Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 05-05-2016, 06:07 PM   #181
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
Is there something wrong with you? The weapons were purchased by Enrique Marquez. He then lent them to the shooters. That is illegal ,and he faces multiple charges for it .
A lot of illegally held guns were one time purchased legally..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Reread.
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 06:19 PM   #182
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
[QUOTE=spence;1100019]Reread.[/QUOTE

Reading that crap article from the Post was painful enough once but I read it again . It never mentions that the "legally "purchased fire arms used in the killings were not purchased by the shooters . It's more of an anti-gun article then a truthful one . I expected nothing else
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 06:19 PM   #183
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
No, they were all bought legally from licensed dealers.

I don't think that's really even that important part of the issue though...the question is the threshold for the feds to deny rights under current law without sufficient evidence there's a clear threat to public safety.

Huh? is this a question? can you form this into a sentence or put a verb in so we can comprehend what you are saying?



"There is no limit on the amount of ammunition that U.S. citizens can buy and keep in their homes; " from your link https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ef3_story.html
Is FALSE information and simply not true, there is a limit, there might not be for all states, but here in the People's Republic of Mass. there is. These journalists should get things correct if they want to be taken seriously instead of trying to put fear into their articles.

"A government that does not trust it's law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust" James Madison

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Regan
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 06:21 PM   #184
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post

Reading that crap article from the Post was painful enough once but I read it again . It never mentions that the "legally "purchased fire arms used in the killings were not purchased by the shooters . It's more of an anti-gun article then a truthful one . I expected nothing else
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yep

just more dividing the country, anti gun bull

"A government that does not trust it's law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust" James Madison

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Regan
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 06:39 PM   #185
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
[QUOTE=buckman;1100020]
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Reread.[/QUOTE

Reading that crap article from the Post was painful enough once but I read it again . It never mentions that the "legally "purchased fire arms used in the killings were not purchased by the shooters . It's more of an anti-gun article then a truthful one . I expected nothing else
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Actually it does, you didn't read it did you?
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 06:46 PM   #186
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot View Post
"There is no limit on the amount of ammunition that U.S. citizens can buy and keep in their homes; " from your link https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ef3_story.html
Is FALSE information and simply not true, there is a limit, there might not be for all states, but here in the People's Republic of Mass. there is. These journalists should get things correct if they want to be taken seriously instead of trying to put fear into their articles.
What is the legal ammo possession limit in MA?
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 07:39 PM   #187
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
What is the legal ammo possession limit in MA?
I don't think there is a limit .
You always want to make sure you have one more than you need and you never know how many you'll need .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 07:39 PM   #188
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
I don't think there is a limit .
You always want to make sure you have one more than you need and you never know how many you'll need .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Slip doesn't agree.
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 07:45 PM   #189
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,038
Oh I agree with buckman
but as far as the law states,

here we are allowed 10,000 rounds of rimfire and 10,000 rounds of centerfire
if you are a reloader and have a need for a chitload of primers because they are sold in large quantity, then you can get a permit at your fire dept. for a few bucks and can have I think more than twice that amount of ammo. I am sure it is online at massgov someplace

Some people don't realize there is a limit, like reporters obviously.

"A government that does not trust it's law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust" James Madison

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Regan
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 08:04 PM   #190
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot View Post
Oh I agree with buckman
but as far as the law states,

here we are allowed 10,000 rounds of rimfire and 10,000 rounds of centerfire
if you are a reloader and have a need for a chitload of primers because they are sold in large quantity, then you can get a permit at your fire dept. for a few bucks and can have I think more than twice that amount of ammo. I am sure it is online at massgov someplace

Some people don't realize there is a limit, like reporters obviously.
Well I finally learned something from this thread .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 09:46 PM   #191
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Sure, Syed Rizwan Farook.
You misread my question. Read it again, in the proper context. Amazing that someone who is as contextually attuned to and driven by CONTEXT would miss the context in which I asked my question:

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
but I wouldn't want a terrorist to be denied their Second Amendments Rights either.
Detbuch reply: Do you have any evidence of this?

The context was your "want." Do you have any evidence that you wouldn't want a terrorist to be denied their Second Amendment rights?

I was yanking your chain regarding your usual "do you have any evidence of this" type of rebuttal of someone's opinion of a politician formed and based on obviously circumstantial occurrences of past speeches, position papers, legislation, and repetitive talking points.

Can you provide any "evidence," circumstantial or positive, that you wouldn't want a terrorist to be denied their Second Amendment right to bear arms?

Silly question? It was meant to be as silly as your non sequiturs or often straw man statements, and then insisting on "evidence" for someone else's opinions.

On the other hand, you were attempting what you think is clarity when you said: "I don't think that's really even that important part of the issue though...the question is the threshold for the feds to deny rights under current law without sufficient evidence there's a clear threat to public safety."

To begin with, what you think is clearly the question is muddled again by your situational ethics. When it suited you, you backed up Nebe's assertion that your chances of being killed by a terror attack were very rare. But it suits you in this thread to posit that there's a clear threat to public safety if the feds threshold to deny rights is not raised (made sufficient) in order, among other things, to " Keep guns out of the hands of terrorists."

But what is clear to me, not only in this assertion by you, but in consistently similar statements by you in many other posts, is that the federal government simply doesn't have enough authority over the individuals in this country. Any occurrence which you conveniently deemed rare in another instance, now conveniently becomes a threat to public safety and should be cause to give the federal government the power to deny rights. So any contrived crisis must not be wasted if it can be used to expand the federal government's scope of power.

The federal government actually does have within its original constitutional scope of power the ability to severely limit the immigration of any category of groups into this country. But applying that power in order to mitigate the "threat to public safety" is not acceptable to you, or other Progressives who ply such bromides as "that is not us." It clearly has been us over most of our history, but Progressives, among the arsenal of anti-American and Constitution busting tactics, have in the importation of massive numbers of immigrants who provide no special qualities or abilities to strengthen what were actually once considered American values, found another way of actually watering down those values while at the same time creating a large populace of allies who will add to and strengthen the Progressive trajectory of central government's intrusion into every aspect of our lives.

I do not have actual "evidence" that you really do wish to limit our once unalienable rights and making those rights government rights rather than individual rights. But it just seems, clearly, that you do.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 11:41 AM   #192
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
http://secondnexus.com/politics-and-...74c1490547666e
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 12:25 PM   #193
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
http://secondnexus.com/politics-and-...74c1490547666e
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Interesting . . . no evidence that she intentionally or willingly broke the law. Does that mean she did, but she just didn't know that she did?

Wikipedia:
Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content.

But in Hillary's case, ignorance is merely bliss. Is being unaware that one is breaking a law a positive qualification for the reputedly highest office in the land? Is the lack of proper procedure which leads to the unintentional breaking of a federal law a qualification for the chief law enforcer of the land?
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 05:34 PM   #194
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot View Post
"There is no limit on the amount of ammunition that U.S. citizens can buy and keep in their homes;


Is FALSE information and simply not true, there is a limit, there might not be for all states, but here in the People's Republic of Mass. there is. These journalists should get things correct if they want to be taken seriously instead of trying to put fear into their articles.
So there's no federal law, but Massachusetts -- perhaps the most liberal state in the nation -- caps you at a measly 20,000 rounds? The government tyranny here is beyond reproach!

Buck, what would you estimate as the most ammo you've ever had at one time?

This nitpick also doesn't do anything to dismiss the fact the weapons were all purchased legally at a FLL. This has been reported many times...
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 05:39 PM   #195
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Interesting . . . no evidence that she intentionally or willingly broke the law. Does that mean she did, but she just didn't know that she did?

Wikipedia:
Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content.

But in Hillary's case, ignorance is merely bliss. Is being unaware that one is breaking a law a positive qualification for the reputedly highest office in the land? Is the lack of proper procedure which leads to the unintentional breaking of a federal law a qualification for the chief law enforcer of the land?
You're presuming a law was broken, this is still just speculation. I read a legal paper some months ago though that was very specific that intent is everything in this cases. If not they'd have to indict most of the CIA and DoD.
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 05:41 PM   #196
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,038
so what?

he also entered the country legally
had a job
but somewhere along the line was radicalized into the murderer he was

why is it important that the weapons were at some point in their existence purchased at an FFL?

Guns don't kill people, people do
Guns are inanimate objects just like a knife or a car
Why is everything a gun control issue?

because it is about control

I am not on the side of giving up control, I enjoy freedom

"A government that does not trust it's law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust" James Madison

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Regan
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 08:05 PM   #197
ecduzitgood
time to go
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,318
Romanian Hacker 'Guccifer' Just Gave Bernie Sanders the Democratic Nomination http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/9856196
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
ecduzitgood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 08:21 PM   #198
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecduzitgood View Post
Romanian Hacker 'Guccifer' Just Gave Bernie Sanders the Democratic Nomination http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/9856196
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Yet the FBI found no evidence, he can't provide any evidence and he's regarded as 3rd rate hack...

He's just making crap up because he's in jail.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 08:28 PM   #199
Fly Rod
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Fly Rod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
What is the legal ammo possession limit in MA?
here is what I or anyone can store without a special permit if ya have a gun permit


•Not more than 10,000 rounds of rimfire ammunition
•Not more than 10,000 rounds of centerfire rifle/pistol ammunition
•Not more than 5,000 rounds of shotgun ammunition
•Not more than 1000 primers
•Not more than 16 pounds of smokeless powder
•Not more than 2 pounds of black powder

With a local permit from your local fire department

•Up to 30,000 rounds of rimfire ammunition*
•Up to 50,000 rounds of centerfire rifle/pistol ammunition*
•Up to 50,000 rounds of shotgun ammunition*
•Up to 10,000 primers
•Not more than 48 pounds of smokeless powder
•Not more than 5 pounds of black powder

So what is your point spence?....

"When its not about money,it's all about money."...
Fly Rod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 08:30 PM   #200
ecduzitgood
time to go
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Yet the FBI found no evidence, he can't provide any evidence and he's regarded as 3rd rate hack...

He's just making crap up because he's in jail.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I haven't heard the FBI say anything yet.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
ecduzitgood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 08:39 PM   #201
Fly Rod
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Fly Rod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
spence, plus a fellon can not legally possess a firearm in mass, but yet they can have a musket.......no sense at all....

"When its not about money,it's all about money."...
Fly Rod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 06:37 PM   #202
ecduzitgood
time to go
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,318
https://gma.yahoo.com/emails-hillary...205506182.html
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
ecduzitgood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 08:03 PM   #203
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecduzitgood View Post
https://gma.yahoo.com/emails-hillary...205506182.html
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Old news.
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 09:27 PM   #204
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,038
No it's not old news unless you call tonight's news old.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:48 AM   #205
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot View Post
No it's not old news unless you call tonight's news old.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This was reported in December by Politico.
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 09:33 AM   #206
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Old news.
Oldies but goodies.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 03:29 PM   #207
ecduzitgood
time to go
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,318
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016...emails-hacked/

Iran probably has them also.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
ecduzitgood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2016, 04:46 PM   #208
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecduzitgood View Post
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016...emails-hacked/

Iran probably has them also.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
That email cited in the story came from the known hack of Sidney Bluemthal's server...not Clinton's. It was his email sent to her.

You're reading made up news.
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2016, 06:20 PM   #209
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
That email cited in the story came from the known hack of Sidney Bluemthal's server...not Clinton's. It was his email sent to her.

You're reading made up news.
Oh that makes it better
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2016, 06:29 PM   #210
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
Oh that makes it better
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
It makes it irrelevant.
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com