Pen2_the_penguin

iTrader: (4)

common sense my ***; all thats going to do is jack up the prices of everything for needless hardware, and creates more potential complications with the user.

Not only that, that would require registration and "permissions" from the government, which seems to be the REAL reason they thought of this tax money grubbing idea; to keep track of who legally has guns to raid and watch next.

Criminals will get around it like everything else; hell you can make a shotgun tube for 20 bucks at lowes if you really wanted to.

Davezorz

iTrader: (2)

To shamelessly quote one of my favorite gun blogs " Heck, Lowe's sells 90% Sten receivers on aisle 5"


The engineer in me is curious how they could make a device like this serviceable, and not be easily bypassed. When colt released their series 80, many people simply removed the firing pin block.

TheScaryOne

iTrader: (3)

I wouldn't be opposed to a perfect (to me) biometric system. First, it must only store my "signature" in an encrypted, non-retrievable form. Second, it must be completely passive, and self-contained within the firearm. No batteries, no communication, no extra devices (except maybe an interface only for programming "signatures"), nothing. Third, it must be sensitive enough to stop someone else with a similar "signature" from using it, but not so sensitive that it would stop me from using it in any case. Fourth, I must be able to add and subtract owner and user "signatures" as an end user, with no forms, charges, or third party interference. Fifth, it must not feature a universal reset. It must be reset with my owner "signature", or not at all. Sixth, it must be serviceable, without being circumnavigable. Seventh, it must be cheap, but extremely durable and reliable.

Maybe a bioelectromagnetic palm reader that runs off of our natural electrical field. If someone made such a device, you wouldn't even need to mandate it, as it would sell itself. It would decrease gun thefts, as who wants to steal a gun that is unusable except for some parts? You wouldn't need to invest in costly gun safes, because if the kids aren't programmed in, they can't use them, and they'd be useless to criminals except as clubs.

In any case I think we're still decades away from technology I'd accept. I'd sure hate to be the guy trying to defend himself when he finds out that his watch is blocking the antenna signal from his bracelet and causing him to not be able to fire, or that he forgot to recharge it that day, or left it on the sink when he was washing his hands.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

this one is for Sammy:

05pearl

iTrader: (4)

^ Guy is walking around, open carry, with a video camera. He has every right to do that, but to me, he's just a douche looking for attention (and, I do have my CCW, btw)

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

^ Guy posting on a public forum, talking ****, overusing commas. He has every right to do that, but to me, he's just a douche looking for attention (and, I do post on this same forum, btw)

05pearl

iTrader: (4)

He's still a douche to me,,,,

fooger03

iTrader: (2)

Attempted gun confiscation in boston ends with 72 dead.

Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston | Buckeye Firearms Association

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

while maintaining douchebag statuses ourselves, we don't tend to get hassled by police for doing perfectly legal douchebaggery.

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

I'm not gonna watch it, but let me guess... white guy, daylight hours, holstered handgun, doing nothing wrong, understands his rights, doesn't give the cop anything... RACIST!

05pearl

iTrader: (4)

Brain - I'm just saying that this guy, who is open carrying, is walking around with a video camera. He knows that he's going to attract attention and wants it all on tape so he can be a youtube hero. He doesn't have to start taping until the cops begin to mess with him - which they never did. Hence, he's still a douche to me.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

I can post one of a black guy open carrying a rifle with the exact same result.

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

Yeah, but that's not racist, because a black guy walking around with a camera WITH or WITHOUT OC'ing is going to get stopped anyways. A white guy walking around with a camera is "making a documentary" and not a problem. It's only when he OC's that he's a redneck out to cause trouble that he gets stopped... RACIST!

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

well here it is anyways



the officer mentions 4 times he's allowed to open carry, but for some reason he needs to stop the guy ask ask him for his id in order to check his mental records, and where he lives, and where he's going.

meanwhile, i walk outside with my ipod and a camera, and i'm never stopped to be checked for pirated music...

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

Right, it's because you're white. Try walking down the street listening to music and being black and carrying a camera, bet you get stopped. But you're white, so no issues until you OC... then you get stopped, totally racist.

I know I sound like a broken record... there is a right way and a wrong way to OC. Having a camera in your hand while you walk around with a gun is the latter. It serves no purpose except to satisfy your attention-seeking ego. It makes gun-owners look like lunatics. It hurts the efforts of people who are dedicating good portions of their lives and money to improving the image of gun-owners. At some point, you've got to assume that Bloomberg or Soros personally sends a $100 bill to every retard who posts up a "Look at me OC" video.

Even in CA, despite what getting OC banned led to for gun-rights recently in Peruta, it remains a huge loss because the guys doing it didn't have the political backing they needed and tried to ram their guns down the throats of vehemently anti-gun liberal mayors of the major coastal areas, and lost huge. Gun-rights battles are not won by showing people your guns. Voters have allowed our gun-rights to deteriorate for over 100yrs, and only in the past 15 or so have we turned it around. It's a process that is going to take many more years, and many millions of dollars... and it's working despite "efforts" of the attention-***** OC'ers.

Latest news on what getting OC banned (still a huge loss) has done for CA... victory in Peruta, and now an actual SHALL-ISSUE bill... who woulda thought?

Assemblyman Tim Donnelly Introduces CAL-FFL's Sweeping Handgun Carry License Reform Bill | CAL-FFLCAL-FFL

Bill Text - AB-1563 Firearms: license to carry concealed weapons.

AB-1563 - Assembly Bill-– AMENDED


This is a guy OC'ing who is trying to help us. You can tell he is really trying to help improve the image of gun owners, trying to help get quality legislation passed, and trying to get law-enforcement on our side. What a great day for gun-rights at the local ballpark.
Man with gun causes scare during children

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

here sam:

Two Suspects Who Dragged Mom Across a Parking Lot Get a Swift Lesson in Texas’ Concealed Carry Law | Video | TheBlaze.com

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

Sweet... like it should be.

05pearl

iTrader: (4)

Agreed

mx5autoxer

iTrader: (1)

And he's in Blacksburg. I was always very respectful and open about my concealed weapons whenever I was there visiting my then GF's apartment. That department has been through a lot in the past few years and I want to make their lives as easy and stress free as I can. I really don't understand being confrontational or smart-assy with them.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

It won't happen like that in PRNJ very soon, or ever. SCOTUS declined to hear Drake on Friday.