On 7/1/18 8:39 AM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 6/30/18 9:18 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:56:38 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

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.


California used to have no waiting period for long guns, only handguns.
Not now, all have 10 day waiting period. I remember buying my Remington
1100 San Francisco Gun Exchange. Yes SF used to have gun stores. And
they wrapped it in brown paper and handed it to me. My Ithaca 37 from
monkey ward, handed to me with a box of gratis shells.

I am trying to remember the last gun I had to wait for. It was
certainly a while ago if ever. In Florida a CCW gets you out the door
as soon as the NICS check clears and you get the paperwork done.
I really have not bought than many guns tho. Nothing like Harry the
gun dealer or our resident collector.
The last handgun I bought from a store up north was before the GCA68
at Ye Olde Hunter in Alexandria and I think you just paid the man and
left with it. It was a half a century ago tho. I may be wrong ;-)

I wonder if anyone still has those records?


When I bought my CZ Scorpion some months ago, I walked out of the store
after paying for it in no more than 20 minutes. Just the quick NICS
check. It's usually five full days of waiting for a handgun.


What! No back story. Are you sure that rifle wasn't owned by
Buffalo Bill or one of the former presidents you are chums
with?


Scarlett Johansson rubbed it across her naked breasts when she found out
I was going to buy it.

On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 08:57:00 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:

Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 6/30/18 9:00 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 8:31 PM, 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. No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it
won't
surprise me if he turns out to be 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." 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. 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. 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.


At a certain point I think we have squeezed the gun issue about as
hard as we can. It is time to start trying to just stop the crazy
people who think it is OK to kill a bunch of innocent victims.
I have said many times, guns are for lazy people but it is far from
the only deadly thing out there. Some can be even more devastating.
There are plenty of industrial gasses that are totally unregulated and
have the ability to really do some damage.
How many people would recognize the smell of acetylene and know to run
like hell if they smelled it coming out of the vents in a building?



I guess this is what is called today as "having a conversation".

Nothing is really accomplished but points of view are identified.

Fretwell's point on industrial gases is...absurd.


I'd like to hear your point of view on your bankruptcies,
forclosure, tax evasion etc. Every time the subject is broached
you respond with crickets. What say you.

Please add 'Vietnam service' to the list. I'd like to thank him for his support of the Vietnam war
effort, but he won't tell us who he worked for or what he 'really' did!

On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 09:01:23 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 7/1/18 4:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 9:22 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/30/18 9:18 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:56:38 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

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.


California used to have no waiting period for long guns, only handguns.
Not now, all have 10 day waiting period.* I remember buying my
Remington
1100 San Francisco Gun Exchange.** Yes SF used to have gun stores.* And
they wrapped it in brown paper and handed it to me.** My Ithaca 37 from
monkey ward, handed to me with a box of gratis shells.

I am trying to remember the last gun I had to wait for. It was
certainly a while ago if ever. In Florida a CCW gets you out the door
as soon as the NICS check clears and you get the paperwork done.
I really have not bought than many guns tho. Nothing like Harry the
gun dealer or our resident collector.
The last handgun I bought from a store up north was before the GCA68
at Ye Olde Hunter in Alexandria and I think you just paid the man and
left with it. It was a half a century ago tho. I may be wrong* ;-)

I wonder if anyone still has those records?


When I bought my CZ Scorpion some months ago, I walked out of the
store after paying for it in no more than 20 minutes. Just the quick
NICS check. It's usually five full days of waiting for a handgun.


It may be that if you have a LTC or other permit (if required) the
waiting period is waived because you have already had a full background
check.

That said, based on the websites I've looked at, a permit is *not*
required, nor is any proof of training to purchase a unregulated
long gun in Maryland.* Perhaps that's when a waiting period is imposed?

Anyway, the point is that the recent Maryland shooter did not require
a permit to purchase the shotgun he used and was likely only subject
to the quick criminal background check they quickly do by phone.* If the
court issues he previously had with his beef with the newspaper were
dismissed, there was no criminal background.



No exam or extra paperwork is required to purchase a "non-regulated"
long gun in Maryland.

Even for police officers, though, the same handgun waiting period is
imposed for handgun sales, I believe. Some years ago, I had a nice Ruger
revolver, but I wanted the S&W version. So I sold my Ruger to a police
officer for his personal use. As such, he was able to use a local state
police barracks armorer at the barracks as his FFL. We both drove to the
barracks, went inside with the pistol in its box, handed it over to a
trooper, and the buyer filled out the paperwork. He had to wait the same
period of time as I would have waited, were I the purchaser.

Here's another nonsensical Maryland law:

"Illegal to purchase, sell or manufacture magazines with a capacity of greater than 10 rounds within
Maryland. However, possession of magazines greater than 10 rounds is legal if purchased out of
state. These may not, however, be transferred to a subsequent owner unless done so outside the state
of Maryland."

Unreal.

On 7/1/2018 9:11 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" Wrote in message:

It's not a big deal.Â* I am going to look into the information that John
provided.Â* I am about to get rid of most of my firearms anyway.Â* I'll
keep the one I occasionally carry and probably one other.Â* The rest
are just collecting dust in a gun safe.

Is that .22LR S&W or Ruger stainless revolver going on the auction
block? If it is, if it is in great shape *and* if it is DA, I'd be
interested.Â*Â* Â* I've got a friendly neighborhood FFL to whom it could
be shipped.


I don't have a .22LR S&W or Ruger stainless revolver. I *had* a S&W
stainless steel .357 Magnum at one time but sold it.

Only .22LRs I have is a Ruger "plinker" SR22 pistol and a Ruger rifle.

The other handguns are not .22's

On 7/1/18 9:47 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/1/2018 9:11 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" Wrote in message:

It's not a big deal.Â* I am going to look into the information that John
provided.Â* I am about to get rid of most of my firearms anyway.Â* I'll
keep the one I occasionally carry and probably one other.Â* The rest
are just collecting dust in a gun safe.

Is that .22LR S&W or Ruger stainless revolver going on the auction
block? If it is, if it is in great shape *and* if it is DA, I'd be
interested.Â*Â* Â* I've got a friendly neighborhood FFL to whom it
could be shipped.


I don't have a .22LR S&W or Ruger stainless revolver.Â* I *had* a S&W
stainless steel .357 Magnum at one time but sold it.

Only .22LRs I have is a Ruger "plinker" SR22 pistol and a Ruger rifle.

The other handguns are not .22's




Ah, my mistake. Oh well...

On 6/30/18 11:28 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:38:41 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 6/30/2018 7:30 PM, Bill wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 3:56 PM, Bill wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 2:39 PM, Bill wrote:
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.

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. 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. 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. With that right comes responsibility however.




So, someone steals your car, and uses it in a bank robbery. What charges
against you will you accept?



What does that have to do with anything? The car was stolen. All I
said was that a record of transfer for a firearm, be it stolen, lost
or sold be kept.

My mention of Maritime law was related to the fact that in certain
circumstances a former boat owner can be held responsible for
damage in the future if it's transfer is not properly documented.

There was a case like this years ago when the former owner of a
yacht caused significant damage to a coral reef or protected
salt water grass or something. The transfer of ownership was apparently
not properly done and the former owner got hit with a huge fine.
He fought it but still ended up settling for $20K.




You are stating the former/or owner of the gun should be held liable for
its use if there is no paperwork filed. Guy steals your gun and next day
shoots someone. You do not even know there has been a theft. What
charges will you accept?


I stated that a transfer ... stolen, sold or lost should be reported
within 48 hours. As long as that is done, you are not held responsible.

If you have a gun stolen from you and you don't even notice it's
missing, I don't think you should have had that gun in the first place.

That is more to the point of what I am suggesting. More awareness.






You are out of town for a week?



I don't write the laws. I just come up with ideas. :-)

I suppose exceptions would have to exist for situations such as that.


===

The devil is always in the details, and as you try to package
everything up in bureaucratic red tape, new details emerge which
require another layer of regulations and exceptions. That continues
ad infinitum until the real root cause is addressed: We've got to get
better at identifying the crazies amongst us and rendering them
harmless.


I thought it was sadly humorous that in the Annapolis shooting, a
*cop* who "investigated" the shooter some years ago determined he was
not dangerous. Police, even in an upscale area like Annapolis, aren't
trained to make a qualfified determination in regard to behaviors or
outright threats that aren't completely overt.

On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 10:10:33 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 6/30/18 11:28 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:38:41 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 6/30/2018 7:30 PM, Bill wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 3:56 PM, Bill wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 2:39 PM, Bill wrote:
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.* No clues yet what this guy's motive was but it won't
surprise me if he turns out to be* 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."* 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.* 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.* 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.

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. 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. 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. With that right comes responsibility however.




So, someone steals your car, and uses it in a bank robbery. What charges
against you will you accept?



What does that have to do with anything? The car was stolen. All I
said was that a record of transfer for a firearm, be it stolen, lost
or sold be kept.

My mention of Maritime law was related to the fact that in certain
circumstances a former boat owner can be held responsible for
damage in the future if it's transfer is not properly documented.

There was a case like this years ago when the former owner of a
yacht caused significant damage to a coral reef or protected
salt water grass or something. The transfer of ownership was apparently
not properly done and the former owner got hit with a huge fine.
He fought it but still ended up settling for $20K.




You are stating the former/or owner of the gun should be held liable for
its use if there is no paperwork filed. Guy steals your gun and next day
shoots someone. You do not even know there has been a theft. What
charges will you accept?


I stated that a transfer ... stolen, sold or lost should be reported
within 48 hours. As long as that is done, you are not held responsible.

If you have a gun stolen from you and you don't even notice it's
missing, I don't think you should have had that gun in the first place.

That is more to the point of what I am suggesting. More awareness.






You are out of town for a week?



I don't write the laws. I just come up with ideas. :-)

I suppose exceptions would have to exist for situations such as that.


===

The devil is always in the details, and as you try to package
everything up in bureaucratic red tape, new details emerge which
require another layer of regulations and exceptions. That continues
ad infinitum until the real root cause is addressed: We've got to get
better at identifying the crazies amongst us and rendering them
harmless.


I thought it was sadly humorous that in the Annapolis shooting, a
*cop* who "investigated" the shooter some years ago determined he was
not dangerous. Police, even in an upscale area like Annapolis, aren't
trained to make a qualfified determination in regard to behaviors or
outright threats that aren't completely overt.

Well, your wife still puts up with you, so she must not be qualified either.

Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 9:27 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:13:17 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

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.


We've kicked the paperwork requirement to death. We disagree.



We have. But one other point .... you corrected me about the difference
in Maryland's law regarding minimum age requirements. There's no
minimum age to possess an unregulated long gun but you have to be 18
to buy one. So, who is responsible for the 15 year old (or younger) kid
in possession of a rifle or shotgun?


That basically says the parents are still in charge and can teach the kid
about guns and safety. Just not the person turns 18, then buy a gun and
learn. Instead of all the registration laws that are being proposed and
won’t do anything to decrease the violence, I would not be opposed to a law
that says you have to pass a gun safety course. One equivalent to the NRA
course I took at 13 to get a hunting license. Which is still required by
the state of California to get a hunting license with very few exceptions.

On 7/1/18 11:19 AM, Bill wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/30/2018 9:27 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 19:13:17 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

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.


We've kicked the paperwork requirement to death. We disagree.



We have. But one other point .... you corrected me about the difference
in Maryland's law regarding minimum age requirements. There's no
minimum age to possess an unregulated long gun but you have to be 18
to buy one. So, who is responsible for the 15 year old (or younger) kid
in possession of a rifle or shotgun?


That basically says the parents are still in charge and can teach the kid
about guns and safety. Just not the person turns 18, then buy a gun and
learn. Instead of all the registration laws that are being proposed and
won’t do anything to decrease the violence, I would not be opposed to a law
that says you have to pass a gun safety course. One equivalent to the NRA
course I took at 13 to get a hunting license. Which is still required by
the state of California to get a hunting license with very few exceptions.


A serious, mandatory gun safety course everywhere would be a good idea.
It might not do anything to stop those who are hell bent on violence,
but it might cut down on the large number of "accidental" shootings,
which would be a step in the right direction. I took a basic safety
course and then a concealed carry course out at a nice range near Dulles
Airport in Virginia. Both were worthwhile.

On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 06:47:08 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 02:15:43 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:

Fretwell's point on industrial gases is...absurd.


What is absurd on the industrial gases? Columbine and at least one other
mass attack had rigged propane bombs, which luckily failed to explode.

Those were just kids who flunked chemistry or never watched Myth
busters. The gas inside the tank is not particularly dangerous.


They tried to use a small explosive to rupture the tank I think. Did not
rupture. And a fast leaking tank is a bomb. Couple years ago, in Dublin,
Ca near me, a minister was blown through the glass patio doors when the
tank developed a giant leak.

A slow leak is a much worse explosion. It is all about involving as
much volume of fuel air mix as possible. If you insert the gas into
the HVAC system it is a lot more effective than just breaching the
tank in one room. That is simple middle school science. Maybe I am
more aware of this because I heard a house go up when I was a kid and
there was nothing left but the 1st floor deck when we got there.
Pieces of the house were spread out over a whole block. Everyone in
the house died. The FD determined one stove burner was on simmer.