Ron

Because what you think someone else is, is dependant on where you stand yourself. When I take political tests I am always shown as economic right, socially libertarian. From the one everyone seems to be taking now: Economic Left/Right: 2.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.26 And on other tests I get pretty much same results. See attachments. However, if someone is way left of me then they might try to call me a NAZI.... Even though he was a facist and I am, by definition, the opposite of him. If the observer is way right of me, they would call me a hippy. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Not even going to get near how to convert one..... The BATF has busted people for less than just saying how it *could* be done. To the point of going to gun shows UC and asking guys how to do it and then busting them when they said how it *could* be done. So, I will just mention the legal ways. The easiest way to legally make one is to buy a lightning link that is in the NFA database. I have attached a pic of a registered LL. It should be noted that a transferable lightning link runs close to 7-8k these days. Also it makes the weapon FA only. You can buy a legal lower for about 9-10k, or a whole gun for anywhere from 10k to almost 20k depending on type and how it was made FA. http://www.machinegunpriceguide.com/html/us_mg_6.html http://www.machinegunpriceguide.com/html/us_mg_7.html Many times FA is a waste of ammo. When I was in the Army, only spec ops folks had true FA weapons since they were the only ones that could show the discipline to not "spray and pray". The regular Army had three round burst. Most times we only shot on semi. It is a hot item to own, they are loads of fun and the price on them just keeps going up. As for any situations where FA is needed? I could only think of suppression to get them down. But I never saw combat either. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

If you only felt that way about the 2nd. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And I do not disagree. But at what point do you think that the populace gets a say? And how do they give it if an election was not enough (twice IIRC)? Understand, I agree with you... But I am interested in your answer as to when, if ever, a vote could trump a ruling. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

While I think gays have the same rights as hetero's... The question is really: When does what, really equal law? On the one side you have a democracy (ok, a representive republic), and on the other judicial. Or *opinion*. Even if take religion out of it, it still becomes who has the correct opinion. In this case, it could easily be said that the justices are a group that is dictating based on their opinion. While you and even I agree, the question is not what we think, but at what point does what side (voters/justices) win? And then we have to be willing to accept the outcome of that process even when we disagree with the final outcome. I think it would be foolish to automatically give power to any one part of those two sides. Justices have made mistakes before... NFA 1934 comes to mind. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Heck, why not put them on all cars and also make alcohol breath test interlocks mandatory as well? Those two would save FAR more lives than smart guns and the technology is already available. But people like Bill and Quade would scream against those, but are fine stepping all over the 2nd. They want gun databases claiming how many crimes would be solved, but oppose DNA databases that would solve FAR more crimes. I would not approve of speed limiters, DNA databases, interlocks, OR gun databases. I wonder why they are opposed to almost any intrusion into privacy and rights except when it comes to gun owners? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No Bill, I just gave you the same type of answer you give all the time. I am STILL waiting for you to show me where skydiving is in the BoR. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Sure Bill, how about I answer them like you do? I don't support reserves or AAD's for base jumpers. Still waiting to see where you found skydiving in the BoR. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

skydiving is not in the BoR. Do you support gun registration? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Sorry double post. iPhone issue "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nice way to half answer: Do you not think that DNA databases will save lives and help catch criminals? So do you support smart gun technology? Do you support DNA databases? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You don't approve of smart gun technology? You seem to be supporting it in this post: and in this one: and here: So do you support smart gun technology? Do you not think it will save lives? Do you not think that DNA databases will save lives and help catch criminals? You seem to think DNA testing has saved lives here: So do you support smart gun technology? Do you support DNA databases? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

But you are fine with me having to register all my guns "Just for the hell of it"? DNA and fingerprint databases would solve many more crimes than gun fingerprinting. So if you really wanted to cut down on crime, you would support manditory DNA and fingerprinting. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Why not every single jumper? Remember, it will save lives just like your claims of "smart guns". "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

None, but that does not mean that it is worth taking the chance that it could fail "just because". When it is safe enough for the military, then it is safe enough for others use, not the other way around. Unless you think that a citizens life is not worth as much as a cops. You still have not answered my question... So I will ask again. Given how useful having everyone finger printed and with DNA samples on file could be to solving crimes... How do you feel about mandatory finger printing and DNA samples being taken? And why? In fact, DNA and finger print databases could solve MORE crimes than any bullet tracking, PLUS, the technology already exists. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Then I guess you are OK with manditory ADD usage? CURRENTLY a lot less. Add in a bunch of un-needed electric gizmos and that number could increase. When the electric add ons are safe enough that the police use them, then they are safe enough for everyone. Not the other way around. Unless you take the stand that a citizens life is worth less than a cops. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And I did not disagree. But, I do think I have the right not to have that data in some govt database. So yes, you could fingerprint guns, but that data is not attached to me. That way if I was a suspect you could test my gun, but you are not allowed to have a database. Using that same logic I assume you would be fine with giving the Govt a DNA sample as well then? After all, if you don't commit any crimes you would have nothing to worry about right? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Not that I doubt you... .But got any data to back that up? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No, they are still just tools to me. Both however, IMO, are protected under the Constitution. I would not support a database of legal owners guns, nor a database of legal citizens DNA and finger prints. I would like to hear the opinion of why gun registration is fine, but a database of DNA would not be fine. Both would help identify victims and criminals. I think that guns are protected under the 2nd and DNA is protected under the 4th. I think both are voided when the person has committed a crime. 1. Cars are not protected under the Constitution. 2. You do not need to get a car registered to own it. You do not need a license to own a car. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You didn't seem to answer my question... So I will ask again. Given how useful having everyone finger printed and with DNA samples on file could be to solving crimes... How do you feel about mandatory finger printing and DNA samples being taken? And why? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I really do not have a problem with doing ballistics on the bullets, or on the casings. Mico stamping has several problems: 1. Does not work on non semi weapons. A guy could shoot you with a revolver and the brass is contained in the weapon. 2. It only goes to the last legal owner. A good number of weapons used in crimes are stolen. Criminals do not tend to buy from FFL's. 3. I am against registration. So while I could agree to stamping, I would only support its use in criminal investigations. In other words if I was found near a crime scene with a weapon of the same caliber, it should be tested. NOT I live in the same city as a crime and I have to have my gun registered. 4. Would you really want to leave brass after a trip to the range knowing that someone could pick it up and use it against you? They could just drop your spent casings at a crime scene and BAMN, you are a suspect. 5. Firing pins are easy to change. Some firing pins are easy to make. A file can remove the microstamp in a few strokes. Do you think the police have the right to require that every citizen is fingerprinted? How about that the police collect DNA on everyone? Think of the number of crimes that would be solved if every one of us, once we turn 18, had to be fingerprinted and had to submit a DNA sample! Would you support that? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nope. I think deep down you know that you have no idea what you are talking about. And you know this based on?????? I guess your collection of firearms? Your comment is JUST like the whuffo claiming that skydivers all are crazy and have a death wish. Or that all people with small canopies are compensating for having a small penis. I am still waiting for you to tell the group if you buy one jump ticket at a time. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Warning of what? Are you making a threat? And what exactly are you gonna do hero? You said you supported it. You supported it. Pretty much end of the story. You support registration that HAS lead to confiscation. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You are ok with confiscation. You admitted that. Trying to say that since someone was not there they are not allowed to have an opinion is such a bogus position it is not even funny. Point is you admitted to being fine with confiscation. You are a strong proponent of registration. Registration has lead to confiscation in other Countries AND in the US. Confiscation has been proven to be illegal. Yet you supported it... Heck, you DID it. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I have read the whole bill. It is a stupid law that will only remove citizens rights, while doing nothing to prevent crime. For starters it is to OWN, not to carry. Even though the 2nd gives the right to KEEP and BEAR arms... I am OK with reasonable restrictions on who can keep (no felons, mentally unstable, children...ect). And I am OK with reasonable requirements to carry (Classes, range certification... ect). But this bill requires people to jump through a hoop just to own a weapon. The NICS check does a good job of screening already. Clearly you are not a right to own individual. You are only OK if people follow the rules you feel are justified. That is not right to own, that is right to own what I feel is ok and only in the way I feel is ok. But for fun: Chicago already outlaws firearms. This is nothing but pandering to fear. If firearms laws actually worked, this incident would have never been able to happen. 1. The shooter was a juvenile so he was not legally able to own a firearm (18). 2. Much less a pistol (21). 3. Much less in Chicago (illegal). 4. Or on a school bus (illegal). Ah, so almost any shotgun, or hunting rifle is fine. Hate to break this to you, but a hunting rifle or a shotgun is just as dangerous as many rifles and both are MORE dangerous than a pistol. Why only target those items? The "license" to own a firearm is the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. I bet even though you have been "a right-to-own advocate for some 30 years"... I bet I could write a test you could not pass. Also, the Constitution does not say "If you pass a test". What kind of test would you require before a person exercises their right to free speech? The test requires that you pass "any other subject the AG determines to be appropriate"??!?!?!?!?! Ever hear the joke about the black guy that went to vote in GA in the late 50's? They had a "poll test" you had to be able to read a newspaper and tell the sheriff what it said. If you were white, they handed you a copy of the local town paper. When a black guy came up they handed him a copy of the Chinese Times. The sheriff asked, "Boy can you tell me what that paper says?" The black man replied, "Yep, no niggers are voting today." The rest of the bill IS ALREADY ALLOWED. 1. Any dealer that sells weapons must have a 4473 filled out and a NICS must be done (Except in some states that allow a CHL holder to skip the NICS). 2. The ATF can inspect whenever they want. 3. If a police department has a serial number, they can already track it back to the dealer and that dealer is required to keep the 4473 for 20 years. And if the dealer closes shop he has to send all his 4473's to the ATF. The bill claims "(2) it is in the national interest and within the role of the Federal Government to ensure that the regulation of firearms is uniform among the States, that law enforcement can quickly and effectively trace firearms used in crime, and that firearms owners know how to use and safely store their firearms." But then says, "(a) In General- This Act and the amendments made by this Act may not be construed to preempt any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision of that State, or prevent a State or political subdivision of that State from enacting any provision of law regulating or prohibiting conduct with respect to firearms, except to the extent that the provision of law is inconsistent with any provision of this Act or an amendment made by this Act, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency." So they really don't care if the State bans firearms... That's fine according to the bill. But if a State allows ownership then they must follow these rules. Allowing a State to ban firearms is not exactly ensuring that "the regulation of firearms is uniform among the States" now is it? So: 1. What tests would you require to exercise the right to fee speech? What test for preventing illegal search and seizures? What test to prevent a person from testifying against themselves? What test to get the right to a fast and fair trial? What test to avoid cruel and unusual punishment? 2. How would this bill do anything that is not already in place? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334