Another ...
 

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 15:50:04 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 15:12:27 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


It's important to remember that "culture" varies enormously from state
to state, and region to region. Folks in rural areas absolutely
detest having big city values pushed on to them. Why should they be
punished for the misdeeds of others?



We are becoming much more homogeneous as a nation. The farmlands and
rural areas of the past are becoming high tech manufacturing areas.
As this trend continues it's not unreasonable (IMO) to expect a more
uniform "culture" as it relates to firearms.

===

You need to a drive through the fly over states or even the western
portions of the eastern states. The first day of deer season is
regarded as a holiday in many parts of Pennsylvania and rural areas of
NY.

Amen.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 6:26 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:17:15 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 3:56 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 1:59:25 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 2:05 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 13:56:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 6/30/2018 10:34 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/30/18 9:30 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t
they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and
out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the
guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did
"something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old,
named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a
minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as
"sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are
banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the
shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is
legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of
sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media
rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion
for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some
reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not
registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that
firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required
within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a
decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms
and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs
a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced.Â* Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful,Â* I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's
heads they may be more careful in the control of who has access to
their firearms.Â* I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings
who got the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms.Â* What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd
Amendment rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the
world to argue that any further attempt to control the use and
ownership of firearms is fruitless.Â* Change has to start somewhere.
Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind
eye and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have
been enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities.Â* With that right comes responsibility however.



I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm.


I see no problem if the "kid" is of legal age to own the firearm and
it is transferred to him along with a new registration of ownership.

That leaves the original owner (gifter) with no further responsibility.

Of course under the rules I have proposed if someone just gifts a
firearm to someone without any documentation of the transfer, the
original owner should still be held responsible if that firearm ever
becomes used in criminal activity.


I still ask, why is documentation a mitigator in any crimes?
What difference does it really make?
Virtually every one of these mass shootings involve legally purchased
and properly documented firearms.

When you look at the bulk of the murders (around the drug trade), the
guns are usually stolen and I doubt anyone will be rushing down to the
police station to register a stolen gun, particularly since most are
barred from owning one in the first place.



Because we have to change our thinking about gun ownership, not outlaw them.

You said you had a shotgun at 15 and "unfettered" access to a .22 before
then. Tim just mentioned that he had a .357 at 15 and a .44 at 17.

Obviously both of you were responsible and careful with them otherwise
either or both of you would not be around to be posting in rec.boats today.

But, let me ask you this:

Do you (and Tim) think that now-a-days any 15 year old kid in your
neighborhoods should have the right to have a shotgun or a .357 whatever
it was?

Is your confidence in other families and the parents that control
them high enough to feel comfortable with kids barely beyond puberty
walking around with those firearms?

Not me. Many parents today don't even enforce some of the basic
rules we grew up with.

I do understand what your saying ass well as asking, Richard. And it's a difficult question for me to answer. You said "think that now-a-days any 15 year old kid in your neighborhoods should have the right ..."

Well, around my 'neighborhood' you'll find that about any teenager has at least access to some type of a firearm. I mean, when the first day of deer season rolls around, the local schools shut down because most of the kids are going to be out deer hunting anyhow. "free day" is what the schools call it.

Now to be (I take it you mean 'casually") Walking around with a firearm, I'd say not only no, but "heck no!"
When I was a kid buying a .357, I had already been ingrained with a great deal of respect for people and for the firearms. You don't go flagging it around in front of people.

I'd like to say I that would be true with kids in my area today.



Me too. But I am not sure in today's days of violent video games and
lack of strong parental control of kids that access to firearms at 15
as a general rule is a good idea.

I am sure the community you grew up in was different back then and I
know you had strong family influences. Sounds like that culture remains
today but I am not sure that's true everywhere.


Well of course it's not true everywhere! I wouldn't give 'any kid' a rifle, and I'm sure most
'responsible' adults feel the same way. But, back to what Greg said, none of this extra paperwork
you propose would have stopped any of the shootings!



OK. Forget it.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 5:47 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 12:04:18 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:44:57 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for asÂ* "sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!

That just traces the gun back to the person it was stolen from. The
police report would do that.

No one mentioned a stolen gun. That's a whole different story.




I did (above):

"If stolen, sold or legally transferred a report of that event or
transfer would be required within 48 hours."

Another ...
 

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:02:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 6/30/2018 12:17 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 10:34:17 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/30/18 9:30 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t
they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and
out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy
from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old,
named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as
"sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are
banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the
shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is
legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings
but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some
reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not
registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that
firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required
within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and
the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a
7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced.Â* Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful,Â* I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms.Â* I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms.Â* What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless.Â* Change has to start somewhere.Â* Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities.Â* With that right comes responsibility however.



I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm.

I suspect that has more to do with your desire to outlaw hunting in
all forms than preventing mass shootings since millions of "kids" are
given guns every year and a minuscule fraction ever do anything wrong
with them. (other than murder helpless animals)



No problem in states that allow "kids" to have rifles for hunting as
long as they are of the legal age for that state and the rifle is
registered to them. Of course the parents still have parental
responsibilities as to how and when it is used and stored.

I am not sure there is any state (except maybe Hawaii) that does not
allow 15 or 16 year old kids to hunt alone.
OTOH they still have to be 18 to own a gun so there is a flaw in the
logic.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 5:51 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:38:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 09:30:52 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old, named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for asÂ* "sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a 7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced. Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful, I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms. I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

Since there was no problem establishing who owned the gun, again, what
would registration accomplish?
It is just one more layer of bureaucracy and no doubt tax.
Laws requiring proper storage of the gun already exist, even in gun
friendly states like Florida but, since Lanza (Sandy Hook) shot his
mom when he took the gun, I doubt the law would have much punishment
available to use against her.



It's kinda fun watching you come up with every reason in the world
to do nothing.



Bull****. He's not advocating 'do nothing'. He's pointing out the futility of passing more laws
which do nothing to stop the shootings but do create more government jobs and paperwork.



Bull**** yourself. It seems any attempt to even discuss possibilities
of how to address the killing that takes place using guns is countered
by "it wouldn't have stopped ...."

That has not been my point throughout this discussion.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 5:55 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:11:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 1:21 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 12:20:13 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 10:34:17 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/30/18 9:30 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t
they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and
out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy
from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old,
named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as
"sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are
banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the
shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is
legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings
but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some
reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not
registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that
firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required
within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and
the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a
7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced.Â* Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful,Â* I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms.Â* I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms.Â* What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless.Â* Change has to start somewhere.Â* Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities.Â* With that right comes responsibility however.



I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm.

I suspect that has more to do with your desire to outlaw hunting in
all forms than preventing mass shootings since millions of "kids" are
given guns every year and a minuscule fraction ever do anything wrong
with them. (other than murder helpless animals)


There you go again. I have ne desire to outlaw hunting in all forms, as ypu
phrase it.

You certainly never miss a chance to criticize it but that still
leaves us with the fact that "kids" are allowed to hunt alone in most
states, including Maryland so that must mean they have unsupervised
use of a firearm.


I was 15 when I got my first shotgun. I had unfettered access to a .22
before that.


I was just looking at Maryland's gun laws including the most recent
changes. The focus of the changes seem to be on assault type "military"
looking long guns and restrictions on magazine capacities.

There still is no minimum age requirement to purchase and own a long gun
however and no permits, proof of training or anything is required.

Seems nuts to me in this day and age. The way I read it a 7 year old
can buy a shotgun or a .22.

A buyer must be 18 to purchase a long gun in Maryland.

http://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-la...n/minimum-age/



That's a federal law. Note this sentence on another website by the
same Giffords Law Center that you just cited:

"However, there appears to be no minimum age to possess a rifle or
shotgun in the state."

http://lawcenter.giffords.org/minimum-age-to-purchase-possess-in-maryland/

The one I linked to was last updated in November of 2017. Perhaps
Maryland's laws have been further updated since.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 6:02 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:02:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 12:17 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 10:34:17 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/30/18 9:30 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t
they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and
out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy
from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old,
named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as
"sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are
banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the
shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is
legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings
but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some
reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not
registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that
firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required
within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and
the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a
7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced.Â* Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful,Â* I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms.Â* I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms.Â* What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless.Â* Change has to start somewhere.Â* Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities.Â* With that right comes responsibility however.



I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm.

I suspect that has more to do with your desire to outlaw hunting in
all forms than preventing mass shootings since millions of "kids" are
given guns every year and a minuscule fraction ever do anything wrong
with them. (other than murder helpless animals)



No problem in states that allow "kids" to have rifles for hunting as
long as they are of the legal age for that state and the rifle is
registered to them. Of course the parents still have parental
responsibilities as to how and when it is used and stored.


Are there states that require the registration of rifles? Massachusetts doesn't, but I see
California does.

"The California Department of Justice ("DOJ") retains information about the purchaser and seller of
all in-state firearm sales and transfers, and requires that any firearms imported into the state be
reported to the DOJ.[14] Furthermore, the Attorney General is required by law to maintain a registry
containing the fingerprints and identifying information of the transferee, and the unique
identifying information of every firearm transferred in the state, pursuant to §11106.[15]"

...according to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_la...tates_by_state

Most states don't require registration of long guns.



I think they should.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 6:16 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 15:44:54 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:36:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The laws governing the purchase of a shotgun in Florida are stricter
than those in Maryland.

I bought a shotgun in Florida back when we wintered down there after
we found a 4-5 foot rattlesnake coiled up at our front door one day.

Like Maryland, they did a quick telephone background check, rang me up
but I had to wait several days to pick it up and take it home.

Maryland lets you take it home the same day after the quick phone
background check.

===

Are you sure about that? I've never had to wait for anything other
than the background check and that only takes a few minutes, if that.
Filling out the form takes longer.

According to this, FL has a three day waiting period and some counties go up to five days:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_la...tates_by_state



This is why we need uniform gun laws rather than the patchwork system we
have now.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 6:19 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:02:27 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 3:44 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:36:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The laws governing the purchase of a shotgun in Florida are stricter
than those in Maryland.

I bought a shotgun in Florida back when we wintered down there after
we found a 4-5 foot rattlesnake coiled up at our front door one day.

Like Maryland, they did a quick telephone background check, rang me up
but I had to wait several days to pick it up and take it home.

Maryland lets you take it home the same day after the quick phone
background check.

===

Are you sure about that? I've never had to wait for anything other
than the background check and that only takes a few minutes, if that.
Filling out the form takes longer.



I am sure. It was back in 2003 though, so perhaps the rules have
changed. They did the instant (phone) background check, I paid for the
the shotgun but the store had to hold it for something like 5 days
before I could pick it up. Bought it at a WalMart of all places.
Winchester 20 gauge.

It could also have been because I was not
a permanent Florida resident. Don't know. I never had a Florida
driver's license. Florida was kinda strange. I bought and registered
a pickup truck down there with Florida tags but I didn't need a
Florida driver's license to do it.

I still have the shotgun. Never been fired. But now I have a minor problem.

Because I bought it in Florida (well before I had a LTC permit
in Massachusetts) it is technically illegal for me to have it up here.
I didn't know all the rules and laws back then and it may be difficult
for me to legally transfer or sell it. This state has no record that I
have it.

I am sure if I just turned it over to the town police (which is probably
what I'll do when the time comes) they will just take it with no
questions asked.



Why not just register it? The way I read this, it's permissable:

"Although registration is not specifically required by law, transfers of firearm ownership are
required to be recorded with the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security
(EOPSS): by the seller if in state, or by the buyer if out of state. The Massachusetts EOPSS also
provides the option to register a firearm, although, other than obtaining a firearm from out of
state (a transfer of ownership), this is not required by law."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Massachusetts



Thanks. I'll look into this.

I asked the owner of the gun shop where I have purchased my other guns
here in MA. He's an FFL and he didn't know what I should do. He said
he couldn't buy it from me even if I almost gave it away. No records
of how I obtained it, he said.

Another ...
 

On 6/30/2018 6:29 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 13:57:50 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 6/30/2018 11:04 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 10:34:17 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 6/30/18 9:30 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 7:44 AM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:19:51 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:28:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/29/18 12:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/29/2018 11:38 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/29/18 11:32 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:05:34 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 10:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:13:47 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/28/18 8:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/28/2018 8:38 PM, Tim wrote:
Mr. Luddite

... shooting in Annapolis, MD ?
..........

This strict gun control laws are really paying off, aren’t
they?



Tim, it's more like this country has gone totally crazy and
out of
control.Â* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to beÂ* a right wing nutcase.


Well, for what it is worth, the police have identified the guy
from
photo recognition software. It was reported he did "something" to
obliterate his fingerprints. He's a white man, 39 years old,
named
Jarrod Warren Ramos, according to multiple law enforcement
sources, who
apparently lives in Laurel, Maryland.

Ramos has a connection to the paper. He filed a defamation claim
in 2012
against the paper but the case was dismissed. He also has a minor
conviction for "harassment" some years ago.



Tim thinks Maryland has "strict" gun laws. That's kind of funny,
since
Maryland doesn't have "strict" gun laws.

They have most of the things people are clamoring for as
"sensible"
or "common sense" gun laws
* handgun license to buy one
* handgun de facto registration
*Assault Weapons ban
* high cap magazine ban
* universal background checks on all sales
* red flag law

Do they still have that stupid fired case law?


As I said, Maryland does not have strict gun laws.

There is no "handgun license." There is a "handgun qualification
license."Â* Even an idiot like Alex could get one.

I'm not sure what "handgun de facto registration" means.

There is no "assault weapons ban." Most AR-15 type rifles are
banned if
they don't have heavy barrels, but you can buy an AR-10 off the
shelf,
and any number of different semi-auto rifles.

Only the sale of hi-cap mags are prohibited. Possession is
legal, as is
buying them across the state line and bringing them into Maryland.

I have no idea what a "red flag" law is.

Your state is one of the ones the left uses for examples of sensible
gun laws. BTE to enlighten you the red flag law mean they had the
ability to take Ramos' shotgun based on his social media rantings
but
they didn't.

Thanks for pointing out the futility tho.


Ahh, so there's nothing that can be done. Let 'er rip!


I've come to the conclusion that there really is nothing that can
be done in terms of new gun laws mainly because of how many guns
already exist and the lack of records as to where they are or who
owns them. Yeah, mandatory background checks, etc., may help but most
places already have them.

The only thing I can think of .... and this will cause indigestion for
many here ... is a required registration of all guns
and strict enforcement of the required registration.Â* If for some
reason
you are found to be in possession of a firearm that is not
registered to
you as it's owner, it results in immediate confiscation of that
firearm.

The data base or registry identifies the owner and the owner is held
responsible for it and it's use.Â* If stolen, sold or legally
transferred a report of that event or transfer would be required
within
48 hours.

Not dissimilar for titles for vehicles.

So to some ... go take an antacid.

It's the tiny bit of liberal DNA in me.







I'd certainly support complete registration of all firearms as a decent
start. Used firearms must be registered, too. Along with the
registration, a mandatory background check of the purchaser. All
firearms, no exceptions.

That would not have changed any of the recent shootings at all.
They had no problem tracing this guy's shotgun back to the dealer
within hours. What would registration do?


I can't understand why you are so down on registration of firearms and
the attendant paperwork and
bureaucracy.

The purpose of all that is to help find the perpetrator when he robs a
7/11, shoots someone, and
leaves his gun on the counter as he departs.

Now get off this negative attitude!



There's another aspect of mandatory gun registration that I'd like to
see implemented and enforced.Â* Similar to some of the Admiralty/Maritime
laws, I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed.

Before Greg points out that it "wouldn't have prevented any mass
killings" so therefore it's not helpful,Â* I'd like to make the point
that perhaps with some criminal responsibility hanging on owner's heads
they may be more careful in the control of who has access to their
firearms.Â* I am thinking of the kid in one of these shootings who got
the firearm from his mother who technically owned it.

It's more of an issue of reinforcing awareness of the responsibility
that goes with having firearms.

1 or 2 new laws certainly are not going to end mass shootings or
criminal activities using firearms.Â* What is required is a cultural
change that includes those who are so adamant about their 2nd Amendment
rights and all the naysayers who find every reason in the world to argue
that any further attempt to control the use and ownership of firearms is
fruitless.Â* Change has to start somewhere.Â* Better to recognize and
accept that there's a serious problem and support those reasonable
attempts to at least have some potential affect than to turn a blind eye
and wake up someday to find that far more draconian measures have been
enacted.

I fully support the right to gun ownership for last resort self defense
and sporting activities.Â* With that right comes responsibility however.



I'd extend that responsibility to anyone who "gifts" a kid a firearm.

Absolutely. There should be a record of the transaction.


??

What does ?? mean?

You said this: "I think firearms used in any kind of criminal activity should have
some level of responsibility traced back to the owner on record,
regardless if the owner on record was even remotely connected to the
crime committed."

I agreed there should be a record of the transaction.



Ha! ?? was supposed to be a "thumbs up" emoticon. Something got
lost in the translation. :-)