Police shoot a man amed with a Mac10 in times Square.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Are you afraid of answering for some reason?

Your question has been answered before, several times, by all of us. Why are you asking it THIS time?

Because of Ron's rely to me earlier in the thread.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm confused. Are you trying to antagonize me?

Me? You? Why should I?

Because I like making points in the form of a question?

Who would do such a thing?

You have to ask?

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Are you afraid of answering for some reason?

Your question has been answered before, several times, by all of us. Why are you asking it THIS time?

Because of Ron's rely to me earlier in the thread.

Either you have proof that the woman made a straw purchase, or you're pulling your usual misdirect bullshit - which is it?

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Are you afraid of answering for some reason?

Your question has been answered before, several times, by all of us. Why are you asking it THIS time?

Because of Ron's rely to me earlier in the thread.

Either you have proof that the woman made a straw purchase, or you're pulling your usual misdirect bullshit - which is it?

Which woman? My question didn't refer to any particular individual.

But it's nice to know that for once you agree with me per your previous posts, and disagree with Ron.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Are you afraid of answering for some reason?

Your question has been answered before, several times, by all of us. Why are you asking it THIS time?

Because of Ron's rely to me earlier in the thread.

Either you have proof that the woman made a straw purchase, or you're pulling your usual misdirect bullshit - which is it?

Which woman? My question didn't refer to any particular individual.

But it's nice to know that for once you agree with me per your previous posts, and disagree with Ron.

Wrong. I agree with Ron's assessment of your usual arguments.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Would you classify someone who can pass the background check and who makes a straw purchase of a gun as "law abiding"?

To simplify, and correct any lack of clarity from something written 2.5 years ago.

There is no such thing as straw purchase. It's legal for someone to buy a gun. It may/probably be illegal for that person to then sell to a third party. In CA, all transfers must be done via an FFL. In that states that do not require this, I do not know what the duty of care laws are. I suspect that if the original buyer knows that they are facilitating a felon to obtain a weapon, that a crime is being committed. But since you've failed to establish that, it doesn't apply.

This has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence. No potentially illegal action has taken place when the gun purchase is made. It's only if there is a subsequent transfer.

But it does follow your usual pattern, Kallend, of believing in rights and due process unless it has something to do with guns. Then you're more Patriot Act Man than John Ashcroft, W Bush, and Diane Feinstein in one.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Would you classify someone who can pass the background check and who makes a straw purchase of a gun as "law abiding"?

To simplify, and correct any lack of clarity from something written 2.5 years ago.

There is no such thing as straw purchase. .

So what did you mean when YOU wrote:

Straw sales aren't legal, so the "law abiding gun owners" phrase rings false. In CA, private transfer aren't allow at all. In other states, I don't know what responsibility is place on the seller if he knows the buyer is a felon.

and


You need to be 21 (at least in CA) to buy a handgun. At least 18 elsewhere. I venture that a pretty big chunk of criminals commited their first crime before that age. And if they have somone else do a straw purchase, that is also an illegal purchase.

Is ATF lying when it states:
Tucson, Ariz., – The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),
U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona, Arizona Attorney General, and representatives
from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) – the trade association for the
firearms industry – today announced a major campaign to reduce significantly the illegal
straw purchases of firearms in Tucson.
The program, called “Don't Lie for the Other Guy,” was developed to raise public
awareness that it is a serious crime to purchase a firearm for someone who cannot legally
do so or for someone who does not otherwise want his or her name associated with the
transaction. The program is also designed to educate firearms dealers on how to better
detect and deter potential straw purchases.

www.atf.gov/press/releases/2009/08/081309-pho-atf-usao-stop-illegal-firearms-purchases.pdf

Is it just possible that once again you are both wrong and being untruthful about it?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Is it just possible that once again you are both wrong and being untruthful about it?

Nope.

but you're wrong when you presume someone is not a law abiding citizen without evidence (ie, a conviction) to the contrary.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Is it just possible that once again you are both wrong and being untruthful about it?

Nope.

but you're wrong when you presume someone is not a law abiding citizen without evidence (ie, a conviction) to the contrary.

If I had done that, I would indeed be wrong. However it is amazingly stupid of you to be dishonest about what I wrote when all you have to do is back up in the thread to see that I wrote nothing of the sort.

A implies B is not the same as B implies A.

Perhaps you'll also explain how you know better than ATF about straw purchases.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

still haven't zipped up yet, I see.

[kallend 2,113]

Still unable to respond honestly, I see.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Still unable to respond honestly, I see.

Sounds like another poll you could post.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm confused. Are you trying to antagonize me?

Me? You? Why should I?

Because I like making points in the form of a question?

Who would do such a thing?

You have to ask?

Who knows?

[Ron 10]

Quote

Is a straw purchaser a "law abiding citizen"?

Up until the second they make that decision.... Yep. You of course are free to attempt to be judge/jury/executioner in your own mind all you want.

But you taking that stance does not change FACTS one little bit. And the facts are you are not guilty till proven guilty.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Just admit its this:

Quote

Either you have proof that the woman made a straw purchase, or you're pulling your usual misdirect bullshit - which is it?

It is all you ever do.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Is a straw purchaser a "law abiding citizen"?

Up until the second they make that decision.... Yep. .

Correct. So the fact that they passed the background check implies nothing because the decision may have been premeditated (and according to ATF, it usually is).

Thanks.

QED.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Correct. So the fact that they passed the background check implies nothing because the decision may have been premeditated (and according to ATF, it usually is).

Thanks.

QED.

Wrong as usual..... He is not a criminal till he actually does it.

And he is not guilty till he is proven guilty in a court of law.

Sorry, you don't get to make up rules no matter how much you would like to make them.

You should jump all over Boxer since she has done it and admitted to it.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Correct. So the fact that they passed the background check implies nothing because the decision may have been premeditated (and according to ATF, it usually is).

Thanks.

QED.

Wrong as usual..... He is not a criminal till he actually does it.

Contradicting your previous post so soon? Last time you wrote they were law abiding "Up until the second they make that decision"

Quote

And he is not guilty till he is proven guilty in a court of law.

NO ONE except you has suggested anything about guilt, and you contradicted yourself on that issue when you wrote that OJ Simpson was a murderer.

Quote

Sorry, you don't get to make up rules no matter how much you would like to make them.

You should jump all over Boxer since she has done it and admitted to it.

So warpedskydiver was wrong and Kelpdiver was wrong last time this was discussed, and ATF is wrong and Ron is right.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

and ATF is wrong and Ron is right.

And FBI is wrong and kallend is right...what's your point?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

and ATF is wrong and Ron is right.

And FBI is wrong and kallend is right...what's your point?

Non sequitur.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm confused. Are you trying to antagonize me?

Me? You? Why should I?

Because I like making points in the form of a question?

Who would do such a thing?

You have to ask?

Who knows?

Don't you?

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[Ron 10]

Quote

Contradicting your previous post so soon?Laugh Last time you wrote they were law abiding "Up until the second they make that decision"

I think you do have an comprehension problem.

Until they make the decision, and that only happens when they actually do the deed, they are still innocent.

Now, maybe in your own little world just the THOUGHT of doing bad things makes them guilty.... But in the real world it is the deed.

100% consistent. But then again your throwing all kinds of crap out and hoping something other than the topic sticking is ALSO 100% consistent.

Quote

NO ONE except you has suggested anything about guilt, and you contradicted yourself on that issue when you wrote that OJ Simpson was a murderer.

Good thing I am just a guy with an OPINION and I am not convicting him. You want to convict people based on your opinion alone and punish them based on what you seem correct.

Quote

So warpedskydiver was wrong and Kelpdiver was wrong last time this was discussed, and ATF is wrong and Ron is right.

Actually, the only one wrong here is you. All the thrashing around you do to try and distract from that does not work.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 2,113]

Have you been drinking already?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Have you been drinking already?

Wow... the best you can do is some personal slam?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Have you been drinking already?

Wow... the best you can do is some personal slam?

It was a charitable comment on the quality of your post, which makes claims about me that contradict the clear evidence of the posts in the thread, and which, when challenged, you have been unable to substantiate.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.