craddock

??? What do you mean by this? In many states Open Carry is legal. It is Legal in Wisconsin which is one of the four states that does not allow CCW. It may be legal in KS and Nebraska also(non CCW states. Are you implying that a permit holder can not Open Carry in a state that allows it otherwise? . edited for spelling That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

How do you know this? Open carry is quite Legal in Colorodo so it would have to be in violation of local laws. Are you that familiar with the local laws where this took place? That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Is it possible that they found more survivers, but in the time it took them to get the surviving Miner out the others parished? They had to carry him close to 3/4 of a mile I believe as the EMT's were working on him. They had no idea how they were going to get 12 dying people out of the mine in a quick fashion. Didn't it take close to 45 minutes to get the surviving one out? I am not implying this happened of course but it could be possible for more deaths to have occured while they saved the first. It would be very gutsy for them to try and cover that up however, as there would be too great of a possibility that the truth could come out That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Not what she said. It was pretty clear what she was saying I thought. It is not usually a grim note to find someone alive when most hope is already gone for that scenerio That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Clearly a Personal Attack. If many people did that here they would be banned Settle down there. Your post was inaccurate. The Miner was found 700 ft from the mine car. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Bull. Incorrect. Change to "conlcuded 50 people were killed in a gun hoimicde for every one person that was killed by a gun in self defense" and you would be closer to the conclusion of this study. It has been no secret that in most defensive uses of firearms the gun is not even fired much less used to shoot and Kill someone. I think this study speaks highly of our right to protect ourselves. People are rarely using there firearm to kill yet are able to protect themselves an enormous amount of times of year. What that number is we will never actually know. But the fact that we are using the firearms without killing speaks great for our cause. Thanks for bringing that study to everyones attention That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

You attempt to be quite funny Kallend for a guy who often fails to give his opinion on controversial subjects like this dispite putting others down for theirs. You just love to ridicule others opinions on all sorts of topics but rarely dare to give yours. For the record the statement John was countering was not even close to being true. That statement was This statement is so, so far from the truth in regards to what the study concluded. LOL. Rather than point to other studies one can easily just pick apart this statement. The cases cited for self defense in this study were those were someone was killed. Not where a gun was used. Most firearms used in self defense are not even fired (for example see the CCW thread) much less actually used to kill someone. Studies on defensive firearm uses per year in the US range widely with most being between 1 to 2.5 million. There is one study where a byproduct of the intent of the study concluded a low number closer to 100,000. I will agree to throw out the excessive high and low and then determine why we should ignore the rest of the studies. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Personal take? It is not like there is a huge amount of gray area on the law. What's your take. Besides to check locally first which I suggested early in this thread. I only got into this because of all the bad uneducated info. being handed out to the OP. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

What's your problem? I was trying to help the OP who was being fed bad Info. I said first off to check his local laws. He can ship them without an FFL legaly as far as the Fed's are concerned. And it is not that hard to do in most places despite what some on here are insinuating. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Just to clarify as there are some comprehension problems here. The FFL has to be on the recieving end. It does not have to be shipped by an FFL. Although the USPS will not ship a hangun from a non-FLL holder Hence there statement "A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun." I am not correcting your post just adding to it That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Bullshit. Your reservations were about firearms in general not Handguns How about this. I have a Springfield Operator I will sell you as I would like to buy a new standard TRP without the full rail as my Operator has. It is quite a nice piece so I am sure you will enjoy it. Sweet, crisp 4 LB trigger. Will Feed and Extract anything and is very accurate. You have your FFL fax me a copy of his FFL and I will ship the hangun to him as soon as I have received payment from you. I will ship via Fed-Ex Air. Then we can settle what is legal, while you get a very nice 1911 out of the deal and I can get my new TRP that I was going to get in March anyway. Everybodies happy although your wallet will be alittle bit lighter. Contact me for payment info That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

The Machine Gun Ban goes back to 84 and 86 and has nothing to do with the 94 AWB that has now sunsetted. There is alot more that goes into transfering a Class III weapon than using an FFL to ship. No federal laws about Flash hiders though. Sounds like you are confusing different laws. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

No That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

OK #1 is wrong. This is wrong. If this is well known then it is a well known misconseption. I dispute it because it is wrong. Nothing more nothing less. I can send a firearm to your FFL anyday of the week legally. Some shipping sevices may require an FFL as does the USPS for handguns, but this is not a legal issue. It is the Unites States Postal Service's policy for shipping Handguns. You need to use another carrier for those or have an FFL ship the handgun. Not for legal reasons though That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

First of all the Assault Weapon ban has sunsetted not that it had mcuh to do with shipping firearms. My FFL charges $20 per Firearm I have him Transfer. He does this on the side out of his house. It takes me 20 minutes to get to his house and only five to my post office. They will not let me ship handguns there without an FFL so I need to use another carrier for them. Fed-EX is 15 minutes form my house and UPS (who I have not used for Firearms is even closer). Sure it is no trouble for me to drive to my FFL and pay for him to arrange shipping, but is even less for me to just do it myself. It may be easier for some if they live much closer to an FFL than a suitable shipping carrier. Do it how ever you want but it is the shippers choice. It is perfectly legal to ship a firearm without using an FFL. So long as it is going to yourself, or an FFL(Manufacturers are FFL's which is why this is legal) That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Wrong Hell you can even ship fireams to yourself in another state with no FFL on either end. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Wrong. I sent a rifle the the USPS not all that long ago. It is handguns that the USPS will not ship without an FFL. And what red tape for UPS? They make you ship blue label I think. I have used Fed Ex in the past also but had to pay for overnight. Finding and paying an FFL to ship a package is time saving? LOL WTF? 1/8 the time? Red tape? What about Fed-Ex( albiet overnight) The USPS works great for long guns. Do you guys read the links you post me. While I have not read them all, I have bought and sold guns to/from private citizens that shipped out of state. I would suggest you go to the Delivery services and ask them. Then get back to me. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Did you read what you quoted? It says what I was trying to explain only better. Again for those who care. You do not need to have a firearm shipped from an FFL. You can ship it yourself to the FFL That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Here is exactly what the ATF 'Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide' (ATF P 5300.4) says: (B9) May a nonlicensee ship a firearm by carrier? A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by carrier to a resident of his or her own state or to a licensee in any state. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun. In addition, Federal law requires that the carrier be notified that the shipment contains a firearm and prohibits common or contract carriers from requiring or causing any label to be placed on any package indicating that it contains a firearm. [18 U. S. C. 922( a)( 2)( A) and 922( e), 27 CFR 178.31] That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Then why not post us a link to that law. When did it change. The last firearm I transfered was in November at which point FFL's could recieve for private individuals. I have a hard time believing this law changed since them and I never heard about it. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

You are getting alot of incorrect information in this thread. First of check YOUR OWN state laws in California. This is where you will use the FFL anyway but you should check local laws and ords. Assuming(bad thing to do) that you are in an area legal to own firearms this is very easy. Find a FFL that you want to use and have him send or Fax a copy of his FFL to your Dad and have your Dad send via Fedex or UPS(I think they have to go Blue label if you use UPS) the firearms to the FFL. You fill out the paperwork at the FFL in California and pick them up. As far as the Guns being registered to yourself, that would be a California thing again not a Federal. Most states do not require registration although some do for handguns. You are going to need an FFL in California anyway so start there. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

You are not the only one to say this but I find it incorrect. Unless their has been a very recent change that I should/would have heard about. The shipping service may require an FFL to ship (as does the Postal Service? for handguns. Someone does anyway) but it is not Federal law. He just needs to find an FFL that will do tranfers relatively inexpensive and have the sender get a copy(fax is now allowed) and ship them. My FFL charges me $20 to do a transfer per "firearm". If I sell a firearm I ship it myself without the use of an FFL on my end. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

To alot of people yes but not entirely. That Colt is still worth good money because there are several states that have their own version of the AWB that is still on effect. If you are looking to sell it you want to target some of those states. They include California and the liberal group out east like NY, MA, MD, NJ. You can get a good $ for that Colt if you are looking to and buy or build a different manufacturers AR-15 for half the price. Quality would be every bit as good and you could get it to shoot better if you want. Depends on if the "Colt" name means anything to you. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Yes, so long as you do not have any local laws prohibiting your weapon That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

What is there to admit. I asked you ""Do you know that other studies indicate firearms are used (used does not imply fired) over 2 million times a year for personl protection.?" What the fuck does it matter what study I believe? Everyother study done on the matter is significently higher. Would it make you feel better if we threw out the high and low and took used the average of the rest? That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.