Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/2014 9:26 AM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

I've never regarded you as a weenie but if you want to be one, I
can't stop you.



Wayne, there is no question that Massachusetts has gone overboard in
some of it's gun control measures IMO. The worst in my mind is the
convoluted and mysterious way in which the types and models of handguns
are "approved" for sale in the state. It's a case of government
over-reaching .... or a case of outright bribery and corruption. I am
not sure which.

Although it doesn't really affect what I do I think limits on magazine
sizes doesn't make a firearm any safer nor does a requirement for a 10lb
trigger pull. IMO, those are "real good" laws that don't really add to
any safety issues.


The only gun control regulations that make sense to me a

A gun handling and safety course requirement that includes an overview
of federal, state and local laws governing the use of firearms and:

A background check for a license and an instant background
check when making gun purchases, and:

The registration of purchased firearms tying it's serial number
to the original and subsequent owners.

I'd love to see reciprocal recognition of licenses or permits throughout
all the states. It may be possible someday if all
the states had the minimum requirements of background checks and
registration.

I don't see any of those requirements as being unreasonable or an
infringement on the right to own a firearm. I see them as being
responsible gun ownership.

The guy calls you a weenie, and you're talking to him?
Give it up. You'll find no joy here.



I've been called worse.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 19:36:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 6:06 PM, Poco Loco wrote:

You'll find that both Luddite and Krause tend to ignore arguments they
can't refute.



Refute what? None of the questions or comments have anything to do
with the issue being discussed.

This whole subject centers around the strange wording of the 2A that
historians and legal scholars have been scratching their asses for a
couple of hundred years trying to figure out what the hell Madison was
talking about. He lived in the days of Red Coats, Minute Men, muskets
and flintlocks not 30 round magazines, semi-automatic rifles and
pistols. When he drafted the wording of the 2A, the "militia" consisted
of farmers and fishermen who were expected to bring their own musket or
flintlock to the fight when needed.


The subject had to do with the paperwork you'd like to see to enable
authorities to establish a 'chain of custody' in the even the firearm
was used to commit a crime.

Do you not remember all the pushing you've been doing on this issue?
Now you're wanting to go back and argue about the 'milita' definition?
Well, now the 'militia' consists of farmers, fisherman, business
owners, business workers, government workers, and all the retirees
therefrom, and anyone else I've missed.

As to your 'chain of custody', please explain why you think it's
necessary - again. Try to use some arguments that haven't been
debunked.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 20:47:57 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/14/14 8:27 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/14/2014 8:02 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/14/2014 7:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/14/2014 6:06 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:52:30 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 11/14/2014 10:59 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 23:31:59 -0800, jps wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 01:31:38 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 21:22:50 -0800, jps wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 21:43:46 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:40:01 -0800, jps
wrote:

Thank you for stepping out and making your thoughts known
about gun
control. You make a reasoned argument for common sense law.

You didn't notice that his argument was based on a CNN show that
demonstrated that if you tried, you could find someone to break
the
law. Would 2 laws have stopped them? Three?

If someone wants to break the law, there's little stopping them.
Please cite one law on the books that prevents a determined
person
from breaking it.

Holy crap. Where do you come up with these empty arguments?

NRA pamphlet?

Laws are meant to let people know where the line is. If they
cross
it, they're liable to be prosecuted and put in jail or fined
silly.
How would prosecuting someone for lying on a background check or
failing to sell a gun through a proper process be any different
than
any other law?

Come on, try to field a real argument, please.

I am simply saying, the justification Richard was trying to make
was
the "gun show loophole" but the loophole did not exist in the
cases he
was citing. Every gun they bought was already illegal under both
state
and federal law. Then they broke another federal law when they
crossed
state lines with them.
Does anyone believe one more law would stop them?

It is like showing someone buying crack on the street and
saying we
need another drug law.

In Washington, we just passed a referendum that requires all gun
buyers to go through a background check, gun show or private sale.

It will prevent people ignoring the law when they see a few idiots
prosecuted for selling a gun illegally, either through straw
purchase
or ignoring the background check.

Laws and education can incrementally stem the flow, little by
little.
Same as we've cut into the death rate from auto accidents. It's a
fair comparison.

That reading thing again. I was pointing out that there were already
laws that would have prevented the CNN crew from legally purchasing
the guns they bought and they still bought them. The thing that
****ed
Richard off was when I pointed out that they had to drive over 600
miles, visit 5 gun shows just to find 3 illegal sellers.
If you know anything about TV at all you know they had hours of
footage of people following the law that ended up on the cutting
room
floor to get the "70 seconds" they used.



You don't know how many people turned them down other than the one
person in Tennessee.

You are right, we don't know how many people turned down the
offers. If
CNN wasn't practicing yellow journalism they would have provided that
information in their report.

I don't know either. Unlike you however, I don't "assume" what I
don't
know and make it a fact in my conclusions.

We shouldn't have to assume. They, the media, should provide the
information without our asking.

It is like the NBC guys not telling us that the put an IED next to the
truck's gas tank to make it blow up because they were unable to
make it
blow up when they crashed other vehicles into the side of the truck.

Again though, the point is missed. They still bought a small
arsenal in
two days consisting of a Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle, two Glock
17's
and a S&W 45 with no questions asked.

Were the sales illegal? Did they do the paperwork after the sales and
neglect to report it in the video they released.

You'll find that both Luddite and Krause tend to ignore arguments they
can't refute.



Refute what? None of the questions or comments have anything to do
with the issue being discussed.

This whole subject centers around the strange wording of the 2A that
historians and legal scholars have been scratching their asses for a
couple of hundred years trying to figure out what the hell Madison was
talking about. He lived in the days of Red Coats, Minute Men, muskets
and flintlocks not 30 round magazines, semi-automatic rifles and
pistols. When he drafted the wording of the 2A, the "militia" consisted
of farmers and fishermen who were expected to bring their own musket or
flintlock to the fight when needed.






So, are you saying Madison wasn't forward thinking enough to write that
part of the constitution?


Not only do I believe that but so do many people far more qualified than
I. Experts have been debating the wording of what he wrote and it's
applicability in more modern times for years.



The Constitution has been interpreted, re-intepreted, added to and
subtracted from since the beginning. There's nothing particularly
sacrosanct about the 2nd Amendment. A few more mass shootings at
schools, movie theaters, sporting events, shopping centers, et cetera,
and the pressure for universal licensing and registration will be upon
us, no matter what the gun nutzies in rec.boats and the NRA want.

I'm already "licensed," as are you, Richard. I have no problem supplying
state or federal authorities with the serial numbers of firearms I
legally own and may someday sell to other individuals.
I'm certainly not depending upon the likes of Herring, BAR, Wayne, or
PsychoSnotty to defend us from the government.

Gosh...are you two holding hands? Such togetherness.

I'm already 'licensed' too, just as you and Richard are. I have a
problem providing the federal authorities any more information than
necessary to perform their function, to include serial numbers, names,
addresses, etc., etc. of guns I legally own and may transfer by sale
or gift to those whom I feel qualified to own a gun.

I certainly don't need a couple of liberals telling me their
interpretation of the Constitution.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 20:33:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 7:47 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:44:20 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

You
should not be able to buy or sell or gift a firearm without paperwork
recording the giver, seller and buyer.

===

That's your opinion because it is the party line of all weenies just
like you.



You can add me to your "weenie" file because I agree with him.

BTW, it's not the Federal Government you need to worry about so much.
State governments can and do create and enforce their own gun laws.

If everyone remains unwilling to give a bit, Florida may end up
like Massachusetts.

That's why I am an advocate of uniform and standardized laws that
everyone can live with.

BTW ... state laws for guns on board vary also. Wouldn't it be nice if
they were all the same when you travel?

Fine, let's all push for nationwide adoption of the Virginia state
laws.

Then everyone would be happy.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 01:28:26 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 20:44:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:44:16 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:

Been to lots of Virginia gun shows. No one tried to sell me a gun,
other than dealers who wanted the fed form completed.

===

That has been my experience in Florida also. One guy at a small booth
told me that he had been warned by BATF agents to not engage in
private sales at the gun show. That shows that there is some
enforcement going on.

To be honest, there are not really that many guns for sale at a gun
show anyway. It is more like a hunting, camping and survival supplies
show with more than a little general merchandize you would expect to
see at the flea market.,
Most of the guns seem to be for sale from dealers, hyping their
business.

That's also true of the Virginia shows. I've yet to see anyone trying
to make an individual transaction. All dealers, all requireing the
background check.

I might say Harry's full of ****, but that wouldn't be nice.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 08:38:43 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



The only gun control regulations that make sense to me a

A gun handling and safety course requirement that includes an overview
of federal, state and local laws governing the use of firearms and:

Which would have to be approved by the government, require paperwork
for proof of attendance, require the bureaucracy to manage the
paperwork, and of course require recertification every three years.


A background check for a license and an instant background
check when making gun purchases, and:

Which is already a requirement for purchase from a dealer. Give
individuals the ability to get the instant background check by putting
in a social security number.


The registration of purchased firearms tying it's serial number
to the original and subsequent owners.

Why? If the gun is used to commit a crime the police want the guy who
used it.

I'd love to see reciprocal recognition of licenses or permits throughout
all the states. It may be possible someday if all
the states had the minimum requirements of background checks and
registration.

I'd love to see Virginia's laws adopted by all the states.

I don't see any of those requirements as being unreasonable or an
infringement on the right to own a firearm. I see them as being
responsible gun ownership.


Would the requirement for a voter ID card be an infringement on the
rights of voters?

*Any* additional demands on those involved in the transfer of a
firearm is an 'infringement'. The question has to do with the degree
of infringement.

Where does it end? You indicate happiness with lots of paperwork.
Bloomberg wouldn't like your solution at all. Many others would push
for a total ban on guns and confiscation.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 21:18:28 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 11/14/2014 8:50 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/14/14 8:45 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 15:32:57 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

You think the unlicensed individuals selling firearms walk around with
signs?

===

I saw a guy with a sign that said "Certified Asshat". Was it you?


Obviously you were looking in the mirror.

Not likely. Reference to Krause the Asshat might be found on the
Maryland shooters newsgroup where he was banished. Curse those moderated
groups, eh Harry?

Poor Harry.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 21:05:15 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 8:52 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 12:36:18 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/14/14 12:19 PM, wrote:

I am a (CCW) licensed owner so most of this does not apply to me
anyway but again, if these sellers are willing to break an existing
law, what would make them follow another law?


You don't seem able to comprehend the "gun show loophole." It's not just
a loophole for gunshows, either. When I sold my SIG to a Virginia buyer
in Virginia, I called the VSP to find out what I needed to do to make
the transaction kosher. "Individual to individual, we don't care" was
the response. I went through an FFL.

I am not sure who you talked to in the VSP but it is a violation of
that federal law I cited to sell a gun to a person from another state
and it is illegal to buy one from another state without at least one
FFL involved in each state.. That has been true since 1968.



Right. The problem is that with no requirements for background checks
or transaction reporting of private sales, who's gonna catch 'em?
Money is exchanged, gun is transferred with no records kept.

Talk about naive.

How would another law stop them? Who would catch them if they didn't
report the transaction? You reckon all those folks in Chicago, etc.,
would start reporting transactions?

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 02:03:59 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 21:05:15 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 8:52 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 12:36:18 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/14/14 12:19 PM, wrote:

I am a (CCW) licensed owner so most of this does not apply to me
anyway but again, if these sellers are willing to break an existing
law, what would make them follow another law?


You don't seem able to comprehend the "gun show loophole." It's not just
a loophole for gunshows, either. When I sold my SIG to a Virginia buyer
in Virginia, I called the VSP to find out what I needed to do to make
the transaction kosher. "Individual to individual, we don't care" was
the response. I went through an FFL.

I am not sure who you talked to in the VSP but it is a violation of
that federal law I cited to sell a gun to a person from another state
and it is illegal to buy one from another state without at least one
FFL involved in each state.. That has been true since 1968.



Right. The problem is that with no requirements for background checks
or transaction reporting of private sales, who's gonna catch 'em?
Money is exchanged, gun is transferred with no records kept.

Who would catch them if there was another law?
The wording of the federal law is sufficient to prosecute both the
buyers and sellers in that CNN piece and also prosecute the guys who
took them across state lines. It is just not anything the BATF is
willing to pursue.
That is not really an investigatory agency. Most of their time is
spent simply trying to audit the transactions that are required to be
recorded now. They barely get to each dealer once a year, if that and
it is a cursory inspection of records at best.

Occasionally they will identify a suspected "bad dealer:" and tear his
records apart, warranted or not but most of the time it is like the
DMV. They just plod along.
The abuses of the BATF Swat teams seems to be largely in the past but
they still happen.
A dummy hand grenade seems to be the biggest offense these days.
Nobody seems capable of looking at the bottom and figuring out it is
hollow inside,.The blue spoon is lost on them too,

Amen.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Saturday, 15 November 2014 10:37:37 UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?

I apologize to you if my comments caused you some concern, I'm sure you know that wasn't my intention.
Anything I comment on has already been posted in this newsgroup...I have no secret source of information.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't converse with any of the newsgroup participants privately...except for a couple of welcome calls from Tim per year...and maybe a yearly e-mail from Harry when a certain circumstance arises.
My motivation is to expose certain posters for their true character... after numerous attacks, threats etc against me, my wife and son, let alone repeated posting of personal information and google images of a house they claim to be mine.
As far as those two... nothing is off the table..except of course low life attacks against their families. Even I wouldn't stoop that low.
In the future I will refrain from mentioning your name in my exposure of their flaws.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 04:49:15 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 1:27 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/14/2014 8:56 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:20:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I don't think private sellers at gun shows or anywhere for that matter
are criminals by nature, looking to break any laws. They may not have
even known that the state law to check ID's existed. They are gun nuts,
not professional dealers.

===

You can be sure that anyone with a booth at a gun show has been
advised of their legal obligations and has signed a statement
acknowledging those obligations. The organizers take care of such
things to protect themselves from legal action.



I think the problem here is the source and ones point of view of the
source. Dick trusts the source (in this case CNN) go give you the
straight skinny so he takes the limited info they gave us as gospel. If
you take those numbers as a fair stat on illegal gun sales, you come to
about 25% dirty sales. On the other hand 1, many here don't take CNN as
fair and balanced since they have been caught red handed in the past
taking sides, secondly, the real time personal experience of each and
ever gun buyer on this group would suggest that it's nowhere near 25%,
again suggesting CNN possibly didn't play straight, and with their
history, I give the weight to that side of the story.. but then again, I
wear a tin hat, I mean, I think MSNBC is biased too :)


The CNN thing was not a documentary on the percentage of illegal gun
sales or even the number of attempts at buying. It was very simply a
demonstration of how easy it was to purchase a bunch of firearms over a
weekend with no questions asked.

That's all it was. If you want to believe it was all scripted and made
with hired actors, that's your call.


The show was designed to show 'ease of purchase'. Would you deny that?
Given it's purpose, do you think they *honestly* portrayed the events?

If you do, then you're quite naive.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 07:55:46 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 11/15/2014 7:26 AM, True North wrote:
FlatulentOne sez....
"I've been trying to ignore your remarks because you seem to have issues.
But you crossed the line. You are an ungrateful little snot. And you
know what I mean. "


Bingo!
You're finally making some sense.
It was my impression a few years ago that Richard made a substantial contribution to the MickeyMouse racing team and who knows what else to help out the little PeterPan/Tinkerbell deadbeat on his mis-adventures.
You'd think L'il Snot would keep this in mind.
On the other hand, maybe we just think differently up here. Every year we thank the good people of Boston and the state of Mass for the help they generously gave us 97 years ago in our hour of need.

**** you, Donnie.
Fix your boisenberry. It has line length issues.

Go to 'View' and click on 'Word Wrap'. That worked for me.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 06:41:25 -0500, KC wrote:

On 11/15/2014 4:49 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 1:27 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/14/2014 8:56 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:20:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I don't think private sellers at gun shows or anywhere for that matter
are criminals by nature, looking to break any laws. They may not have
even known that the state law to check ID's existed. They are gun
nuts,
not professional dealers.

===

You can be sure that anyone with a booth at a gun show has been
advised of their legal obligations and has signed a statement
acknowledging those obligations. The organizers take care of such
things to protect themselves from legal action.



I think the problem here is the source and ones point of view of the
source. Dick trusts the source (in this case CNN) go give you the
straight skinny so he takes the limited info they gave us as gospel. If
you take those numbers as a fair stat on illegal gun sales, you come to
about 25% dirty sales. On the other hand 1, many here don't take CNN as
fair and balanced since they have been caught red handed in the past
taking sides, secondly, the real time personal experience of each and
ever gun buyer on this group would suggest that it's nowhere near 25%,
again suggesting CNN possibly didn't play straight, and with their
history, I give the weight to that side of the story.. but then again, I
wear a tin hat, I mean, I think MSNBC is biased too :)


The CNN thing was not a documentary on the percentage of illegal gun
sales or even the number of attempts at buying. It was very simply a
demonstration of how easy it was to purchase a bunch of firearms over a
weekend with no questions asked.

That's all it was. If you want to believe it was all scripted and made
with hired actors, that's your call.


Again, I didn't say that, I am starting to think you are too stupid to
see beyond the hyperbole...

Name calling unnecessary. Let them do it.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 00:28:33 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:05:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:03:09 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/14/14 10:59 AM, wrote:


That reading thing again. I was pointing out that there were already
laws that would have prevented the CNN crew from legally purchasing
the guns they bought and they still bought them. The thing that ****ed
Richard off was when I pointed out that they had to drive over 600
miles, visit 5 gun shows just to find 3 illegal sellers.
If you know anything about TV at all you know they had hours of
footage of people following the law that ended up on the cutting room
floor to get the "70 seconds" they used.



Perfectly legal in "gun show loophole states" like Virginia for
individuals to sell their regulated firearms to someone without
an instant check.

I ask again, why did CNN go to Tennessee, North Carolina and South
Carolina then? Were they saying there are no gun shows in Georgia or
are they not saying that those sellers wanted them to walk over to the
instant check booth first?

That is the problem with TV, you only see what the producer wants you
to see.


Maybe they decided to pick three nearby states within reasonable driving
distance and see how each compared in terms of easy of buying.

Yeah a 600 mile road trip is reasonable when there is a gun show in
Atlanta just about every weekend. There are 6 this month within an
hour's drive. Why did they have to make that grand loop if this
problem is so pervasive?

I just watched it again to get their story as accurate as I can.
They actually went to shows in Georgia, Tennessee and South Carolina.
(They did not visit North Carolina)

They showed they went to North Carolina on the map and they did not
tell us about the other 2 shows they attended. (they said a total of
5)
I do not think it unreasonable to think they stopped off at a show in
North Carolina. So what if they didn't?


They purchased twice in Tennessee and once in South Carolina for a total
of four (4) guns. One Tennessee purchase was for two (2) Glocks.

They also reported that they were asked for ID's three times, once in
each of the states visited.

I was going on what they showed tape of.
So what?
Are you really going to say they only talked to SIX sellers in 2 days
at 5 shows? That is still ludicrous

If you actually watch and listen to the recorded conversations, it's
hard to conceive that this whole thing was scripted.

The narration is clearly scripted and probably recorded several times
until they got it just the way they wanted it. Most of the "facts" are
in the narration with short clips of actual conversation, taken
largely out of context.

That is, of course, unless you think everyone they talked to are actors,
hired to play a part. If you believe that, more power to you.



Just look at what you actually saw. You had some B roll from a guy
with a hidden camera walking around a gun show and the narrator
talking over the shot. He sets up a sound bite. The "seller" says a
sentence or two, then the narrator takes over again and tells you what
you are supposed to take away from that. There is no context, you
don't know what was said before or after the little clip. You only
have what the narrator says happened.




Well said.

And...the purpose of the show was to sway opinion, as it definitely
did in Luddite's case.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/2014 10:48 AM, True North wrote:
On Saturday, 15 November 2014 10:37:37 UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?

I apologize to you if my comments caused you some concern, I'm sure you know that wasn't my intention.
Anything I comment on has already been posted in this newsgroup...I have no secret source of information.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't converse with any of the newsgroup participants privately...except for a couple of welcome calls from Tim per year...and maybe a yearly e-mail from Harry when a certain circumstance arises.
My motivation is to expose certain posters for their true character... after numerous attacks, threats etc against me, my wife and son, let alone repeated posting of personal information and google images of a house they claim to be mine.
As far as those two... nothing is off the table..except of course low life attacks against their families. Even I wouldn't stoop that low.
In the future I will refrain from mentioning your name in my exposure of their flaws.


What a ****ing jackass... You will stoop to any level to make yourself
feel better... Just go out and get a life like the rest of us and get
back with me.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/2014 10:52 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 06:41:25 -0500, KC wrote:

On 11/15/2014 4:49 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 1:27 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/14/2014 8:56 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:20:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I don't think private sellers at gun shows or anywhere for that matter
are criminals by nature, looking to break any laws. They may not have
even known that the state law to check ID's existed. They are gun
nuts,
not professional dealers.

===

You can be sure that anyone with a booth at a gun show has been
advised of their legal obligations and has signed a statement
acknowledging those obligations. The organizers take care of such
things to protect themselves from legal action.



I think the problem here is the source and ones point of view of the
source. Dick trusts the source (in this case CNN) go give you the
straight skinny so he takes the limited info they gave us as gospel. If
you take those numbers as a fair stat on illegal gun sales, you come to
about 25% dirty sales. On the other hand 1, many here don't take CNN as
fair and balanced since they have been caught red handed in the past
taking sides, secondly, the real time personal experience of each and
ever gun buyer on this group would suggest that it's nowhere near 25%,
again suggesting CNN possibly didn't play straight, and with their
history, I give the weight to that side of the story.. but then again, I
wear a tin hat, I mean, I think MSNBC is biased too :)


The CNN thing was not a documentary on the percentage of illegal gun
sales or even the number of attempts at buying. It was very simply a
demonstration of how easy it was to purchase a bunch of firearms over a
weekend with no questions asked.

That's all it was. If you want to believe it was all scripted and made
with hired actors, that's your call.


Again, I didn't say that, I am starting to think you are too stupid to
see beyond the hyperbole...

Name calling unnecessary. Let them do it.


Sorry, it was a reaction to continually having words put in our mouth....

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 01:44:07 -0800, jps wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 8:54 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/13/2014 7:03 PM, Poco Loco wrote:


It was a great discussion. However, the failure of many to agree with
Luddite caused a degree of frustration which resulted in some comments
not taken well.

It's a damn shame that a difference of opinion can't simply be
accepted. Very sad!

It is strange how some folks handle opposition when they feel they are
smarter than everyone else in the room... Even if they are, I have
always found that new blood can lead to new innovations and even new
attitudes... I think these types of folks are ripping themselves off.





Common sense is not an indicator of "smartness".

Debate and discussion is how controversial issues are resolved. When
the issue is a social problem it is the responsibility of all to
contribute to the solution. Hiding your head in the sand and pretending
the problem doesn't exist doesn't count.

In the end, those who push strongly enough win. Those who cling to the
status quo end up getting run over. Better to be a participant.

Hear, hear.

You missed this:

"The crime rate has been dropping for decades.
Nobody ever got anyone to "tune in" to hear a story about how great
things are going and we are safer than ever.

It is all "Things that are going to kill you, details at 11"

(Greg)


Hear, hear.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/14 10:53 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?


One of the few remaining delights of rec.boats is to see vile posts like
these from right-wing trash like Herring and others and then shortly
afterwards see posts from them whining about the "atmosphere" here.

--
Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your
morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a
child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child
clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s
pro-birth.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/14 11:04 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/15/2014 10:48 AM, True North wrote:
On Saturday, 15 November 2014 10:37:37 UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?

I apologize to you if my comments caused you some concern, I'm sure
you know that wasn't my intention.
Anything I comment on has already been posted in this newsgroup...I
have no secret source of information.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't converse with any of the newsgroup
participants privately...except for a couple of welcome calls from Tim
per year...and maybe a yearly e-mail from Harry when a certain
circumstance arises.
My motivation is to expose certain posters for their true character...
after numerous attacks, threats etc against me, my wife and son, let
alone repeated posting of personal information and google images of a
house they claim to be mine.
As far as those two... nothing is off the table..except of course low
life attacks against their families. Even I wouldn't stoop that low.
In the future I will refrain from mentioning your name in my exposure
of their flaws.


What a ****ing jackass... You will stoop to any level to make yourself
feel better... Just go out and get a life like the rest of us and get
back with me.


You're always on the bottom stoop. Get a job. Go rake leaves.
--
Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your
morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a
child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child
clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s
pro-birth.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/14 11:06 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/15/2014 10:52 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 06:41:25 -0500, KC wrote:

On 11/15/2014 4:49 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 1:27 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/14/2014 8:56 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:20:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

I don't think private sellers at gun shows or anywhere for that
matter
are criminals by nature, looking to break any laws. They may not
have
even known that the state law to check ID's existed. They are gun
nuts,
not professional dealers.

===

You can be sure that anyone with a booth at a gun show has been
advised of their legal obligations and has signed a statement
acknowledging those obligations. The organizers take care of such
things to protect themselves from legal action.



I think the problem here is the source and ones point of view of the
source. Dick trusts the source (in this case CNN) go give you the
straight skinny so he takes the limited info they gave us as
gospel. If
you take those numbers as a fair stat on illegal gun sales, you
come to
about 25% dirty sales. On the other hand 1, many here don't take
CNN as
fair and balanced since they have been caught red handed in the past
taking sides, secondly, the real time personal experience of each and
ever gun buyer on this group would suggest that it's nowhere near 25%,
again suggesting CNN possibly didn't play straight, and with their
history, I give the weight to that side of the story.. but then
again, I
wear a tin hat, I mean, I think MSNBC is biased too :)


The CNN thing was not a documentary on the percentage of illegal gun
sales or even the number of attempts at buying. It was very simply a
demonstration of how easy it was to purchase a bunch of firearms over a
weekend with no questions asked.

That's all it was. If you want to believe it was all scripted and made
with hired actors, that's your call.


Again, I didn't say that, I am starting to think you are too stupid to
see beyond the hyperbole...

Name calling unnecessary. Let them do it.


Sorry, it was a reaction to continually having words put in our mouth....


With all that is in your mouth already, there's hardly room for someone
else's words.

--
Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your
morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a
child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child
clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s
pro-birth.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 07:48:59 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

On Saturday, 15 November 2014 10:37:37 UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?

I apologize to you if my comments caused you some concern, I'm sure you know that wasn't my intention.
Anything I comment on has already been posted in this newsgroup...I have no secret source of information.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't converse with any of the newsgroup participants privately...except for a couple of welcome calls from Tim per year...and maybe a yearly e-mail from Harry when a certain circumstance arises.
My motivation is to expose certain posters for their true character... after numerous attacks, threats etc against me, my wife and son, let alone repeated posting of personal information and google images of a house they claim to be mine.
As far as those two... nothing is off the table..except of course low life attacks against their families. Even I wouldn't stoop that low.
In the future I will refrain from mentioning your name in my exposure of their flaws.

And you're always scrupulously honest too!

That comment was about as funny as the crap Krause spews.

Famous words..."I apologize...but..."

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:06:18 -0500, KC wrote:

On 11/15/2014 10:52 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 06:41:25 -0500, KC wrote:

On 11/15/2014 4:49 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 1:27 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/14/2014 8:56 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:20:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I don't think private sellers at gun shows or anywhere for that matter
are criminals by nature, looking to break any laws. They may not have
even known that the state law to check ID's existed. They are gun
nuts,
not professional dealers.

===

You can be sure that anyone with a booth at a gun show has been
advised of their legal obligations and has signed a statement
acknowledging those obligations. The organizers take care of such
things to protect themselves from legal action.



I think the problem here is the source and ones point of view of the
source. Dick trusts the source (in this case CNN) go give you the
straight skinny so he takes the limited info they gave us as gospel. If
you take those numbers as a fair stat on illegal gun sales, you come to
about 25% dirty sales. On the other hand 1, many here don't take CNN as
fair and balanced since they have been caught red handed in the past
taking sides, secondly, the real time personal experience of each and
ever gun buyer on this group would suggest that it's nowhere near 25%,
again suggesting CNN possibly didn't play straight, and with their
history, I give the weight to that side of the story.. but then again, I
wear a tin hat, I mean, I think MSNBC is biased too :)


The CNN thing was not a documentary on the percentage of illegal gun
sales or even the number of attempts at buying. It was very simply a
demonstration of how easy it was to purchase a bunch of firearms over a
weekend with no questions asked.

That's all it was. If you want to believe it was all scripted and made
with hired actors, that's your call.


Again, I didn't say that, I am starting to think you are too stupid to
see beyond the hyperbole...

Name calling unnecessary. Let them do it.


Sorry, it was a reaction to continually having words put in our mouth....

I'm not the one deserving an apology.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:16:58 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/15/14 10:53 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?


One of the few remaining delights of rec.boats is to see vile posts like
these from right-wing trash like Herring and others and then shortly
afterwards see posts from them whining about the "atmosphere" here.

Who's whining? Luddite had a rightful complaint. Don was out of line.
Nothing new there.

And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Saturday, 15 November 2014 12:45:52 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:16:58 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/15/14 10:53 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?


One of the few remaining delights of rec.boats is to see vile posts like
these from right-wing trash like Herring and others and then shortly
afterwards see posts from them whining about the "atmosphere" here.

Who's whining? Luddite had a rightful complaint. Don was out of line.
Nothing new there.

And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs.

I think we've been darn accurate profiling you.
"Bang on"... as y'all like to say down there.
BTW I apologized to Richard...why is it any of your business to continue bringing up this issue in the newsgroup?

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/2014 11:56 AM, True North wrote:
On Saturday, 15 November 2014 12:45:52 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:16:58 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/15/14 10:53 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?


One of the few remaining delights of rec.boats is to see vile posts like
these from right-wing trash like Herring and others and then shortly
afterwards see posts from them whining about the "atmosphere" here.

Who's whining? Luddite had a rightful complaint. Don was out of line.
Nothing new there.

And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs.

I think we've been darn accurate profiling you.
"Bang on"... as y'all like to say down there.
BTW I apologized to Richard...why is it any of your business to continue bringing up this issue in the newsgroup?


You've got your line length set at an unreasonably long length on your
huckleberry. Shorten it up a bit. ;-)

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/2014 11:41 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 07:48:59 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

On Saturday, 15 November 2014 10:37:37 UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?

I apologize to you if my comments caused you some concern, I'm sure you know that wasn't my intention.
Anything I comment on has already been posted in this newsgroup...I have no secret source of information.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't converse with any of the newsgroup participants privately...except for a couple of welcome calls from Tim per year...and maybe a yearly e-mail from Harry when a certain circumstance arises.
My motivation is to expose certain posters for their true character... after numerous attacks, threats etc against me, my wife and son, let alone repeated posting of personal information and google images of a house they claim to be mine.
As far as those two... nothing is off the table..except of course low life attacks against their families. Even I wouldn't stoop that low.
In the future I will refrain from mentioning your name in my exposure of their flaws.

And you're always scrupulously honest too!

That comment was about as funny as the crap Krause spews.

Famous words..."I apologize...but..."


Dick did what he did because he is a generous person... Yeah, I know, I
have some problems with him, at the same time I feel he is a good
person, with good intent... Several others here were in on it too, thank
you all. Here is rec.boats is just an exchange of words and I don't
think any of them expected me to appease their opinions here in exchange
for their help... To that help, weather you all regret it or not it did
what it was intended for, got us into a running vehicle so we could
begin our recovery... and we are still out there kickin' it, thanks to
Dick and the others. I don't care if harry and don make up stories.. Who
are they kidding? You all lived it, and at least half of you were
directly involved.... Thanks again, still running the crap out of that
truck...

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Saturday, November 15, 2014 11:57:01 AM UTC-5, True North wrote:
On Saturday, 15 November 2014 12:45:52 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:16:58 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/15/14 10:53 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?


One of the few remaining delights of rec.boats is to see vile posts like
these from right-wing trash like Herring and others and then shortly
afterwards see posts from them whining about the "atmosphere" here.

Who's whining? Luddite had a rightful complaint. Don was out of line.
Nothing new there.

And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs.

I think we've been darn accurate profiling you.
"Bang on"... as y'all like to say down there.
BTW I apologized to Richard...why is it any of your business to continue bringing up this issue in the newsgroup?

My response was to Krause. Direct your whine to him.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/15/2014 10:52 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 07:55:46 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 11/15/2014 7:26 AM, True North wrote:
FlatulentOne sez....
"I've been trying to ignore your remarks because you seem to have issues.
But you crossed the line. You are an ungrateful little snot. And you
know what I mean. "


Bingo!
You're finally making some sense.
It was my impression a few years ago that Richard made a substantial contribution to the MickeyMouse racing team and who knows what else to help out the little PeterPan/Tinkerbell deadbeat on his mis-adventures.
You'd think L'il Snot would keep this in mind.
On the other hand, maybe we just think differently up here. Every year we thank the good people of Boston and the state of Mass for the help they generously gave us 97 years ago in our hour of need.

**** you, Donnie.
Fix your boisenberry. It has line length issues.

Go to 'View' and click on 'Word Wrap'. That worked for me.

I don't see a word wrap option.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Saturday, 15 November 2014 13:34:04 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 11:57:01 AM UTC-5, True North wrote:
On Saturday, 15 November 2014 12:45:52 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:16:58 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/15/14 10:53 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?


One of the few remaining delights of rec.boats is to see vile posts like
these from right-wing trash like Herring and others and then shortly
afterwards see posts from them whining about the "atmosphere" here.

Who's whining? Luddite had a rightful complaint. Don was out of line.
Nothing new there.

And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs.

I think we've been darn accurate profiling you.
"Bang on"... as y'all like to say down there.
BTW I apologized to Richard...why is it any of your business to continue bringing up this issue in the newsgroup?

My response was to Krause. Direct your whine to him.

Duh!
You named me directly..
here, read this again if you've forgotten already.

"And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs."

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 11/15/2014 1:27 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/14/2014 8:56 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:20:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I don't think private sellers at gun shows or anywhere for that matter
are criminals by nature, looking to break any laws. They may not have
even known that the state law to check ID's existed. They are gun nuts,
not professional dealers.

===

You can be sure that anyone with a booth at a gun show has been
advised of their legal obligations and has signed a statement
acknowledging those obligations. The organizers take care of such
things to protect themselves from legal action.



I think the problem here is the source and ones point of view of the
source. Dick trusts the source (in this case CNN) go give you the
straight skinny so he takes the limited info they gave us as gospel. If
you take those numbers as a fair stat on illegal gun sales, you come to
about 25% dirty sales. On the other hand 1, many here don't take CNN as
fair and balanced since they have been caught red handed in the past
taking sides, secondly, the real time personal experience of each and
ever gun buyer on this group would suggest that it's nowhere near 25%,
again suggesting CNN possibly didn't play straight, and with their
history, I give the weight to that side of the story.. but then again, I
wear a tin hat, I mean, I think MSNBC is biased too :)


The CNN thing was not a documentary on the percentage of illegal gun
sales or even the number of attempts at buying. It was very simply a
demonstration of how easy it was to purchase a bunch of firearms over a
weekend with no questions asked.

That's all it was. If you want to believe it was all scripted and made
with hired actors, that's your call.

It did not really show how easy was to buy firearms off grid. They
admitted to 600 miles of driving and 5 gun shows to buy 3 guns. That does
not look easy. Easy is going to the hood and buying stolen guns. Just
convince them you are not police. There was a Scotland Yard detective
probably 20 years ago, who was anti gun, who wrote a paper on how easy it
was to buy a handgun off the street in London. And handguns had been
banned for many years by that time. I saw one of the expose' shows where
they bought a couple guns in Idaho. Made it look easy. But they admitted
to being turned down a lot. When my father went to the hospital when the
cancer got to him, someone broke in and robbed all the guns except for one
22 rifle. This was before the requirements of safes. Those weapons could
easily be used for crimes, and would be sold off grid. Buying for
criminals is most likely easy and cheaper than buying legally.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:12:45 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 01:44:07 -0800, jps wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 8:54 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/13/2014 7:03 PM, Poco Loco wrote:


It was a great discussion. However, the failure of many to agree with
Luddite caused a degree of frustration which resulted in some comments
not taken well.

It's a damn shame that a difference of opinion can't simply be
accepted. Very sad!

It is strange how some folks handle opposition when they feel they are
smarter than everyone else in the room... Even if they are, I have
always found that new blood can lead to new innovations and even new
attitudes... I think these types of folks are ripping themselves off.





Common sense is not an indicator of "smartness".

Debate and discussion is how controversial issues are resolved. When
the issue is a social problem it is the responsibility of all to
contribute to the solution. Hiding your head in the sand and pretending
the problem doesn't exist doesn't count.

In the end, those who push strongly enough win. Those who cling to the
status quo end up getting run over. Better to be a participant.

Hear, hear.

You missed this:

"The crime rate has been dropping for decades.
Nobody ever got anyone to "tune in" to hear a story about how great
things are going and we are safer than ever.

It is all "Things that are going to kill you, details at 11"

(Greg)


Hear, hear.

The crime rate has been dropping and so has the percentage of
Americans owning guns.

And yet the number of deaths by gun is maintaining at a constant. So
either more crime related deaths are being committed by gun or more
people are killing themselves by gun.

Crime rate includes burglary, robbery, rape, assualt, etc. Is there a
relationship between more guns being owned by fewer Americans and the
crime rate?

How's the death by gun rate of K-12 and Higher Ed doing?

What I do know is that the more guns that a society owns, the more
deaths are as a result of guns and death rates per capita climb.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 12:35:36 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 11/15/2014 10:52 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 07:55:46 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 11/15/2014 7:26 AM, True North wrote:
FlatulentOne sez....
"I've been trying to ignore your remarks because you seem to have issues.
But you crossed the line. You are an ungrateful little snot. And you
know what I mean. "


Bingo!
You're finally making some sense.
It was my impression a few years ago that Richard made a substantial contribution to the MickeyMouse racing team and who knows what else to help out the little PeterPan/Tinkerbell deadbeat on his mis-adventures.
You'd think L'il Snot would keep this in mind.
On the other hand, maybe we just think differently up here. Every year we thank the good people of Boston and the state of Mass for the help they generously gave us 97 years ago in our hour of need.

**** you, Donnie.
Fix your boisenberry. It has line length issues.

Go to 'View' and click on 'Word Wrap'. That worked for me.

I don't see a word wrap option.

Ah, you're not using Agent. Maybe under 'message views' or some such?

Agent just sizes the lines to fit the window in which the posts
appear.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:40:19 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

On Saturday, 15 November 2014 13:34:04 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 11:57:01 AM UTC-5, True North wrote:
On Saturday, 15 November 2014 12:45:52 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:16:58 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/15/14 10:53 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:37:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/15/2014 8:49 AM, True North wrote:


Don, referring to a recent post you made regarding "contributions" made
to a participant in this newsgroup:

I request that you keep any knowledge of that circumstance to yourself.
You don't know what the story was and you are misrepresenting it here.

It was a long time ago, had nothing to do with motorcycle racing and I
was not alone in lending some help during a rough time.

Some things should be off the table in terms of discussion. Ok?


Since when has honesty meant anything to White or Krause?


One of the few remaining delights of rec.boats is to see vile posts like
these from right-wing trash like Herring and others and then shortly
afterwards see posts from them whining about the "atmosphere" here.

Who's whining? Luddite had a rightful complaint. Don was out of line.
Nothing new there.

And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs.

I think we've been darn accurate profiling you.
"Bang on"... as y'all like to say down there.
BTW I apologized to Richard...why is it any of your business to continue bringing up this issue in the newsgroup?

My response was to Krause. Direct your whine to him.

Duh!
You named me directly..
here, read this again if you've forgotten already.

"And, since when has honesty meant anything to you or Don White. You
two make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs."


There's not a thing there about Richard. I named you directly as I
stated a simple fact.

Since when has honesty meant anything to you or Harold Krause? You two
make up lies and then feed each other from your own troughs.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:50:09 -0500, wrote:

The best I can tell the NICS is based on name and DOB.

===

As I understand it the preferred NCIS identifier is driver's license
number. We were told that by the coast guard after they refused to
accept our US passports as valid ID.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 09:54:35 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:12:45 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 01:44:07 -0800, jps wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 8:54 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/13/2014 7:03 PM, Poco Loco wrote:


It was a great discussion. However, the failure of many to agree with
Luddite caused a degree of frustration which resulted in some comments
not taken well.

It's a damn shame that a difference of opinion can't simply be
accepted. Very sad!

It is strange how some folks handle opposition when they feel they are
smarter than everyone else in the room... Even if they are, I have
always found that new blood can lead to new innovations and even new
attitudes... I think these types of folks are ripping themselves off.





Common sense is not an indicator of "smartness".

Debate and discussion is how controversial issues are resolved. When
the issue is a social problem it is the responsibility of all to
contribute to the solution. Hiding your head in the sand and pretending
the problem doesn't exist doesn't count.

In the end, those who push strongly enough win. Those who cling to the
status quo end up getting run over. Better to be a participant.

Hear, hear.

You missed this:

"The crime rate has been dropping for decades.
Nobody ever got anyone to "tune in" to hear a story about how great
things are going and we are safer than ever.

It is all "Things that are going to kill you, details at 11"

(Greg)


Hear, hear.

The crime rate has been dropping and so has the percentage of
Americans owning guns.

How could you possibly know that? Survey? Registered guns? If I were
called, I wouldn't volunteer any information about guns I own. (Of
course, they could, as Luddite says, find bits and pieces by reading
enough crap online.

And yet the number of deaths by gun is maintaining at a constant. So
either more crime related deaths are being committed by gun or more
people are killing themselves by gun.

Ah, the population is increasing - especially in those cultures where
shooting each other is the norm.

Crime rate includes burglary, robbery, rape, assualt, etc. Is there a
relationship between more guns being owned by fewer Americans and the
crime rate?

Is there a relationship between hoods on the streets of Chicago,
Flint, NO, etc, and the crime rate?

Are you implying that all burglaries, robberies, rapes, assaults,
etc., are committed with guns? What's your point?

How's the death by gun rate of K-12 and Higher Ed doing?

How far back are you going? Check it out...
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeind...table_01_1.asp

What I do know is that the more guns that a society owns, the more
deaths are as a result of guns and death rates per capita climb.

Actually that really depends on the society. Perhaps you should look
at Switzerland.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:53:38 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 12:52:52 -0500, BAR wrote:

The only purpose of registration is to enable confiscation.

No, it also enables direct taxation. It will start as a
"reasonable"registration fee and then, just like car tags, it will
become another profit center for the cities and states.
Just like cigarette taxes, those without any guns will have no problem
allowing the tax to increase to prohibitive levels. You only have to
look at some of the taxes proposed so far, like the nickel a bullet
tax proposed in California, the $25 a gun tax in Chicago and the 5%
excise tax on everything shooting related in New Jersey.
Once a tax structure is in place, raising the tax is virtually a
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen.


It's already happening in DC, and you can bet the amounts for
registration, re-registration, and finger printing won't be going down
- unless an honest Republican gets elected Mayor.

(I'd say 'honest Democrat', but that's an oxymoron. Harry'd catch me
on that.)

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 12:52:52 -0500, BAR wrote:

The only purpose of registration is to enable confiscation.

No, it also enables direct taxation. It will start as a
"reasonable"registration fee and then, just like car tags, it will
become another profit center for the cities and states.
Just like cigarette taxes, those without any guns will have no problem
allowing the tax to increase to prohibitive levels. You only have to
look at some of the taxes proposed so far, like the nickel a bullet
tax proposed in California, the $25 a gun tax in Chicago and the 5%
excise tax on everything shooting related in New Jersey.
Once a tax structure is in place, raising the tax is virtually a
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen.

Just look at cigarettes. Taxes are used to prevent use. New York at $4.35
a pack. To Mo. At $0.17 a pack.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

jps wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:12:45 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 01:44:07 -0800, jps wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 8:54 AM, KC wrote:
On 11/13/2014 7:03 PM, Poco Loco wrote:


It was a great discussion. However, the failure of many to agree with
Luddite caused a degree of frustration which resulted in some comments
not taken well.

It's a damn shame that a difference of opinion can't simply be
accepted. Very sad!

It is strange how some folks handle opposition when they feel they are
smarter than everyone else in the room... Even if they are, I have
always found that new blood can lead to new innovations and even new
attitudes... I think these types of folks are ripping themselves off.





Common sense is not an indicator of "smartness".

Debate and discussion is how controversial issues are resolved. When
the issue is a social problem it is the responsibility of all to
contribute to the solution. Hiding your head in the sand and pretending
the problem doesn't exist doesn't count.

In the end, those who push strongly enough win. Those who cling to the
status quo end up getting run over. Better to be a participant.

Hear, hear.

You missed this:

"The crime rate has been dropping for decades.
Nobody ever got anyone to "tune in" to hear a story about how great
things are going and we are safer than ever.

It is all "Things that are going to kill you, details at 11"

(Greg)


Hear, hear.

The crime rate has been dropping and so has the percentage of
Americans owning guns.

And yet the number of deaths by gun is maintaining at a constant. So
either more crime related deaths are being committed by gun or more
people are killing themselves by gun.

Crime rate includes burglary, robbery, rape, assualt, etc. Is there a
relationship between more guns being owned by fewer Americans and the
crime rate?

How's the death by gun rate of K-12 and Higher Ed doing?

What I do know is that the more guns that a society owns, the more
deaths are as a result of guns and death rates per capita climb.

Cite that gun ownership is dropping. Not some telephone poll! There has
been a massive purchasing of firearms I the last 6+ years.