Discussion:
FAKE NEWS: CBS Makes Up Bogus Term To Describe Ammo Used In Las Vegas Shooting
Add Reply
David Fritz
2017-10-08 07:37:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was used by the
Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the ammunition he used
“automatic rounds.”

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) confirmed to
the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as “automatic rounds,” which
contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF rules.

CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns Stephen
Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal under ATF rules.”

CBS News ?@CBSNews
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds,
they were perfectly legal under ATF rules http://cbsn.ws/2hL3NDZ
10:00 AM - Oct 4, 2017
2,303 2,303 Replies 155 155 Retweets 183 183 likes

“Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.

CBS later updated their report but they failed to mention their correction
anywhere in the article.

2nd Amendment advocates slammed the liberal network for their bogus
“automatic rounds” claim over social media:

Sebastian Gorka DrG ?@SebGorka
"automatic rounds??"

Yet again @CBSNews demonstrates they know nothing about the subject they
write on. https://twitter.com/cbsnews/status/915622557306548224 …
12:50 PM - Oct 4, 2017
255 255 Replies 1,542 1,542 Retweets 3,298 3,298 likes

Dana Loesch ?@DLoesch
TH is an “automatic round?”
https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/915622557306548224 …
2:33 PM - Oct 4, 2017
233 233 Replies 234 234 Retweets 961 961 likes

Brandon Darby ?@brandondarby
WTF is an “automatic round”?
https://twitter.com/cbsnews/status/915622557306548224 …
11:27 AM - Oct 4, 2017
20 20 Replies 38 38 Retweets 88 88 likes
"automatic rounds"
Calling for an immediate ban on checkmarks expressing opinions on guns
until they figure out what the hell is going on
https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/915622557306548224 …
11:30 AM - Oct 4, 2017
12 12 Replies 73 73 Retweets 266 266 likes

http://www.dailywire.com/news/21978/fake-news-cbs-makes-bogus-term-
describe-ammo-used-ryan-saavedra
PIBB
2017-10-08 11:09:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?

The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
!Jones
2017-10-08 13:13:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
x-no-idiots: yes

On Sun, 08 Oct 2017 12:09:31 +0100, in talk.politics.guns PIBB
Post by PIBB
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
Oh, these people love to pettifog about trivial matters of
terminology. What the writer obviously meant was that the ammunition
was rimless <YAWN>.

The point is that one shooter killed something like 60 people and
wounded 500 more or so in a period of five to seven minutes. If it
were one isolated incident, it certainly wouldn't be acceptable;
however, the only thing unusual about it was that a single shooter was
able to achieve a firing position from which he could do great damage.
Otherwise, it was just another day at the office (heck, on an average
day in the US, we *usually* kill that many and half again more) ...
but, let's don't talk about *that*; let's argue about what to call the
bullets.

Jones

--
How's my posting?

Direct Complaints to the Usenet Abuse Hotline:
Please Dial: 1-800-328-7448
Sgt. Rock
2017-10-08 14:50:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by !Jones
The point is that one shooter killed something like 60 people
Yes he did, now FUCK OFF with our gun rights, you TRAITOR!
Sgt. Rock
2017-10-08 14:51:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by !Jones
let's argue about what to call the
bullets.
Jones
Let's have someone engrave your NAME on them next time, traitor!
RD Sandman
2017-10-08 15:35:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by !Jones
x-no-idiots: yes
On Sun, 08 Oct 2017 12:09:31 +0100, in talk.politics.guns PIBB
Post by PIBB
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
Oh, these people love to pettifog about trivial matters of
terminology. What the writer obviously meant was that the ammunition
was rimless <YAWN>.
The point is that one shooter killed something like 60 people and
wounded 500 more or so in a period of five to seven minutes. If it
were one isolated incident, it certainly wouldn't be acceptable;
however, the only thing unusual about it was that a single shooter was
able to achieve a firing position from which he could do great damage.
Otherwise, it was just another day at the office (heck, on an average
day in the US, we *usually* kill that many and half again more) ...
Bullshit. You have to include suicides to get anywhere near that number
and suicides involve willing participants. Approximately 60% of the
deaths by firearm are suicides.
Post by !Jones
but, let's don't talk about *that*; let's argue about what to call the
bullets.
Jones
--
How's my posting?
Please Dial: 1-800-328-7448
--
RD The Sandman

If you see a munitions guy running, do try to
keep up with him.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
!Jones
2017-10-08 17:42:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
x-no-idiots: yes

On Sun, 08 Oct 2017 10:35:32 -0500, in talk.politics.guns RD Sandman
Post by RD Sandman
Bullshit. You have to include suicides to get anywhere near that number
and suicides involve willing participants. Approximately 60% of the
deaths by firearm are suicides.
Approximately 60% of the firearm deaths are self-inflicted; it is
incomprehensible to me how you say that these don't count. As
Kellerman's work showed: if your weapon kills someone, that "someone"
will probably be *you*!

Neither you nor anyone else has a clue how many of the self-inflicted
gunshot wounds are suicides and how many are the result of simple
incompetence and/or carelessness; either way, it's a GSW death and
counts.

My statement stands.

Jones

--
How's my posting?

Direct Complaints to the Usenet Abuse Hotline:
Please Dial: 1-800-328-7448
Sgt. Rock
2017-10-08 17:49:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by !Jones
Neither you nor anyone else has a clue how many of the self-inflicted
gunshot wounds are suicides
As long as YOU become one, we do not care!
RichA
2017-10-08 21:55:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by !Jones
x-no-idiots: yes
On Sun, 08 Oct 2017 10:35:32 -0500, in talk.politics.guns RD Sandman
Post by RD Sandman
Bullshit. You have to include suicides to get anywhere near that number
and suicides involve willing participants. Approximately 60% of the
deaths by firearm are suicides.
Approximately 60% of the firearm deaths are self-inflicted; it is
incomprehensible to me how you say that these don't count. As
Kellerman's work showed: if your weapon kills someone, that "someone"
will probably be *you*!
Neither you nor anyone else has a clue how many of the self-inflicted
gunshot wounds are suicides and how many are the result of simple
incompetence and/or carelessness; either way, it's a GSW death and
counts.
My statement stands.
Jones
--
How's my posting?
Please Dial: 1-800-328-7448
Democrats are more comfortable dolling out billions of oxy pain-pills as suicide (voluntary or otherwise) mechanisms.

Loading Image...
BTR1701
2017-10-08 15:02:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
No, CBS is clearly describing the ammunition, not the gun, and saying the
ammunition was legal under ATF regs.

They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
trotsky
2017-10-08 17:41:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
No, CBS is clearly describing the ammunition, not the gun, and saying the
ammunition was legal under ATF regs.
They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
So true. Who wouldn't want to be more knowledgeable like the right wing
guys committing the mass killings?
Sgt. Rock
2017-10-08 17:48:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
the right wing guys committing the mass killings?
Paddock was a Dem Jew, you LIAR!
max headroom
2017-10-08 18:38:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by trotsky
Post by BTR1701
They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
So true. Who wouldn't want to be more knowledgeable like the right wing
guys committing the mass killings?
Who? A pinkie who revels in his ignorance.
FPP
2017-10-08 21:49:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
No, CBS is clearly describing the ammunition, not the gun, and saying the
ammunition was legal under ATF regs.
They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
So true.  Who wouldn't want to be more knowledgeable like the right wing
guys committing the mass killings?
Yup. All we need to do now is correct the report, and those 500 people
who were shot will get up and walk out of the hospital, and maybe even
claw their way out of their graves.

Problem solved! We've done it again!
We're No. 1!
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
trotsky
2017-10-08 22:10:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
No, CBS is clearly describing the ammunition, not the gun, and saying the
ammunition was legal under ATF regs.
They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
So true.  Who wouldn't want to be more knowledgeable like the right
wing guys committing the mass killings?
Yup.  All we need to do now is correct the report, and those 500 people
who were shot will get up and walk out of the hospital, and maybe even
claw their way out of their graves.
Problem solved!  We've done it again!
We're No. 1!
The problem with the folks on the right is they're not worried about a
bullet to the head because there's no brain activity to cease.
FPP
2017-10-08 21:48:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
No, CBS is clearly describing the ammunition, not the gun, and saying the
ammunition was legal under ATF regs.
They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
Another bullshit semantic argument to avoid talking about the real problem.

Yes, by all means, focus on a misunderstanding in the report and ignore
the 500 lb gorilla with the AK.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
BTR1701
2017-10-08 22:11:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
No, CBS is clearly describing the ammunition, not the gun, and saying the
ammunition was legal under ATF regs.
They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
Another bullshit semantic argument to avoid talking about the real problem.
Yes, by all means, focus on a misunderstanding in the report and ignore
the 500 lb gorilla with the AK.
I didn't see any AKs in those crime scene photos.
FPP
2017-10-08 22:24:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be converted
to fire automatically.
No, CBS is clearly describing the ammunition, not the gun, and saying the
ammunition was legal under ATF regs.
They're completely full of shit. How hard would it be for these effete
liberals who clearly know nothing about this subject to hire a firearms
expert to vet their stupidity when they need to report on it?
Another bullshit semantic argument to avoid talking about the real problem.
Yes, by all means, focus on a misunderstanding in the report and ignore
the 500 lb gorilla with the AK.
I didn't see any AKs in those crime scene photos.
Really? Look closer?=
Maybe CNN will animate one for you.

You did see the gorilla, though, right?
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
RD Sandman
2017-10-08 15:30:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling
the
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds,
they
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired
automatic
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be
converted
Post by PIBB
to fire automatically.
No, if that occurred then the gun would come under the firearms
acts of 1934 and 1986. All a bumpstock does is allow the
shooter to hold his trigger finger stiff and let the gun's
recoil actuate the trigger for the next rounds.
--
RD The Sandman

If you see a munitions guy running, do try to
keep up with him.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 00:27:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by PIBB
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was
used by the Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling
the ammunition he used “automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
confirmed to the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as
“automatic rounds,” which contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF
rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns
Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds,
they were perfectly legal under ATF rules.”
While the guns Stephen Paddock used in Las Vegas fired
automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal under ATF rules
Isn't the report saying the rounds were fired automatically?
The point it makes is that the guns were legal but could be
converted to fire automatically.
No, if that occurred then the gun would come under the firearms
acts of 1934 and 1986. All a bumpstock does is allow the
shooter to hold his trigger finger stiff and let the gun's
recoil actuate the trigger for the next rounds.
That's still not quite accurate. The recoil causes the gun to
move back and forward, "bumping" against the shooter's finger.
It's still the finger that actuates the trigger.
FPP
2017-10-08 12:32:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
RD Sandman
2017-10-08 15:36:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
--
RD The Sandman

If you see a munitions guy running, do try to
keep up with him.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
moviePig
2017-10-08 15:51:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
In an ideal society, how much personal destructive power should be
available to the common individual? If not 'zero', then Las Vegas-like
events can be seen as the occasional cost of doing business.
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
t***@gmail.com
2017-10-08 16:06:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
I'd Tell You, but Then I'd Have to Kill this post later, and you don't really want to know anyway, but here is a clue: Nemesis

https://www.google.com/search?q=Chalmers+Johnson+Nemesis&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS712US712&oq=Chalmers+Johnson+Nemesis


Yeah, I know, makes no sense, it's not logical or rational, but I assure you, if Paddock's motivation involves rage against US foreign policy, you will never hear about it on the MSM.



-------------

"the chickens have come home to roost"

Gawd Blesh Uh-merka!
FPP
2017-10-08 21:51:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.

Seems like common sense.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
BTR1701
2017-10-08 22:11:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?

And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
FPP
2017-10-08 22:27:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
Then you do what any other investigator would do. Be suspicious.

The same way any decent LEO would look at a purchase of 2 tons of
fertilizer and a hundred barrels of fuel oil and ask the next logical
question.

Use those finely honed cop instincts and ask yourself a simple
question... "What the fuck does anybody want with that kind of firepower?"

Last time I checked, the Constitution doesn't prohibit common sense.
And THAT is why you're a moron.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
BTR1701
2017-10-08 22:38:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then you do what any other investigator would do. Be suspicious.
And then what?
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
FPP
2017-10-08 23:41:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then you do what any other investigator would do. Be suspicious.
And then what?
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
And you pretend to have law enforcement experience?
You tell *me*, Inspector Clouseau?

Had they investigated him, don't you think the explosive materials would
have rung a bell, Quasimodo?
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
BTR1701
2017-10-09 00:18:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then you do what any other investigator would do. Be suspicious.
And then what?
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
And you pretend to have law enforcement experience?
You tell *me*, Inspector Clouseau?
Had they investigated him, don't you think the explosive materials would
have rung a bell, Quasimodo?
All he had was Tannerite, which is extremely common. I know seven people
off the top of my head who have Tannerite and some of them also own guns.

Oh, noes!

And since Tannerite is *also* legal to buy and possess, I ask again, then
what?
FPP
2017-10-09 07:02:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then you do what any other investigator would do. Be suspicious.
And then what?
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
And you pretend to have law enforcement experience?
You tell *me*, Inspector Clouseau?
Had they investigated him, don't you think the explosive materials would
have rung a bell, Quasimodo?
All he had was Tannerite, which is extremely common. I know seven people
off the top of my head who have Tannerite and some of them also own guns.
Oh, noes!
And since Tannerite is *also* legal to buy and possess, I ask again, then
what?
Then what? You pretend to be affiliated with law enforcement.
That's a pretty stupid question. You ASK him.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 08:40:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Had they investigated him, don't you think the explosive
materials would have rung a bell, Quasimodo?
All he had was Tannerite, which is extremely common.
I know seven people off the top of my head who have
Tannerite and some of them also own guns.
And since Tannerite is *also* legal to buy and possess,
I ask again, then what?
Then what?  You ASK him.
Cop: Do you have any Tannerite?
Guy: None of your damn business. Bugger off.
[Conversation ends.]
FPP
2017-10-08 23:42:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then you do what any other investigator would do. Be suspicious.
And then what?
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
FPP
2017-10-08 23:49:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then you do what any other investigator would do.  Be suspicious.
And then what?
Post by BTR1701
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Funny... Amazon can show me everything I've ever bought from then, and when.
Walmart knows what pants size I wear.

You have been outside in the last 15 years, right?
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 01:39:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then you do what any other investigator would do.  Be suspicious.
And then what?
Post by BTR1701
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Funny... Amazon can show me everything I've ever bought from
then, and when. Walmart knows what pants size I wear.
Your local sheriff doesn't know. The FBI doesn't know.
And there is way for ANYONE to know how much or how many
of ANYTHING that you've bought
BTR1701
2017-10-09 00:18:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
I can walk into a gun store (or Walmart) right now and buy a few boxes of
ammo, slap down a couple of Tubmans, and walk out and neither that store
nor anyone else will have a record of how much ammo I bought. All they'll
have is a record of an ammo sale. Not to whom it was sold or how much that
person has bought from other stores around the country or from friends and
relatives.
A cop pulls over a car for a broken tail light and hears banging coming
from the trunk.
Does he walk away, or take "None of your business" for an answer?
Are you making the argument that making a perfectly legal firearm purchase,
after having passed all government-mandated background checks, gives rise
to the same probable cause and exigent circumstances that not only provide
law enforcement legal basis to secure a warrant to search private property,
but can even supersede the warrant requirement itself?

'Cause if that's not what you're arguing, your analogy is full of shit.
FPP
2017-10-09 06:58:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
I can walk into a gun store (or Walmart) right now and buy a few boxes of
ammo, slap down a couple of Tubmans, and walk out and neither that store
nor anyone else will have a record of how much ammo I bought. All they'll
have is a record of an ammo sale. Not to whom it was sold or how much that
person has bought from other stores around the country or from friends and
relatives.
A cop pulls over a car for a broken tail light and hears banging coming
from the trunk.
Does he walk away, or take "None of your business" for an answer?
Are you making the argument that making a perfectly legal firearm purchase,
after having passed all government-mandated background checks, gives rise
to the same probable cause and exigent circumstances that not only provide
law enforcement legal basis to secure a warrant to search private property,
but can even supersede the warrant requirement itself?
'Cause if that's not what you're arguing, your analogy is full of shit.
Every time I've bought ammo in Mass, they've required a photo ID.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 08:31:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
I can walk into a gun store (or Walmart) right now and buy a few boxes of
ammo, slap down a couple of Tubmans, and walk out and neither that store
nor anyone else will have a record of how much ammo I bought. All they'll
have is a record of an ammo sale. Not to whom it was sold or how much
that person has bought from other stores around the country or from friends
and relatives.
A cop pulls over a car for a broken tail light and hears banging coming
from the trunk.
Does he walk away, or take "None of your business" for an answer?
Are you making the argument that making a perfectly legal firearm purchase,
after having passed all government-mandated background checks, gives rise
to the same probable cause and exigent circumstances that not only
provide law enforcement legal basis to secure a warrant to search private
property, but can even supersede the warrant requirement itself?
'Cause if that's not what you're arguing, your analogy is full of shit.
Every time I've bought ammo in Mass, they've required a photo ID.
Why would any free citizen put up with that kind of bullshit?
More to the point of this thread, does the seller record your sale and
pass the information on to law enforcement? And even if he does, so
what? It's legal for you to own a million rounds, if that's what you want.
FPP
2017-10-09 09:43:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Just Wondering
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
I can walk into a gun store (or Walmart) right now and buy a few boxes of
ammo, slap down a couple of Tubmans, and walk out and neither that store
nor anyone else will have a record of how much ammo I bought. All they'll
have is a record of an ammo sale. Not to whom it was sold or how much
that person has bought from other stores around the country or from
friends and relatives.
A cop pulls over a car for a broken tail light and hears banging coming
from the trunk.
Does he walk away, or take "None of your business" for an answer?
Are you making the argument that making a perfectly legal firearm purchase,
after having passed all government-mandated background checks, gives rise
to the same probable cause and exigent circumstances that not only
provide law enforcement legal basis to secure a warrant to search
private property, but can even supersede the warrant requirement itself?
'Cause if that's not what you're arguing, your analogy is full of shit.
Every time I've bought ammo in Mass, they've required a photo ID.
Why would any free citizen put up with that kind of bullshit?
More to the point of this thread, does the seller record your sale and
pass the information on to law enforcement?  And even if he does, so
what?  It's legal for you to own a million rounds, if that's what you want.
Troll.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
FPP
2017-10-09 07:00:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or month
or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
I can walk into a gun store (or Walmart) right now and buy a few boxes of
ammo, slap down a couple of Tubmans, and walk out and neither that store
nor anyone else will have a record of how much ammo I bought. All they'll
have is a record of an ammo sale. Not to whom it was sold or how much that
person has bought from other stores around the country or from friends and
relatives.
A cop pulls over a car for a broken tail light and hears banging coming
from the trunk.
Does he walk away, or take "None of your business" for an answer?
Are you making the argument that making a perfectly legal firearm purchase,
after having passed all government-mandated background checks, gives rise
to the same probable cause and exigent circumstances that not only provide
law enforcement legal basis to secure a warrant to search private property,
but can even supersede the warrant requirement itself?
'Cause if that's not what you're arguing, your analogy is full of shit.
I'm making an argument that a cop can act on a valid suspicion. Buying
mass quantities of firearms or ammo in a short period of time is at
least worth a question.

Thinking otherwise is why we're the only nation in the developed world
to have this level of shooting deaths.

So why is the US so "unique"?
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 08:36:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
I can walk into a gun store (or Walmart) right now and buy a few boxes of
ammo, slap down a couple of Tubmans, and walk out and neither that store
nor anyone else will have a record of how much ammo I bought. All they'll
have is a record of an ammo sale. Not to whom it was sold or how much
that person has bought from other stores around the country or from friends
and relatives.
A cop pulls over a car for a broken tail light and hears banging coming
from the trunk.
Does he walk away, or take "None of your business" for an answer?
Are you making the argument that making a perfectly legal firearm
purchase, after having passed all government-mandated background checks, gives rise
to the same probable cause and exigent circumstances that not only
provide law enforcement legal basis to secure a warrant to search private
property, but can even supersede the warrant requirement itself?
'Cause if that's not what you're arguing, your analogy is full of shit.
I'm making an argument that a cop can act on a valid suspicion.
Act how? Valid suspicion of what, performing a perfectly legal act?
Cop: I've heard you bought ten thousand rounds
of ammo. Explain yourself.
Guy: It's none of your damn business. Get lost.
[Conversation ends.]
FPP
2017-10-09 09:44:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records? The same way we quantify everything else.
I can walk into a gun store (or Walmart) right now and buy a few boxes of
ammo, slap down a couple of Tubmans, and walk out and neither that store
nor anyone else will have a record of how much ammo I bought. All they'll
have is a record of an ammo sale. Not to whom it was sold or how much
that person has bought from other stores around the country or from
friends and relatives.
A cop pulls over a car for a broken tail light and hears banging coming
from the trunk.
Does he walk away, or take "None of your business" for an answer?
Are you making the argument that making a perfectly legal firearm
purchase, after having passed all government-mandated background checks, gives rise
to the same probable cause and exigent circumstances that not only
provide law enforcement legal basis to secure a warrant to search
private property, but can even supersede the warrant requirement itself?
'Cause if that's not what you're arguing, your analogy is full of shit.
I'm making an argument that a cop can act on a valid suspicion.
Act how?  Valid suspicion of what, performing a perfectly legal act?
   Cop:  I've heard you bought ten thousand rounds
         of ammo.  Explain yourself.
   Guy:  It's none of your damn business.  Get lost.
         [Conversation ends.]
Troll. Nice try.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 01:36:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or
month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records?  The same way we quantify everything else.
That would be to say, not at all, because we DON'T quantify everything
else. Where are the records that show how much gasoline you, or anyone
else, bought in the last six months? Or how much toilet paper or cough
syrup, or how many baseball hats and hoodies, or steak and chef knives?
Is there ANYTHING that is quantified the way you suggest ammo purchases
should be quantified?
FPP
2017-10-09 07:03:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Just Wondering
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records?  The same way we quantify everything else.
That would be to say, not at all, because we DON'T quantify everything
else.  Where are the records that show how much gasoline you, or anyone
else, bought in the last six months?  Or how much toilet paper or cough
syrup, or how many baseball hats and hoodies, or steak and chef knives?
Is there ANYTHING that is quantified the way you suggest ammo purchases
should be quantified?
I don't know about you... but I call them "receipts". Everyone gives me
one when I buy something.

What do you do? Barter?
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 08:51:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by Just Wondering
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records?  The same way we quantify everything else.
That would be to say, not at all, because we DON'T quantify everything
else.  Where are the records that show how much gasoline you, or
anyone else, bought in the last six months?  Or how much toilet paper
or cough syrup, or how many baseball hats and hoodies, or steak and
chef knives? Is there ANYTHING that is quantified the way you suggest
ammo purchases should be quantified?
I don't know about you... but I call them "receipts".
Everyone gives me one when I buy something.
What do you do?  Barter?
You go to a small neighborhood grocery store and buy a gallon
of milk, a pack of toilet paper and a loaf of bread. The total
comes to $6.92. You hand the cashier a $20 bill, she gives you
$13.08 change and a receipt. The cash register isn't a newfangled
electronic marvel, so the receipt only shows amounts, not what was
purchased. Since you paid cash, nobody sees your ID. Now, tell us
all about how that receipt will let the government track how much
toilet paper you buy in six months.

Do you even think your ideas through before posting bullshit like that?
There is no possible way for the government to know how much
of anything that anyone's bought in the last six months.
Government doesn't even have access to your precious receipts,
and even if it did, those receipts wouldn't show what you want
Big Brother to know about anyone.
FPP
2017-10-09 09:44:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Just Wondering
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week
or month or year?
No answer here. Apparently FPP hasn't thought this through.
Records?  The same way we quantify everything else.
That would be to say, not at all, because we DON'T quantify
everything else.  Where are the records that show how much gasoline
you, or anyone else, bought in the last six months?  Or how much
toilet paper or cough syrup, or how many baseball hats and hoodies,
or steak and chef knives? Is there ANYTHING that is quantified the
way you suggest ammo purchases should be quantified?
I don't know about you... but I call them "receipts". Everyone gives
me one when I buy something.
What do you do?  Barter?
You go to a small neighborhood grocery store and buy a gallon
of milk, a pack of toilet paper and a loaf of bread.  The total
comes to $6.92.  You hand the cashier a $20 bill, she gives you
$13.08 change and a receipt.  The cash register isn't a newfangled
electronic marvel, so the receipt only shows amounts, not what was
purchased.  Since you paid cash, nobody sees your ID.  Now, tell us
all about how that receipt will let the government track how much
toilet paper you buy in six months.
Do you even think your ideas through before posting bullshit like that?
There is no possible way for the government to know how much
of anything that anyone's bought in the last six months.
Government doesn't even have access to your precious receipts,
and even if it did, those receipts wouldn't show what you want
Big Brother to know about anyone.
Nice attempt, troll. Not biting.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 01:12:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or
month or year?
Then you do what any other investigator would do.  Be suspicious.
The same way any decent LEO would look at a purchase of 2 tons of
fertilizer and a hundred barrels of fuel oil and ask the next logical
question.
Use those finely honed cop instincts and ask yourself a simple
question... "What does anybody want with that kind of firepower?"
Bullshit, the two aren't even roughly comparable. Why would anyone want
10,000 rounds of ammo? Maybe because he's a competition shooter and
goes through 10,000 rounds every month just in the normal course of
competition and practice. Or maybe because he got a good deal on it.
Or maybe because he recalls an ammo shortage a few years back and wants
to stock up in case another shortage happens. Or maybe he's preparing
for the Zombie Apocalypse. Or maybe just because, no particular reason
other than he just wants it.

I'd guess that 10% of the entire U.S. population owns at least 10,000
rounds of ammo. It really, truly is no big deal. The fact is, if
someone intends to use a gun to do bad things, 500 rounds is going to be
plenty. Nearly every gun owner owns at least that much ammo. If that's
your concern, your LEO is going to have to be suspicious of every gun
owner out there.
Last time I checked, the Constitution doesn't prohibit
common sense. And THAT is why you're a moron.
The Constitution does not grant common sense.
You're an obvious example.
Ed Stasiak
2017-10-09 03:19:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Just Wondering
Post by FPP
FPP
Last time I checked, the Constitution doesn't prohibit
common sense. And THAT is why you're a moron.
The Constitution does not grant common sense.
You're an obvious example.
lol
FPP
2017-10-09 07:05:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or
month or year?
Then you do what any other investigator would do.  Be suspicious.
The same way any decent LEO would look at a purchase of 2 tons of
fertilizer and a hundred barrels of fuel oil and ask the next logical
question.
Use those finely honed cop instincts and ask yourself a simple
question... "What does anybody want with that kind of firepower?"
Bullshit, the two aren't even roughly comparable.  Why would anyone want
10,000 rounds of ammo?  Maybe because he's a competition shooter and
goes through 10,000 rounds every month just in the normal course of
competition and practice.  Or maybe because he got a good deal on it. Or
maybe because he recalls an ammo shortage a few years back and wants to
stock up in case another shortage happens.  Or maybe he's preparing for
the Zombie Apocalypse.  Or maybe just because, no particular reason
other than he just wants it.
He wasn't a competition shooter.
I'd guess that 10% of the entire U.S. population owns at least 10,000
rounds of ammo.  It really, truly is no big deal.  The fact is, if
someone intends to use a gun to do bad things, 500 rounds is going to be
plenty.  Nearly every gun owner owns at least that much ammo.  If that's
your concern, your LEO is going to have to be suspicious of every gun
owner out there.
Last time I checked, the Constitution doesn't prohibit common sense.
And THAT is why you're a moron.
The Constitution does not grant common sense.
You're an obvious example.
The Constitution doesn't outlaw morons, either. Lucky for you.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 08:22:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that
if someone buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo,
somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
And how would the government know how many rounds of ammo someone has
bought? And would this be over their entire lifetime? Or per week or
month or year?
Then you do what any other investigator would do.  Be suspicious.
The same way any decent LEO would look at a purchase of 2 tons of
fertilizer and a hundred barrels of fuel oil and ask the next logical
question.
Use those finely honed cop instincts and ask yourself a simple
question... "What does anybody want with that kind of firepower?"
Bullshit, the two aren't even roughly comparable.  Why would anyone
want 10,000 rounds of ammo?  Maybe because he's a competition shooter
and goes through 10,000 rounds every month just in the normal course
of competition and practice.  Or maybe because he got a good deal on
it. Or maybe because he recalls an ammo shortage a few years back and
wants to stock up in case another shortage happens.  Or maybe he's
preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse.  Or maybe just because, no
particular reason other than he just wants it.
He wasn't a competition shooter.
You made up a general scenario about why ANYONE would want 10,000 rounds
of ammo. I gave you some reasons.
Post by FPP
I'd guess that 10% of the entire U.S. population owns at least 10,000
rounds of ammo.  It really, truly is no big deal.  The fact is, if
someone intends to use a gun to do bad things, 500 rounds is going to
be plenty.  Nearly every gun owner owns at least that much ammo.  If
that's your concern, your LEO is going to have to be suspicious of
every gun owner out there.
I note that you had no response to those observations.
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
2017-10-08 23:02:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
No sale.
FPP
2017-10-08 23:43:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
FPP
2017-10-08 23:51:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
BTR1701
2017-10-09 00:18:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
Presumably the person asking this question is a law enforcement officer,
and at that point the smart answer is to hand him a business card with a
lawyer's contact info, and then shut the door in his/her face.
FPP
2017-10-09 07:06:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
Presumably the person asking this question is a law enforcement officer,
and at that point the smart answer is to hand him a business card with a
lawyer's contact info, and then shut the door in his/her face.
I'm not interested in "the smart answer". I'm interested in keeping
maniacs from killing me and my family.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 08:57:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
Presumably the person asking this question is a law enforcement officer,
and at that point the smart answer is to hand him a business card with a
lawyer's contact info, and then shut the door in his/her face.
I'm not interested in "the smart answer".
That may explain why you don't propose any smart answer.
I'm interested in keeping maniacs from killing me and my family.
Then buy a gun, get a CCW permit, and learn how to use it.
Either that, or hire a bevy of bodyguards. Or move to where
the odds of running int a maniac are smaller. 'Cause you're not going
to save your family by getting laws passed, or by relying on a cop's
"suspicions".
FPP
2017-10-09 09:44:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Just Wondering
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
Presumably the person asking this question is a law enforcement officer,
and at that point the smart answer is to hand him a business card with a
lawyer's contact info, and then shut the door in his/her face.
I'm not interested in "the smart answer". That may explain why you
don't propose any smart answer.
I'm interested in keeping maniacs from killing me and my family.
Then buy a gun, get a CCW permit, and learn how to use it.
Either that, or hire a bevy of bodyguards.  Or move to where
the odds of running int a maniac are smaller.  'Cause you're not going
to save your family by getting laws passed, or by relying on a cop's
"suspicions".
Not biting.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 01:45:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should
be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
FBI: Knock-knock.
GUY: Who's there?
FBI: The FBI.
GUY: What do you want?
FBI: Our records show you bought 10,000 rounds of ammo.
GUY: So what?
FBI: Why did you buy 10,000 rounds of ammo?
GUY: None of your business.
FBI: Well, it is now.
GUY: Where's your warrant based on probable cause?
FBI: Uh, uh ... [Stands there looking foolish without a warrant.]
GUY: That's what I thought. [Closes door, conversation is over.]
FPP
2017-10-09 07:07:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
    FBI:  Knock-knock.
    GUY:  Who's there?
    FBI:  The FBI.
    GUY:  What do you want?
    FBI:  Our records show you bought 10,000 rounds of ammo.
    GUY:  So what?
    FBI:  Why did you buy 10,000 rounds of ammo?
    GUY:  None of your business.
    FBI:  Well, it is now.
    GUY:  Where's your warrant based on probable cause?
    FBI:  Uh, uh ... [Stands there looking foolish without a warrant.]
    GUY:  That's what I thought.  [Closes door, conversation is over.]
You ought to write comedy. You're a joke, after all.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 08:24:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what
should be done tofix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
     FBI:  Knock-knock.
     GUY:  Who's there?
     FBI:  The FBI.
     GUY:  What do you want?
     FBI:  Our records show you bought 10,000 rounds of ammo.
     GUY:  So what?
     FBI:  Why did you buy 10,000 rounds of ammo?
     GUY:  None of your business.
     FBI:  Well, it is now.
     GUY:  Where's your warrant based on probable cause?
     FBI:  Uh, uh ... [Stands there looking foolish without a warrant.]
     GUY:  That's what I thought.  [Closes door, conversation is over.]
You ought to write comedy.  You're a joke, after all.
You think you're some kind of wit. You're half right.
FPP
2017-10-09 09:44:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what  should be done
tofix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone
buys 43 guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
Then the next sentence should be "Well, it is now."
     FBI:  Knock-knock.
     GUY:  Who's there?
     FBI:  The FBI.
     GUY:  What do you want?
     FBI:  Our records show you bought 10,000 rounds of ammo.
     GUY:  So what?
     FBI:  Why did you buy 10,000 rounds of ammo?
     GUY:  None of your business.
     FBI:  Well, it is now.
     GUY:  Where's your warrant based on probable cause?
     FBI:  Uh, uh ... [Stands there looking foolish without a warrant.]
     GUY:  That's what I thought.  [Closes door, conversation is over.]
You ought to write comedy.  You're a joke, after all.
You think you're some kind of wit.  You're half right.
Not biting.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
BTR1701
2017-10-09 00:18:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anonymous Remailer (austria)
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks, and set a flag so that if someone buys 43
guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
And when the answer is "None of your business", then what?
No sale.
And when the answer is "Because I feel like it and I can afford it and it's
perfectly legal", then what?
FPP
2017-10-09 07:08:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 09:01:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Then your answer is to wait until he murders a few dozen
people... and THEN ask him questions.
Which is what we've been doing.  How is that working out?
Minority Report was a science fiction movie. The uncomfortable
fact is that there are evil people in the world, and if they
decide to do evil stuff there's nothing anybody can do in
advance that will prevent it.
FPP
2017-10-09 09:45:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Just Wondering
Then your answer is to wait until he murders a few dozen people... and
THEN ask him questions.
Which is what we've been doing.  How is that working out?
Minority Report was a science fiction movie. The uncomfortable
fact is that there are evil people in the world, and if they
decide to do evil stuff there's nothing anybody can do in
advance that will prevent it.
Not just trolling... but stupid trolling.
Not biting.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 01:01:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by RD Sandman
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal, according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely
stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
What exactly do YOU see as the problem and what
should be done to fix it?
Start with background checks
We already HAVE background checks. Paddock underwent background
checks, and passed them. I challenge you to come up with a rational
background check that Paddock would not have passed. But you won't,
because you can't.
Post by FPP
and set a flag so that if someone buys 43 guns
A background check doesn't tell if someone buys a gun. You're
not advocating background checks, you're pushing for gun
registration, which most gun owners regard as a big step
toward gun confiscation. They won't put up with it even
if you pass a law. This isn't just a guess, it's already happened.
https://www.teaparty.org/citizens-revolt-refuse-register-guns-36938/
We even have law enforcement officers refusing to enforce strict
gun laws.
http://gunwars.news21.com/2014/some-sheriffs-protest-gun-restrictions-others-refuse-to-enforce-laws/

Besides, Paddock could have carried out his plan with only two
guns anyway. There are probably 60 million or more people who
own at least two guns. What are you going to do, put a third
of the adult population, all law-abiding citizens, under
surveillance? Where's your constitutional authority for such
a sweeping invasion of privacy? Where are you going to find
the manpower an money to do it? What makes you think the people
will put up with it?
Post by FPP
and 10,000 rounds of ammo, somebody will ask him why.
There is no background check for ammo purchases. Again, you're
advocating something else entirely. Even if you put a 1,000 round
limit on ammo OWNERSHIP (which there would be no way to enforce),
that would have been enough for Paddock to carry out his plan.
I'd wager that 95% of gun owners have at least 1,000 rounds of ammo.
A lot of target shooters go through more than that every month.
They might buy 10,000 rounds in six months and never have more
than 1,000 rounds at any one time. But suppose you had some method
to actually tell when someone's ammunition inventory reaches 10,000
rounds. What do you do, send an FBI agent knocking at his door?
Without probable cause the conversation would be something like this:
FBI: Knock-knock.
GUY: Who's there?
FBI: The FBI.
GUY: What do you want?
FBI: Our records show you bought 10,000 rounds of ammo.
GUY: So what?
FBI: Why did you buy 10,000 rounds of ammo?
GUY: None of your business. [Closes door, conversation is over.]
Seriously, the FBI has better things to do than waste its time
on such nonsense.
Post by FPP
Seems like common sense.
No it doesn't. Your ideas are not well thought out. They are
emotional knee-jerk responses to a tragedy. If they had already
been in place, they would not have stopped Paddock.
BTR1701
2017-10-09 01:27:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Start with background checks
We already HAVE background checks. Paddock underwent background
checks, and passed them. I challenge you to come up with a rational
background check that Paddock would not have passed. But you won't,
because you can't.
Post by FPP
and set a flag so that if someone buys 43 guns
A background check doesn't tell if someone buys a gun. You're
not advocating background checks, you're pushing for gun
registration, which most gun owners regard as a big step
toward gun confiscation. They won't put up with it even
if you pass a law. This isn't just a guess, it's already happened.
And let's face it, if "undocumented immigrants" in contravention of federal
law are not only okay, pols like Nancy Pelosi actually *praise* them for
violating the law, then I can't imagine why my "undocumented firearms"
would be a problem.

I mean, we can pick and choose which federal laws we want to obey, right?
https://www.teaparty.org/citizens-revolt-refuse-register-guns-36938/
We even have law enforcement officers refusing to enforce strict
gun laws.
Which again should be no problem. If local law enforcement can refuse to
enforce federal law when it comes to immigration, creating "sanctuary
cities" for illegal immigrants, then it should also be perfectly legitimate
for local law enforcement to refuse to enforce federal gun laws, creating
sanctuary cities for "undocumented firearm owners".
Lesmond
2017-10-09 05:01:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Start with background checks
We already HAVE background checks. Paddock underwent background
checks, and passed them. I challenge you to come up with a rational
background check that Paddock would not have passed. But you won't,
because you can't.
Post by FPP
and set a flag so that if someone buys 43 guns
A background check doesn't tell if someone buys a gun. You're
not advocating background checks, you're pushing for gun
registration, which most gun owners regard as a big step
toward gun confiscation. They won't put up with it even
if you pass a law. This isn't just a guess, it's already happened.
And let's face it, if "undocumented immigrants" in contravention of federal
law are not only okay, pols like Nancy Pelosi actually *praise* them for
violating the law, then I can't imagine why my "undocumented firearms"
would be a problem.
I mean, we can pick and choose which federal laws we want to obey, right?
Why can anyone buy a gun any time they want, but I can't buy lawn darts?
--
She may contain the urge to run away
But hold her down with soggy clothes and breeze blocks
RichA
2017-10-08 21:52:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
Democrats are the guilty ones. They talk specifics they have no understanding of instead of just harping on the vacuous "gun control" theme.
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 00:31:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
Go ahead, tell us what the problem is.
FPP
2017-10-09 07:11:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Just Wondering
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
Go ahead, tell us what the problem is.
Morons like you, for one.
The politicians working for the NRA for another.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 09:02:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by Just Wondering
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
Go ahead, tell us what the problem is.
Morons like you, for one.
The politicians working for the NRA for another.
Translation: You can't even identify the real problem,
much come up with a real solution.
FPP
2017-10-09 09:43:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by Just Wondering
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
Go ahead, tell us what the problem is.
Morons like you, for one.
The politicians working for the NRA for another.
Translation:  You can't even identify the real problem,
much come up with a real solution.
I told you what the problem was. The NRA and the gun manufacturers have
bought Congress.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
FPP
2017-10-09 07:12:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Just Wondering
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
Go ahead, tell us what the problem is.
You may have begun to understand that I'm not going to take anything you
say seriously.

I know who you are. You're not fooling anyone.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Just Wondering
2017-10-09 09:05:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by Just Wondering
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
Yet while the guns that Stephen Paddock used to shoot more than 500
people in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly legal,
according to rules established by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the CBS report falsely stated.
You clowns will talk about everything except the problem.
Go ahead, tell us what the problem is.
You may have begun to understand that I'm not going
to take anything you say seriously.
Why should I be different? It's obvious your brain is
incapable of entertaining ANY serious thought, such as
what the problem is.
FPP
2017-10-08 12:37:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was used by the
Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the ammunition he used
“automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) confirmed to
the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as “automatic rounds,” which
contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns Stephen
Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal under ATF rules.”
So you're taking a simple screwup and blowing it out of all proportion,
instead of addressing why 500 people got shot?

CBS was obviously commenting on the bump stock's ability to mimic a
fully automatic weapon.
Yeah, you get right on that semantic error while they clean up the blood
and bury the bodies.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
max headroom
2017-10-08 15:01:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was used by the
Las Vegas shooter during the rampage – calling the ammunition he used
“automatic rounds.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) confirmed to
the Daily Wire that there is no such thing as “automatic rounds,” which
contradicts CBS’s claim about ATF rules.
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns Stephen
Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal under ATF rules.”
So you're taking a simple screwup and blowing it out of all proportion,
instead of addressing why 500 people got shot?..
Garbage in, garbage out. The electorate depends on the press to keep it informed so it can vote
smartly.

Sloppy writing betrays sloppy thinking. Either CBS's writers are sloppy (probable) or the emotional
tilt is to imply that there was some sort of terrible mistake made in ruling these guns legal, and
IT MUST BE REMEDIED!
Ed Stasiak
2017-10-08 15:31:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by FPP
FPP
David Fritz
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns Stephen
Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal under ATF rules.”
So you're taking a simple screwup and blowing it out of all proportion,
instead of addressing why 500 people got shot?
“Simple screwup”? No, this is just another example of the lies spewed
by the fake news Mainstream Media to push gun control, just as BTR1701
shows in another thread, where CNN used an animation of a conventional
AR (with a silencer and grenade launcher…) to represent a bump fire stock.

It’s all about confusing the issue and making logical discussion impossible,
just as the MSM insists on lumping suicides with murders, claiming criminals
get their guns from gun shows or mom & pop gun stores, making irrelevant
comparisons with the U.S. and X country, etc.

The goal is to avoid an honest discussion of the issue, which the anti-gun
fundies know they can’t win, thus the focus by the MSM on hysteria, twisted
statistics and out-right lies because when the foundation of your belief is
that inanimate objects _cause_ crime, you’ve nowhere to go but down.
FPP
2017-10-08 21:52:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by FPP
FPP
David Fritz
CBS tweeted a link to their report, saying, “While the guns Stephen
Paddock used in Las Vegas fired automatic rounds, they were perfectly
legal under ATF rules.”
So you're taking a simple screwup and blowing it out of all proportion,
instead of addressing why 500 people got shot?
“Simple screwup”? No, this is just another example of the lies spewed
by the fake news Mainstream Media to push gun control, just as BTR1701
shows in another thread, where CNN used an animation of a conventional
AR (with a silencer and grenade launcher…) to represent a bump fire stock.
It’s all about confusing the issue and making logical discussion impossible,
just as the MSM insists on lumping suicides with murders, claiming criminals
get their guns from gun shows or mom & pop gun stores, making irrelevant
comparisons with the U.S. and X country, etc.
The goal is to avoid an honest discussion of the issue, which the anti-gun
fundies know they can’t win, thus the focus by the MSM on hysteria, twisted
statistics and out-right lies because when the foundation of your belief is
that inanimate objects _cause_ crime, you’ve nowhere to go but down.
Nope. simple misreporting by someone who got their terms wrong.
You don't have to be a genius to debunk the report, Ed.

CBS wasn't trying to fool anybody. It's absurd to think they were.
--
"Donald Trump accepted the Republican nomination Thursday July 22nd."
"ISIS claimed responsibility". - J. P. Shanley
Wile E. Coyote
2017-10-09 01:46:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Fritz
CBS made up a bogus term to describe the ammunition that was used by the
Las Vegas shooter during the rampage - calling the ammunition he used
"automatic rounds."
That's becuase thier brains aren't fully formed.
--
It's time for the students to step up their game and kill people like
Coulter.

Siri Cruise <***@yahoo.com> April 25, 2017
Loading...