Jump to content

US sales of guns and ammunition soar amid coronavirus panic buying


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 479
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think it's more that we've heard what you have to say on this issue, sir. You came. You shared. We got it. I really hate to generalize but I think the repetitiveness of your post

The satire is a country so held hostage by its universally-ridiculed gun laws that it can't enact reasonable public health measures over gun stores.  Either that or an ammosexual having a convers

I'd never heard of him - that's funny, I don't care WHO you are!    For the record?  I'm with him on "gun names" - mine are called .45, 12 gauge, .22, .357, etc...  Boats are the only "thing" I've eve

Posted Images

22 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

Quite a good point . .   

And here is a study of "friendliness" based on 

https://www.farandwide.com/s/friendliest-countries-world-aa0ee1b2420147d7

Some surprises, and the US does not rank very high. 

So one might conclude that having lots and lots of guns around does not make a nation-state friendly . . 

Enter a survey released by InterNations, a global network for people who live and work abroad. The organization polled its 20,259-person membership, hailing from more than 187 countries,

That's because all of dem libbryuls that don't own gunz are humourless.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a silver lining note, all this self-isolation time / "working from home" combined with my Pre- "The Sickness" orders of reloading components has allowed me to catch up on replenishing my stocks.  Plus, I can "self-isolate" in the desert to do some target practice.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

Yep, this is bad stuff. I don't speak for Tom but I think he has two goals: 1) Ridiculing the FL and other lawmakers re his pet peeve, and 2) becoming a lay scholar on 2nd A issues. I think Tom is a better, more thoughtful person than you think, apparently, because I don't think he is cheering any of this on. He is annoying AF, however. 

whats the over/under on the date Tom quietly stops using the word 'panicdemic'?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, DustyDreamer said:

So you suppose. But more importantly, many are being made by people with no training or experience who's first thought when confronted with a threat is "oh, a gun will solve that". 

What could possibly go wrong?

They could miss.

18 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

I believe I’ve opined in the past it’s pretty damn sad people get to that point. Buying a gun because you fear racist violence is a really bad place to be, and I find it nauseating TomBalls cheers this on. He’s not letting a panic go to waste, more guns are good.

It's more the fact than the fear of racist violence that motivates people and I too find it nauseating.The only thing worse would be if the victims were defenseless.

 

16 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

whats the over/under on the date Tom quietly stops using the word 'panicdemic'?

The day after politicians stop using the panicdemic to pursue unrelated policy goals. It can't come soon enough for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Olsonist said:

Tom is proud that his boy is protecting Merica's essential services from liberal scum such as myself.


"Proud" would be the right word if I felt I had anything to do with the decision, but at least you're right that I am glad about it, as mentioned in post 282 on Monday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Tomabbey,

Paranoia has struck deep.  Into my heart it has crept.  It started when I was sometimes afraid.  You get the drift.

I am contemplating reclaiming my wife's turkey tool.

We put it in isolation at a friend's when I had a confrontation with Mr. Baker.  I have slain that demon.

It seems like a practical tool for an inexperienced person in the unlikely event of uninvited visitors.

The only other time I felt this way was when I worked midnights at the power plant in Gary, IN (murderer capital at the time).  5th Avenue at 10 pm on Saturday night makes you very aware to keep the car running good.  I had to pass my bro's late ex-father in laws pharmacy.  He was leaving work one evening and a young man from the neighborhood decided that the wallet he was carrying  was too much weight for the older man to carry.  Using his tool he relived him of the excess weight and then said, "Not your lucky day" and used the tool on his thigh.  I never followed up on that fear.

So I may ask my friend for its return.  He is a compassionate human being and will counsel me on my decision and I will ask for his instruction on it's operation.

Otherwise, I'll lay low and keep the doors locked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

Dear Jack,

I remember locking all doors when I was not going through them from my days living in Miami. I don't miss locked doors a bit.

Can't recall the date I noticed windows in Miami/Gables had bars on them. Post-Mariel I'd guess. 

I'm not too worried about these folks in this panic spree. These are folks who've never had guns. Never wanted them. They know they don't know. The women will read the directions.

I have some hope there will soon be a national hotline for counseling gun-haters thru the angst of these trying times. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be an very interesting poll or study once we come out of this, would be to determine the number of self-described anti-gunners and gun-grabbers who bought a gun for self-protection during this crisis.  I wish the ATF had a tick box on the 4473 for party affiliation and attitude related to strict gun control and gun bans.  It would be enlightening for sure.  But I doubt few of them would be honest with the answer.  It would be along the same lines of asking someone in an exit poll if they voted for trump.  

I suspect attitudes among the anti-gunnerz during a severe societal crisis is similar to the old adage that there are no atheists in foxholes.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

sniff, sniff, sniff,  The smell of fear is strong in here.

stay home, stay safe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Desert Racer said:

What would be an very interesting poll or study once we come out of this, would be to determine the number of self-described anti-gunners and gun-grabbers who bought a gun for self-protection during this crisis.  I wish the ATF had a tick box on the 4473 for party affiliation and attitude related to strict gun control and gun bans.  It would be enlightening for sure.  But I doubt few of them would be honest with the answer.  It would be along the same lines of asking someone in an exit poll if they voted for trump.  

I suspect attitudes among the anti-gunnerz during a severe societal crisis is similar to the old adage that there are no atheists in foxholes.  

How many of them end up in a pawn shop in a few weeks time or being sold very cheaply after this is over? 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/2/2020 at 11:11 PM, Blue Crab said:

These purchases are not for a life of crime or terrorism or mass shootings. 

perhaps not for the original purchaser however pounds to peanuts will get you at least one falls into crime and that's too many .

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mid said:

perhaps not for the original purchaser however pounds to peanuts will get you at least one falls into crime and that's too many .

Is that why Aussie grabbers are going after museum collections?

Has anyone actually stolen a museum piece, fabricated a new firing pin, and used it in a crime, or is this just a phantom fear?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mad said:

How many of them end up in a pawn shop in a few weeks time or being sold very cheaply after this is over? 
 

Probably a fair number.  But it doesn't invalidate my original point that the majority of those out rushing to buy a gun in the frenzy were likely either anti-gun or extremely ambivalent about guns.  Its amazing what a crisis can do to suddenly change people's minds.  And I'm sure when they do sell them back to pawn shops or online on gunbroker.com - they will go back to saying in polite company how icky guns are and how they should be banned.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well of course,  there's nothing  better than as many ignorant humans as possible, with loaded guns, that they don't have training on and or understand how to use..

This wont end well......

Keep selling those guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Keith said:

Well of course,  there's nothing  better than as many ignorant humans as possible, with loaded guns, that they don't have training on and or understand how to use..

This wont end well......

Keep selling those guns.

More of what is being said about, not by, the people in question.

March set a new background check record. The predicted problems with all these buyers, every single one of them an irrational idiot according to those who don't like guns, have not materialized. Keep predicting it, but the underlying assumption that they're all irrational idiots might just be flawed.

I think it's just possible some of them are busily acquiring knowledge and training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool! My county made the cut!

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Bay-Area-gun-stores-closed-Second-Amendment-COVID-15177177.php

The NRA is suing Alameda County for violatin' gunsters 2A rahts. They even cite DC v Heller.

The lawsuit cites Heller as precedent localities are directly violating by denying the "right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.”

Damn. I was going to defend my hearth and home but liberals made me use the internet.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

More of what is being said about, not by, the people in question.

March set a new background check record. The predicted problems with all these buyers, every single one of them an irrational idiot according to those who don't like guns, have not materialized. Keep predicting it, but the underlying assumption that they're all irrational idiots might just be flawed.

I think it's just possible some of them are busily acquiring knowledge and training.

I guess you haven't bothered to noticed what the collective wisdom of the electorate has brought to you to manage your country...

 

carry on..... 

Stay inside and stay safe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Desert Racer said:

What would be an very interesting poll or study once we come out of this, would be to determine the number of self-described anti-gunners and gun-grabbers who bought a gun for self-protection during this crisis.  I wish the ATF had a tick box on the 4473 for party affiliation and attitude related to strict gun control and gun bans.  It would be enlightening for sure.  But I doubt few of them would be honest with the answer.  It would be along the same lines of asking someone in an exit poll if they voted for trump.  

I suspect attitudes among the anti-gunnerz during a severe societal crisis is similar to the old adage that there are no atheists in foxholes.  

It is actually painful to read the musings of someone so consumed by fear . . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Keith said:

I guess you haven't bothered to noticed what the collective wisdom of the electorate has brought to you to manage your country...

 

carry on..... 

Stay inside and stay safe.

Stay inside and oil your gunz would be more appropriate advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Keith said:

I guess you haven't bothered to noticed what the collective wisdom of the electorate has brought to you to manage your country...

 

carry on..... 

Stay inside and stay safe.

I noticed and that's why I've asked for help repeatedly. Canadians are so wise and such good neighbors that I would expect a call for help to be answered but it hasn't been so far. Still, I'll try again.

How is the Canuck confiscation program for .22 magazines going?

Last I heard, it was like most gun confiscation programs around the world, resulting in a lot more "boating accidents" than actual confiscations. But I haven't been on a Canuck gun forum in over a year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Olsonist said:

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Bay-Area-gun-stores-closed-Second-Amendment-COVID-15177177.php

The NRA is suing Alameda County for violatin' gunsters 2A rahts. They even cite DC v Heller.

The lawsuit cites Heller as precedent localities are directly violating by denying the "right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.”

The author of that one is misinformed on at least one subject.

Quote

In the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes. The lawsuit cites Heller as precedent localities are directly violating by denying the "right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.” The Second Amendment was made fully applicable to state and local governments through the Due Process and Privileges or Immunities Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment in the 2010 Supreme Court case McDonald v. City of Chicago. That case is also cited in the lawsuit against Bay Area officials.

The bolded part is wrong in a couple of ways. First, it's privileges and immunities. Second, when Alan Gura tried to make that argument, Scalia basically told him to shut up and sit down. That part of the 14th amendment has no practical application due to racist Reconstruction era precedents and the court (and the NAACP) like it that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

This isn't the first time the NRA has sued Alameda, County of.

https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-9th-circuit-guns-20171012-story.html

And over gun shops no less.

The lawsuit did occur but readers know that the NRA was not among the listed plaintiffs.

On 3/29/2020 at 6:12 AM, Steganographic Tom said:

As the rest of that post notes, the 2017 reversal you are referencing saw the majority recognize our right to buy guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Paul D. Clement is listed as a counsel for the NRA as part of the appeal.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/10/10/13-17132.pdf

Yes, but the parties who brought the suit remained the same:

Quote

John TEIXEIRA; Steve Nobriga; Gary Gamaza; Calguns Foundation, Inc., (CGF); Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., (SAF); California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees, (CAL-FFL), Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA; Alameda County Board Of Supervisors, as a policy making body; Wilma Chan, In Her Official Capacity; Nate Miley, in his official capacity; Keith Carson, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.

An amicus curiae is not a plaintiff. The NRA did not sue Alameda in that case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to keep this neutral, I get the "living in fear" mindset but I really don't think that's the real, and certainly not the only, basis for the 100 million of us and our 300 million guns. Even overlooking the utility aspect, guns are fun. Some people collect stamps. And racecars. And spiders ffs.

It does explain panic buying, no argument. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Steganographic Tom said:

The bolded part is wrong in a couple of ways. First, it's privileges and immunities. Second, when Alan Gura tried to make that argument, Scalia basically told him to shut up and sit down. That part of the 14th amendment has no practical application due to racist Reconstruction era precedents and the court (and the NAACP) like it that way.

Tom, do you support the NAACP? Are you even on the same page with them?? Do you have some grasp on their struggle, a grasp of the basics of racial bias, in today's world? 

The search function  shows that you have name-dropped the NAACP 165 times. You average 33 NAACP's per year. 

Just sayin'.

Quote

Let's play DRED SCOTT'S REVENGE

        35 results for Tom "dogballs" Ray

  • 2019 sixteen Dreds/yr.
  • 2018  Thirteen Dreds/yr.
  • 2017 Three Dreds/yr.
  • 2016 none
  • 2015 none
  • 2012 THE ORIGINAL One Dred

Corporations Are People

Plenipotentiary Tom replied to Plenipotentiary Tom's topic in Political Anarchy

...Dred Scott. We had to fight a war and pass a Constitutional amendment to overturn that precedent. Button is just more case law. Your argument is inductive but go back to your basis step. Dartmouth College v. Woodward. Case law. It gives Corporations the right of contract. I have no idea… April 14, 2012

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jocal505 said:

The search function  My Creepy database shows that you have name-dropped the NAACP 165 times. You average 33 NAACP's per year. 

Just sayin'.

FTFY.

Just saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Desert Racer said:

FTFY.

Just saying.

Certain race-baiting works, on Political Anarchy.  It has been accepted for years, and is part of the fabric of what we are, as an internet community. I belong to this community, and, just like the next guy, I bring along certain observations.

Yo, the Civil Rights Act established the basics for us long ago. MLK paid the freight for it, so yeah, let's credit him, but not like this:

Quote

MLK's BY YEAR 53 results total

Search > MLK > Tom Ray three pages of examples

  • 2019 Six MLK's/yr
  • 2018 Seven  MLK's
  • 2017 Two MLK's
  • 2016 Five MLK's
  • 2015 Eight MLK's
  • (only covers half of the mangling of a man who weaponized decency)

This is fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

Get a room. I'll pay for it. 

Only if I get to have a 6' long 2x4 that I can maintain social distancing with while whacking joey about the head and shoulders......

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

Get a room. I'll pay for it. 

Tom and I landed in the same room, we have one already, thanks. :mellow:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jocal505 said:

 

Tom and I landed in the same room, we have one already, thanks. :mellow:

The anatomically correct blowup doll that you glued a cutout of Tom's face on does not count......

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know how when the detectives find the serial killer/rapist, the hideyhole is covered with new articles and pics of the victims.  Here, they'd find:

  Quote

Let's play DRED SCOTT'S REVENGE

        35 results for Tom "dogballs" Ray

  • 2019 sixteen Dreds/yr.
  • 2018  Thirteen Dreds/yr.
  • 2017 Three Dreds/yr.
  • 2016 none
  • 2015 none
  • 2012 THE ORIGINAL One Dred

Corporations Are People

Plenipotentiary Tom replied to Plenipotentiary Tom's topic in Political Anarchy

...Dred Scott. We had to fight a war and pass a Constitutional amendment to overturn that precedent. Button is just more case law. Your argument is inductive but go back to your basis step. Dartmouth College v. Woodward. Case law. It gives Corporations the right of contract. I have no idea… April 14, 2012

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Olsonist said:

Paul D. Clement is listed as a counsel for the NRA as part of the appeal.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/10/10/13-17132.pdf

His work was poor, and unenlightened or something, in the recent NY case. The issue was outdoor gun rights, if any, and he has no foundation for an argument.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happens when you elect people to public office . . 

who do not believe that government is in any sense capable . . 

You get incompetence and corruption . .    Really, what did you expect?  (from AP) 

Some states and cities that have been shipped masks, gloves, ventilators and other essential equipment from the nation’s medical stockpile to fight the coronavirus have gotten an unwelcome surprise: the material is unusable.

Nearly 6,000 medical masks sent to Alabama had dry rot and a 2010 expiration date. More than 150 ventilators sent to Los Angeles were broken and had to be repaired. In Oregon, it was masks with faulty elastic that could cause the straps to snap, exposing medical workers to the disease.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Olsonist said:

Paul D. Clement is listed as a counsel for the NRA as part of the appeal.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/10/10/13-17132.pdf

So? Do you know the difference between plaintiffs/defendants & amici?

13 hours ago, jocal505 said:

His work was poor, and unenlightened or something, in the recent NY case. The issue was outdoor gun rights, if any, and he has no foundation for an argument.

Joe, you can stop babbling about the "NY case", there is discussion about a different case right now. Do try to keep up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

So? Do you know the difference between plaintiffs/defendants & amici?

The NRA Legal Defense Fund lists Teixeira v. County of Alameda as part of its current litigation.

https://www.nradefensefund.org/current-litigation.aspx

I see that you are trying to make an important legal distinction here, counselor, but is there anything else I can help you with?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

I see that you are trying to make an important legal distinction here, counselor, but is there anything else I can help you with?

Well thanks, Mr. Other Counselor, and as you well know gunz, bazookas, nukes, etc. do not keep us safe . . 

they keep us in fear - and that is the object. 

This is actually pretty good  . . (Rocket Launchers don't count. They are kewl. Humor alert) 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Olsonist said:

The NRA Legal Defense Fund lists Teixeira v. County of Alameda as part of its current litigation.

https://www.nradefensefund.org/current-litigation.aspx

I see that you are trying to make an important legal distinction here, counselor, but is there anything else I can help you with?

Actually, readers can easily see that you're wrong again and they don't list it as part of current litigation. There's a paragraph about a Michigan case that mentions the case in passing but there's no listing of that case as part of current NRA litigation.

Because, as mentioned previously, this is just plain false.

22 hours ago, Olsonist said:

This isn't the first time the NRA has sued Alameda, County of.

https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-9th-circuit-guns-20171012-story.html

And over gun shops no less.

Because the NRA did not sue Alameda in that case. Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Tom, do you support the NAACP? Are you even on the same page with them?? Do you have some grasp on their struggle, a grasp of the basics of racial bias, in today's world? 

The search function  shows that you have name-dropped the NAACP 165 times. You average 33 NAACP's per year. 

I support their long-established corporate first amendment rights, as you would know if you were a reader.

I think I'm on the same page as they are with respect to people who think that

On 5/4/2015 at 2:35 PM, jocal505 said:

The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.

I don't really understand where that kind of racial bias comes from in today's world. Maybe you can explain why you think black people are so immature and volatile?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, bpm57 said:

So? Do you know the difference between plaintiffs/defendants & amici?

Joe, you can stop babbling about the "NY case", there is discussion about a different case right now. Do try to keep up.

Different case, with the same issues and personalities, and the same strained ideas. Nothing new here, but you NEED something better.

Paul Clement is supposed to be a heavyweight. His presentation was that we still must pee if we want to run around with guns. Gorsuch tossed in that we might have to do chores at our Mother's house... as we run around with guns. Brilliant shit.

Quote

Paul Clement, before the SC: what if we want coffee, but gunz are being transported for repairz?

 

Did you notice the pathetic level of these arguments, DeadEye?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steganographic Tom said:
Quote

 

I support their long-established corporate first amendment rights, as you would know if you were a reader.

I think I'm on the same page as they are with respect to people who think that

I don't really understand where that kind of racial bias comes from in today's world. Maybe you can explain why you think black people are so immature and volatile?

Good Morning Tom, on a Sunday.

You left a trail of race-baiting, in a comfy pattern.  Go ahead, let's see you double down on the pattern. Jim Crow bullshit  may be sustainable in this environment, you are a rock star now.

Quote

 2019

Welcome to THE RACEBAITER TIME MACHINE   five years of interesting behavior by our host, Tom "dogballs" Ray

Six MLK's/yr.

Five Taney's/yr.

Fourteen Dreds/yr.

Twenty six "Immature and volatiles" per year

Sixty six NAACP'S/yr

(Tom's red ink spew is unknown; quotes do not search)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

During COVID-related gun-buying frenzy, many are first-time owners
 

Quote

 

After standing in line at a Pittsburgh-area sporting goods store for more than an hour, not knowing what he would say to the sales clerk, the self-described “liberal Democrat from New York City” bought a gun. He said it was an impulse buy, not a “panic.”

His purchase last week occurred during a nationwide rash of firearm sales to people who had never considered gun ownership until becoming rattled by concerns about COVID-19’s impact on America’s social infrastructure. Last week, many southwestern Pennsylvania gun shops ran out of stock. Owners said they sold firearms of all types to many first-time buyers.

“The stock market is tanking. I’m well-read enough to know that puts the onus on people to feel differently about how commodities are traded and how people will act,” said the gun-purchasing anesthesiologist, who lives in Fox Chapel and works in Pittsburgh.

He asked that his name be withheld due to concerns about how friends and neighbors might react to his self-defense solution.

 

Certainly sounds ignorant, irrational, and cowardly to me. I'll let Happy inform of us his likely penis size for those to whom that matters. NTTIAWWT.
 

Quote

 

Todd Edmiston, owner of A&S Indoor Pistol Range in Youngwood, Westmoreland County, said on Wednesday he was selling out of some supplies and seeing a lot of new customers.

“More first-time handgun owners,” he said. “A lot of people asking about self-protection and questions we don’t usually hear, asking if we provide training.”

On Wednesday at Keystone Shooting Center in Mars, Butler County, owner Ty Eggemeyer said the percentage of customers buying their first gun was “extremely high.”

“Most of what’s selling is for self-defense and protection,” he said. “Mostly handguns. Our home-defense shotguns, wiped out.”

Interest in classes and training at Keystone was strong.

 

That's just crazy talk. Everyone (in the gungrabby chorus) knows that these people aren't interested in training at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, mad said:

Next headline 

“Virus hotspots discovered at gun ranges across the country”

So training is bad?

I thought the concern was that not training is bad?

Seems like the only "good" solution would be to not exercise our right to buy guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Steganographic Tom said:

So training is bad?

I thought the concern was that not training is bad?

Seems like the only "good" solution would be to not exercise our right to buy guns.

That’s not what I was implying, just pointing out that going to the range en-masse for training to use their newly acquired firearms is just another virus transfer hot-spot in waiting.......but you knew that anyway. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Steganographic Tom said:

Actually, readers can easily see that you're wrong again and they don't list it as part of current litigation. There's a paragraph about a Michigan case that mentions the case in passing but there's no listing of that case as part of current NRA litigation.

Because, as mentioned previously, this is just plain false.

Because the NRA did not sue Alameda in that case. Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Olsonist said:

The NRA Legal Defense Fund lists Teixeira v. County of Alameda as part of its current litigation.

https://www.nradefensefund.org/current-litigation.aspx

I see that you are trying to make an important legal distinction here, counselor, but is there anything else I can help you with?

Odd, the only reference on that page to Teixeira is in the discussion of Oakland Tactical Supply, LLC, Jason Raines, Matthew Remenar and Scott Fresh v. Howell Township

Did you have a different page in mind? Or is my install of firefox showing a completely different page?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Steganographic Tom said:

 

Seems like the only "good" solution would be to not exercise our right to buy guns.

Let's look at this. "Our right to buy guns" is brand new, and is only based on Heller, and you hate the shit out of Heller. Your ordinary .22/dogballs  problem is based on Heller's rejection of battle weapons.

You seem confused, as you thrash around and rail about this and that. 

Quote

Beto O'Rourke: "You're damn right I'm going to take the assault weapons."

Crown response: loud, and hearty, cheering.

Tom Ray: Wtf?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Did you notice the pathetic level of these arguments, DeadEye?

Poor Joe, as usual, unable to comprehend what it means when something is illegal. Joey will now start dancing, using the "well has anyone ever been charged using that law?" defense.

Sorry Joey, it seems like possibly losing rights for life (and, you know, being a convicted felon) make most people unwilling to be the test case.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

Poor Joe, as usual, unable to comprehend what it means when something is illegal. Joey will now start dancing, using the "well has anyone ever been charged using that law?" defense.

Sorry Joey, it seems like possibly losing rights for life (and, you know, being a convicted felon) make most people unwilling to be the test case. 

 

You guys are civil rights crusaders, remember?

Quote
How many times was Martin Luther King jailed?
29

Answer Wiki. Martin Luther King Jr. was sent to jail for various acts of civil disobedience, resulting in a total of 29 occurrences, according to the King Center.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mad said:

Next headline 

“Virus hotspots discovered at gun ranges across the country”

I did some gun training yesterday.  Worked on 1200 yd steel in about 15kts of crosswind.  That was sporty.  Fortunately my "gun range" is open expanses of desert and I didn't see another soul for 50 miles save for the cars going by on the highway 5 miles away.  It's part of my self-isolation and WFH.  ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Desert Racer said:

I did some gun training yesterday.  Worked on 1200 yd steel in about 15kts of crosswind.  That was sporty.  Fortunately my "gun range" is open expanses of desert and I didn't see another soul for 50 miles save for the cars going by on the highway 5 miles away.  It's part of my self-isolation and WFH.  ;)

Why?  Handguns at 7-10 yds is practical.  You are such a stud.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Let's look at this. "Our right to buy guns" is brand new,

Our right to buy guns is new?  I'm curious, if the FF's and all legal precedent since says that we have the right to keep and bear arms -  how are people who weren't born in 1776 going to obtain arms in order to be able to keep and bear them?  You can't very well keep and bear something you can't legally obtain first.  Do they have to make their own if they can't buy them?  Or are only those muskets passed down from the colonial days allowed to be kept and beared?   

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

Why?  Handguns at 7-10 yds is practical.  You are such a stud.  

Yeah, but zombies and looters at 1200 is so much more fun.  And more challenging.  

Besides, practical handgun is later this week.  I need to load up about 1000 rounds of 9mm first.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Desert Racer said:
17 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Let's look at this. "Our right to buy guns" is brand new,

Our right to buy guns is new?

1871 was like yesterday. But Joe's a non-reader so is unaware that the 9th Circuit recognized our right to buy guns

On 4/3/2020 at 11:52 AM, Desert Racer said:

What would be an very interesting poll or study once we come out of this, would be to determine the number of self-described anti-gunners and gun-grabbers who bought a gun for self-protection during this crisis.  I wish the ATF had a tick box on the 4473 for party affiliation and attitude related to strict gun control and gun bans.  It would be enlightening for sure.  But I doubt few of them would be honest with the answer. 


I found an honest one yesterday (post 493) and another today.

I’m One of Those Anti-Gun People Who Just Bought His First Firearm
 

Quote

 

Ilya from Michigan writes . . .

If you’d have met me three weeks ago, you’d unequivocally know my stance on guns. I was not only against the ownership of AR-15s, I was in the minority of folks who thought all private gun ownership should be illegal.

Fast forward to today: I own a GLOCK 19 Gen5.

I’m still in a bit of disbelief that there is a dangerous weapon in my house: one that more frequently contributes to accidental deaths, violent homicides, and suicides, rather than the romanticized personal protection experiences.

What happened? The world changed overnight and my opinion…evolved.

I’ve always been a strongly opinionated person, but I pride myself on the idea that my beliefs are loosely held. Strong opinions are great, but what you don’t want is to be egotistically blinded by them. I don’t want to be held hostage by a belief that is no longer valid, given new information.

...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

Is it the view of the PA firepower "enthusiasts" 

that gun shops are essential ?

Pot dispensaries and liquor stores are far more "essential" stores to keep open, right professor?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jocal505 said:

You guys are civil rights crusaders, remember?

 

Tell us, Mr. DGU, how many resulted in a felony conviction?

And Joe, I thought you were against racebaiting? _You_ brought up MLK, therefore by your own standards your are racebaiting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bpm57 said:

Pot dispensaries and liquor stores are far more "essential" stores to keep open, right professor?

In my state, the pot dispensaries are open but the liquor stores have been ordered closed.  How is that fucking fair???!!!

ETA:  If the beer and booze runs out, there will be riots in the streets and social order will break down.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Desert Racer said:

In my state, 

On April 1st there was a sort of press release to the effect that Gov. DeWine had banned alcohol sales. 

Got to admit I panicked bigly for a good five minutes. 

They got me good. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
On 4/5/2020 at 12:59 AM, Excoded Tom said:

Actually, readers can easily see that you're wrong again and they don't list it as part of current litigation. There's a paragraph about a Michigan case that mentions the case in passing but there's no listing of that case as part of current NRA litigation.

Because, as mentioned previously, this is just plain false.

Because the NRA did not sue Alameda in that case. Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with.

The NRA lost the case that they did not sue in.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.357363/gov.uscourts.cand.357363.61.0.pdf

Wayne is sad.

image.png.86403263ee1640f734ff8cac5dfb143c.png

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
On 3/26/2020 at 5:33 AM, Pertinacious Tom said:

That case and another one continue to make their way through the system.

9th Circuit Panel Says Panicdemic-Inspired Shutdowns of Gun Stores Were Unconstitutional

And the judge has a sense of humor so included a draft opinion to make it easier for the en banc 9th to overturn this result.
 

Quote

 

...

Yesterday a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit unanimously ruled that Ventura County's decision to ban a wide range of firearm-related activities for a month and a half violated the Second Amendment. Applying essentially the same analysis in another case decided yesterday, the same panel ruled that Los Angeles County likewise violated the Second Amendment when it shut down gun stores for 11 days early in the pandemic.

The right to keep and bear arms, Judge Lawrence VanDyke observes in McDougall v. County of Ventura, "means nothing if the government can prohibit all persons from acquiring any firearm or ammunition….These blanket prohibitions on access and practice clearly burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment and fail under both strict and intermediate scrutiny."

The 9th Circuit panel overruled U.S. District Judge Consuelo Marshall, who in 2020 dismissed the challenge to Ventura County's anti-gun pandemic policy, rejecting the constitutional claims made by individual residents, retailers, ranges, and gun rights groups. Marshall deemed the county's policy a valid exercise of public health powers that was perfectly consistent with the Second Amendment.

This case therefore illustrates not only the arbitrariness of COVID-19 lockdowns but also the willingness of some courts to accept public health as an excuse for violating clearly established constitutional rights. It also illustrates judicial resistance to treating the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment with the same respect as other constitutional rights. VanDyke mocks both of those tendencies in a slyly satirical "alternative draft opinion" that he suggests his 9th Circuit colleagues can use when they overturn the panel's decision, an outcome he views as inevitable.

...

VanDyke, in short, predicts that his colleagues will reach a foreordained conclusion that fits their policy preferences by combining excessive deference to the government's public health judgments with a blithe disregard for Second Amendment rights—tendencies the 9th Circuit has displayed repeatedly in cases involving both COVID-19 restrictions and gun control. And since VanDyke already has done the work necessary to achieve that result, the appeals court will not have to put much effort into it.

By writing "an alternative draft opinion that will apply our test in a way more to the liking of the majority of our court," VanDyke says, "I can demonstrate just how easy it is to reach any desired conclusion under our current framework, and the majority of our court can get a jumpstart on calling this case en banc. Sort of a win-win for everyone." He concludes his concurring opinion with two words: "You're welcome."

 

It will be funny to see how closely the inevitable en banc reversal matches the satire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Pertinacious Tom said:

That case and another one continue to make their way through the system.

9th Circuit Panel Says Panicdemic-Inspired Shutdowns of Gun Stores Were Unconstitutional

And the judge has a sense of humor so included a draft opinion to make it easier for the en banc 9th to overturn this result.
 

It will be funny to see how closely the inevitable en banc reversal matches the satire.

The satire is a country so held hostage by its universally-ridiculed gun laws that it can't enact reasonable public health measures over gun stores. 

Either that or an ammosexual having a conversation with himself on a public forum.  

Or both, I suppose.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Rain Man said:

The satire is a country so held hostage by its universally-ridiculed gun laws that it can't enact reasonable public health measures over gun stores. 

The problem is the disparate treatment of other businesses.

Quote

That regulatory scheme, VanDyke says, "ultimately boils down to the government's designation of 'essential' and 'non-essential' businesses—but nowhere has the government here explained why gun stores, ammunition stores, and firing ranges are 'non-essential' businesses while bicycle shops, hardware stores, and golfing ranges are 'essential.'" If the county were right that its distinctions are not subject to judicial review, he says, it "could order the closure of Mexican restaurants but make an exception for French restaurants, because the arbitrariness of that distinction would not matter any more than the distinction between bicycling and shooting at outdoor gun ranges."

If it's a reasonable public health measure for a gun shop, why not a bike shop? The obvious answer is because TeamD.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...