Remind me again of your gun laws.

Could someone explain me why the f**c do you need to lisence a silencer in US?

If you need one for a crime you can do a decent one from scrap in carage in about 20mins, ffs...

Here we licence guns, not silencers...

JungleMike Posts: " . . the National Guard confiscating guns during Katrina did alarm me. I have thought hard about what I would do I such a situation and it's not easy . . I think I would try to get ID numbers from the applicable troops and some form of receipt. I'm certainly NOT going to break any law by resisting or heaven forbid, firing on US troops/law-enforcement. If I can ID who took my guns, I will make THEM accountable later. . "[Edited by Don W]

If 'Martial Law' had vbeen declared by the appropriate authority, then thereafter there can be only one armed group permitted. Usually the NG or police. If one was unwisely and obviously armed, despite the ML declaration, then confiscation is the only solution. The soldier on the scene is not obliged to do anything but follow his or her orders. ID is for the movies, and receipts for the birds. ML is not the time or the place for re-negotiations. As for accountability, that would be handled through the courts afterwards, but you can guess demands are not going to be well received. Insurance policies generally exclude losses during ML. Advice? "Leave the guns at home, son, leave your guns at home." Kenny Rogers.

posted by orangetom1999

Don White, I am going to say this again . . about Weaver . . cutting a shotgun barrel to the wrong length does not warrant killing Weaver' wife, son or Dog. Was not Randy Weavers wife holding a child when she was shot?? Think it through. I do fault the authoritys. Very poor leadership . . [Edited by Don W]

I do not recall how many days Weaver willfully endangered the lives of his family and pets by breaking yet another law. It is the law of the land which says when a duly authorized officer orders you to stop, stand aside, and submit to arrest, that you are required to do so. If you choose to disobey, that is called "resisting arrest." Also a crime. The government paid "damages" to Weaver for the unintended loss of life. The settlement was prompted more because local attitudes made a fair trial (in a prospective jury trial) unlikely. There was no legal requirement to pay damages to Weaver. He and he alone caused his losses.

As to Ellian Gonzolez...do not ever try to put on class warfare or politics on me...in the manner you do....Rich Vs Poor..is the ultimate cheap politics to me..and very overdone..in the last two elections. It is the ultimate cop out to me. It is like bottom feeding. IT is cheap politics.

Demogauging politicians find it all to easyto"jerk around" an uninformed citizenry.

I have no doupt that this boy was caught up in politics . . I dont agree with this either . . very poor leadership on the Government side. All the Governments involved.

Only the US government was involved. Florida had no jurisdiction on an illegal immigrant. The elected and appointed representatives of the United States of America cannot sumit to or be thwarted by the old, worn out political aganda of a bunch of disgruntled (and rich) emigres.

As to Waco . . once again 80 people killed.

I believe the tragic outcome at Waco was both caused by and greatly aided by David Karesh - not the FBI or BATF - who poured gasoling on those 'good' folks.

This is poor leadership . . on all levels . . from the top down. No matter what David Koresh did ..it does not warrant killing some 80 people. I do not know what you could possibly be thinking by statements like this Don White.

I forgot how long the US Government waited for David Karesh to obey the laws of the land. At some point in time, you have to stop humoring an adult who acts like child. The entire tragedy is properly laid at David Karesh's feet and those who opted to die with him. It was an example of good leadership at all levels.



[edit on 5/23/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by donwhite
I do not recall how many days Weaver endangered the lives of his family and pets by breaking yet another law. It is the law of the land when a duly authorized officer orders you to stop, stand aside, and submit to arrest, that you are obliged to do so. If you don't, that is called "resisting arrest." A crime. The government paid "damages" for the unintended loss of life. The settlement was prompted more because of local attitudes (in a prospective jury trial) than by any legal requirement to pay damages.

Damages paid for killing an unarmed mother by shooting her in the head while she was holding her infant child has nothing to do with "local attitudes". No jury from any part of the country would have countenanced such actions.

[edit on 23-5-2006 by Winchester Ranger T]

Northwolf,
I am not particularly enamoured with the public having silencers. There is little reason for them in my opinion though I understand your quandry about licensing them. People tend to watch to many movies without thinking abou the details involved. Most silencers ..even the professional ones are good for only so many shots..then require maintnence..parts replacement..etc. Another thing..only the most well made professional silencers are long range tools. Most are made for close range applications.
I myself am a machinist by trade..silencers are not difficult to manufacturer at all unless you are trying to make a reusable and very effecientquiet one ..this requires more attention to details. Most peoples do not have this level of skills. Yes one can make disposable ones very very quickly. Knowlege of handloading ammunitions also helps.

Don White..I'll say this again ..since it keeps going over your head in lieu of the Government/professional side of the fence. Randy Weaver and what happened at Ruby Ridge..does not excuse the unprofessionalism of the Government peoples at all levels..right up to the White House/Department of Justice. Nothing done warrants the killing of Randy Weavers wife, son or dog. Especially since he was surrounded by professionals and so equipped with the latest gadgetery and gimickery. THe total irony of this is that Randy Weaver ..the person they were out to get survived and the rest died...very unprofessional job...very unprofessional.
I'll clarify this for you in case you missed it...the one they were out to get and the one you mentioned ..is alive...They got everyone else...get the point yet???? THese are supposed to be professionals....!!!!! From the top down..professionsals!!!

In the case of Waco, Texas...they killed everyone....everyone....everyone. Combatants as well as non combatants. A very professional job...very professional.
Including the coverup and the spin.
Oh..by the way..I overlooked this in your previous post...is it our habit in this country to kill crazies..or do we institutionalize them?? You need to think before you spin. Nevertheless...it does not once again warrant the killing of 80 people.

Your position is .." at some time the authority of the courts have to be recognized"
What happened to the value and preciousness of life...does it go out the window in the face of political expediency????

In Below Top Secret ..under the Rant Category ...thread on Jacksonville,Florida murder capital of the USA taking the place of Houston , Detroit. Here you try to make the case for removal of guns in the hands of Americans implying the value of life.. Yet here in this thread..in the face of government/political expediency you dismiss government incompetancy and loss of life..for politics...no value to life in these cases..clearly. This will not wash on your part..by people who read and can see this trend line in your reasoning. YOur reasoning is perfectly logical...and reasonable to those who see only one side...to those who can see both sides..it doesnt make good nonsense. Life is either a valuable commodity or it is not...
Historically...always..when politics enters the picture..the value of life goes down...it is not valuable in the face of political expediency...this is historically demonstratable...over and over in history. Always..without exception.
This is the clear historical fingerprint of logical reasonable men. Without exception.


Thanks,
Orangetom

I agree...well said olde man..well said.

This is not Sarajevo, Yugoslavia...where they,governments, mowed down everyone in the recent unpleasantness.

Thanks,
Orangetom

In TX, the laws vary slightly by county, and most of the power is put into the hands of a grand jury, to decide what you can be charged with.

In the urban areas, you will get in trouble for having a firearm in your car. There's a law in TX that if you are traveling more than 2 counties from your home, you can carry a gun for protection. It's important to note that most counties in TX are 25-75 miles across; so you actually have to be traveling. When the HOUSTON PD has tried to hassle visitors from rural areas, the grand juries have asked whether the person had suitcases, etc., and "no billed" (refused to formally charge) the defendant, without which the prosecutor cannot procede to trial.

It's illegal to carry a gun in liquor stores, hospitals, schools, county buildings etc. Other buildings can be declared a "No Gun Zone," by the owner, and it's a crime to carry a gun there.

On the other hand, in rural TX, you also see signs that say "Guns Welcome! Help Us Deter Crime!" It really varies with the locality and the attitudes in that spot.

There was a notorious case in TX in the 1990's, that Ted Koppell raised hell with on "Nightline." A guy in rural Dallas County heard a noise in his driveway at 3 in the morning. He had defaulted on the bank payments on his pickup. He saw a guy trying to force the lock on the truck, and the homeowner shot him.

The homeowner told the grand jury that in his mind, the bank would never believe it if the truck was stolen---they'd think he sold it and was trying to collect insurance. The man said he shot because of that. He shot the guy in the leg, but it hit an artery and the guy died.

It turns out that the "thief" was a "repo man," hired by the bank to collect the pickup. He had made no legal attempt to contact the owner or confiscate the pickup, and was known for just stealing vehicles the bank wanted back.

The grand jury "no-billed" the homeowner, and told the judge that repo or not, the man was a thief under the law, and the homeowner was not under an obligation to risk his own life by announcing his attention to shoot.

Ted Koppell railed about it for weeks, especially to the overseas press. His attitude has helped fuel the perception of texans as trigger-happy retards, or criminally-insane bounty hunters and repo-men.

I would also point out that, along with a high ratio of gun ownership (~50% of all homes statewide contain a gun), Texas has the lowest rate of "home invasions" in the nation.

Likewise, Texas DPS/Highway patrol, and rural police tend to be especially polite, since about half of all cars in rural areas contain a firearm as well. If you've ever been stopped by state police in Massachussetts or another anti-gun state, you'll instantly notice the disdain cops there have for tax payers.

Concealed Carry Permits
For $200 dollars plus instructor fees, you can take a 6-week course and be certified to carry a concealed pistol. There are extensive background checks, and I think they register the gun you train with, although you are permitted for any pistol in the same category (revolver or semiauto). You also have to get the sheriff's permission.

In addition, because of the background check, you are allowed to buy guns without any waiting period (although they'll check to see if you're wanted).

Since the program was implemented 10 years ago, there have only been 4 cases of a permit-holder being charged with misuse of a pistol. All 4 have been found guilty and sentenced. There are probably 100,000 Texans with permits.

When I last worked in Law enforcement, CCP-holders were much more accurate with their weapons than police themselves. I think your odds of being shot by a stray bullet from a cop was like, 11%. While a bullet from a CCP-holder hit a buystander about 4% of the time.

There have been about 10 cases in 10 years where an officer was being assaulted by criminals, and a CCP-holder came to the defense of police, and either drove off the attackers, or helped arrest them.

Also, in the Two Texas episodes where someone went "postal," private gun-owners either shot the perp (at the Luby's in Garland Texas), or fired back at the assailant and forced him to take cover and quit shooting people ( the University of TX in 1967).

In response to someone who posted that you could kill people in rural areas: this is the main reason why eveyone is armed out in the sticks. Where the police have a 2-hour response time, it's up to you to fend off any attackers. Imagine what it is like to live where there are no police---you'd be fairly paranoid, too. And own some good dogs, as well.
.

Great post..thanks again.

First off ...let me say..I have no beef with the authorities per se...Police in particular. They have a difficult job and are often caught inbetween the local realitys and political necessity. By political necessity I mean carrying out the political necessity of any particular administration. Not a position I envy in anyone. This would make thier job doubly hazardous. The public requirement and then the political will which changes like the wind and fashion of the day.

I do have a beef with the political will of different administrations which changes like the wind...for political reasons..not necessarily the benifit of the public. I strongly disapprove of this type of political whoredom. I also do not believe in the benovelant tendency of governments..I believe in the natural tendency of governments twords mischief for political reasons..not for the benifit of the public welfare.

I agree with you about people owning guns..particularly in the country...where the local constabulary is hours away. People out in these places tend to be more independent and self sufficient. People intending to violate the law...need to think further when dealing with these types of peoples. It would be wise of them.

Problems with people carrying concealed in this state also have been very low..almost non existant. The cases here where people use their firearms to protect themselves and their property are almost never reported as compared to the sensationalism promoted by the media and politics when crimes are reported. This slant is deliberately cultivated for political reasons/expediency.

I agree with you in your post that people who practice regularly with thier firearms have more accuracy when using them than the others. It is a sad state of affairs which happens so often that those using thier firearms in the carrying out of crimes or breaking the law often are such lousy shots that they kill or injury many bystanders. This has been amply demonstrated in this town many times.
I do not believe this is justification as so many are wont to attempt to use or misuse...to warrant taking the firearms away from people who dont commit crimes or break the law. All this type of thinking and practice does historically is entrench career politicians and career political partys. It never improves the safety of the public.

Here in this state you can carry open..concealed with a permit. I know people who do both. I dont get nervous around them ..either way. I am just not easily given to fright. Texas seems to be more restrained than here but I understand that this is a individual state by state option. No problem here. I believe in states rights.
I also understand what you are saying about states like Mass. and others with very restrictive state laws...the constabulary having contempt for the public. I dont approve of this either. If this is civilization ..you can keep it.

Thanks Doc for another great post,
Orangetom

Orangetom,

What state do you live in?

One of the things I didn't communicate very well is that, in TX, context is everything. People who reside here know that. The law has some leeway, and is applied much more strictly in metropolitan areas.

I grew up in a rural area, and I still recall my first day on the job as a bag-boy at the local grocery. (I was in high school)

A woman, wearing chaps, spurs, and an ancient colt peacemaker walked up to me and said, "where's the beer?" I told her it was a dry county, with no alcohol sales. She asked me where the nearest beer was, and I gave her directions (20 miles). Then she asked about the milk.

I pointed out that she was armed. She said "oops. Been out building fence all day. Rattlesnakes everywhere since the last rain."

Anyway, that crap would've gotten her arrested in downtown Dallas, even 20 years ago. But in BFE Texas, nobody was surprised. I think the manager kept a pistol in the safe and a shotgun under his desk. Never was robbed, though.

Anwyay, what state do you live in, and is there variation between rural/urban? Half of all texans still live in a county with less than 100,000 people.

.

Before I shove off to work here...

I understand that in Texas context is everything..States Rights ..no problem with that here. I dont plan however to live in Texas.

I am in Virginia on the Chesapeake Bay. City of Hampton. Recent law changes here in this state have authorized open carry as well as concealed carry with permits.

I dont know what the need was for the open carry law..one could always carry open here. Just that concealed permits were very difficult to acquire. I suppose that with the concealed carry laws going into effect someone wanted to officially put the open carry law in to effect..or on record. Not many people carry open but I have seen it and done the same.

I have carried rifles and shotguns in the rack behind the seat of my pick up..the window rack. ..no problem here. The local constabulary has never stopped me. I dont do this often but have had no problem with it.

Citys do tend to be a bit more nervous about firearms in the hands of the public than out in the country. I understand this ..much more wildlife in the citys than out in the country. I just dont approve of the tendency of politics to attempt to make the public guilty of some kind of crime and remove thier private property without a crime being committed by them or being tried for a crime. This never works to protect the public long term but it does make the politicians/political partys more secure.

thanks for your post,
Orangetom

Originally posted by Winchester Ranger T

posted by donwhite

". . Weaver endangered the lives of his family by "resisting arrest." The government paid "damages" for the unintended loss of life. The settlement was prompted more because of local attitudes (in a prospective jury trial) than by any legal requirement to pay damages.

Damages paid for killing an unarmed mother by shooting her in the head while she was holding her infant child has nothing to do with "local attitudes". No jury from any part of the country would have countenanced such actions.

[Edited by Don W]

The tragedy wuold not have occurred but for Randy Weaver who was fully prepared to put his family at risk to avoid arrest and probable jail time. Very selfish on his part and totally irreponsible. Whether or not to pay damages always includes estimations of local juror's attutudes in cases where sympathy is likely to influence jurors. The payment was probably less than the cost of trial and appeals if the US had lost the case. Payments in settlement cases are never considered admissions of liability. Or fault, or blame. If there had been a trial, Randy Weaver would have been a co-defendant because he was the first causation. The police are never held to perfection in the performance of their duty. They are required to use only "ordinary" care. This Weaver incident is a non-starter in the real world.



[edit on 5/23/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by orangetom1999

I dont know what the need was for the open carry law..one could always carry open here. Just that concealed permits were very difficult to acquire. I suppose that with the concealed carry laws going into effect someone wanted to officially put the open carry law in to effect..or on record. Not many people carry open but I have seen it and done the same.

I have seen it when a business-owner was bringing a really HUGE amount of cash into the bank. Like, $80,000 in twenties. He had called the bank and told them that he was concerned. The bank had no problem with him being armed, but they asked for a police escort so that the public could see that it wasn't a bank robbery. ( And so he couldn't stage one, if the thought crossed his mind.)

In my experience, business owners are about the only people who request to carry a gun in a commercial area. The only times I saw it, everyone agreed it was totally justified.

Orangetom, I don't know if I gave the wrong impression, or phrased things to make you think I'm anti gun or something.

I am not; ALL of the cops I worked with were pro-gun. The only Anti's in my state tend to be city police officials in large cities---where I suspect it is largely political---in my state, those are the liberal-leaning, pro-gun control areas: Austin, Dallas, Houston, etc.

Anyway. I'm pro 2nd amendment.

.

Out here lots of shooters and hunters use silencers (mainly in rifles) because it reduces the noice that shooting ranges cause to the neighbourhood (thus making ranges closer to the cities more acceptable)

Other reason is that a silencer, even when used with full power rounds, reduces fatigue on shooter during training.

Third reason is that they allow hunters to hunt wihtout ear plugs etc. in orser to hear their prey and still avoid damage to their hearing.



As for concealed carry/open carry, out here you can't carry loaded guns unless you are hunting. certain groups can get a special warrant to carry (judges, prosecutors, prison officials offduty etc.)

No Sir,

YOu never gave me the impression you were anti 2nd Amendment. I never thought that about your posts.

Obviously I am pro 2nd Amendment. I am also for responsibility in firerams ownership and usage.
I do not care for being around the shooting range with wildlife who mostly make noise and showmanship. I move to the other end of the range or leave. If I need that sillyness I turn on the television.

Thanks Doc for some great posts,
Orangetom

Obviously I am pro 2nd Amendment. I am also for responsibility in firerams ownership and usage.
I do not care for being around the shooting range with wildlife who mostly make noise and showmanship. I move to the other end of the range or leave.

[cheney humor]

Serious Hunters don't drink; serious drinkers don't hunt.

[/cheney humor]

There are four people I hunt with; and only one is a family member. And I have a large family . . .


I know this thread is about gun laws, but I just have to mention the "magnum envy" you see among firearms enthusiasts. In my experience, this is due to the fact that most hobbyists don't shoot enough to get really good. So they hope to make up for it with firepower.

For instance, I got a 6 pt. white-tail, using a .243. (unsuccessful) Hunters who saw me were laughing at the "kiddie gun," saying that you need a 7mm or .30-06 to "git a deer."

I suggested that they probably couldn't hit a deer if one was caught in the headlights of their monster truck, and that it doesn't matter what's in your gun if you cannot find the target. You can imagine the response.

Same with upland game. I hunt pheasant with a 12 guage, but I use low brass, and I wing 'em. I hunt for the meat, so I'm always trying to down the bird and have as much good meat as possible. People hunting with extra-grain magnum superloads crack me up. I'd be upset if those types ever actually hit something.

Another bit of this is the factoid that 80% of deer taken in the USA are shot within a one eighth of a mile of a road. I have taken deer on the last day of the season, just by getting out of the truck and *walking* (OMG!) into the woods . . .

I even saw a guy with a "boom box" up in a tree. I've also gotten deer that were fleeing from a party of hunters on ATV's.

Just trying to highlight the fact that its always the nuts & neanderthals that make any human endeaver look "stoopit."

.

[edit on 24-5-2006 by dr_strangecraft]

I never understood the attraction to these 7mm magnums and others of this ilk. I have for some time now thought that someone is on a puppet string here.
The manufacturers have for some time now ...worked planned obscolescence
to sell thier products...even in the firearms industry.

The .243 or sometimes refered to as the 6mm has been putting meat on the table for years and years before the magnums came around...and worked just fine in capable hands. All the magnums in the world will not make up for poor skills.

Agree also with your use of Low Brass.

While I am not much of a hunter...I do like to fish. My goal in fishing is meat on the table..not trophys. The closest I will ever come to trophy mounting is a photograph...the meat goes to the table.

Use the minimum of what I need to put the meat on the table and dont go overboard on the cost or the power needed to accomplish this goal ..that is a good philosophy and practice. Always.

Another great post Doc,
Thanks,
Orangetom

Out here we have laws that say what caliber you can use for what animal (minimum power limits) Hence most use .308win or 7.62x54R in their rifle hunting, since those are minimums for Moose, which is one of the main Game animals, so the same guns are used for Deers too.

Originally posted by northwolf
Out here we have laws that say what caliber you can use for what animal (minimum power limits) Hence most use .308win or 7.62x54R in their rifle hunting, since those are minimums for Moose, which is one of the main Game animals, so the same guns are used for Deers too.

Not sure where you are (moose country, obviously), but that sounds common-sense to me. Texas white tail are smaller than their northern counterparts. Moose and Elk would definitely take a bigger caliber, since they are so much larger.

What I was thinking about is people thinking that a more powerful weapon is ALWAYS better IN EVERY SITUATION than a weapon that might be more suitable.

Another example is home defense. If you live in an apartment with nothing more than drywall between you and your neighbors, maybe a 357 magnum or a 44 mag is not really a good choice for home defense.

I have things like that, but then I live in a secluded area. Frankly, anyone who makes it over the concertina wire and past the dogs pretty much deserves what I ventilate 'em with.

Another consideration is range. A .243 has a shorter effective range than a 7mm. But in the dense scrub of the Texas hill country, you rarely have a shot at more than 150 yards. So range isn't really the question: it comes down to getting an accurate shot. And if you cannot get a clean shot from 150 yards, well then a bigger gun won't help things much.

I'm from Finland... so my point of view might be quite different on some issues...

One thing that i've noticed is how different hunting practices are here and in USA, for example small pest hunting in USA is mainly done with rifles, prone shooting prairie dogs etc. Out here most small game is dealt with shotguns.

and .222, .223 and 6mm are mainly bird hunting calibers (we have some fairly large birds that sit a tree tops)

[edit on 24-5-2006 by northwolf]

Originally posted by northwolf
for example small pest hunting in USA is mainly done with rifles, prone shooting prairie dogs etc. Out here most small game is dealt with shotguns.

and .222, .223 and 6mm are mainly bird hunting calibers (we have some fairly large birds that sit a tree tops)

[edit on 24-5-2006 by northwolf]

On the American plains, there are no trees. Shotguns peter out after about 50 yards (meters) or so. Prairie dogs have a "sentry" that stands on his hind legs and watches the horizon while the rest feed. They have keen eyesight, and can easily see a human or vehicle approaching on the horizon. Sniper-style rifles are required.

Unless you have cover, you need an accurate rifle. When I've hunted prairie dog, we used an old one-piece school desk-chair that made a great shooting rest.

most birds, whether upland game or migratory waterfowl, are hunted with a shotgun here.

It's interesting to hear about the different styles in different areas.
.

Originally posted by donwhite
This Weaver incident is a non-starter in the real world.

A dead wife and a dead son, killed by the FBI and the Federal Marshalls service respectively is big news in the real World, even if you believe that illegal trading in short barrelled shotguns somehow justifies their killings.

We can but wait for the next Ruby Ridge or Waco to see how the denizens of the Federal government react to the next armed stand off.

There is is an old saying that says:

"When you have a shiny new hammer, most everything looks like a nail".

The Federal government has many such hammers.