Yep, can't even talk about the new d line coach on the football board I read without it getting shut down within hours. Well played semi-civil people.
People are seriously freaked. It's unlike anything I've ever seen before. Luckily I've been stock piling for a while.
People are funny. Wish I had an AR-15 to sell. I stated earlier in the thread that there would be a high-capacity magazine ban coming, but I really don't think so. As long as the House and Senate are split, there's really no danger. I wonder how many gun manufacturer stocks Dianne Feinstein owns....
An old timer and gun store owner commented that he hasn't seen this kind of buying fervor since Kennedy and King were assassinated and a weapons ban was on the horizon. Even .22 ammo is hard to come by. Even reloading components are practically impossible to find. Usually, reloading guys are immune or at least insulated from this kind of stuff.
What's the over/under on nice pieces of paper showing up at ranges in the near future with a picture of the lovely Dianne Feinstein on them?
And they'll probably charge $24.99 per target. What a buncha fucking price gouging bastards, they are.
There's a three and a half year old, 72 page thread just like this on another section of the Board, too. Amazing.
File this under Unintended Consequences: My idiot sister has decided to jump on the bandwagon to "get a gun now before I can't get one at all". Never mind that any kind of outright ban on all firearms is well nigh impossible. So this moron (can you feel the sibling love?) who has no criminal record, is of legal age, and has no history of mental illness, are therefore has few barriers to aquiring one, is buying a gun. She can barely spell gun, has never hunted or fired one for any purpose, and, I might add, is sober less often than me. This person, who is one of the least responsible people I know, and I wouldn't trust with a fucking spork, will be in possession of a firearm. And she was swayed by friends that are just as stupid as she is. For every kakatoch, Vanilla, and LatinGroove, who all appear to semi-intelligent and knowledgeable gun owners, there are 3 drooling idiots who want to get their hands on a gun for a variety of ill-considered, poorly developed reasons. Call me elitist (that fact that most people who vote have the right to do so disturbs me as well). But this is the crap that gives me pause folks.
Are you both within decent driving distance of each other? If so, sign both of you up for a firearms safety class. Maybe she will learn something and be a little better off than she is now.
An indoor shooting range opened up near us recently (we live within 5 miles of each other). I've already been there, taken some basic instruction, and fired a hand gun. I'm not anti-gun. Target shooting was a blast. The thought of fresh venison has me drooling right now. I'm anti-stupid-people-with-guns. Good luck with legislation for that. Good idea though - if and when the unthinkable occurs, I will encourage her to join me there.
I think it's a great idea, and in the end more range time for you too. *Fun update... AR15.com (and others) are suing the State of New York, declaring the gun control act NY recently passed as unconstitutional- violating the 5th and 14th amendments. Read the legal notice here: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.nysrpa.org/files/SAFENoticeOfClaim.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.nysrpa.org/files/SAFENoticeOfClaim.pdf</a>
In their haste to pass this thing before even the citizenry got a chance to read it, nobody noticed that it didn't have an addendum for law enforcement. So all the cops' Glock 17 mags will be illegal too once this shitshow gets legs. IF it gets legs.
Good letter on the subject written by a friend of mine which I signed. Worth a read. <a class="postlink" href="http://sofrep.com/16644/1000-green-berets-sign-letter-of-support-for-2nd-amendment/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sofrep.com/16644/1000-green-bere ... amendment/</a>
I was reasonably convinced, until I came to this: This is dumb at best, intentionally deceptive at worst. Leaving aside the dubious 'clearly indicates' wording, a 'direct relationship' implies a causal relationship without coming out and saying it. It's careful word choice designed to lie without actually lying. They recommend that 'gratuitous' violence is discouraged? Great, who decides what's gratuitous and what's necessary? Also, why movies and videogames, but not books? What's the rationale? Is it because banning and censoring books is so strongly associated with oppressive regimes in the public mind, whereas movies and videogames are fair game? The paragraph above strikes me as eerily similar to the weapons ban that its decrying: poorly thought out, silly scapegoating nonsense. Also, I'm far less worried about war being 'sold as entertainment' to our children than I am about it being sold to our adults. Let's face it: the State sells war as something glorious every time it needs a fresh influx of soldiers to fight a war, and there's plenty of advertisements put out by Governments the world over to support that. The last stats I saw suggested that 80%+ of America's youth play videogames. Even if only half of those people are playing violent video games (and I suspect it's more), that's 40% of your youth. How many of that 40% go on to shoot up a school? 0.00000000000000000001%? Oh, but wait, that's because only the 0.x^11% that go on to be murderous pricks are playing the 'gratuitously' violent games, right? Get the fuck out.
The whole blaming video games for our murder rate and desensitization towards violence never made sense to me. For a start the data doesn't actually suggest a correlation between our love for video games and homicides. If you're too lazy to read the article, it's worth it to take a second to at least look at the graphs. Ok, and if you don't trust statistics? Well, all of these mass shooters have glaring emotional dysfunctions totally absent from video games. Yes, some of them played xbox/nintendo/whatever, but practically everyone in that age range does at least occasionally. That's about as reliable as saying someone's preference for hamburgers drove them to kill. Regarding other murders, there's usually a motive, altercation, upbringing, etc that explains the cause. You don't hear about murders from that really well adjusted kid who just seemed to like halo too much. The connection is an easy intuitive leap to make, but the evidence supporting it dries up quickly after that.