When Seconds Count

[ryr8828]

The police are only minutes away.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/nyregion/14shoot.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all

They strode into the restaurant supply store in Harlem shortly after 3 p.m. on Thursday, four young men intent on robbery, one with a Glock 9-millimeter pistol, the police said. The place may have looked like an easy mark, a high-cash business with an owner in his 70s, known as a gentle, soft-spoken man.

But Charles Augusto Jr., the 72-year-old proprietor of the Kaplan Brothers Blue Flame Corporation, at 523 West 125th Street, near Amsterdam Avenue, had been robbed several times before, despite the fact that his shop is around the corner from the 26th Precinct station house on West 126th Street.

There were no customers in the store, only Mr. Augusto and two employees, a man and a woman. The police said the invaders announced a holdup, approached the two employees and tried to place plastic handcuffs on them. The male employee, a 35-year-old known in the community as J. B., struggled with the gunman, who then hit him on the head with the pistol.

Watching it happen, Mr. Augusto, whom neighborhood friends call Gus, rose from a chair 20 to 30 feet away and took out a loaded Winchester 12-gauge pump-action shotgun with a pistol-grip handle. The police said he bought it after a robbery 30 years ago.

Mr. Augusto, who has never been in trouble with the law, fired three blasts in rapid succession, the police said, although Vernon McKenzie, working at an Internet company next door, heard only two booms, loud enough to send him rushing to a window, where he heard someone shout: “You’re dead! You’re dead!”

The first shot took down the gunman at the front. He died almost immediately, according to the police, who said he was 29 and had been arrested for gun possession in Queens last year and was the nephew of a police officer.

Mr. Augusto’s other two blasts hit all three accomplices, who stumbled out the door, bleeding.

One of them, a 21-year-old, staggered across 125th Street and collapsed in front of the General Grant Houses, a nine-building complex with 4,500 residents, one of the city’s biggest housing projects. Someone called 911, and an ambulance rushed him to St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center, where he was dead on arrival. The police said he had a record of arrests for weapons possession and robbery.

Another wounded man left a blood trail that the police followed to 125th Street and Amsterdam Avenue. The fourth wounded man was picked up, on the basis of witness descriptions, at 128th Street and St. Nicholas Terrace. Both were taken to St. Luke’s.

The names of the men who were shot — two dead and two wounded — were not immediately released by the authorities. The two at the hospital, both 21 years old, were in stable condition late Thursday night, the police said.

Outside the emergency room entrance of the hospital, at 113th Street and Amsterdam Avenue, relatives and friends of the dead and wounded men screamed and wailed in anguish as word of what had happened spread.

“No! No!” a woman cried. “They said he just died!”

Another crying woman, surrounded by family members, heard one of her relatives had been shot trying to rob a store.

“Oh my God!” she wailed. “Why would they want to rob a store?” She started to scream: “Damn! Why? Why would he go to a family store? He got money!” She slumped against the wall and began to pray.

Later, a man ran into the emergency room and came out screaming, “Oh, God!” He held his head in his hands and sat at the curb, apparently devastated.

A youth about 16, crying and pacing at the emergency room entrance, slammed his fist into a yellow pole.

The scene back at Blue Flame was also grim. Ordinarily, 125th Street between Amsterdam and Broadway is a placid setting: a couple of storefront businesses; Our Children’s Foundation, an after-school program; the Antioch Baptist Church and the Manhattan Pentecostal Church; the facades of the housing project looming up; a lot of passing and parked cars. The facade of the store is brick and concrete, with the words “Blue Flame” emblazoned in faded blue on the front of the three-story building.

Two hours after the shootings, the body of a man lay on the sidewalk, its upper half covered in white plastic. Gray pants and white sneakers, with the toes pointed up, were visible. And there was the inevitable crowd of bystanders.

“How the hell are you going to rob someone in broad daylight?” said Sarah Martin, president of the General Grant Residents Association. Looking around at the crowd of people, she added, “They’re very upset, the people who live in this area.”

Gene Hernandez, 47, sympathized with Mr. Augusto, but not with the would-be robbers. “If I were him, I would kill a dozen of them,” he said. “You have to protect your workers and your family. Case closed.”

Stefany Blyn, who leases a commercial building from Mr. Augusto, described him as a “laid-back, unexcitable guy,” who often lounged in his chair on the sidewalk.

She said she was “not totally amazed” at the robbery, because he had told her that he had been robbed several times before and that he dealt in a lot of cash in his business, which was the sale and service of stoves and other kitchen equipment. The shop opened in 1929, according to news articles about it.

“He was trying to make a living in his business,” said John E. Walker, who works at Drum Television Network, next door.

Venus Singleton, 51, said she hoped that Mr. Augusto would not get into trouble over the shootings. “I hope that the gun was licensed and that he was in his rights,” she said.

Paul J. Browne, chief spokesman for the Police Department, said that Mr. Augusto had not been arrested or charged. He was being treated like a witness and was still being questioned early Friday at the station house. It was unclear if the shotgun was registered, but Mr. Browne said, “There is a lower threshold for owning a shotgun in the city, a permit as opposed to a license.”

A law enforcement official said that the district attorney was considering a possible misdemeanor weapons charge against Mr. Augusto, indicating that he did not have a permit for the shotgun.

Under long-established New York law, a person is allowed to use deadly physical force when he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to meet the imminent use of deadly physical force and there is no reasonable chance of retreating from the danger.

A woman who answered the telephone at Mr. Augusto’s home in Irvington, N.Y., said the family would have no comment.

Reporting was contributed by Bobby Allyn, Sewell Chan, Jason Grant, Christine Hauser, Javier C. Hernandez, Anahad O’Connor, William K. Rashbaum, A. G. Sulzberger and Mathew R. Warren.

He deserves a medal, not an indictment or fine. Anyone who counts on the police to protect them and their family is a fool.

[KinjaKahn]

He should be fined!! The fine should be identical in price to the permit he failed to obtain.

[BoredWithNoSB]

He deserves a medal, not an indictment or fine. Anyone who counts on the police to protect them and their family is a fool.

So, just because he broke a law you don't like it's OK? Possession without a permit is illegal, yes? In my view he was as big of a thug as the men he shot.

[hannitykillspuppies]

He deserves a medal, not an indictment or fine. Anyone who counts on the police to protect them and their family is a fool.


interesting. with all the tax payer money spent on law enforcement i think we should just do away with it. i mean you can't count on them, so why waste all that money?

[hannitykillspuppies]

He should be fined!! The fine should be identical in price to the permit he failed to obtain.
i'm not sure if you're being serious or not, but i agree that this seems the logical solution if they're going to insist on going forward with this.

[ryr8828]

interesting. with all the tax payer money spent on law enforcement i think we should just do away with it. i mean you can't count on them, so why waste all that money?

They're pretty busy writing dui's to someone who has had 2 beers.

Who will protect the donut shops?

[hannitykillspuppies]

They're pretty busy writing dui's to someone who has had 2 beers.

Who will protect the donut shops?

getting people who are drinking and driving off the road is certainly a waste of resources.

[ryr8828]

getting people who are drinking and driving off the road is certainly a waste of resources.

Much more important to harass the guy who's had 2 beers than to go down into the tough part of town where the crack dealers are at.

Or just bust the guy who has 2 joints on him. He's all mellow and probably won't shoot at you. Leave that dangerous guy who sells crack to jr. high kids alone. He's crazy.

[BoredWithNoSB]

Much more important to harass the guy who's had 2 beers than to go down into the tough part of town where the crack dealers are at.

Or just bust the guy who has 2 joints on him. He's all mellow and probably won't shoot at you. Leave that dangerous guy who sells crack to jr. high kids alone. He's crazy.

Wow. When you putting your deposit down on the shack in Montana?

[hannitykillspuppies]

Much more important to harass the guy who's had 2 beers than to go down into the tough part of town where the crack dealers are at.

Or just bust the guy who has 2 joints on him. He's all mellow and probably won't shoot at you. Leave that dangerous guy who sells crack to jr. high kids alone. He's crazy.

if you're driving shitty shitty enough to get pulled over after 2 beers than that's your fault for being a pussy.

don't bust the guy with 2 joints, but don't make weed legal. after all according to your hero ronnie, weed is the most dangerous drug around.

[ryr8828]

if you're driving shitty shitty enough to get pulled over after 2 beers than that's your fault for being a pussy.

don't bust the guy with 2 joints, but don't make weed legal. after all according to your hero ronnie, weed is the most dangerous drug around.

Since when do you have to drive bad to get pulled over?

[hannitykillspuppies]

Since when do you have to drive bad to get pulled over?
you're right, driving poorly shouldn't get you pulled over.

[hannitykillspuppies]

you've brought this two beer dui thing up at a least a few times now.

you're not a two beer queer are you?

[ryr8828]

you're right, driving poorly shouldn't get you pulled over.

What the fuck does that have to do with what I said?

I said you don't have to drive bad to get pulled over.

[ryr8828]

you've brought this two beer dui thing up at a least a few times now.

you're not a two beer queer are you?

It irritates me that you can get a dui and spend thousands of dollars without being drunk. It irritates me that cops spend all their time trying to write these revenue producing dui's instead of fighting real crime. There's a big difference between being loaded and unable to function, and drinking 2 beers (which put most people over the legal breathalyzer limit).

As far as the other if you ever get the opportunity to meet me in person ask again and I'll see how quick I can give you an answer.

[becherr]

getting people who are drinking and driving off the road is certainly a waste of resources.

Sober driver yet three drinking teens all under the limit....08. They all get Minor in Possession by consumption. Designated driver, nobody in the car is drunk. $500 fine and a manditory court date with a misdimeanor violation.

When appearing in court the judge tells one of the kids, "Haven't you figured it out, if there are three or more kids in a car after 11 PM in this country, your getting pulled over."

Probable cause for the pull over, one license plate light out, the other was perfectly illuminating the plate.

Where they wrong....yep. Was it a way to get resources/money....most definately.

Whatever happened to right is right?

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Another crying woman, surrounded by family members, heard one of her relatives had been shot trying to rob a store.

“Oh my God!” she wailed. “Why would they want to rob a store?” She started to scream: “Damn! Why? Why would he go to a family store? He got money!” She slumped against the wall and began to pray.

Later, a man ran into the emergency room and came out screaming, “Oh, God!” He held his head in his hands and sat at the curb, apparently devastated.

A youth about 16, crying and pacing at the emergency room entrance, slammed his fist into a yellow pole.

The scene back at Blue Flame was also grim. Ordinarily, 125th Street between Amsterdam and Broadway is a placid setting: a couple of storefront businesses; Our Children’s Foundation, an after-school program; the Antioch Baptist Church and the Manhattan Pentecostal Church; the facades of the housing project looming up; a lot of passing and parked cars. The facade of the store is brick and concrete, with the words “Blue Flame” emblazoned in faded blue on the front of the three-story building.

Two hours after the shootings, the body of a man lay on the sidewalk, its upper half covered in white plastic. Gray pants and white sneakers, with the toes pointed up, were visible. And there was the inevitable crowd of bystanders.

“How the hell are you going to rob someone in broad daylight?” said Sarah Martin, president of the General Grant Residents Association. Looking around at the crowd of people, she added, “They’re very upset, the people who live in this area.”

Gene Hernandez, 47, sympathized with Mr. Augusto, but not with the would-be robbers. “If I were him, I would kill a dozen of them,” he said. “You have to protect your workers and your family. Case closed.” Four men tried to rob a store, one man stood up to them and HKP's turned this into a pot-smoking-rights debate????

Dude, *I'm* your guy if you wanna go after the hardcore, Right-wing, anti-dope, Conservatives here.

The guy in this story was over-powered, out-manned yet still got the upper hand in this robbery.

Oh and HKP, you mentioned not being against the 2nd Amendment. Where's your 'Yippie Kay Yay' for Mr. Augusto????

[ryr8828]

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/899/kaplan.png

[SuperGonzo]

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/899/kaplan.png

That's some damn fine police work there, Lou.

[Jiddy78]

He should be fined!! The fine should be identical in price to the permit he failed to obtain.

Most logical thing in this thread...No punishment for defending himself...but square up the permit he should have had all along...That's not a fine/penalty either...It's just doing what should have been done all along.

[domenick2x]

Most logical thing in this thread...No punishment for defending himself...but square up the permit he should have had all along...That's not a fine/penalty either...It's just doing what should have been done all along.
I agree. If he's had the gun for a couple of years, retro the annual permit cost. Otherwise, as he's committed no crime otherwise, no harm no foul.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Four men tried to rob a store, one man stood up to them and HKP's turned this into a pot-smoking-rights debate????

Dude, *I'm* your guy if you wanna go after the hardcore, Right-wing, anti-dope, Conservatives here.

The guy in this story was over-powered, out-manned yet still got the upper hand in this robbery.

Oh and HKP, you mentioned not being against the 2nd Amendment. Where's your 'Yippie Kay Yay' for Mr. Augusto????
i'm not the one who brought up weed.

i didn't realize the 2nd amendment excuses citizens from going through the proper steps for legal gun ownership. terrible to expect people to follow the letter of the law for ownership in their city/state of residence.

once again your lack of comprehension abilities fails you.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Sober driver yet three drinking teens all under the limit....08. They all get Minor in Possession by consumption. Designated driver, nobody in the car is drunk. $500 fine and a manditory court date with a misdimeanor violation.

When appearing in court the judge tells one of the kids, "Haven't you figured it out, if there are three or more kids in a car after 11 PM in this country, your getting pulled over."

Probable cause for the pull over, one license plate light out, the other was perfectly illuminating the plate.

Where they wrong....yep. Was it a way to get resources/money....most definately.

Whatever happened to right is right?i'm not sure what your argument is.

they were pulled over for a legitimate violation. being under the limit doesn't matter when you are under 21 and consuming alcohol. and the judge is right, because the majority of the time that car full of teenagers is up to something they shouldn't be doing, such as drinking.

[Roy Munson]

They're pretty busy writing dui's to someone who has had 2 beers.

Who will protect the donut shops?
I'd expect adults to be responsible enough not to drink if they're driving.

[Roy Munson]

It irritates me that you can get a dui and spend thousands of dollars without being drunk. It irritates me that cops spend all their time trying to write these revenue producing dui's instead of fighting real crime. There's a big difference between being loaded and unable to function, and drinking 2 beers (which put most people over the legal breathalyzer limit).

As far as the other if you ever get the opportunity to meet me in person ask again and I'll see how quick I can give you an answer.
so your problem is with the level of intoxication with which you should be allowed to drive?

I say zero. Please tell my why any level of intoxication should be legal.

[hannitykillspuppies]

how many 100 pounders do you know?

http://www.brad21.org/bac_charts.html

[Roy Munson]

how many 100 pounders do you know?

http://www.brad21.org/bac_charts.html
maybe his beers are of the 40 oz variety

[hannitykillspuppies]

maybe his beers are of the 40 oz varietyi believe that's why they're illegal here.

[becherr]

i'm not sure what your argument is.

they were pulled over for a legitimate violation. being under the limit doesn't matter when you are under 21 and consuming alcohol. and the judge is right, because the majority of the time that car full of teenagers is up to something they shouldn't be doing, such as drinking.

My arugument is that we have taken Law Enforcement away from the Officer on the street and have allowed Politicians and Lawyers.

There has been so much pressure placed on Law Enforcement to become a "Money Making" establishment instead of an enforcer of laws. Instead of "Sound judgement" it is about getting money to fund the new court house or jail. I used to listen to it when I was Patrol Supervisor for a few of the posts I worked on. "Gotta pay for the Old Soldiers home, your shifts ticket quota is low this month."

In my example, were the kids wrong? Damn right. Was it in the kids best interest to be sited and fined? I don't think so.

There had to be a better way to deal with the situation other then to charge three teens, mark thier record with a misdemeanor and charge them $750 per. It did however raise $2250 for the county though so I am sure he got his star.

I thought the judges comment was pure wrong too. To tell youth that if there are more then two of you in a car after 11 you WILL be pulled over. So now being a teen with three in a car is probable cause? I was in the courtroom when she said it (My son blew a .034 or something) and I was looking for a way to challenger her on it but was finally told to let it go.

Wrong were they....yep. And Law Enforcement wonder why youth of such contempt....

[Roy Munson]

My arugument is that we have taken Law Enforcement away from the Officer on the street and have allowed Politicians and Lawyers.

There has been so much pressure placed on Law Enforcement to become a "Money Making" establishment instead of an enforcer of laws. Instead of "Sound judgement" it is about getting money to fund the new court house or jail. I used to listen to it when I was Patrol Supervisor for a few of the posts I worked on. "Gotta pay for the Old Soldiers home, your shifts ticket quota is low this month."

In my example, were the kids wrong? Damn right. Was it in the kids best interest to be sited and fined? I don't think so.

There had to be a better way to deal with the situation other then to charge three teens, mark thier record with a misdemeanor and charge them $750 per. It did however raise $2250 for the county though so I am sure he got his star.

I thought the judges comment was pure wrong too. To tell youth that if there are more then two of you in a car after 11 you WILL be pulled over. So now being a teen with three in a car is probable cause? I was in the courtroom when she said it (My son blew a .034 or something) and I was looking for a way to challenger her on it but was finally told to let it go.

Wrong were they....yep. And Law Enforcement wonder why youth of such contempt....
If the driver was sober, why were the rest of the people in the car tested?

Was the traffic stop legal? Did the officers smell alcohol and then notice the individuals were underage and decide to test them, or was it the other way around? If the officer was just hunting because he could... then I agree, he was wrong.

Many many times I was drunk off my ass in the passenger seat of my sober friend's car while we drove to and from parties. Was it wrong, sure, but there's something to be said for being somewhat responsible too. Officer discression in your son's case could have been some encouraging words as to what they were doing was pretty responsible.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

i'm not the one who brought up weed.

i didn't realize the 2nd amendment excuses citizens from going through the proper steps for legal gun ownership. terrible to expect people to follow the letter of the law for ownership in their city/state of residence.

once again your lack of comprehension abilities fails you. What fails you is being able to compare one crime to another more egregious one.

Not having a permit= small crime. Not even a misdemeanor in some cases.

Trying to rob another person= a felony.

[abreu]

Most logical thing in this thread...No punishment for defending himself...but square up the permit he should have had all along...That's not a fine/penalty either...It's just doing what should have been done all along.
I'm with this.

I think that our gun laws are absolutely terrible. It's much too easy to slip through the background check process and guns end up in the hands of people that don't deserve to have them far too often.

[BoredWithNoSB]

I agree. If he's had the gun for a couple of years, retro the annual permit cost. Otherwise, as he's committed no crime otherwise, no harm no foul.

Can't I agree with this. If the only penalty for not getting a permit is that you have to retroactively pay for it, why would you ever buy one? If you don't get caught, you don't have to pay and if you do, you're no worse off.

Illegally carrying a weapon (without a permit) should get you serious fines and potential jail time. Using a weapon that you do not have a permit for should be come with even more penalties. Often times, permitting is tied in with an education component. Skip that and you have even dumber people walking around carrying.

[hannitykillspuppies]

What fails you is being able to compare one crime to another more egregious one.

Not having a permit= small crime. Not even a misdemeanor in some cases.

Trying to rob another person= a felony.
please direct me to where i said that the shooter's crime of not obtaining the proper license/permit for his fire arm was as egregious as the four men who were attempting to hold up his store.

actually i'll help you out, i didn't.

i said if they insist on pursuing charges against the guy for it than kinja's solution would be the most logical.

not sure what was so difficult to understand about that. perhaps you can explain where it was so confusing for you that you took it to mean that i was implying that this man's crime was remotely comparable to the 4 men who entered the store intent on robbing the man. that way in the future i can dumb it down so hopefully you won't have any difficulty understanding what you are reading.

[becherr]

If the driver was sober, why were the rest of the people in the car tested?

Was the traffic stop legal? Did the officers smell alcohol and then notice the individuals were underage and decide to test them, or was it the other way around? If the officer was just hunting because he could... then I agree, he was wrong.

Many many times I was drunk off my ass in the passenger seat of my sober friend's car while we drove to and from parties. Was it wrong, sure, but there's something to be said for being somewhat responsible too. Officer discression in your son's case could have been some encouraging words as to what they were doing was pretty responsible.

The cop could smell beer in the car after the traffic stop. Therefore he intoxed the occupants not the driver. Of course they were all under 21 thus, the test.

The reason for the traffic stop was for a license plate light being out. There are two lights on car for the plates and one was out. The plate was fully visible.

The cop was hunting and I found that the county has to suits agaist it for simular cases that happened in the last year. Not sure what the parents are trying to do since they can't win....I think parents with multiple children are starting to see the pattern set and getting sick of thier first time offenders getting raked over the coals for money.

[hannitykillspuppies]

The cop could smell beer in the car after the traffic stop. Therefore he intoxed the occupants not the driver. Of course they were all under 21 thus, the test.

The reason for the traffic stop was for a license plate light being out. There are two lights on car for the plates and one was out. The plate was fully visible.

The cop was hunting and I found that the county has to suits agaist it for simular cases that happened in the last year. Not sure what the parents are trying to do since they can't win....I think parents with multiple children are starting to see the pattern set and getting sick of thier first time offenders getting raked over the coals for money.

one of the license plate lights was out, that's a violation. down here you get a fix-it ticket which amounts to like 5 or 10 bucks. really driving up revenue.

why aren't the parents getting sick of their kids acting like idiots?

[residenceevil]

I think someone's watching too many old Western movies.

[becherr]

one of the license plate lights was out, that's a violation. down here you get a fix-it ticket which amounts to like 5 or 10 bucks. really driving up revenue.

why aren't the parents getting sick of their kids acting like idiots?

Since the example I sited was of my idiot, I can say the parents are getting sick of the idiots. Trust me, I had my share of idiot moves made by my son and he got the riot act thrown at him. Not much one can do when said son is 18.

A license plate bulb burnt out, when the plate is still visible is nothing more then a cop hunting. I dought he smelled any alcohol in the car since those three that had drank a beer weren't reeking of drink. What is being discovered is they (Cops in our country) are pulling over kids and giving them breath-o-lizors and the kids are blowing 0.0. Most kids wouldn't tell thier parents anything but it seems some have and the parents have taken exception. Had my son and those he were with blown 0.0 and been pulled over for a burnt out light bulb I would have called BS too. Unfortuntely for him and his fellows, they had drank a beer.

Kids have it pretty easy now a day but they do live in a no defect environment.

I just feel that discretion has been taken away from Law Enforcement by politics and lawyers.

[domenick2x]

Since the example I sited was of my idiot, I can say the parents are getting sick of the idiots. Trust me, I had my share of idiot moves made by my son and he got the riot act thrown at him. Not much one can do when said son is 18.

A license plate bulb burnt out, when the plate is still visible is nothing more then a cop hunting. I dought he smelled any alcohol in the car since those three that had drank a beer weren't reeking of drink. What is being discovered is they (Cops in our country) are pulling over kids and giving them breath-o-lizors and the kids are blowing 0.0. Most kids wouldn't tell thier parents anything but it seems some have and the parents have taken exception. Had my son and those he were with blown 0.0 and been pulled over for a burnt out light bulb I would have called BS too. Unfortuntely for him and his fellows, they had drank a beer.

Kids have it pretty easy now a day but they do live in a no defect environment.

I just feel that discretion has been taken away from Law Enforcement by politics and lawyers.
That kind of thing was recently ruled as unconstitutional, if I recall, just last year. Cops do NOT have a right to question or search an occupant of a vehicle without probable cause.

I'd have to look it up, but I'm pretty sure that's how the court ruled.

Smells like lawsuit.

[hannitykillspuppies]

That kind of thing was recently ruled as unconstitutional, if I recall, just last year. Cops do NOT have a right to question or search an occupant of a vehicle without probable cause.

I'd have to look it up, but I'm pretty sure that's how the court ruled.

Smells like lawsuit.
the cop smelled alcohol and saw the occupants were all underage.

[domenick2x]

the cop smelled alcohol and saw the occupants were all underage.
What is being discovered is they (Cops in our country) are pulling over kids and giving them breath-o-lizors and the kids are blowing 0.0.

It should take a competent lawyer all of about 20 minutes to file the appropriate paperwork on a number of these situations. This is profiling, and it's illegal.

*close book*

[becherr]

That kind of thing was recently ruled as unconstitutional, if I recall, just last year. Cops do NOT have a right to question or search an occupant of a vehicle without probable cause.

I'd have to look it up, but I'm pretty sure that's how the court ruled.

Smells like lawsuit.

Probable cause to pull a vehicle over has always had to be established.

Pulling a car over for a burned out plate light, dispite the plate still visible, is probable cause BUT very minor. Throw three teens in that car and your getting pulled over. To have a judge say "You haven't figured it out? If there are more then 3 teens in a car your going to get pulled over." Isn't. Have me drive MY CAR...as it was the one pulled over, and I didn't get pulled over says something.

I am not anti Law Enforcement at all, I was that. Come on though.

[becherr]

It should take a competent lawyer all of about 20 minutes to file the appropriate paperwork on a number of these situations. This is profiling, and it's illegal.

*close book*

One has to establish that. I have one child (An iditot per Hannity) that misbehaved. Other parents established the patern wtih multible children.

[becherr]

It should take a competent lawyer all of about 20 minutes to file the appropriate paperwork on a number of these situations. This is profiling, and it's illegal.

*close book*

In a small community who wants to pay for a lawyer when most would call your kid an idiot (Like Hannity) anyway. Just go with it.

[hannitykillspuppies]

It should take a competent lawyer all of about 20 minutes to file the appropriate paperwork on a number of these situations. This is profiling, and it's illegal.

*close book*it should take a competent person to realize you don't have to take a brethalyzer if you aren't driving a vehicle.

[becherr]

it should take a competent person to realize you don't have to take a brethalyzer if you aren't driving a vehicle.


Tell that to an 18 year olds that have been taught to say "Yes Sir and No Sir" to authority.

[hannitykillspuppies]

In a small community who wants to pay for a lawyer when most would call your kid an idiot (Like Hannity) anyway. Just go with it.

sorry, i'm not seeing why you are so bent out of shape about this. you keep complaining about why the kid was pulled over even though it was for a legitimate violation. then you complain about your underage kid getting popped for drinking. the traffic stop was legal, they smelled alcohol and investigated. i suppose the cop should have just chalked it up to kids being kids and let them on their way.

[becherr]

sorry, i'm not seeing why you are so bent out of shape about this. you keep complaining about why the kid was pulled over even though it was for a legitimate violation. then you complain about your underage kid getting popped for drinking. the traffic stop was legal, they smelled alcohol and investigated. i suppose the cop should have just chalked it up to kids being kids and let them on their way.

I don't believe he smelled anything. If thee people drink beer and get in a car put in breath mints and the driver gets pulled over and the cop comes to the drivers window do you believe he is going to smell BEER? Please. I think that the pattern has been broken here as they are taking the police to court....or whomever goes to court.

Kids do stupid things. Not sure if you have kids or your age but we live in a no defect environment now.

I will tell that my son was wrong but it is being discovered that they have consistantly pulled over vehicles that have kids in them.

Why? MONEY. A SEARCH for revenue for the county. Based on politics to get money for the county and based on a cops fear for dealing with first time offenders the way the feel fit.

[Roy Munson]

I don't believe he smelled anything. If thee people drink beer and get in a car put in breath mints and the driver gets pulled over and the cop comes to the drivers window do you believe he is going to smell BEER? Please. I think that the pattern has been broken here as they are taking the police to court....or whomever goes to court.

Kids do stupid things. Not sure if you have kids or your age but we live in a no defect environment now.

I will tell that my son was wrong but it is being discovered that they have consistantly pulled over vehicles that have kids in them.

Why? MONEY. A SEARCH for revenue for the county. Based on politics to get money for the county and based on a cops fear for dealing with first time offenders the way the feel fit.
cops in my town were the same way. I worked for the borough and talked to some of the cops who said that if they saw a driver backwards baseball hat after hours, they knew who to pull over.

I grew up during the wigger years...

[KinjaKahn]

I grew up during the wigger years...Bigot.

[Roy Munson]

Bigot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aMLTlDCTYk

[KinjaKahn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aMLTlDCTYk
Ahhhh yes, digging Vanilla Ice is the racist 'get out of jail free' card.

[Roy Munson]

Ahhhh yes, digging Vanilla Ice is the racist 'get out of jail free' card.
if there was one of those, digging Vanilla ice wouldn't be it.

[KinjaKahn]

if there was one of those, digging Vanilla ice wouldn't be it. That makes your judgement better!

[Roy Munson]

That makes your judgement better!
eminem might be it.

[KinjaKahn]

eminem might be it.
What about all the non-caucasian rappers, are they wiggers too?

[Roy Munson]

What about all the non-caucasian rappers, are they wiggers too?
that would be difficult.

[Roy Munson]

What about all the non-caucasian rappers, are they wiggers too?
these guys fit the bill...

http://www.perpetualchild.com/icyhotstuntaz/icyhot2.jpg

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

these guys fit the bill...

http://www.perpetualchild.com/icyhotstuntaz/icyhot2.jpg Is that a new boy band...or some kids trying to be tough??? (in a Lions jersey nonetheless).

[Jiddy78]

Is that a new boy band...or some kids trying to be tough??? (in a Lions jersey nonetheless).

The Icy Hot Stuntaz have been around for quite some time homey...Recognize!

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

The Icy Hot Stuntaz have been around for quite some time homey...Recognize! Ok, now that was funny.

[Iron Jaw]

He should be fined!! The fine should be identical in price to the permit he failed to obtain.

A permit is required for a shotgun in New York? I know the state has always had strict handgun laws (enforced on honest citizens vs. criminals), but not so much for rifles and shotguns, unconcealed in your own home and place of business.

Stupid law.

[Iron Jaw]

Probable cause to pull a vehicle over has always had to be established.

Pulling a car over for a burned out plate light, dispite the plate still visible, is probable cause BUT very minor. Throw three teens in that car and your getting pulled over. To have a judge say "You haven't figured it out? If there are more then 3 teens in a car your going to get pulled over." Isn't. Have me drive MY CAR...as it was the one pulled over, and I didn't get pulled over says something.

I am not anti Law Enforcement at all, I was that. Come on though.

Or sobriety checkpoints, which are legal in many states. The highway patrol runs them on occasion. One of their favorites is setting up a sobriety point north of the Mexcian border on favorite "party in Mexico" night, where teens go south to take advantage of the Mexican age limits (which are selectively enforced in Mexico anyway). The philosophy is, go down, party, but don't drive back drunk.

The state troopers also run southbound operations in conjunction with the feds, checking for stolen vehicles which are often taken to Mexico where recovery is difficult at best (a major problem on the southern border - the Mexican officials might stop and take them, but they have been known to keep them for themselves).

Of course, my agency can set up immigration checkpoints anywhere in the state we deem necessary so long as all the highway saftey provisions are taken care of. The primary duty at an immigration checkpoint is to check immigration status (per INA, 287 (A) (1 & 3), successfully challenged in the SCOTUS on more than one occasion, Martinez-Fuerte, Sifuentes, Brignoni-Ponce, etc.). Since federal agents have the authority to arrest for any crime committed in their presence (state, federal or local) under Title 19, it's not uncommon to nail a drunk driver or two at a checkpoint deemed for immigration. It's also quite common to nail drug smugglers and violators of drug laws (canines are a major part of checkpoint operations).

But, if we are on roving patrol, we do need to develop the PC for a vehicle stop. Not hard, when 30 people are in the back of a gutted suburban.

[hannitykillspuppies]

A permit is required for a shotgun in New York? I know the state has always had strict handgun laws (enforced on honest citizens vs. criminals), but not so much for rifles and shotguns, unconcealed in your own home and place of business.

Stupid law.
you have any proof of this?

[domenick2x]

A permit is required for a shotgun in New York? I know the state has always had strict handgun laws (enforced on honest citizens vs. criminals), but not so much for rifles and shotguns, unconcealed in your own home and place of business.

Stupid law.
Harlem - NYC. City permit required for any firearm. And if I recall correctly, damned hard to get approved.

[Iron Jaw]

Harlem - NYC. City permit required for any firearm. And if I recall correctly, damned hard to get approved.

Thus I take it there are no gun crimes committed by criminals in Harlem.:D:p

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

They always abide by the law in Washington DC.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1298&dat=19880729&id=5eoQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=1osDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6987,5787694

[swordfish]

I used to be called a wigger because I listened to rap music and had some black friends. My immediate response was usually Fuck You. Racism sucks.

[domenick2x]

Thus I take it there are no gun crimes committed by criminals in Harlem.:D:p
I'd respond in saying that all gun crimes in Harlem are committed by criminals.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

I'd respond in saying that all gun crimes in Harlem are committed by criminals. Lemme guess....'criminals' are ALL of those carrying guns regardless of whether they're merely trying to protect themselves or not..???

[domenick2x]

Lemme guess....'criminals' are ALL of those carrying guns regardless of whether they're merely trying to protect themselves or not..???
Reading comprehension is your friend.

You should arrange to have tea. You clearly haven't spent much time with your friend recently.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Reading comprehension is your friend.

You should arrange to have tea. You clearly haven't spent much time with your friend recently. Meanwhile, you should stop spending so much time watching 'Dancing with the Stars'.

Your posts read as such.

[Roy Munson]

Meanwhile, you should stop spending so much time watching 'Dancing with the Stars'.

Your posts read as such.
no I'm smarter

no, I'm smarter

no... I'm smarterer...

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

no I'm smarter

no, I'm smarter

no... I'm smarterer... Dom's predisposed to thinking that guns suck- as do you- so it's no surprise that you want to liken this to 'smarts' or who knows more.

Had he merely stuck to spelling out what he was getting at regarding Harlem, guns, and 'criminals', i'm sure it would have led to Anybody violating NY's gun laws is a 'criminal'.

No, i don't subscribe to that theory.

[domenick2x]

Dom's predisposed to thinking that guns suck- as do you- so it's no surprise that you want to liken this to 'smarts' or who knows more.

Had he merely stuck to spelling out what he was getting at regarding Harlem, guns, and 'criminals', i'm sure it would have led to Anybody violating NY's gun laws is a 'criminal'.

No, i don't subscribe to that theory.
crim·i·nal

ADJECTIVE:

1. Of, involving, or having the nature of crime: criminal abuse.
2. Relating to the administration of penal law.
3.
1. Guilty of crime.
2. Characteristic of a criminal.
4. Shameful; disgraceful: a criminal waste of talent.

NOUN:

One that has committed or been legally convicted of a crime.


I think I'm on pretty solid ground with my earlier statement.

So... to put a question to you, rather than try to put words in your mouth, are you of the opinion that laws that people feel are unjustified or unreasonable should NOT be followed?

And, by the way, you are completely wrong your statement. I'll actually be doing some shooting of clay pigeons next weekend, and I'm a former gun owner.

[Roy Munson]

Dom's predisposed to thinking that guns suck- as do you- so it's no surprise that you want to liken this to 'smarts' or who knows more.

Had he merely stuck to spelling out what he was getting at regarding Harlem, guns, and 'criminals', i'm sure it would have led to Anybody violating NY's gun laws is a 'criminal'.

No, i don't subscribe to that theory.
I've never said guns suck. I just don't think people NEED assault rifles. There are plenty of perfectly valid uses for guns, and none of them involve an assault rifle.

I will admit the AR15 I picked up in Bass Pro Shops felt cool and maybe I'd make up a need if I wanted to drop a G on a gun.

[becherr]

I've never said guns suck. I just don't think people NEED assault rifles. There are plenty of perfectly valid uses for guns, and none of them involve an assault rifle.

I will admit the AR15 I picked up in Bass Pro Shops felt cool and maybe I'd make up a need if I wanted to drop a G on a gun.

I am of the belief that if it isn't capable of full auto it isn't an assualt rifle. My .22 Cal is semi auto and isn't considered an assault rifle so I can't figure out why an AR15 would be considered in that same league.

Your assault rifles have fully automatic capability in my humble opinion.

[Roy Munson]

I am of the belief that if it isn't capable of full auto it isn't an assualt rifle. My .22 Cal is semi auto and isn't considered an assault rifle so I can't figure out why an AR15 would be considered in that same league.

Your assault rifles have fully automatic capability in my humble opinion.
aren't there conversions for these as well as an AK?

also, does your .22 weigh as little as an AR, or have a telescoping stock to make it more mobile?

[ryr8828]

Making an ar or ak full auto now is nigh on impossible for the normal person. Full auto would be a malfunction which would lead to a useless weapon.

I agree that the term assault rifle is an ignorant term, my rifles are no different than wooden stocked models.

[Iron Jaw]

Making an ar or ak full auto now is nigh on impossible for the normal person. Full auto would be a malfunction which would lead to a useless weapon.

I agree that the term assault rifle is an ignorant term, my rifles are no different than wooden stocked models.

Fully automatic weapons have been illegal to the consumer since 1936, except by special permit.

The law is already in the books.

Enforcement of the existing law is another matter. The weapons can be obtained, made, converted, purchased illegally, etc.

Anyway, I read the guy used a shotgun.

Shotguns are not part of the assault rifle class.

They are perfectly legal 99.9 percent of the time.

Unless they are "sawed-off.'" Sawed-off shotguns are illegal.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Fully automatic weapons have been illegal to the consumer since 1936, except by special permit.

The law is already in the books.

Enforcement of the existing law is another matter. The weapons can be obtained, made, converted, purchased illegally, etc.

Anyway, I read the guy used a shotgun.

Shotguns are not part of the assault rifle class.

They are perfectly legal 99.9 percent of the time.

Unless they are "sawed-off.'" Sawed-off shotguns are illegal.is that because they are more easily concealable or does it produce more firepower? my gun knowledge consists of renting a 9mm from the local range so excuse my ignorance.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

is that because they are more easily concealable or does it produce more firepower? my gun knowledge consists of renting a 9mm from the local range so excuse my ignorance. 'Assault' weapons tend to be categorized by the magazine- and number of bullets it holds.

My Tec-9 was under the 'assault weapons' ban some number of years ago although it was just a tricked out, low-cost 9mm with an extra 'handle' and a 36-round magazine that came with it.

So what did the manufacturer do to get around the 'ban'??? Made 'em with a smaller magazine.

[tichabou]

http://www.rialtotheatre.com/images/events/tech9ne.jpg

[hannitykillspuppies]

'Assault' weapons tend to be categorized by the magazine- and number of bullets it holds.

My Tec-9 was under the 'assault weapons' ban some number of years ago although it was just a tricked out, low-cost 9mm with an extra 'handle' and a 36-round magazine that came with it.

So what did the manufacturer do to get around the 'ban'??? Made 'em with a smaller magazine.i was talking about the sawed off shotguns.

i thought that was fairly obvious. but then again, it's you.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

i was talking about the sawed off shotguns.

i thought that was fairly obvious. but then again, it's you. Then you really are dimmer than i thought.

Sawed off shotguns can 'spray' shot in a wider area than a full-length barreled shot gun. The conceal capability's a problem- well back in prohibition times it was- but that's now largely secondary. The laws for rifles and shotguns have to do with barrel lengths (and now also magazine capacity).

And no, a sawed off shot gun doesn't have more 'firepower' than a full-length barrel shot gun.
lol

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Now go do yourself a favor and research US v Miller (1939).

[Roy Munson]

my rifles are no different than wooden stocked models.

*cough* bullshit *cough*

[ryr8828]

*cough* bullshit *cough*

PbvOT1ZKW3o

auCPzPgTbaM

[ryr8828]

is that because they are more easily concealable or does it produce more firepower? my gun knowledge consists of renting a 9mm from the local range so excuse my ignorance.

I think the thought behind the law against sawing off shotguns had to do with the ability to conceal them.
Minimum barrel length 18 inches. Minimum overall length 26 inches. That's federal, your state may be more restrictive. You can still have a shotgun shorter than federal guidelines if you buy a $200 federal tax stamp and have yourself approved by your local law enforcement agency.

It's the same process as buying a fully automatic weapon, short barreled rifle, or a suppressor.

http://www.serbu.com/top/super_shorty_870.jpg
The purchasing info for this shotgun says it is classified as an aow (any other weapon) and can be transferred with only a $5 tax stamp. So I guess I was wrong about the $200 for short shotguns.
http://www.serbu.com/top/superShorty.php

[domenick2x]

Now go do yourself a favor and research US v Miller (1939).
I found this part interesting:


In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

I found this part interesting: Also worth noting is that the US military utilized 30 to 40 thousand short-barreled shot guns during WWII in warfare & to keep German prisoners in line.

That statement cuts both ways. Munson's always questioning why one would need an AR-15. Welp, because one could use it because the military used it.

[ryr8828]

Also worth noting is that the US military utilized 30 to 40 thousand short-barreled shot guns during WWII in warfare & to keep German prisoners in line.

That statement cuts both ways. Munson's always questioning why one would need an AR-15. Welp, because one could use it because the military used it.

I have a hard time with people telling me what I need.

Does anyone need a jet ski?
A motorcycle?
How many people die from these each year?

An Albert Pujols jersey?
I get that sucker wrapped around your neck and you're done for.

60 inch tv? No, you can get buy with a 19 inch. Hell you can get by with no tv at all.

[hannitykillspuppies]

I have a hard time with people telling me what I need.

Does anyone need a jet ski?
A motorcycle?
How many people die from these each year?

An Albert Pujols jersey?
I get that sucker wrapped around your neck and you're done for.

60 inch tv? No, you can get buy with a 19 inch. Hell you can get by with no tv at all.

great analogies. because all those things, like guns, are designed specifically to kill.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Also worth noting is that the US military utilized 30 to 40 thousand short-barreled shot guns during WWII in warfare & to keep German prisoners in line.

That statement cuts both ways. Munson's always questioning why one would need an AR-15. Welp, because one could use it because the military used it.

by this logic everyone should be able to own an abrams tank, an apache helicopter, an f-18, a nuclear sub, a destroyer, sams, nuclear warheads, stealth bombers, predators....

[ryr8828]

great analogies. because all those things, like guns, are designed specifically to kill.

Tools and toys are what you make of them.

[KinjaKahn]

by this logic everyone should be able to own an abrams tank, an apache helicopter, an f-18, a nuclear sub, a destroyer, sams, nuclear warheads, stealth bombers, predators....
Awhile back an F18 was for sale for $28 million. Of course it doesn't include the classified avionics\weapon systems... and would cost a fortune to maintain.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

by this logic everyone should be able to own an abrams tank, an apache helicopter, an f-18, a nuclear sub, a destroyer, sams, nuclear warheads, stealth bombers, predators.... That's the logic the SCOTUS used back then. Maybe you oughtta take 'em up on it and try to buy one of those items you named....then you can come back here and tell us how you made out.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Awhile back an F18 was for sale for $28 million. Of course it doesn't include the classified avionics\weapon systems... and would cost a fortune to maintain.that's like owning a gun without any bullets.

[becherr]

aren't there conversions for these as well as an AK?

also, does your .22 weigh as little as an AR, or have a telescoping stock to make it more mobile?

The .22 I have was bought by my step dad nad wieghts much less then a AR and most definately an AK. It is smaller then an AR or AK for length.

[becherr]

*cough* bullshit *cough*

Um....with what I know I can take any gun and make it look mean.

The M60 Machine gun in the Rambo movie with the right side pistol grib looked really bad ass. Wouldn't increase the performance.

[Roy Munson]

PbvOT1ZKW3o

auCPzPgTbaM

Its still bullshit.

This guy oversimplifies what each weapon is, and lies about what people and the media say and think an assualt rifle is. The vast majority of people will not equate assault rifle as fully automatic. Just because one bullet comes out when you pull the trigger doesn't mean you can call each of the weapons equal.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

[Roy Munson]

Um....with what I know I can take any gun and make it look mean.

The M60 Machine gun in the Rambo movie with the right side pistol grib looked really bad ass. Wouldn't increase the performance.
looking mean is not the point... its the performance of the weapon.

[becherr]

looking mean is not the point... its the performance of the weapon.

I understand that, there are those that want to take my old 22 and claim it is an assualt rifle because it is semi automatic like an AR or AK. Additionally, there are those that want to take into account magazine capacity but that is BS too. An assault weapon has the capability to shoot fully auto or it isn't an assault rifle.

[Roy Munson]

I understand that, there are those that want to take my old 22 and claim it is an assualt rifle because it is semi automatic like an AR or AK. Additionally, there are those that want to take into account magazine capacity but that is BS too. An assault weapon has the capability to shoot fully auto or it isn't an assault rifle.
I disagree... You can have increased performance of a weapon and still not be fully auto. A 6lb, telescoping stock, pistol gripped, 50 round clip AR 15 is nothing like your standard semi-auto rifle, and shouldn't be classified as such.

[becherr]

I disagree... You can have increased performance of a weapon and still not be fully auto. A 6lb, telescoping stock, pistol gripped, 50 round clip AR 15 is nothing like your standard semi-auto rifle, and shouldn't be classified as such.

I think that would have more to do with the type of round the weapon fires. The only reason an AR or AK is a even a slight more threat is that armor piercing and other varieties of rounds are produced for the military causing those into procuring these illegally a threat. Again, those that carry the weapon are the threat not the weapon.

[Roy Munson]

guns don't kill people... people kill people?

then we should label the owners assault people...

[becherr]

guns don't kill people... people kill people?

then we should label the owners assault people...


Yep, Leave the gun out of it. Any one killing people with a gun should be called assault people and thusly classified. Oh, sorry they do that they just don't classify them as assault people but felons, criminals, murderers.

[Roy Munson]

Yep, Leave the gun out of it. Any one killing people with a gun should be called assault people and thusly classified. Oh, sorry they do that they just don't classify them as assault people but felons, criminals, murderers.
this is only if you believe that guns don't kill people, people kill people. While this may be technically true, guns make the act easier. Give the kids in columbine a hatchet and see what kind of damage they could have inflicted before being taken down.

[becherr]

this is only if you believe that guns don't kill people, people kill people. While this may be technically true, guns make the act easier. Give the kids in columbine a hatchet and see what kind of damage they could have inflicted before being taken down.

People kill people still holds true. If we had hatches only then those that didn't would be in danger of those that did AND WANTED TO HURT THEM. Ask OJ....he had a knike, not a hatchet but pretty simular situation. You want to kill someone your going to kill someone.

[domenick2x]

People kill people still holds true. If we had hatches only then those that didn't would be in danger of those that did AND WANTED TO HURT THEM. Ask OJ....he had a knike, not a hatchet but pretty simular situation. You want to kill someone your going to kill someone.
Two guys, a couple of hatchets.... killing 12, injuring 21? Guns (like bombs) enable killing on a larger scale.

[ryr8828]

Its still bullshit.

This guy oversimplifies what each weapon is, and lies about what people and the media say and think an assualt rifle is. The vast majority of people will not equate assault rifle as fully automatic. Just because one bullet comes out when you pull the trigger doesn't mean you can call each of the weapons equal.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

I don't think you spend much time listening to the vast majority of people or reading what the media says.
I can't count the times I've read about "machine gun" or "automatic assault rifle" in a news article about a crime and it turns out to be an old sks or possibly even a shotgun. There are a few anti gun big city police chiefs who love to perpetuate these myths, Chicago and Miami in particular.

People who don't have guns don't generally know much about them. The first thing people say when they see one of my ar's is "Wow is that automatic?"

You're all tore up about weight and collapsible stocks.
My 12 gauge weighs one pound less than my ar15 carbine. My 12 gauge weighs less than my ar15 rifle and ak47 rifle.
If I wore the clothing it would take to conceal my ar15 carbine I could also conceal my 12 gauge bird gun.

Where can I get one of those 50 round "clips"? Never seen one.

[becherr]

Where can I get one of those 50 round "clips"? Never seen one.[/QUOTE]

I was going to ask the same thing. Last I knew all you could get was a 30 round "Banana Clip" but what do I know.

[swordfish]

Where can I get one of those 50 round "clips"? Never seen one.


You pro-gun guys should get out more. You didn't know about the liberal killer 200 round clips? They make the gun full auto. Just insert the clip and your semi-auto is now a M-60.

[ryr8828]

Where can I get one of those 50 round "clips"? Never seen one.

I was going to ask the same thing. Last I knew all you could get was a 30 round "Banana Clip" but what do I know.[/quote]

I saw a 40 rounder but it was $30.

You can buy 75 round drums but it's a novelty and makes it like trying to shoot a tractor.

[Roy Munson]

Where can I get one of those 50 round "clips"? Never seen one.

I was going to ask the same thing. Last I knew all you could get was a 30 round "Banana Clip" but what do I know.
change it to 30 and the point remains the same...

[Roy Munson]

I don't think you spend much time listening to the vast majority of people or reading what the media says.
I can't count the times I've read about "machine gun" or "automatic assault rifle" in a news article about a crime and it turns out to be an old sks or possibly even a shotgun. There are a few anti gun big city police chiefs who love to perpetuate these myths, Chicago and Miami in particular.

People who don't have guns don't generally know much about them. The first thing people say when they see one of my ar's is "Wow is that automatic?"

You're all tore up about weight and collapsible stocks.
My 12 gauge weighs one pound less than my ar15 carbine. My 12 gauge weighs less than my ar15 rifle and ak47 rifle.
If I wore the clothing it would take to conceal my ar15 carbine I could also conceal my 12 gauge bird gun.

Where can I get one of those 50 round "clips"? Never seen one.

Put it all together, and what do you get? Thats right, an assault rifle.

[ryr8828]

change it to 30 and the point remains the same...What round count do you deem to be safe in your all knowing about gun safety and crime prevention omnipotence?

In your world the only people that would have rights are terrorists and criminals.
They would still have any gun that they want.
You must be Barack Obama.

[domenick2x]

What round count do you deem to be safe in your all knowing about gun safety and crime prevention omnipotence?

In your world the only people that would have rights are terrorists and criminals.
They would still have any gun that they want.
You must be Barack Obama.
One. All weapons should be single shot.

How could you need more?

[Roy Munson]

What round count do you deem to be safe in your all knowing about gun safety and crime prevention omnipotence?

In your world the only people that would have rights are terrorists and criminals.
They would still have any gun that they want.
You must be Barack Obama.
I said none of this, but you can continue to think I did.

[Roy Munson]

One. All weapons should be single shot.

How could you need more?
You can only have one or the other. You can either have all the guns you want, or all the ammo you want, but not both.

[ryr8828]

One. All weapons should be single shot.

How could you need more?

All my weapons are single shot. They fire only one shot at a time.

[Roy Munson]

What round count do you deem to be safe in your all knowing about gun safety and crime prevention omnipotence?

In your world the only people that would have rights are terrorists and criminals.
They would still have any gun that they want.
You must be Barack Obama.
zero is the safest, but what the fuck does somebody need more than 3 for? Hell, why not make it 5 incase you go 0/3 at whatever you're shooting at. If you've got a scope though, I'm going back to 3. Missing 3 times with a scope is pretty piss poor.

[Roy Munson]

All my weapons are single shot. They fire only one shot at a time.
so do automatics...

[ryr8828]

zero is the safest, but what the fuck does somebody need more than 3 for? Hell, why not make it 5 incase you go 0/3 at whatever you're shooting at. If you've got a scope though, I'm going back to 3. Missing 3 times with a scope is pretty piss poor.

Fine.

The law abiding people will have only 3.

Criminals and terrorists will not be limited. They never are.

[becherr]

zero is the safest, but what the fuck does somebody need more than 3 for? Hell, why not make it 5 incase you go 0/3 at whatever you're shooting at. If you've got a scope though, I'm going back to 3. Missing 3 times with a scope is pretty piss poor.

I haven't been bird hunting in years but you can easily miss more then three times if you don't get out often.

[becherr]

zero is the safest, but what the fuck does somebody need more than 3 for? Hell, why not make it 5 incase you go 0/3 at whatever you're shooting at. If you've got a scope though, I'm going back to 3. Missing 3 times with a scope is pretty piss poor.

Zero is only the safest for those that aren't going to follow the laws.

[Roy Munson]

Fine.

The law abiding people will have only 3.

Criminals and terrorists will not be limited. They never are.
then I want my fucking rocket launcher.

[Roy Munson]

I haven't been bird hunting in years but you can easily miss more then three times if you don't get out often.
You can always reload.

Plus don't many sport shooters use a double-barrel/over-under?

I've shot plenty of sporting clays with an over-under.

[Roy Munson]

Zero is only the safest for those that aren't going to follow the laws.
zero is the safest for all...

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

guns don't kill people... people kill people?

then we should label the owners assault people... Meanwhile, when somebody beats somebody else up, it's considered 'assault'.

And if you beat somebody with an instrument that can cause harm it's 'assault with a deadly weapon'.

But we don't have laws where somebody can be convicted of 'assault with an assault weapon'.

[becherr]

then I want my fucking rocket launcher.

They can be made but are illegal. So you have your illegal rocket launcher and the rest of the law abiding citizens are without, therefore, vulnerable to your evey evil intention.

[ryr8828]

zero is the safest for all...

People like you make me want to buy one of these
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee64/jbrackjr/DSC00388.jpg

and one of these

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/soowah/new57.jpg

[Roy Munson]

People like you make me want to buy one of these
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee64/jbrackjr/DSC00388.jpg


Thats my favorite SMG in COD4.

I'll bet it has zero performance improvements over your standard semi-auto hunting rifle. Yes, I know the one pictured is the civilian version that is also semi-auto with a longer barrel. And as I've learned on the video, you pull the trigger once and one bullet comes out, so its more like every other semi-auto gun than its automatic brother.

Shorten the barrel on that thing and there's really no need for a pistol.

[ryr8828]

Thats my favorite SMG in COD4.

I'll bet it has zero performance improvements over your standard semi-auto hunting rifle. Yes, I know the one pictured is the civilian version that is also semi-auto with a longer barrel. And as I've learned on the video, you pull the trigger once and one bullet comes out, so its more like every other semi-auto gun than its automatic brother.

Shorten the barrel on that thing and there's really no need for a pistol.SBR is illegal in Obamastan, unless you're one of King Richard Daley's bodyguards.

The ps90 does have that 50 round magazine you were talking about though.

The pistol only holds 20.

[Roy Munson]

SBR is illegal in Obamastan, unless you're one of King Richard Daley's bodyguards.

The ps90 does have that 50 round magazine you were talking about though.

The pistol only holds 20.
You should add this to the list too...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/H%26K-SL8.jpg

[ryr8828]

I've already got two rifles that shoot 5.56 in the ar15 platform so I don't need that monstrosity.

[swordfish]

http://www.ruger.com/SR556/video.html

You need this one tho..

[swordfish]

with this

http://shopruger.com/images/18004_L.jpg

[Iron Jaw]

I believe, the key is, teaching your kids the difference between right and wrong. In my family that means instilling good religious values.

I was around guns from the time I was about three years old. Every member of my family of 8, including my mother and sisters knew how to use them and what they were for. My father trained us early on how to use them for hunting, sport target shooting and self defense.

We trained regularly. We also learned what they were capable of doing.

Not one of the offspring has ever had a firearm accident and have used them responsibly.

In my profession, I carry a .40 cal H&K with 13 rounds (12 round mag and one in the chamber, with two additional mags in a pouch) every day. When I go out in the field I add either a shotgun or my assigned M-4 Rifle, which fires a 5.56mm cartridge, has a 30 round mag (I keep two mags loaded in the truck) and has both, semi and fully auto capability.

When I'm off-duty, I normally carry my .40 cal concealed. As a fed, I can carry concealed anywhere in the U.S. including any conveyance. So long as my adversaries carry weapons it is a necessity. My adversaries do not pay attention to existing laws of carry, conceal or purchase.

All of the boys in the family served in the military (one of the girls too), 3 Marines and 2 Army.

The point is, all of us were raised with firearms.

None of us are killers.

We all know how to do it if necessary.

We know the difference between right and wrong.

Until we, as a nation get back to that philosophy, the government can legislate 500,000 gun laws and it will not do one iota of good. There are too many existing, they can be made by a person with know-how, and can be purchased legally or illegally, borrowed or stolen.

[Jiddy78]

I believe, the key is, teaching your kids the difference between right and wrong. In my family that means instilling good religious values.



"Son, if you think somebody has committed a sin that you deem hell-worthy, wish hell upon them, and be sure that everybody around you knows about it....If yer not sure at what moment to let everybody know (anytime is really good), but if yer looking for that perfect time...Like immediately after they die is like that slow clap moment."


Today's lesson in the Jiddy household.

[TGPackersTwins19]

Can't I agree with this. If the only penalty for not getting a permit is that you have to retroactively pay for it, why would you ever buy one? If you don't get caught, you don't have to pay and if you do, you're no worse off.

Illegally carrying a weapon (without a permit) should get you serious fines and potential jail time. Using a weapon that you do not have a permit for should be come with even more penalties. Often times, permitting is tied in with an education component. Skip that and you have even dumber people walking around carrying.


In most places, you do not need a permit to own/use a gun. I own a shotgun and a .22. Neither are documented.

Which automatically invalidates the "dumber people" argument.

[TGPackersTwins19]

Lemme guess....'criminals' are ALL of those carrying guns regardless of whether they're merely trying to protect themselves or not..???

Crime is committed by criminals.

[TGPackersTwins19]

by this logic everyone should be able to own an abrams tank, an apache helicopter, an f-18, a nuclear sub, a destroyer, sams, nuclear warheads, stealth bombers, predators....

None of these are 'arms'

[TGPackersTwins19]

You should add this to the list too...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/H%26K-SL8.jpg

Oh, man I SO want one of those...

[Vegas]

Oh, man I SO want one of those...

The libs don't want you to have one. Because it's nasty looking.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Crime is committed by criminals. But to some here, 'criminals' can be those who own a firearm that once was legal but is now illegal due to passage of a law by liberals.

[hannitykillspuppies]

None of these are 'arms'
yes none of those are weapons.

[TGPackersTwins19]

yes none of those are weapons.

Big machine weaponry. Different than common arms.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Big machine weaponry. Different than common arms.arms=weaponry.

[Cat in the Hat]

The libs don't want you to have one. Because it's nasty looking.

I guess the question I raise is this: Do people really need a semi-automatic or lesser gun that looks like a machine gun or other advanced military portable light arms?

Don't get me wrong, I fully support anyone's right to own a gun and even use a gun in a legal manner (shooting range, hunting, self defense, and even collecting), but other than the "cool factor" so-to-speak, why have a gun that looks like an AK-47?

I don't own a gun myself. However, I am an Eagle Scout and have used and fully respect guns and what they can do for both good and bad. When it comes down to it, considering we aren't allowed to actually own fully-automatic guns, is a semi-automatic gun that looks like a fully-automatic gun going to truly help us defend ourselves better? After the first couple shots are fired, the opponent if not killed or greater in numbers will figure out the gun is not automatic.

Again, please don't misinterpret this as me saying we shouldn't be allowed to have guns. We do deserve the ability to own guns as it says in the Constitution.

[Vegas]

I guess the question I raise is this: Do people really need a semi-automatic or lesser gun that looks like a machine gun or other advanced military portable light arms?

Don't get me wrong, I fully support anyone's right to own a gun and even use a gun in a legal manner (shooting range, hunting, self defense, and even collecting), but other than the "cool factor" so-to-speak, why have a gun that looks like an AK-47?

I don't own a gun myself. However, I am an Eagle Scout and have used and fully respect guns and what they can do for both good and bad. When it comes down to it, considering we aren't allowed to actually own fully-automatic guns, is a semi-automatic gun that looks like a fully-automatic gun going to truly help us defend ourselves better? After the first couple shots are fired, the opponent if not killed or greater in numbers will figure out the gun is not automatic.

Again, please don't misinterpret this as me saying we shouldn't be allowed to have guns. We do deserve the ability to own guns as it says in the Constitution.

Is an old double action revolver a semi-auto? According to a lot of anti-gun types, it is. It gets the next round into firing position each time the trigger is pulled.

Bill Clinton went hunting with a Remington 1100 shotgun. Should those be banned?

[KinjaKahn]

I guess the question I raise is this: Do people really need a semi-automatic or lesser gun that looks like a machine gun or other advanced military portable light arms?
Does anyone need a nice house... can't a concrete cube do just fine? Do you need a Cadillac when a Smart car will do the same job? Does anyone need color television? black and white is plenty... Outlaw color paint, its unnecessary.

[domenick2x]

Does anyone need a nice house... can't a concrete cube do just fine? Do you need a Cadillac when a Smart car will do the same job? Does anyone need color television? black and white is plenty... Outlaw color paint, its unnecessary.
So the answer is no, you don't need it. Thanks for clarifying.

[Cat in the Hat]

Is an old double action revolver a semi-auto? According to a lot of anti-gun types, it is. It gets the next round into firing position each time the trigger is pulled.

Bill Clinton went hunting with a Remington 1100 shotgun. Should those be banned?

I'm not saying a semi-auto gun in general should be banned at all. I just think the appearance of the gun should perhaps be limited. That's what I'm getting at. How much of that helps contribute to crimes? A general inquiry as opposed to criticism. I will never tell a person they cannot have their guns. I just worry about what sort of guns are out there and who's hands they're in. I understand guns don't kill people, people kill people. But might it be that the type of gun involved may influence the ultimate use or perhaps misuse of the gun?

As far as what Kinja said in terms of do we need a nice house or a Caddy, etc., no we don't NEED those things. The thing is, with the exception of the car/vehicle on some levels these things don't contribute to such destruction and despair as a gun can when used for malicious purposes. Yes a car can be used as a weapon and even a TV if one believes in subliminal messages and psychological warfare in terms of visual influences, but that pretty much doesn't matter if it's color or monochrome. However, these items aren't used for negative reasons as much as guns are.

My biggest question is why do average folks need to have access to guns that were created for military purposes of more efficient ways of killing people and even semi-automatic replicas of those guns?

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

So the answer is no, you don't need it. Thanks for clarifying. Fortunately, the US Constitution doesn't ask whether one 'needs' a firearm or not.

Thankfully, it does allow for firearms regardless of 'need'.

[tichabou]

I don't understand why "big machine weapons" aren't arms. I remember two or three years ago, I was reading reason and they argued that I should be able to own a tank if I want.

[Vegas]

I'm not saying a semi-auto gun in general should be banned at all. I just think the appearance of the gun should perhaps be limited. That's what I'm getting at. How much of that helps contribute to crimes? A general inquiry as opposed to criticism. I will never tell a person they cannot have their guns. I just worry about what sort of guns are out there and who's hands they're in. I understand guns don't kill people, people kill people. But might it be that the type of gun involved may influence the ultimate use or perhaps misuse of the gun?

As far as what Kinja said in terms of do we need a nice house or a Caddy, etc., no we don't NEED those things. The thing is, with the exception of the car/vehicle on some levels these things don't contribute to such destruction and despair as a gun can when used for malicious purposes. Yes a car can be used as a weapon and even a TV if one believes in subliminal messages and psychological warfare in terms of visual influences, but that pretty much doesn't matter if it's color or monochrome. However, these items aren't used for negative reasons as much as guns are.

My biggest question is why do average folks need to have access to guns that were created for military purposes of more efficient ways of killing people and even semi-automatic replicas of those guns?

Can you imagine the government guy that gets to decide which guns look too mean? You give license like that and someone will say they all look mean and ban all guns.

Should the government tell Jay Leno how many cars he can own or tell John Edwards how big a house he's allowed to have or Algore how much energy he's allowed to use?

[Cat in the Hat]

Can you imagine the government guy that gets to decide which guns look too mean? You give license like that and someone will say they all look mean and ban all guns.

Should the government tell Jay Leno how many cars he can own or tell John Edwards how big a house he's allowed to have or Algore how much energy he's allowed to use?

Couldn't it be simply limited to any otherwise legal firearms that directly resemble known automatic weapons used by any military? Or perhaps have a special license to purchase weapons or application kits with that kind of appearance. In the case of requiring a special license at least it still allows folks to have the kinds of guns they wish to purchase, but it makes the decision process a bit more complicated as further financial considerations are to be made to get these weapons. That might limit the amount of folks who truly take interest in purchasing these weapons at least on a legit level.

[Vegas]

Couldn't it be simply limited to any otherwise legal firearms that directly resemble known automatic weapons used by any military? Or perhaps have a special license to purchase weapons or application kits with that kind of appearance. In the case of requiring a special license at least it still allows folks to have the kinds of guns they wish to purchase, but it makes the decision process a bit more complicated as further financial considerations are to be made to get these weapons. That might limit the amount of folks who truly take interest in purchasing these weapons at least on a legit level.

So do we need to restrict the after market? Nobody can buy synthetic stocks?

And do we need to make laws so nobody can paint their jeep the same color as the military? We don't have enough government intervention in the markets now?

[ryr8828]

I'm not saying a semi-auto gun in general should be banned at all. I just think the appearance of the gun should perhaps be limited. That's what I'm getting at. How much of that helps contribute to crimes? A general inquiry as opposed to criticism. I will never tell a person they cannot have their guns. I just worry about what sort of guns are out there and who's hands they're in. I understand guns don't kill people, people kill people. But might it be that the type of gun involved may influence the ultimate use or perhaps misuse of the gun?

As far as what Kinja said in terms of do we need a nice house or a Caddy, etc., no we don't NEED those things. The thing is, with the exception of the car/vehicle on some levels these things don't contribute to such destruction and despair as a gun can when used for malicious purposes. Yes a car can be used as a weapon and even a TV if one believes in subliminal messages and psychological warfare in terms of visual influences, but that pretty much doesn't matter if it's color or monochrome. However, these items aren't used for negative reasons as much as guns are.

My biggest question is why do average folks need to have access to guns that were created for military purposes of more efficient ways of killing people and even semi-automatic replicas of those guns?

The way a weapon looks has nothing to do with it being used in a crime. It may make liberals pee themselves when they look at it but it doesn't make it more efficient if someone decides to break the law.

What would your preferable government allowed gun look like?

[domenick2x]

So do we need to restrict the after market? Nobody can buy synthetic stocks?

And do we need to make laws so nobody can paint their jeep the same color as the military? We don't have enough government intervention in the markets now?
The 2nd Amendment covers Jeeps?

[ryr8828]

The 2nd Amendment covers Jeeps?

The 9th amendment.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

The way a weapon looks has nothing to do with it being used in a crime. It may make liberals pee themselves when they look at it but it doesn't make it more efficient if someone decides to break the law.

What would your preferable government allowed gun look like?
http://abbybuckley.com/spitball.JPG

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

The 2nd Amendment covers Jeeps? The 10th Amendment could apply...

...if liberals allowed it to.

:rolleyes:

[ryr8828]

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu90/nbh40/tacticoolAR15.jpg

[Peter for President]

Lemme guess....'criminals' are ALL of those carrying guns regardless of whether they're merely trying to protect themselves or not..???
He could have just as well said all crimes are committed by criminals if that would have made it easier.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

He could have just as well said all crimes are committed by criminals if that would have made it easier. Wow. Replying to a post from August '09???

Btw, the problem with your statement- and the Midget-Whisperer's- is that all crimes *aren't* always committed by 'criminals'.

Clearly- re-focusing on that particular topic- laws by liberals have *created* 'criminals' out of law-abiding citizens (regarding the 'assault' weapons changes/bans).

That clear 'nuff for ya to understand??

[domenick2x]

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu90/nbh40/tacticoolAR15.jpg
This seems very anti-topical for this thread title.

If you had to wield that bad boy, you better have a few minutes on your hands to find the trigger.

[ryr8828]

This seems very anti-topical for this thread title.

If you had to wield that bad boy, you better have a few minutes on your hands to find the trigger.

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu90/nbh40/internet-soldier.jpg

[ryr8828]

http://hellinahandbasket.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/tacticool.jpg

[ryr8828]

http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/642/TactiCool.JPG

[ryr8828]

And a poster of the original picture...http://thxforthe.info/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/tacticool.jpg

[ryr8828]

http://images.slashdot.org/articles/08/08/14/142201-1.png

[ryr8828]

Sometimes zombies don't respond to gunfire...
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2008/12/chainsaw-bayonet.jpg

[ryr8828]

Even normal looking handguns can be put to evil uses in the wrong hands.

http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/ww356/suttonfan041/cat_gun.jpg