|
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
Maybe they'll make it part of XGames or the Olympics!
A northern Indiana man has pleaded guilty to criminal charges after killing his fiancee’s 3-year-old son while they were playing a “gun game” in their Michigan City home. Authorities said Zachariah Grisham, 24, frequently played a game in which he would point a real gun at the boy while child would point an imaginary gun back. Grisham shot the boy in the head in September 2013. He told police he forgot his gun was loaded and pulled the trigger. Grisham pleaded guilty Thursday to a felony charge of child neglect. He was originally charged with both child neglect and reckless homicide. Authorities said the shooting wasn’t intentional. “It did not meet the qualifications of murder. It’s a very unfortunate incident,” LaPorte County Deputy Prosecutor Dave Ambers told The Times of Northwest Indiana. Grisham faces up to 12 years in prison. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:06:12 -0700, jps wrote:
Maybe they'll make it part of XGames or the Olympics! And your point is? Got balls? |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Monday, June 9, 2014 2:12:01 PM UTC-7, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:06:12 -0700, jps wrote: Maybe they'll make it part of XGames or the Olympics! And your point is? Got balls? I'm wondering what his point is too? Maybe an obsession? |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/9/2014 6:48 PM, Tim wrote:
On Monday, June 9, 2014 2:12:01 PM UTC-7, John H. wrote: On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:06:12 -0700, jps wrote: Maybe they'll make it part of XGames or the Olympics! And your point is? Got balls? I'm wondering what his point is too? Maybe an obsession? He loves the attention. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
|
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
In article ,
says... On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Desperate. Not long ago he he equated guns to circular saw blades. As I said, this will get straightened out when guns are "socially unacceptable." Like cigarettes. I still smoke, but I won't last long. Time will take care of it, as it will with guns. Gun nuts can only delay the inevitable. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. Do some reading, jps. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...nd-irrelevant/ |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/11/2014 1:11 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. Different objectives and purposes. Driver's education is designed to teach teenagers *how* to drive and to instruct as to applicable laws for driving. My state (Massachusetts) requires gun permit applicants to complete a NRA (and State Police) approved safety course before a permit application will be processed. The required course is only 5 hours ... 4 classroom and 1 live firing on a range. It's not intended to teach you *how* to shoot, but rather how to shoot and handle guns safely. I am not sure how much more info could be presented in a longer course. My oldest son and his wife took a much longer course however. They met twice a week for about 3 months to complete it but it covered training in shooting techniques, etc., not safety. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/11/2014 1:11 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. "kids you know"? And I suppose you expect us to believe you know enough kids to make a nation wide speculation? Come on jps, admit it... you made that up didn't you, cause it suits your agenda? Come on, you can admit it. But it must be fun to have folks spend their nights addressing your straw men, you are almost as good as harry krause... Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
|
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ Didn't Florida recently pass a law stating that accidental brandishing was no longer a criminal offense? |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ I've read just about all the MA General Laws on firearms in an attempt at being as informed as I can. I don't recall the exact section or wording but it is illegal to *consciously* show a concealed weapon as a threat or in anger. It's not specifically called "bandishing" but is basically the same thing. However, the statutes only talk about requirements for "concealed carry". No where do they discuss Open Carry or identify any laws against it. Theoretically one could open carry without exhibiting any threatening attitude but I wouldn't test the law (or lack of). |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/2014 7:27 AM, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ Didn't Florida recently pass a law stating that accidental brandishing was no longer a criminal offense? Yup they did. Problem is, like in Florida, MA or any other state, it's the word of the person who saw the gun against yours. Each situation is subjective. If someone like JPS happened to see that you were carrying because the wind blew your jacket open, he'd scream that he was threatened. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:10:55 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:21:21 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. At a certain point I agree with JP. The CCW course has very little to do with the gun and mostly talks about why you can't actually use the gun. (use of deadly force law) You did not get that in the Marines. That still has little to do with a guy who buys a skeet gun or a hunting rifle., We learned how to shoot targets at 200, 300 and 500 yards with the M16A1 for qualification. We did fam fire with the M16A1 on full-auto. We also fam fired the 1911 in .45. Nobody died on Parris Island while I was there. You guys must be good. Our longest range target was only 300 yards, for the M14. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/2014 8:08 AM, BAR wrote:
In article m, says... On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ Didn't Florida recently pass a law stating that accidental brandishing was no longer a criminal offense? Isn't that the small t-shirt law with respect to concealed carry permits. If you bend over and your shirt comes up and exposes your concealed firearm it is incidental and not an overt act and isn't punishable? Sounds about right. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/2014 8:21 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/12/2014 7:27 AM, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ Didn't Florida recently pass a law stating that accidental brandishing was no longer a criminal offense? Yup they did. Problem is, like in Florida, MA or any other state, it's the word of the person who saw the gun against yours. Each situation is subjective. If someone like JPS happened to see that you were carrying because the wind blew your jacket open, he'd scream that he was threatened. A puff of wind would be threatening to JPS. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/2014 8:37 AM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:10:55 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:21:21 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. At a certain point I agree with JP. The CCW course has very little to do with the gun and mostly talks about why you can't actually use the gun. (use of deadly force law) You did not get that in the Marines. That still has little to do with a guy who buys a skeet gun or a hunting rifle., We learned how to shoot targets at 200, 300 and 500 yards with the M16A1 for qualification. We did fam fire with the M16A1 on full-auto. We also fam fired the 1911 in .45. Nobody died on Parris Island while I was there. You guys must be good. Our longest range target was only 300 yards, for the M14. #00 yds is pleanty long enough for self defense practice, Except, maybe for Harry Krause. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:18:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ I've read just about all the MA General Laws on firearms in an attempt at being as informed as I can. I don't recall the exact section or wording but it is illegal to *consciously* show a concealed weapon as a threat or in anger. It's not specifically called "bandishing" but is basically the same thing. However, the statutes only talk about requirements for "concealed carry". No where do they discuss Open Carry or identify any laws against it. Theoretically one could open carry without exhibiting any threatening attitude but I wouldn't test the law (or lack of). I wonder if those types of laws might be more municipal laws. If hunting is allowed in the state, then there wouldn't be a statewide ban on 'brandishing' a firearm. However, Boston may well have such a law, or any other city/municipality. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:51:42 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 6/12/2014 8:37 AM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:10:55 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:21:21 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. At a certain point I agree with JP. The CCW course has very little to do with the gun and mostly talks about why you can't actually use the gun. (use of deadly force law) You did not get that in the Marines. That still has little to do with a guy who buys a skeet gun or a hunting rifle., We learned how to shoot targets at 200, 300 and 500 yards with the M16A1 for qualification. We did fam fire with the M16A1 on full-auto. We also fam fired the 1911 in .45. Nobody died on Parris Island while I was there. You guys must be good. Our longest range target was only 300 yards, for the M14. #00 yds is pleanty long enough for self defense practice, Except, maybe for Harry Krause. That '#' shows you were taught to capitalize the first word of a sentence. Must have had a non-union teacher. Maybe a nun. They'd sneak up behind and smack the **** out of your ear for not capitalizing appropriately. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/14, 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 07:27:33 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ Didn't Florida recently pass a law stating that accidental brandishing was no longer a criminal offense? That refers to something like your gun "printing" on a covering garment or your coat blowing open for a moment. If you intentionally hold your coat open to show your gun or pull it out to threaten someone, it is still brandishing. They are working on a "warning shot" exception to the 10-20-life law. As it is, if you fire a warning shot, you better look like you have a valid reason to kill them and you just missed. Every instructor I have ever had said you just shoot for the center of mass, no warning shots. That bullet is going to land somewhere and the only place you are legally allowed to have it land is in a person who is presenting an imminent threat to you. BTW that is not necessarily true if an animal that is posing that threat. The burden of proof is much higher if you shoot a protected animal. Well, of course...you want to be able to legally stand your ground against a raccoon walking through your yard. It's Florida. -- If right-wing assholes could fly, rec.boats would be an airport! |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
|
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
|
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/2014 9:52 AM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:18:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:56:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/11/2014 8:32 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 6/11/2014 7:21 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:11:51 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:25:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. Most kids I know have to take a minimum of 40 hours of classroom instruction and 20+ hours of driving. Please tell me which states require anywhere near that amount of instruction or training under the supervision of an instructor to own a gun. I just looked and if you are over 18 here you only have to take a "drug and alcohol awareness course" That is new You can't even buy a gun if you are under 18. (21 for handguns) BTW I am not sure I ever heard any of you say the shooter was not proficient enough with his gun. In fact some of were bitching that Lanza was too well trained. In spite of all of that training you seem to think drivers get, they kill about 95 people a day and nobody really seem to care as long as it doesn't **** up traffic. BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. That's not true in all states. Massachusetts for example does not recognize a DD214 in lieu of the required NRA and State Police approved safety course that is mandatory to obtain a permit of any kind. There are other several other optional courses offered that, in some cases, a DD214 *with* pistol qualification (that just about everyone gets if they were in the military) qualifies you to *take* the course. It doesn't qualify you as having successfully completed it. Don't let our new AG or Governor know about how your Commonwealth screws you. What can I say? Trying to exit stage right. (or left, so not to politically offend anyone). It's well established and recognized by everyone up here ... the pro-gun groups and the no-guns groups ... that we have the most confusing and screwed up gun laws in the nation. Two major state agencies/departments that contradict each other but both determine what's banned and what's not. Funny thing is that for all the laws, restrictions and bans the one thing that is not even mentioned in MA General Laws regarding guns is "open carry". There are *no* laws on the books that prohibit it. Of course, nobody in their right mind who wants to keep his/her permit would waltz down main street with a six shooter strapped to their waist, but there is no law that prohibits it. === No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ I've read just about all the MA General Laws on firearms in an attempt at being as informed as I can. I don't recall the exact section or wording but it is illegal to *consciously* show a concealed weapon as a threat or in anger. It's not specifically called "bandishing" but is basically the same thing. However, the statutes only talk about requirements for "concealed carry". No where do they discuss Open Carry or identify any laws against it. Theoretically one could open carry without exhibiting any threatening attitude but I wouldn't test the law (or lack of). I wonder if those types of laws might be more municipal laws. If hunting is allowed in the state, then there wouldn't be a statewide ban on 'brandishing' a firearm. However, Boston may well have such a law, or any other city/municipality. Boston and it's immediate surrounding sections are basically "no issue" areas for concealed carry permits and are probably very restrictive in the other 3 permit classes as well. It's the pulsating heart of "progressive" liberalism and Mini-Me would like nothing better than to ban all guns everywhere. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
|
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
|
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:20:15 -0500, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... Boston and it's immediate surrounding sections are basically "no issue" areas for concealed carry permits and are probably very restrictive in the other 3 permit classes as well. It's the pulsating heart of "progressive" liberalism and Mini-Me would like nothing better than to ban all guns everywhere. You sound like you're uphappy there. When you move south you can buy all the guns your heart desires. You can then be happy about how easy it is to own guns. What sounds unhappy about where Luddite lives? He may be complaining about the stupidity of some laws, but how does that translate to 'unhappiness'? How many guns do you own? If you're against gun ownership, why not say something to your liberal arsenal-owning hero? |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:41:42 -0700, jps wrote: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. You really need to get out a little more. States are already moving that way and you want more Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. HUH? A drive around the block without hitting anything and parking the car when you were 16 does not demonstrate any particular proper training. After that, for the next 70 years, anyone who can hobble up to the counter, read line 3 on the eye chart and write a check is "properly trained". It is mail order in most states these days. Talk about dogs that can't hunt. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. Woof Woof. My mom was a bad driver in her later years. At 89 turning 90, she aced the written test and they did not behind the wheel test her, and issued a 5 year license! And you only have to drive around for a couple days and see really bad driving. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
jps wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:17:05 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 22:46:33 -0700, jps wrote: On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 21:37:04 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:06:12 -0700, jps wrote: Maybe they'll make it part of XGames or the Olympics! A northern Indiana man has pleaded guilty to criminal charges after killing his fiancee’s 3-year-old son while they were playing a “gun game” in their Michigan City home. Authorities said Zachariah Grisham, 24, frequently played a game in which he would point a real gun at the boy while child would point an imaginary gun back. Grisham shot the boy in the head in September 2013. He told police he forgot his gun was loaded and pulled the trigger. Grisham pleaded guilty Thursday to a felony charge of child neglect. He was originally charged with both child neglect and reckless homicide. Authorities said the shooting wasn’t intentional. “It did not meet the qualifications of murder. It’s a very unfortunate incident,” LaPorte County Deputy Prosecutor Dave Ambers told The Times of Northwest Indiana. Grisham faces up to 12 years in prison. A guy ****ed up and he is going to jail, what's your point? If everyone who killed his kid doing something stupid in a car went to jail we would run out of places to build prisons pretty quickly. Let's assume that whatever was happened in your hypothetical car trip was in service of getting people from one place to another, when something ****ed up. Or, are you saying that parents regularly take their kids out in the car expressly to play games of chicken? Please explain what purpose there is in playing games with guns? If people didn't "play games" with cars everyone would be driving a Corolla (or some other "sensible" car). If we put the same kind of restrictions on cars you want on guns they would have 5 point seat belts for all occupants, there would be speed governors, biometric sensors to be sure only authorized drivers were driving, high performance cars would be banned and we would all have to wear helmets. It would certainly save lives (more than gun restrictions) and you could still get back and forth to work "unhindered". That's baloney. There's no test for owning a firearm, you don't have to know the laws, you just go in and fill out the paperwork and if you're not a felon, you get a gun. Not one state allows you to operated a car without proper training. Your analogy doesn't hold water. In other words that dog won't hunt. You have to pass a test in California to purchase a handgun. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/2014 9:54 AM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:51:42 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: On 6/12/2014 8:37 AM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:10:55 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:21:21 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. At a certain point I agree with JP. The CCW course has very little to do with the gun and mostly talks about why you can't actually use the gun. (use of deadly force law) You did not get that in the Marines. That still has little to do with a guy who buys a skeet gun or a hunting rifle., We learned how to shoot targets at 200, 300 and 500 yards with the M16A1 for qualification. We did fam fire with the M16A1 on full-auto. We also fam fired the 1911 in .45. Nobody died on Parris Island while I was there. You guys must be good. Our longest range target was only 300 yards, for the M14. #00 yds is pleanty long enough for self defense practice, Except, maybe for Harry Krause. That '#' shows you were taught to capitalize the first word of a sentence. Must have had a non-union teacher. Maybe a nun. They'd sneak up behind and smack the **** out of your ear for not capitalizing appropriately. Everyone knows that the pound sign is a capital 3. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/2014 11:48 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 6/12/14, 11:38 AM, wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 09:54:39 -0400, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:51:42 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: #00 yds is pleanty long enough for self defense practice, Except, maybe for Harry Krause. That '#' shows you were taught to capitalize the first word of a sentence. Must have had a non-union teacher. Maybe a nun. They'd sneak up behind and smack the **** out of your ear for not capitalizing appropriately. Actually you should write out a number if it is the first thing in a sentence. Herring should consider getting psychiatric help for his "Harry Obsession." Do you know any decent psychiatric helpers? I sure don't. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 6/12/14, 11:15 AM, wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 07:27:33 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ Didn't Florida recently pass a law stating that accidental brandishing was no longer a criminal offense? That refers to something like your gun "printing" on a covering garment or your coat blowing open for a moment. If you intentionally hold your coat open to show your gun or pull it out to threaten someone, it is still brandishing. They are working on a "warning shot" exception to the 10-20-life law. As it is, if you fire a warning shot, you better look like you have a valid reason to kill them and you just missed. Every instructor I have ever had said you just shoot for the center of mass, no warning shots. That bullet is going to land somewhere and the only place you are legally allowed to have it land is in a person who is presenting an imminent threat to you. BTW that is not necessarily true if an animal that is posing that threat. The burden of proof is much higher if you shoot a protected animal. Well, of course...you want to be able to legally stand your ground against a raccoon walking through your yard. It's Florida. Hell, I wanted to shoot a raccoon in the yard the other night. Maybe two. 1:30 am and get woke up to fighting raccoons. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:21:21 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. At a certain point I agree with JP. The CCW course has very little to do with the gun and mostly talks about why you can't actually use the gun. (use of deadly force law) You did not get that in the Marines. That still has little to do with a guy who buys a skeet gun or a hunting rifle., We learned how to shoot targets at 200, 300 and 500 yards with the M16A1 for qualification. We did fam fire with the M16A1 on full-auto. We also fam fired the 1911 in .45. Nobody died on Parris Island while I was there. I was Air Force. We were not allowed to fire the M16 on full auto. And basic at Lackland used M1 carbines. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:31:49 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 6/12/2014 9:54 AM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:51:42 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: On 6/12/2014 8:37 AM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:10:55 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:21:21 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... BTW there are several states that do require some training for a handgun card and all of them require training for a concealed carry card If you have a DD214 with anything greater than a general discharge you can fore go the training. If you are active duty or reserve you can fore go the training. At a certain point I agree with JP. The CCW course has very little to do with the gun and mostly talks about why you can't actually use the gun. (use of deadly force law) You did not get that in the Marines. That still has little to do with a guy who buys a skeet gun or a hunting rifle., We learned how to shoot targets at 200, 300 and 500 yards with the M16A1 for qualification. We did fam fire with the M16A1 on full-auto. We also fam fired the 1911 in .45. Nobody died on Parris Island while I was there. You guys must be good. Our longest range target was only 300 yards, for the M14. #00 yds is pleanty long enough for self defense practice, Except, maybe for Harry Krause. That '#' shows you were taught to capitalize the first word of a sentence. Must have had a non-union teacher. Maybe a nun. They'd sneak up behind and smack the **** out of your ear for not capitalizing appropriately. Everyone knows that the pound sign is a capital 3. Absolutely. That's what Sister Mary Rosella taught me. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:33:34 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 6/12/2014 11:48 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 6/12/14, 11:38 AM, wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 09:54:39 -0400, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:51:42 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: #00 yds is pleanty long enough for self defense practice, Except, maybe for Harry Krause. That '#' shows you were taught to capitalize the first word of a sentence. Must have had a non-union teacher. Maybe a nun. They'd sneak up behind and smack the **** out of your ear for not capitalizing appropriately. Actually you should write out a number if it is the first thing in a sentence. Herring should consider getting psychiatric help for his "Harry Obsession." Do you know any decent psychiatric helpers? I sure don't. Apparently the one to whom he was the closest has moved back to Jacksonville. That big, twin-Volvo-engined trawler must get awful lonely all by his lonesome. Poor thing. |
Whoohooo!! Gun games!!!
On 6/12/14, 3:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote: On 6/12/14, 11:15 AM, wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 07:27:33 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote: On 6/11/2014 10:04 PM, Wayne.B wrote: No law against "brandishing" a firearm? That's what would get you arrested in many places. http://www.usacarry.com/brandishing-firearm/ Didn't Florida recently pass a law stating that accidental brandishing was no longer a criminal offense? That refers to something like your gun "printing" on a covering garment or your coat blowing open for a moment. If you intentionally hold your coat open to show your gun or pull it out to threaten someone, it is still brandishing. They are working on a "warning shot" exception to the 10-20-life law. As it is, if you fire a warning shot, you better look like you have a valid reason to kill them and you just missed. Every instructor I have ever had said you just shoot for the center of mass, no warning shots. That bullet is going to land somewhere and the only place you are legally allowed to have it land is in a person who is presenting an imminent threat to you. BTW that is not necessarily true if an animal that is posing that threat. The burden of proof is much higher if you shoot a protected animal. Well, of course...you want to be able to legally stand your ground against a raccoon walking through your yard. It's Florida. Hell, I wanted to shoot a raccoon in the yard the other night. Maybe two. 1:30 am and get woke up to fighting raccoons. Well, of course, because little animals are soooo annoying and there's no reason to leave them alone. I get it. -- If right-wing assholes could fly, rec.boats would be an airport! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com