• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jocal505

  • Rank
    moderate, informed gunowner
  • Birthday 08/14/1950

Contact Methods

  • MSN

Profile Information

  • Location
    Seattle, Wa
  • Interests
    performance sailing, alpine skiing, music

Recent Profile Visitors

8,643 profile views
  1. A history of the 2nd Amendment

    Jeffie can sure crank out a fine thread title. "A History" of the Second. I have one to present. Did you hear the one about the dimestore history that was accepted within Heller? The Standard Model scholars are 90% Libertarian attorneys, not historians, and their core work was purpose-sponsored by CATO. Levy took full solo credit for both the financing, and the strategy of Heller, and branded his product, Joyce Malcolm's scholarship, with CATO's brand. But since 1983, Malcolm has left unanswered the formal criticism from the historical community (and of Lois Schwoerer and Patrick Charles in particular. Malcolm has claimed both consensus and documentation which doesn't exist. (Winning.) Here's an important, behind-the-scenes look at the situation the century before the Declaration of Independence: The founding fathers played upon the 1669 grievances of the English Parliament, which, as predicted, were suffering disarmament efforts from Catholic militia lieutenants appointed by James the II. The Parliament pointedly avoided armed conflict by using vague language to appoint itself the namer of militia lieutenants. Then they legislated a loyalty oath to themselves from these lieutenants. James II stood down. But to do this, Parliament had to rectify an arrangement they had made with Charles I, that they would not fight Charles I per their natural right if he would be monarch. These arrangements were formally terminated when the English Declaration of Rights became the English Bill of Rights in 1669. They had also granted that Charles I could run the militia. Due process for search and seiziure of arms was not even discussed. (Wales, Scotland, and Ireland were facing keen disarmamant efforts from this Parliament.) Rich Protestant landowners had gun rights under terms of law. They acted as de facto Justices of the Peace. Certain language supporting the armed challenge of the sovereign was spelled out in English Law, about the right to fight tyrants (in a mustered militia). While Pooplius may quote the ominous words of Hamilton in The Federalist 29, standing on this very English law, there no similar provision is to be found in U.S. law., Rather, taking up arms against government authority is termed treason. If you want to challenge this (and certain bozos need to), I have done your homework for you. Here are the best "Standard Model" writers, and how they present this. Each author above in a Libertarian attorney. Halbrook , Kates, and Cramer are featured as CATO researchers on their site. Hardy wrote the FOPA Act for the NRA, and wrote memoirs about it.
  2. A history of the 2nd Amendment

    Sounds like a gracious compromise, like an accommodation.. Then, the crybaby whining for five years on PA. A cottage industry which hums like a drone and gets rotated into most threads.
  3. A history of the 2nd Amendment

    Well, I hope the paper targets were square, not human-shaped . Otherwise, basically, you would be programming the shooter to shoot at human forms with a lethally violent tool. You would me normalizing and practicing and visualizing the shooting of human forms by your family. Just sayin'.
  4. Are Illegal Immigrants Also The People?

    Be careful where you go with this. For you to equate "the people" to the militia, for example, is oversimplistic. Each operates from a different legal foundation, for starters. Here are some questions that contemporary jurists must consider if, like the Pooplius bit, they are to going to equate the Second Amendment’s “well-regulated militia” with an unprofessional armed citizenry. Here's a discussion of "The People" issue, referring to the vacated Nordyke decision: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1705564

    As they say, consider the source. Well, let's see. What Tom claims broadly about the ACLU's gun position is false. They flat-out oppose The Standard Model. What Tom claims Adam Winkler says about due process is contradicted by Mr. Winkler in the first line of Tom's source. MLK's position on gun violence, and on non-violence, is violated by Tom. MLK's core values are intentionally mis-represented. The fifth auxiliary right trumpeted by Hamilton in Federalist 29 has been denied 4X by Tom, on Political Anarchy. The congressional ban of gun violence research is denied by Tom. Colonial era gun confiscation existed at all levels of local, state, and federal government. Tom claims there was no confiscation at that time. Tom's "Brady's Best "was spammed for year's, but was useless. The past few years of Tom's extensive Miller namedropping mis-represented the gun rights of fighting age males as gun rights of "The People." I don't know squat about the Madison quote Tom has presented now...except that I wouldn't trust Tom's interpretation of anything.
  6. Bump Stocka

    Yep Nope. I find that Jeffie and Guy create drama, then go elsewhere when confronted with the overwhelming facts. Examples include the particulars of sourced gun violence research, and particulars of sourced FF history. I find air, vapor, and temper, but not discussion. Let's check out some interesting fabrication and imagining: Here we have straight conjecture and opinion, an idea in defiance of strong market forces. Like Jeffie, no support or cite is offered, just a pro-gun POV. Guy's idea is bullshit (and the drama directed at Steamer is am empty, angry diversion). We'll see, won't we? If Guy is right, bumpstocka shelves will soon be empty across the nation.
  7. Bump Stocka

    You are a dropper of bombs, buddy. Don't change your story and fabric on us now.
  8. Bump Stocka

    Hi Jeff. What do you want me to say? What should I say? frenchie and chinabald will let me know what to say.
  9. A history of the 2nd Amendment

    So you don't plan to follow these laws, but feel you have a say in the sentencing attached to them. You want it both ways. The "set" was in streets, which are public spaces. Members of the public called in a guy with a gun, loitering with a gun in a holster. The investigating officers found a felon who had broken a local law. A proper arrest and court trial followed. The prosecutor offered a plea deal, before a judge owho oversaw the proceedings, including some local information you and I haven't seen. The "actor" turned the plea deal down...and hoped for the mercy (and nullification) of Pooplius types...in a state where the people hate guns for personal reasons. I've lived in Philly Tom. Do they shoot paintballs? Why would I need to know that? To calibrate and assess today's whining?
  10. A history of the 2nd Amendment

    This places you as uninformed. Jeffie can't keep up,. Some dogs don't hunt. Our Jeffie has taken the profile of a foul mouthed spectator.
  11. Active shooter on the Vegas Strip

    No lie was intended, or is intended. I think I have a good point here, and your love for guns and your name-calling doesn't negate what I'm saying. Furthermore, your own untruthfulness is exposed here. A room full of guns functioning in fully automatic mode are suddenly not machine guns. The fully automatic fire, which was recorded on audio, does not relate to machine gun policies, or to established, common sense logic related to machine guns. Bullshit, chinabald. Fully automatic fire shall not be hidden or sustained behind such cheap semantics. You want to make the issue about a name...I could tell a thousand lies an hour, but the fucking elephant in the room is fully automatic gunfire being marketed legally via bump stock devices.
  12. Bump Stocka

    How bogus. Your narrative is false, and was exposed by the Kolbe decision. FACT CHECKING BEHIND TOM RAY The gun industry advertising and gun industry execs called these things assault weapons all through the eighties, up until a phony name change in 1991. Presto change-o, eh? Yet these guns were designed as assault weapons, according to your own sources. The AW is "ordinary," but supposedly has a new laying ass, made up name that nobody uses. Right. How dumb do you think we are?
  13. A history of the 2nd Amendment

    More sniveling here ^^^^. Poor baby. BB guns do a lot of damage every year, actually. And they can be better regulated than firearms. Common sense applies, sorry you don't care for it. I remember when you summoned me to the Stoopid law thread (to discuss gun confiscation), but you just flicked to airsoft guns four or five times. You seem to lose a lot of sleep about airsoft guns. Carry on.
  14. A history of the 2nd Amendment

    He's been to the big house more than once, had a few felony convictions. Was seen driving around in a car wearing a real-looking gun in a holster. Got himself in trouble in New Jersey. Save the tear jerkers. When uncooperative, you kinda lose the benefit of the doubt. Grandma is poorly advised to break laws for you Tom. Have it both ways much? Consider yourself a double dipper much? You can't push the boundaries of gun laws, add exotic guns, then ask for leniency in NJ too.
  15. Bump Stocka

    Sorry, but this statement is really funny. I just wanted to quote it so I can smile next time you call me a flaming liberal dickhead. Glock ran three shifts a day before California's 10-round legislations kicked in. Other manufacturers would crank out illegal parts until midnight of the ban dates. Glock's marketing supported the pushed manufacturing efforts, of course. This source is from Jeff's NPR interview around 2013: As for the present, Guy, think supply and demand. Many of your elk want these things, do you think the manufacturers just stood down? Really? Which of us is correct about bump stock supply? Who knows? In this secretive industry, normal public disclosure is off the table because of Tiahrt and PLCA limitations. I'm assuming the madness will continue, that Cabella and others will re-supply bumpstocks forthwith. My .02.