"weapons bans coming soon?" by puddleglum / LJWorld.com

Blogs home puddleglum

weapons bans coming soon?

What's going on these days? I am all for guns, but do we really need high-capacity pistols? Or high capacity assault rifles? It seems that the only thing they are good at is not defending yourself from a bunch of bad guys, but killing a bunch of strangers. Is it that hard to reload your trusty 1911? And now this deal in ft. hood. Was it a u.s. citizen? how did he obtain these guns? was he an islamic terrorist? if we allow high-capacity magazines, shouldn't we allow government sponsored health care? if the swiss can do it, why can't we?

By puddleglum

November 5, 2009

puddleglum

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

5 November 2009
at 4:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

and why are flame-throwers illegal?
5 November 2009
at 8:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

and why are flame-throwers illegal?”

Marion writes:

Oh, man, I now have the opportunity to have more fun with you, puddleglum, than can be imagined.

Flamethrowers are “NOT” illegal!

LOL!

Flamethrowers are “NOT” firearms and therfore do not fall within the pervue of firearms laws.

You so silly; you velly, velly silly, long time!

Generally, flamethrowers are sort-kinda-perfectly-legal.

Illegalise flamethrowers and you illegalise those weed flamers that you can buy at the local builders material supply houses!
5 November 2009
at 9:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Marion writes:

“puddleglum (Anonymous)”

Are you a pothole or what?
5 November 2009
at 9:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tbaker (Anonymous) says…

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Thomas Jefferson
5 November 2009
at 9:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

blue73harley (Anonymous) says…

I have a 50 round drum for my 1911. I have no trouble reloading.
5 November 2009
at 9:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Yeah, I got……………..a few 50 rounders for my Thompson Guns………………………………

..well and a few “C” drums left over from WWII…………
5 November 2009
at 10:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

A military officer with a couple of pistols - how would “bans” have affected any outcome? Stupid knee-jerk emotionalism.

Relinquishing your rights and liberties never ensures your security, only your servitude.

5 November 2009
at 10:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

blue73harley (Anonymous) says…

Just watching the news…so far they are reporting that he had one semi-auto pistol and one revolver….and a bad attitude about serving in an armed conflict. His cousin refers to him as a “good American”. Right. Praise be to Allah.
5 November 2009
at 11:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BigPrune (Anonymous) says…

…and he is a Psychiatrist.
5 November 2009
at 11:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

The wounded suspect's name is Nidal Malik Hasan.
5 November 2009
at 11:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8…

“Maj Hasan, aged 39, was a military psychiatrist and was reportedly due to be sent on a mission to Iraq.

His cousin said Maj Hasan - a US-born Muslim - had been resisting such a deployment.”
5 November 2009
at 11:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

1029 (Anonymous) says…

Well, one day when the taxman comes knocking at your door to rob you of your hard earned wages you will understand why we need high-capacity pistols and high-capacity assault rifles. It's coming soon with the Obama socialism and the health care. And if anyone got close enough to you for you to be able to tell that they were good or bad they probably would have already killed you anyway so you may as well kill them first while they're still a stranger to you. It only makes sense.
5 November 2009
at 11:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

The BBC reports:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacif…

“The move comes 10 days before President Barack Obama is due to make his first visit to China since taking office.

He will be in China from 15-18 November.”

Marion writes:

Is there any chance at all that they will keep him?
6 November 2009
at midnight

Suggest removal

Permalink

compmd (Anonymous) says…

Surprise! Military officers have access to guns!

“we might be the only first-rate country in the world that allows assault weapons and high-capacity pistols-but at least we have a government that doesn't supply us a shred of health care.”

This doesn't make any sense. People pay (usually a lot) for their guns, the government doesn't give them away.

I pay 99c for each real HK 20rd mag for my HK91. Show me a low cap pistol mag that cheap.

Also, generally, weapons designed for higher capacity are not the most accurate. The uneducated seriously underestimate the difficulty in accurate marksmanship.

I haven't checked, but I'd be willing to bet flamethrowers fall under the NFA AOW provision.

Sorry, no ban is going to happen. People today can walk into a gun shop and buy AK47s, AR15s, and even .50BMG rifles. Heck, I'm a regular guy and I have an HK91, which is a huge high power battle rifle. Good luck enforcing a ban on people who have stuff like that. As the great Spartans once said when told to lay down their weapons, “come and get them.”
6 November 2009
at 12:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

prolifersforwar (Anonymous) says…

We are going to need, like, sooooo much ammo during the end of days.

6 November 2009
at 2:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TopJayhawk (Anonymous) says…

If a few others around would have had their weapon, it would not have mattered that he had high-capacity mags, Besides, if he is military, he had access to al of that stuff, and a civilian ban would not have done a thing.
6 November 2009
at 5:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“compmd (Anonymous) says…

“I haven't checked, but I'd be willing to bet flamethrowers fall under the NFA AOW provision.”

Marion writes:

Well, call ATF this morning and ask.

You are wrong.

When you find that you are wrong, you will come back on here and let everyone know that you are wrong, right?
6 November 2009
at 5:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bondmen (Anonymous) says…

It's human motivation one should look to and not an inanimate object if you seriously wish to get to the bottom of the whys and wherefores.

They say madmen become psychiatrists to figure themselves out. Well sometimes they don't and instead they become the inmates in charge of the asylum, and certainly this appears to be the case with Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.

Yet the genesis of his insanity becoming reality seems to be Barack Hussein Obama's failure to keep his promise to pull US troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan. And in the back of Hasan's mind there is his holy Koran which tells true believers to kill the infidel (which is most of US). Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is apparently a well schooled true believer.

Sadly there were signs aplenty of his approaching crackup. Words he spoke in anger and disgust and comments made on social internet sites. When will America wake up to the very real threat from the enemy within its own military ranks? How many more such incidents will it take?
6 November 2009
at 6:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Bondmen:

Why are you using the shooter's middle name?

;)
6 November 2009
at 6:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…

Fill in the blank ” Don't f_ ed the trolls.”
6 November 2009
at 6:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

RoeDapple (Anonymous) says…

http://www.cracked.com/article_17016_…

“There are currently no federal laws governing or restricting the ownership of flame-throwing devices. Some states have laws restricting possession of flamethrowers, with violations only considered to be misdemeanors, but 40 states have absolutely no laws whatsoever concerning flamethrowers.”

Only 1141 shopping days left until 12-21-2012 !!!
6 November 2009
at 7:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

I've had a hell of time trying to get a high cap mag for my Ruger mini-thirty. I had one that didn't work–jammed after the 1st or 2nd shot, ordered one from Cabela's on-line–never came–-bought one AT Cabela's, didn't even lock into the gun. Am I going to be overwhelmed when Obama's Civilian National Security Force comes around to gather me up for dissing him? I was planning a stand-off. That gun has a Redfield scope that is deadly accurate as far as the eye can see. Forget that whole idea!!*wink*
6 November 2009
at 7:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rrussell (Rex Russell) says…

Tom, That last post,even as you try to mask it humor,tells me volumes about you. Get help.

6 November 2009
at 7:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

drake (Anonymous) says…

Tom, I've commented to you before about the mini-30. There is no high cap mag for the mini-30 that will work. NONE!! Stop wasting your time trying to find one. Sell the rifle and buy a mini-14 instead. 30 round clips available that actually work.
6 November 2009
at 8:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

Tom,
I have a metal 30-rd clip for mini-30 if you want it.
cheap. and money back guarantee .
6 November 2009
at 8:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Rex, lighten up.

Drake, I may have missed your advice. I love this rifle and that sucks.
6 November 2009
at 8:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

Marion,
a thompson? I bet you couldn't hit the side of a barn if you were inside the barn with that thing.
I figured you would be the type for a collection of chauchats.
avez-vous l'amusement avec moi encore?
6 November 2009
at 8:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

compmd:
“Also, generally, weapons designed for higher capacity are not the most accurate. The uneducated seriously underestimate the difficulty in accurate marksmanship.”

yeah generally, but one of the most accurate pistols I have is a dwm 1908 (1929) and it has a ''snail” 32-rd 9mm drum magazine.
it is the most accurate pistol I own-except for target .22 high standard stuff.
6 November 2009
at 8:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Are you serious puddle? For a Ruger? You can PM me or my email is campdavid599@earthlink.net. Thanks….and don't worry, I'm not a survivalist nut.
6 November 2009
at 8:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

Marion,
does it bother you knowing that there are muslims in the army that are more likely to be guided by their religious beliefs than their officers' orders?
6 November 2009
at 8:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

blue harley-
100 rd mag for your 1911?

sounds cool, but also extremely heavy.
do you have to have a tripod for that rig?

6 November 2009
at 8:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

Flamers, heh, heh. Got that right. Most gun “enthusiasts” are compensating for the inadequacies of the “weapon” god gave 'em.

$0.02
6 November 2009
at 8:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…

Cappy's getting nominated to http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/
6 November 2009
at 8:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

“Sorry”.
6 November 2009
at 8:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

drake (Anonymous) says…

No problem Tom. I hated to get rid of mine too, but a gun that will not feed with a 30 round clip is not any better than a hammer for defense. My buddy that bought it also got about 12 different mags w/ it from all different manufacturers. He was sure that he could file or manipulate at least one to work in the gun. Nope.
6 November 2009
at 8:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Here's the part that irks me drake. My now dead bro-in-law sold me that gun about 2002, and had to have known this. He died of pancreatic cancer in 2004 and sneakily left about $400k to his x-wife and daughter. My sister fought it in Alaskan courts and never got a dime back. Well, now his first wife died and the trashy daughter is driving around an Escalade and living high on the hog. I liked him and he was my pheasant hunting buddy for years. I guess he was just p/o'd at my sister and her daughter for some stuff–very long story. He was morpheined to the bejesus at the the end and probably did not know what he was doing. I asked my sister, “Why in the world are you letting Sandy and Shawna (the x-wife and daughter) stay with you like that?” I guess they were at their house for like several weeks prior to his death. My sister is a trusting soul–-and a bit naive. I would've never done that–-they conspired the whole time right there in the house behind her back and *boom*! out $400k–-cash–-and some of it was from the sale of her house in Fairbanks when they sold it circa 2000. The upside is she has his retirement, a paid off house worth about $450k, a condo in Mexico paid off and worth about $150k and other entitlements she has not even dipped into yet. Still, that mini-thirty thing and that other stunt shows what you sometimes never know about a person. He screwed my parents over on some real estate “deals” to apparently. Why am I going on about this and who cares? Got me.
6 November 2009
at 8:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Attention all passengers: Please remember that express buses to CrazyBaseLand depart every hour, on the hour.
6 November 2009
at 8:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

drake-maybe your buddy's gun has a defect.
I have never had any trouble what-so ever: except from cheap plastic mags that suck.
6 November 2009
at 9:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

coolmom (Anonymous) says…

i hated our mini 30.

6 November 2009
at 9:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

so how many bullets did it take to take down hasan?
30-rds?

I love how nobody addresses the real issue here.
6 November 2009
at 9:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

“I love how nobody addresses the real issue here.”
_________________________________________________

Blame that on the jerkwad that started the thread. There's no real issue to be found in that spew of mindless rambling.

This event is not even 24 hours old… and yet the usual extremist suspects are already jockeying for political positions, trying to leverage this one way or another.

We don't even know who any of the victims are—their names haven't been released, because they're still trying to notify families!

If the author of this post had any sense of decency, they'd delete it and quit playing “Political Necrophilia.”

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
6 November 2009
at 9:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Actually, puddle, the 1921/28 Thompson with its vertical foregrip and fitted with a Cutss Comsensator is accurate well out to 100 yards, quite capable of putting half a dozen rounds on target in just over a second.

When using an “L” drum the thing is ideally configured.

The “C” Drum makes it a bit heavy, especially when the shoulder stock is removed for those up-close-and-personal situations.
6 November 2009
at 9:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

agnostick,
thankyou for your typical name-calling.

you sound like the only extremist around here.
maybe you should go back to topeka?
thankyou
6 November 2009
at 9:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

marion,
how many rds does the c-clip hold?
compensator or not, a .45 climbs like the federal defecit.

even a nice lil' MP38 climbs .
but-how bout this:does it bother you knowing that there are muslims in the army that are more likely to be guided by their religious beliefs than their officers' orders?
6 November 2009
at 10:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

remember_username (Anonymous) says…

Did Tom just go off the deep end at 8:46, or did I miss an earlier post?
6 November 2009
at 10:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

marion,
how many rds does the c-clip(sic) hold?

compensator or not, a .45 climbs like the federal defecit.

even a nice lil' MP38 climbs .
but-how bout this:does it bother you knowing that there are muslims in the army that are more likely to be guided by their religious beliefs than their officers' orders?”

Marion writes:

puddleglum is completley out of its depth and faking it anda has revealed those facts by using the term “c clip”.

No one who has even been in the same room with a Thompson would describe a “C” Drum as a “clip”.

LOL!

The “C” Drum:

http://www.tommygunshop.com/cgi-bin/i…

The “L” Drum:

http://www.tommygunshop.com/cgi-bin/i…

“C” = Roman numeral for “100”.

“L” = Roman numeral for “50”.

Had you been awake in class, you would have instantly recognised this but since you are faking it anyway………….

Further, as there are only very few MP-38s in the USA, it is highly unlikely that puddle has seen one, much less fired one.

A '21/28 can be kept on target by an experienced shooter with little or no muzzle climb.

An MP-38 is hardly “little”:

http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg33-e.htm
6 November 2009
at 10:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

“…maybe you should go back to topeka?” - puddle

Just be glad he doesn't moderate *THIS* forum.

6 November 2009
at 10:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Sound like he took care of all of his people, whether they liked each other or not, Tom.
6 November 2009
at 11:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

faking it marion?
only a novice would ever refer to a magazine as a clip.

I was using your words.

sounds like it is you who is faking it.
there are more Mp38's in the united stated than anywhere else in the world. hop on you tube and you can watch an old lady firing one in a wheel chair.
yeah, they are small-compared to a MG-34.
yeah, they are big-compared to a p-38
yeah, i have fired one.
No, I don't own one.
yeah, the muzzle climbs.
no, not as much as a ppsh.
yeah, I have fired one of those also.
No, I don't own one.

are you still not going to answer my question?
typical.
6 November 2009
at 11:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

top j sez:
If a few others around would have had their weapon, it would not have mattered that he had high-capacity mags, Besides, if he is military, he had access to al of that stuff, and a civilian ban would not have done a thing.

this makes sense to me.
and this is a serious question:
If the military is allowed to have high-capacity magazines, shouldn't civlians?
6 November 2009
at 11:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

RoeDapple (Anonymous) says…

Tom,
Back i the early '80s a friend and I got a fantastic deal on 1000 20 round mags for AR style rifles. He kept 100, I kept (xxx), and we sold the rest. I sold off all 50 and 100 round mags I had, all Ruger mini's and haven't looked back. Had too many problems with 50's and 100's, and the Rugers were never my favorite. High capacity mags that fail can take the fun out of an afternoon of plinking, and I have enough 20's and 30's to melt down all (x) of my AR's without reloading a mag.

Just went out this morning to recheck the zero on the deer rifle. 308 Win. shot a .315 inch 5 shot, 100 yard group straight into the wind. Took out the Stag Arms Lefty and ran a couple of mags through it too. Spotted Bambi and Faline on the way home….
6 November 2009
at 11:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jimmyjms (Anonymous) says…

Firstly, if you're going to write a “blog,” use some capitalization.

Secondly, this:

“If the military is allowed to have high-capacity magazines, shouldn't civlians?”

Why? Should civilians have access to tanks, F-14's, and chemical and biological weapons?

“I love how nobody addresses the real issue here.”

Seems to me that the real issue is that events like this give lie to the idea that concealed carry would work.
This is an idiotic blog.
6 November 2009
at noon

Suggest removal

Permalink

hornhunter (Anonymous) says…

Tom, don't throw those old clips that don't work away. I heard the government will be have a Cash for Clip program soon.
6 November 2009
at 12:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

thanks Jimmyjms.

it took a long time.
But Really, Why Must I Use Capitalization On My Blog?
Isn't It Wasting More Natural Resources?
6 November 2009
at 12:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

and what's wrong with the public owning some f-14s?
it would be great if the city commission closed down the T and bought some f-14's. sporadic flyovers above downtown-not to mention scaring off all the hustlers from Missouri. And we could protect douglas county from Obama.

6 November 2009
at 12:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BrianR (Anonymous) says…

“Japan would never invade the United States. We would find a rifle behind every blade of grass.”
— Isoroku Yamamoto, Fleet Admiral and Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II on why Japan would never attempt a conventional invasion of the U.S.
6 November 2009
at 1:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

japan did invade the united states-and they won.
Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Lexus, Infinity, Sony, Mitsubishi (yep, same company that made the Zero fighter plane seen over pearl harbor).
anybody know how well escalades are selling in Japan?
6 November 2009
at 1:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

musbhiorlo (Anonymous) says…

guns aren't the problem.
6 November 2009
at 3:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

Marion,
does it bother you knowing that there are muslims in the army that are more likely to be guided by their religious beliefs than their officers' orders?”

Marion writes:

Yes.
6 November 2009
at 3:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Guardian (Anonymous) says…

jimmyjms (Anonymous) says…

“Seems to me that the real issue is that events like this give lie to the idea that concealed carry would work.”

Uh, statistics indicate it does. But let's not let the facts confuse the issue.

http://home.pacbell.net/rsdotson/stat…
6 November 2009
at 4:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…

I recommend taking a look at a Ruger CX-4 Storm .45 ACP or Beretta Xtrema II for lots of fun, cheaper ammo, and excellent home defense. The CX-4 is better for the close-in, since it's a carbine. The Xtrema II only comes in 26- and 28-inch barrels, but with the 28 and a six-shot extension tube, capacity is 12 rds, and throws them all out in 1.73 sec. A street sweeper. Check out the video on-line. The latter is pricey, though.
6 November 2009
at 4:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…

Sorry, not Ruger, Berreta CX-4.
6 November 2009
at 4:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

MeAndFannieLou (Anonymous) says…

Wow - there is a *lot* of testosterone on this thread!

6 November 2009
at 5:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

i was hoping to get the most testosterone-coated blog ever, but I think its falling a little short.

thankyou for answering my question marion.
now if you wanna go back to the personal attacks concerning clips and magazines and drums, let me know.

In the meantime, get your MP40 on, and go have some fun.
6 November 2009
at 6:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

musbhiorlo (Anonymous) says…

guns aren't the problem.

I agree.
big capacity magazines are great-btw
I have several 75-rd ak drums..but mostly 40-rd ak mags
that's my thing.
6 November 2009
at 6:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Firearms bans?

Yeah, I think the Obmanistas will try it but I do not believe they will be successful.
6 November 2009
at 7:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

kansasfaithful (Anonymous) says…

Be prepared to die for your cause.
6 November 2009
at 9:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

i was hoping to get the most testosterone-coated blog ever, but I think its falling a little short.”

Marion writes:

Well, why don't you start by explaining to us your perceived connection between Second Amendment rights and testosterone?

(This otta be good!)
6 November 2009
at 11:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

uneekness (Anonymous) says…

you guys crack me up. I love how you think the government is shakin in it's boots over you guys, or that somehow you're keeping us all free or something. Wow. Unless you have the modern day equivalent of the French Navy backing you up, you're going to be about as successful as Daniel Shays, David Koresh and the Confederate States of America with your little armed insurrection. (Who was it who put down Shays and his Revolutionary War vet buddies' little rebellion? Oh yeah - revered founding father George Washington.)

If you could just let go of your fevered little super-patriot fantasies, you might notice that Democrats tend to favor gun control because the party's base is mostly urban, where senseless gun violence is a serious problem. Sorry, nobody is scheming to turn the country communist, held at bay only because they haven't found a way to “git yer guns.”

You really want to change the government? Exercise your First Amendment rights. That's what really brings about change in this country. Or better yet, vote. Sometimes your guy wins, sometimes the other one does. But regardless, whoever wins gets to do things like overhaul healthcare, raise taxes, and yes, change gun laws. The winner's exercising of this power is legitimate, unless overturned in the courts on constitutional grounds (see - you go to court when you think the government has overstepped it's authority, not start shooting at them).

Somehow, without a single gun to back it up, the Supreme Court's rulings on these matters are respected and enforced, even when the executive branch is on the losing end. (Abraham Lincoln excepted.) This is how a CIVIL society works. Maybe someday you yahoos will choose to grow up and join it.
7 November 2009
at 12:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bc (Anonymous) says…

How do gun control laws keep criminals from getting guns?
7 November 2009
at 8:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

compmd (Anonymous) says…

“When you find that you are wrong, you will come back on here and let everyone know that you are wrong, right?”

Wrong about what? I made no statement of fact regarding the NFA AOW provision.

“yeah generally, but one of the most accurate pistols I have is a dwm 1908 (1929) and it has a ''snail” 32-rd 9mm drum magazine.”

Nice, puddle! There was much more creativity and better craftsmanship in older firearms I think. Perhaps I should have been more specific and said that the accuracy vs. capacity argument held true generally more for modern firearms.

7 November 2009
at 8:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

uneekness (Anonymous) says…

You're right! Enforcement is impossible. While we're at it, enforcement of drug laws are impossible too - off the books! Oh yeah, and traffic laws as well - I'm constantly being passed by speeders who are not being pulled over. Get rid of those too! Any others while we're at it?
7 November 2009
at 9:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…

“Exercise your First Amendment rights. That's what really brings about change in this country.”
Except when Dear Leader asks people to report “fishy” information so the dissenters can be identified.
7 November 2009
at 9:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“6 November 2009
at midnight

Suggest removal

Permalink
compmd (Anonymous) says…

” haven't checked, but I'd be willing to bet flamethrowers fall under the NFA AOW provision.”

Later compmd wrote:

“7 November 2009
at 8:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink
compmd (Anonymous) says…

“When you find that you are wrong, you will come back on here and let everyone know that you are wrong, right?”

Wrong about what? I made no statement of fact regarding the NFA AOW provision.”

Marion writes:

Yep, no statement of fact, per se but you did express willingness to make a bet that you were right.

You are wrong and have been shown to be so.

Where is your admission that you would have lost the airbet that you wrote you were willing to make?
7 November 2009
at 10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

you go girlfriend.

allrighty then. the second amendment link with testosterone.

this is easy.
the second amendment was written by men, who had testosterone flowing heavily at the time-despite their deployment of powdered wigs and fancy ruffled shirts.
like all good stuff, this amendment was inked by men only.

there you go.

second amendment.
written by men (not french)
and broiling with testosterone.
as it should be.

I have no problem with it.
7 November 2009
at 11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

check this baby out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8hlj4…
7 November 2009
at 11:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

compmd (Anonymous) says…

Marion says:

“Yep, no statement of fact, per se but you did express willingness to make a bet that you were right.”

Willingness indeed, yet still, none was made. So now people have to apologize to you for things they never did? Who dropped a turd in your cheerios this morning? Take a pill, dude. Then go outside and enjoy the day.
7 November 2009
at 11:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

RoeDapple (Anonymous) says…

http://rtsponderings.files.wordpress….
7 November 2009
at 12:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

puddleglum (Anonymous) says…

roe D for the win!

7 November 2009
at 12:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tumbilweed (Anonymous) says…

Hey, maybe if we had voted McCain in, there would be more troops shipping out, so maybe more of them would go on deadly rampages. Or maybe not. Who knows.
7 November 2009
at 1:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Irish (Irish Swearingen) says…

My God, Roe! Is that a gun in your pocket or are you really happy to see me?
I was never like this before I started commenting on here.
I blame this change on Roe, Ronda, Mel, and Multi.
I am going to stay with my trusty bow and arrows. Low tech, but stealthy, very, very stealthy.
7 November 2009
at 1:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

RoeDapple (Anonymous) says…

Well Irish, if Cappy is correct about the gun in my pocket, this is what I would make up the difference with….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QC8jnS…

He obviously was one of those, “I'll show you mine if you show me yours” grade school types who was very disappointed with his version of “Show and Tell”
8 November 2009
at 3:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

“roe D for the win!” – puddleglum

I agree. Hard to uplevel that one. “Game Over, Man!”
8 November 2009
at 3:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Irish (Irish Swearingen) says…

M\e also, what porch said.
A lot more interesting to get firewood this way, though a trifle more expensive.