Had to share this story
 

On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 06:38:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/1/2014 1:18 AM, wrote:


Felons are unlikely to sign any kind of transfer form, that is the
express train to the slammer, so I am not sure that is even relevant.


Greg, you are therefore making the case *for* gun registration and the
tracking of sales/transfers.

Don't know how you got that from what Greg said. Felons making
transfers are not going to worry about paperwork.

From the ATF:
http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms-frequently-asked-questions-unlicensed-persons#possession-restrictions

Q: Are there certain persons who cannot legally receive or possess
firearms and/or ammunition?

Yes, a person who —

Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by
imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year;
Is a fugitive from justice;
Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled
substance;
Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been
committed to a mental institution;
Is an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States or an
alien admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;
Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable
conditions;
Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his
or her citizenship;
Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from
harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of
such intimate partner; or
Has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
Cannot lawfully receive, possess, ship, or transport a
firearm.

A person who is under indictment or information for a crime
punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year cannot lawfully
receive a firearm.

Such person may continue to lawfully possess firearms obtained
prior to the indictment or information.

[18 U.S.C. 922(g) and (n), 27 CFR 478.32]

Granted, if Joe Blow walked up and said he wanted to buy my P938, I
wouldn't know if he fell into one of the categories above. So, I
wouldn't sell him my gun.

If he were persistent, I'd tell him to get in the car and we'd go to
the nearest FFL dealer where he could pay the fee and complete the
paperwork.

But, if I'm transfering the gun to someone, like my son-in-law, whom I
know well, then I'll just record the transfer on the form I posted
earlier.

Easy.

Had to share this story
 

On Friday, October 31, 2014 11:07:15 PM UTC-4, KC wrote:
On 10/31/2014 10:33 PM, wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 7:30:25 PM UTC-4, KC wrote:
On 10/31/2014 3:54 PM, wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 3:40:00 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:29:47 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, October 31, 2014 2:36:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:

These days they are pretty useless anyway because all of these cars
with collision avoidance systems trip them.

Not really. The newer detectors are *much* smarter, and the adaptive cruise controls and collision avoidance systems don't even register on them.

This is the one I have:
https://www.escortradar.com/PassportMax2/
Dies it really help that much these days with the triggered guns and
the lasers?
Since I left Maryland, the speed trap capital of the world, I really
have not been paying much attention

Yes and no. With the instant-on or pulse guns, you're depending on it being used on someone traveling in front of you so you get the alert. You have to be pretty close to the gun for it to measure your speed, but the detector can pick it up from a very long distance. Even if they don't clock someone first, if you are quick enough with the brakes you may still knock enough off before it locks in to avoid a ticket.

With laser you're hoping to get a scattered laser signal when they clock someone else. Good news is that they must be stationary and can't shoot you through a closed window. Laser, at least around here, is rare.

So they do work, but you have to be vigilant and pay attention to traffic and your situation. Hey, that sounds like driving, at least what you're supposed to do!

Bottom line, you can't set your speed at 20 over and blindly drive like the old days of X and K band that was always on. Personally, I never go any faster than I'm willing to get caught for. Well, most of the time...


I don't get it.. to me a radar decector means you don't really give a
**** about me or my family, you are gonna' do what ever you want, kind
of like that nurse in Maine who could care less about the quarantine
cause she thinks she is just entitled to put others in danger. Selfish
people use radar detectors to go faster than their elected officials
think they should go to protect themselves and others... and probably
call the cops when somebody speeds by their house, after all, they are
selfish.... lol!

But yet you wrote " I routinely set my cc to 72-73 on the highway when the speed limit is 65". Seems that you have no problem that "you don't really give a **** about me or my family" when you are driving above the limits set by your elected officials.

Fact is, I don't talk on my cell phone when driving, I keep to the right except when passing, I'm courteous to other drivers, and I actually actively participate in driving. I'm far safer than 99.9% of the other drivers on the road, even when speeding at 15 over the limit.

And no, I don't speed in a neighborhood, mine or anyone else's. And it does **** me off when someone does.

It's all about making the right judgment calls Know what I mean?


I don't really think 5 mph over is all that bad, and neither do the cops
or the state... Folks that use radar dectectors do it so they can go
insanly over the speed limit and don't tell me different, if they
didn't, they wouldn't have any need for a detector.. that's why I don't
need one...

You said you went 8 over. That's insane to some people, but I guess you get to decide where the line is. OK.

Had to share this story
 

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 22:00:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 9:40 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 10/30/2014 10:17 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:45:08 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/30/2014 8:22 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:48:03 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Of course, there are the hard core gun nuts who jump to the claim that
registration automatically means confiscation someday. I don't think we
will ever see that happen.

===

Based on the way things seem to be going, I don't think you can rule
it out. Rights are eroded one small step at a time. I don't
consider myself to be a hard core gun nut but do try to read the tea
leaves and check which way the wind is blowing.



I guess I've been reading different tea leaves.

If there has ever been a period for advocates of gun bans and/or repeal
of the 2A to be successful it was in the recent 18 month period that
involved something like 74 separate mass school shootings.

Can you cite one of those shootings that would have been stopped with
a stronger background check or gun registration? They had no problem
tracking every one of these guns back to a legal buyer, usually the
parent or the shooter himself.


They couldn't even get a universal background check approved.

Why bother to pass an unenforceable law, at least not against the
people you are trying to keep the gun away from.




That's not the point Greg. We were discussing the possibilities or
probabilities of guns being banned or revoking the 2A. My point was
that if there was ever a reason for those who would advocate a ban it
would have been the recent 74 mass school shootings. It wasn't enough
to even get universal background checks supported. That's why I don't
think you'll ever see a general ban of firearms in our lifetime or of
the next two or three generations.

You are approaching this issue with a can of paint and a brush while
standing at the door to a room with your back to the inside of the room.
With every compromise you are taking a step backwards toward the corner
of the room and laying down a swath of wet paint in front of you.

Compromise to Gun Control Advocates is where you do what they say.



One thing is for sure Bar. This discussion has opened my eyes with
regard to how touchy this subject is and how adamant and fundamental
people are about their "gun rights". Even suggesting that maybe some
reasonable controls be considered results in condemnation and ridicule
by some.

But what else is new? If you can't debate the subject ridicule the
opponent.


I honestly saw no ridicule in BAR's post. And I don't recall any
ridicule in any of the other posts.

I took BAR's post figuratively - 'anyone' allowing the passage of one
more gun control measure is painting himself into that corner.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/1/2014 12:04 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 19:05:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Gun control and it's related issues are a big deal in today's society.
We shouldn't bury our heads in the sand and ignore it while clinging to
the 2A and interpretations of what "infringement" means. Eventually it
may be interpreted in a way that gun nuts won't like. Better to
reason, negotiate and find ways to keep 2A rights while satisfying those
who would like to revoke it entirely. This is the 21st century.

===

History has repeatedly shown that a policy of appeasement is the wrong
strategy against an intractable foe. The NRA is frequently criticzed
for their hard ball, "my way or the highway," no compromise tactics
but I think they appreciate that every inch of ground lost will be
twice as difficult to regain. A lot of the political hysteria is a
result of the mostly liberal media flogging every incident for all
it's worth. Meanwhile, the real issue statistically, black-on-black
murder, seems to get very little media attention unless an NFL
football player is involved.

Luckily there aren't too many footballers committing murder, otherwise
they'd have to ban football.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/1/2014 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/1/2014 2:00 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 22:25:06 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



I did a lot of driving a few years ago back and forth from Florida. Made
about 11 or 12 trips, about 1500 miles each way over a period of three
years. Many of the trips included hauling a trailer or a boat.

It took 2 and a half days, regardless of how fast I drove.

Did one trip non-stop other than a 20 minute nap and fuel stops. I'll
never do that again.

I used to go to Florida from Southern Md twice a year for years. It is
a shorter ride (950 or so) to St Pete and my fastest trip was a tad
over 14 hours door to door. Usually it was more like 17 or 18 with a
short nap in a truck stop or a rest station along the way (Brunswick
Georgia generally) By then the sun was up and I did the Florida leg.

I had a radar detector but the real aid was the childrens band radio
and choosing your travel time carefully. I did most of the driving at
night but I was a midnight to 8 guy anyway.



The worst part of driving to Florida (or anywhere south of here) is
getting through the southern part of CT, New York and New Jersey.
After that it's a pretty easy drive except for some parts of Maryland.

I used to leave MA at about 11 pm after sleeping in the afternoon or
evening. That would usually get me over the George Washington Bridge in
New York just before the major rush hour traffic.


A detour over the mountains is a pleasant way to avoid those crazy city
dwellas. You just have to safely make your way out of taxachusetts
first.;-)

Had to share this story
 

On 11/1/2014 8:01 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 21:19:40 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 8:49 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 13:02:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Raises another question. Ever wonder why a new gun comes with a spent
shell in the box or case?

To test functionality. And/Or, to build a database of gun "fingerprints", i.e. bullet striations. That info, along with registration, can lead back to the owner.

I have never bought a gun with a case in the box.
I do question the validity of all of these ballistic fingerprint
things if the gun has been used a lot. I agree that if they have the
gun and a recently fired bullet or case, they usually can match them
up but if this gun has several thousand rounds of barrel erosion and
the slings and arrows of dirty ammo going through it, matching up
tool marks from the day it was made is going to be far from exact.

I bet the difference between S/N xxxxx1 and xxxxx2 brand new is less
than xxxx1 to xxxx1 after years of hard use. If the same tool cut the
rifling, won't the tool marks be very close to the same?




Interesting. When was the last time you bought a new gun?

Every gun I have purchased in the past 3-4 years has an envelope with a
spent round casing that was fired from the gun at the factory.

It's also mandatory that new guns come with some type of lock.

Is this a MA thing or is it true everywhere?


The S&W's I bought came with a shell casing in a sealed envelope. The
Sig Sauers came without a casing. The Kimber also came without a
casing, but it did have a sticker on the box saying, "NO SHELL CASING
FOR MARYLAND."


Ah .. That suggests the purpose is other than simply to prove the gun
was test fired.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/1/2014 8:35 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 22:00:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 9:40 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 10/30/2014 10:17 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:45:08 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/30/2014 8:22 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:48:03 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Of course, there are the hard core gun nuts who jump to the claim that
registration automatically means confiscation someday. I don't think we
will ever see that happen.

===

Based on the way things seem to be going, I don't think you can rule
it out. Rights are eroded one small step at a time. I don't
consider myself to be a hard core gun nut but do try to read the tea
leaves and check which way the wind is blowing.



I guess I've been reading different tea leaves.

If there has ever been a period for advocates of gun bans and/or repeal
of the 2A to be successful it was in the recent 18 month period that
involved something like 74 separate mass school shootings.

Can you cite one of those shootings that would have been stopped with
a stronger background check or gun registration? They had no problem
tracking every one of these guns back to a legal buyer, usually the
parent or the shooter himself.


They couldn't even get a universal background check approved.

Why bother to pass an unenforceable law, at least not against the
people you are trying to keep the gun away from.




That's not the point Greg. We were discussing the possibilities or
probabilities of guns being banned or revoking the 2A. My point was
that if there was ever a reason for those who would advocate a ban it
would have been the recent 74 mass school shootings. It wasn't enough
to even get universal background checks supported. That's why I don't
think you'll ever see a general ban of firearms in our lifetime or of
the next two or three generations.

You are approaching this issue with a can of paint and a brush while
standing at the door to a room with your back to the inside of the room.
With every compromise you are taking a step backwards toward the corner
of the room and laying down a swath of wet paint in front of you.

Compromise to Gun Control Advocates is where you do what they say.



One thing is for sure Bar. This discussion has opened my eyes with
regard to how touchy this subject is and how adamant and fundamental
people are about their "gun rights". Even suggesting that maybe some
reasonable controls be considered results in condemnation and ridicule
by some.

But what else is new? If you can't debate the subject ridicule the
opponent.


I honestly saw no ridicule in BAR's post. And I don't recall any
ridicule in any of the other posts.

I took BAR's post figuratively - 'anyone' allowing the passage of one
more gun control measure is painting himself into that corner.


Poorly worded on my part. You are correct.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/1/2014 1:38 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 21:16:32 -0400, KC wrote:

On 10/31/2014 9:09 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 19:30:15 -0400, KC wrote:


I don't get it.. to me a radar decector means you don't really give a
**** about me or my family, you are gonna' do what ever you want, kind
of like that nurse in Maine who could care less about the quarantine
cause she thinks she is just entitled to put others in danger. Selfish
people use radar detectors to go faster than their elected officials
think they should go to protect themselves and others... and probably
call the cops when somebody speeds by their house, after all, they are
selfish.... lol!

If you lived in Maryland when they were the speed trap state, it would
make more sense to you. 65 on the beltway was not endangering anyone.
Writing tickets for it was simply revenue.


Were they writing tickets for less than ten over?

Yes. 9 over was $20 and one point, 10 over was $40 and 2 points.
Five over generally got you a ticket.
When they did the Beltway at rush hour, usually everyone got a 9 over
ticket. They would shoot the first car in a "platoon" (pack), 20 cops
would jump out in the road and wave everyone over. They would write
like crazy until they were are cited, and do it again.
They usually had the ticket pretty much made out before they got there
and they just put in the time and the name, DL number etc. This was
production speed trapping at it's finest.

If you didn't stop, you got an "evading" ticket and you were in
serious trouble. You might even be arrested and have your car
impounded.

That was when a radar detector was handy. If you had enough warning,
you could drop out of the pack and pull over on the shoulder if
necessary. Usually just being obviously slower than everyone else was
enough but you had the real chance of being hit from behind.


Well, that's nuts I guess glad I wasn't there but I probably wouldn't
have gotten nailed anyway. Aside from the examples I gave above, I
rarely go over the sl anyway. Of course half of my driving is with a
trailer on... Aside from within the city limits in CT, it's gotten to
the point that the average speed say, west of hartford, south of
Cromwell, or East of hartford to the Mass border, the "Average speed" is
probably 75 with the fast lane up around 80-85 a lot of the time
depending on conditions.. Going 65-70 like me holds up traffic, going
55-65 is just dangerous because they will pass you on both sides and of
course as you all know, folks just seem to think cause you have a
trailer, you can maneuver and stop faster than Mario Andretti so they
cut you off left and right... Either way,like I said, it's very rare
when I get more than say, 3-7 miles over.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/1/2014 8:32 AM, wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 11:07:15 PM UTC-4, KC wrote:
On 10/31/2014 10:33 PM, wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 7:30:25 PM UTC-4, KC wrote:
On 10/31/2014 3:54 PM, wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 3:40:00 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:29:47 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, October 31, 2014 2:36:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:

These days they are pretty useless anyway because all of these cars
with collision avoidance systems trip them.

Not really. The newer detectors are *much* smarter, and the adaptive cruise controls and collision avoidance systems don't even register on them.

This is the one I have:
https://www.escortradar.com/PassportMax2/
Dies it really help that much these days with the triggered guns and
the lasers?
Since I left Maryland, the speed trap capital of the world, I really
have not been paying much attention

Yes and no. With the instant-on or pulse guns, you're depending on it being used on someone traveling in front of you so you get the alert. You have to be pretty close to the gun for it to measure your speed, but the detector can pick it up from a very long distance. Even if they don't clock someone first, if you are quick enough with the brakes you may still knock enough off before it locks in to avoid a ticket.

With laser you're hoping to get a scattered laser signal when they clock someone else. Good news is that they must be stationary and can't shoot you through a closed window. Laser, at least around here, is rare.

So they do work, but you have to be vigilant and pay attention to traffic and your situation. Hey, that sounds like driving, at least what you're supposed to do!

Bottom line, you can't set your speed at 20 over and blindly drive like the old days of X and K band that was always on. Personally, I never go any faster than I'm willing to get caught for. Well, most of the time...


I don't get it.. to me a radar decector means you don't really give a
**** about me or my family, you are gonna' do what ever you want, kind
of like that nurse in Maine who could care less about the quarantine
cause she thinks she is just entitled to put others in danger. Selfish
people use radar detectors to go faster than their elected officials
think they should go to protect themselves and others... and probably
call the cops when somebody speeds by their house, after all, they are
selfish.... lol!

But yet you wrote " I routinely set my cc to 72-73 on the highway when the speed limit is 65". Seems that you have no problem that "you don't really give a **** about me or my family" when you are driving above the limits set by your elected officials.

Fact is, I don't talk on my cell phone when driving, I keep to the right except when passing, I'm courteous to other drivers, and I actually actively participate in driving. I'm far safer than 99.9% of the other drivers on the road, even when speeding at 15 over the limit.

And no, I don't speed in a neighborhood, mine or anyone else's. And it does **** me off when someone does.

It's all about making the right judgment calls Know what I mean?


I don't really think 5 mph over is all that bad, and neither do the cops
or the state... Folks that use radar dectectors do it so they can go
insanly over the speed limit and don't tell me different, if they
didn't, they wouldn't have any need for a detector.. that's why I don't
need one...

You said you went 8 over. That's insane to some people, but I guess you get to decide where the line is. OK.


I have gone 8 over, in a 65 mph zone... But I have not decided it was
ok, the State Police did and 95% of the time, that is just flowing with
traffic in the slow lane.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/1/2014 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/1/2014 2:00 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 22:25:06 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



I did a lot of driving a few years ago back and forth from Florida. Made
about 11 or 12 trips, about 1500 miles each way over a period of three
years. Many of the trips included hauling a trailer or a boat.

It took 2 and a half days, regardless of how fast I drove.

Did one trip non-stop other than a 20 minute nap and fuel stops. I'll
never do that again.

I used to go to Florida from Southern Md twice a year for years. It is
a shorter ride (950 or so) to St Pete and my fastest trip was a tad
over 14 hours door to door. Usually it was more like 17 or 18 with a
short nap in a truck stop or a rest station along the way (Brunswick
Georgia generally) By then the sun was up and I did the Florida leg.

I had a radar detector but the real aid was the childrens band radio
and choosing your travel time carefully. I did most of the driving at
night but I was a midnight to 8 guy anyway.



The worst part of driving to Florida (or anywhere south of here) is
getting through the southern part of CT, New York and New Jersey.
After that it's a pretty easy drive except for some parts of Maryland.

I used to leave MA at about 11 pm after sleeping in the afternoon or
evening. That would usually get me over the George Washington Bridge in
New York just before the major rush hour traffic.



If you are going through at the wrong time it's worth it to head out 84
which with normal traffic would add about three hours to the trip iirc,
but still better than going through that NE corridor in the afternoon...