ALL my guns are gone! - Page 2 - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > General Discussion Forums > Off-Topic

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 01-19-2013, 06:21 PM   #31
Jeeper
 
Carlsbad0331's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 571
There was an interesting article with the LAPD chief the other day where he very clearly stated that he supported more gun control because it would keep his officers more safe.
But another interesting fact... In the last two weeks the LAPD has had 4 officer involved shootings where unarmed civilians were shot because "the officer was in fear for their life". In two of the cases, the unarmed civilian was killed.
I am a strong supporter of law enforcement, but something is very wrong when officers are shooting unarmed people this often. I clearly understand the need for an officer to use force when necessary. But something is wrong here...

Carlsbad0331 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-19-2013, 06:57 PM   #32
Six
Jeeper
 
Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Durtburg, WV
Posts: 1,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by 907farmer View Post
They are not sent in, nor are the log books. The 4473s go in a "dead" file. And are kept unroll the business no longer exists. They are not sent to the ATF unless a request is sent for a gun trace.
Want to know how I know you're wrong?

Six is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-19-2013, 07:31 PM   #33
G54
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
G54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,963
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Six View Post
Want to know how I know you're wrong?
G54 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-19-2013, 07:42 PM   #34
Jeeper
 
Tweak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Keller, TX
Posts: 2,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjpjr45 View Post
I had a lot of guns. That is until yesterday, when the weirdest thing happened. My buddy called me and asked if I wanted to go salt water fishing. I said sure, but with all people looking for guns these days, I figured it was safer to take them all with me, than leaving at my home. Well we got the boat off the trailer loaded up all our equipment, then put all my guns in. The boat seemed to sit pretty low in the water, but we thought it was OK. We made our way out into the Gulf of Mexico to do some fishing. The wind picked up a bit and the seas got a bit rough. Since we were sitting so low, we started taking on water and ended up sinking. Luckily we were wearing life jackets. The bad thing is all my guns are now on the bottom of the gulf. Anyone know where I can find a gun cheap.
i too lost all my guns in a tragic boating accident. however i was kayaking in colorado. in hindsight, maybe i didnt need to bring THAT much ammo with me
Tweak is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-19-2013, 09:00 PM   #35
Jeeper
 
05ljman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Detroit Area
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ
Why lose em when you can sell em in a private sale with no record?

Anybody else puzzled by why MSRs, which very rarely are used in shootings, are being banned while pistols, the cause of over 80% of firearm crimes and 4/5ths of all shooting fatalities, are being left alone? The facts are there and easy to determine: pistols kill more Americans than all other types of firearms combined, by a multiple factor.

Something bigger is going on. What militia in the history of the world armed itself with pistols? None. The govt doesn't want the population to have the same teeth they do, and that concerns me greatly - as it should you, too.
Oh yeah that is really scary. Why would the government want to do this? More power? That's what I think. I'm not trying to start a fire here but isn't the second amendment in place so we can protect ourselves against a tyrannical government?
__________________
"That tree jumped out at me"

"It didn't look that deep.." (Famous Last Words)
05ljman is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-20-2013, 01:35 PM   #36
G54
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
G54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,963
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by 05ljman View Post

Oh yeah that is really scary. Why would the government want to do this? More power? That's what I think. I'm not trying to start a fire here but isn't the second amendment in place so we can protect ourselves against a tyrannical government?
The founders meant for us, the militia, to be armed as is the standing army...we the people ARE the Militia and are to be able to defend against enemies foreign and domestic. To be honest, IMO we should be allowed full auto rifles at the very least. The only reason our own gov would want us disarmed would be to eliminate the militia as a detriment to their unconstitutional agenda; whatever it might be.
G54 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-20-2013, 01:37 PM   #37
G54
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
G54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,963
Images: 5
Click image for larger version

Name:	ForumRunner_20130120_143711.jpg
Views:	66
Size:	107.5 KB
ID:	199841
G54 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-20-2013, 01:38 PM   #38
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by gus54

The founders meant for us, the militia, to be armed as is the standing army...we the people ARE the Militia and are to be able to defend against enemies foreign and domestic. To be honest, IMO we should be allowed full auto rifles at the very least. The only reason our own gov would want us disarmed would be to eliminate the militia as a detriment to their unconstitutional agenda; whatever it might be.
I completely agree. If they can run a background check and you don't have any fell onus than you should be able to buy any full auto. And the ATF totally bends you over for trying to get a silencer. The general public is retarded when it comes to silencer. A lot of fire arms that you can slap a silencer on are still really loud. The only super quite silencer would me a 22lr.
IWANNAOFFROAD is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-20-2013, 01:43 PM   #39
Jeeper
 
Tweak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Keller, TX
Posts: 2,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by IWANNAOFFROAD View Post
I completely agree. If they can run a background check and you don't have any fell onus than you should be able to buy any full auto. And the ATF totally bends you over for trying to get a silencer. The general public is retarded when it comes to silencer. A lot of fire arms that you can slap a silencer on are still really loud. The only super quite silencer would me a 22lr.
i hear ya. im currently waiting on a stamp for my AAC-SDN6. check was cashed about a month ago, so im getting there. the funny part is that suppressors werent taxed because you could assassinate people without anyone knowing. it was because of the great depression, they didnt want poachers running around the woods illegally killing animals to eat. the people that could afford the $200 stamp ($3200 in todays money) were very unlikely to need to poach to eat. it is only recently, with hollywood movies making suppressors as loud as a pin drop that people are scared of them.
Tweak is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-20-2013, 01:45 PM   #40
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Gus, nail on the head brother. Standing armies lead to wars of aggression and oppression of subjects. Being the army ourselves allows us to become citizens.

Iwannaoffroad, try subsonic ammo. Breaking the sound barrier will always create a sonic boom.

You can own a full auto/select fire with a 200$ permission slip, the problem is no one is allowed to PRODUCE new ones for American purchase, except leo & military, who get em at 800$ a pop. This means they are all at least 25 years old, and relatively rare (expensive). Daggum Hughes Amendment.

Corporations can own guns and silencers, as well as trusts. Nussience permits are a good way to get approval.
Gotta love country life.
__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-20-2013, 03:51 PM   #41
Moderator

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
doclouie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: In the mountains.
Posts: 3,660
Images: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by IWANNAOFFROAD View Post
I completely agree. If they can run a background check and you don't have any fell onus than you should be able to buy any full auto. And the ATF totally bends you over for trying to get a silencer. The general public is retarded when it comes to silencer. A lot of fire arms that you can slap a silencer on are still really loud. The only super quite silencer would me a 22lr.
A 45 ACP is another great round for a silencer as long as you reload them yourself.
__________________
2000 Sahara, 3.5" Rubicon Express Lift, 1" spring spacer & 1" Body Lift, 33" or 35" BFG Mud tires, Front & Rear ARB, Rancho 9000 shocks, UCF Ultra High Belly Up

doclouie is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-21-2013, 12:47 PM   #42
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: So Cal
Posts: 81
Joel 3:10
__________________
01 Wrangler 4 cylinder, 2" pro comp, locked rear.
The Green Machine is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-21-2013, 09:03 PM   #43
Jeeper
 
Vroooom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sin-Tex
Posts: 1,635
I hate to stir-up the pot again, but in the interests of stimulating insightful commentary :

I was still fertilizing diapers at the time, but I recently saw a movie about Richard Nixon where he got himself into a heap of trouble when he uttered the statement:
"It isnt illegal when I do it."

keep that in mind when you google:

18 USC section 241

Then as you ponder the potential of that...

18 USC section 242

It would seem that previous administrations have equiped us to resist all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC.

But to do so effectively, we must get off our couches, stop sniveling about the challenges, and actually make sensable, rational, researched arguements.
__________________
Threads wander aimlessly....always refer back to post #1
2012 Black Unlimited Sahara (mine)
2011 Black Corvette 3LT (wife's)
2005 Black Suzuki C50T (ours)
"Hope" is NOT a strategy
Vroooom is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-22-2013, 09:47 AM   #44
Jeeper
 
Vroooom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sin-Tex
Posts: 1,635
bump for the day-crew
__________________
Threads wander aimlessly....always refer back to post #1
2012 Black Unlimited Sahara (mine)
2011 Black Corvette 3LT (wife's)
2005 Black Suzuki C50T (ours)
"Hope" is NOT a strategy
Vroooom is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-23-2013, 05:37 PM   #45
G54
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
G54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,963
Images: 5
Copied this from another site. Di Fi's gun legislation proposals:

Something good posted on the site:

ATTENTION GUN OWNERS!!!!!!!!!
This ban includes not only "assault rifles," but also numerous handguns and shotguns, and of course, magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. In other words, this isn't really an "assault weapons" ban as much as it is a gun ban!

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on Thursday Jan 24th she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.

According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein's website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of "assault weapon" that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein's new bill are as follows:

"Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms". The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

"Adopts new lists of prohibited external features".
For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the "pistol grip" of which "protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon," the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any "grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip." Also, the new bill adds "forward grip" to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as "a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip." Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.

"Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban".
Feinstein's 1994 ban listed "grenade launcher" as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing "rocket launcher." Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add "nuclear bomb," "particle beam weapon," or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.

"Expands the definition of "assault weapon" by including":
Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.

Any "semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds," except for tubular-magazine .22s.

Any "semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches," any "semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds," and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.

"Requires owners of existing "assault weapons" to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA)".
The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

"Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.”.
Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.

"Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition".
The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.

"Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court".
The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.

"Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban".
Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”

"The Department of Justice study".
On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”

“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends".
From the imposition of Feinstein's “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, available here. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.

"Traces":
Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE fo
r more than a decade.
Call You U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Fein intends to introduce her bill tomorrow, January 24th. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.

Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must hear from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-l...your-reps.aspx
G54 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-23-2013, 08:25 PM   #46
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Little more meat, little less potato. From her website.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ
...

Here is your ban, hot off the press:

In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.

Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:

Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
120 specifically-named {yet to be named} firearms;
Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.

Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test;
Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and
Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.

Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.*{i.e. magazines}

Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and
Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.

Requires that grandfathered weapons be >registered< {WTF!?} under the National Firearms Act, to include:
Background check of owner and any transferee;
Type and serial number of the firearm;
Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/publ...ssault-weapons...


Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ
... from 2008
Dear Attorney General Holder:

As strong supporters of the Second Amendment, we were very concerned to see your recent remaks suggesting that the administration will push for the reinstatement of the 1994 ban on "assault weapons" and ammunition magazines.
We believe that this ban was ineffective during the 10 years it was law, and would oppose its reenactment. Crime began falling before the ban was passed in 1994, and continued falling during and after the ban. The last time the murder rate was at its current level was more than forty years ago.
Even the Urban Institute study of the ban's effectiveness mandated by the 103rd Congress found that it could only have a limited effect because "the banned weapons and magazines were never used in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders".
It is hard to believe the ban would be any more effective in controlling crime by well-funded international drug traffickers, who regularly use grenade launchers, anti-tank rockets and other weapons that are not available on the civilian market in the United States.
The gun control community has intentionally misled many Americans into believing that these weapons are fully automatic machine guns. They are not. These firearms fire one shot for every pull of the trigger. Some of the guns that would be banned under proposed bills have been around for more than 70 years, and are often passed down from generation to generation.
Many of our constituents lawfully own and use these firearms and ammunition magazines that would be affected by a new ban. Indeed, these are commonly owned firearms throughout the country. Law-abiding Americans use these guns for all the same reasons they use any other kind of gun - competitive shooting, hunting, and defending their homes and families.
Our constituents also have very real and serious problems that we in Congress urgently need to address. People are worried about keeping their jobs, paying for their families' health care, educating their children, and retiring with the kind of security their parents and grandparents enjoyed. A long and divisive fight over a gun control issue will only distract us from giving these more important issues the attention they deserve.
Again, we would actively oppose any effort to reinstate the 1994 ban, or to pass any similar law. We urge you to abandon this initiative and to focus instead on effective law enforcement strategies to enforce our current laws against violent criminals and drug traffickers.

Sincerely,
Mike Ross (D-AR), Tim Holden (D-PA), Jerry Costello (D-IL), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Sanford Bishop (D-GA), John Dingell (D-MI), Marion Berry (D-AR), Nick Rahall (D-WV), Gene Green (D-TX), Chet Edwards (D-TX), Ciro Rodriguez (D-TX), Gene Taylor (D-MS), Bart Stupak (D-MI), Collin Peterson (D-MN), John Tanner (D-TN), Allen Boyd (D-FL), Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), Eric Massa (D-NY), Steve Kagen, MD (D-WI), Betsy Markey (D-CO), Paul Hodes (D-NH), Ron Kind (D-WI), Peter Welch (D-VT), Leonard Boswell (D-IA), Tim Ryan (D-OH), Walt Minnick (D-ID), John Boccieri (D-OH), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Tom Perriello (D-VA), Earl Pomeroy (D-ND), Ben Chandler (D-KY), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Debbie Halvorson (D-IL), Travis Childers (D-MS), Tim Walz (D-MN), Peter DeFazio (D-OR)Solomon Ortiz (D-TX)Paul Kanjorski (D-PA)Rick Boucher (D-VA)Mike McIntyre (D-NC)John Murtha (D-PA)Bart Gordon (D-TN), Zach Space (D-OH), Alan Mollohan (D-WV), Lincoln Davis (D-TN), Artur Davis (D-AL), Charlie Melancon (D-LA), John Barrow (D-GA), Christopher Carney (D-PA), Dan Boren (D-OK), Parker Griffith (D-AL), Charlie Wilson (D-OH), Heath Shuler (D-NC), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD), Jim Marshall (D-GA), Jason Altmire (D-PA), Larry Kissell (D-NC), John Salazar (D-CO), Brad Ellsworth (D-IN), Frank Kratovil (D-MD), Glenn Nye (D-VA), Bobby Bright (D-AL), Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ), Joe Baca (D-CA)...
Just send these people an email reminding them they signed this - oh, wait, they mostly got booted for Tea Party folks... Well I hope that works out for us! Well, send it to their replacements anyway.
__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 01:14 PM   #47
Jeeper
 
myquite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 496
Great thread, Awesome!
__________________
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering
if they've made a difference. The Marines don't
have that problem."
myquite is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 01:20 PM   #48
Jeeper
 
Vroooom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sin-Tex
Posts: 1,635
Once again...

Google:

18 USC Subchapter 241
http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/241.html

and

18 USC Subchapter 242
http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/242.html

Correspond with your "Representative goventment" accordingly.
__________________
Threads wander aimlessly....always refer back to post #1
2012 Black Unlimited Sahara (mine)
2011 Black Corvette 3LT (wife's)
2005 Black Suzuki C50T (ours)
"Hope" is NOT a strategy
Vroooom is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 06:09 PM   #49
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vroooom
Once again...

Google:

18 USC Subchapter 241
http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/241.html

and

18 USC Subchapter 242
http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/242.html

Correspond with your "Representative goventment" accordingly.
But isn't a law saying that depriving a man his rights is a crime a bit redundant?
__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 06:24 PM   #50
zombie & ninja slayer

WF Supporting Member
 
Redsand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: southern illinois, no where near chicago (allendale)
Posts: 2,252
I'm sorry officer, I turned my guns in yesterday. Though it was strange that he wasent in uniform, and in an unmarked suv but who am I to argue with the police
__________________

"It puts the lotion on its skin or it gets the hose again"
Redsand is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 06:35 PM   #51
I am JD & It's my Dream

WF Supporting Member
::WF Administrator::
 
JDsDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Peach State
Posts: 26,917
Images: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by gus54 View Post
I just sold all mine at the gun show. No more guns in my house anymore. Nope. Sold em all. Ammo too. And holsters. Yep. Aaaall gone. Gonna use the money to buy a few Dobermans.
I know this post is from a couple of days ago but Gus, you have GOT to post a picture of yourself on patrol with a doberman strapped to your hip


I saw this hanging in a local gun shop the other day and had to share



Name:  fasy.jpg
Views: 99
Size:  7.4 KB
__________________
The kind of woman that when my feet hit the floor each morning the devil says "Oh Crap, She's up!"

To All Of Our Forum Veterans and Active Service Members.
Our Debt To You Is Greater Than We Could Ever Repay.
Thank You

Become a Supporting Member!
JDsDream is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 06:37 PM   #52
Jeeper
 
Vroooom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sin-Tex
Posts: 1,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
But isn't a law saying that depriving a man his rights is a crime a bit redundant?
The law says that to CONSPIRE (plot/plan with others) to deprive somone of exersizing their constitutional rights is a felony. And to do so under the color of authority (governemt) is a different felony...specifically exempting the "Im just doing my job" excuse.

Legislators are immune from prosecution during their session. But anti-gun lobbiests are NOT immune.
__________________
Threads wander aimlessly....always refer back to post #1
2012 Black Unlimited Sahara (mine)
2011 Black Corvette 3LT (wife's)
2005 Black Suzuki C50T (ours)
"Hope" is NOT a strategy
Vroooom is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 07:16 PM   #53
Jeeper
 
Mom sold the Jeepster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by afd660
This guy need to sell his off.... haha... he looks qualified to hold and use one doesnt he??? Magazine in, safety down, thumb in trigger guard... Thank you idiot Joe Morrisey D-Va for making me feel safe... LOL.. I thought bringing a firearm into a govt building was illegal...
Yep, that's his thumb on the TRIGGER
Mom sold the Jeepster is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 07:16 PM   #54
Jeeper
 
ed98208's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 390
JMHO: The sudden insistence on gun regulation is a direct result of the Sandy Hook massacre. If that had not happened then none of this would be going on. Prior to 20 first graders and 6 women being gunned down with great efficiency by a man with a high-capacity weapon, all was quiet on the gun rights front. Even after all of the other recent high profile mass-shootings, citizens and politicians would just be all riled up for a week or two and then it went straight back to the status quo. Sandy Hook broke the camel's back. The horror of it simply could not be swept under the rug with a few speeches and memorials. This one demanded action, not words.

So that's why they're going after high capacity weapons and not the common handguns that cause most of the 12,000 non-suicide gun deaths per year. It's not about saving Biggie and Tupak - it's about the massacres of the innocents. It's about making it more difficult for someone to walk into a public place and shoot dozens of people in a matter of seconds, and to put so many bullets into each victim that there are no survivors. Is it such a terrible thing to try and prevent that if we can?

And yes, all of you gun enthusiasts can go ahead and make fun of how naive that sounds and how stupid anyone must be to think that it'll make a whit of difference, etc. etc. because I've read it all. But the fact is that more than twice as many Americans don't own guns as do own guns. Most people don't care or think about guns unless they're being used for criminal purposes. All they know is that there doesn't seem to be a valid reason why any member of the general public needs to own high capacity guns any more than they need bazookas, tanks, attack helicopters or sea-to-air-anything.

In this case it looks like the "tyranny of the majority" will be visited upon the vocal minority. I believe that's how democracy works, isn't it?

So, there's a little different perspective for you to attack. I'm sure you all prefer these threads to continue with you all in agreement about how clever and right you are (seriously, what a freakin' circle jerk) but don't fool yourselves into thinking that your views are shared by every American, or even most of them.
ed98208 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 07:27 PM   #55
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed98208
In this case it looks like the "tyranny of the majority" will be visited upon the vocal minority. I believe that's how democracy works, isn't it?
Thank God we live in a Republic with affirmation of endowed rights. It tends to prevent that whole mob rule thing you're talking about.

I see no valid reason for Americans to own 90% of their belongings. But you claim they make your life easier, simpler, or otherwise better. Either way, I acknowledge your right to own them.

If you run me over, you will be held liable, however not even then would I propose banning auto-motrons and Jeeps (btw, I have been hit by a car as a pedestrian, never been shot though). It just doesn't solve anything, even though it may help you sleep at night.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/us...s.html?hp&_r=0

Feinstein sure has her work cut out for her.
__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 07:49 PM   #56
Jeeper
 
SmugglersBlues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: To close for criminals, too far away for victims.
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed98208 View Post
JMHO: The sudden insistence on gun regulation is a direct result of the Sandy Hook massacre. If that had not happened then none of this would be going on. .
I agree with the first half of this thought however the second is not true at all. If you look up the facts of Operation Fast and Furious and the meaning behind it. They were hoping to have the weapons used in crimes in the U.S. and have the public demand more gun control. As we know Operation Fast and Furious didnt work out that way. Then when Sandy Hook happened they seized on it because as we all know you never let a crisis go to waste.

If you are ok with your rights being stripped away little by little then that is your business. I however will defend your rights and mine with my life if needed.
__________________
I would take an unpleasant truth over a comfortable false hood. You learn nothing from lies, whether someone else is telling them to you, or you are telling them to yourself.

- Me (sometimes I'm pretty deep)
SmugglersBlues is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 07:53 PM   #57
Jeeper
 
SmugglersBlues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: To close for criminals, too far away for victims.
Posts: 525
Do you really need that lift kit in your Jeep. I hear it makes them more dangerous as they could roll easier. Do you really need those big tires? They cause bad gas mileage and more emissions. Do you really need that...........
__________________
I would take an unpleasant truth over a comfortable false hood. You learn nothing from lies, whether someone else is telling them to you, or you are telling them to yourself.

- Me (sometimes I'm pretty deep)
SmugglersBlues is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 08:00 PM   #58
G54
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
G54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,963
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDsDream View Post

I know this post is from a couple of days ago but Gus, you have GOT to post a picture of yourself on patrol with a doberman strapped to your hip
I only sold my personal guns. So far Im allowed to keep my duty gun with hi cap mags. They're even kicking around the idea of issuing, gulp, those evil black rifles since they've ramped up our active shooter training.
G54 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 08:16 PM   #59
Jeeper
 
ed98208's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
I see no valid reason for Americans to own 90% of their belongings. But you claim they make your life easier, simpler, or otherwise better. Either way, I acknowledge your right to own them.

If you run me over, you will be held liable, however not even then would I propose banning auto-motrons and Jeeps (btw, I have been hit by a car as a pedestrian, never been shot though). It just doesn't solve anything, even though it may help you sleep at night.
Aw, c'mon BlueRidge. I consider you to be one of the sharper tacks in this box. Surely you don't need me to explain the difference between an improvised weapon and a purpose-built weapon. Or between a Tiffany lamp and an AR-15.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
Feinstein sure has her work cut out for her.
Ain't that the truth. In the end probably nothing will change and this is all just a more elaborate-than-usual exercise in hand wringing and political posturing.

Here's my loony conspiracy theory: The gun manufacturers are behind it all. They knew it would cause a run on guns and ammo, and they're laughing all the way to the bank.

.
ed98208 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 01-24-2013, 09:30 PM   #60
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed98208

Aw, c'mon BlueRidge. I consider you to be one of the sharper tacks in this box. Surely you don't need me to explain the difference between an improvised weapon and a purpose-built weapon. Or between a Tiffany lamp and an AR-15.

Ain't that the truth. In the end probably nothing will change and this is all just a more elaborate-than-usual exercise in hand wringing and political posturing.

Here's my loony conspiracy theory: The gun manufacturers are behind it all. They knew it would cause a run on guns and ammo, and they're laughing all the way to the bank.

.
Well thank you - I do enjoy our differing viewpoints (and abilities to express them congenially) quite a bit as well.

I am just one of them Constitutional guys. It says we are the army, so I have a responsibility to be proficient in arms and capable of supplying defensive tactics for my community, state, and nation. This requires the availability of Modern Sporting Rifles, Assault Rifles, Military type rifles, evil black rifles, "that shoulder thing that pops up", photon blasters or whatever else ya wanna call em. If 99% of Americans don't like it, well that's tuff. I don't assert that I may carry them where ever I choose, nor do I assert concealment is allowable without permission slips, which pretty much leads me to my next point.

The simple facts are these types of rifles are rarely used in any type of shooting, mass or otherwise. We had a ban, the 103rd Congress mandated statistical analysis of its effectiveness - they rated it marginally (if at all) effective due to the rarity of these shootings.

Handguns kill. They kill often. They killed in Columbine, 4 years into an AWB. They killed in VT, with 21 normal capacity mags. They killed in Aurora, and they killed in Newtown. They have been used to kill presidents and attempt to kill presidents. They have killed assasins while in police custody in a police station. They have killed, wounded, and maimed political leaders in public. They kill thousands of kids in the street, or who find it in daddys nightstand. They kill thousands of scared kids (teens) who don't have a friend to turn to, a shoulder to cry on, or an uncle to guide them. Just little lost sheep in a big bad world of wolves, and an easy way out.

Assault Rifles don't do any of that. Not by a factor of 100, anyway.

If you keep a handgun in your home for selfdefense, in the statistical time frame you will need to use it for that:
1.4 family members of yours will be killed by it, intentionally or otherwise
4 times it will be stolen and used in a criminal shooting or robbery
33 people will commit suicide with it

And you alledge magazine size and look or feature of a gun kill? No sir, I do not believe that for one second. We can take HUGE steps towards a peaceful, nonviolent society (though not ultimately attainable) but banning the only rifles with teeth will not do that. Yet this is all our leaders wish to address.... I ask why. My 2 favorite words are 'how' and 'why'. I like to know things, not take it for granted, use rules of thumb, or take others word for it. So here why applies. And there is NO logical why - the statistics are there. It is not assault rifles that kill. It IS handguns.

I ask you, what militia in the history of Earth chose or chooses to arm itself with pistols? None I have ever learned of, but a short-lived one, that is to be certain.

And why should I trust a govt with a rifle they won't trust me with? With the NDAA, MCA of 2006, PATRIOT Act, strike on Anwar al-Alwaki, etc, etc we should be more observant than ever before of the purpose behind the 2nd Amendment (and gunowners have it wrong, too). I recommend you read Eldridge Gerrys comments in Congress in 1789 (August I think) as well as others concerned with acts of aggression or oppression, foreign or domestic. We need a 2nd Amendment to apply to the biggest and badest weaponry (small arms) we can build, else the enforcement of the Constitution falls to no one and imperialism reigns supreme. History is like a big ol water wheel. It may look a bit different and be full of different actors, but the big picture keeps repeating.

Well, that got longer than I meant, lol. Imagine that. =) and maybe it is the boolit makers behind it all! Wouldn't that be a big ol kick in the teeth!

__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




» Network Links
»Jeep Parts
» Featured Product

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:26 PM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC