wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:39:08 -0400, H the K
wrote:

Keith Nuttle wrote:
In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".


In some states, there are ways around the "validation" because of the
gun show loophole, which must be closed.

I believe he is talking about the Concealed Carry permit
investigation. That is right up there with the one you need to buy a
machine gun.
In real life, gun control advocacies should love the CCW license. It
gets gun owners mandatory gun safety education, police checks,
fingerprints and photo ID. Isn't that what people have been asking for
since the 60s?
The reality is most CCW holders seldom carry anyway, once the novelty
wears off. The strange thing is, the places where I would want to
carry a gun, prohibit it.


In most states, if you buy a gun from a licensed dealer, you have to
fill out a federal form, and the dealer then calls in the info to a
federal facility set up to do so-called instant screenings to see if
your name pops up on any of the federal "don't sell a gun to him"
databases. That has nothing to do with a concealed carry permit, which
is a state matter.

In Virginia, if you go to a gun show, there will be licensed dealers and
unlicensed dealers and individual sellers. The latter two groups can
sell their firearms to anyone, and not "bother" with the form or phone call.

I have several CCW permits, and they required completion of real gun
safety education courses, fingerprints, state police background checks,
photo ID and in one case, a letter from local law enforcement officials.

On Aug 18, 9:33*pm, Keith Nuttle wrote:
jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...

At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow.

“It is attempted intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can purchase
at a local gunshop.”

Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is wrong.
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of a
gun.”

I suspect that the president is much safer with people who are legally
carrying guns than with anyone else. *In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".- Hide quoted text -


the biggest gun mass killer, the guy at VA tech...owned his guns
legally

33 dead people as a result.

thanks to the NRA

On Aug 19, 6:27*am, wf3h wrote:
On Aug 18, 9:33*pm, Keith Nuttle wrote:



jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...

At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow.

“It is attempted intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can purchase
at a local gunshop.”

Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is wrong..
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of a
gun.”

I suspect that the president is much safer with people who are legally
carrying guns than with anyone else. *In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".- Hide quoted text -

the biggest gun mass killer, the guy at VA tech...owned his guns
legally

33 dead people as a result.

thanks to the NRA

You mean, we told him to pull the trigger????
thanks tot he NRA?

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote:
In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".


In some states, there are ways around the "validation" because of the
gun show loophole, which must be closed.

Why? The 1st amendment isn't limited to those who pass a background check?

The validation process isn't stringent enough if card carrying loonies
like Krause can get themselves validated. But sadly, closing the gun
show loophole won't prevent professional murderers and other armed crime
doers from obtaining the tools of their trade.

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Don White wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message
m...
jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...


At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow. “It is attempted
intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can purchase
at a local gunshop.”

Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is wrong.
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of a
gun.”

Sooner rather than later, one of the gun-toting right-wing
nincompoops is going to open fire or "have an accident" or get into
a brawl with law enforcement.

When these armed idiots show up at public meetings at which the
president is going to appear, it increases the workload of the
secret service and local police forces.

Some kind of federal law restricting weapons within a couple thousand
feet of anywhere the President of member of congress may be is in order
This is something you couldn't trust the individual states to
pass/enforce.



I've been practicing so I can handle the impending invasion of the
Loogy/JustHate Zombies...


http://tinyurl.com/ma5znl

Did you bother to read the target "100 Yard Sight-In" in the upper right
hand corner of the target? You use that target to get your weapon zeroed
so that you can move to the 300 and 500 yard targets.

First five shot group at 100 yards from the new ZombieKiller Rifle. I
was plopped on a ground cloth and using the rifle's built-in sights.
Took a couple of shots first to sight in for elevation...there wasn't
any wind.

They are called iron sights. And you should be able to walk the group,
1.5 inches, to the center in no more than four three shot groups.

Tomorrow I'm going to try some shots with the new scope I just
attached. Once I get used to it, I should be able to put five between
the eyes of your typical zombie at 100 yards.

Scope? Scopes are for pussies. You should be able to put 10 in the black
at 500 yards in the prone position using iron sites.

Freaking scopes, are you pretending to be a sniper shooting a paper
targets at 100 yards?


Harry pretends to be a lot of things. :-)

On Aug 19, 9:04*am, Tim wrote:
On Aug 19, 6:27*am, wf3h wrote:





On Aug 18, 9:33*pm, Keith Nuttle wrote:

jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...

At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow.

“It is attempted intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can purchase
at a local gunshop.”

Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is wrong.
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of a
gun.”

I suspect that the president is much safer with people who are legally
carrying guns than with anyone else. *In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".- Hide quoted text -

the biggest gun mass killer, the guy at VA tech...owned his guns
legally

33 dead people as a result.

thanks to the NRA

You mean, we told him to pull the trigger????
thanks tot he NRA?-

the NRA has always been in favor of psychopaths owning guns.

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 9:04 am, Tim wrote:
On Aug 19, 6:27 am, wf3h wrote:





On Aug 18, 9:33 pm, Keith Nuttle wrote:
jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...
At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow.
“It is attempted intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can purchase
at a local gunshop.”
Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is wrong.
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of a
gun.”
I suspect that the president is much safer with people who are legally
carrying guns than with anyone else. In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".- Hide quoted text -
the biggest gun mass killer, the guy at VA tech...owned his guns
legally
33 dead people as a result.
thanks to the NRA
You mean, we told him to pull the trigger????
thanks tot he NRA?-

the NRA has always been in favor of psychopaths owning guns.

And hiring psychopaths as the leaders...

J i m wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote:
In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".


In some states, there are ways around the "validation" because of the
gun show loophole, which must be closed.

Why? The 1st amendment isn't limited to those who pass a background
check?

The validation process isn't stringent enough if card carrying loonies
like Krause can get themselves validated. But sadly, closing the gun
show loophole won't prevent professional murderers and other armed crime
doers from obtaining the tools of their trade.

If we stopped law abiding citizens from owning guns then it will just be
the criminals and government with guns.

On Aug 19, 10:04*am, H the K wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 19, 9:04 am, Tim wrote:
On Aug 19, 6:27 am, wf3h wrote:

On Aug 18, 9:33 pm, Keith Nuttle wrote:
jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...
At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow.
“It is attempted intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can purchase
at a local gunshop.”
Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is wrong.
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of a
gun.”
I suspect that the president is much safer with people who are legally
carrying guns than with anyone else. *In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".- Hide quoted text -
the biggest gun mass killer, the guy at VA tech...owned his guns
legally
33 dead people as a result.
thanks to the NRA
You mean, we told him to pull the trigger????
thanks tot he NRA?-

the NRA has always been in favor of psychopaths owning guns.

And hiring psychopaths as the leaders

the crazier the better. it's impossible to be too right wing in
america.

BAR wrote:
J i m wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote:
In most states those who have guns
have passed back ground checks, so have been "validated".


In some states, there are ways around the "validation" because of
the gun show loophole, which must be closed.

Why? The 1st amendment isn't limited to those who pass a background
check?

The validation process isn't stringent enough if card carrying loonies
like Krause can get themselves validated. But sadly, closing the gun
show loophole won't prevent professional murderers and other armed
crime doers from obtaining the tools of their trade.

If we stopped law abiding citizens from owning guns then it will just be
the criminals and government with guns.


It was the gun show loophole being discussed, moron.