Biden's Thursday Speech On Gun Control, A Bust!

[White 6]

And they don't have to let you out on bail either. Bail is not guaranteed and not. Only excessive bail is forbidden. They could keep you in jail until trial if they want.

Conditions of bail include no drinking and a host of other restrictions, in exchange for letting you out of jail.

All bails, include no drinking, even when drinking not part of the arrest problem? I didn't know.

 

[woodwork201]

I disagree completely. I was just quibbling over the "due process" allegation that some made--a bond agreement isn't "due process" as much as it is coercion.

Yes, I know you were counting on the fact that so many so-called, self-proclaimed, conservatives don't really mean it. They love the gun control that they love and then they hate the rest.

 

[woodwork201]

I handled the situation regarding the neighbor having too many beers, and emptying his 9 millimeter into the air above his head in celebration, on my own. The situation was not repeated by him, ever. You could say, I moderated the situation on my own with no official entanglements. I guess, I was just lucky to have an existing ongoing relationship with the neighborhood beat cops, being the head of the local neighborhood watch, hosting them in meetings and attending training. They left reasonably satisfied.

You committed a felony. Period. You took the law into your own hands, and you put your neighbors at risk. A man fired his gun in public under the influence of alcohol and, not at all surprising based on your posts and attitudes here, you thought you had the right answers more than the community, the law, and the police, and you thought you had the authority to make up the rules.

You're a felon, even if not convicted. So when you post in these current threads that you don't break the law so you don't expect to lose your guns, you lie. In reality, you're a threat to your community and you're a felon. But if nothing else, I'm consistent and absolute in my defense of the 2nd Amendment. You should go to prison for 20 years for lying to the police in an investigation but your guns should be waiting for you when you get out.

In relation to your comment on background checks, Nothing anywhere, ever works perfectly, every time in any complex system. Does no mean no attempt should be made. I'm an 80% solution guy, meaning I know in dealing with attacking a problem or clean up, often 80% of the goal, if started and worked, can be accomplished with 10-15% of the labor. Progress on the problem is much better than no progress on the problem.

So you're suggesting that background checks stop 80% of crime and that if they didn't exist, crime would go up by 4 times? Are you suggesting that crime was reduced by 80% when the Brady Bill was passed?

 

[White 6]

You committed a felony. Period. You took the law into your own hands, and you put your neighbors at risk. A man fired his gun in public under the influence of alcohol and, not at all surprising based on your posts and attitudes here, you thought you had the right answers more than the community, the law, and the police, and you thought you had the authority to make up the rules.

You're a felon, even if not convicted. So when you post in these current threads that you don't break the law so you don't expect to lose your guns, you lie. In reality, you're a threat to your community and you're a felon. But if nothing else, I'm consistent and absolute in my defense of the 2nd Amendment. You should go to prison for 20 years for lying to the police in an investigation but your guns should be waiting for you when you get out.


So you're suggesting that background checks stop 80% of crime and that if they didn't exist, crime would go up by 4 times? Are you suggesting that crime was reduced by 80% when the Brady Bill was passed?

Nope. Never charged, never convicted. Don't bother telling me. Try somebody that cares. You just out of argument on the topic. The topic, being Biden's Thursday Speech On Gun Control, A Bust

 

[woodwork201]

Nope. Never charged, never convicted. Don't bother telling me. Try somebody that cares. You just out of argument on the topic. The topic, being Biden's Thursday Speech On Gun Control, A Bust

Are you seriously threatening me to threadban me again for proving you wrong in a thread topic? Did you learn nothing at all the last time you did that and you lost on appeal? What I got from the other mods is that a moderator threatening members and abusing his authority was not acceptable on USMB. Now you're going to claim my response was off topic so you think you're going to get away with this thread ban?

Go to post 14 in this thread, asshole. You said you're not going to lose your guns because you're not a criminal. For me to respond to your own post and your own words is certainly as on topic as were your own words to which I responded. You say you're not a criminal and I simply respond by reminding you are absolutely a criminal and that you openly admitted to committing a felony. Then you reaffirm your confession while threatening me with being off topic in the same post?

You really do not have the disposition to be a moderator. You're a great example, even if only at the Internet forum level, showing that many people who think they have power will abuse that power. It didn't take you more than a few days for the power to go to your head. Thank God you're not a cop. What you might do to someone if you had both a badge and a gun is just scary. Are you ready to go back to the site staff for more discussion or are you going to drop the threats?

 

[White 6]

Are you seriously threatening me to threadban me again for proving you wrong in a thread topic? Did you learn nothing at all the last time you did that and you lost on appeal? What I got from the other mods is that a moderator threatening members and abusing his authority was not acceptable on USMB. Now you're going to claim my response was off topic so you think you're going to get away with this thread ban?

Go to post 14 in this thread, asshole. You said you're not going to lose your guns because you're not a criminal. For me to respond to your own post and your own words is certainly as on topic as were your own words to which I responded. You say you're not a criminal and I simply respond by reminding you are absolutely a criminal and that you openly admitted to committing a felony. Then you reaffirm your confession while threatening me with being off topic in the same post?

You really do not have the disposition to be a moderator. You're a great example, even if only at the Internet forum level, showing that many people who think they have power will abuse that power. It didn't take you more than a few days for the power to go to your head. Thank God you're not a cop. What you might do to someone if you had both a badge and a gun is just scary. Are you ready to go back to the site staff for more discussion or are you going to drop the threats?

Don't go paranoid. This is just another example of your taking a reply and making up what you would like to see, and is a fantasy of your own making. Certainly not mine. Feel free to report the thread, if you would like.

 

[Shawnee_b]

Hope you are not completely correct, but not certain. You very well might be. I didn't see how the 9mm thing came up and don't remember, just remember hearing and thinking "uh-oh, don't go there Joe". You got to admit, though, my AR has capabilities not found in my 30/30 lever action bush gun/ deer rifle.

Here's part of how the 9MM thing got going. Biden says it's a "high caliber weapon, because it will blow a lung out of a person, but with a 22 they can maybe save that person"...... (after he kills you anyway)

Hmmmm, lets have all secret service carry a 22 then? Oh yeah, governments usual "what's good for me is not good for you."

Try about the 2 min mark if you can't stand looking or listening to the completely uninformed idiot, I can't..



Then here is a take on it.

 

[White 6]

Here's part of how the 9MM thing got going. Biden says it's a "high caliber weapon, because it will blow a lung out of a person, but with a 22 they can maybe save that person"...... (after he kills you anyway)

Hmmmm, lets have all secret service carry a 22 then? Oh yeah, governments usual "what's good for me is not good for you."

Try about the 2 min mark if you can't stand looking or listening to the completely uninformed idiot, I can't..



Then here is a take on it.

Yep. Commented somewhere else on the blowing the lungs out thing regarding 9mm. Been a lot of these threads. Lots of confusion on ammo effects, by Joe and a lot of others. All have to be corrected or at least noted honestly, kind of like public service to the board, or we can become an echo chamber also.
Lol. Thinking of Secret Service with .22 (ludicrous) brings of thoughts of Russian KGB with silencers for execution. If the Secret Service shoots somebody or cops do either, it needs to stop somebody quick. .22s are for shooting squirrels and target practice. Funny thing though, in my permit class there were two people shooting .22 for range qualification. I think the instructor told them it worked for in would work by the book, for qualification, but unwise for carry.

 

[2aguy]

Yep. Commented somewhere else on the blowing the lungs out thing regarding 9mm. Been a lot of these threads. Lots of confusion on ammo effects, by Joe and a lot of others. All have to be corrected or at least noted honestly, kind of like public service to the board, or we can become an echo chamber also.
Lol. Thinking of Secret Service with .22 (ludicrous) brings of thoughts of Russian KGB with silencers for execution. If the Secret Service shoots somebody or cops do either, it needs to stop somebody quick. .22s are for shooting squirrels and target practice. Funny thing though, in my permit class there were two people shooting .22 for range qualification. I think the instructor told them it worked for in would work by the book, for qualification, but unwise for carry.

It's not confusion.....they throw those statements out there knowing the democrat party media wing will keep playing them over and over again, and uninformed people will absorb them, especially when the hollywood wing of the democrat party makes movies showing exactly that.....

 

[Flash]

Are you seriously threatening me to threadban me again for proving you wrong in a thread topic? Did you learn nothing at all the last time you did that and you lost on appeal? What I got from the other mods is that a moderator threatening members and abusing his authority was not acceptable on USMB. Now you're going to claim my response was off topic so you think you're going to get away with this thread ban?

Go to post 14 in this thread, asshole. You said you're not going to lose your guns because you're not a criminal. For me to respond to your own post and your own words is certainly as on topic as were your own words to which I responded. You say you're not a criminal and I simply respond by reminding you are absolutely a criminal and that you openly admitted to committing a felony. Then you reaffirm your confession while threatening me with being off topic in the same post?

You really do not have the disposition to be a moderator. You're a great example, even if only at the Internet forum level, showing that many people who think they have power will abuse that power. It didn't take you more than a few days for the power to go to your head. Thank God you're not a cop. What you might do to someone if you had both a badge and a gun is just scary. Are you ready to go back to the site staff for more discussion or are you going to drop the threats?

This is the same mod that threatened me last week because I proved him/her/it wrong.

I don't know why USMB allow this person to be a moderator.

Maybe because we are not reporting the abuses?

 

[White 6]

It's not confusion.....they throw those statements out there knowing the democrat party media wing will keep playing them over and over again, and uninformed people will absorb them, especially when the hollywood wing of the democrat party makes movies showing exactly that.....

You mean it's just political games?! I'm shocked, shocked, I say! Yes, there is quite a bit of that out there, but honestly, some people just don't know shit. Also, have to mention, not everybody on a pro-gun position argues their point every time in good faith, either, sculpting replies more based on emotional and sometimes half-truth than, facts.

 

[woodwork201]

Yep. Commented somewhere else on the blowing the lungs out thing regarding 9mm. Been a lot of these threads. Lots of confusion on ammo effects, by Joe and a lot of others. All have to be corrected or at least noted honestly, kind of like public service to the board, or we can become an echo chamber also.
Lol. Thinking of Secret Service with .22 (ludicrous) brings of thoughts of Russian KGB with silencers for execution. If the Secret Service shoots somebody or cops do either, it needs to stop somebody quick. .22s are for shooting squirrels and target practice. Funny thing though, in my permit class there were two people shooting .22 for range qualification. I think the instructor told them it worked for in would work by the book, for qualification, but unwise for carry.

What are your thoughts on the smallest size ammunition that is reasonable for self-defense and personal carry?

 

[woodwork201]

This is the same mod that threatened me last week because I proved him/her/it wrong.

I don't know why USMB allow this person to be a moderator.

Maybe because we are not reporting the abuses?

Why am I not surprised?

 

[White 6]

What are your thoughts on the smallest size ammunition that is reasonable for self-defense and personal carry?

I have never carried anything but Federal 9mm LE/Personal defense 124 Gr. after I started carrying. My brother-in-law carries a very small automatic .380 pocket pistol, as a "get off me" gun, his round are as close to personal defense rounds as he can find. I can say, I would never carry a .22. You could really piss somebody off and they kill or injure you before they succumb to their injuries, but I have no doubt some people do carry them. I just prefer full size utility weapons, as it was what I carried most of the time, back in the day, and full size is most common among servicemen and law enforcement for it's all around utility.

 

[woodwork201]

I have never carried anything but Federal 9mm LE/Personal defense 124 Gr. after I started carrying. My brother-in-law carries a very small automatic .380 pocket pistol, as a "get off me" gun, his round are as close to personal defense rounds as he can find. I can say, I would never carry a .22. You could really piss somebody off and they kill or injure you before they succumb to their injuries, but I have no doubt some people do carry them. I just prefer full size utility weapons, as it was what I carried most of the time, back in the day, and full size is most common among servicemen and law enforcement for it's all around utility.

Interesting. As a weapons expert, would you say that the 9mm round is more weight than a 5.56/.223 or less weight than a 5.56/.223?

 

[White 6]

Interesting. As a weapons expert, would you say that the 9mm round is more weight than a 5.56/.223 or less weight than a 5.56/.223?

Haven't been called that, over 30 years. You're thinking of Paul Herrel on YouTube. My answer off the top of the head is it is not a good comparison as the 5.56 being a lighter bullet, but leaving the muzzle at a much higher velocity. The rounds are designed for different purposes, entirely.

 

[Shawnee_b]

Yep. Commented somewhere else on the blowing the lungs out thing regarding 9mm. Been a lot of these threads. Lots of confusion on ammo effects, by Joe and a lot of others. All have to be corrected or at least noted honestly, kind of like public service to the board, or we can become an echo chamber also.
Lol. Thinking of Secret Service with .22 (ludicrous) brings of thoughts of Russian KGB with silencers for execution. If the Secret Service shoots somebody or cops do either, it needs to stop somebody quick. .22s are for shooting squirrels and target practice. Funny thing though, in my permit class there were two people shooting .22 for range qualification. I think the instructor told them it worked for in would work by the book, for qualification, but unwise for carry.

It's never going to be corrected. Take for instance Wapo printing a lie (not that they ever would). They get sued and rescind it. Sooooooooo. 95% of the people already read it, believe it and never even see the redaction.

Where does Joe get his technical information on guns from. Beto? Fienstien, Corn Pop? Are there any dem politicians writing gun laws even know which end of a barrel a bullet comes out of? Possibly but they aren't in the select clique.

94 awb for instance. Stupid little things, flash hider bad, muzzle brake good, pistol grip bad, bayonet lug bad,,,,,

Look the following up. Use of assaults weapons went up when the ban was on. It was not renewed in 2004 because govt sub committees, found it did more harm than good and was totally useless. But the dems are back at it again? Another assaults weapon ban and mag ban, what else? They aren't stopping there, never have since 1934MGA and never will. They simply want total control and think disarming the people will give them that. It's not about the kids. And you wonder why the right is so fed up with idiot dems with their anti gun agenda? Come up with something works.

Thing here I see in Joes vid, we need a 22 for self defense but Govt needs what stops a man, (and that's not a 9mm in my book but a 45acp) Why? Govt is elite, they put their pants on different than we do, they are MORE IMPORTANT than us mere subjects so instead of pissing a perp off with a 22, the govt wants them stopped before they can do further harm.

How about simply what is good for them is good for us too? All these laws and bans only apply to us. Govt is exempt. Look at the 1958 baloney switchblade act. Couple from NY and 1 from Maine (Pino, Delauncy) watched West side story" and got scared of switchblades. Can't carry a auto over state lines (whether you can own it is your state is state law) but any Govt employee is exempt. Your postman can carry one on a x-country trip but we can't.

From Obama, "leave it to Joe to screw things up". He is and he will again, especially gun regs.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What are your thoughts on the smallest size ammunition that is reasonable for self-defense and personal carry?

30 super carry.

 

[2aguy]

Yep. Commented somewhere else on the blowing the lungs out thing regarding 9mm. Been a lot of these threads. Lots of confusion on ammo effects, by Joe and a lot of others. All have to be corrected or at least noted honestly, kind of like public service to the board, or we can become an echo chamber also.
Lol. Thinking of Secret Service with .22 (ludicrous) brings of thoughts of Russian KGB with silencers for execution. If the Secret Service shoots somebody or cops do either, it needs to stop somebody quick. .22s are for shooting squirrels and target practice. Funny thing though, in my permit class there were two people shooting .22 for range qualification. I think the instructor told them it worked for in would work by the book, for qualification, but unwise for carry.

The mob tended to use .22s to kill people too...

 

[White 6]

It's never going to be corrected. Take for instance Wapo printing a lie (not that they ever would). They get sued and rescind it. Sooooooooo. 95% of the people already read it, believe it and never even see the redaction.

Where does Joe get his technical information on guns from. Beto? Fienstien, Corn Pop? Are there any dem politicians writing gun laws even know which end of a barrel a bullet comes out of? Possibly but they aren't in the select clique.

94 awb for instance. Stupid little things, flash hider bad, muzzle brake good, pistol grip bad, bayonet lug bad,,,,,

Look the following up. Use of assaults weapons went up when the ban was on. It was not renewed in 2004 because govt sub committees, found it did more harm than good and was totally useless. But the dems are back at it again? Another assaults weapon ban and mag ban, what else? They aren't stopping there, never have since 1934MGA and never will. They simply want total control and think disarming the people will give them that. It's not about the kids. And you wonder why the right is so fed up with idiot dems with their anti gun agenda? Come up with something works.

Thing here I see in Joes vid, we need a 22 for self defense but Govt needs what stops a man, (and that's not a 9mm in my book but a 45acp) Why? Govt is elite, they put their pants on different than we do, they are MORE IMPORTANT than us mere subjects so instead of pissing a perp off with a 22, the govt wants them stopped before they can do further harm.

How about simply what is good for them is good for us too? All these laws and bans only apply to us. Govt is exempt. Look at the 1958 baloney switchblade act. Couple from NY and 1 from Maine (Pino, Delauncy) watched West side story" and got scared of switchblades. Can't carry a auto over state lines (whether you can own it is your state is state law) but any Govt employee is exempt. Your postman can carry one on a x-country trip but we can't.

From Obama, "leave it to Joe to screw things up". He is and he will again, especially gun regs.

Remember, front page mistakes are almost never front page retraction, at WAPO, NYT, or anywhere else. Getting it right the first time is very important, and no outlets in the history of news outlet has a perfect score. I read all with a filter.
The 1934 MGA will be 100 years old in 12 years. I'm 67, and not missing the bygone days, when gangster messed up the fun of Tommy Guns for everybody.
You will never see me with a .22 for self-defense. Lots of fun for plinking targets or hunting squirrel parts of the year.
Get a permit. I can carry mine to most states I would want to go to, by car and carry concealed. Thing that surprised me about TN is its acceptance of reciprocity not necessarily a two-way street. There are states that do not even require range qualification, that permit their citizens, and TN accepts their permits with much less training, while some of those same state, like Illinois and I think Indiana do not accept ours. I am absolutely not surprise, none permit holders not allowed to carry freely over state lines. Otherwise you would have would be patriots and vigilantes crossing state line every time one of the liberal Democrat controlled states hosted a riot.