Firearms

vreihen16 wrote

^^^^^^ Careful there, WVNed. Discussing politics on this site is an instant trip to banned camp.....

These days anything and everything is politics and a trip to the ban camp if someone wants rid of you.
None of what I mentioned is politics. It is history now.

I have to go finish the reading the safety warnings for my new electric coffee grinder. I got up to don't use it in the shower and took a break. Only 6 more pages of fine print to go.

Or someone could tell me about my Springfield Armory High Power. I haven't fired it yet.

I found this stuff under a forum called firearms.

Or is this about people that catch their arms on fire and I misunderstood. Haven't done that in a long time.

WVNed wrote

....

Or is this about people that catch their arms on fire and I misunderstood. Haven't done that in a long time.

I read a book on the history of the 2nd and how its roots go back to the Magna Carta. It was a bit of a tough read as arm, as in that appendage below the shoulder, arm, as in firearm and army, as in soldier were all spelled arme! Had to get the context to decipher what the author was talking about!

I will tone it down. The time for discussions about many things has passed.

If the world needs saved by the efforts of an old fat guy with Parkinson's disease you are so screwed.

OK, I failed the IQ test so I'm not smart enough to walk away from this topic.
Personally I think any state has the right to require a test for concealed carry permit in the same way hunters in many states are required to successfully complete an approved hunter education course before they can purchase a hunting license.
Sadly that opens up what I'm calling blue state abuse, for which there is only a legal remedy. Remember the New York's concealed carry abuse case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022). In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that New York’s requirement to show "proper cause" or a special need for self-defense to obtain a concealed carry license violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
I've been a proponent of USCCA | U.S. Concealed Carry Association courses. Even as an experienced shooter and occasional competition shooter, I learned a lot specifically related to the law and defense shooting.
I don't think its too much to ask people to make a commitment in time and money to make sure they are not a danger to themselves and others.
In a perfect world, that would be enough but there are a lot of places where politicians will twist the law to make this as difficult as possible. Some times the only cure is a UHaul.

Next time your at your range look up at the ceiling and tell me there is no need for training. I have two friends that are range officers and they tell me some crazy stories.

Car-Addicted wrote

OK, I failed the IQ test so I'm not smart enough to walk away from this topic.
Personally I think any state has the right to require a test for concealed carry permit in the same way hunters in many states are required to successfully complete an approved hunter education course before they can purchase a hunting license.
Sadly that opens up what I'm calling blue state abuse, for which there is only a legal remedy. Remember the New York's concealed carry abuse case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022). In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that New York’s requirement to show "proper cause" or a special need for self-defense to obtain a concealed carry license violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
I've been a proponent of USCCA | U.S. Concealed Carry Association courses. Even as an experienced shooter and occasional competition shooter, I learned a lot specifically related to the law and defense shooting.
I don't think its too much to ask people to make a commitment in time and money to make sure they are not a danger to themselves and others.
In a perfect world, that would be enough but there are a lot of places where politicians will twist the law to make this as difficult as possible. Some times the only cure is a UHaul.

Next time your at your range look up at the ceiling and tell me there is no need for training. I have two friends that are range officers and they tell me some crazy stories.

The problem is one side always says we are not coming for your guns...and then lies and does come after them. It makes it hard to agree to anything when you know their end goal is disarmed populace and they think you are a criminal, or want to make you into one, for owning something to protect your family. Remember criminals follow the law, I guarantee Johnny the hood rat will be taking the CC class.

I have gained a ton of knowledge and skill taking pistol and rifle course and practicing. The average person does not take these classes. Should they? Probably. There should probably be the equivalent of the Hunter Safety course(which I learned a lot from) for CC people. But we can't give them an inch, they take a fucking mile.

Growing up I never understood single issue voters and thought it made no sense. Now I understand more clearly than ever.

Come and take them.

Car-Addicted wrote

OK, I failed the IQ test so I'm not smart enough to walk away from this topic.
Personally I think any state has the right to require a test for concealed carry permit in the same way hunters in many states are required to successfully complete an approved hunter education course before they can purchase a hunting license.
Sadly that opens up what I'm calling blue state abuse, for which there is only a legal remedy. Remember the New York's concealed carry abuse case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022). In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that New York’s requirement to show "proper cause" or a special need for self-defense to obtain a concealed carry license violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
I've been a proponent of USCCA | U.S. Concealed Carry Association courses. Even as an experienced shooter and occasional competition shooter, I learned a lot specifically related to the law and defense shooting.
I don't think its too much to ask people to make a commitment in time and money to make sure they are not a danger to themselves and others.
In a perfect world, that would be enough but there are a lot of places where politicians will twist the law to make this as difficult as possible. Some times the only cure is a UHaul.

Next time your at your range look up at the ceiling and tell me there is no need for training. I have two friends that are range officers and they tell me some crazy stories.

I'm very careful which range I go to. It can be a very dangerous place without vigilant Safety Officers. But yep, those holes in the ceilings and walls occurred even under supervision

Torgus wrote

The problem is one side always says we are not coming for your guns...and then lies and does come after them.

There is always a group of people who feel the need to control all aspects of everyone's life and control of firearms is always top of their list. History is replete with confiscation of weapons and the tyranny and genocide that follows. I'm a long standing member of the "cold dead hands brigade"

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun"
Mao Zedong

ezaircon4jc wrote

Everyone should know there is no such things as an unloaded gun!!! Never, Ever....Treat EVERY gun as if it is loaded.

Killed by Death wrote

Everyone should know there is no such things as an unloaded gun!!! Never, Ever....Treat EVERY gun as if it is loaded.

Just ask Alec Baldwin

Car-Addicted wrote

Just ask Alec Baldwin

Yep, perfect example. Funny how so many tv and movie stars are anti-gun. Yet have no objections whatsoever about using them as props to make money.

Killed by Death wrote

Yep, perfect example. Funny how so many tv and movie stars are anti-gun. Yet have no objections whatsoever about using them as props to make money.

And the manipulate them endlessly to create fascination by the audience and make more money.

I always love the scene where the hero points and gun and demands an answer. NO. So now he racks the slide or pumps the shotgun to show he is REALLY serious. Well does that mean it wasn't ready to fire before? Gun owners know and groan.

If I ever have burglars I'm going to grab my pump shotgun and stand on the other side of the door and pump the slide to scare them. If they are smart they'll hear me scrambling to grab the ejected buckshot round, and fire through the door at the source of the sound. Maybe I best re-think the whole thing.

Killed by Death wrote

Yep, perfect example. Funny how so many tv and movie stars are anti-gun. Yet have no objections whatsoever about using them as props to make money.

Sure...but they are "actors"...I mean the hint is right there in the name. They also portray murderers, rapists, kidnappers, use of drugs, alcohol abuse all to make a buck too, and I'm sort of hoping that morally they're anti all those things too.

I don't blame them for being anti-gun (if they are, some aren't) but using guns in a movie or show. Now I would say it is a little bit hypocritical to take that position and then surround yourself with armed bodyguards, but at the same point, what else are they to do? It's an armed society and an alarming amount of society seems fixated on these "celebrities" and meeting them (or worse).

I do not understand the hype though - I mean Avril Lavigne has a house that I drive past every day to get to the bus stop and never once have I been tempted to meet her or look for her in the nearest town, etc. I probably would not recognize 95% of Hollywood stars if I met them in real life. But that isn't the case for a number of people.

My theory is that people judge these actors for being anti gun and yet using them in their place of work because they are afraid of the pulpit these actors have, not because the actors are being hypocritical.

Watching The World Burn wrote

Killed by Death wrote

Yep, perfect example. Funny how so many tv and movie stars are anti-gun. Yet have no objections whatsoever about using them as props to make money.

Sure...but they are "actors"...I mean the hint is right there in the name. They also portray murderers, rapists, kidnappers, use of drugs, alcohol abuse all to make a buck too, and I'm sort of hoping that morally they're anti all those things too.

I don't blame them for being anti-gun (if they are, some aren't) but using guns in a movie or show. Now I would say it is a little bit hypocritical to take that position and then surround yourself with armed bodyguards, but at the same point, what else are they to do? It's an armed society and an alarming amount of society seems fixated on these "celebrities" and meeting them (or worse).

I do not understand the hype though - I mean Avril Lavigne has a house that I drive past every day to get to the bus stop and never once have I been tempted to meet her or look for her in the nearest town, etc. I probably would not recognize 95% of Hollywood stars if I met them in real life. But that isn't the case for a number of people.

My theory is that people judge these actors for being anti gun and yet using them in their place of work because they are afraid of the pulpit these actors have, not because the actors are being hypocritical.

Point taken but actors can play "murderers, rapists, kidnappers, use of drugs, alcohol" all without a gun prop. And yes being anti-gun all while using armed body guards is f'd up.

Killed by Death wrote

Point taken but actors can play "murderers, rapists, kidnappers, use of drugs, alcohol" all without a gun prop. And yes being anti-gun all while using armed body guards is f'd up.

That's not really my point though. Of course they can play a rapist, kidnapper etc without using a gun, what I'm saying is that regardless of what tool they use to play a kidnapper, murderer, rapist, etc, HOPEFULLY, these clowns are anti-rape, anti-kidnapping, anti-murder, etc. In other words, these people are constantly playing a part that they hopefully disagree with on a personal level (whether it is guns or kidnapping, it doesn't really matter), all to make money. That's their job, they are paid to act out a role, regardless of whether they personally agree with it, so I don't find it hypocritical of them to use guns in a movie when they personally disagree with them.

I do find it a little hypocritical when they use armed bodyguards because that is outside their role as actor, that is a choice then. However, as I said, in some respects, what else are they going to do when the rest of society is armed and really really wants to meet them (some with good intent, others with the opposite intent). Bringing a knife to a gunfight is never a good idea.

I have personally never cared what these clowns think about politics, or really any opinion that they happen to hold. They're free to speak it, as am I for my own opinions. What I do not understand is why other people seem to care about what they say (and possibly adopt it as their own position without critically thinking about said position). If less people cared, there would be no issue I think. It's the pulpit these guys have that the 2A folks are afraid of. Take that away and they have nothing. But I think the focus on attacking these actors is wrong if the goal is to take the pulpit away - it is only going to cause their base to more rabidly endorse said celebrity I think.

There are 2 kinds of animals. Domesticated animals expect the farmer to protect them and non domesticated animals that dont.

Domesticated animals aren't smart enough to realize the farmer is only protecting his own interests. Those may or may not include them.

What I hear when some express their opinions is MOOOO MOOOO.

I am a child of the greatest generation. My dad served in Burma. My mother's brother is buried in France. Both mom and dad thought it important that I learned to use, maintain and be safe with firearms. My mom was a good shot with a rifle. I do not see any significant changes in the world that make the skill to protect yourself and the common sense to act appropriately less valuable.

An old friend my wife hadn't seen in 30 years stopped to visit.
She has remarried to a retired preacher. We had lunch.
He described what he did as hard work and wouldn't do it again.
He didn't say grace over the meal.

They were traveling from Michigan to vacation in Florida. They expressed concern for their safety here since we are a pro-gun state. America is so dangerous in general.
Her son lives in Europe and it is always safe there. Jill bought her a nice necklace designed by a local jeweler with the sun over the mountains. She brought Jill a box of Rice A Roni like they ate in college.
They got in their hybrid small SUV and continued their trip.

Mooo Moooo, that herd smell.

Watching The World Burn wrote

That's not really my point though. Of course they can play a rapist, kidnapper etc without using a gun, what I'm saying is that regardless of what tool they use to play a kidnapper, murderer, rapist, etc, HOPEFULLY, these clowns are anti-rape, anti-kidnapping, anti-murder, etc. In other words, these people are constantly playing a part that they hopefully disagree with on a personal level (whether it is guns or kidnapping, it doesn't really matter), all to make money. That's their job, they are paid to act out a role, regardless of whether they personally agree with it, so I don't find it hypocritical of them to use guns in a movie when they personally disagree with them.

I do find it a little hypocritical when they use armed bodyguards because that is outside their role as actor, that is a choice then. However, as I said, in some respects, what else are they going to do when the rest of society is armed and really really wants to meet them (some with good intent, others with the opposite intent). Bringing a knife to a gunfight is never a good idea.

I have personally never cared what these clowns think about politics, or really any opinion that they happen to hold. They're free to speak it, as am I for my own opinions. What I do not understand is why other people seem to care about what they say (and possibly adopt it as their own position without critically thinking about said position). If less people cared, there would be no issue I think. It's the pulpit these guys have that the 2A folks are afraid of. Take that away and they have nothing. But I [...]

Flawed premise. Even in countries where the citizenry aren’t armed, the elite class(es) still have armed security. They feel entitled to the “protection”.

Sedan_Clan wrote

Flawed premise. Even in countries where the citizenry isn’t armed, the elite class(es) still have armed security. They feel entitled to the “protection”.

It was my assumption that the comments re: actors were specific to the American actors, so I made my comments limited to the USA as well. I somewhat doubt that the posters care very much about anything that happens beyond the USA, but I could be wrong. Most of us tend to inwardly focus on our own country with only a passing thought to other countries, myself included - its natural.

So would you still say it is a flawed premise if confined to the USA and if so, why?

Watching The World Burn wrote

It was my assumption that the comments re: actors were specific to the American actors, so I made my comments limited to the USA as well. I somewhat doubt that the posters care very much about anything that happens beyond the USA, but I could be wrong. Most of us tend to inwardly focus on our own country with only a passing thought to other countries, myself included - its natural.

So would you still say it is a flawed premise if confined to the USA and if so, why?

Regardless of nationality, we all tend to pay attention to what occurs in other countries, especially countries similar to ours (..ex. Americans paid close attention to how Australia treated its citizens during COVID, and it was a revealing wake up call).

When it comes to 2A rights and gun culture specifically, Americans tend to be super protective of it - while also acknowledging it comes with a cost - because there are innumerable examples of disarmed societies and the tyranny that follows.

Regarding the premise, most people in the U.S. really don’t care that much about celebrities…..at least not enough to want to harm them. It’s not like we don’t see them walking around in plain clothes without any security in sight. We just don’t really care that much. My lady sees celebrities everyday on airplanes and nobody really cares. This is especially true when you get outside of places like Los Angeles. I have buddies who regularly see Carrie Underwood, for example, around town and it’s not even something that raises an eyebrow.

Don't even have to look at Australia about how bad it can get during Covid. Canada was pretty bad.

It's interesting the mentality these days concerning firearms. I for one used to be anti gun. I don't remember when that shift changed. I think as I got older and saw more of the world is when my stance changed. Having now owned various firearms for a few years I am more attuned to people that are not comfortable with them. It's interesting when I have dated women that found out I have firearms through me telling them....some of them immediately go into the narrative...."I don't feel safe." Mind you, they never knew I have firearms as they're not in open view. I just thought it was time to discuss that part of my life.

My mom sort of splits the difference. I think she doesn't care for firearms. She found out I have them when one day she happened to be helping me clean my house and found my rifle bag with my AR in it. We've only talked a handful of times about guns in general. But one thing that she said to me which many 2A supporters have said....a gun doesn't shoot itself just sitting there by itself.

I think as more of this stupidity with tolerating criminals and going at it as a problem that can be solved with some social worker intervening, even the most staunch left winger will start changing their minds about the 2A. It was funny seeing lefties freaking out during the summer of love having crime on their door step. Then deciding that they should get a gun and then finding out it's not as easy as the propaganda they were fed. "What? I have to wait 7 days before I can take possession of my gun?" "What? I have to go through this training and have this additional 'certification' before I can even buy a gun?"

I think eventually things will turn around with how society views guns. In the words of this political Youtuber, Greg Foreman, says....The fastest way to red pill a liberal is to give them exactly what they want. And that's so true. The unfortunate part is to get there with guns I fear that a major societal upheaval is going to have to happen which will result in lots of violence and death.

The parents that wont let their kids come over because you have guns have kids that eat Tide pods.

You see we dont just have guns. We1 have chainsaws, big kitchen knives, matches, glue, cooking spray, brake cleaner, snakes, wild animals, gas cans, a host of things that kids that have grown up sheltered because things are dangerous don't know what to do with.
Ignorance isnt bliss, it's dangerous.
We had a go-cart. My son's friend came over and we got it out.
The second time he crashed into the house I put it away. No idea what to do and didn't listen to instruction.

It's why people act like 12 year olds when they are 30 now.