Hillary for prison 2016

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Your just being a pain in the ass now. The guns used in the terrorist attack were acquired illegally by the terrorist . Perhaps you would like to make the gun manufacture liable ? Whatever you do don't put the blame where it belongs .
The real fix is in making sure people like them do not get here I'm the first place .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, they were all bought legally from licensed dealers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ef3_story.html

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.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

No, they were all bought legally from licensed dealers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ef3_story.html

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.

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

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

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.

[buckman]

[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

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by buckman

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

[spence]

[QUOTE=buckman;1100020]

Originally Posted by spence

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?

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by spence

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.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

"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?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

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

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

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.

[Slipknot]

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.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

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

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by spence

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?....

[spence]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

"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...

[Slipknot]

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