|
|
|
|
| |
| |
pyotr filipivich wrote:
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show
jgrove24@hotmail.com (john grove) wrote back on 14 Sep 2004
14:04:37 -0700 in talk.politics.guns :
JG, you are obviously uninformed about automobiles as well
as "assault" weapons.
For starters, "assault weapons" are not machine guns.
But machine guns are assault weapons.
The
AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
Why should it be?
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles? Five
days, or two weeks?
16 years in most States.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Are possession of certain make and models of automobiles
banned, de facto & de jure, in various states or municipalities?
Yes.
And I haven't even addressed the question of the banning of
foreign imports,
Quotas?
or the re-importing of American Made Automobiles
sold overseas?
Can't do it legally, or at least not without huge and expensive
EPA / DOT hassles.
Yeah, tell me about how "tightly" regulated automobiles are
compared to guns.
Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
tschus
pyotr
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:18:21 -0600, S. O. Damocles wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
But machine guns are assault weapons.
Correction: Assault RIFLES are capable of full automatic fire. The
point being made here is that NONE of the firearms the AWB addressed were
'machineguns' (i.e., capable of full automatic fire). NONE of them were.
The AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
Why should it be?
According to you and your ilk, it was.
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles? Five days, or two
weeks?
16 years in most States.
It IS? Which states impose any kind of age limit on purchase of a
motor vehicle?
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Not to BUY the car there isn't. And the mandatory insurance is only
mandatory if you drive the thing on public roads. Sheesh, we went through
all this some time ago.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Again, you DO NOT NEED a driver's license in order to take
possession off a car.
Are possession of certain make and models of automobiles
banned, de facto & de jure, in various states or municipalities?
Yes.
Mere possession of some cars is banned? I don't think so. Say, you
really aren't very bright, are you?
--
jimbo@sonic.net
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary, and those who don't."
|
| |
| |
Jim Bianchi wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:18:21 -0600, S. O. Damocles wrote:
Correction: Assault RIFLES are capable of full automatic
fire. The
point being made here is that NONE of the firearms the AWB
addressed were 'machineguns' (i.e., capable of full
automatic fire). NONE of them were.
The AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
According to you and your ilk, it was.
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles?
Five days, or two weeks?
It IS?
Yep.
Which states impose any kind of age limit on
purchase of a motor vehicle?
Most states require someone to be 18 years old
to purchase a car.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to
buy a car?
Not to BUY the car there isn't.
Yep, in many states there is.
And the mandatory insurance
is only mandatory if you drive the thing on public roads.
Nope, the insurance is mandatory when you register the vehicle,
whether or not you operate it on public roads.
Sheesh, we went through all this some time ago.
And you still can't get it right, eh?
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Again, you DO NOT NEED a driver's license in order to take
possession off a car.
Are possession of certain make and models of automobiles
banned, de facto & de jure, in various states or
municipalities?
Mere possession of some cars is banned?
Yep, give it some thought before you shoot your
stupid pie-hole off again, numbnuts.
I don't think
We know.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:57:02 -0600, S. O. Damocles wrote:
Jim Bianchi wrote:
Yep.
Most states require someone to be 18 years old
to purchase a car.
Which states are those? I bought a car at 16, drove that sucker home
and all. Plus I know more than one person who has bought a new vehicle from
a dealer for roadracing purposes. They were under 16. They paid for it and
took possession of the thing. They did not have to register it either, so
they didn't have to show proof of insurance.
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Not to BUY the car there isn't.
Yep, in many states there is.
Which states, exactly?
And you still can't get it right, eh?
No you can't.
--
jimbo@sonic.net
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary, and those who don't."
|
| |
| |
Jim Bianchi wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:57:02 -0600, S. O. Damocles wrote:
Which states are those?
Most states require someone to be of legal age to
enter into a purchase contract for a vehicle, among
other things.
<snip personal annecdotes>
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Not to BUY the car there isn't.
Which states, exactly?
No you can't.
|
| |
| |
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show "S. O. Damocles"
<so@damocl.es> wrote back on Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:18:21 -0600 in
talk.politics.guns :
pyotr filipivich wrote:
But machine guns are assault weapons.
Not according to the law banning "assault weapons".
Why should it be?
Good question. Too bad for the anti-gunners, but they can't tell the
differences between a full automatic "assault _rifle_" and a semiautomatic
rifle with a black plastic stock and a silly bayonet lug. Of course,the
ignorant media can't tell the difference, either because they don't know,
or because they lie.
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles? Five
days, or two weeks?
16 years in most States.
Oh really? You have to wait sixteen years from the time you plunks
down your money till you can accept delivery of your automobile? Are you
aware, comrade, that the old days of State rationing of Automobiles are
over?
You mistake the issuance of a drivers license for a waiting period.
Your ignorance is showing.
But to continue your tap dancing, what automobiles are forbidden to be
owned by persons under the age of 21?
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Not the same.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Really? I don't recall having to produce that to demonstrate I was
legal to possess an automobile. (Come to think of it, I did have to produce
a drivers license to verify the check. But that's a different thing
entirely.)
Yes.
This is news to me. Which makes, models and what locations.
And I haven't even addressed the question of the banning of
foreign imports,
Quotas?
Quotas are not the same as a ban. There is a big difference between
allowing only N thousand Toyotas into the country and forbidding the import
of any "assault weapons".
or the re-importing of American Made Automobiles
sold overseas?
Can't do it legally, or at least not without huge and expensive
EPA / DOT hassles.
Still can't tell the difference between high hurtles and a complete
ban, can you?
Yeah, tell me about how "tightly" regulated automobiles are
compared to guns.
Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
Not even close, bubbleh. Not even close. But you have demonstrated the
further depths of your unknowing.
--
pyotr filipivich
Denial is not a river in Egypt, "Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme,
a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the
denying person knows the truth on some level. LtCol Grossman.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:27:33 -0600, News Server wrote:
Jim Bianchi wrote:
Most states require someone to be of legal age to
enter into a purchase contract for a vehicle, among
other things.
While this is true, I should point out that a contract is NOT
necessary in order to purchase a car.
<snip personal annecdotes>
Thank you.
--
jimbo@sonic.net
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary, and those who don't."
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:18:21 -0600, "S. O. Damocles" <so@damocl.es>
wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
But machine guns are assault weapons.
To dimwits like Diane Feinstein they might be but they are not and
never have been.
Why should it be?
agreed since the AK-47 went out of production in 1959.
16 years in most States.
Not long enough
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Excuse me but cite? We used to drive on the farm or on the family
airport w/o a license for years.
THOM
Yes.
Quotas?
Can't do it legally, or at least not without huge and expensive
EPA / DOT hassles.
Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
|
| |
| |
"S. O. Damocles" wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
But machine guns are assault weapons.
And they have ALREADY been banned by the National Firearms Act of 1934 (a
FEDERAL law). What's your point, Danny Boy, besides the one on top of your
head?
The AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
Why should it be?
Indeed, given what the 2nd Amendment says.
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles? Five days, or two
weeks?
16 years in most States.
Funny, but I drove mine off the lot the same day I bought it. In California.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Not everywhere.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take possession of
an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Au contraire. You do NOT need to have a driver's licence in order to buy a
car.
Are possession of certain make and models of automobiles banned, de facto
& de jure, in various states or municipalities?
Yes.
Oh really? Which models? Where?
And I haven't even addressed the question of the banning of foreign
imports,
Quotas?
Not that I know of.
or the re-importing of American Made Automobiles sold overseas?
Can't do it legally,
Yes you can.
or at least not without huge and expensive EPA / DOT hassles.
Wrong again.
Yeah, tell me about how "tightly" regulated automobiles are compared to
guns.
Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
Here's an image for a T shirt for you:
<http://www.bushmaster.com/sunset-updated.jpg>
--
Theodore A. Kaldis
kaldis@worldnet.att.net
|
| |
| |
pyotr filipivich wrote:
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show "S. O.
Damocles" <so@damocl.es> wrote back on Thu, 16 Sep 2004
19:18:21 -0600 in talk.politics.guns :
Not according to the law banning "assault weapons".
Well then, clearly by your own admission Peter, the
AWB did not ban all assault weapons, eh?
The AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
Why should it be?
Good question. Too bad for the anti-gunners, but they
can't tell the differences between a full automatic
"assault _rifle_" and a semiautomatic rifle with a black
plastic stock and a silly bayonet lug. Of course,the
ignorant media can't tell the difference, either because
they don't know, or because they lie.
So what are you whining about? A bunch of ignorant idiots
banned *some* weapons that cosmetically "looked similar"
to more serious weaponry, without really reducing the firepower
available to the citizens -- during the "ban", fully automatic machine
guns and other destructive devices were still available for purchase
by anyone.
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles?
Five
days, or two weeks?
Oh really? You have to wait sixteen years from the time
you plunks down your money till you can accept delivery of your
automobile? Are you aware, comrade, that the old days of
State rationing of Automobiles are over?
You mistake the issuance of a drivers license for a waiting
period.
Your ignorance is showing.
But to continue your tap dancing, what automobiles are
forbidden to be owned by persons under the age of 21?
It's you pig-ignorant gunnies who digressed and drove off-topic
into discussions about motor vehicles. Why not stay on point
and topic -- it about FIREARMS.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to
buy a car?
Not the same.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Really? I don't recall having to produce that to
demonstrate I was legal to possess an automobile. (Come to think of it, I did
have to produce a drivers license to verify the check. But
that's a different thing entirely.)
This is news to me. Which makes, models and what locations.
M1 Abrahms :)
Any vehicle not lawfully entered into the U$, such as any late
model car smuggled across the Canadian or Mexican borders, is
illegal merely to possess, and can/will be seized by customs/epa
upon discovery.
And I haven't even addressed the question of the banning
of foreign imports,
Quotas are not the same as a ban. There is a big
difference between allowing only N thousand Toyotas into
the country and forbidding the import of any "assault
weapons".
Really? Well, there are 1000s of vehicles produced overseas that
are completely banned from the U$A. Do you ignorant gunnies
really want to continue debating automobile and import rules and
regs?
or the re-importing of American Made Automobiles
sold overseas?
Still can't tell the difference between high hurtles and a
complete ban, can you?
And you ignorant gunnies can't seem to tell the difference
between a car and a gun.
Yeah, tell me about how "tightly" regulated automobiles
are compared to guns.
Not even close, bubbleh. Not even close. But you have
demonstrated the further depths of your unknowing.
Sez the pig-ignorant gunnie who thinks discussing automobiles
and vehicle import duties, quotas and regs has sweet @$#* all to
do with the topic of FIREARMS in the U$$A.
|
| |
| |
Thom wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:18:21 -0600, "S. O. Damocles"
<so@damocl.es> wrote:
To dimwits like Diane Feinstein they might be but they are
not and never have been.
You ain't the sharpest tack in the box, are ya boy?
The
AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
Why should it be?
agreed since the AK-47 went out of production in 1959.
Not long enough
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to
buy a car?
Perhaps there should be, eh?
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Excuse me but cite? We used to drive on the farm or on the
family airport w/o a license for years.
I'm sure you and your family engaged in many perversions
hidden on your own property, don't make it legal per se.
THOM
|
| |
| |
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
"S. O. Damocles" wrote:
And they have ALREADY been banned by the National Firearms
Act of 1934 (a FEDERAL law).
Actaully, Teddy, they ain't banned. Anyone who can legally purchase
a gun today can also purchase a fully automatic maching gun or
other destructive device.
What's your point, Danny Boy,
besides the one on top of your head?
Who's Danny?
The AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
Indeed, given what the 2nd Amendment says.
Does the 2nd Amendment say *anything* about
felons not being covered?
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles?
Five days, or two weeks?
Funny, but I drove mine off the lot the same day I bought
it. In California.
After waiting 16 years from the time your wretched mother
done birthed your sorry excuse for a human.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to
buy a car?
Not everywhere.
So move there, numbnuts.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to
take possession of an automobile?
Au contraire. You do NOT need to have a driver's licence
in order to buy a car.
Actually, in many states you do.
Are possession of certain make and models of automobiles
banned, de facto & de jure, in various states or
municipalities?
Oh really? Which models? Where?
Any/all models no lawfully imported into the US.
And I haven't even addressed the question of the banning
of foreign imports,
Not that I know of.
or the re-importing of American Made Automobiles sold
overseas?
Yes you can.
Wrong again.
Sez Teddy the pathological liar.
Yeah, tell me about how "tightly" regulated automobiles
are compared to guns.
|
| |
| |
S. O. Damocles wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
But machine guns are assault weapons.
No, they aren't. The term "assault weapons" is applied to semi
automatic firearms that have more than one of certain cosmetic features
and look like military firearms.
Machine guns are referred to as machine guns.
Submachine guns are referred to as sub machine guns except for the ones
shown on TV when discussing the AWB.
Assault Rifles are referred to as assault rifles unless being shown used
in Iraq while discussing the AWB.
The
AK47 was never covered by the AWB.
Why should it be?
16 years in most States.
There is no minimum age in any state (AFAIK) for ownership of an
automobile. There is a minimum age for a DL or to drive one on the street.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Absolute bull#@($. There is a need *only* if the vehicle is to be
driven on public thoroughfares. No requirement of insurance for farm
machinery or for a car to be driven on private property.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Again. incorrect. There is no ownership requirement of a drivers license.
Are possession of certain make and models of automobiles
banned, de facto & de jure, in various states or municipalities?
Yes.
Such as?
And I haven't even addressed the question of the banning of
foreign imports,
Quotas?
No longer in effect.
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
|
| |
| |
S. O. Damocles wrote:
Jim Bianchi wrote:
Yep.
Nope.
Which states impose any kind of age limit on
purchase of a motor vehicle?
Most states require someone to be 18 years old
to purchase a car.
Care to post the statute from one of them?
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to
buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Not to BUY the car there isn't.
Yep, in many states there is.
Care to name one and post the statute from it?
And the mandatory insurance
is only mandatory if you drive the thing on public roads.
Nope, the insurance is mandatory when you register the vehicle,
whether or not you operate it on public roads.
There is no need to register the vehicle unless it will be used on
public thoroughfares.
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
|
| |
| |
News Server wrote:
Jim Bianchi wrote:
Most states require someone to be 18 years old
to purchase a car.
Which states are those?
Most states require someone to be of legal age to
enter into a purchase contract for a vehicle, among
other things.
A purchase *contract* is for timepurchase of an item. It has nothing to
do with the fact that it is a vehicle and does not apply to a vehicle
purchased for cash.
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
|
| |
| |
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
"S. O. Damocles" wrote:
For starters, "assault weapons" are not machine guns.
And they have ALREADY been banned by the National Firearms Act of 1934 (a
FEDERAL law). What's your point, Danny Boy, besides the one on top of your
head?
No, they haven't. Machine guns are perfectly legal to own per federal
law. *Some* states have laws banning sale of them but no federal law does.
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
|
| |
| |
"RD (The Sandman)" whose sig file is WAY to large wrote:
News Server wrote:
Most states require someone to be 18 years old
to purchase a car.
Which states are those?
A purchase *contract* is for timepurchase of an item. It has nothing to
do with the fact that it is a vehicle and does not apply to a vehicle
purchased for cash.
Correct!
Even a twelve year old (or younger!) with enough cash can LEGALLY
purchase and own ANY automobile/vehical that they desire.
AND(!) ANYBODY can buy/operate it with no insurance, licensing, or
registration.
But, only on there own property!
They just can't (legaly) drive it off the lot!
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:02:51 -0600, S. O. Damocles wrote:
Sez the pig-ignorant gunnie who thinks discussing automobiles
and vehicle import duties, quotas and regs has sweet @$#* all to
do with the topic of FIREARMS in the U$$A.
Geeze, this whole cars vs guns thing was initiated by a gungrabber
who tried to push the idea that firearms should be treated like cars. The
result was this mess of which you are complaining. FWIW, I agree. Cars have
little to do with firearms. The comparison is invalid, as is any attempt to
treat them the same. This is something you (and your side) should remember.
--
jimbo@sonic.net
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary, and those who don't."
|
| |
| |
"S. O. Damocles" <so@damocl.es> wrote in message news:<IXq2d.34$9Z.49161@news.uswest.net>...
pyotr filipivich wrote:
But machine guns are assault weapons.
Why should it be?
16 years in most States.
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Want to drive a semi? Thats an extra license. Hazmat semi? even more
requirements.
Yes.
Quotas?
And safety upgrades needed to met US regs.
JG
Can't do it legally, or at least not without huge and expensive
EPA / DOT hassles.
Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:44:00 -0600, S. O. Damocles wrote:
RD wrote:
The term "assault weapons" is applied to semi automatic firearms that
have more than one of certain cosmetic features and look like military
firearms.
That may be how the term is used in that statute, however you'd have to be
an idiot to claim that full auto machine guns are not assault weapons.
You'd have to be a gungrabber to claim they are. The proper
terminology for a shoulder fire military firearm capable of full automatic
fire at the users option is assault RIFLE. Unlesss it is a full auto only
MACHINEGUN, e.g., M-60, M1918 .30, M1917 .30, M1 .50, and so on. Though both
types can fire full auto, the difference is that the rifle is intended to be
fired semi-automatically also, whereas the machinegun (and submachinegun) is
designed to be fired only full auto. That, in some cases, a skilled
machinegun user can touch off single shots is not relevant in that this is
not how the weapon was designed to be used.
An assault weapon is the name given to an entirely arbitrary class
of firearms based, as far as anyone can tell, on appearance only (as opposed
to function). Not all of them are even copies of military firearms. Each of
the firearms on the AWB list (both federal and those states that have
similar legislation in force) is capable of only semi automatic fire, and as
such are no more deadly or inherently dangerous than any of a number of
firearms that are NOT banned.
One of the indications the AWB was your basic 'feel good' law is
that many of the banned firearms were, after importation, cosmetically
changed -- fixed buttstocks were fitted, grenade launchers and bayonet
mounts were ground off, and CHANGING NOTHING ELSE, the weapons suddenly
became legal to sell. The caliber used and the semi-automatic action was not
changed in any way.
And we're s'posed to 'feel safer' because of this ban? Go figure..
--
jimbo@sonic.net
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary, and those who don't."
|
| |
| |
Jim Bianchi wrote:
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:44:00 -0600, S. O. Damocles wrote:
RD wrote:
The term "assault weapons" is applied to semi automatic
firearms that have more than one of certain cosmetic
features and look like military firearms.
You'd have to be a gungrabber to claim they are. The proper
terminology for a shoulder fire military firearm capable of
full automatic fire at the users option is assault RIFLE.
Are rifles weapons, numbnuts?
<snip off-point self-abuse>
An assault weapon is the name given to an entirely
arbitrary class of firearms based, as far as anyone can tell, on appearance
only (as opposed to function).
So you don't have anything to fear then. A bunch of idiots
banned *some* guns based on cosmetics and not function.
If they ban all *yellow* Fords, Chevys, etc, are you going to
whine and complain that their taking away your right to a car?
Not all of them are even
copies of military firearms. Each of the firearms on the
AWB list (both federal and those states that have similar
legislation in force) is capable of only semi automatic
fire, and as such are no more deadly or inherently
dangerous than any of a number of firearms that are NOT
banned.
So why are you ignorant gunnies whining? They banned something
that, acording to you, has no effect.
One of the indications the AWB was your basic 'feel good'
law is that many of the banned firearms were, after importation,
cosmetically changed -- fixed buttstocks were fitted,
grenade launchers and bayonet mounts were ground off, and
CHANGING NOTHING ELSE, the weapons suddenly became legal to
sell. The caliber used and the semi-automatic action was
not changed in any way.
Yet you are still whining.
And we're s'posed to 'feel safer' because of this ban? Go
figure..
Who cares how safe *you* feel?
Who cares how safe some AWB idiots feel?
|
| |
| |
On 17 Sep 2004 13:15:38 -0700, john grove wrote:
Automobiles serve a useful purpose in commerce and personal lives.
Assault weapons are meant to KILL PEOPLE.
Oh geeze. Not another one. Mr Grove: The major point here is the
demonstrable fact that these things you (incorrectly) claim are only meant
to kill people do it so much less frequently than other things you say
'serve a useful purpose.' It's NOT the putative utility of either that is
being argued. Rather it is the end result. The use of cars (whatever their
utility) is responsible for a lot more deaths on an annual basis than are
firearms. And the comparison to those deaths through the use of what you and
your ilk are pleased to call assault weapons is even more absurd.
16 years in most States.
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Want to drive a semi? Thats an extra license. Hazmat semi? even more
requirements.
..ah, but you CAN drive a semi. It's only when this is done in
commerce the extra license is required. You also can BUY or POSSESS a semi
without the need to possess any kind of license, which is the point. As for
Hazmat, puleeze, Mr. Grove. Hazmat is something carried by a truck. It's not
the bare truck itself. Do try to keep up, and do try to make reasonable
objections. (If you can -- I've not heard any so far.)
--
jimbo@sonic.net
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary, and those who don't."
|
| |
| |
RD (The Sandman) wrote:
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
For starters, "assault weapons" are not machine guns.
No, they haven't. Machine guns are perfectly legal to own per federal
law. *Some* states have laws banning sale of them but no federal law
does.
Which Federal law would that be? Kaldis already cited the law restricting
the ownership of machine guns (they fall under a class III firearms license
which requires, among other things, proof of an actual need for them). The
Firearms Act of 1986 shored up the gaps in the 1934 law.
|
| |
| |
S. O. Damocles wrote:
RD (The Sandman) wrote:
Yes they are.
That may be how the term is used in that statute, however
you'd have to be an idiot to claim that full auto machine
guns are not assault weapons.
Considering that the term "assault weapon" did not exist before the ban, I'd
have to say that anyone who uses the term outside the statutory definition
would be an idiot.
|
| |
| |
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show "S. O. Damocles"
<so@damocl.es> wrote back on Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:02:51 -0600 in
talk.politics.guns :
For starters, "assault weapons" are not machine guns.
But machine guns are assault weapons.
Well then, clearly by your own admission Peter, the
AWB did not ban all assault weapons, eh?
Gad, but you are desperate to keep the confusion going, aren't you? By
your definition, anything used in an "assault" must be an "assault weapon"
right? So by your own definition, rocks are "assault weapons", Pool cues
are "assault weapon", knifes are "assault weapons", frozen legs of lamb are
"assault weapons", your feet fist and teeth are "assault weapons". OTOH,
maybe you ought to be banned, due to your dangerous capability as an
"assault weapon".
However, in the real world, Machine Guns were not covered by the
"Assault Weapon Ban". If you have problems with understanding that
distinction, take it up with the authors of that particular bit of
legislation.
You can't seem to grasp that "assault rifle" is a term with a simple
definition, but "assault weapon" as defined by this law, was such a kludge
it was meaningless. Otherwise, you would be able to explain why an M-16
knock off like the AR-15 was banned, but Ruger's Mini-14, which fired the
exact same round at the exact same rate (once only per trigger pull) was
not.
But by now, it is obvious that you are not honestly interested in
anything but continuing the lies about what was an assault weapon. Maybe
you should contact CBS and apply to them for a position as "expert source".
You'll fit right in.
==
pyotr filipivich.
For Sale: Un circulated Roman Drachmas, feature Julius Ceaser's Portrait,
several dated 44 BCE. Comes with Certificate of Authenticity.
|
| |
| |
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show "S. O. Damocles"
<so@damocl.es> wrote back on Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:02:51 -0600 in
talk.politics.guns :
Secondly, what is the waiting period for automobiles?
Five
days, or two weeks?
16 years in most States.
It's you pig-ignorant gunnies who digressed and drove off-topic
into discussions about motor vehicles. Why not stay on point
and topic -- it about FIREARMS.
Sorry buckwheat, but it was John Grove who brought up the subject when
he wrote: "Why are automobiles given more oversight than weapons?"
He was wrong, but you supported him, with such a display of willful
ignorance not seen Po Han Lin tried to convince people that pistols could
be fired by dogs or cats biting them with their little teeth.
Considering your willful ignorance about what was covered by the
"assault weapon ban", your obfuscation of the realities of the relative
level of regulation of guns versus automobile is to be expected.
Kindly do try to come up with a relevant argument.
toodles
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
To paraphrase Al Capone: You can get more protection with a
restraining order and a gun than with a restraining order alone.
|
| |
| |
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show "News Server"
<netnews@newsserver.org> wrote back on Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:27:33 -0600 in
talk.politics.guns :
Which states impose any kind of age limit on
purchase of a motor vehicle?
Most states require someone to be 18 years old
to purchase a car.
Most states require someone to be of legal age to
enter into a purchase contract for a vehicle, among
other things.
<snip personal annecdotes>
Good point. However, that is not the question.
The question was "what is the waiting period between the payment and
the delivery of an automobile?"
Probably due to S.O.D.'s desire to obfuscate his ignorance of the
current state of firearm regulation, he confused legal age of purchase with
"waiting period". Take it up with him about his confusion that there is a
sixteen year waiting period. Maybe there was in the old Soviet Union, but
not in the United States.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
|
| |
| |
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show "S. O. Damocles"
<so@damocl.es> wrote back on Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:02:51 -0600 in
talk.politics.guns :
pyotr filipivich wrote:
It's you pig-ignorant gunnies who digressed and drove off-topic
into discussions about motor vehicles. Why not stay on point
and topic -- it about FIREARMS.
In other words, you were exposed as posting so much C_BS.
You have yet to demonstrate that automobiles have _any_ waiting period
mandated by law preventing you from purchasing one and taking it with you.
Or are you unaware of five day grace period for stalkers and rapists
provided by the Brady Act?
Or the 15 day waiting period in California for any firearm?
Which applies to adults as well as "children" (even "children" as
defined by the Brady Campaign to prevent handgun violence to Criminals.) Do
you understand that there is no waiting period for purchasing automobiles,
or do you want to continue with the hand waving?
Is there a criminal background check in order for you to buy a car?
There is MANDATORY liability insurance coverage, though.
Not the same.
"Pay no attention to S.O.D.'s hand waving." He mistakes requiring
insurance for a back ground check, and hopes no body notices his CBS.
Do you need an "Automobile Owner ID" card in order to take
possession of an automobile?
Yeah, it's called a Driver's License.
Really? I don't recall having to produce that to
demonstrate I was legal to possess an automobile. (Come to think of it, I did
have to produce a drivers license to verify the check. But
that's a different thing entirely.)
OOPS, one more "error" on S.O.D.'s part hopes nobody notices. (And to
update my post, I didn't have to do verify the check. Paid cash.)
Are possession of certain make and models of automobiles
banned, de facto & de jure, in various states or
municipalities?
Yes.
This is news to me. Which makes, models and what locations.
M1 Abrahms :)
Any vehicle not lawfully entered into the U$, such as any late
model car smuggled across the Canadian or Mexican borders, is
illegal merely to possess, and can/will be seized by customs/epa
upon discovery.
That's more of the import bans.
But from your vast compendium of information, what are the
jurisdictions which will confiscate an automobile which is legal to import
or manufacture for sale in the United States?
And I haven't even addressed the question of the banning
of foreign imports,
Quotas?
Quotas are not the same as a ban. There is a big
difference between allowing only N thousand Toyotas into
the country and forbidding the import of any "assault
weapons".
Really? Well, there are 1000s of vehicles produced overseas that
are completely banned from the U$A.
Name two.
Do you ignorant gunnies really want to continue debating automobile
and import rules and regs?
If you could be honest about it, and cease the obfuscation. But you're
the one who can't tell the difference between a semi-automatic civilian
AR-15 knock off and a full automatic issue M-16.
or the re-importing of American Made Automobiles sold overseas?
Can't do it legally, or at least not without huge and expensive
EPA / DOT hassles.
Still can't tell the difference between high hurtles and a
complete ban, can you?
And you ignorant gunnies can't seem to tell the difference
between a car and a gun.
So is it illegal to re-import a 1957 Chevy from Argentina? Is it
illegal to import used Mercedes from Germany?
Yeah, tell me about how "tightly" regulated automobiles
are compared to guns.
Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
Not even close, bubbleh. Not even close. But you have
demonstrated the further depths of your unknowing.
Sez the pig-ignorant gunnie who thinks discussing automobiles
and vehicle import duties, quotas and regs has sweet @$#* all to
do with the topic of FIREARMS in the U$$A.
Like I said earlier, it is the anti-gun nuts who seem to feel that guns
have almost no regulation while cars are so strictly regulated.
You haven't managed to do so. You've done some loverly tap dancing, but
you have not addressed a few serious issues:
If cars were treated like guns, you would not be able to pay for your
car and drive it off the lot, without first waiting between five and
fifteen days. That is, of course, assuming you passed a criminal
background check and are legal to purchase one.
Of course, you would have to buy your automobile from a lot in your
home state. If you buy a car out of state, it will have to be shipped to a
dealer in your home state.
And, of course, there is the small detail that your "drivers license"
is only good in your home state. You would have to apply for a separate
drivers license in each state you wish to drive in, and they don't have to
give you one.
We haven't gotten to the fact that in some municipalities (and states),
possession of your automobile is illegal, and if discovered by the police,
will be subject to confiscation, and you will be liable to arrest for
having an illegal car.
Have we mentioned that in some parts of the country, you have to have a
local permit to own an automobile, but several of those locations have
decided to quit printing the applications forms "as a cost cutting
measure."
So take it up with John Grove, he's the one who started the thread
drift. You, just demonstrated that you're not interested in any honest
comparison.
have fun
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
|
| |
| |
| |
