BoatBanter.com

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)
-   General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)
-   -   Very Refreshing (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/163200-very-refreshing.html)

Wayne.B February 2nd 15 06:35 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:41:35 -0500, wrote:

Trusts are usually used to bypass the local sheriff/CLEO.


===

How does that work?

Mr. Luddite February 2nd 15 06:42 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On 2/2/2015 11:43 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 2/2/2015 9:28 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/2/2015 9:24 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:16:10 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/2/2015 8:58 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 08:41:30 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/2/2015 7:43 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:
On Sun, 01 Feb 2015 23:22:03 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/1/2015 11:13 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sunday, February 1, 2015 at 7:53:26 PM UTC-8, Mr. Luddite
wrote:
On 2/1/2015 10:33 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 01 Feb 2015 19:15:13 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:


Tim, that's a wonderful historical statement, true for it's
time. It's
more of a tradition now though. I don't care how many guns are
privately owned, there's no way they could be used to fend
off the US
military if our government somehow decided to become
"tyrannical".
Heck, they can't agree on how many sugars to put in a coffee.


Considering the number of conservative southerners and
westerners who
are actually the ones to join the military, why would you
think they
would fight the citizens if the government became tyrannical?
You would be more likely to have a military coup.


I agree a few thousand guys in a compound somewhere will not
stand
much of a chance but a million well armed guys could cause some
serious problems. Particularity if the military was less than
enthusiastic in quelling them.
Our military is yet to win a single "asymmetric" war even when
they
were motivated to do it..


I think your hypotheticals originate in la-la land. By it's
nature and
governmental structure it is impossible to even imagine a
military
"coup" in the USA today and we aren't going to have another
Civil War.


Richard, a coup is one thing, disarmament of the free citizen is
another. an overthrow would be hard to pull off, and a
disarmament would be even harder. I dont' think it would be
that easy for US soldiers to willingly fire on US citizens.
especially on such a basis. Few kids are gonna fire on people
from their home town regardless of who wrote the orders.

Not really sure, but round where I live, If disarmament of the
public came push and shove, I'd say things might get pretty
bloody. On both sides.



Who's talking "disarmament"?

Personally (and no offense) I think the people shouting the most
about
gun ownership to protect themselves against their government in
the USA
have been drinking too much NRA juice.


Or listening to Bloomberg, et al.



I am talking about those who hang on the "necessary militia" stuff
and
are fearful that the government will someday conspire and use the
military against it's citizens to justify *no* reasonable gun control
laws. Those concerns were true when written but not relevant today.
We have better ways to resolve differences and they've worked fine
so far. Most people can have any firearm they want (within reason)
for their sporting, competition or self defense reasons.


So Bloomberg, et al, are just ****in' in the wind?



What success has Bloomberg, et al, have to show for themselves? It
takes votes and they can't get any.


Look at the ridiculous laws in Maryland and your home state, for
example. You think
Bloomberg, et al, had nothing to do with those?



I have no problem with the gun control laws here or in Maryland (for
what I know about them). My only complaint here is the conflict between
the certification agency and the Attorney General. They need to be on
the same page.

I can understand why you feel the way you do. I've read the gun laws in
Virginia. Basically, there aren't any.


Do you think that conflict might be intentional?

Are home buyers out and about in your area this winter?



We've had about 6 private showings. Two are looking into the financing
part. Usually the women love it but the guys think it's too big or find
reasons it won't work. (horse sense).

Another couple wanted to visit last Wednesday, the day after the 28" of
snow. I had to laugh. You know the length of the driveway. Told them
they'd have to ski or snowmobile up until I could get everything
cleared. They rescheduled for this week except as of right now we've
had another 10 inches or so and it's still snowing. Winter sucks.



Wayne.B February 2nd 15 06:46 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 13:16:10 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:42:48 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 11:48:55 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:25:20 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 07:07:28 -0500,
wrote:

Isn't it amazing how easy it is to push Americans to vote for
Republicans against their own interests when the only thing the GOP has
to offer is fear and hate?

Yeah Fear of an over reaching government and hate of wasteful
spending.

===

Well said. Vast government over reach is what I'm seeing.

Tried to build a pier huh?


===

No, I fought that battle 10 years ago and won but it took 6 months
when it should have taken 6 days. Frankly the Corps shouldn't have
been involved in that decision at all since the plans met all existing
regs and CC canals are not exactly federal water ways except in their
bloated bureaucratic mind.

Right now an organization that I belong to is trying to make some
relatively minor improvements to some land we own and the red tape,
stalling and delays are unbelievable. The Corps is once again
involved even though the land is many miles from anything that
resembles a waterway or anything else.


The twisted government logic is that even though the Feds and the
State may not have jurisdiction, they still need to process the permit
and certify that they don't have jurisdiction before the county, that
does have jurisdiction can proceed.
These days it is the small tooth sawfish that is holding up permits.
They can spend 6 months surveying a spot and give it the OK. The next
day after the first permit was applied for, if another application is
filed it goes on the stack and the process starts over again like they
had never looked at the first one.
The states and the feds have to sign off on the sawfish even in county
controlled canals.


===

That is the kind of ridiculous nonsense that I'm talking about. These
government agencies have all been co-opted by obstructionists that
want no development anywhere. The agencies seem happy to go along
with it because it increases their span of control and relative
importance.

Is there any legitimate scientific evidence that shows harm to small
tooth sawfish by homeowner docks? I don't recall ever voting for that
piece of regulatory power. I wouldn't even know who we had to vote
out of office to get it changed. The whole regulatory business has
taken on a life of its own with no end in sight.

Mr. Luddite February 2nd 15 06:49 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On 2/2/2015 11:46 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:16:10 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



What success has Bloomberg, et al, have to show for themselves? It
takes votes and they can't get any.


Some places in New York are fighting a "confiscation or remove from
the state" clause in their 10 magazine ban as we speak.
Bloomberg is the #2 briber of politicians last year. That money is
going to buy something where it can.



This is like what items are listed for on eBay. As Rick Harrison would
say, "Is that what they're asking or is that what they're getting?"

There have been all kinds of proposals put forth by anti-gun nuts
ranging from "smart guns" only to your referenced confiscation or
remove. None have gone anywhere.

A more reasonable approach is to grandfather existing guns or magazines
that, after proper debate and vote, are determined to be banned. It's
the way most change takes place. Slowly and without screwing over the
existing owners.



Keyser Söze February 2nd 15 06:56 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On 2/2/15 12:41 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 11:33:10 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:



I don't have any issues with the Maryland gun laws. I've never been
unable to buy any firearm I wanted, and usually for a handgun, I get the
"no reason not to approve" response from the state in three or four days.

The federal regs to get a tax stamp for a silencer are an entirely
different matter. I went the "trust" route and have two co-trustees, so
three different notaries were involved. Armed with the 15-page trust, I
went to my dealer and he collected the sales price for the silencer and
the $200 that goes to the feds for a stamp that took about four months
to get. During that period, the silencer sat in the dealer's safe. The
"trust" route, I have been told, is a bit faster than going through the
local sheriff and filing a different set of paperwork.

The process certainly helps me understand why some guys buy an adaptor
and screw on an oil filter as a suppressor. :)


Trusts are usually used to bypass the local sheriff/CLEO.

I bet your dealer knew your locals would not sign a Form 4


As a matter of fact, the local sheriff is pro-gun and signs off on the
paperwork, and has said so in response to inquiries and there are any
number of individuals who have posted that he does.

The trust has legal provisions someone filing as an individual doesn't get.

So, once again, you are incorrect in your assumption.

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

Keyser Söze February 2nd 15 06:58 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On 2/2/15 1:35 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:41:35 -0500, wrote:

Trusts are usually used to bypass the local sheriff/CLEO.


===

How does that work?


Greg is incorrect. Trusts may be used to bypass a sheriff who won't sign
off, but that is not a problem in our county. There are advantages to a
trust that have to do with use of the items and succession of ownership.

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

[email protected] February 2nd 15 07:33 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 1:36:22 PM UTC-5, Wayne. B wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:41:35 -0500, wrote:

Trusts are usually used to bypass the local sheriff/CLEO.


===

How does that work?


http://199trust.com

Wayne.B February 2nd 15 08:44 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:07:15 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 13:46:49 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 13:16:10 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:42:48 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 11:48:55 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:25:20 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 07:07:28 -0500,
wrote:

Isn't it amazing how easy it is to push Americans to vote for
Republicans against their own interests when the only thing the GOP has
to offer is fear and hate?

Yeah Fear of an over reaching government and hate of wasteful
spending.

===

Well said. Vast government over reach is what I'm seeing.

Tried to build a pier huh?

===

No, I fought that battle 10 years ago and won but it took 6 months
when it should have taken 6 days. Frankly the Corps shouldn't have
been involved in that decision at all since the plans met all existing
regs and CC canals are not exactly federal water ways except in their
bloated bureaucratic mind.

Right now an organization that I belong to is trying to make some
relatively minor improvements to some land we own and the red tape,
stalling and delays are unbelievable. The Corps is once again
involved even though the land is many miles from anything that
resembles a waterway or anything else.

The twisted government logic is that even though the Feds and the
State may not have jurisdiction, they still need to process the permit
and certify that they don't have jurisdiction before the county, that
does have jurisdiction can proceed.
These days it is the small tooth sawfish that is holding up permits.
They can spend 6 months surveying a spot and give it the OK. The next
day after the first permit was applied for, if another application is
filed it goes on the stack and the process starts over again like they
had never looked at the first one.
The states and the feds have to sign off on the sawfish even in county
controlled canals.


===

That is the kind of ridiculous nonsense that I'm talking about. These
government agencies have all been co-opted by obstructionists that
want no development anywhere. The agencies seem happy to go along
with it because it increases their span of control and relative
importance.

Is there any legitimate scientific evidence that shows harm to small
tooth sawfish by homeowner docks? I don't recall ever voting for that
piece of regulatory power. I wouldn't even know who we had to vote
out of office to get it changed. The whole regulatory business has
taken on a life of its own with no end in sight.


The problem is this is the 4th branch of government, US Civil Service.
There is no way to vote them out. A lot of these things are simply
administrative rules, not laws.
The revolving door works the same at EPA as it does at DoD.


===

We have to start defunding them so they're forced to focus on what's
important.

Wayne.B February 2nd 15 08:52 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 14:44:14 -0500, wrote:

I got the impression Scott is not signing
them either.


===

He's saying that he won't sign unless he personally knows the
individual. I could probably get an introduction but it's not worth
the bother to me.

Wayne.B February 2nd 15 08:53 PM

Very Refreshing
 
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 14:47:07 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 13:42:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/2/2015 11:43 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:


Are home buyers out and about in your area this winter?



We've had about 6 private showings. Two are looking into the financing
part. Usually the women love it but the guys think it's too big or find
reasons it won't work. (horse sense).

Another couple wanted to visit last Wednesday, the day after the 28" of
snow. I had to laugh. You know the length of the driveway. Told them
they'd have to ski or snowmobile up until I could get everything
cleared. They rescheduled for this week except as of right now we've
had another 10 inches or so and it's still snowing. Winter sucks.


Yeah it is tough here too. It rained a few minutes today and it may
drop down in the 60s. ;-)


===

Dayumm, another cold wave.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:56 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com