• Firearms Background Check

    From Starbase@VERT/INFERNO to Cruisefx on Mon Sep 3 14:36:20 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Cruisefx to All on Thu Oct 23 2003 04:19 pm

    I understand that if you are on probation, that you are not allowed to posse a gun license. What types of checks do they perform on an individual. As f as I understand, you will only be turned down if you have felonies on your record (not misdemeannors)?




    Still violates the 2 amendmant even with a felony. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


    So why is the government telling felony people they cannot have a gun?

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ The Inferno Radio BBS
  • From Chris Trainor@VERT/FLEETHQ to Starbase on Mon Sep 3 15:49:10 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Starbase to Cruisefx on Mon Sep 03 2012 14:36:20

    Still violates the 2 amendmant even with a felony. The right of the people t keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    So why is the government telling felony people they cannot have a gun?

    That's pretty simple... because when you've been convicted of a felony
    many of your rights are suspended. You can get them back after you've
    served your time and convinced a judge to purge the record.

    Any time you're tossedin prison a whole pile of your rights go poof.

    --Chris

    ------------------------------------------
    | Chris Trainor - FleetHQ BBS
    | telnet://bbs.fleethq.org
    | http://www.facebook.com/FleetHQ
    | +1-401-949-0465 (V.34/HST/CrankyAtTimes) ------------------------------------------

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ FleetHQ BBS - Greenville, RI
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Chris Trainor on Mon Sep 3 19:46:21 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Chris Trainor to Starbase on Mon Sep 03 2012 03:49 pm

    That's pretty simple... because when you've been convicted of a felony
    many of your rights are suspended. You can get them back after you've served your time and convinced a judge to purge the record.

    Any time you're tossedin prison a whole pile of your rights go poof.

    I think you've hit the point pretty good here. The problem is our society is beginning to NOT give back basic rights to felons. Once a felon is released, the full Bill of Rights is *supposed* to be restored. I've often wondered how it is that felons are not allowed their 2nd Amendment.

    This discussion got me curious enough to look it up, and I came across this story:

    N.C. Supreme Court Reverses Felony Firearms Act ? Rules that 2nd. Amendment Permits Convicted Felons to Possess Gun

    It's written by Kim Lambert, and I found it at news.lawreader.com, written in late 2009. Unfortunately, the judgement applied only in one felon's case, but it's a step in the right direction, in my opinion.

    I've worked with and met more than a few felons in my life. Those whose lives crossed mine were rather peaceful people who fucked up early in life, and were working rather hard to stay on the up and up. It's hard to believe that in our country someone who committed a felony at 18 or 19 can't own a simple hunting rifle for the rest of their lives.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Southeast Texas Chat
  • From Chris Trainor@VERT/FLEETHQ to Dreamer on Mon Sep 3 23:09:18 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Chris Trainor on Mon Sep 03 2012 19:46:21

    beginning to NOT give back basic rights to felons. Once a felon is released the full Bill of Rights is *supposed* to be restored. I've often wondered h it is that felons are not allowed their 2nd Amendment.


    The problem is, it's the ex-Con's job to fix it afterwards... and
    they're not often told about it. :) Plus remember, just because they
    were released from prison doesn't mean they're not still 'serving time'
    of one sort or another. Early release, probation, etc all still mean
    you're under restrictions.

    Also I believe there is a 10 year waiting period after all that jazz is overwith before you can petition the court for clearance.


    --Chris

    ------------------------------------------
    | Chris Trainor - FleetHQ BBS
    | telnet://bbs.fleethq.org
    | http://www.facebook.com/FleetHQ
    | +1-401-949-0465 (V.34/HST/CrankyAtTimes) ------------------------------------------

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ FleetHQ BBS - Greenville, RI
  • From Poindexter Fortran@VERT/REALITY to Dreamer on Tue Sep 4 07:22:57 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Chris Trainor on Mon Sep 03 2012 07:46 pm

    I think you've hit the point pretty good here. The problem is our society is beginning to NOT give back basic rights to felons. Once a felon is released,
    the full Bill of Rights is *supposed* to be restored. I've often wondered how it is that felons are not allowed their 2nd Amendment.

    Yet, apparently, the right to bear arms isn't just taken from an ex-felon, but anyone living with a felon. As more and more people are processed through the criminal system, this sounds like another means to assist in disarming the public.

    --pF

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org
  • From Corey@VERT/TSGC to Poindexter Fortran on Tue Sep 4 10:06:09 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Poindexter Fortran to Dreamer on Tue Sep 04 2012 07:22 am

    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Chris Trainor on Mon Sep 03 2012 07:46 pm

    I think you've hit the point pretty good here. The problem is our societ is beginning to NOT give back basic rights to felons. Once a felon is released,
    the full Bill of Rights is *supposed* to be restored. I've often wondere how it is that felons are not allowed their 2nd Amendment.

    Yet, apparently, the right to bear arms isn't just taken from an ex-felon, b anyone living with a felon. As more and more people are processed through th criminal system, this sounds like another means to assist in disarming the public.

    --pF


    no guns. they misread it years ago.
    they meant, We had the right to Bear arms.
    not deer arms, not wolf arms, not boar arms. BEAR ARMS!


    "Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"



    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to Poindexter Fortran on Tue Sep 4 19:06:22 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Poindexter Fortran to Dreamer on Tue Sep 04 2012 07:22 am

    the full Bill of Rights is *supposed* to be restored. I've often wondered how it is that felons are not allowed their 2nd Amendment.

    Yet, apparently, the right to bear arms isn't just taken from an ex-felon, but anyone living with a felon. As more and more people are processed through the criminal system, this sounds like another means to assist in disarming the public.


    well, felons are second class citizens. best thing is to not get a felony. i have known some great people who have had felonies.

    i would try to get the felony expunged during the time your governor is awaiting re-election. some people deserve a second chance, especially if they made some poor choices early in life and turned their life around.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to Corey on Tue Sep 4 19:06:41 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Corey to Poindexter Fortran on Tue Sep 04 2012 10:06 am

    no guns. they misread it years ago.
    they meant, We had the right to Bear arms.
    not deer arms, not wolf arms, not boar arms. BEAR ARMS!

    i'm okay with that too.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Corey@VERT/TSGC to Mro on Tue Sep 4 18:04:15 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Mro to Corey on Tue Sep 04 2012 07:06 pm

    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Corey to Poindexter Fortran on Tue Sep 04 2012 10:06 am

    no guns. they misread it years ago.
    they meant, We had the right to Bear arms.
    not deer arms, not wolf arms, not boar arms. BEAR ARMS!

    i'm okay with that too.


    and a good arm with nice sharp claws is a fine weapon.

    "Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"



    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org
  • From starbase@VERT/LOMBBS to Chris Trainor on Wed Sep 5 01:41:00 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Chris Trainor to Starbase on Mon Sep 03 2012 15:49:00

    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Starbase to Cruisefx on Mon Sep 03 2012 14:36:20

    Still violates the 2 amendmant even with a felony. The right of the peopl keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    So why is the government telling felony people they cannot have a gun?

    That's pretty simple... because when you've been convicted of a felony
    many of your rights are suspended. You can get them back after you've served your time and convinced a judge to purge the record.

    Any time you're tossedin prison a whole pile of your rights go poof.

    --Chris

    ------------------------------------------
    | Chris Trainor - FleetHQ BBS
    | telnet://bbs.fleethq.org
    | http://www.facebook.com/FleetHQ
    | +1-401-949-0465 (V.34/HST/CrankyAtTimes) ------------------------------------------

    I understand the felony and rights thing in where you coming from. On the other hand just because you get a felony is not a reason to suspend a person constitutional rights unless it is directly stated to the fact in the constitution. I did not see any statement in there to the right suspending fact. We have let the government go to far.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ telnet://lombbs.dyndns.org
  • From Ed Vance@VERT/CAPCITY2 to DREAMER on Sat Sep 8 21:03:00 2012
    This discussion got me curious enough to look it up, and I came across this DR>story:

    N.C. Supreme Court Reverses Felony Firearms Act ? Rules that 2nd. Amendment DR>Permits Convicted Felons to Possess Gun

    It's written by Kim Lambert, and I found it at news.lawreader.com, written in
    late 2009. Unfortunately, the judgement applied only in one felon's case, bu
    it's a step in the right direction, in my opinion.

    I've worked with and met more than a few felons in my life. Those whose live
    crossed mine were rather peaceful people who messed up early in life, and wer
    working rather hard to stay on the up and up. It's hard to believe that in o
    country someone who committed a felony at 18 or 19 can't own a simple hunting
    rifle for the rest of their lives.

    Dreamer,

    In the mid 1960s I was at a Bus Stop talking to a guy who said he
    couldn't get any Radio License because he once ran a Unlicensed Radio
    Station when He was younger and the FCC caught him.


    * SLMR 2.1a #T348 * Tagline dropped due to budget cuts.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Capitol City Online - telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - 502-875-8938
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to All on Sun Sep 9 02:52:51 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Ed Vance to DREAMER on Sat Sep 08 2012 09:03 pm

    live DR>crossed mine were rather peaceful people who messed up early in life, and wer DR>working rather hard to stay on the up and up. It's hard
    to believe that in o DR>country someone who committed a felony at 18 or 19 can't own a simple hunting DR>rifle for the rest of their lives.

    a felony is a SERIOUS crime.
    they just dont hand out felonies frivously. if they cant talk it down to a lesser charge usually they have it coming.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Corey@VERT/TSGC to Mro on Sun Sep 9 00:13:41 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Mro to All on Sun Sep 09 2012 02:52 am

    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Ed Vance to DREAMER on Sat Sep 08 2012 09:03 pm

    live DR>crossed mine were rather peaceful people who messed up early in life, and wer DR>working rather hard to stay on the up and up. It's hard to believe that in o DR>country someone who committed a felony at 18 or 1 can't own a simple hunting DR>rifle for the rest of their lives.

    a felony is a SERIOUS crime.
    they just dont hand out felonies frivously. if they cant talk it down to a lesser charge usually they have it coming.


    I am a felon now.
    in the 80's I showed some mormons how to fake long distance phone card codes to get free phone calls. one of them built up a nice vending business. then they were caught. and very quickly pointed me out. it was my first offence. I got 7 years in a federal prison camp. and the mormons got to keep everything they bought from thier profits. the arresting agent told me, they would have never known about me if the mormons hadnt of told them...
    so now I cant ever vote or have a gun. and have to register where I live for the rest of my life. yeah mormons, gods people.


    "Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to Corey on Sun Sep 9 11:10:27 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Corey to Mro on Sun Sep 09 2012 12:13 am

    so now I cant ever vote or have a gun. and have to register where I live
    for the rest of my life. yeah mormons, gods people.


    well you did choose to break the law, correct?

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Corey@VERT/TSGC to Mro on Sun Sep 9 09:13:44 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Mro to Corey on Sun Sep 09 2012 11:10 am

    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Corey to Mro on Sun Sep 09 2012 12:13 am

    so now I cant ever vote or have a gun. and have to register where I live for the rest of my life. yeah mormons, gods people.


    well you did choose to break the law, correct?


    that is true. if I never showed them, they would have never handed me in.

    "Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to Corey on Sun Sep 9 14:35:52 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Corey to Mro on Sun Sep 09 2012 09:13 am


    so now I cant ever vote or have a gun. and have to register where I live for the rest of my life. yeah mormons, gods people.


    well you did choose to break the law, correct?


    that is true. if I never showed them, they would have never handed me in.


    but you do realize that it is not their fault that you broke the law? that started with your actions. things didnt play out as you expected and they turned you in. that does not make it any less your fault.

    when someone decides to break the law they have to live with the consequences. I'm not being preachy, but i hope you realize that it starts with you and that is why you have that felony.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Corey@VERT/TSGC to Mro on Sun Sep 9 14:00:03 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Mro to Corey on Sun Sep 09 2012 02:35 pm

    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Corey to Mro on Sun Sep 09 2012 09:13 am


    so now I cant ever vote or have a gun. and have to register where I live for the rest of my life. yeah mormons, gods people.


    well you did choose to break the law, correct?


    that is true. if I never showed them, they would have never handed me in.


    but you do realize that it is not their fault that you broke the law? that started with your actions. things didnt play out as you expected and they turned you in. that does not make it any less your fault.

    when someone decides to break the law they have to live with the consequence I'm not being preachy, but i hope you realize that it starts with you and th is why you have that felony.


    that is true too. showing someone how do to it, is the same as doing it yourself.

    "Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org
  • From Starbase@VERT to Poindexter Fortran on Sat Sep 15 16:37:59 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Poindexter Fortran to Dreamer on Tue Sep 04 2012 07:22 am

    Yet, apparently, the right to bear arms isn't just taken from an ex-felo anyone living with a felon. As more and more people are processed throug criminal system, this sounds like another means to assist in disarming t
    I agree this is government at it best to disarm us. The people living with
    the felon did not commit a felony and they still have they 2 amendment right

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Starbase@VERT to Mro on Sat Sep 15 16:44:01 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Mro to All on Sun Sep 09 2012 02:52 am

    a felony is a SERIOUS crime.
    they just dont hand out felonies frivously. if they cant talk it down to lesser charge usually they have it coming.
    Felony is a serious crime but that still should not suspend a person 2nd amendment right to bear unless it is stated in black and white in the constitution

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Poindexter Fortran@VERT/REALITY to Starbase on Sun Sep 16 08:23:26 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Starbase to Mro on Sat Sep 15 2012 04:44 pm

    Felony is a serious crime but that still should not suspend a person 2nd amendment right to bear unless it is stated in black and white in the constitution.

    Misdemeanors are going the way of the middle class, it seems. Felonious protesting? Really?

    --pF

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org
  • From The Dark Rider@VERT/DUNDER to Poindexter Fortran on Tue Sep 18 20:19:13 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Poindexter Fortran to Starbase on Sun Sep 16 2012 08:23:26

    Misdemeanors are going the way of the middle class, it seems. Felonious protesting? Really?

    Yeah, remember, it used to be illegal to protest in Egypt, too...

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Digital Underground - telnet://sinep.gotdns.com
  • From Starbase@VERT/BEDROCKB to Poindexter Fortran on Tue Sep 18 23:56:55 2012
    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Poindexter Fortran to Starbase on Sun Sep 16 2012 08:23:26

    Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Starbase to Mro on Sat Sep 15 2012 04:44 pm

    Felony is a serious crime but that still should not suspend a person amendment right to bear unless it is stated in black and white in the constitution.

    Misdemeanors are going the way of the middle class, it seems. Felonious protesting? Really?

    --pF


    Just my view.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Bedrock BBS - bbs.kristyandrick.com - Just online and growing...
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Dreamer on Sun Jan 27 07:34:16 2013
    I've worked with and met more than a few felons in my life. Those whose liv crossed mine were rather peaceful people who fucked up early in life, and we working rather hard to stay on the up and up.

    I know some like that. I also know some who continue to screw up but the legal system in this area continues to let them out despite "persistent felon" charges being applied. Around here, the ones you describe are the ones that actually were honest about what they did, really "did their time," and really regret what they did.

    Unfortunately, those others are the ones that have never been honest about what they did, really did not "do their time," and think that the only thing they did wrong was getting caught.

    I am convinced that the prisons in this area are mostly full of the honest guys in the first category who feel sorry for what they did and really believe they should do the time for it. The ones in the second category are back out in a matter of months and are back to conning people, running prescription pills, or whatever it was they went in for.

    I feel bad for the guys in the first category, but because of the majority of folks that fall into the second category, I am glad that felons lose some of their rights. The fact that they are not legally allowed to have guns is great in my book. Puts things a little into my favor should they ever screw up again and enter my house uninvited. That is one thing the local legal system does get right.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Capitol City Online - telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - 502-875-8938
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Dumas Walker on Sun Jan 27 14:41:03 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dumas Walker to Dreamer on Sun Jan 27 2013 07:34 am

    some of their rights. The fact that they are not legally allowed to have guns is great in my book. Puts things a little into my favor should they ever screw up again and enter my house uninvited. That is one thing the local legal system does get right.

    Unfortunately, whether it's legal or not, anyone who really wants a gun will find a gun, including felons. It's one of those laws that are passed to help people feel safe, instead of actually accomplishing anything. How many times do you hear of a tragedy committed by a nutjob with priors? How'd he get the weapon? Sometimes it's snuck away from family or friends, other times purchased off the street.

    We're not allowed to drive without a valid license, or drunk, or with certain safety items out of code. There's tons of things citizens are not allowed to do, but they do it anyway. Same thing with people who are pathologically aggressive, they're gonna bring whatever they got their hands on to the fight, and the more power the better for them.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Southeast Texas Chat
  • From Deuce@VERT/SYNCNIX to Dreamer on Mon Feb 11 12:24:19 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Dumas Walker on Sun Jan 27 2013 02:41 pm

    We're not allowed to drive without a valid license, or drunk, or with certain safety items out of code. There's tons of things citizens are not allowed to do, but they do it anyway.

    Are you saying that there shouldn't be drivers testing or laws against drunk driving? Or maybe that there's no point in suspending the drivers license of a
    drunk driver?

    ---
    http://DuckDuckGo.com/ a better search engine that respects your privacy.
    ■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)
  • From Corey@VERT/TSGC to Deuce on Mon Feb 11 13:44:08 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Deuce to Dreamer on Mon Feb 11 2013 12:24 pm

    Subject: Re: Firearms Background Check
    @VIA: SYNCNIX
    @MSGID: <51195373.1102.dove-gun@nix.synchro.net>
    @REPLY: <510590DF.93.dove-gun@setxchat.net>
    @TZ: 41e0
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Dumas Walker on Sun Jan 27 2013 02:41 pm

    We're not allowed to drive without a valid license, or drunk, or with certain safety items out of code. There's tons of things citizens are no allowed to do, but they do it anyway.

    Are you saying that there shouldn't be drivers testing or laws against drunk driving? Or maybe that there's no point in suspending the drivers license o drunk driver?


    help! my arms are on fire.

    "Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Deuce on Mon Feb 11 15:33:30 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Deuce to Dreamer on Mon Feb 11 2013 12:24 pm

    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Dumas Walker on Sun Jan 27 2013 02:41 pm

    We're not allowed to drive without a valid license, or drunk, or with certain safety items out of code. There's tons of things citizens are
    not allowed to do, but they do it anyway.

    Are you saying that there shouldn't be drivers testing or laws against
    drunk driving? Or maybe that there's no point in suspending the drivers license of a drunk driver?

    No, I'm saying there's many people out there who are going to do what they want to do, blast the law.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Southeast Texas Chat
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Deuce on Mon Feb 11 15:57:21 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Deuce to Dreamer on Mon Feb 11 2013 12:24 pm

    Are you saying that there shouldn't be drivers testing or laws against
    drunk driving? Or maybe that there's no point in suspending the drivers license of a drunk driver?

    I should probably expand on my previous reply a little bit. We have existing gun laws that already fairly limit the fire power the average citizen can have.

    The 2nd amendment was written at a time when the military's firepower pretty much equalled the citizens', and I don't think they could have foresaw modern artillary and whatnot. So they didn't add any qualifiers to "shall not be infringed". However, there has to be a limit. No, I don't think citizen's should be allowed to have missiles, fully functioning tanks, or unconventional weapons. But we should be allowed to have enough armament to protect ourselves in the case of catastrophic emergency. If really bad stuff goes down, and our rather small police forces are overwhelmed, and/or we are in an area our beloved overlords can't get to, we need to be able to defend ourselves from anyone, including ourselves. That's the intent of the 2nd amendment, and why it was written as it was.

    Now, as to what that has to do with my reply regarding licenses and people ignoring laws? If a person has homicidal intent, I don't think he is going to care about gun laws. If he can't get a gun, he'll get a knife. If he's intent on harming lots of people and can't get a gun, he'll build a bomb or blow a truck.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Southeast Texas Chat
  • From Deuce@VERT/SYNCNIX to Dreamer on Mon Feb 11 19:39:22 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Deuce on Mon Feb 11 2013 03:33 pm

    We're not allowed to drive without a valid license, or drunk, or with certain safety items out of code. There's tons of things citizens are not allowed to do, but they do it anyway.

    Are you saying that there shouldn't be drivers testing or laws against drunk driving? Or maybe that there's no point in suspending the drivers license of a drunk driver?

    No, I'm saying there's many people out there who are going to do what they want to do, blast the law.

    I thought those were points to support why it is useless to regulate in the area, sorry. What was the point you were trying for with the examples?

    ---
    http://DuckDuckGo.com/ a better search engine that respects your privacy.
    ■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)
  • From Deuce@VERT/SYNCNIX to Dreamer on Mon Feb 11 19:41:58 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Deuce on Mon Feb 11 2013 03:57 pm

    Now, as to what that has to do with my reply regarding licenses and people ignoring laws? If a person has homicidal intent, I don't think he is going to care about gun laws. If he can't get a gun, he'll get a knife. If he's intent on harming lots of people and can't get a gun, he'll build a bomb or blow a truck.

    I still don't quite see what point that speaks to though. Are you saying that limiting guns makes sense just like limiting driving does, or are you saying something else entirely?

    ---
    http://DuckDuckGo.com/ a better search engine that respects your privacy.
    ■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Deuce on Tue Feb 12 06:22:36 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Deuce to Dreamer on Mon Feb 11 2013 07:41 pm

    I still don't quite see what point that speaks to though. Are you saying that limiting guns makes sense just like limiting driving does, or are you saying something else entirely?

    I'm trying to point out that the laws we have now make sense. More legislation, taking away more gun rights, makes no sense as it harms law abiders more than those who are intent on breaking the law.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Southeast Texas Chat
  • From Khelair@VERT/TINFOIL to Dreamer on Tue Feb 12 05:27:00 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Deuce on Mon Feb 11 2013 15:57:21

    I should probably expand on my previous reply a little bit. We have existin gun laws that already fairly limit the fire power the average citizen can ha

    Purely a digression here, but did you read the article or hear on any of the faux news channels about how when NYC was doing their first buyback of this whole ordeal that somebody actually showed up with an AT-4 (anti-tank/armor single-fire rocket) to turn in?

    -The opinions expressed are not necessarily an advocation of any of the aforementioned ideologies, concepts, or actions. We still have the freedom of speech, for now, and I enjoy using it in a satirical or ficticious manner to amuse myself.-

    ΓÇ£In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act.ΓÇ¥-- George Orwell

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Tinfoil Tetrahedron : telnet bismaninfo.hopto.org 8023 : http:8080
  • From Deuce@VERT/SYNCNIX to Dreamer on Tue Feb 12 09:15:45 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Dreamer to Deuce on Tue Feb 12 2013 06:22 am

    I still don't quite see what point that speaks to though. Are you
    saying that limiting guns makes sense just like limiting driving does,
    or are you saying something else entirely?

    I'm trying to point out that the laws we have now make sense. More legislation, taking away more gun rights, makes no sense as it harms law abiders more than those who are intent on breaking the law.

    Ok, I guess I just don't get the similie then. Thanks for the explination.

    ---
    http://DuckDuckGo.com/ a better search engine that respects your privacy.
    ■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Khelair on Tue Feb 12 20:36:23 2013
    Re: Citizens' weaponry
    By: Khelair to Dreamer on Tue Feb 12 2013 05:27 am

    Purely a digression here, but did you read the article or hear on any
    of the faux news channels about how when NYC was doing their first buyback of this whole ordeal that somebody actually showed up with an AT-4 (anti-tank/armor single-fire rocket) to turn in?

    LOL, that's awesome! I wonder how they got their hands on it?

    I'd be surprised if you can buy that surplus. hehe

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Southeast Texas Chat
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Deuce on Tue Feb 12 20:37:53 2013
    Re: Re: Firearms Background Check
    By: Deuce to Dreamer on Tue Feb 12 2013 09:15 am

    Ok, I guess I just don't get the similie then. Thanks for the
    explination.

    It's ok. Sometimes things make sense to me that I just can't explain to others. Seriously, it happens so often I sometimes think I have asperger's or something. :p My mind just seems to make associations that others' don't.

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Southeast Texas Chat
  • From Khelair@VERT/TINFOIL to Dreamer on Tue Feb 12 22:43:25 2013
    Re: Citizens' weaponry
    By: Dreamer to Khelair on Tue Feb 12 2013 20:36:23

    LOL, that's awesome! I wonder how they got their hands on it?

    I'd be surprised if you can buy that surplus. hehe

    Heh. I'm guessing that somebody had a friend who was a sergeant or higher in the supply and stock MOS (can't remember off the top of my head what the MOS code is or the real MOS name right now). I know that weapons, I think it was prior to the 70s, were regulated much, much less than they are now, but it would still blow my mind to find out that something like that was ever anything more than military hardware.
    That particular weapon, when I was trained in it, was over $6000 a round, as well. They're a single-fire weapon, not reloadable. Not sure if they're worth $6000 just to play with, but holy crapola they're fun to watch & shoot.

    -The opinions expressed are not necessarily an advocation of any of the aforementioned ideologies, concepts, or actions. We still have the freedom of speech, for now, and I enjoy using it in a satirical or ficticious manner to amuse myself.-

    ΓÇ£In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act.ΓÇ¥-- George Orwell

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Tinfoil Tetrahedron : telnet bismaninfo.hopto.org 8023 : http:8080