|
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 12:03:20 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:
He said he worked for a general in the Vietnamese army North or South? |
Another ...
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 12:42:32 -0400, John H.
wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 12:19:55 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 08:17:10 -0400, John H. wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 05:14:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: 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? Parent or adult who gave, or loaned, the kid the gun. I'm thinking this would apply: Maryland law provides that a person “may not store or leave a loaded firearm in a location where the person knew or should have known that an unsupervised child would gain access to the firearm.”1 This section does not apply if: The child’s access is supervised by an individual age 18 or older; The child’s access was obtained as a result of unlawful entry; The firearm is in the possession or control of a law enforcement officer while the officer is engaged in official duties; or The child has a certificate of firearm and hunter safety.2 Interestingly: Maryland also prohibits any person from selling, renting or transferring ammunition for a regulated firearm to a person under age 21, or any ammunition to a person under age 18. Maryland also prohibits the sale or transfer of a rifle or shotgun to a person under age 18. So whoever gave or sold the kid ammo could be in deep ****! http://lawcenter.giffords.org/minimu...s-in-maryland/ Unless the kid had a hunting license. When I was 15, you could buy 12 ga and .22 ammo at 7-11, pretty much the same as getting a slurpee. Couldn't find that exception. The law doesn't prohibit the 'possession' by a kid, just prohibits the transfer. Maryland has some stupid people making stupid laws. That is pretty universal. We seem to elect "law makers" based on how they look on TV, not how smart they are. You can look to the leaders on capitol hill or the guys who lived at the other end of the mall for the last 50-60 years to see that. |
Another ...
On 7/1/18 1:38 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 12:42:32 -0400, John H. wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 12:19:55 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 08:17:10 -0400, John H. wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 05:14:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: 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? Parent or adult who gave, or loaned, the kid the gun. I'm thinking this would apply: Maryland law provides that a person “may not store or leave a loaded firearm in a location where the person knew or should have known that an unsupervised child would gain access to the firearm.”1 This section does not apply if: The child’s access is supervised by an individual age 18 or older; The child’s access was obtained as a result of unlawful entry; The firearm is in the possession or control of a law enforcement officer while the officer is engaged in official duties; or The child has a certificate of firearm and hunter safety.2 Interestingly: Maryland also prohibits any person from selling, renting or transferring ammunition for a regulated firearm to a person under age 21, or any ammunition to a person under age 18. Maryland also prohibits the sale or transfer of a rifle or shotgun to a person under age 18. So whoever gave or sold the kid ammo could be in deep ****! http://lawcenter.giffords.org/minimu...s-in-maryland/ Unless the kid had a hunting license. When I was 15, you could buy 12 ga and .22 ammo at 7-11, pretty much the same as getting a slurpee. Couldn't find that exception. The law doesn't prohibit the 'possession' by a kid, just prohibits the transfer. Maryland has some stupid people making stupid laws. That is pretty universal. We seem to elect "law makers" based on how they look on TV, not how smart they are. You can look to the leaders on capitol hill or the guys who lived at the other end of the mall for the last 50-60 years to see that. Interesting. I cannot recall one instance where I saw a Maryland state lawmaker on television, and that includes Mike Miller, the local and current president of the Maryland senate. I've seen the governor a few times on TV, and of course, the elected federal officials. |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 12:59:40 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 7/1/2018 10:10 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: 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. Up here they may not be trained or qualified to psychoanalyze someone however they *are* authorized to remand someone to the court system for possible involuntary commitment for treatment for drug abuse or alcoholism. Not sure it that extends to other behavioral problems. Doctors, cops and family members can petition the court to have someone involuntarily be put in a state run de-tox and rehab program. The cops may be able to instigate the process, we call it "Baker act" here, but the actual court ordered commitment requires due process and if the defendant is rich enough to actually get it, his doctors will be involved. Seldom do those procedures succeed if that happens. An example would be the Vegas guy. He could afford experts that would assure nothing ever got into his records that labeled him a danger even if they had tried to go after him. |
Another ...
On 7/1/18 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/1/2018 10:10 AM, 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. Up here they may not be trained or qualified to psychoanalyze someone however they *are* authorized to remand someone to the court system for possible involuntary commitment for treatment for drug abuse or alcoholism.* Not sure it that extends to other behavioral problems. Doctors, cops and family members can petition the court to have someone involuntarily be put in a state run de-tox and rehab program. I wonder what the coincidence is of alcohol or drug abuse and the mass shootings we've been discussing. Doesn't seem to be much of "motivator." |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:05:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. There was more going on than simply shooting the tank. Where was the ignition source? My bet, some distance away. OTOH a friend of mine did 3 inner tubes full of Oxy/acetylene and brought the cops from 3 miles away. He wanted to do it in front of my house but I wouldn't let him. + |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:08:04 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 7/1/2018 12:06 PM, wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 04:57:26 -0400, "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. There were never any charges brought by the paper to dismiss. We don't really know the details of the harassment charges but the cop I saw seemed to blow it off as I assume the rest of the LE establishment did. I really haven't been watching much of this because we are keeping the TV off these days. Based on what I read (which obviously may not be accurate) *he* is the one who sued the paper for defamation. It was his lawsuit that was dismissed by the court. The question was whether the paper ever had him charged for threats and they chose not to. |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:34:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 7/1/2018 1:28 PM, John H. wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:08:04 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 7/1/2018 12:06 PM, wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 04:57:26 -0400, "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. There were never any charges brought by the paper to dismiss. We don't really know the details of the harassment charges but the cop I saw seemed to blow it off as I assume the rest of the LE establishment did. I really haven't been watching much of this because we are keeping the TV off these days. Based on what I read (which obviously may not be accurate) *he* is the one who sued the paper for defamation. It was his lawsuit that was dismissed by the court. Are CNN and MSNBC still blaming Trump? Haven't watch any live TV for the last two days. Sick of the political horse****. Tiger Woods is on now. Makes for a pleasant TV experience. |
Another ...
On 7/1/2018 1:54 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:05:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. There was more going on than simply shooting the tank. Where was the ignition source? My bet, some distance away. OTOH a friend of mine did 3 inner tubes full of Oxy/acetylene and brought the cops from 3 miles away. He wanted to do it in front of my house but I wouldn't let him. + I don't know what the details are. All I know is what I read in the paper the next day and the police report. They said someone reportedly shot it with a rifle and it blew up. They were also shooting off fireworks and other 4th of July type pyrotechnics so maybe that had something to do with it. I always thought those propane tanks were considered safe because they couldn't blow up. |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:45:54 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 7/1/18 1:38 PM, wrote: That is pretty universal. We seem to elect "law makers" based on how they look on TV, not how smart they are. You can look to the leaders on capitol hill or the guys who lived at the other end of the mall for the last 50-60 years to see that. Interesting. I cannot recall one instance where I saw a Maryland state lawmaker on television, and that includes Mike Miller, the local and current president of the Maryland senate. I've seen the governor a few times on TV, and of course, the elected federal officials. You don't have TV ads for your political offices? Maybe not Mike Miller or Steny. Those guys have been "plugged in" for 30-40 years. They may be running virtually unopposed. I still remember when Mike Miller was the go to lawyer for bikers with drug busts and DUIs. We all had his phone number memorized ... just in case. |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:49:30 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
I wonder what the coincidence is of alcohol or drug abuse and the mass shootings we've been discussing. Doesn't seem to be much of "motivator." Drug use is a question on the 4473 and there is no exception for states where it is legal |
Another ...
Keyser Soze wrote:
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.* 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. 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. I would like to see a mandated course in grammar school. Lot more practical than some of the mandated stuff. |
Another ...
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. A lot of years ago a guy in Oakland decided to commit suicide. Turned on the gas with no pilot lights. He slept through the night and forgot about the suicide attempt. Got up in the morning and decided to light the stove. House blew up just like you described. My buddy worked across,the street in a car repair shop. Their windows blew out. He and his coworkers escaped injury and the guy across the street escaped most injury. Jim said the guy was standing in the middle of the explosion with the match still in his hand. |
Another ...
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/1/2018 1:54 PM, wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:05:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. There was more going on than simply shooting the tank. Where was the ignition source? My bet, some distance away. OTOH a friend of mine did 3 inner tubes full of Oxy/acetylene and brought the cops from 3 miles away. He wanted to do it in front of my house but I wouldn't let him. + I don't know what the details are. All I know is what I read in the paper the next day and the police report. They said someone reportedly shot it with a rifle and it blew up. They were also shooting off fireworks and other 4th of July type pyrotechnics so maybe that had something to do with it. I always thought those propane tanks were considered safe because they couldn't blow up. Not under normal circumstances. But if ever shot a gallon can full if water, the can splits apart into close to a flat sheet. Same with a full propane tank. Would let a lot of propane out quickly. And may be enough spark from the bullet to ignite. |
Another ...
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 14:13:41 -0400, John H.
wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:34:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Haven't watch any live TV for the last two days. Sick of the political horse****. Tiger Woods is on now. Makes for a pleasant TV experience. We watched the ladies play a little while yesterday. Question Do they hit from the blue tees? |
Another ...
|
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 14:14:18 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 7/1/2018 1:54 PM, wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:05:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. There was more going on than simply shooting the tank. Where was the ignition source? My bet, some distance away. OTOH a friend of mine did 3 inner tubes full of Oxy/acetylene and brought the cops from 3 miles away. He wanted to do it in front of my house but I wouldn't let him. + I don't know what the details are. All I know is what I read in the paper the next day and the police report. They said someone reportedly shot it with a rifle and it blew up. They were also shooting off fireworks and other 4th of July type pyrotechnics so maybe that had something to do with it. I always thought those propane tanks were considered safe because they couldn't blow up. That is why I say something else was going on. Myth busters shot a bunch of them and never even got a fire until they provided an ignition source (even firing tracers). Then they did have some kind of flame but it was very close and they got a fireball. We all know enough about carburetors to understand that to get a bang, you need the right mix of fuel and air. This is best accomplished in the wild by letting the fuel build up in the air slowly in the presence of an ignition source until it ignites. Then you end up with a whole lot of combustible material in a large general area. The theory on the house that blew up was the pilot light on the stove was out or defective, the burner was not turned off all the way and it did not go bang until it hit the pilot light on the furnace or water heater at the other end of the house. |
Another ...
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 18:48:39 -0400, John H.
wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 18:43:38 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 14:13:41 -0400, John H. wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:34:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Haven't watch any live TV for the last two days. Sick of the political horse****. Tiger Woods is on now. Makes for a pleasant TV experience. We watched the ladies play a little while yesterday. Question Do they hit from the blue tees? They hit from tees which are placed to give them a yardage between 6,200 and 6,600 yards. Where do Tiger and Phil hit from |
Another ...
Keyser Soze
- show quoted text - One needs to be easily and heavily armed in Flyover, Illinois, to take on those groundhogs and squirrels. ......... Beats pumping stumps and plastic sodie bottles... |
Another ...
|
Another ...
On 7/1/18 8:26 PM, Tim wrote:
Keyser Soze - show quoted text - One needs to be easily and heavily armed in Flyover, Illinois, to take on those groundhogs and squirrels. ........ Beats pumping stumps and plastic sodie bottles... Yeah, well, I'm not shooting defenseless animals for sport. |
Another ...
On 7/1/2018 8:29 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 14:23:30 -0400, wrote: If you let me loose in the 19th century with all of my 20th century knowledge I would be a millionaire, if not a god. ;-) === What would you "invent" first? And would you be able to build it, promote it, and sell it? A lot of the infrastructure for that sort of thing, that we take for granted, would be missing. The past is littered with brilliant inventors who couldn't get their product off the ground even though it was superior. I'd just be a 19th Century Nostradamus traveling around forecasting the future. Once people realized I was always right I'd make a fortune. I can just imagine telling people that in 2016 a guy who builds skyscrapers named "Trump" would become the 45th POTUS. They'd ask, "What's a skyscraper?" |
Another ...
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 20:29:34 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 14:23:30 -0400, wrote: If you let me loose in the 19th century with all of my 20th century knowledge I would be a millionaire, if not a god. ;-) === What would you "invent" first? And would you be able to build it, promote it, and sell it? A lot of the infrastructure for that sort of thing, that we take for granted, would be missing. The past is littered with brilliant inventors who couldn't get their product off the ground even though it was superior. I am not really sure what exact dates we are talking about because I have not been paying much attention but I would try to consult with someone I know who was successful (Sam Colt, Edison etc) I also know enough about Edison to understand you are not getting rich working for him but it would get you into the right circles. I understand you can't just go down to Home Depot for materials so you really need to get to know the people who were manufacturing things I would certainly be coming up with things I know about that made my life better and then just wait for my neighbors to beat a path to my door. The real money would be in bets you know you would win. |
Another ...
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 20:45:25 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
Yeah, well, I'm not shooting defenseless animals for sport. Actually I tend to agree with you (I gave up shooting birds for shooting skeet) but if it was for a good reason, sorry Bambi. |
Another ...
7:45 PMKeyser Soze - hide quoted text - On 7/1/18 8:26 PM, Tim wrote: Keyser Soze - show quoted text - One needs to be easily and heavily armed in Flyover, Illinois, to take on those groundhogs and squirrels. ........ Beats pumping stumps and plastic sodie bottles... Yeah, well, I'm not shooting defenseless animals for sport. .......... Me either. |
Another ...
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 20:17:10 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 18:48:39 -0400, John H. wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 18:43:38 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 14:13:41 -0400, John H. wrote: On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 13:34:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Haven't watch any live TV for the last two days. Sick of the political horse****. Tiger Woods is on now. Makes for a pleasant TV experience. We watched the ladies play a little while yesterday. Question Do they hit from the blue tees? They hit from tees which are placed to give them a yardage between 6,200 and 6,600 yards. Where do Tiger and Phil hit from Average for PGA is about 7200 yards. Tees are movable, but they hit from the tips (furthest). |
Another ...
Tim Wrote in message:
Keyser Soze - show quoted text - One needs to be easily and heavily armed in Flyover, Illinois, to take on those groundhogs and squirrels. ........ Beats pumping stumps and plastic sodie bottles... Fat Hairy and his buddies don't seem to think so. They loved shooting that stump so much they built a bunker next to it complete with a bed. -- x ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ |
Another ...
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 7/1/18 8:26 PM, Tim wrote: Keyser Soze - show quoted text - One needs to be easily and heavily armed in Flyover, Illinois, to take on those groundhogs and squirrels. ........ Beats pumping stumps and plastic sodie bottles... Yeah, well, I'm not shooting defenseless animals for sport. You did seem to enjoy ripping the lips off fish and throwing them back in the water to die, at least until you saw the "light". -- x ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ |
Another ...
|
Another ...
On 7/1/18 3:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote: 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.* 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. 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. I would like to see a mandated course in grammar school. Lot more practical than some of the mandated stuff. I'd rather see kids in grammar school concentrate on reading, writing, and math. |
Another ...
On 7/1/18 3:27 PM, Bill wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote: On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. A lot of years ago a guy in Oakland decided to commit suicide. Turned on the gas with no pilot lights. He slept through the night and forgot about the suicide attempt. Got up in the morning and decided to light the stove. House blew up just like you described. My buddy worked across,the street in a car repair shop. Their windows blew out. He and his coworkers escaped injury and the guy across the street escaped most injury. Jim said the guy was standing in the middle of the explosion with the match still in his hand. He didn't smell the gas? |
Another ...
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 7/1/18 3:13 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: 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.* 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. 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. I would like to see a mandated course in grammar school. Lot more practical than some of the mandated stuff. I'd rather see kids in grammar school concentrate on reading, writing, and math. Would be nice. But we have LGBT training, how to put on a condom, etc. firearms safety training might actually help. |
Another ...
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 7/1/18 3:27 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. A lot of years ago a guy in Oakland decided to commit suicide. Turned on the gas with no pilot lights. He slept through the night and forgot about the suicide attempt. Got up in the morning and decided to light the stove. House blew up just like you described. My buddy worked across,the street in a car repair shop. Their windows blew out. He and his coworkers escaped injury and the guy across the street escaped most injury. Jim said the guy was standing in the middle of the explosion with the match still in his hand. He didn't smell the gas? Have no idea. Maybe he was stupid as well as suicidal. |
Another ...
On Mon, 2 Jul 2018 15:07:15 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 7/1/18 3:27 PM, Bill wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 7/1/2018 11:54 AM, wrote: 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. I live in a *very* rural area right now. Last year around July 4th someone shot a 20 lb propane tank with a gun in a field about a half mile or so from my house. The explosion was deafening and we and all our neighbors felt our houses shake. A lot of years ago a guy in Oakland decided to commit suicide. Turned on the gas with no pilot lights. He slept through the night and forgot about the suicide attempt. Got up in the morning and decided to light the stove. House blew up just like you described. My buddy worked across,the street in a car repair shop. Their windows blew out. He and his coworkers escaped injury and the guy across the street escaped most injury. Jim said the guy was standing in the middle of the explosion with the match still in his hand. He didn't smell the gas? It is possible that if he slept through the buildup of the gas he might have gotten used to the smell. Bill didn't say whether he was hurt. Being right in the middle, it is possible he may have escaped much more than some burns. The people in the house up the street from me were on the second floor when it went off and they became part of the debris field. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com