Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

The estimates on Licensed Dealers and "private sales" varies, but it would appear that 65-70% of gun purchasers are through retail stores and the remainder are "private sale" transactions between individuals. The latter are not subject to Federal background checks, but may be subject to state laws on the issue (the Supreme Court hasn't stepped in and told states they can't do it -- heh).

So, if you're buying an assault rifle or M16 from Avon Barksdale, you should be free and clear of a background check and I'd assume the serial numbers are professionally removed. If you're buying a gun from Walmart...present your ID, wait 30 seconds...pay the man.

[Mike]

So shotgun purchases go through a federal background check despite the weapon not requiring registration? I think you're referring to the federal system for handgun purchases.

[iam416]

So shotgun purchases go through a federal background check despite the weapon not requiring registration? I think you're referring to the federal system for handgun purchases.

It's any firearm. After reading through several sites, any firearm sale is subject to the Federal check -- if it's from a licensed dealer.

[iam416]

It applies to all firearms. Firearms are defined in the Code of Fed. Regulations as:

Any weapon, including a starter gun, which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or any destructive device; but the term shall not include an antique firearm. In the case of a licensed collector, the term shall mean only curios and relics.

So, you know, a Kentucky long rifle from 1830 is excluded, but a 12-gauge from 2015 is not.

[iam416]

Ok, I've quoted the CFR. We all lose. You can GFY, Mike, for instigating that.

I've heard there are people in this world who actually like Tabasco hot sauce? I've also heard there are people in this world without a shred of good taste. I assume the Ven diagram for these two classes is a perfect overlay.

[entropy]

Trump call Hilary the devil:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/devil-trump-sanders-clinton-226544

Dat woman, she da Debil!

First thing Trump has said that made sense...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[froot loops]

There is always a chance that there could be fraud in voting, but if there was, there would be cases being tried. It would be the best run conspiracy of all time if you had even 1 percent fraudulent votes and no criminal cases.

[entropy]

Ha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iam416]

There is always a chance that there could be fraud in voting, but if there was, there would be cases being tried.

I'm not sure that logic is particularly airtight. I mean, the fraud would occur in areas controlled by the party doing the fraud. The party would necessarily control the Prosector's office. Further, if the party also held the Presidency, they'd also control the DOJ.

I mean right now Courts are finding southern states have racial animus because of actions those states took as recently as 1960, 1964, etc. There's a pretty strong case that in 1960 Chicago put JFK in office. Nixon won downstate, but JFK dominated the urban vote and cemetery vote. And having lived in Cleveland and been registered 5 times, it doesn't stretch my imagination to conclude that there is some fraud about.

Let me put your logic to the test. Look, I know AAs scream about police brutality, but if there really was as much police brutality as they say, then there would be lots of prosecutions of cops.

In any event, I'm still unclear about the hardship associated with presenting one of numerous acceptable forms of ID to confirm that you are the person on the voting roll especially given early voting and expansive absentee options.

I'm assuming that those against those laws don't think there should be any confirmation.

[iam416]

ACORN's efforts: https://ballotpedia.org/ACORN_and_vo...stration_fraud

Sampling of Voting Fraud cases: http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/20...-15-Merged.pdf

All in all, I agree that it's a red herring argument. It's minimal at worst. That said, I don't quite embrace the outrage of requiring some sort of identification.

[iam416]

My favorite from the Heritage sampling is the dude from Cleveland who filled out over 100 false registrations in the names like Mary Poppins, Michael Jackson, etc. in exchange for drugs, then turned them over to the NAACP who then submitted them to the Cuyahoga Board of Elections.

And that is probably why I was registered to vote some many times. Of course, looking at some of the sentences for submitted multiple absentee ballots, I'm sure glad I only voted once!

A close second is a county election in Kentucky that had to be thrown out because votes were being out and out bought.

[Hannibal]

Trump is going to get whipped, DSL. The Ds ran a far better convention, one that was damn near Reagan-esque in its City on the Hill theme.

It was an Orwellian masterpiece. The parents of a dead soldier actually spoke in favor of the candidate who voted for possibly the most unpopular war in our history! It was less than a decade ago that the parents of dead soldiers were hounding George W. and screeching for his impeachment at the top of their lungs. They used their son as an example of Muslim patriotism even though, as Talent pointed out, Muslims have participated in the war on terror at a paltry rate (well below their percentage of the general population). The Democrats painted a rosy picture of the country at a time when a huge majority of the country thinks that the country is on the wrong track. Remember when Bush I tried to do this and everyone's response was about what a clueless, out of touch idiot he was? And they didn't even convince people that the country is on the right track or try and blame Republicans for the problems! They were just successful because optimism = good (?) They waved around the American flag despite the Democrat party being the traditional home of the flag burners; slightly less than 50% of the party voted for an unapologetically pro-USSR Socialist.

Holy shit I wish that the Republicans could pull that off. Even in their best years they can't. And obviously this year's wasn't their best.

[froot loops]

Part of the problem with NC voter ID law was it cut down the early voting. The champion of the law testified to the general assembly in 2013 that the a could help Republicans win elections and that was the reason for the photo ID requirement.

[Mike]

It's any firearm. After reading through several sites, any firearm sale is subject to the Federal check -- if it's from a licensed dealer.

Ah. I stand corrected. I haven't purchased a firearm since it went into effect in '98. But rifles and shotguns are not required to be registered, at least in Michigan.

[iam416]

Part of the problem with NC voter ID law was it cut down the early voting. The champion of the law testified to the general assembly in 2013 that the a could help Republicans win elections and that was the reason for the photo ID requirement.

Yeah, I think if you're going to have an ID requirement you need substantial early voting. We have that in Ohio, I think. I mean, I can get an absentee ballot really easily and vote from home if I want to. Or show up and vote. I'm all for maximum enfranchisement, but I don't particularly sympathize with the arguments against confirmation requirements.

But, as noted, it's not a particularly big problem, so I'll survive either way.

As for helping parties win, Virginia has the opposite going where the Governor tried enfranchise tons of reliable D voters and the State Supreme Court said it was an illegal executive action.