Healy to lend voice.

[71montess]

What is stream and twitch stream, and I don't want to "Google" it.

Don’t let the streams cross !

 

[drgrant]

Scuse me while I go eat some humble pie

Good on you for stopping the washing machine and maybe correcting the unbalanced load? I mean we get it, everyone here has thrown a stupid comforter in a washing machine and then realized they f***ed up / regretted it once it gets to spin cycle....

FWIW this thread has only occurred about 48 times before. Usually a couple steps back and some introspection clears up the problem. especially considering the
audience... nobody here is going to be friendly to stuff like gating, mandatory training, etc, for obvious reasons. Hell if I took an informal survey I could probably get at least 100+ votes that say "Background checks to buy guns are completely foul" and IMHO thats not even a remotely extreme position in my book.

 

[71montess]

f*** that. Never got a shot, one time I caught covid I had a fever and chills and body aches. Tylenol and motrin handled the fever which got rid of everything else.

Don’t be so quick to give the liberal antis an inch. We already compromise with the 20,000 or so gun laws on the books now. Let them eat shit.

 

[drgrant]

like if I could somehow sell tickets to Lautenberg's grave piss trough, for $20 apiece to get access to piss on that a**h***s grave, I'd probably make about $1000 in an hour, just consider much of the audience that way. (id buy at least $100 worth for myself but thats besides the point)

 

[peterk123]

Here’s an idea: Only shoot at clubs that require an orientation that goes over basic firearms safety. I live in a constitutional carry state. We don’t have any more firearms accident than the gestapo states that mandate what you want to mandate here. And I shoot at a private club that vets it’s members prior to allowing them to shoot there.

That’s a lot better solution than you suggesting a government that wants to disarm the populace to decide who can or can’t own or purchase firearms.

I am willing to bet that most of the kids here in Montana under the age of ten know more about firearms and firearms safety than Agnotology. A training course does nothing but check a box. A right that is passed on from generation to generation, and is honored and respected, is the most valuable training on earth. Agnotology; interesting handle. I am willing to admit my ignorance though. I had to look up the term.

Okay, getting off this train. Time to post something happy, like fishing the Gallatin today!

 

[Optimator]

What, because I don't want a moron who doesn't know the safety from the trigger in the next lane shooting me because he was too stupid to read the manual? Because they don't know how to clear their firearm without pulling the trigger? I don't care who wins a Darwin Award, I just don't want them to give me theirs. Here's a great quote from Carlin - "Imagine the intelligence of the average person. Now realize half of people are stupider than that."

Actually yes. If you don't want to live with that feeling of fear, don't go to the range. And that's what it is, a feeling. Getting shot at a range from someone else negligently discharging their firearm is not a statistically significant hazard.

The LTC curriculum does not make you a safe firearms owner. You are lectured about the tenets of firearms safety and safe storage, but repetition and experience cements learning, not sitting through a class for a few hours then shooting a few rounds down range.

Your proposed Firearms Safety Identification Card similarly does very little to ensure actual firearms safety, except to allay some of your fears. To address your Carlin quote--If I imagine the intelligence of the average person, then assume half of the population falls below that, then I can't imagine having them sit through a 3 hour class makes them any less liable to flag me or look down a barrel to see if there's a jam. To me, when a gun is running smoothly that's when everything's fine and dandy. When you have an actual malfunction, that's when your training kicks in, but if you do not have actual training, you are liable to panic and everything you got talked at for three hours goes out the window.

My feeling on the subject is, when you purchase a firearm, you are purchasing an inanimate object. As such, the act of purchasing should not be impeded in the name of others' safety, because the gun has yet do do anything at your command. It's not going to do squat sitting in a drawer which is what a ton of pandemic buyers did. For the actual operation of a firearm, there are already an unbelievable number of laws on the books that govern illegal uses of the firearm. If you are unfamiliar with the operation of the firearm, you can get instruction. Why do you need to create preconditions to a purchase, when the lion's share of learning is done post-purchase?

If a range wants to institute a safety class or brief prior to being able to shoot, that's fine, it's a private business or organization, and they have to pay business insurance.

EDIT: whoops I see you've acquiesced that safety training is be a "nice-to-have" vs. something that should be mandatory.

 

[pastera]

Hell if I took an informal survey I could probably get at least 100+ votes that say "Background checks to buy guns are completely foul" and IMHO thats not even a remotely extreme position in my book.

If you aren't safe enough to own a gun in public then they shouldn't have let you out of jail...

 

[Mesatchornug]

Scuse me while I go eat some humble pie

Since I now need to update my brain, what prevents a Democrat majority SCOTUS from ruling Heller, Bruen, Miller, got it wrong? That Roe v Wade was right ? There is nothing to prevent the laws see-sawing then? In which case, nothing matters besides who is in power.

Strictly speaking? Nothing.

Philosophically? Maintaining an impartial judiciary is what guards us from the tyranny of that "Least Dangerous Branch."

The Court occasionally gets things wrong. Sometimes, they had bad facts (e.g., Miller). Others, they wanted to do politics (e.g., Schenck).

This is just one more reason that it's important to limit the power of government. If we don't give them these powers to begin with, we don't have to spend a century unwinding these decisions.

(It's also why I so often remind people the problem is with Progressives, not Liberals. The Founders were Liberals, after all.)

 

[Dadstoys]

That is terrifying if that isn't a hyperbolic statement.

and would put you directly at odds with the 2A

Would it now ?
How would that be ?

 

[pastera]

That is terrifying if that isn't a hyperbolic statement.

and would put you directly at odds with the 2A

Please explain how the desire to defend oneself from another whose intent is to take your life, liberty or property?

While the words may have been Crude the position is correct.
Further crude language is protected by the 1st which is the backstop of the 2nd

 

[pastera]

@Agnotology
Today's four boxes diner is pretty good and somewhat pertinent to this discussion.

View: https://youtu.be/UwSpQ78OAt0

 

[MGnoob]

“The Linksy-Eldridge bill would prohibit possession of ghost guns and the manufacturing of a 3D-printed gun without a federal firearms license, and would ban distribution of digital instructions to program a 3D printer to manufacture or produce firearms and some components.”

You can’t down the manufacturer firearms plan a FFL and you can’t ban information..
Those are clear first and second amendment..

Might be able to swing making you put a serial number on it and registering it which is also bullshit but at least that’s in the ballpark of reality

 

[Agnotology]

Would it now ?
How would that be ?

Because most of the Marxists you run into today are counter to his actual philosophical writings. Not that I agree with either of them, apart from his notions regarding private firearm ownership.

the terrifying bit was saying 'listening to them scream'. Implying torture. Or a long, slow death.

 

[pastera]

Because most of the Marxists you run into today are counter to his actual philosophical writings. Not that I agree with either of them, apart from his notions regarding private firearm ownership.

the terrifying bit was saying 'listening to them scream'. Implying torture. Or a long, slow death.

But Marx believed in corporate ownership of arms not an individual right.
So to say you agree with Marx is to side with those that believe the 2A is tied to militia service (Marx's intent was for people to own arms only for revolution)

 

[Dadstoys]

Because most of the Marxists you run into today are counter to his actual philosophical writings. Not that I agree with either of them, apart from his notions regarding private firearm ownership.

the terrifying bit was saying 'listening to them scream'. Implying torture. Or a long, slow death.

No ,most of them want you disarmed and at their mercy.
That has never changed.
Disarm and then slaughter.
10's of millions under communist rule.
If you don't know that , shame on you , history is just a few clicks away or read a book.
If you do know that and are just spouting communist propaganda about how lovely it would be under communist rule , shame on you too.

As far as "Terrifying" You obviously haven't been around enough to even know what that is if you find that terrifying.
Prey you live a good enough life to never see the true meaning of it .

 

[p..]

“The Linksy-Eldridge bill would prohibit possession of ghost guns and the manufacturing of a 3D-printed gun without a federal firearms license, and would ban distribution of digital instructions to program a 3D printer to manufacture or produce firearms and some components.”

You can’t down the manufacturer firearms plan a FFL and you can’t ban information..
Those are clear first and second amendment..

Might be able to swing making you put a serial number on it and registering it which is also bullshit but at least that’s in the ballpark of reality

I imagine the state would take an approach similar to California's ban on "unserialized firearm precursor parts."



This includes 80% lowers / unfinished receivers.

Firearm Precursor Part Identification Guidebook

I would like to draw the reader's attention to the firearm precursor part in the lower right photo below:

 

[pastera]

“The Linksy-Eldridge bill would prohibit possession of ghost guns and the manufacturing of a 3D-printed gun without a federal firearms license, and would ban distribution of digital instructions to program a 3D printer to manufacture or produce firearms and some components.”

You can’t down the manufacturer firearms plan a FFL and you can’t ban information..
Those are clear first and second amendment..

Might be able to swing making you put a serial number on it and registering it which is also bullshit but at least that’s in the ballpark of reality

The ghost is in the machine and cannot be removed.
With creative fixtures I'm confident that an AR lower could be done from 0% on my desktop setup.

3d printing? How do you enforce that when self replicating systems are in the public domain? They could shut down commercial sales of printers completely and a person could iteratively build a printer with required precision very quickly.

 

[pastera]

I imagine the state would take an approach similar to California's ban on "unserialized firearm precursor parts."

View attachment 727744

This includes 80% lowers / unfinished receivers.

Firearm Precursor Part Identification Guidebook

I would like to draw the reader's attention to the firearm precursor part in the lower right photo below:

View attachment 727745

It's a precursor part if it is marketed as such.
Simply sell paperweights and state modifications to your product are violations of your terms of service and void any implied warranty.

 

[p..]

It's a precursor part if it is marketed as such.
Simply sell paperweights and state modifications to your product are violations of your terms of service and void any implied warranty.

I did see that wording. But I think if you ran into a kid fresh out of the academy, and an aggressive prosecutor, your McMaster Carr order could end up in evidence and reason may go out the window.

 

[pastera]

I did see that wording. But I think if you ran into a kid fresh out of the academy, and an aggressive prosecutor, your McMaster Carr order could end up in evidence and reason may go out the window.

Yep, you can beat the charge but enjoy the ride...

 

[71montess]

So, if you own tools and have an 80% nearby, you are guilty as charged. Boy can they twist the laws to make their laws !!!!

 

[Horrible]

lol I have rifles from the 50s without serial numbers

 

[Agnotology]

But Marx believed in corporate ownership of arms not an individual right.
So to say you agree with Marx is to side with those that believe the 2A is tied to militia service (Marx's intent was for people to own arms only for revolution)

Marx makes no statement to that, via private letters, or published books. He spoke and wrote often and repeatedly about how important individual people having firearms was, and that any attempt to disarm the general populace should be resisted, violently if necessary. You can extrapolate and guess at what he *really meant* but no one is a mind reader, and it's not like we have much in the way of surviving letters to read into. Marx was pretty well hated even in his own time - i think 11 people showed up to his funeral. Or maybe 13. It was a low number.

No ,most of them want you disarmed and at their mercy.
That has never changed.
Disarm and then slaughter.
10's of millions under communist rule.
If you don't know that , shame on you , history is just a few clicks away or read a book.
If you do know that and are just spouting communist propaganda about how lovely it would be under communist rule , shame on you too.

As far as "Terrifying" You obviously haven't been around enough to even know what that is if you find that terrifying.
Prey you live a good enough life to never see the true meaning of it .

Hi. If you aren't going to read, why reply? for the.... 16th time it feels like. I don't support any form of Marxism. Not Leninism. Not Stalinism. Not Communism. Not Socialism. Not Democratic Socialism. Not a single form. I am familiar with the books. The same way I've read the bible, the Qu'ran, the Turner Diaries, Mein Kampf, etc, I've read Marx. I've never said communist rule is amazing. You are putting words in my mouth.

 

[pastera]

Marx makes no statement to that, via private letters, or published books. He spoke and wrote often and repeatedly about how important individual people having firearms was, and that any attempt to disarm the general populace should be resisted, violently if necessary. You can extrapolate and guess at what he *really meant* but no one is a mind reader, and it's not like we have much in the way of surviving letters to read into. Marx was pretty well hated even in his own time - i think 11 people showed up to his funeral. Or maybe 13. It was a low number.

Why Karl Marx Supported Gun Rights - Intellectual Takeout

Karl Marx didn’t support the right of workers to bear arms because he saw it as an inalienable right. He supported gun rights because they were a means to an end.

intellectualtakeout.org

In fact, Marx didn’t believe in individual rights at all. Instead, Marx saw firearms as a means to an end, and the end was revolution. “The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition,” he explained, “and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed.”

If you don't believe in individual rights then you cannot support the 2nd in either its text or intent, period.
The entire bill of rights is to limit the government’s infringement on the inalienable rights of the individual.

 

[rogersmithiii]

Licenses are for subjects. Anything less than constitutional carry is homosexual.

I'm curious what other rights you think should need a permission slip for

None of this is about crime. Or dead kids. Or Mass shootings. It’s all merely an excuse to pass gun control.

Gangsta Andrea has already announced that she’s not going to go after the gang bangers who are committing most of the gun crime. She’s going after the law abiding gun owner.

Anything progressives can do to make it more expensive, more annoying, more risky, more dangerous and more complicated to own a gun is on tap to pass whenever the opportunity shows itself.

 

[Agnotology]

Why Karl Marx Supported Gun Rights - Intellectual Takeout

Karl Marx didn’t support the right of workers to bear arms because he saw it as an inalienable right. He supported gun rights because they were a means to an end.

intellectualtakeout.org

If you don't believe in individual rights then you cannot support the 2nd in either its text or intent, period.
The entire bill of rights is to limit the government’s infringement on the inalienable rights of the individual.

That is an opinion piece, based on extrapolations and assumptions, using the actions of people who never met Marx beyond his written works as proof of what Marx originally intended. The meaning between the lines is based in bias. The closest thing you could possibly find, and I am going off of memory, would be some of his writings during the German Uprisings around the late 1840s where he predicts that those in charge will force the "workers" to put down their arms once victory is attained and the goals of a constitutional republic are attained.

That article is the first google result you will get from "marx private firearm ownership" and about 30 other variations of that statement. I disagree with the author on his interpretation, and the very quote you give reinforces my interpretation, which has no interpretation, just reading as written.

I gotta be honest, it's very tiring. This is the same article I was getting from HarryM, and at the end of the day, it's Marxism, while a philosophy I am familiar with, I don't subscribe to. I am being replied to like I am somehow a defender of the "isms" when it couldn't be further from my positions. Marx would have hated my guts.

Also unsure as to what the last two lines have to do with Marx. This all kicked off from me pointing out marxists don't follow Marx's teachings despite them being unambiguous, and that Marx would be closer to the RKBA than what the majority of self-espoused "marxists" are pushing for.

 

[p..]

The same way I've read the bible, the Qu'ran, the Turner Diaries, Mein Kampf, etc, I've read Marx.

Turner Diaries... that was a hard book to finish. I read it for probably the same reason you did, so I'd know for myself what was in it. When I finished that one, I felt like I needed to go play with a pile of puppies for the rest of the day.

I started reading Unintended Consequences, but when I was just a couple chapters into it I happened to catch a live stream audio interview with the author. He sounded drunk, and crazy. I never finished that one.

 

[Coyote33]

Don’t be so quick to give the liberal antis an inch. We already compromise with the 20,000 or so gun laws on the books now. Let them eat shit.

There's a state produced poster, and a now out of date book about Massachusetts gun laws.


Gun Laws:

Attorney Foley's Book:
MA gun laws

Massachusetts Gun Laws Poster:
MA gun laws

Gun Violence report in the hands of DeLeo

other:
MA gun laws

MA Gun Laws

 

[Agnotology]

Turner Diaries... that was a hard book to finish. I read it for probably the same reason you did, so I'd know for myself what was in it. When I finished that one, I felt like I needed to go play with a pile of puppies for the rest of the day.

I started reading Unintended Consequences, but when I was just a couple chapters into it I happened to catch a live stream audio interview with the author. He sounded drunk, and crazy. I never finished that one.

I grew up on bestgore, ebaumsworld, and a host of other websites where I was numb to human suffering, blood, gore, viscera and death by the time I was 12. The only thing that still generates a reaction from me besides apathy is anyone being cruel to a dog.

 

[Dadstoys]

Marx makes no statement to that, via private letters, or published books. He spoke and wrote often and repeatedly about how important individual people having firearms was, and that any attempt to disarm the general populace should be resisted, violently if necessary. You can extrapolate and guess at what he *really meant* but no one is a mind reader, and it's not like we have much in the way of surviving letters to read into. Marx was pretty well hated even in his own time - i think 11 people showed up to his funeral. Or maybe 13. It was a low number.


Hi. If you aren't going to read, why reply? for the.... 16th time it feels like. I don't support any form of Marxism. Not Leninism. Not Stalinism. Not Communism. Not Socialism. Not Democratic Socialism. Not a single form. I am familiar with the books. The same way I've read the bible, the Qu'ran, the Turner Diaries, Mein Kampf, etc, I've read Marx. I've never said communist rule is amazing. You are putting words in my mouth.