Had to share this story
 

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

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.

Only if you believe the only people who sell guns would be willing to
make the buyer fill out the form.
BAO contended a while ago that most of the crime guns were stolen. It
is clear that they would never go through legal channels again. They
still move around.

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.
BTW, despite your contention otherwise, some of the Columbine weapons
were illegally purchased at a Colorado gun show.

If you are just talking about nuts and people shooting the ones they
love, registration and background checks mean nothing.
Until they snap, they will be fine upstanding citizens who would pass
any background check and after they go on their shooting spree, there
is no problem figuring out who did it or what gun they used.

Gun registration does little in solving crimes; it reduces it.
Keeps the guns in the hands of fewer people.
Make it a big hassle to own a gun, and "marginal" people are less likely
to get their hands on one. Simple as that.

And that has worked in Chicago and Detroit, and Oakland?

Had to share this story
 

wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 15:01:23 -0400, KC wrote:

Again, I agree. Youtube all you want, then try it. I tried to Youtube a
lock for our trailer, the technique, perfectly applied failed miserably.
When I was a kid I decided that since I kept losing house keys, I would
just make a pic set and learn to pick the locks around the house. I was
always pretty good with tools and such, had a friend who helped me make
the tools (his dad did locksmithing) but never actually had success with
a 5 pin houselock and rakepick...

Lock picking just takes the touch,. Once you get the hang of it, you
can do it.
You put tension on the cylinder and probe each pin, feeling for the
spot that it lines up, when you get them all, the lock turns.
A high quality "pin" lock, where the tolerances are tight, can be
tough, those with the wafers like a desk drawer lock are trivial.
They have vibrating picks that are a lot easier to use

Or you just make a bump key ;-)

Some of the door locks are really hard to pick, as they have a notch in the
pin to defeat the pressure method. But lots of locks are easy to pick.
When I started at NCR we all made lock picks to open registers that the
customer lost the keys, and we did not want to go to the office to get a
copy.

Had to share this story
 

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 01:44:01 -0400, 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?


Certainly does not seem to be true in Florida. Maybe the dealers just
remove it if the manufacturer puts them in there.
The 9mm I bought recently had a trigger lock but it is a joke. A 10
year old with a fingernail file could pop it off.

The guns I've bought here all came with the same type lock:
http://www.info4guns.com/graphics/pi...cable_lock.jpg

Each has it's own key. Probably could be picked or the cable cut, but
would keep a kid from accidentally loading the gun and shooting
someone.

Pretty much what all come with. My AR came with one. POS as to key hardly
works. Cops give away cable locks at sportsman shows.

Had to share this story
 

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 11/1/2014 11:54 AM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/1/2014 10:34 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 09:34:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

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.


Interesting:
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/201...ing-technology

"Maryland has already been down the road of requiring that a fired
shell casing be provided for every pistol sold in the state (that
being a simpler type of microstamping). That requirement has not
produced a single criminal conviction in 15 years, and the Maryland
State Police no longer enter the shell casings into a searchable
database both because of the cost and lack of effectiveness of the
technology. In fact, New York recently repealed its shell case
requirement in order to use those funds to hire more state police,
leaving Maryland as the only state that still retains this costly and
ineffective requirement. Repeating the shell casing mistake with a
more expensive, less reliable technology just wastes even more
resources."



Maybe Massachusetts no longer requires it either although my most recent
purchase (a couple of months ago) of a Sig Sauer P238 came with one.

Did the FFL who transferred the firearm to you keep the shell casing? If
not, then it isn't needed in your state.


Nope. They are in the box or case and the buyer keeps them.

It seems strange that the manufacturers would bother to include them in
some states and not others regardless if the state uses them.

That's one of the complaints I have about gun laws. They are not
uniform. Every state has it's own set of laws. I can't legally travel
from here to my son's house in SC with a gun in my car because of the different laws.

Does not cost the manufacturer anything to include the casing. They test
fire the weapon anyway, so include the casing. Maybe a penny for the bag.
Have to pick up the casing anyway.

Had to share this story
 

KC wrote:
On 10/31/2014 10:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 10:15 PM, KC wrote:
On 10/31/2014 10:00 PM, 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


and there is the problem. *You* decide what's "reasonable" then decide
who is being touchy... again, coming into a debate with predetermined
judgements, and just assuming everyone else stipulates to your point of
view (before the debate even starts) is arrogant.. and a few other
things I don't need to bother with. You do tend to start discussions
that are already finished in your head.... But that's what dems do....
be considered results in condemnation and ridicule
by some.


It was called a discussion Scott, something you are not capable of doing
without getting all puffy and getting your underwear in a bunch.

Just ignore it.





You are incredible... lol...

No, you are the incredible one. He pointed out your judgement errors. You
also probably camp in the left lane. I love driving in Europe. They seem
to know how to drive on a highway. Stay right except to pass. Cops give
tickets for driving in other than the left lane, if you are not passing.

Had to share this story
 

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 10/31/2014 10:10 PM, KC wrote:
On 10/31/2014 9:34 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 9:04 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:24:27 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

SC only has one plate, mounted on the rear. I don't run a front
"vanity" plate for that very reason.


The cops use your headlights then as their secondary target.

Many years ago Car and Driver did a radar test and they found the
radiator was the biggest target, followed by the headlights.
The corvette was the lowest reflectivity car they tested (fiberglass
body, retracting headlights and a tilted radiator)

These days, if I wanted a laser resistant car, I would get one with
retracting headlights and paint the nose with bed liner material
It would buy you several hundred feet anyway.
They also sell a laser jammer. It basically floods the road in front
of you with IR noise. Again, you get a few hundred feet.



I just drive 65. Max.



I will go 5-7 over.. It's an unwritten but well known fact that the CT
State Police will not tag you for less than ten over on the
interstates... unless there are other circumstances of course.. But in
general you will not get a ticket for 74 in a 65....


I understand. I just don't feel the need to test the limits.

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.

The problem in California is the towing and truck laws. Both asinine and
dangerous. You can tow at 55 mph maximum! 70 mph speed limit on I-5, 2
lanes each way and the trucks and trailers are limited to 55. Most get
away with 63, but the traffic is trying to do 80. So you have a truck
doing 63 trying to pass a truck doing 60, or a Walmart truck doing 55.
They do not speed. Lose job if they do. So you have traffic jams and
speed differential accidents. Most states around here either have the same
speed limit for trucks or towing as the regular traffic. Or at the most a
5 mph differential. Cops love the revenue of towing tickets. I got a
ticket towing my race car for 5 over at 1:30am in Madera county years ago.
At that time the towing speed limit was 50, and a week later limit went to
55. And I was only doing the 5 over.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/4/2014 9:47 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 01:58:45 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

You don't give kids enough credit. They are useless feel good devices
similar to useless feel good laws.

Just go in my garage and get an angle grinder or dremel or the cutting
torch.

I opened the trigger lock I have with a paper clip and didn't damage
it at all. Mom and Dad would have no idea I have free access to the
gun



Ban kids then.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/4/2014 9:47 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 01:58:45 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

You don't give kids enough credit. They are useless feel good devices
similar to useless feel good laws.

Just go in my garage and get an angle grinder or dremel or the cutting
torch.

I opened the trigger lock I have with a paper clip and didn't damage
it at all. Mom and Dad would have no idea I have free access to the
gun


Like to see that vid...

Had to share this story
 

On 11/4/2014 9:58 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/4/2014 9:47 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 01:58:45 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

You don't give kids enough credit. They are useless feel good devices
similar to useless feel good laws.

Just go in my garage and get an angle grinder or dremel or the cutting
torch.

I opened the trigger lock I have with a paper clip and didn't damage
it at all. Mom and Dad would have no idea I have free access to the
gun


Like to see that vid...


Me too. Kids using angle grinders, cutting torches and dremel tools.

There's another solution. Don't have guns around when you have kids in
the household.

I never felt a desire or need for having guns in the house while we were
raising our three kids. I didn't hunt and guns really didn't hold that
much interest to me.

It wasn't until about four years ago that I decided to get a permit.
Part of the reasoning was because of the great guitar shop experiment
that involved carrying a relatively large amount of cash and the
recommendation of a lawyer. The other was the recognition that I was
getting older, we had already experienced a home invasion and I wanted a
last resort means of defending my wife and I other than a baseball bat.

Had to share this story
 

On 11/4/2014 10:26 AM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/4/2014 9:58 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/4/2014 9:47 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 01:58:45 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

You don't give kids enough credit. They are useless feel good devices
similar to useless feel good laws.

Just go in my garage and get an angle grinder or dremel or the cutting
torch.

I opened the trigger lock I have with a paper clip and didn't damage
it at all. Mom and Dad would have no idea I have free access to the
gun


Like to see that vid...


Me too. Kids using angle grinders, cutting torches and dremel tools.

There's another solution. Don't have guns around when you have kids in
the household.

I never felt a desire or need for having guns in the house while we were
raising our three kids. I didn't hunt and guns really didn't hold that
much interest to me.

It wasn't until about four years ago that I decided to get a permit.
Part of the reasoning was because of the great guitar shop experiment
that involved carrying a relatively large amount of cash and the
recommendation of a lawyer. The other was the recognition that I was
getting older, we had already experienced a home invasion and I wanted a
last resort means of defending my wife and I other than a baseball bat.

My parents gave me a .22 rifle when I was 12 years old. I still have it
and will have it until the day I die. It has never killed a living
breathing animal or human. It has destroyed countless targets. I
received the firearm about 41 years ago and it has been in my possession
every where I have lived since I received it. My kids didn't know about
it until they were about 14 or 15.



I find nothing wrong with that Bar. You are obviously a responsible gun
owner. I'll bet that even when they were 14 or 15 their access to that
rifle was carefully monitored and any use of it was supervised.