Had to share this story
 

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 10/29/2014 7:40 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 10/29/2014 2:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 18:44:21 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/28/2014 5:57 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 17:37:09 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/28/2014 2:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:23:01 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

$35 every three years doesn't sound onerous to me. We pay $100 for six
years up here. Free if 70 or over.


Per gun? Eeek!

You will love Florida



LOL ... no

The $100 is for the license or renewal every 6 years.
You can own as many guns as you want. The registration process allows
the state to monitor how many you buy and sell though and they might
investigate if they suspect you are an unlicensed dealer.

I didn't take John's $35 (for three years) as being a fee per gun.
It's just for the fingerprinting.


As I said, you missed the fee per gun part.



What was it, $13 bucks or something? I don't have a problem with that.

I expect not. You wouldn't have a problem with $1300/gun, but it would
sure be an infringement on the right of many, including me, to own a
firearm, wouldn't it? Would it require a change in the Constitution to
pass such a law in a city, county, or state?



Who said I wouldn't have a problem at $1,300 per gun? You did. Not me.

$13 bucks every three years to cover the cost of having reasonable gun
registration and controls doesn't seem crazy to me. $1,300 does.

We pay $50 (per vehicle) every two years to keep car registrations current.

We pay $100 every six years to keep our gun permits current and valid.

All we are talking about are *reasonable* controls to address gun safety
and ownership concerns in the 21st Century. Citing the 2nd Amendment and
refusing to consider any laws or rules that make the rest of the
population feel more comfortable doesn't make sense.

What's the going rate for 18 holes of golf? $25-$30 bucks? What's the
going rate for a full hookup at a campsite?

Seems you are willing to pay for what you enjoy.


Cars are not a constitutionally protected item. $$ every couple years to
keep your guns? More like a poll tax to vote.

True, but I see the whole thing differently. There is much concern and
controversy surrounding firearm ownership now-a-days, some with good reason.

Some anti-gun people and groups advocate the ban on them altogether and
continue to challenge the "meaning" of the 2nd Amendment. We don't live
in the 17 or 18 hundreds. Trying to defend gun rights on the nuance and
interpretation of the 2A wording may backfire someday with a more liberal
Supreme Court. If that happens ... gun owners are screwed.

Rather than dig in our heels and reject every attempt to put reasonable
controls on gun ownership, why not try to understand the reasoning of
others and be willing to compromise without giving away your rights? If
you notice, the lack of compromise and willingness to respect other
views/concerns on issues is at the core of a totally dysfunctional
government. It's not how rational, mature people resolve an issue.

I agree somewhat. I think there should be rational gun laws. What we have
now is a mishmash of a lot of hysteria driven, non enforced laws. And even
more ignorant laws coming. Where do you draw the line? Like Harry's AR15!
Same weapon with a lighter barrel is illegal? A S&W 626 in stainless is
legal in California. Same exact weapon with the grey finish is illegal.
Never been tested and passed by the state. Absolutely stupid!

Had to share this story
 

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/29/14 7:40 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/29/14 4:54 PM, KC wrote:
On 10/29/2014 2:30 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:36:25 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/29/14 1:01 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 12:28:50 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/29/14 12:17 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:35:39 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/29/14 11:25 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 06:36:30 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/28/14 11:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 18:42:34 -0400, F*O*A*D
wrote:

On 10/28/14 5:52 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:08:54 -0400, F*O*A*D
wrote:

You send your kids out to collect plastic bottles by the
roadside to
turn in for deposit? I suppose that is easier on you than
finding and
keeping a decent job.

I think he is referring to your "hobby" of killing water
bottles and
performing mundane tasks on firearms, routinely performed by
third
world children.


Ahh, yes, I do enjoy shooting one and two liter sodapop
bottles, and I'm
going to start putting Mentos in some of them. Ginger ale,
I've found,
produces the biggest "explosions."

I doubt "third world children" are working on new in the box
Colt AR15s.

They might have some well-used ones that Dick Cheney's
corporation left
behind somewhere, though. I wonder if those kids have "Go"
and "No Go"
tools in their little kits when they need to replace the
barrels in
those Cheney Saturday Night Specials.

And since you are interested, I might upgrade the trigger in
my AR15.
It's a "milspec" trigger with a "milspec" 6-1/2 pound pull,
and is ok
but not great. I'd like a smoother trigger with maybe half
that amount
of pull.

For a moment there, I thought the Ingerfool family found a
good job
right out of the Grapes of Wrath. :)

It takes a lot more skill to keep those old M16s (and AKs)
running
than a new in the box AR.
The fact that you have access to lots of off the shelf parts
does not
enhance your argument.




I have no use or need for a select fire M16, though I don't see
where
regular maintenance on it would be any more difficult or even
significantly different than on my AR15. There's very little
difference
in stripping them down and keeping them running. Most of the
parts are
identical. The key is keeping the rifle clean and lubed.

I don't know anything about the care and maintenance of the AK
rifles.
They don't interest me.

Non responsive answer ... again.


Your posit was that it took more skill to keep an old M16
running. What
skills would it take beyond my ability to produce a working AR15
from a
stripped lower and upper? I have the skills I need to build and
maintain
my AR rifles. I know where all the pieces and parts go, including
the
various springs and detents. I have no desire or need to
manufacture a
billet lower or hammer a barrel.

As I stated, I don't know anything about AKs.

A 3d world child is keeping an old M16 running with limited access to
parts if any and it is usually a worn out Vietnam era M16A1 that we
gave away during one of our "save the world from communism"
misadventures.
That is far more difficult than simply dropping new parts in a new
lower. and acting like you are a master gunsmith.



Really. What parts are these Third World kids machining? Springs?
Detents? Levers? Are they carving parts out of hickory logs? Or are
they
simply scavenging parts out of one old rifle and tossing them into
another old rifle.

Exactly.

I made no claim of being a master gunsmith. I'm no more of a master
gunsmith than you are a master auto mechanic, public health expert, or
environmental engineer, or an expert in any of the other 100 areas in
which you've claimed mastery.

You only seem to hang your hat on that one skill, assembling erector
set guns..



I don't see rec.boats as a place where I would want to discuss or show
my expertise with Trompe-l'Å“il oil painting.


Oh brother.... learned a new word on the internets I see... lol.


No, you ignorant ass. Took art history classes (two) in college.



Or a drafting class.


Took mechanical drawing in junior high school. In those days, the public
schools had $$$ for interesting electives. Took "art" in two grades,
chorus in 9th grade. What did your junior high do for "culture," Bilious,
hand out comic books?



My junior high school and high school were excellent schools. My public
high school had the highest grade point and graduation rate of any public
school at UC Berkeley. But UC professors and administrators kids went to
these schools. And was the last of the 50's students, so we actually had
good teachers, and not union protected incompetents. Lots of our teachers
went to school on the GI bill for WW2, so they had both life experience and
some common sense. Unlike what we have for teachers now.

Had to share this story
 

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/29/14 8:28 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:54:46 -0400, KC wrote:

On 10/29/2014 2:30 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:36:25 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


I don't see rec.boats as a place where I would want to discuss or show
my expertise with Trompe-l'Å“il oil painting.


Oh brother.... learned a new word on the internets I see... lol.

Paint by number?


It is just a pretentious way of saying you have a degree of
perspective in your picture. It is usually taught in the introduction
to art class.
In it's most simple sense, you create a vanishing point somewhere near
the center of the picture with lines to the edges of the frame and use
that to scale object sizes as you move forward toward the viewer.
Once you get the concept, you know objects far away are smaller than
objects up close and you adjust shapes to reflect it still using those
imaginary lines.
The more off center your vanishing point is, the more oblique the view
is that you are representing.

My father was an artist in his spare time, mostly working in charcoal.
I learned these concepts in grade school. I just never really found
the love for the process.


Well, of course you didn't, because appreciation of art or the creation
of it, why, they are liberal arts pursuits.


Bull****. Some are creative in other than painting, and other "art".

Had to share this story
 

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:32:26 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/29/2014 2:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 18:44:21 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/28/2014 5:57 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 17:37:09 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/28/2014 2:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:23:01 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

$35 every three years doesn't sound onerous to me. We pay $100 for six
years up here. Free if 70 or over.


Per gun? Eeek!

You will love Florida



LOL ... no

The $100 is for the license or renewal every 6 years.
You can own as many guns as you want. The registration process allows
the state to monitor how many you buy and sell though and they might
investigate if they suspect you are an unlicensed dealer.

I didn't take John's $35 (for three years) as being a fee per gun.
It's just for the fingerprinting.


As I said, you missed the fee per gun part.



What was it, $13 bucks or something? I don't have a problem with that.

I expect not. You wouldn't have a problem with $1300/gun, but it would
sure be an infringement on the right of many, including me, to own a
firearm, wouldn't it? Would it require a change in the Constitution to
pass such a law in a city, county, or state?



Who said I wouldn't have a problem at $1,300 per gun? You did. Not me.

$13 bucks every three years to cover the cost of having reasonable gun
registration and controls doesn't seem crazy to me. $1,300 does.

We pay $50 (per vehicle) every two years to keep car registrations current.

We pay $100 every six years to keep our gun permits current and valid.

All we are talking about are *reasonable* controls to address gun
safety and ownership concerns in the 21st Century.

What you consider reasonable and what Bloomberg, et al, consider
reasonable are two very different things.

Citing the 2nd
Amendment and refusing to consider any laws or rules that make the rest
of the population feel more comfortable doesn't make sense.

Who's doing that?

What's the going rate for 18 holes of golf? $25-$30 bucks? What's the
going rate for a full hookup at a campsite?

For cheap golf, since I walk, yes. Campsites probably average $45. So
what? The Constitution says absolutely nothing about golf or camping.
If the county government wanted to impose an extra $50 tax on camping,
there would be no infringement of my rights.

Seems you are willing to pay for what you enjoy.




My point, which you seem adept at skipping over, is that very
unreasonable laws *could* be made without those changes to the
Constitution you deemed impossible.

$100 every six years for your gun permits is chicken feed. But that
same amount to one who can't afford $5 for a photo ID to enable him to
vote may be insurmountable. Therefore his rights are being infringed
upon.

Had to share this story
 

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 22:34:32 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:24:39 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/29/14 8:28 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:54:46 -0400, KC wrote:

On 10/29/2014 2:30 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:36:25 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


I don't see rec.boats as a place where I would want to discuss or show
my expertise with Trompe-l'œil oil painting.


Oh brother.... learned a new word on the internets I see... lol.

Paint by number?


It is just a pretentious way of saying you have a degree of
perspective in your picture. It is usually taught in the introduction
to art class.
In it's most simple sense, you create a vanishing point somewhere near
the center of the picture with lines to the edges of the frame and use
that to scale object sizes as you move forward toward the viewer.
Once you get the concept, you know objects far away are smaller than
objects up close and you adjust shapes to reflect it still using those
imaginary lines.
The more off center your vanishing point is, the more oblique the view
is that you are representing.

My father was an artist in his spare time, mostly working in charcoal.
I learned these concepts in grade school. I just never really found
the love for the process.


Well, of course you didn't, because appreciation of art or the creation
of it, why, they are liberal arts pursuits.

Again you totally misunderstand what I said. I just had no interest in
drawing or painting. I still appreciate the work of people who do.
The mechanics interested me, I just was not that interested in doing
it myself. Perhaps my dyslexia may have had something to do with it.

Oh ****. Something else for Harry to add to his data base. In twenty
years he'll be calling you names with 'dyslexia' therein.

Had to share this story
 

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:21:32 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:46:21 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/29/14 5:34 PM, amdx wrote:
On 10/28/2014 7:06 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/28/14 7:58 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


It would be absurd to draw any conclusions from this data - right?



Not at all. The conclusion is that you are an ill-informed, ignorant
racist.


I'm curious, is he racist because of something he said in this post,
or are you are you just calling people racist again.

Mikek





Some years before your arrival here, Herring worked as a substitute
babysitter teacher frequently made racist comments about his minority
students and their families, he's made anti-ethnic remarks about
Latinos, and over the years, he's made all manner of racist remarks
about blacks. I call him a racist because he is one.

Curiosity satisfied?

===

What if the remarks he made about his students were true? Would he
still be a racist? Under the law you can not libel someone with a
true statement.

It's for damn sure any comments I made about students and their lack
of parental support were true.

Had to share this story
 

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:34:34 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 10/28/2014 7:06 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/28/14 7:58 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


It would be absurd to draw any conclusions from this data - right?



Not at all. The conclusion is that you are an ill-informed, ignorant
racist.


I'm curious, is he racist because of something he said in this post,
or are you are you just calling people racist again.

Mikek



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

For the record: Harry is a liar. Many, many examples of same are
readily available.

Of course, there may be some folks here who actually believe Harry
took the photo of the owls posted as his own, or that he actually does
have a 'Maryland red barn' on his property.

Had to share this story
 

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:25:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/29/14 6:16 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:57:28 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 10/29/14 5:55 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:21:29 -0400, Harrold wrote:

Alarms, booby traps, security lighting, security cameras, guns behind
the double deadbolted steel doors. Nah, he's not paranoid. All that's
missing is a moat and a gun turret on the roof. What is Krausie so
afraid of?

===

That's easy, he's afraid of the past. Did you ever see the episode of
the Sopranos where Tony is in a small town in Maine and runs into a
mob informer who is now in the witness protection program? It's not
pretty. I don't think Harry is in the WPP but there are still things
that can go bump in the night, even if you've lived an otherwise
exemplary life like he has.



Still got that alarm system on your dock, W'hine? How about the one on
your house for when you are out of town?

===

Maybe you should watch that episode of the Sopranos if you missed it.
It might make you a little "tight" under the collar.


Oh, I've known a few of the "real deal" guys over the years.

Nice fellows, and far less crooked than your banksters. I knew Jimmy
Hoffa -distantly- in Detroit when the Teamsters were aligned with my UAW
client, I knew Roy Williams pretty well from my reporter days and his
union days in Kansas City, and I did some work for the Teamsters when
Jackie Presser ran the show. Jackie had a habit of calling me early
Sunday mornings...it was a bit of a startle the first few times.

So, you still have that alarm system on your dock, W'hine?

Gosh, breakfast with all those presidents, Yale education, and
friendships with mobsters...what *haven't* you done, Harry?

And why are you crossposting? Do the folks in the other group really
need to hear of your exploits?

Had to share this story
 

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:58:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/29/2014 7:40 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 10/29/2014 2:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 18:44:21 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/28/2014 5:57 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 17:37:09 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/28/2014 2:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:23:01 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

$35 every three years doesn't sound onerous to me. We pay $100 for six
years up here. Free if 70 or over.


Per gun? Eeek!

You will love Florida



LOL ... no

The $100 is for the license or renewal every 6 years.
You can own as many guns as you want. The registration process allows
the state to monitor how many you buy and sell though and they might
investigate if they suspect you are an unlicensed dealer.

I didn't take John's $35 (for three years) as being a fee per gun.
It's just for the fingerprinting.


As I said, you missed the fee per gun part.



What was it, $13 bucks or something? I don't have a problem with that.

I expect not. You wouldn't have a problem with $1300/gun, but it would
sure be an infringement on the right of many, including me, to own a
firearm, wouldn't it? Would it require a change in the Constitution to
pass such a law in a city, county, or state?



Who said I wouldn't have a problem at $1,300 per gun? You did. Not me.

$13 bucks every three years to cover the cost of having reasonable gun
registration and controls doesn't seem crazy to me. $1,300 does.

We pay $50 (per vehicle) every two years to keep car registrations current.

We pay $100 every six years to keep our gun permits current and valid.

All we are talking about are *reasonable* controls to address gun safety
and ownership concerns in the 21st Century. Citing the 2nd Amendment and
refusing to consider any laws or rules that make the rest of the
population feel more comfortable doesn't make sense.

What's the going rate for 18 holes of golf? $25-$30 bucks? What's the
going rate for a full hookup at a campsite?

Seems you are willing to pay for what you enjoy.


Cars are not a constitutionally protected item. $$ every couple years to
keep your guns? More like a poll tax to vote.

True, but I see the whole thing differently. There is much concern and
controversy surrounding firearm ownership now-a-days, some with good reason.

Some anti-gun people and groups advocate the ban on them altogether and
continue to challenge the "meaning" of the 2nd Amendment. We don't live
in the 17 or 18 hundreds. Trying to defend gun rights on the nuance and
interpretation of the 2A wording may backfire someday with a more
liberal Supreme Court. If that happens ... gun owners are screwed.

Rather than dig in our heels and reject every attempt to put reasonable
controls on gun ownership, why not try to understand the reasoning of
others and be willing to compromise without giving away your rights?
If you notice, the lack of compromise and willingness to respect other
views/concerns on issues is at the core of a totally dysfunctional
government. It's not how rational, mature people resolve an issue.



I'll bet there is no one here unwilling to compromise on 'reasonable'
gun controls. For example, I see nothing wrong with a law prohibiting
the sale of 'fully automatic' weapons to the general public. And I
have no problems with a background check, as long as the check isn't
used at some later date to confiscate or take other action against me
for gun ownership.

Define 'reasonable'. That's the problem. When do 'reasonable gun
controls' give away my rights? You say $1300/gun is 'unreasonable' and
therefore couldn't happen. How about $273.94/gun every six years?
Would that be 'unreasonable'? If we changed it to every three years?
How about every year? Have you ever seen a 'tax' go away?

I have. Last year I wrote emails and letters to the state and Governor
in regards to the state parks charging $10/night/dog in a campsite.
That cost me an extra $20/night. This year the state stopped adding
the extra fee. I doubt my correspondence changed any minds, but it
might have helped a bit.

Had to share this story
 

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:21:36 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/29/2014 8:13 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:32:26 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

What's the going rate for 18 holes of golf? $25-$30 bucks?

Closer to a "benny" here in season if you want to play a nice course..



I am sure John must get decent fees at the military courses he plays.

Quantico and Fort Belvoir charge me $26/18 holes - walking. A cart
adds $16 and greatly reduces the calorie burn.

Mostly I play a local county course - Greendale - which charges me $19
to play 18 holes - walking.

But, if they raised the rates to $450, I couldn't complain that my
Constitutional rights were being violated.