Speaking to the original topic, as far as I can tell the this executive order will attempt to change the definition of “seller” as in which sellers need an FFL. There are non-FFL holders who buy and sell lots of guns for profit (legally). Anyway, we’ll have to see exactly what is coming out. Our NRA will provide good updates.
The whole purpose of this “universal background check” thing is to drive registration in a step by step manner. Once all firearms transfers by law have to be done with a NICS check, then the obvious question will be “well how do we know?” and registration will be the so-called solution. Of course, criminals won’t give a (**() about gun laws, ever.
The obvious solution is that we’ve got all the gun laws we need and more, we just need to prosecute them.</font id=“red”> Before Charleston Thug Life went offline, they were clearly showing that arrests for “unlawful carrying of a firearm” (I think a 3 or 5 year prison sentence) and other gun charges were routinely having the charges dropped by our local prosecutors. If they were prosecuted, the sentences were jokes like “time served” or a “1 year of probation.”
“You have the right to the pursuit of happiness. You do not have a guarantee that you shall have it.”
AMEN!!!
In the future, where every stranger poses a potential threat, knowing the predator mindset is the only safe haven.
We’ve got more than we need. I’ve got a weapons permit in GA and have had one for 40 years, and hunting licenses in GA and SC and FL, and live within sight of SC, yet it is illegal for me to drive across the Savannah River bridge and buy a handgun in SC. Or for someone to drive from SC into GA and sell one to me.
Yet I can order one on line and Fed Ex will bring it to me. Go figure.
Hell, there aren’t that many military units that have actual live fire (not simunitions) shoot house training. Most of that is reserved for SF units and not but a few small select units at that.
USASOC, JSOC, MARSOC, NSW (All of SOCOM, for that matter), all infantry units, a lot of cav scout units, and plenty other combat arms MOS’s train with live fire in shoot houses.
quote:Originally posted by archer
Again, only the smallest most elite SF units train in situations that would prepare them for life or death situations. Even with infantry units, you don’t know how they’ll react when the bullets start to zing past their heads until it actually happens because even they don’t train to that extreme
No training exists that can prepare anyone for life or death situations, and no training will ever reveal how someone will react when in a firefight.
Please do our military a great service, and not talk out of your ass about things that you have no idea about. Please, stay in your lane.
Hell, there aren’t that many military units that have actual live fire (not simunitions) shoot house training. Most of that is reserved for SF units and not but a few small select units at that.
USASOC, JSOC, MARSOC, NSW (All of SOCOM, for that matter), all infantry units, a lot of cav scout units, and plenty other combat arms MOS’s train with live fire in shoot houses.
quote:Originally posted by archer
Again, only the smallest most elite SF units train in situations that would prepare them for life or death situations. Even with infantry units, you don’t know how they’ll react when the bullets start to zing past their heads until it actually happens because even they don’t train to that extreme
No training exists that can prepare anyone for life or death situations, and no training will ever reveal how someone will react when in a firefight.
Please do our military a great service, and not talk out of your ass about things that you have no idea about. Please, stay in your lane.
I know archer and I know what he did when he was a member of our military so let’s just say he’s driven in (**() near every lane the military offers so he can surely drive in whichever one he choose on a public forum so how about you practice what you preach with regards to talking out of your ass. Back when we served, some of the units you mentione
Speaking to the original topic, as far as I can tell the this executive order will attempt to change the definition of “seller” as in which sellers need an FFL. There are non-FFL holders who buy and sell lots of guns for profit (legally). Anyway, we’ll have to see exactly what is coming out. Our NRA will provide good updates.
The whole purpose of this “universal background check” thing is to drive registration in a step by step manner. Once all firearms transfers by law have to be done with a NICS check, then the obvious question will be “well how do we know?” and registration will be the so-called solution. Of course, criminals won’t give a (**() about gun laws, ever.
The obvious solution is that we’ve got all the gun laws we need and more, we just need to prosecute them.</font id=“red”> Before Charleston Thug Life went offline, they were clearly showing that arrests for “unlawful carrying of a firearm” (I think a 3 or 5 year prison sentence) and other gun charges were routinely having the charges dropped by our local prosecutors. If they were prosecuted, the sentences were jokes like “time served” or a “1 year of probation.”
“You have the right to the pursuit of happiness. You do not have a guarantee that you shall have it.”
AMEN!!!
In the future, where every stranger poses a potential threat, knowing the predator mindset is the only safe haven.
Xpress H20B Bay Series
Yamaha 115 SHO
no doubt, our law system needs to carry out punishment for crimes committed. Seems al
I know archer and I know what he did when he was a member of our military so let’s just say he’s driven in (**() near every lane the military offers so he can surely drive in whichever one he choose on a public forum so how about you practice what you preach with regards to talking out of your ass. Back when we served, some of the units you mentioned didn’t even exist. Regardless, the majority of the units you mentioned still make up an extremely small percentage of our military so again, the whole talking out of your ass thing…
Oh, and you conveniently left out where he said, “No one knows how they’re going to react in a life or death situation until they’re placed in a life or death situation.”
I guess while you were flapping your butt cheeks, your reading comprehension took a dump. Way to do the uniform proud…
And for the record, sitting on a static firing line shooting at paper targets didn’t constitute “live fire training” when I served. Then again, video game joystick operator wasn’t an MOS either. Lol!!
No matter how much it hurts, how dark it gets, or how far you fall…you are never out of the fight.
I don’t care what constituted live fire training when you served, archer served, or anyone else served. When you are speaking of present times, someones knowledge of what things were like in the 80’s doesn’t give them free reign to opine about how things are now.
The fact is, he was wrong, and obviously not up to date on how our military training has evolved.
The fact is, you’re making it sound as though the units you mentioned are trained in the same manner as the general military and that represents the majority of the military. What archer said was correct, SF units may be “larger” now but again, they still represent but a small fraction of the military and they’re the only ones that use live fire in shoot house scenarios.
I realize the range where you probably qualified as a basic marksman was neat but that is far from live fire training in a shoot house. By your summation, people shooting at Indian Creek rifle range are involved in “live fire training.” You don’t care, I get it, but again thanks for doing the uniform proud by discrediting those that came before you. Now you can go back to googling more military acronyms, completing your order on Medals of America, and reading your digital copy of Men in Green Faces. Operate on, operator.
In all of your efforts to regurgitate what you googled, you obviously missed the whole point of what archer was saying regarding training and you conveniently missed the other comment he said about life and death situations so you were clearly coming to productively add to this discussion. BRAVO ZULU, Internet commando.
No matter how much it hurts, how dark it gets, or how far you fall…you are never out of the fight.
The fact is, you’re making it sound as though the units you mentioned are trained in the same manner as the general military and that represents the majority of the military. What archer said was correct, SF units may be “larger” now but again, they still represent but a small fraction of the military and they’re the only ones that use live fire in shoot house scenarios.
I realize the range where you probably qualified as a basic marksman was neat but that is far from live fire training in a shoot house. By your summation, people shooting at Indian Creek rifle range are involved in “live fire training.” You don’t care, I get it, but again thanks for doing the uniform proud by discrediting those that came before you. Now you can go back to googling more military acronyms, completing your order on Medals of America, and reading your digital copy of Men in Green Faces. Operate on, operator.
In all of your efforts to regurgitate what you googled, you obviously missed the whole point of what archer was saying regarding training and you conveniently missed the other comment he said about life and death situations so you were clearly coming to productively add to this discussion. BRAVO ZULU, Internet commando.
Ugh. You’re right. “Only the smallest, most elite SF units” get any sort of shoot house training. Got it. Now back to my Call of Duty.
Ugh. You’re right. “Only the smallest, most elite SF units” get any sort of shoot house training. Got it. Now back to my Call of Duty.
[/quote]
Yep pretty much. You’d be surprised the cost of ammo in training a LOT of troops. They had .22lr in my first rifle training session. Then for my first pistol qualification they used some old ragged out s&w short barrel .38 revolvers. I believe it was WWII or Korean era ammunition. I was the only one to get a marksman that day. I think my natural “shake” compensated for the wore out pistol.
I don’t know anything about modern military training, other than I know I don’t want a SEAL Team after my azz:face_with_head_bandage:
I do know that most of my inshore fishing is done within sight or hearing distance of Parris Island, and it sure sounds to me like they are live firing over there, or they shoot a LOT of blanks. I also know if you get too close the green men in the RIBs will ask you to leave.
quote: You'd be surprised the cost of ammo in training a LOT of troops. They had .22lr in my first rifle training session. Then for my first pistol qualification they used some old ragged out s&w short barrel .38 revolvers. I believe it was WWII or Korean era ammunition.
My Dad told me that when he enlisted in WWII in 1941 (I think), that all the recruits were issued broomsticks for initial basic training, then wood rifle stocks without actions. He said they didn’t issue him a real working rifle until they put him on the ship to Normandy, and they did their live fire training on the troop transport ship in route. Then dumped on the beach.
Don’t know how true this is, Dad could tell a story, but that’s what he said.
It would also not bother me if you had to be trained quite a bit more to carry one concealed in public.
Again, state the number of lives that will be saved by this investment. It might sound like a good idea, but if we are going to spend millions of dollars, I want to know how big of a problem this is… It sounds like we are coming up with a solution before we have even identified what the problem is. I want to see some analysis done with the following questions answered:
How many lives are taken because of gun accidents?
Where is there a statistical analysis that shows that “gun training” actually saves lives? You would want to see a group of “untrained” versus “trained” operator statistics. What is the per capita death of each group, and when you get that delta, multiply it times the number in question #1 to get potential lives saved.
Again, if we are talking like 15 lives here, is this something we need to spend MILLIONS of dollars on, or do we just let Darwin do his thing?
Anyway, I don’t have the answers, but before I come up with solutions, I like to know that we actually have a problem we are trying to solve for…
Next thing you know, the government will have us all holding up ice cubes in the air to try to stop global warming…
In reality, I’m not going to take the time to find all these statistics you’re demanding, however I guess my general idea would be a system based on Switzerland. Heavy gun ownership, low gun violence rate. Gun training is required, shooting sports are everywhere. Now, go google me up some stats
In reality, I’m not going to take the time to find all these statistics you’re demanding, however I guess my general idea would be a system based on Switzerland. Heavy gun ownership, low gun violence rate. Gun training is required, shooting sports are everywhere. Now, go google me up some stats
Just because they have training doesn't mean that's the reason why gun incidents are low. One day, the world is going to understand that gun violence has a lot more to do about the culture of the country than about the guns. I wonder how many people in Switzerland are taking selfies with a Glock 17 pointed at the mirror with the caption, "Thug Life" on their facebook status.
And by the way, I don’t need to find the statistics. I’m not the one suggesting to put new laws on the books that will cost us millions of dollars. I think if you are going to spend that kind of taxpayer money, then you should at least be burned with showing that it’s a good idea. Something a little better than a “gut feeling”…
It’s a different gun culture, includes the training, responsibility, etc.
I’m not a lawmaker, I’m allowed to suggest things. On a fishing forum. Will get back to you with due diligence.
Sure, you can suggest anything you want. But when you are suggesting new legislation built on “gut feeling”, then someone is going to call it out. That’s actually the problem with the government. Coming up with a “solution” before they have an actual problem. It’s just bad business man!!! I’m just trying to make you a better person
quote:It's a different gun culture, includes the training, responsibility, etc.
NO, it’s a different culture. People constantly try to compare other cultures to the U.S. which generally won’t work simply because we are such a different culture compared to others.
“Apathy is the Glove into Which Evil Slips It’s Hand”, but really, who cares?
It’s a different gun culture, includes the training, responsibility, etc.
I’m not a lawmaker, I’m allowed to suggest things. On a fishing forum. Will get back to you with due diligence.
Sure, you can suggest anything you want. But when you are suggesting new legislation built on “gut feeling”, then someone is going to call it out. That’s actually the problem with the government. Coming up with a “solution” before they have an actual problem. It’s just bad business man!!! I’m just trying to make you a better person
I don’t have the internet viagra to argue to that extent anymore. You and GC going 10-15 pages just isn’t for me at this juncture. I like to just throw things out there for discussion occasionally. It really doesn’t bother me that I haven’t looked up statistics to back up every single opinion I have. If that’s the way we play from now on, then consider yourself the winner in every argument here on out
Show me statistics that gun training will not reduce gun violence if you’re so stat happy.
quote:It's a different gun culture, includes the training, responsibility, etc.
NO, it’s a different culture. People constantly try to compare other cultures to the U.S. which generally won’t work simply because we are such a different culture compared to others.
“Apathy is the Glove into Which Evil Slips It’s Hand”, but really, who cares?
Both are gun happy, one has less crime, one has more crime. It’s worth investigating.
