Yes because as of right now its based on the capacity of the magazine. That choice is currently unavailable.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
|
Yes because as of right now its based on the capacity of the magazine. That choice is currently unavailable.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
That is somthig to research... I'll get back to you...Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
A manufacturers choice. But if such a choice by them (or regulation) was made is it do able?
Enforcement of anything is always a problem - in my area there is new law after new law, no one to enforce it.
Sad, really.
Here is the problem and why the manufacturer isn't going to change any time soon:Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
So it makes it more difficult to comply when the laws keep changing.
In my area the elected Sheriff has announced that he will not enforce a law HE deems unfair. It's been a back and forth and back and forth.
What happens next? I don't know - but now politics are piled on top of politics.
This week I've learned that 2 mayors have left Bloomberg's tax exempt "social welfare" anti-gun group, though I know mayors come and go. Both have left for roughly the same reason (and yes I edited the articles for space you nitpickers).
And in New Hampshire...Quote:
An Illinois mayor said he's dropped his membership with Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the group started by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, because its title doesn't match its agenda. It's too anti-Second Amendment, he said.
“I've dropped out of a group called Mayors Against Illegal Guns,” said Larry Morrissey, an independent mayor from Rockford, Ill. The Daily Caller reported. “The reason why I joined the group in the first place is because I took the name for what it said. Against 'illegal' guns.”
...
Mr. Morrissey said the original mission of the group changed over time.
“So, that's why I dropped out,” he said, in The Daily Caller. “The focus should not be against law-abiding citizens. We should be focusing our enforcement on folks who have no right to carry a gun, concealed or otherwise.”
Read more: Illinois mayor leaves Bloomberg's anti-gun group, citing agenda - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Bloomy is having a rough week or so with his group, what with the revelations of using taxpayer funded NYC servers to host the MAIG website and administered by public employees and including terrorists in his list of gun victims. You just can't make that last one up.Quote:
- Nashua Mayor Donnalee Lozeau said she resigned from "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" on May 10, shortly after joining the nationwide coalition, because it went beyond its stated principles of "keeping illegal guns out of dangerous hands."
Lozeau said she did not know when she joined the group that it would "unfairly attack" fellow Nashuan Sen. Kelly Ayotte in a $2 million barrage of ads after Ayotte opposed an amendment calling for universal background checks for gun purchases in April.
...
Lozeau told the New Hampshire Union Leader she joined the group after extensively researching it at the suggestion of a neighbor, following the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Connecticut.
She said she felt, "How could anyone have too much heartburn about joining a group that's against illegal guns?"
But when she saw the group's first ad criticizing Ayotte, "I said, 'Wait a minute, I don't want to be part of something like that.' I told them, "You're mayors against illegal guns, you're not mayors for gun control.'
"I left the group immediately upon seeing the first ad. I don't think I even made three weeks," she said.
"I can't imagine there is any mayor in the United States who is not against illegal guns," Lozeau said. "There is no question that I and Nashua's law enforcement community are interested in keeping firearms from those not legally entitled to bear them.
"Nowhere within the literature of this group was there any indication that there would be campaigns against members of Congress, particularly around issues that were not related to illegal guns," said Lozeau. "I have known Sen. Ayotte for many years in many capacities, including her time as New Hampshire's Attorney General. Senator Ayotte is a thoughtful, effective, decisive and hardworking advocate for victims and law enforcement."
Update: Bloomy also got caught sending a NYC employee to Nevada to lobby - not for NYC as claimed but for for MAIG.
Quote:
Michael Bloomberg's gun control group sent a city employee to register as a lobbyist in Nevada on state-based firearms issues, a use of government resources that raises further questions about the relationship between the city and the mayor's self-funded 501(c)(4).
City Hall confirmed to POLITICO that Christopher Kocher, who works as a special counsel for Bloomberg's office, registered as a lobbyist for the 2013 legislative session in Nevada, to push a background checks bill there.
The news was first reported by the New York Post.
“With 85 percent of guns used in crimes here coming from out of state, gun policy everywhere has an impact on the safety of New Yorkers,” said Bloomberg spokesman John McCarthy, insisting it's a governmental issue. “The mayor's top priority is keeping New Yorkers safe and that includes seeking sane gun laws in other states and D.C. to help reduce the flow of illegal guns to New York.”
But Nevada lobbying forms show it was not City Hall, but the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Action Fund, for whom Kocher was registered as working. The “action fund” is the 501(c)(4) through which Bloomberg has personally paid for more than $12 million in campaign-style ads against senators who did not back a gun control bill in the Senate, part of a national effort he is waging.
City Hall had insisted last week, when Ace of Spades blogger John Ekdahl first raised questions about the MAIG website being hosted on city government web servers, that there was separation between MAIG as the coalition of mayors involved, and the 501(c)(4), which has tax-exempt status.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2XEwMUI1k
Fast & Furious notwithstanding, what happens if the government gets hold of our guns?
Quote:
Park Police lost track of thousands of weapons, inspector general’s report says
The U.S. Park Police has lost track of thousands of handguns, rifles and machine guns in what a government watchdog agency concluded is the latest example of mismanagement on a police force trusted to protect millions of visitors to the city’s iconic monuments.
There is no indication that police guns got into the hands of criminals, but the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of the Interior warned that the Park Police might not know if they had. In a scathing report, the authors said there is “credible evidence of conditions that would allow for theft and misuse of firearms, and the ability to conceal the fact if weapons were missing.”
The probe was launched in part because of an anonymous tip that Park Police officers were improperly taking weapons home. Investigators discovered two instances in which that had occurred, but they found many other troubling examples of mismanagement, according to the report.
Investigators found 1,400 guns that were supposed to have been destroyed or melted down. An additional 198 handguns donated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are sitting in a building in Anacostia but don’t show up in official records.
Hello again, Steve:
I agree. We should take away ALL the weapons the government has.Quote:
Fast & Furious notwithstanding, what happens if the government gets hold of our guns?
Excon
At least the automatic weapons the police have... why exactly do the police need machine guns anyway?
Because they are trained and duly licensed by the local authorities, elected officials by the people charged with being a first responder in emergency situations from cats under the porch to a terrorist attack... DUH!!
A swat team with billy clubs may not be enough.
Which country do they plan on invading? Or opressing that they would NEED those?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Do they really need automatic weapons to issue parking tickets?
Hmmm...
Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger.Quote:
Harvard study reveals gun control counterproductive
Once again, a study from an organization that you would never accuse of being “gun-loving” or “right-wing” seems to disprove the myth that the availability of handguns increases murder rates. In fact, it doesn’t.
The Harvard study attempts to answer the question of whether banning firearms would reduce murders and suicides. Researchers looked at crime data from several European countries and found that countries with HIGHER gun ownership often had LOWER murder rates.
Russia, for example, enforces very strict gun control on its people, but its murder rate remains quite high. In fact, the murder rate in Russia is four times higher than in the “gun-ridden” United States, cites the study. ”Homicide results suggest that where guns are scarce other weapons are substituted in killings.” In other words, the elimination of guns does not eliminate murder, and in the case of gun-controlled Russia, murder rates are quite high.
The study revealed several European countries with significant gun ownership, like Norway, Finland, Germany and France – had remarkably low murder rates. Contrast that with Luxembourg, “where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, had a murder rate nine times higher than Germany in 2002.”
The study found no evidence to suggest that the availability of guns contributes to higher murder rates anywhere in the world. ”Of course, it may be speculated that murder rates around the world would be higher if guns were more available. But there is simply no evidence to support this.”
Further, the report cited, “the determinants of murder and suicide are basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the prevalence of some form of deadly mechanism.” Meaning, it’s not guns that kill people.
People kill people.
Speech, the reality is that civilised people can own guns and not murder each other but unsophisticated barbarians can not, how you civilise those barbarians in your population who do the killing is the quandry and until you do you need to take the guns from their handsQuote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
But not at the expense of me protecting myself from the barbarians.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
You see I didn't say anything about responsible people not owning guns
Yes, but those who would disarm us don't care if you're responsible or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
The institution may well not have a bias. But the two individuals who carried out the research? Well that's a different matter isn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
The first thing that stands out is the statistical anomaly for Luxembourg. It is way out of line with the surrounding countries. The reason for the anomaly may well have to do with the population sample. Luxembourg is a tiny country in terms of population compared the heavily populated larger countries. In other words, we have a situation whereby we are comparing one small sample with larger samples. This is always fraught with problems.
If this were a realistic study and we wanted to include Luxembourg in our analysis then this anomaly should be reconciled with other samples over a wider time frame. If the figure is genuine( there may be many reasons it is or isn't) then it should be reflected in a overall year by year analysis.
Hmm.. is right.
The reality is that the US is the anomaly, their statistics on gun crime, gun ownership and various other measure of social interaction don't fit with the experience of 95% of the inhabitants of Planet Earth. This is in their experience called "freedom" or "liberty" but is in fact a tyranny which the rest of us don't experience. They cannot understand us and we cannot understand them, they have the strange idea that in order to be free you have to be in a position where you can take the life of another individual. This is a false premise and not intended by their constitution but is the consequence of pecular liberal philosophy
From the country with the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world. Whatever they are doing we should all do the opposite.Quote:
This is in their experience called "freedom" or "liberty"
We have the highest Incarceration rate because we put our criminals behind bars... not keep them loose terrorizing the rest of the citizens.
Hello again, Steve:
There are some REAL problems in the world. Making one up doesn't help matters any. I don't know HOW you can confuse a comprehensive background check with disarming... I really can't... Now, if I read that Obama was calling for DISARMAMENT, or that Joe Biden DOESN'T want you to fire your shotgun in the air, I'd BELIEVE you...Quote:
Yes, but those who would disarm us don't care if you're responsible or not.
But, there's NONE of that.. All this paranoia resides ONLY in the heads of right wingers... Now, do you see why you can't be trusted with adult toys?
Excon
I noticed one of the authors of the study is a Canadian criminologist. Just sayin'Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Did you actually read the study?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
I think he did since he's commenting on the facts argued in that study.
So now you're answering for Tut? Dude...Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Hello again, smoothy:
Nahhhh... We've been here before. I'm committing a FELONY right now, and I KNOW you don't think I should be in jail. More than HALF of the people in the slam are locked up because they did exactly what I did two seconds ago.Quote:
We have the highest Incarceration rate because we put our criminals behind bars...
Now, if we ONLY locked up TRULY bad guys, I'd agree with you. But, you TRULY don't understand what's going on..
Excon
Once again, the premise of a discussion board is lost to some.Quote:
So now you're answering for Tut?
Tell that to Kalifornia.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Wrong again, "you" aren't Tut. Duh.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Ex was speaking to smoothy.Quote:
Tell that to Kalifornia.
BURN!
LOL
Its NOT a victimless crime... try and tell that to the vitims of the gangs that traffic in it... and the victims who are injured and killed by people driving under the influence... and its no better than alcohol if you are behind the wheel.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Ex didn't ask Smoothy a question only he could answer. Duh. Do you have to work hard at looking like an idiot or does it just come natural?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Hello again, smoothy:
So, you DO think I should be rotting in jail. Glad we got that straight.Quote:
Its NOT a victimless crime...
Aren't YOU sullied by associating with somebody who HURTS people? You ACT friendly toward me, but you really think I'm a MONSTER. Glad we got that straight..
Can you SLEEP at night knowing that I'm a DANGEROUS felon, and you DON'T call the cops on me?? How do you live with yourself?
Glad we got ALL this straight..
Excon
You're getting all pissy because I made this comment:Quote:
Do you have to work hard at looking like an idiot or does it just come natural?
What part of that offended you?Quote:
I think he did since he's commenting on the facts argued in that study.
If you are buying it by the pound and distributing it at the highschools... Because that's who I was specifically talking about... or the people smoking a reefer driving their car...Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Nothing, I Just asked if you were answering for Tut now. But if you want to act like an a$$ and a fool about it be prepared to be treated like one. BURN, lol, and all that rot.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Now, do you have anything constructive to add? Ever?
Continue on with your deep analysis for your two friends here. I'm sure it comforts you to no end.
You really suck at insults.
Hello again, smoothy:
That's NOT the law.. Possession of even one gram of pot is a felony under federal law...Quote:
If you are buying it by the pound and distributing it at the highschools... Because that's who I was specifically talking about...
But, I see, that even YOU have some compassion in your heart, and you TOO think Holder should HAVE the prosecutorial discretion to ONLY go after pound dealers..
Excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:47 PM. |