DaVinci

Got it, you are PO'd and the best you can do is make 3rd grade comebacks. No, But Kallend was .... Ya know, the one I replied to with the comment to make those things illegal.....Read post #24 again."So only non-negligent people should have guns? Fair enough." But Quade DID mention that the CA gun rules might not have gone far enough.... Post #3 :"If the gun is on the list, then it kind of proves the California system doesn't go far enough. " I did, post #43: "Depending on the design, a gun can go off if dropped. Examples include weapons without a hammer block (old revolvers and derringers), and open bolt designs (MACS, UZI). Both designs are older and not common anymore in modern firearms. Other examples of a ND can include an object manipulating the trigger. Say a pen pulled the trigger back. That is not the fault of the firearm. Other possibilities involve a damaged weapon. " All I did was say that you were incorrect about the Glock safety. Post #45 "False. The Glock has THREE internal safety's " YOU not I got upset and tried to star a fight. Post #47 "Do try & keep up" Post #48 "Bad people don't obey laws, Einstein" So why are you trying to start a fight? Why can't you just admit that you were wrong about the Glock Safety? Maybe you should read twice, and reply slower. You have mistaken comments and replies, and gotten upset at being corrected. I work from home most if the time.... So I have the time.

Just for you...... I put the 1911 at the top.

I did: post#43. WRONG.... Post #44 to KALLEND. Maybe you should see who and what I replied to... Then you will see you are NOT up to speed like you claim.... Just like I said.

No it is truth.... You should learn to tell the difference between the two. In one there is an argument for the sake of it. The other is correcting erroneous information. You gave bad information, I corrected you. The fact you didn't like being wrong does not change it from factual to pedantic. Like many other guns it goes BANG!!!! No, but you did (incorrectly) state they do not have safeties. Don't blame me for you getting pissed at being wrong.

Maybe you should see who and what I replied to... Then you will see you are NOT up to speed like you claim.

Truth, you made an incorrect claim. I am a Glock armorer. I have fired almost every model to include the full auto G18. Yes, those and then some. Although we normally pin the rear grip safety on the 1911's. I already did. you made an incorrect comment about the lack of safeties on the Glock. Typical of people that do not really know these types of guns. There are three: They are: • Trigger Safety: An external lever mechanism contained within the trigger that prevents the trigger from moving unless the lever is depressed. • Firing Pin Safety: A spring-loaded pin attached by an extension bar to the trigger assembly blocks the striker from striking the primer of the cartridge until the trigger is pulled. • Drop Safety: The far end of the same extension bar locks the striker into place from the rear until the trigger is pulled. To continue to claim that the Glock does not have a safety is to continue to spread incorrect information and make some people think the gun is somehow less safe than models with safeties all over them.

I'd like to feel insulted.... But the damn things just work. And they are really easy to work on. 1911's are nice, but a PITA to work on and when you have an issue it can be a multitude of things. But I still own one.

And you have shown to be unable to understand sarcasm.

It is called sarcasm, Einstein. He wants to pass yet another law, when other laws clearly didn't work. Pointing that out is called sarcasm. Do try to keep up

True, but it has them and that is the point.

Your comment is still incorrect. BTW, I am a Glock armorer. They are: • Trigger Safety: An external lever mechanism contained within the trigger that prevents the trigger from moving unless the lever is depressed. • Firing Pin Safety: A spring-loaded pin attached by an extension bar to the trigger assembly blocks the striker from striking the primer of the cartridge until the trigger is pulled. • Drop Safety: The far end of the same extension bar locks the striker into place from the rear until the trigger is pulled.

Or who to avoid entirely. Not many cops get mugged. While I would not open carry often, I am FOR any progun right.

Seriously.... What if YOU ended up on that list due to some of your comments? Would the list still be a good idea?

Id like you to answer this: "Let's have a 'informed voter' rating. Involved study of the issues, testing on legal knowledge campaign issues and a thorough background check. Has to be renewed before every election. Once obtained, it allows the carrier to vote. " Since voting can do more than a gun... Why not require voter testing before being allowed to vote?

Check your history books. This country was founded by a violent overthrow AFTER the peaceful methods failed. 1. People said the same thing about the British. 2 Vietnam didn't get crushed. 3. Afghanistan beat Russia, and is going the US a hard time. 4. Iraq is not exactly a walk for US forces.

Sure and we already have all of those. Guns are MORE regulated than alcohol. 21 for alcohol 21 for pistols and 18 for long guns. Felons and known alcoholics can buy alcohol, they cannot buy a firearm. Straw purchases for both are illegal. Guns require a background check and in some places a waiting period, alcohol does not... Anywhere. FFL's have more restrictions than a bar. And EVERY buyer has to pass a background check. There are more gun laws that alcohol laws. So for alcohol laws to be like gun laws: You would have to go to an alcohol dealer who would have you fill out a form. You would have to answer questions about your history and provide a valid ID. The dealer would then call the Govt and run a background check on you. In some places you would have to come back in 3-5 days to pick up your alcohol. In some places you could only transport your alcohol in the trunk of your car in a locked case. You may not carry your alcohol anywhere outside of your home. If you want to carry alcohol outside of your home, you would have to go to a class, pay a fee, pass another background check, pass a test, and have to carry your "alcohol carry permit" with you at all times you have a drink with you. This DOES NOT permit you to *drink* that drink, only carry it around.

Where are all the Obama apologists? Where are all those that said it was illegal for Bush to do this and he should go to jail for it?

False. The Glock has THREE internal safety's

Why don't we just pass laws that: 1. Do not allow a person under 21 to have a handgun 2. Not allow a handgun on a school.

Depending on the design, a gun can go off if dropped. Examples include weapons without a hammer block (old revolvers and derringers), and open bolt designs (MACS, UZI). Both designs are older and not common anymore in modern firearms. Other examples of a ND can include an object manipulating the trigger. Say a pen pulled the trigger back. That is not the fault of the firearm. Other possibilities involve a damaged weapon. The California "testing" program involves more than just testing. The actual testing is not actually bad, it is all the other BS that is bad.... High costs, permits that expire... Etc. How do people have AAD fires? More importantly.... How did a kid get a gun (Illegal) How did the gun get into a school (Illegal) Or it shows the testing is mostly BS and never did anything.

I have always loved how liberals take the most liberal stance on everything *except* guns. Wanna get high? Cool. Wanna own a machine gun? Hell no! How do they justify the flip on position? Guns cause harm??? Well drug use does not exactly help society.

Yes, one guy said nothing about lobbyists and hired them. The other said lobbyists were evil, but hired them. Which one is the hypocrite?

Worth quoting..... The 2nd does not protect the hunter, it protects the citizens right to weapons "suitable for military use"

So is the right to self defense.... Ask Blackstone and the SC

You just insult people that disagree with you. When you ask people questions, you demand an answer. When people ask you questions... you tell them to do a search. Hypocrisy at its best. Cho and Loughner both had mental issues that were known about. In both cases the STATE and the SCHOOL failed in reporting.