Gun control

[Utfbo5122]

View attachment 33389201

Oddly enough, once again, his mother warned both the police and fbi about him, and they did nothing for an entire year. Looks like another government fuck up.

 

[phonehome]

Oddly enough, once again, his mother warned both the police and fbi about him, and they did nothing for an entire year. Looks like another government fuck up.

Because you love love love to tell us all how this that and the other things is "against the law already"

Within the current "laws on the books" just EXACTLY what could the police and the FBI have done in that "entire year" ??

To the best of my knowledge Indianan does NOT have any kind of "red flag laws" and your ilk are always going on and on about how you are against them anyway because of a "lack of due process"

Did his mom or anyone else with "standing" try and get him before a judge so he could be "adjudicated" as mentally "defective" or otherwise unfit" ??

You love to quote the law so you should know the police and FBI can NOT initiate those actions and IF they did all we would hear from your kind is whining about "big government" and how they were "trampling on the Constitution" Tucker and SEan and Rush from the grave going on and on about how "un elected bureaucrats" were trying to strip this poor soul who had never broken any kind of law of his scared, god given 2nd amendment rights"

So "the government" should have done WHAT ??

 

[Utfbo5122]

Because you love love love to tell us all how this that and the other things is "against the law already"

Within the current "laws on the books" just EXACTLY what could the police and the FBI have done in that "entire year" ??

To the best of my knowledge Indianan does NOT have any kind of "red flag laws" and your ilk are always going on and on about how you are against them anyway because of a "lack of due process"

Did his mom or anyone else with "standing" try and get him before a judge so he could be "adjudicated" as mentally "defective" or otherwise unfit" ??

You love to quote the law so you should know the police and FBI can NOT initiate those actions and IF they did all we would hear from your kind is whining about "big government" and how they were "trampling on the Constitution" Tucker and SEan and Rush from the grave going on and on about how "un elected bureaucrats" were trying to strip this poor soul who had never broken any kind of law of his scared, god given 2nd amendment rights"

So "the government" should have done WHAT ??

I'm very glad you asked! Since all the facts aren't out yet, it would be interesting to see what was being investigated when he had his guns removed the first time. Was he making threats? Because if he did indeed make threats that had his firearms taken the first time, that alone should have been enough to bar him from purchasing new ones. That is of course, providing the government didn't fuck up, and not push the Paperwork up to where it had to go to get him into the system.

Does that answer your question?

 

[Klingsor]

I'm very glad you asked! Since all the facts aren't out yet, it would be interesting to see what was being investigated when he had his guns removed the first time. Was he making threats? Because if he did indeed make threats that had his firearms taken the first time, that alone should have been enough to bar him from purchasing new ones. That is of course, providing the government didn't fuck up, and not push the Paperwork up to where it had to go to get him into the system.

Does that answer your question?

So just be clear, you're saying the government should be more stringent in its gun control?

 

[Utfbo5122]

So just be clear, you're saying the government should be more stringent in its gun control?

Did I say that? I said the government fucked up in processing his paperwork to even utilize the gun laws they already have. How is more laws going to help when they dont even do the footwork to enforce what they already should be?

 

[Klingsor]

Did I say that? I said the government fucked up in processing his paperwork to even utilize the gun laws they already have. How is more laws going to help when they dont even do the footwork to enforce what they already should be?

I didn't mention more laws. If you want to focus on better enforcement, I'll be happy to support that. As a good start.

 

[Utfbo5122]

I didn't mention more laws. If you want to focus on better enforcement, I'll be happy to support that. As a good start.

I said from the getgo we need very aggressive policing. This would include getting paperwork where it needs to be to a. Ensure the average joe buying a gun isn't hastled with having to wait an hour+ for an authorization transfer number after he already cleared his background check and b. People that should be in the system are filed in the system as they should have been.

 

[phonehome]

Did I say that? I said the government fucked up in processing his paperwork to even utilize the gun laws they already have. How is more laws going to help when they dont even do the footwork to enforce what they already should be?

!rst NO you did NOT answer my questions

2nd just EXACTLY HOW did "the government fuck up in processing his paperwork to utiliize the gun l;aws they already have"

A simple "red flag law seizure" does NOT equal being adjudicated as "mentally defective or deficient" or as "a danger to your self or others" that is the "due process that your ilk always keeps going on and on and on about

This is the same argument/reason/excuse you kind give fore why simply being on "the no fly list" is not sufficient

That (a ruling by a JUDGE) is what it takes to have that "paperwork processed" in order to make the individual in question "fail and back ground check"

Now if you would like to see those laws CHANGED to accommodate that fine

Until thern though if you are going to go on and on and on quoting laws to us as you are apt to do it would behoove you to KNOW what all those laws IN THEIR ENTIRETY ACTUALLY SAY

Who and in what scenario's thos laws appy too and who and when they do NOT

What the burden of proof required to secure a conviction is and who is required to meet that burden

If as WAY TO OFTEN is the case simply saying "I didn't know" (and you can not prove I did) equals a "get out of jail free card" IE I didn't know he was from another state, I didn't know he was ac convicted felon, I didn't know he was going to go out and kill a dozen people with that AR I bought him

 

[Utfbo5122]

!rst NO you did NOT answer my questions

2nd just EXACTLY HOW did "the government fuck up in processing his paperwork to utiliize the gun l;aws they already have"

A simple "red flag law seizure" does NOT equal being adjudicated as "mentally defective or deficient" or as "a danger to your self or others" that is the "due process that your ilk always keeps going on and on and on about

This is the same argument/reason/excuse you kind give fore why simply being on "the no fly list" is not sufficient

That (a ruling by a JUDGE) is what it takes to have that "paperwork processed" in order to make the individual in question "fail and back ground check"

Now if you would like to see those laws CHANGED to accommodate that fine

Until thern though if you are going to go on and on and on quoting laws to us as you are apt to do it would behoove you to KNOW what all those laws IN THEIR ENTIRETY ACTUALLY SAY

Who and in what scenario's thos laws appy too and who and when they do NOT

What the burden of proof required to secure a conviction is and who is required to meet that burden

If as WAY TO OFTEN is the case simply saying "I didn't know" (and you can not prove I did) equals a "get out of jail free card" IE I didn't know he was from another state, I didn't know he was ac convicted felon, I didn't know he was going to go out and kill a dozen people with that AR I bought him

That's where your wrong, bucko. For them to take them in the first place, they would have had a reason to do it, as well as an investigation. Said reason for taking them in the first place would have caused him to ping in the system. Are you however saying due process shouldn't be part of a system like this? The no fly list is a bad example, because you can be put on it without due process, and you'd never even know you were on it until you tried to fly. So bad analogy. You also described a straw purchase pretty well. And that is illegal and even on the form you fill out when you buy a gun.

 

[phonehome]

That's where your wrong, bucko. For them to take them in the first place, they would have had a reason to do it, as well as an investigation. Said reason for taking them in the first place would have caused him to ping in the system. Are you however saying due process shouldn't be part of a system like this? The no fly list is a bad example, because you can be put on it without due process, and you'd never even know you were on it until you tried to fly. So bad analogy. You also described a straw purchase pretty well. And that is illegal and even on the form you fill out when you buy a gun.

No bucko that is WHERE YOU ARE WRONG and have been from the start

A red flag seizure in most states and I assume Indiana is not different can be accomplished WITHOUT a judge ever ruling that that the individual in question has been determined to be "mentally defective or deficient or a danger to themselves or others and THAT is the standard that must be met

In some states and Indiana may be one of them they can be conducted without a judge ever being involved because the seizures are considered "temporary" and often they end up being "voluntary' IE "lets us have that gun and then this ends here" to which the individual agrees KNOWINg full well they cam always buy another one later on down the road

I do not know what you think a "ping" is but simply BEING INVESTIGATED IE "no charges filed" by the FBI or any other Law Enforcement agency is NOT sufficient to make you fail a background check

It's ONLY a "straw purchase if the US Attorney in question can PROVE that it is

If I buy an AR-15 you must prove that I always intended to IMMEDIATEY "private sale" sell it to someone else there is no minimum amount of time I must posses a weapon that I buy before I can "private sale" to anyone and in conducting that sale I am not REQUIRED to learn ANYTHING about the buyer in question which enables me to say all those things referred to above and also I am required to keep no records which is just as well because I learned nothing (on purpose) to record anyway

The ONLY way a US Attorney could have anything close to an "air tight case" against a straw buyer (me) would be IF I was STUPID ENOUGH to bring the would be private sale buyer into the gun shop with me, let him hand the money to the sales person or be seen handing it to me and I allowed the sales person to hand the weapon in question to that person or have me be seen by the sales person in question hand the weapon over and them he walks out of the store with the weapon on his possession AND hopefully have ALL of that on video

Otherwise "I just decided to sell it" and "I did't know " works JUST FINE

I like Movie references when i can use them to quote Daniel Caffey as played by Tom Cruise in "A Few Good Men"

Don't tell me the law, I KNOW the law

 

[Utfbo5122]

No bucko that is WHERE YOU ARE WRONG and have been from the start

A red flag seizure in most states and I assume Indiana is not different can be accomplished WITHOUT a judge ever ruling that that the individual in question has been determined to be "mentally defective or deficient or a danger to themselves or others and THAT is the standard that must be met

In some states and Indiana may be one of them they can be conducted without a judge ever being involved because the seizures are considered "temporary" and often they end up being "voluntary' IE "lets us have that gun and then this ends here" to which the individual agrees KNOWINg full well they cam always buy another one later on down the road

I do not know what you think a "ping" is but simply BEING INVESTIGATED IE "no charges filed" by the FBI or any other Law Enforcement agency is NOT sufficient to make you fail a background check

It's ONLY a "straw purchase if the US Attorney in question can PROVE that it is

If I buy an AR-15 you must prove that I always intended to IMMEDIATEY "private sale" sell it to someone else there is no minimum amount of time I must posses a weapon that I buy before I can "private sale" to anyone and in conducting that sale I am not REQUIRED to learn ANYTHING about the buyer in question which enables me to say all those things referred to above and also I am required to keep no records which is just as well because I learned nothing (on purpose) to record anyway

The ONLY way a US Attorney could have anything close to an "air tight case" against a straw buyer (me) would be IF I was STUPID ENOUGH to bring the would be private sale buyer into the gun shop with me, let him hand the money to the sales person or be seen handing it to me and I allowed the sales person to hand the weapon in question to that person or have me be seen by the sales person in question hand the weapon over and them he walks out of the store with the weapon on his possession AND hopefully have ALL of that on video

Otherwise "I just decided to sell it" and "I did't know " works JUST FINE

I like Movie references when i can use them to quote Daniel Caffey as played by Tom Cruise in "A Few Good Men"

Don't tell me the law, I KNOW the law

He already had weapons taken in the past. And like I said, we still need to wait on all the facts to come out to see what really happend. Why were they taken? I don't know. We'll have to wait and see. I'll assume it was probably over some kind of threat. Which would get you barred with that in your record I any capacity.

You changed up your wording on the straw purchase thing. Btw "with the ar i bought him" that implies you bought it knowing and intending to sell / give it to him. That is the textbook definition of a straw purchase, my guy. The wording matters too. Because when they run that serial number, and it comes back you owned it, and they go back through the records of your phone, or even like you said the gun shop cameras and that pops up, youd be screwd.

 

[phonehome]

He already had weapons taken in the past. And like I said, we still need to wait on all the facts to come out to see what really happend. Why were they taken? I don't know. We'll have to wait and see. I'll assume it was probably over some kind of threat. Which would get you barred with that in your record I any capacity.

You changed up your wording on the straw purchase thing. Btw "with the ar i bought him" that implies you bought it knowing and intending to sell / give it to him. That is the textbook definition of a straw purchase, my guy. The wording matters too. Because when they run that serial number, and it comes back you owned it, and they go back through the records of your phone, or even like you said the gun shop cameras and that pops up, youd be screwd.

Well actually it was WEAPON as in ONE a shotgun

So far what we know it was "at the request of his mom" Ie she "thought he should not have it" Why ? at this point we do NOT know . If you want to leap to the conclusion it was as a result of making some kind of "threat" fine I think it could be any number of other things and could just as easily have been one of those quasi "voluntary" things like I described, Basically "hey your mom is concerned, we are concerned so how about you let us have that shotgun and we will call it a day?"

You keep glossing over the fact In the case of red flag seizure it is almost NEVER that a judge rules that the individual in question is or has been found to be mentally defective or deficient or is danger to himself or others.

THAT is THE SPECIFIC FINDING that NEEDS TO HAPPEN for "something" to get "in your records" that "would get you barred"

If that does NOT happen and it pretty much NEVER DOES then the person in question can still pass a background check and buy anything he wants as often as he wants and as much as he wants.

That is THE LAW

Now on to the great Straw purchase debate Yes you are correct I should have described it as "the AR I purchased and then decided to sell to him" Which if/when I were ever questioned by a US Attorney or and Law Enforcement entity is the EXACT verbage I or any half way intelligent straw buyer would use.

Even though everyone knows what is really going on here, which lead to the "short hand description"

As the US Attorney you are required to PROVE that before I ever entered that gun shop I from the start always intended to sell that AR to that private sale buyer.

How do you intend to do that ?

Get the guy who just shot and killed how ever many people to testify against me?

He is the guy who is the convicted felon who could not legally buy that AR just shot and killed x number of people with it , what ever was said it is his word against mine and I have never even been as much as arrested

Yes you are correct the serial number stops at me as it would in any other "totally legal" FFL sale

You assume that I would be STUPID ENOUGH to call or text or otherwise leave an electronic trail that would connect me with this guy,

I would NOT BE

OR if I am in the habit of doing this I would be SMART ENOUGH to have "burner phone" that I bought at 7-11 and paid for in CASH , bought it months ago so long ago that taped has been taped over probably twice by now, one I burned in a bag of Match Light charcoal and then THREW AWAY the ashes as soon as I heard what that guy did. So good luck with that

I thought I made it clear that I would NEVER be stupid enough to let that guy be anywhere near that gun shop in question to ensure that we are NEVER seen on any kind of camera together, ATM , Traffic cam ,what ever and I sure as hell would NEVER be stupid enough to let the guy be standing next to me in the gun shop while I am making the purchase so whether it is on the stores video or not or it is just the testimony of the salesperson all you have is me buying an AR-15 which is totally legal for ME to do and paying for it in cash which is also totally legal and then by my own admission after an unspecified amount of time conducting/completing a private sale, exactly when you can NOT prove, what I asked or did not ask and as result then knew or did NOT know you also can NOT prove which means that you got squat and I am NOT screwed and because you have got squat that makes that private sale totally legal, legal in the sense that you will NEVER get a conviction which equals an acquittal which equals NOT GUILTY which most people conflate with BEING INNOCENT which is small leap from "He didn't do it" which in the end is all that matters

You know "theory" at the biggest of pictures level

I know all the nitty gritty little bothersome DETAILS , the ones defense attorneys ARE PAID TO KNOW

You say X is "against the law"

I say it is ONLY against the law when/ if you can manage to GET A CONVICTION and in each instance here is why you can"t get one

 

[6inchcock]

Lol talk your shit, fobbit. You might want to read that sentence again. Because "getting that smoked" doesn't make much sense, now does it? Please man. You said m1 "carbine clips" I dont think he had lose m1 carbine ammunition on stipper clips, with a charger up there and he loaded the mags as he heard the police coming. Also, to correct your screw up when you said "m1 garand uses stripper clips." It actually uses an enbloc clip that's housed in an intenral magazine. But ya, talk your shit. Im all ears, top.

FOBBIT, really bitch? Fuck you and the Walter Mitty fantasy you rolled in on. The clip comment was a straight pull from your wiki reference you duchebag and frankly your dumb POG ass is quoting some shit your drill sergeant said "smoked for saying clip" before they took a chapter action and put you out for smoking choad in the laundry room. Whats brass to the grass bitch? Thats something every crew served guy would know...unless he was a POG. Sorry POG in the Army I grew up in clip and magazine were damned near interchangeable. Run your little no CIB having ass along.

Also don't get technical with some bullshit like an Enbloc or a fucking .30 cal carbine magazine when neither of us are that old (and I am too fucking too old) to have carried one in the line of duty.

BTW I have been offline since about the end of March, and in that time how many more legal guns have killed people since then?

 

[phonehome]

FOBBIT, really bitch? Fuck you and the Walter Mitty fantasy you rolled in on. The clip comment was a straight pull from your wiki reference you duchebag and frankly your dumb POG ass is quoting some shit your drill sergeant said "smoked for saying clip" before they took a chapter action and put you out for smoking choad in the laundry room. Whats brass to the grass bitch? Thats something every crew served guy would know...unless he was a POG. Sorry POG in the Army I grew up in clip and magazine were damned near interchangeable. Run your little no CIB having ass along.

Also don't get technical with some bullshit like an Enbloc or a fucking .30 cal carbine magazine when neither of us are that old (and I am too fucking too old) to have carried one in the line of duty.

BTW I have been offline since about the end of March, and in that time how many more legal guns have killed people since then?

And how many times has there NOT been even ONE "Good Guy With a Gun" that guy that he implored us "not to be scared of, because he was just there to "protect us" " been there too save the day ?

How about each and every time

Never a trace

The "solution" that never shows up

Not at the Tavern in Kenosha

Not at the FEDEX facility in question

Not here

Not there

Not at the other place

 

[Utfbo5122]

FOBBIT, really bitch? Fuck you and the Walter Mitty fantasy you rolled in on. The clip comment was a straight pull from your wiki reference you duchebag and frankly your dumb POG ass is quoting some shit your drill sergeant said "smoked for saying clip" before they took a chapter action and put you out for smoking choad in the laundry room. Whats brass to the grass bitch? Thats something every crew served guy would know...unless he was a POG. Sorry POG in the Army I grew up in clip and magazine were damned near interchangeable. Run your little no CIB having ass along.

Also don't get technical with some bullshit like an Enbloc or a fucking .30 cal carbine magazine when neither of us are that old (and I am too fucking too old) to have carried one in the line of duty.

BTW I have been offline since about the end of March, and in that time how many more legal guns have killed people since then?

Brass to the grass is referring to belted ammunition and the way its oriented when being fed into belt fed weapons. The open side of the link faces the ground. Good enough answer? Or nah? In basic these days they'd still probably chapter you out for doing some chode smoking in the laundry room. Not so much in active duty these days. But you'd still catch a sharp case if someone saw.

I too wonder how many legal guns were used. As opposed to stolen, straw bought, or had the serial ground off and got sold off the record would be interesting to know.

 

[Utfbo5122]

And how many times has there NOT been even ONE "Good Guy With a Gun" that guy that he implored us "not to be scared of, because he was just there to "protect us" " been there too save the day ?

Because these shootings happen primarily in areas where guns are prohibited. But here are a few stories.

Walmart Shooter Commits Suicide After Concealed Carry Holder Approached Him

Texas Church Shooting: Concealed-Carry Law Prevented Mass Murder | National Review

FBI Report Highlights Effectiveness of Concealed Carry

Concealed Carry Instructor Who Stopped Mall Attack Gets Congressional Badge of Bravery – Concealed Nation



How about each and every time

Never a trace

The "solution" that never shows up

Not at the Tavern in Kenosha

Not at the FEDEX facility in question

Not here

Not there

Not at the other place

 

[ASexMrHung1]

They want gun control but then the people who can have guns are the police who they are also afraid of. Weird times man.

 

[Klingsor]

They want gun control but then the people who can have guns are the police who they are also afraid of. Weird times man.

You may not have noticed, but "they" also want police reform.

 

[ASexMrHung1]

You may not have noticed, but "they" also want police reform.

Only people that 'they' want to have guns should have guns*

"They" can try to take em, not gonna happen though

 

[Klingsor]

Only people that 'they' want to have guns should have guns*

"They" can try to take em, not gonna happen though

I know, cold dead fingers. I never understood that irrational fear, since this country is *so* far removed from any mass confiscation scenario. In any remotely plausible future, Americans will stay armed to the teeth.