Giving photogs a bad name?

"Whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Friday, 30 May 2014 19:34:20 UTC+1, PAS wrote:


Our rights to own guns is not predicated on our proving a need to have

one.

Them maybe that's the problem or the cause.



No, that's not the problem. Must you justify a need to the government to
exercise every right you have?

Do I need to justify to the govenment if my hobby were collecting nuclear
weapons, would I have to justify my collection of diseases such as the
bubonic plague ?
I think that if you have a hobby or pastime or do anything that is likely
to endanger someone else that that hobby should be controlled in a way to
minimise the efect on others.

You don't seem to grasp this, otherwise you wouldn't be using this
ridiculous analogy. There is a Cosntitutional right to keep and bear arms.
There isn't one to collect diseases. It's fairly simple.

A Constitutional right is not a hobby or pastime. Do you consider your
right to free speech where you live to be a mere hobby?

Yopu don't just hand pout guns to anyone do you, surely there are some
checks, yuor govenrment seems quite keen to keep a check on other
countries do you have a problem with that ?

There are checks, many of them. The process I had to endure in order to get
a license for a handgun was a long one.

Do you think iran or iraq or North Koera have to justify their weaponary
to the USA or anyone else ?

This has no bearing on the subject.

What has happened is that the majority of americans don;t feel teh need
to

have a slave or two but at some point you must have has some right to

own a slave even if that right was only to not outlaw owning a slave.



It appears that your are trying to equate them. A change in culture over
time does not alter our Constitutional rights.

It should do.


Our rights are not subject
to culture, public opinion, etc. There is a specific process that has to
occur in order to amend the Constitution.

And what would that be war or revolution ?

Now you are talking nonsense. There is a specific process outlines in the
Constitution by which it can be amended, and it has been amended before.

The constition is over 300 years old, sometimes you just have to move on.

We value the rights we have, they never get old.

It's fairly evident what a Constitutional right is. No one has said they
are cast in stone forever. But they are not subject to public opinion or
the whims of any politician. There is a specific process in place in
order
to amend the Constitution. Until it is amended, the righte enumerated in
it
are final.

So why not ammend it?, it's been done before and it can be done again.

It can be amended, as I've said more than once. But it not something done
lightly, as by design of the founders. Do you think it is an easy task to
wipe away a Constitutional right such as freedom of speech? The founders
placed a high value on the freedom to keep and bear arms as evident by the
fact that it is the 2nd amendment in the Constitution. That, and any other
right, cannot be taken away so easily.

What was the last one something about 18 year-olds voting I remmeber that
from school. The constitution as ammended.

Socireties civerlised or otherwise update their laws and cultures to some
extent which is usually led by laws, but the idea of a law is to shape the
peoples culture.

Laws and cultures are one thing, Constituitionally protected rights are
another matter.


No I'm trying to explain how society changes and adapts with time.

But that is not analagous to our Constitution.

That's obvious but what does it mean that the Constitution can't be
changed.

It can be changed, but not lightly. Constitutionally protected rights are
not simply subject to a changing culture.

In the UK (as with other countries) we used to refuse to allow women to
vote.

So you may now say I'm comparing gun control with voting.

I'm saying the way the population of a contry can be controlled is by
changing the law of the land which in turn will affect the way peole
behave.

Constituional rights are not simply just laws that can be changed easily.

yes and other contires have their versions of what rights they have too.



And this fits into the discussion about the US Constitution in what way?

What's so special about the US constitiution that makes it so difficult to
change compared with say other laws.

The Constitution provides for a process for it to be amended. It can be
changed but is not something done lightly.


It used to be your right to be a racist and beat people you 'owned' you
could even rape your wife without being prosecuted are you telling me
these revisions in the law were bad ?

In some countriesd they have the 'right' to beat a pregnant women to
death

because she refused to marry the person chosen for her.



Anyone still has the "right" to be a racist. There is no law against
that.
Slavery was abolished, the Constitution was amended and, as I have said,
there is a process for that. Until the 2nd Amendment is changed, the
anti-gun nuts will have to accept the fact that we have the right to
"keep
and bear arms".

Which goes back to the UKs from 1698 which was about self defence (which
we still have, but don't NEED to have a gun, and that we could join in
with the government to protech our shores, but we've moved on from those
times.

Itv seems that the UK has managed to get away from the idea that yuo need
a gun to protect ourselves from either ourselves or invading peoples, but
in the US you NEED a gun to protect you from yourselves, which I think is
a bit sad.

Not once did I ever say I "need" a gun. I have a right to have one if I
choose to. I have made the choice to exercise that right.

I'd hate the idea that the law needed changing so I could feel safe in the
knowledge that I NEEDED a gun about my person to feel that I was safe from
individuals or the militara.

I don't want to sit on the ****ter with a gun in my hand because I feel I
need protecting, and presently in the UK I don't need to do that do you ?


Don't ignore the fact that there are many crimes that are thwarted by
gun
onwers. Those incidents don't garner much publicity.

Perhaps because they rarely happen in the way you imagine them.

I very rarely hear of anyone being protected by a gun unless it's in the
hand of the armed forces (including the police).

Where were all the gun heroes here ?

http://www.euronews.com/2014/04/14/t...in-kansas-usa/

Despite what you think, the majority of people here don't carry guns with
them. If more did, we'd see less tragedies like the one you noted.

Perhaps not. If confronted by a violent criminal, perhaps you are happy
to
be unarmed. I am not.

I'm far less likely to be confronted by a gun carrying person check the
stats.

I said a "violent criminal". I did not say a gun-carrying criminal, don't
twist my words. If someone enters into my home and threatens the safety of
my family or myself, I have a right to defend myslef or my family - with
deadly force if necessary. I prefer to have an advantage in that situation.
Whether the criminal who is threatening me has a gun or not does not matter
to me. He is a threat and I can use whatever force I want to eliminate the
threat - or him.

Or explain why you need to lock so many people up in America why do you
have more criminals than we do percentage wise ?

Take a look at the land of the FREE !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rceration_rate

USA 716 per 100,000
England/wales 148 per 100,000

Perhaps if we had such a high number of criminals in our country we might
too feel the need to carry a gun while having a ****.
So considering our cultures aren't all that differnt why do you feel the
need to incarcerate nearly 5 times the number of peole we do, when we also
have pretty much the same laws.

Statistics don't tell the whole story but that's en entirely different
discussion.

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 09:30:57 -0400, "PAS" wrote:

There are checks, many of them. The process I had to endure in order to
get
a license for a handgun was a long one.

Move to Florida. The requirements here to obtain a license for a
handgun a

1. You must be 21 years of age or older
2. You must be able to demonstrate competency with a firearm.

That's it, but there are exclusions. You can't be a convicted felon,
be so physically impaired that you can't handle a firearm safely, be
committed to a mental institution, be a fugitive from justice, and a
few more restrictions based on criminal charges.

The gun store will provide training to allow you to demonstrate
competency with a firearm. The training is rigorous and requires that
you can point to the trigger and the barrel and know which way to
point the gun when firing it. The training process can last as long
as five minutes.

You have to endure a bit more if you want a Concealed Weapon Permit.
You have to take a course, have a photograph taken, have your
fingerprints taken, sign the application form, and pay $112 for a
permit that is good for seven years.

The course required is arduous. You are required to attend a two hour
class and then a range session. You are required to bring 5 rounds of
ammunition to the range session. The cost of a course varies, but
this one charges $50.00. They point out that it is not necessary to
take notes at the course.

http://floridagunexchange.com/concea...-permit-class/

So, in Florida, to license your Kel Tec PF-9, the gun that George
Zimmerman used to shoot and kill Travon Martin (who was armed with a
box of Skittle candy) and get a permit to carry concealed, you have to
take a few hours of training and be able to fire five shots on a range
without hitting your instructor or your foot.

If, instead of owning a gun, you decide to arm yourself with scissors
and become a barber, you must take 1,200 hours of instruction at a
licensed barbering school.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL

I'll take Florida's way of doing things any time. In Suffolk County on Long
Island, here is what I had to do to get my handgun license which permits me
to have a gun in my home (no open carry, no concealed & carry):

1) Fill out a long application including previous addresses. I had to list
three personal references as well as employer, etc.
2) Provide three affidavits from the personal references
3) The references were all interviewed by a police investigator
4) I was interviewed by a police investigator
5) I had to be finger printed at a cost of $ 100.00 (in addition to the
application fees)
6) You are warned that if you get so much as a speeding ticket during the
application process, you can imperil your chances of getting approved
7) Finally received approval after a six-month period

To purchase a handgun, I go to a gun dealer and make my purchase. I am not
permitted to take possession. I get a form filled out by the gun dealer
that I then have to take to the police department for their approval. With
that approval, then I go back to the gun dealer with the stamped form and
take possession. Then I have to bring the handgun to the police department
for their inspection and recording of serial number and they put the serial
number on my license.

I am only permitted to take the handgun to a range. I have to go from my
home directly to the range and then directly back home. No stops in
between, not even to get gas for the car. Get caught stopping and your
license is revoked and your handgun confiscated. These regulations are made
at the whim of the police commissioner, not by any elected official.

In New York State under the new so-called "Safe Act", we law-abiding
citizens were made into felons overnight if we had any magazines that hold
more than seven rounds even though the magazines were legal before the law
was enacted and were manufactured before the law took effect. Since the law
was rushed through in the dead of night without anyone really reading it, in
violation of the NY State Constitution that requires a three-day waiting
period for a new law so that the public can read it and react to it (the
governor got around this provision of the state constitution by declaring
the law an "emergency" which doesn't require the three-day waiting period),
no one realized that the law failed to exempt law-enforcement from the
seven-round limit in the magazines so they too were in violation of the law.
A provision had to be rushed through to compensate for that. The other
issue is that there are no magazines manufactured for seven or less rounds
for many rifles. Anyone with an "assault rifle" must now register them. An
assault rifle is an automatic rifle. We have not been permitted to won them
since the 1930s If a rifle resembles a military rifle, it's an assault
rifle even though it's not an automatic rifle. Take the same semiautomatic
rifle and make it without a pistol grip stock and its not an assault rifle
under the law. Ammo sales are now reported and there will be background
checks for all ammo sales, even for licenses handgun owners. Internet sales
of ammo must now be shipped to a state licensed dealer so that the sale can
be recorded and reported.

In article ,
Tony Cooper wrote:

The gun store will provide training to allow you to demonstrate
competency with a firearm. The training is rigorous and requires that
you can point to the trigger and the barrel and know which way to
point the gun when firing it. The training process can last as long
as five minutes.

And take place in the yard one would assume...
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography

On 2014-06-02 14:53:12 +0000, "PAS" said:

"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 09:30:57 -0400, "PAS" wrote:

There are checks, many of them. The process I had to endure in order to
get
a license for a handgun was a long one.

Move to Florida. The requirements here to obtain a license for a
handgun a

1. You must be 21 years of age or older
2. You must be able to demonstrate competency with a firearm.

That's it, but there are exclusions. You can't be a convicted felon,
be so physically impaired that you can't handle a firearm safely, be
committed to a mental institution, be a fugitive from justice, and a
few more restrictions based on criminal charges.

The gun store will provide training to allow you to demonstrate
competency with a firearm. The training is rigorous and requires that
you can point to the trigger and the barrel and know which way to
point the gun when firing it. The training process can last as long
as five minutes.

You have to endure a bit more if you want a Concealed Weapon Permit.
You have to take a course, have a photograph taken, have your
fingerprints taken, sign the application form, and pay $112 for a
permit that is good for seven years.

The course required is arduous. You are required to attend a two hour
class and then a range session. You are required to bring 5 rounds of
ammunition to the range session. The cost of a course varies, but
this one charges $50.00. They point out that it is not necessary to
take notes at the course.

http://floridagunexchange.com/concea...-permit-class/

So, in Florida, to license your Kel Tec PF-9, the gun that George
Zimmerman used to shoot and kill Travon Martin (who was armed with a
box of Skittle candy) and get a permit to carry concealed, you have to
take a few hours of training and be able to fire five shots on a range
without hitting your instructor or your foot.

If, instead of owning a gun, you decide to arm yourself with scissors
and become a barber, you must take 1,200 hours of instruction at a
licensed barbering school.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL

I'll take Florida's way of doing things any time. In Suffolk County on Long
Island, here is what I had to do to get my handgun license which permits me
to have a gun in my home (no open carry, no concealed & carry):

1) Fill out a long application including previous addresses. I had to list
three personal references as well as employer, etc.
2) Provide three affidavits from the personal references
3) The references were all interviewed by a police investigator
4) I was interviewed by a police investigator
5) I had to be finger printed at a cost of $ 100.00 (in addition to the
application fees)
6) You are warned that if you get so much as a speeding ticket during the
application process, you can imperil your chances of getting approved
7) Finally received approval after a six-month period

Holy crap!
Even in California there is only a ten day waiting period for firearms
purchase.
For non-LEO purchases the buyer has to complete a gun safety course, or
a hunter's safety course. Either one will do.
For normal purchase no finger prints are required. After the registered
dealer files the purchase with the Cal DOJ and only releases the
firearm to the buyer after 10 days. If a flag shows in the 10 day
review period the DOJ can have an additional 30 days to complete an
in-depth background check. At that point the DOJ has to release the
weapon, or deny firearm ownership with a full declaration of the
disqualifying reason, and provide a notice to appeal the decision.

The only time fingerprints come into play is for a non-LEO CWP, then a
Cal DOJ *Live Scan* of prints are run through the system.
In my case I was able to carry an off duty weapon. When I retired I had
to state that I intended to extend my right for 50 State concealed
carry under LEOSA of 2004. I prove that at the time of my retirement I
was qualified, I then had to go through the *Live Scan* procedure, and
my retired ID was only endorsed for concealed carry after full
clearance. Additionally I have to maintain annual qualification with
any weapons I might carry. In my case they are my Kimber CDP II 45 ACP,
and my Glock 23 .40 S&W.


http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/20...afety-act.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enf...ers_Safety_Act
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/leosasummary.pdf

To purchase a handgun, I go to a gun dealer and make my purchase. I am not
permitted to take possession. I get a form filled out by the gun dealer
that I then have to take to the police department for their approval. With
that approval, then I go back to the gun dealer with the stamped form and
take possession. Then I have to bring the handgun to the police department
for their inspection and recording of serial number and they put the serial
number on my license.

In California you only deal with the gun dealer who enters the
transaction into the State DOJ registration system.

I am only permitted to take the handgun to a range. I have to go from my
home directly to the range and then directly back home. No stops in
between, not even to get gas for the car. Get caught stopping and your
license is revoked and your handgun confiscated. These regulations are made
at the whim of the police commissioner, not by any elected official.

It sounds as if you have some questionable local regulations. I am
surprised they have not been challenged, if not in NY Court the perhaps
the US Supreme Court.

In New York State under the new so-called "Safe Act", we law-abiding
citizens were made into felons overnight if we had any magazines that hold
more than seven rounds even though the magazines were legal before the law
was enacted and were manufactured before the law took effect. Since the law
was rushed through in the dead of night without anyone really reading it, in
violation of the NY State Constitution that requires a three-day waiting
period for a new law so that the public can read it and react to it (the
governor got around this provision of the state constitution by declaring
the law an "emergency" which doesn't require the three-day waiting period),
no one realized that the law failed to exempt law-enforcement from the
seven-round limit in the magazines so they too were in violation of the law.
A provision had to be rushed through to compensate for that. The other
issue is that there are no magazines manufactured for seven or less rounds
for many rifles. Anyone with an "assault rifle" must now register them. An
assault rifle is an automatic rifle. We have not been permitted to won them
since the 1930s If a rifle resembles a military rifle, it's an assault
rifle even though it's not an automatic rifle. Take the same semiautomatic
rifle and make it without a pistol grip stock and its not an assault rifle
under the law. Ammo sales are now reported and there will be background
checks for all ammo sales, even for licenses handgun owners. Internet sales
of ammo must now be shipped to a state licensed dealer so that the sale can
be recorded and reported.

We have to live with a bunch of that silliness in California with 10
round mags, and oddly defined "assault rifles".



--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2014-06-02 15:28:47 +0000, Whisky-dave said:

On Monday, 2 June 2014 14:30:57 UTC+1, PAS wrote:

Le Snip

You don't seem to grasp this, otherwise you wouldn't be using this
ridiculous analogy. There is a Cosntitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Your right I don;t get it.

Then perhaps you should try to get some understanding of US
Constitutional history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_...s_Constitution


You have to remember, we as a nation were emerging from under the thumb
and "tyranny" of the English crown which considered our resistance to
George III's rule and imbalanced taxation of the colonies a rebellion.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 201406020904224435-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

We have to live with a bunch of that silliness in California with 10
round mags, and oddly defined "assault rifles".

All those rattle snakes are a true pest, aren't they?!?
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography

On 2014-06-02 16:29:56 +0000, android said:

In article 201406020904224435-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

We have to live with a bunch of that silliness in California with 10
round mags, and oddly defined "assault rifles".

All those rattle snakes are a true pest, aren't they?!?

You have a strange idea about life in the US don't you?

Where the hell do you get "rattle snakes" out of what has been written
on this subject so far?
The firearms I own are divided into three categories, target weapons,
defense/combat weapons, & antique. My defense/combat weapons, a Kimber
1911 type .45 ACP, and a Glock M23 .40 S&W are intended for defense
against other than rattle snakes.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2014060209521951219-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

On 2014-06-02 16:29:56 +0000, android said:

In article 201406020904224435-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

We have to live with a bunch of that silliness in California with 10
round mags, and oddly defined "assault rifles".

All those rattle snakes are a true pest, aren't they?!?

You have a strange idea about life in the US don't you?

Where the hell do you get "rattle snakes" out of what has been written
on this subject so far?
The firearms I own are divided into three categories, target weapons,
defense/combat weapons, & antique. My defense/combat weapons, a Kimber
1911 type .45 ACP, and a Glock M23 .40 S&W are intended for defense
against other than rattle snakes.

I seee... Zzzzzidewwwiiiindersssss??????
I thought that you lived in the dessert... Opsisis et sorryy!1!
--
teleportation kills
http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography

On 2014-06-02 17:05:19 +0000, android said:

In article 2014060209521951219-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

On 2014-06-02 16:29:56 +0000, android said:

In article 201406020904224435-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

We have to live with a bunch of that silliness in California with 10
round mags, and oddly defined "assault rifles".

All those rattle snakes are a true pest, aren't they?!?

You have a strange idea about life in the US don't you?

Where the hell do you get "rattle snakes" out of what has been written
on this subject so far?
The firearms I own are divided into three categories, target weapons,
defense/combat weapons, & antique. My defense/combat weapons, a Kimber
1911 type .45 ACP, and a Glock M23 .40 S&W are intended for defense
against other than rattle snakes.

I seee... Zzzzzidewwwiiiindersssss??????
I thought that you lived in the dessert... Opsisis et sorryy!1!

I would love to live in a chocolate mousse, or did you have some other
dessert in mind?

I live on the Central Coast of California right between San Francisco &
L.A., and yes, we do see rattle snakes, mountain lion, black bear,
bobcats, coyote, foxes, deer, elk, and wild turkey all around where I
live.
....and as much as I enjoy living in a rural area, I also have other
things to consider as a retired law enforcement officer, and that is my
primary reason to own and be qualified with defense/combat weapons.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_731.jpg

--
Regards,

Savageduck

android wrote:
In article 2014060209521951219-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

On 2014-06-02 16:29:56 +0000, android said:

In article 201406020904224435-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

We have to live with a bunch of that silliness in California with 10
round mags, and oddly defined "assault rifles".

All those rattle snakes are a true pest, aren't they?!?

You have a strange idea about life in the US don't you?

Where the hell do you get "rattle snakes" out of what has been written
on this subject so far?
The firearms I own are divided into three categories, target weapons,
defense/combat weapons, & antique. My defense/combat weapons, a Kimber
1911 type .45 ACP, and a Glock M23 .40 S&W are intended for defense
against other than rattle snakes.

I seee... Zzzzzidewwwiiiindersssss??????
I thought that you lived in the dessert... Opsisis et sorryy!1!

Looks like you've got it nailed!

In most of the US of A men buy guns to make up for a
certain amount of penis envy. Lacking in one area, they
purchase a larger caliber in another area. The guns
aren't useful for anything other than ego, or to dream
of shooting imaginary guys with bigger dicks.

Where I live we use guns as tools for food production.
If I wanted to carry a concealed a weapon... I'd find a
guy with a pistol for sale, and the procedure here is
simple: I give him money (and nothing else) and he gives
me the gun. No paperwork, no police, nothing. I put the
gun in my pocket and walk off.

What I'd do with a pistol in my pocket though, I can't
imagine.

I do own guns. A couple different models of stainless
..243 caliber rifles and a 12ga pump shotgun. I might
shoot a caribou with a .243, but actually the main
purpose of all three guns is to scare off (with the
noise) a pesky polar bear now and then. Dang things
think photographers make good snacks, it seems.

We should have better gun control. People who are nuts
should not be allowed to have guns. That includes gun
nuts.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)