Here we go again. More circumventing the 2nd by the Admin

a reply to: intrptr

By all means, I wasn't directing my remarks to true patriots, those are even fewer than "average joe garage gun factory enthusiasts".

How would you define "true patriot"?

I ask because that term has been hijacked by the right wing propaganda machine and it's always interesting to see how it has affected people.

originally posted by: Answer
What you folks really want to argue about are machineguns. They are the only "military arm" that would be truly attainable to the average person if all 2nd Amendment restrictions went away.

Stop tap dancing around it and say what you mean.

That's really the crux of the issue, isn't it? We can stretch the meaning to absurd lengths to make a rhetorical point, but as a practical matter, fully automatic and, to a lesser extent, semi-automatic firearms are what the primary aspects of this debate are really about. Realistically, these are the practical limit of attainability due to financial considerations, and in the case of the fully automatic weapons, even that's stretching it for the vast majority of people.

a reply to: Indigo5

The purchase of anything over the internet requires either a credit card, or a check/money order.
Either of those require an ADDRESS and a person to send it to.

There is no need, nor any reason why people need to have their rights further restricted by moronic laws stating ammunition can't be purchased over the internet.

This kind of crap is so beyond the "common sense" crutch that Anti-2nd people pitch, it is beyond all belief that most can walk and chew gum at the same time.

a reply to: vor78

The only reason why FA firearms are out of the reach of the average person, is due to supply and demand. The supply is extremely limited, and the demand is high, thus bringing costs in the $10s of thousands.

Remove the illegal restrictions in place, and watch the price go down. And....after a short period of time, demand will as well, as FA is a fad for normal joes. Unless it is for suppressive fire, it is a waste. But, it sure is fun to dump 30 rounds of 9mm through a FA MP5. And expensive.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: intrptr

By all means, I wasn't directing my remarks to true patriots, those are even fewer than "average joe garage gun factory enthusiasts".

How would you define "true patriot"?

I ask because that term has been hijacked by the right wing propaganda machine and it's always interesting to see how it has affected people.

I'm not "right wing" propaganda apparatus…

and we will keep inventing ways and means to circumvent your legislation using technology and ingenuity

Nor am I a legislator.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: vor78

The only reason why FA firearms are out of the reach of the average person, is due to supply and demand. The supply is extremely limited, and the demand is high, thus bringing costs in the $10s of thousands.

Remove the illegal restrictions in place, and watch the price go down. And....after a short period of time, demand will as well, as FA is a fad for normal joes. Unless it is for suppressive fire, it is a waste. But, it sure is fun to dump 30 rounds of 9mm through a FA MP5. And expensive.

Precisely.

It's the forbidden fruit syndrome.

a reply to: intrptr

I'm not "right wing" propaganda apparatus…

Never claimed as much. I simply asked for your definition of "patriot" due to your interesting comment you made previously.

By all means, I wasn't directing my remarks to true patriots, those are even fewer than "average joe garage gun factory enthusiasts".

How do you define what a true patriot is?

a reply to: introvert

I despise labels.

Other than human and inhumane, maybe.

If I have to use a label tis because language has indeed shaped peoples beliefs about others. Dividing us up into classes is the goal to keep us quarreling amongst ourselves about what side of the fence we are on.

My earlier comment to you should speak for itself.

Never claimed as much. I simply asked for your definition of "patriot" due to your interesting comment you made previously.

No, you said "Your legislation" can't take guns away, mistaking me for the anti gun crowd… and maybe a member of officialdom, too.

For shame…

a reply to: intrptr

I was not part of that conversation and I never said that. RalagaNarHallas is the one you need to talk to about that.

I was only curious about how you defined patriotism since you said this:

By all means, I wasn't directing my remarks to true patriots, those are even fewer than "average joe garage gun factory enthusiasts".

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: introvert

Then the attack on ammo sales online..thehill.com...

buyers would still be able to complete an Internet sale, but would need to present a photo I.D. in-person at an authorized dealer before the shipment can be made.

Again...seems reasonable..
James Homes in Colorado?...The theater shooter?

Holmes also bought 3,000 rounds of ammunition for the pistols, 3,000 rounds for the M&P15, and 350 shells for the shotgun over the Internet.

vs. this

On June 25, less than a month before the shooting, Holmes emailed an application to join a gun club in Byers, Colorado. The owner, Glenn Rotkovich, called him several times throughout the following days to invite him to a mandatory orientation, but could only reach his answering machine. Due to the nature of Holmes' voice mail, which he described as "bizarre, freaky", "guttural, spoken with a deep voice, incoherent and rambling", Rotkovich instructed his staff to inform him if Holmes showed up, though Holmes neither appeared at the gun range nor called back.

en.wikipedia.org...

There is a value to non-digital communications. I trust a gun dealer more than I do paypal to determine if someone is out of their mind.

Of course it seems reasonable, to you.

If James Holmes purchased his ammo at WalMart, what would your solution be, then?

The anti-gun legislators pick any piece of a tragedy that they can exploit for their agenda. You'd do well to not read their nonsense and claim "oh that seems reasonable..." because you're approaching from a position of ignorance and buying into propaganda.

If they can't go after the gun, they go after the magazines. If they can't go after the magazines, they go after the ammo. If they can't go after the ammo, they go after the components used to make the ammo. Etc. Etc. Etc. until they find a loophole that works. This is why we know that "reasonable restrictions" are just a sugar-coated facade for total elimination.

Those numbers on the ammo also sound like total BS. That would be easily $2500 worth of ammo after shipping. From what I've read, Holmes was unemployed at the time of the shooting but he had a spare $2500+ laying around to order his ammo?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: intrptr

I was not part of that conversation and I never said that. RalagaNarHallas is the one you need to talk to about that.

I was only curious about how you defined patriotism since you said this:

"By all means, I wasn't directing my remarks to true patriots, those are even fewer than "average joe garage gun factory enthusiasts". "

My bad, sorry, I said that to someone else. Thanks for correcting me.

pa·tri·ot
ˈpātrēət/Submit
noun
1.
a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.
synonyms: nationalist, loyalist; More
2.
trademark
an automated surface-to-air missile designed for preemptive strikes.

Depends on who you ask.

Now that I'm looking into the amount of money he spent on everything right before the shooting, it seems fishy as all hell. How does an unemployed person afford all this?

On May 22, 2012, Holmes purchased a Glock 22 pistol at a Gander Mountain shop in Aurora. Six days later, on May 28, he bought a Remington 870 Express Tactical shotgun at a Bass Pro Shops in Denver.[59] On June 7, just hours after failing his oral exam at the university,[47] he purchased a Smith & Wesson M&P15 semi-automatic rifle from a Gander Mountain in Thornton, with a second Glock 22 pistol at the same Bass Pro Shops in Denver on July 6.[60] All the weapons were bought legally and background checks were performed.[61] In the four months prior to the shooting, Holmes also bought 3,000 rounds of ammunition for the pistols, 3,000 rounds for the M&P15, and 350 shells for the shotgun over the Internet.[62][63] On July 2, he placed an order for a Blackhawk Urban Assault Vest, two magazine holders, and a knife at an online retailer.[62][64] He also purchased spike strips, which he later admitted he planned to use in case police shot at him or followed him in a car chase.[65]

That's around $3000 worth of guns and another $2500 worth of ammo.

a reply to: Answer

Govt backed College loan....................most college kids don't use 100% of that money on classes.

Seems to be that the Govt Indigo5 so loves funded the killing of innocent people.

We MUST investigate all those that are receiving funds in such a manner. They need to submit to background checks, mental health evaluations and so on...............................

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Indigo5

Again...seems reasonable.. James Homes in Colorado?...The theater shooter?

Have any proof that he shot 3,000 rounds in the theater?

He killed 12 and wounded 58 people.
He could have accomplished this using 200 rounds... easily.

So he could have purchased those rounds in a store like Walmart, at a gun show or through a private purchase.

As if the internet was the only way a mass shooter can pull off a crime.

Not sure you really read my post at all? Yes .."he could have purchased those rounds in a store like Walmart, at a gun show or through a private purchase." all of which involve a live human being who might have the opportunity to say...you look and sound insane and I am not comfortable selling to you..

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: Indigo5

buyers would still be able to complete an Internet sale, but would need to present a photo I.D. in-person at an authorized dealer before the shipment can be made.

Again...seems reasonable..

Maybe if the buyer is a total, complete and obvious nut job the dealer might spot it, but its far from certain.

Right...Like the gun range owner with James Holmes.

Soooo...What's the issue?

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Indigo5

The purchase of anything over the internet requires either a credit card, or a check/money order.

Nothing personal...but I don't think you have kept up on the internet.

That said...an electronic payment processing system vetting ammo purchases vs. a live person?

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Answer

Govt backed College loan....................most college kids don't use 100% of that money on classes.

Most of the govn't backed loans go straight to the school. The only way he would have had free use of the money is if he had personal loans.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Indigo5

Again...seems reasonable.. James Homes in Colorado?...The theater shooter?

Have any proof that he shot 3,000 rounds in the theater?

He killed 12 and wounded 58 people.
He could have accomplished this using 200 rounds... easily.

So he could have purchased those rounds in a store like Walmart, at a gun show or through a private purchase.

As if the internet was the only way a mass shooter can pull off a crime.

Not sure you really read my post at all? Yes .."he could have purchased those rounds in a store like Walmart, at a gun show or through a private purchase." all of which involve a live human being who might have the opportunity to say...you look and sound insane and I am not comfortable selling to you..

He was able to buy 4 guns at different stores shortly before the shooting so, obviously, he was able to present himself as a sane individual.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: introvert

Then the attack on ammo sales online..thehill.com...

buyers would still be able to complete an Internet sale, but would need to present a photo I.D. in-person at an authorized dealer before the shipment can be made.

Again...seems reasonable..
James Homes in Colorado?...The theater shooter?

Holmes also bought 3,000 rounds of ammunition for the pistols, 3,000 rounds for the M&P15, and 350 shells for the shotgun over the Internet.

vs. this

On June 25, less than a month before the shooting, Holmes emailed an application to join a gun club in Byers, Colorado. The owner, Glenn Rotkovich, called him several times throughout the following days to invite him to a mandatory orientation, but could only reach his answering machine. Due to the nature of Holmes' voice mail, which he described as "bizarre, freaky", "guttural, spoken with a deep voice, incoherent and rambling", Rotkovich instructed his staff to inform him if Holmes showed up, though Holmes neither appeared at the gun range nor called back.

en.wikipedia.org...

There is a value to non-digital communications. I trust a gun dealer more than I do paypal to determine if someone is out of their mind.

Of course it seems reasonable, to you.

If James Holmes purchased his ammo at WalMart, what would your solution be, then?

Solution? No. But a mechanism for caution. The owner of the gun range knew enough listening to James Holmes guttural, unbalanced ramble on his answering machine to know there was trouble there and to instruct his employees to not allow James on the shooting range before fetching the manager.

Yes..If James Holmes had showed up in his "Joker" get-up at Walmart looking clearly unbalanced and unable to speak rational sentences, perhaps he would have been denied service at the gun counter. Maybe even made a threat and been arrested before he burst into that theater a few days later.

I think I am about done guys...happy to serve as rhetorical object for you guys to scramble on and pat eachother on the back But I am not feeling as if there is enough rational arguments here to make my input anything useful. I don't think insane people (determined to be so in a court of law) should own guns....and I see nothing wrong with having a human look someone in the eyes before selling them large quantities of ammunition or guns.

We seem to whole-heartedly disagree on those fronts..

Catch ya later...

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: Indigo5

buyers would still be able to complete an Internet sale, but would need to present a photo I.D. in-person at an authorized dealer before the shipment can be made.

Again...seems reasonable..

Maybe if the buyer is a total, complete and obvious nut job the dealer might spot it, but its far from certain.

Right...Like the gun range owner with James Holmes.

Soooo...What's the issue?

The range owner only heard the voicemail. The gun store workers who sold Holmes 4 guns obviously didn't think he was insane.