True North wrote:
Mr. Luddite
- show quoted text -
"It was a joke Scott. I don't give a crap about either of the
candidates for the governorship of Florida.

Say, what *was* that third department Rick Perry wanted to abolish?

General Disclaimer:

Due to the sensitivities of some viewers, this post should not be
interpreted as "bullying" or as an expression of superiority. No one was
harmed in the creation of this post, directly or indirectly. "

SNERK!
That L'il Snot is quite the sensitive drama queen.
He works extra hard at being offended.

Takes lessons at the same school you do.

On 10/17/2014 3:05 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/17/2014 2:59 PM, KC wrote:
On 10/17/2014 2:42 PM, True North wrote:
Mr. Luddite
- show quoted text -
"It was a joke Scott. I don't give a crap about either of the
candidates for the governorship of Florida.

Say, what *was* that third department Rick Perry wanted to abolish?

General Disclaimer:

Due to the sensitivities of some viewers, this post should not be
interpreted as "bullying" or as an expression of superiority. No one was
harmed in the creation of this post, directly or indirectly. "

SNERK!
That L'il Snot is quite the sensitive drama queen.
He works extra hard at being offended.



"It was a joke" is the final justification for political placation...


In this case it was to help prevent you from having an aneurysm.



redux....

On Friday, October 17, 2014 6:12:24 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:45:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:



Gee, Greg, I simply don't know. If I were you, I'd be more concerned

about the fact that your current governor is a crook whose company had

to pay the largest fine for fraud in the history of the United States

and who pled the Fifth Amendment what, 75 times?



Plus, he's not a fan of fans.







It turns out Scott was right. Fans were specifically against the

debate rules.

I totally enjoyed my M1A and my 1987 M1 garrand, as well as my Hakim.

Only thing I have right now in high powered rifles chambereed .30 is a collection of .303 Lee's

On 10/17/2014 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:45:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Gee, Greg, I simply don't know. If I were you, I'd be more concerned
about the fact that your current governor is a crook whose company had
to pay the largest fine for fraud in the history of the United States
and who pled the Fifth Amendment what, 75 times?

Plus, he's not a fan of fans.



It turns out Scott was right. Fans were specifically against the
debate rules.


Hey, watch it... next you will say breaking the rules is cheating! Of
course you never know what else they could have back there, the dems in
Fla do have a record of going pretty far to cheat in debates.

On 10/17/14 9:21 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 15:20:26 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

If you live in Maryland and travel out of state, you can legally buy
hi-cap mags in another state and legally bring them back into Maryland,
so...in that regard, Maryland and California are not alike.


Like I said, the stupidest "assault weapons ban" I have ever seen.
Knowing what I do about Maryland politics, it makes me wonder who
bribed whom to get these loopholes in the law.



The bans have effective dates, with ownership prior to the effective
date "grandfathered" legal. So, while Maryland can ban the sale of
certain items such as hi-cap mags after a certain date, it can hardly
ban the purchase of those items out of state because they are not serial
numbered and date of purchase cannot be established.

Now, if you have a skinny barrel upper on a legal lower, and that lower
was manufactured/purchased after the ban date, you could be in trouble,
because the state can determine the "age" of that lower, possibly its
date of manufacture, and certainly the date you legally bought it from
an FFL.

--
The new GOP credo:

Hate the people who are being oppressed,
love the people who are doing the oppressing.

On 10/17/2014 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:45:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Gee, Greg, I simply don't know. If I were you, I'd be more concerned
about the fact that your current governor is a crook whose company had
to pay the largest fine for fraud in the history of the United States
and who pled the Fifth Amendment what, 75 times?

Plus, he's not a fan of fans.



It turns out Scott was right. Fans were specifically against the
debate rules.



You too?

It was a joke.

On 10/18/2014 12:53 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 22:08:47 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/17/14 9:21 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 15:20:26 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

If you live in Maryland and travel out of state, you can legally buy
hi-cap mags in another state and legally bring them back into Maryland,
so...in that regard, Maryland and California are not alike.


Like I said, the stupidest "assault weapons ban" I have ever seen.
Knowing what I do about Maryland politics, it makes me wonder who
bribed whom to get these loopholes in the law.



The bans have effective dates, with ownership prior to the effective
date "grandfathered" legal. So, while Maryland can ban the sale of
certain items such as hi-cap mags after a certain date, it can hardly
ban the purchase of those items out of state because they are not serial
numbered and date of purchase cannot be established.

Now, if you have a skinny barrel upper on a legal lower, and that lower
was manufactured/purchased after the ban date, you could be in trouble,
because the state can determine the "age" of that lower, possibly its
date of manufacture, and certainly the date you legally bought it from
an FFL.

So why even bother?

If there are millions of assault weapons exempted, it sounds like
politicians just trying to be able to say they are doing something

I suppose that is just what happens when you try to write a law that
is uncontitutional on it's face.



Here's how high capacity magazines are treated in Massachusetts. My
understanding is that if you have a pre-ban magazine and it's possession
is questioned the owner has to prove he/she owned it prior to 1994.

http://massguns.com/the-massachusetts-high-capacity-magazine-ban/

On 10/18/2014 1:06 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 22:22:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/17/2014 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:45:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Gee, Greg, I simply don't know. If I were you, I'd be more concerned
about the fact that your current governor is a crook whose company had
to pay the largest fine for fraud in the history of the United States
and who pled the Fifth Amendment what, 75 times?

Plus, he's not a fan of fans.



It turns out Scott was right. Fans were specifically against the
debate rules.



You too?

It was a joke.


It was not seen as a joke here. The news tried to make a big deal of
"fangate" until they finally read the rules,

Personally I think Scott missed a great line

"Mr Crist is here with cool air blowing up his front side while he is
blowing smoke up the voter's backside"


You have to hand it to Crist. He is a master politician whereas Scott
was able to counter the bull**** and smoke with facts every time he saw
Crist's lips moving.

On 10/18/14 12:53 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 22:08:47 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/17/14 9:21 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 15:20:26 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

If you live in Maryland and travel out of state, you can legally buy
hi-cap mags in another state and legally bring them back into Maryland,
so...in that regard, Maryland and California are not alike.


Like I said, the stupidest "assault weapons ban" I have ever seen.
Knowing what I do about Maryland politics, it makes me wonder who
bribed whom to get these loopholes in the law.



The bans have effective dates, with ownership prior to the effective
date "grandfathered" legal. So, while Maryland can ban the sale of
certain items such as hi-cap mags after a certain date, it can hardly
ban the purchase of those items out of state because they are not serial
numbered and date of purchase cannot be established.

Now, if you have a skinny barrel upper on a legal lower, and that lower
was manufactured/purchased after the ban date, you could be in trouble,
because the state can determine the "age" of that lower, possibly its
date of manufacture, and certainly the date you legally bought it from
an FFL.

So why even bother?

If there are millions of assault weapons exempted, it sounds like
politicians just trying to be able to say they are doing something

I suppose that is just what happens when you try to write a law that
is uncontitutional on it's face.


Just what in the Maryland "banned gun list" is unConstitutional?


--
The new GOP credo:

Hate the people who are being oppressed,
love the people who are doing the oppressing.

On 10/18/14 1:06 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 22:22:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/17/2014 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:45:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Gee, Greg, I simply don't know. If I were you, I'd be more concerned
about the fact that your current governor is a crook whose company had
to pay the largest fine for fraud in the history of the United States
and who pled the Fifth Amendment what, 75 times?

Plus, he's not a fan of fans.



It turns out Scott was right. Fans were specifically against the
debate rules.



You too?

It was a joke.


It was not seen as a joke here. The news tried to make a big deal of
"fangate" until they finally read the rules,

Personally I think Scott missed a great line

"Mr Crist is here with cool air blowing up his front side while he is
blowing smoke up the voter's backside"


Scott making any comments about another politician's honesty is
laughable. Mr. "Biggest Fine Ever - 75 Fifth Amendment Pleas"


--
The new GOP credo:

Hate the people who are being oppressed,
love the people who are doing the oppressing.