinstein stated very clearly that she would like to require full confiscation of all “assault weapons” in the US.
So the old statement that no one is coming for your guns — used to be true. With the 1994 “assault weapons” ban, the Democrats successfully split American gun owners down the middle by isolating hunters. Only the evil “black rifles” were banned, and traditional hunting rifles were exempt at the time.
“No one is coming for your guns” was used to great effect to pacify hunters and keep them from opposing the assault weapons ban. It was brilliant propaganda, that Democrats seem to have adopted almost as well as “think of the children!” when proposing ill-conceived or stupid laws.
But the problem is, it’s no longer true. “Hunting rifles” have evolved to be indistinguishable from “assault weapons.” They have the same features, and use the same designs. And the removal of a grandfather clause from the proposed legislation can only mean that full-scale confiscation is in the offing. They are, indeed, coming to take away our guns. Even the “hunting rifles.” And those who are still trying to pass off that old lie are ignorant of the proposed legislation.
:popcorn:
Well, I only read about half. Guess that makes me a centrist.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldno7
A very well-written article, at least at the start he has a lot of legitimate points to make about the demonization of guns and gun guys by liberals. And he writes coherently for several more paragraphs. It is refreshing to see a pro-gun person talk intelligently about the REAL issue, the divide between the pro- and anti- entrenched positions.
And then he slowly works himself into a froth, repeating the same old arguments ad nauseum and demonizing those who disagree with him. Same old, same old...
"The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.
Sleeping dragons and terrible resolve
I do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late."
Yes, we must mend fences. Of course any shooting war that starts on the issue is the lib-tard's fault, right? Not such a good way to mend fences, threatening armed rebellion over laws that will not get passed and, if passed, will not survive review by the Supremes.
But such is the paranoiac rantings of the hoplaphilic.
Tom :moses:
@ratagonia, i hate to look up the definition of a word before i can understand the post (hoplaphilics). well i can't even find that it is a word to begin with. :lol8:
the whole "we don't object to hunting rifles" is just wrong. anyone who thinks the 2nd amendment was written to protect hunting rifles is wrong. it was written to protect the people from a tyrannical government.
(might have helped if I had spelled it correctly).Quote:
Originally Posted by denaliguide
The word was, more or less, coined by a Gun Guy. Wellllllll, he coined the word Hoplophobia for those with an irrational fear of guns...
http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...rm=hoplaphobia
Hoplophiliac might be the better spelling.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...m=Hoplophiliac
Tom