http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/01/28/meet-the-gun-show-loophole Comments On: Meet the Gun Show Loophole! by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Thu, 23 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Thu, 23 May 2013 01:30:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
But truly it is about the fun, oh especially the fun of imagining the boogie man is what I am taking aim at and not some paper target.
Posted by The I.B.A.]]> Tue, 05 Feb 2013 17:33:39 -0800 The Stranger
lol, yeah your firearms will protect you from a drone strike. and your shooting club gives you the skills to defend yourself against active duty military and police. stopping tyrany? history has shown that organized people acting togther don't need weapons to stop tyranny - facebook is much more of a threat to tyrants than your little pea shooter. at least admit what this is about - guns are fun and make you feel powerful, even when you are not.
Posted by asymptoticbliss]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 03:40:45 -0800 The Stranger
BTW Sen. Feinstein's bill wouldn't ban semi-automatic weapons. It would ban semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting detachable box magazines and which have at least one other 'military' feature such as a pistol grip or flash suppressor.
Posted by Ken Mehlman]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 09:11:45 -0800 The Stranger
"Machine Guns," defined as multiple bullets shot with one pull of the trigger, are already HIGHLY regulated, though they can be had in certain states (not WA); same with "Sawed Off Shotguns," defined as shotguns with a barrel length shorter than 18-inches. Basically they are both illegal here in WA, though no more dangerous than any other gun, which are all SUPPOSED to be dangerous.

Semi-auto guns, defined by one bullet shot with one pull of the trigger (just like your mom's revolver) are the most common weapons in the world, so no, they are not "unusual" at all. "Assault Weapons" are predominantly SEMI-auto her in the US.

Yes, guns are supposed to be dangerous, that’s what they do, though they are not inherently evil as many people on this blog think.


Posted by GeneStoner]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 00:24:43 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:23:02 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Ken Mehlman]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:10:52 -0800 The Stranger What do you not get about the phrase "the Right of THE PEOPLE" ?
Posted by Cascadian Bacon]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:32:01 -0800 The Stranger
I was just pointing out that by your understanding of the intention of "well regulated militia" in the 2nd Amendment, it would seem that we are only guaranteed the right to keep and bear those arms used in our militia duties.
Posted by dwightmoodyforgetsthings]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:02:29 -0800 The Stranger
The 2nd Amendment ain’t about hunting folks; it is the palladium of all other God-given liberties elucidated in the Bill of Rights.

Posted by GeneStoner]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:57:41 -0800 The Stranger Posted by dwightmoodyforgetsthings]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 12:59:27 -0800 The Stranger Posted by GeneStoner]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 12:36:01 -0800 The Stranger
That's in line with my interpretation.
Posted by dwightmoodyforgetsthings]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:15:56 -0800 The Stranger
Back in the 18th century, a “regular” army meant an army that had standard military equipment. So a “well regulated” army was simply one that was “well equipped” and organized. It does not refer to a professional army.

The 17th century folks used the term “standing army” or “regulars” to describe a professional army. Therefore, “a well regulated militia” only means a well equipped militia that was organized and maintained internal discipline. It does not imply the modern meaning of “regulated,” which means controlled or administered by some superior entity.

Federal control over the militia comes from other parts of the Constitution, but not from the Second Amendment.
Posted by GeneStoner]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:22:48 -0800 The Stranger
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." — George Mason

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men capable of bearing arms." — Richard Henry Lee

"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age…" — Title 10, Section 331 of the U.S. Code

Don't worry, we will let you draft-dodge this one also...
Posted by GeneStoner]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:16:30 -0800 The Stranger
Whether it be guns or sudafed, it is not the inanimate object that is the problem, it is what is in the heart and mind of man.

A lunatic or a criminal do not follow laws by nature, so more so-called "gun control" (or sudafed control) will not do a damn thing.


Posted by GeneStoner]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:03:39 -0800 The Stranger
I'm not dancing a jig. In fact, I respect you quite a lot, despite our differences on gun control.

I knew that somebody would point out the lack of background checks on private sales.

Trouble is, would it really help much? It would certainly work with law abiding citizens, but would it work with criminals?

It seems like saying, 'Although ID restrictions on Sudafed are a good idea, if we made mandatory government checks on private sales, we could stop the meth epidemic!'
Posted by CPN]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:52:18 -0800 The Stranger I don't need to refute you, your college socialist level opinion has already be refuted by The Bill of Rights.

What don't you get about the phrase "well regulated"?
Posted by Goldy]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:47:04 -0800 The Stranger If the sales are unregulated with no paperwork and no record of transaction how can you possibly say that it accounts for 40% of the market?

I know you got the statistic from Ronald Reagan's favorite vegetable's campaign to prevent gun violence. Where did they get it? Well they made it up, you would find that they have quite the history of this sort of thing if you bothered to check your sources.

You call yourself a Journalist?
lol
Posted by Cascadian Bacon]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:45:20 -0800 The Stranger
Yeah. Paying attention to creepy guys out in the open on the sidewalk holding up a huge sign saying "I'm a sketchy creep and I love guns!" It's the same as Stalin!
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:42:43 -0800 The Stranger Nice to see that you are in favor of a surveillance state spying on it's citizens.

@37
I don't need to refute you, your college socialist level opinion has already be refuted by The Bill of Rights. Now don't you have something more important to do, like lick the boots of some nanny state politicians.
Posted by Cascadian Bacon]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:38:11 -0800 The Stranger
And it certainly doesn't violate any rules for the FBI, ATF, and DHS to take a few pictures of these gun dorks lining the sidewalks and flag that for future reference.

When you're trying to sift though millions of profiles to try to anticipate where the next domestic terrorist or crazed gunman is coming from, it helps to have mugshots of the jackasses who are members of the nuttiest 10 percent demographic.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:17:01 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Goldy]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:47:35 -0800 The Stranger
If all we get from this buyback is greater public awareness and support for closing this "gun show loophole," then it was worth it just for that.
Posted by Goldy]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:43:59 -0800 The Stranger Posted by catsnbanjos]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 13:47:00 -0800 The Stranger Posted by catsnbanjos]]> Mon, 28 Jan 2013 13:40:43 -0800 The Stranger