[jdulej]

Originally Posted by PugMom

it's the exact opposite where we are. half the neighborhood is ex military or ex police. i'd say a GOOD number are armed properly. good guys with guns always makes me feel safer

As an earlier poster pointed out, the Secret Service does not seem to see it that way. It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?

[PugMom]

i read the article posted, very interesting, but allow me to question the report. in sandy hook, columbine & parkland--they all had some sort of emotional disturbance. these are the shootings that come to mind right away. thoughts?

[PugMom]

Originally Posted by jdulej

As an earlier poster pointed out, the Secret Service does not seem to see it that way. It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?

for protection & safety purposes mainly, also for sport/target practice

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by jdulej

You're sort of making the original poster's point. A room full of people with guns means you've got something to worry about. A room full of people without guns, means you have a lot less to worry about. The NRA tries to spin it the other way round.

For me, I'd much rather be in a store or school or a church (not that you could drag me into one of those) full of people without guns.

Actually, no. I did not "make" the original poster's point. There are exceptions to almost any situation. I am sure that most everyone in an NRA meeting feels secure knowing others are carrying. Our government via the SS has a different outlook on the situation. Protection of the asset is a different matter entirely. Ask them for their reasoning or RULES.

Personally, I have no problem with CCW individuals carrying in a church. In the past few years, there have been several church shootings. One was stopped by a man (NRA member?) with a gun. I understand some folks are in great fear of guns and worry that they may go off by themselves and harm humans. Those folks probably should not have a gun, or should take a gun safety course just to know how they work. It says a lot about someone that had to let everyone know that they would not ever be seen in a church. There's more threat of being zapped by the Holy Spirit in church than being shot in one by a gun totin' miscreant.

[PugMom]

not sure if you guys saw the recent news report re: a 70yr old female, who was forced to use her gun to take down a home intruder. thank God she was able to defend herself & partner, lest they may be the ones being buried

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by MDLNB

I'm sorry that no one has answered your question to your satisfaction. Please allow me to answer the question that you probably already know the answer to. You CAN own a M1 tank and/or a fully automatic weapon. Google is your friend. If you apply for a federal permit and undergo a background check and pay a substantial fee, you can own the tank and/or the fully automatic weapon. And you can even call it an "assault weapon" if it pleases you. There you, you're welcome.

It would help if you took your own advice. See, you left out a little detail. The tank (M1's are not for sale) must be neutered and make street legal first. Meaning no weapon systems, barrel concreted, and all tactical equipment removed.

So, I will go with that, you are okay with the government requiring the tank be neutered, so you would not mind if they require all guns to be disabled and cripple. Barrels filled.

I know (you have said multiple times) tight you are MUCH smarter than the rest of us. If so, try finding the truth, and not just enough of the truth to support your own misconceptions, the the rest of the story.

Oh, and I will save you the trouble of replying that I didn't say I wanted to it work, I just said I wanted to own it.

Well, I said I wanted it so I would be equally armed as the governments military, since the argument I was responding to was that the 2nd was there to allow us to take back our government from rogue actors. Kind of hard to take back the government with AR15s (toys) and M1 Tanks that are crippled (can't even use it with tracks - so no off road fighting - I am sure the rogue government will help by only fighting on paved hiways.

I guess I could drive it around and run over bad guys... but then it isn't really a gun is it.

As to the fully automatic weapon -

For example, a private citizen can lawfully own a machine gun only if:

* the possessor isn’t a “prohibited person,”
* the full-auto machine gun was made before 1986, and
* their relevant state law does not ban that the firearm (whether banning machine guns outright or any firearm with certain features).

"For example, someone can lawfully possess a machine gun made this morning if it is in connection with their duties as a government or law enforcement official, or if they have their Federal Firearms License (FFL) and have either made or possess the machine gun for possible sale to government/law enforcement personnel."

In 1934, the National Firearms Act (NFA) was passed which restricted machine gun possession, among other types of firearms.

Remember, though, if you want to possess these modern machine guns, you must be a government employee possessing the machine gun in connection with your official duties OR you must get your Federal Firearms License (FFL) and become an SOT.

As an FFL, you must also pay a special yearly tax to become a Special Occupational Taxpayer (SOT) – this allows you to purchase and sell NFA firearms (including machine guns) without paying a tax per item/transaction.

The machine guns can be banned outright based on function (because they are machine guns) or they can be banned/partially-banned based on features.

And a summary:

How to Purchase a Machine Gun as an Individual:

* Confirm that they are lawful to possess in your state

* Find a currently registered machine gun made before 1986 either at a gun shop or a private individual. You can search locally or online (but out-of-state online sales of all firearms must go to your local gun shop).

* Purchase the machine gun as an individual or through a trust – but, no, you can’t take it home yet! Trusts were popular to avoid certain requirements (fingerprints, law enforcement approval, etc.) but ATF changed the rules last year. Previously, your local Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) approval was required, but the ATF changed the rules last year to only require notification. Also, members of a trust could obtain new NFA firearms without fingerprints/photos but now every lawful possessor is required to submit them each time. These rule changes removed much of the reason to get a trust.

* Fill out an ATF Form 4 application to transfer an NFA firearm. This application will include a $200 check for your tax, your fingerprints, a passport-style photograph, and information about you and the firearm.

* Wait 9-12 months for the ATF to approve and return your paperwork.

* Take your machine-gun home and enjoy!

Since you are okay with those restrictions, I suggest we let them apply to ALL guns. How about that.

And you of course left out cruise missiles and F35 fighters. Which I would be facing when trying to take back my country. So, cherry picking, doesn't work.

My point stands.

[PugMom]

excellent thread with many thoughtful posts

[Caymus]

Originally Posted by jdulej

It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?

Maybe that neighborhood is in Chicago.

[jdulej]

Originally Posted by PugMom

i read the article posted, very interesting, but allow me to question the report. in sandy hook, columbine & parkland--they all had some sort of emotional disturbance. these are the shootings that come to mind right away. thoughts?

Not quite sure who you were addressing this to, but I'll toss in my 2 cents. IMO, there is one (and only one) reason why someone commits any sort of violent crime - because they are mentally unstable.

Why not, as a start, require anyone who wants to buy a gun to prove they are mentally stable. 99.9% would pass and go on their way with their shiny new killing machine. The .1 failures are just out of luck.

We don't seem to have any issues adding more and more restrictions to people's right to vote, this does not seem to add that much of a burden to the vast majority gun owner wannabes

[jdulej]

Originally Posted by Caymus

Maybe that neighborhood is in Chicago.

If you can get past the NYTs paywall there is an interesting article on Chicago gun violence. Here is a snippet from fact checking of Trump and Cruz at the NRA convention

The three cities with the highest gun homicide rates — Jackson, Miss.; Gary, Ind.; and St. Louis — had rates double that of Chicago’s or more. All are in states with more permissive gun laws than Illinois.

Chicago’s reputation for having the strictest gun control measures in the country is outdated. Mr. Cruz cited the city’s handgun ban — without noting that the Supreme Court nullified the ban in 2010. An appeals court also struck down a ban on carrying concealed weapons in Illinois in 2012, and the state began allowing possession of concealed guns in 2013 as part of the court decision.

Today, Illinois has tougher restrictions than most states, but it does not lead the pack, ranking No. 6

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by jdulej

As an earlier poster pointed out, the Secret Service does not seem to see it that way. It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?

Here's my thought on carrying in your own neighborhood. One day, my spouse was out in the yard (previous state) and a coyote started harassing her. My weapons were not available at the time, so I ran at the animal shouting at it. It retreated slowly, barking and growling as it went. After that, I made sure that I always had a weapon handy. My thought is that it is better to have protection and not need it than to need it and not have it. If you do not habitually carry your weapon all the time, who's to say when you might suddenly need it? A crazed animal, a drug influenced neighbor, an out of control domestic resulting in a frustrated gun wielding citizen....who knows? Since most or at least half my family are trained in weapons handling and have CCW, I often ask them when they take trips on their motorcycles or even in their autos, if they are carrying. It's good to remind them and gives me peace of mind that they at least have some tool for self defense. A gun against a carjacking is a great equalizer. There was one instance in Texas where a CCW lady left her gun in her truck when she had dinner with her parents in a diner that had a sign posted prohibiting guns inside. The place was held up and someone was murdered in the process (I think one or both her parents were victims?). She said later that all she could do was glance out the window and wonder why she didn't have her protection which was just a few feet away. If I have my wallet in my pocket, I have my CCW with me also. Not that I am afraid, but I am prepared to protect my family and anyone else that might need assistance in my vicinity. The school shooting demonstrates the old saying that "when seconds count, a COP is minutes away." or something like that.

[Taltarzac725]

Best Coyote Deterrents & Repellents: Protecting Your Dog From Coyotes!

We had coyotes a few years ago here and some neighbors did walk their dogs while armed with guns but there are better options against coyotes.

Originally Posted by MDLNB

Here's my thought on carrying in your own neighborhood. One day, my spouse was out in the yard (previous state) and a coyote started harassing her. My weapons were not available at the time, so I ran at the animal shouting at it. It retreated slowly, barking and growling as it went. After that, I made sure that I always had a weapon handy. My thought is that it is better to have protection and not need it than to need it and not have it. If you do not habitually carry your weapon all the time, who's to say when you might suddenly need it? A crazed animal, a drug influenced neighbor, an out of control domestic resulting in a frustrated gun wielding citizen....who knows? Since most or at least half my family are trained in weapons handling and have CCW, I often ask them when they take trips on their motorcycles or even in their autos, if they are carrying. It's good to remind them and gives me peace of mind that they at least have some tool for self defense. A gun against a carjacking is a great equalizer. There was one instance in Texas where a CCW lady left her gun in her truck when she had dinner with her parents in a diner that had a sign posted prohibiting guns inside. The place was held up and someone was murdered in the process (I think one or both her parents were victims?). She said later that all she could do was glance out the window and wonder why she didn't have her protection which was just a few feet away. If I have my wallet in my pocket, I have my CCW with me also. Not that I am afraid, but I am prepared to protect my family and anyone else that might need assistance in my vicinity. The school shooting demonstrates the old saying that "when seconds count, a COP is minutes away." or something like that.

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

It would help if you took your own advice. See, you left out a little detail. The tank (M1's are not for sale) must be neutered and make street legal first. Meaning no weapon systems, barrel concreted, and all tactical equipment removed.

So, I will go with that, you are okay with the government requiring the tank be neutered, so you would not mind if they require all guns to be disabled and cripple. Barrels filled.

I know (you have said multiple times) tight you are MUCH smarter than the rest of us. If so, try finding the truth, and not just enough of the truth to support your own misconceptions, the the rest of the story.

Oh, and I will save you the trouble of replying that I didn't say I wanted to it work, I just said I wanted to own it.

Well, I said I wanted it so I would be equally armed as the governments military, since the argument I was responding to was that the 2nd was there to allow us to take back our government from rogue actors. Kind of hard to take back the government with AR15s (toys) and M1 Tanks that are crippled (can't even use it with tracks - so no off road fighting - I am sure the rogue government will help by only fighting on paved hiways.

I guess I could drive it around and run over bad guys... but then it isn't really a gun is it.

As to the fully automatic weapon -

For example, a private citizen can lawfully own a machine gun only if:

* the possessor isn’t a “prohibited person,”
* the full-auto machine gun was made before 1986, and
* their relevant state law does not ban that the firearm (whether banning machine guns outright or any firearm with certain features).

"For example, someone can lawfully possess a machine gun made this morning if it is in connection with their duties as a government or law enforcement official, or if they have their Federal Firearms License (FFL) and have either made or possess the machine gun for possible sale to government/law enforcement personnel."

In 1934, the National Firearms Act (NFA) was passed which restricted machine gun possession, among other types of firearms.

Remember, though, if you want to possess these modern machine guns, you must be a government employee possessing the machine gun in connection with your official duties OR you must get your Federal Firearms License (FFL) and become an SOT.

As an FFL, you must also pay a special yearly tax to become a Special Occupational Taxpayer (SOT) – this allows you to purchase and sell NFA firearms (including machine guns) without paying a tax per item/transaction.

The machine guns can be banned outright based on function (because they are machine guns) or they can be banned/partially-banned based on features.

And a summary:

How to Purchase a Machine Gun as an Individual:

* Confirm that they are lawful to possess in your state

* Find a currently registered machine gun made before 1986 either at a gun shop or a private individual. You can search locally or online (but out-of-state online sales of all firearms must go to your local gun shop).

* Purchase the machine gun as an individual or through a trust – but, no, you can’t take it home yet! Trusts were popular to avoid certain requirements (fingerprints, law enforcement approval, etc.) but ATF changed the rules last year. Previously, your local Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) approval was required, but the ATF changed the rules last year to only require notification. Also, members of a trust could obtain new NFA firearms without fingerprints/photos but now every lawful possessor is required to submit them each time. These rule changes removed much of the reason to get a trust.

* Fill out an ATF Form 4 application to transfer an NFA firearm. This application will include a $200 check for your tax, your fingerprints, a passport-style photograph, and information about you and the firearm.

* Wait 9-12 months for the ATF to approve and return your paperwork.

* Take your machine-gun home and enjoy!

Since you are okay with those restrictions, I suggest we let them apply to ALL guns. How about that.

And you of course left out cruise missiles and F35 fighters. Which I would be facing when trying to take back my country. So, cherry picking, doesn't work.

My point stands.

I answered your question and you preferred to be facetious. Ok.

I knew an old Gunny in the Marines that once said to us, "don't come complaining to me about a problem unless you also have a solution." Of course, when I say "old" he was probably in his 30's or 40's...
Bad people are the problem and good people are the solution.
Guns are not the problem, only the weapon of choice for the bad people. Guns are also the possible choice of good people as a solution to bad people using a gun to perpetrate bad things. If you don't like guns (not you specifically) then solve the people problem before they resort to acting on their malicious intent.

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Best Coyote Deterrents & Repellents: Protecting Your Dog From Coyotes!

We had coyotes a few years ago here and some neighbors did walk their dogs while armed with guns but there are better options against coyotes.

Yes, there are OTHER options for coyotes, and that was just an example. I love animals so I would hesitate to use a firearm on an animal unless it was a matter of hunting for food or absolute defense. Same with people as far as absolute defense.....not hunger...

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by jdulej

Not quite sure who you were addressing this to, but I'll toss in my 2 cents. IMO, there is one (and only one) reason why someone commits any sort of violent crime - because they are mentally unstable.

Why not, as a start, require anyone who wants to buy a gun to prove they are mentally stable. 99.9% would pass and go on their way with their shiny new killing machine. The .1 failures are just out of luck.

We don't seem to have any issues adding more and more restrictions to people's right to vote, this does not seem to add that much of a burden to the vast majority gun owner wannabes

You made two very good points. Why not prove they are mentally stable? Who decides and wouldn't they be able to fool the person making the judgement?

You mentioned "more and more" restrictions on voting. What restrictions? The Constitution states that ONLY American citizens may vote in national elections. Is providing proof of citizenship and identification a restriction? But, we do not need to go off subject, right?

I believe that a half way decent background check is a form of proving a person is mentally stable, IF done properly. However, as many know of the gov's background check for a security clearance, background investigations are very expensive and can cost as much as $20K or more. Even then, some sneak through.