How many more?
 

Why have any laws at all, Max. They all get broken. Making murder a
criminal offense doesn't stop all murders from happening as far as I
can tell. So why make it a crime?

So it's all or nothing with you. people will always break the law so
making something illegal does not abolish the problem forever. It
only restricts those who are law abiding from taking those actions.
Making gun ownership illegal will only stop law abiding citizens from
owning them, not criminals. Criminals are the one that break the law
so it would do nothing to solve the problem.

How many more?
 

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Maxprop wrote:
Oh gee...let me think. How about a gun show? Nah, that would never
happen.

1) Yes, you could conceivably buy a machine gun--more likely a submachine
gun--at a gun show, but you'd have to jump through the same set of hoops
as
if you'd bought it from a licensed gun dealer. $400 federal tax, fees,
etc., permit, 6-9 month waiting period, extremely extensive FBI
background
check etc.

Nope... when was the last time you were in a gun show that there
wasn't someone dealing under the table?

I haven't been to a gun show for quite a while, but I've NEVER seen anyone
deal below the table. Everything is closely scrutinized and the players are
above board. Now--when was the last time you were at a gun show--ever.

2) You can't buy fully automatic weapons from a private seller without
transacting the sale through an FFL dealer with the above provisions.
It's
illegal to do otherwise, thanks to gun control laws. So does it happen?
Probably. What does that tell you about gun control laws?

Sure. It's illegal. I'm sure no one breaks the law.

No legally obtained full-auto weapons have ever been used in the commission
of a crime.

Max

How many more?
 

In article .com,
Bill wrote:
Why have any laws at all, Max. They all get broken. Making murder a
criminal offense doesn't stop all murders from happening as far as I
can tell. So why make it a crime?

So it's all or nothing with you. people will always break the law so
making something illegal does not abolish the problem forever. It
only restricts those who are law abiding from taking those actions.
Making gun ownership illegal will only stop law abiding citizens from
owning them, not criminals. Criminals are the one that break the law
so it would do nothing to solve the problem.

No one is saying make their ownership illegal. That's just another
false "fact" in your diatribe.




--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

How many more?
 

In article t,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Maxprop wrote:
Oh gee...let me think. How about a gun show? Nah, that would never
happen.

1) Yes, you could conceivably buy a machine gun--more likely a submachine
gun--at a gun show, but you'd have to jump through the same set of hoops
as
if you'd bought it from a licensed gun dealer. $400 federal tax, fees,
etc., permit, 6-9 month waiting period, extremely extensive FBI
background
check etc.

Nope... when was the last time you were in a gun show that there
wasn't someone dealing under the table?

I haven't been to a gun show for quite a while, but I've NEVER seen anyone
deal below the table. Everything is closely scrutinized and the players are
above board. Now--when was the last time you were at a gun show--ever.

Therefore, it must be true. Last year.

2) You can't buy fully automatic weapons from a private seller without
transacting the sale through an FFL dealer with the above provisions.
It's
illegal to do otherwise, thanks to gun control laws. So does it happen?
Probably. What does that tell you about gun control laws?

Sure. It's illegal. I'm sure no one breaks the law.

No legally obtained full-auto weapons have ever been used in the commission
of a crime.

Has nothing to do with my comment.
--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

How many more?
 

No one is saying make their ownership illegal. That's just another
false "fact" in your diatribe.

You haven't said anything The shooter at VT waited for his guns, he
didn't buy them that morning. He planned this out for an extended
period of time. It is also an exceptional case not the general rule.
At least Oz is saying that handguns are the problem. You have yet to
say anything to actually argue against.

How many more?
 

"Bill" wrote in message
oups.com...
No one is saying make their ownership illegal. That's just another
false "fact" in your diatribe.

You haven't said anything The shooter at VT waited for his guns, he
didn't buy them that morning. He planned this out for an extended
period of time. It is also an exceptional case not the general rule.
At least Oz is saying that handguns are the problem. You have yet to
say anything to actually argue against.



I've said plenty, but you aren't interested in listening. There is no need
to have unfettered access to guns. Clearly, the system (whatever is
currently in place) is inadequate, given what happened. I haven't heard one
peep from you and those like you about any realistic solution nor even a
willingness to look at rational options.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

How many more?
 

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article t,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Maxprop wrote:
Oh gee...let me think. How about a gun show? Nah, that would never
happen.

1) Yes, you could conceivably buy a machine gun--more likely a
submachine
gun--at a gun show, but you'd have to jump through the same set of hoops
as
if you'd bought it from a licensed gun dealer. $400 federal tax, fees,
etc., permit, 6-9 month waiting period, extremely extensive FBI
background
check etc.

Nope... when was the last time you were in a gun show that there
wasn't someone dealing under the table?

I haven't been to a gun show for quite a while, but I've NEVER seen anyone
deal below the table. Everything is closely scrutinized and the players
are
above board. Now--when was the last time you were at a gun show--ever.

Therefore, it must be true. Last year.

2) You can't buy fully automatic weapons from a private seller without
transacting the sale through an FFL dealer with the above provisions.
It's
illegal to do otherwise, thanks to gun control laws. So does it happen?
Probably. What does that tell you about gun control laws?

Sure. It's illegal. I'm sure no one breaks the law.

No legally obtained full-auto weapons have ever been used in the
commission
of a crime.

Has nothing to do with my comment.

Halliburton does.

Max

How many more?
 

"Maxprop" wrote in message
link.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article t,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Maxprop wrote:
Oh gee...let me think. How about a gun show? Nah, that would never
happen.

1) Yes, you could conceivably buy a machine gun--more likely a
submachine
gun--at a gun show, but you'd have to jump through the same set of
hoops
as
if you'd bought it from a licensed gun dealer. $400 federal tax, fees,
etc., permit, 6-9 month waiting period, extremely extensive FBI
background
check etc.

Nope... when was the last time you were in a gun show that there
wasn't someone dealing under the table?

I haven't been to a gun show for quite a while, but I've NEVER seen
anyone
deal below the table. Everything is closely scrutinized and the players
are
above board. Now--when was the last time you were at a gun show--ever.

Therefore, it must be true. Last year.

2) You can't buy fully automatic weapons from a private seller without
transacting the sale through an FFL dealer with the above provisions.
It's
illegal to do otherwise, thanks to gun control laws. So does it
happen?
Probably. What does that tell you about gun control laws?

Sure. It's illegal. I'm sure no one breaks the law.

No legally obtained full-auto weapons have ever been used in the
commission
of a crime.

Has nothing to do with my comment.

Halliburton does.

Max


You're a stockholder?


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

How many more?
 

I've said plenty, but you aren't interested in listening.

I have been looking back at your posts and I haven't seen you give one
solution to anything or one thing you think we should do.


There is no need
to have unfettered access to guns. Clearly, the system (whatever is
currently in place) is inadequate, given what happened. I haven't heard one
peep from you and those like you about any realistic solution nor even a
willingness to look at rational options.

First I never said we should just have completely unfettered access to
guns. I never even implied such a thing. In fact I have said several
times that I think we should put more energy into enforcing the laws
we have instead of adding more laws to the mix. The ones we have are
adequate but not enforced 100%. I also see this as a very exceptional
case that should not spark an over emotional response into doing
something that would hurt more people than it would help. There is no
evidence that banning guns will stop violent crimes. I am not saying
we should just let eveyrone have all the guns they want. I never did
but you just get all emotional and think what you want instead of
actually looking at what people are saying.

How many more?
 

"Bill" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've said plenty, but you aren't interested in listening.

I have been looking back at your posts and I haven't seen you give one
solution to anything or one thing you think we should do.


There is no need
to have unfettered access to guns. Clearly, the system (whatever is
currently in place) is inadequate, given what happened. I haven't heard
one
peep from you and those like you about any realistic solution nor even a
willingness to look at rational options.

First I never said we should just have completely unfettered access to
guns. I never even implied such a thing. In fact I have said several
times that I think we should put more energy into enforcing the laws
we have instead of adding more laws to the mix. The ones we have are
adequate but not enforced 100%. I also see this as a very exceptional
case that should not spark an over emotional response into doing
something that would hurt more people than it would help. There is no
evidence that banning guns will stop violent crimes. I am not saying
we should just let eveyrone have all the guns they want. I never did
but you just get all emotional and think what you want instead of
actually looking at what people are saying.



You continue to claim that I am in favor of banning guns. I'm not. Please
feel free to repost where I said that.

I am in favor of reducing the number of guns on the streets and of making it
very difficult for their purchase. The current laws do not rise to that
level. The assault rife ban is a case in point. It didn't go far enough, and
as someone else pointed out, was about what the weapon looked like, rather
than what it could actually do.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com