HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Stevie Wonder says he wil...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:16 PM

Stevie Wonder says he will go buy a gun to show the ridiculousness of the laws!!

That's awesome. Stevie Wonder was just interviewed by Piers Morgan at the inaguration. He said he told a friend, hey why don't you take me to the gun store and i'll buy a gun so people can see how easy it is.

Thanks Stevie for your music, your patriotism, and mostly your sense of humor.

147 replies, 10550 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 147 replies Author Time Post
Reply Stevie Wonder says he will go buy a gun to show the ridiculousness of the laws!! (Original post)
okaawhatever Jan 2013 OP
Systematic Chaos Jan 2013 #1
muntrv Jan 2013 #2
slackmaster Jan 2013 #15
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #18
slackmaster Jan 2013 #20
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #24
slackmaster Jan 2013 #26
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #27
slackmaster Jan 2013 #30
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #32
slackmaster Jan 2013 #33
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #42
Kennah Jan 2013 #111
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #131
Kennah Jan 2013 #142
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #143
williamc1967txlib Jan 2013 #55
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #61
slackmaster Jan 2013 #62
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #63
slackmaster Jan 2013 #64
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #65
slackmaster Jan 2013 #66
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #67
slackmaster Jan 2013 #81
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #118
slackmaster Jan 2013 #121
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #122
Benton D Struckcheon Jan 2013 #134
slackmaster Jan 2013 #136
Benton D Struckcheon Jan 2013 #140
LeftInTX Jan 2013 #3
ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #25
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #68
hack89 Jan 2013 #4
okaawhatever Jan 2013 #5
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #56
RebelOne Jan 2013 #80
yurbud Jan 2013 #6
yurbud Jan 2013 #7
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #10
yurbud Jan 2013 #11
the devil Jan 2013 #49
yurbud Jan 2013 #54
BigAnth Jan 2013 #115
MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #8
slackmaster Jan 2013 #9
slackmaster Jan 2013 #12
okaawhatever Jan 2013 #19
slackmaster Jan 2013 #21
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #73
obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #75
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #78
obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #137
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #139
slackmaster Jan 2013 #79
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #86
slackmaster Jan 2013 #87
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #94
slackmaster Jan 2013 #95
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #100
slackmaster Jan 2013 #103
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #107
slackmaster Jan 2013 #110
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #112
slackmaster Jan 2013 #113
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #116
DevonRex Jan 2013 #88
slackmaster Jan 2013 #89
DevonRex Jan 2013 #93
obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #138
krispos42 Jan 2013 #13
slackmaster Jan 2013 #14
krispos42 Jan 2013 #36
slackmaster Jan 2013 #38
krispos42 Jan 2013 #45
freshwest Jan 2013 #16
slackmaster Jan 2013 #17
pnwmom Jan 2013 #39
slackmaster Jan 2013 #43
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #70
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #69
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #74
slackmaster Jan 2013 #82
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #91
slackmaster Jan 2013 #92
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #96
slackmaster Jan 2013 #98
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #104
Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #102
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #85
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #90
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #101
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #117
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #120
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #123
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #124
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #128
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #130
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #132
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #133
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #135
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #144
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #145
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #146
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #147
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #22
babylonsister Jan 2013 #23
proud2BlibKansan Jan 2013 #28
OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #29
slackmaster Jan 2013 #31
OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #41
slackmaster Jan 2013 #44
Jarhead1775 Jan 2013 #48
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #71
snooper2 Jan 2013 #59
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #77
slackmaster Jan 2013 #83
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #119
slackmaster Jan 2013 #125
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #129
Ashgrey77 Jan 2013 #127
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #126
stuntcat Jan 2013 #34
nolabels Jan 2013 #35
another_liberal Jan 2013 #37
slackmaster Jan 2013 #40
another_liberal Jan 2013 #47
Samantha Jan 2013 #46
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #50
xoom Jan 2013 #51
okaawhatever Jan 2013 #52
slackmaster Jan 2013 #58
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #72
Brother Buzz Jan 2013 #53
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #57
slackmaster Jan 2013 #60
DeSwiss Jan 2013 #76
Paladin Jan 2013 #84
valerief Jan 2013 #106
valerief Jan 2013 #97
slackmaster Jan 2013 #99
duffyduff Jan 2013 #105
ecstatic Jan 2013 #108
Historic NY Jan 2013 #109
tblue37 Jan 2013 #114
Generic Brad Jan 2013 #141

Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:18 PM

1. I had to rec this just for Stevie's music. He made my early years just a bit more bearable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:30 PM

2. Please let there be video of Stevie making his purchase!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muntrv (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:16 PM

15. It would be a long video - At least 20 minutes for actually buying the gun plus another segment...

 

...in which he physically takes possession of it at least 10 days later.

Probably way too dull for most peoples' attention spans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #15)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:31 PM

18. Not at a gun show. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #18)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:36 PM

20. No, because he lives in California it would be exactly the same at a gun show.

 



ETA I sincerely hope he goes through with it. He may be in for a few surprises.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #20)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:39 PM

24. How about next door in Nevada?...

And back at you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #24)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:40 PM

26. A California resident cannot legally buy a gun in any other state...

 

...unless he or she has a Federal Firearms License.

If his point is to show how "easy" it is to buy a gun in California, he's in for a few surprises. It's actually a whole lot easier to buy a car here than to buy a gun, if you have cash to pay for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #26)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:44 PM

27. I didn't know that...

but it does show that we need a country wide standard, in both gun sales and elections

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #27)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:45 PM

30. I think the laws in California are stricter than they need to be. Some of them seem to be there...

 

...just to make it a hassle to buy a firearm rather than advancing the cause of public safety.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #30)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:48 PM

32. I think we all can agree, though...

that all firearms sales require a background check. That, and toughen the penalties on black marketing of guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #32)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:50 PM

33. Yes, in fact I do agree on background checks on all sales. The present system doesn't allow it.

 

The national background check system, called NICS, is available only to gun dealers. Collectors and plain old people who have an old gun to sell can't use it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #33)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:58 PM

42. Make it a requirement for gun dealers...

To do these checks or lose their license. Of course, a fee should be charged to the sellers to cover the dealers cost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #42)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 02:34 PM

111. It is already the law for gun dealers to run checks, whether it's at a gun show or elsewhere

A gun dealer is subject to federal laws, and any applicable state laws, whether they sell at their shop, over the Internet (which is a very prolonged event when the gun crosses state lines), over their kitchen table, or at a gunshow.

Sidenote: Before Ebay banned firearms from their site, back in 1998, I bought a rifle over Ebay. Must have taken close to 2 months to get the gun. Seller had to transfer it to his FFL (Federal Firearms Licensee) there in his home state, the FFL transferred it to my local FFL, then the FFL transferred it to me.

I think the key agenda item, that has a lot of widespread support including RW Governors and Legislators, is background checks on private sales. People get all hung up on gun shows, but it's been my experience that 90% or more of sellers at gun shows are licensed dealers. However, if one focuses on gun shows, it ignores the reality that private sales can occur ANYWHERE without a background check, unless there is state law forbidding it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #111)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 06:55 PM

131. What I mean is that...

if two private individuals decide to make a deal, the have to go to a licensed dealer to do the background check before the transaction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #131)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:34 PM

142. I'm good with that

The State of Maryland requires just such a check on private sales of handguns, but one can also go to any Maryland State Police barracks, and they will perform the background check.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #142)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:55 PM

143. That is probably a better idea...

than using dealers. The cops should already be set up for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #26)


Response to slackmaster (Reply #26)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:51 AM

61. nobody has to even show an ID in AZ, so...a cali resident can go next door or to craigslist

or, to rephrase, a cali resident can get a gun in the majority of states without showing ID.

and yes, craigslist in CA has rules about guns- but someone selling a (legal) $500 dollar piece of an ar-15 online CERTAINLY knows where to get the rest of the gun, and will tell you in a parking lot.

there are probably plenty of idiots who wouldn't even recognize stevie, too. or notice his lack of sight.

plus, he was in DC, so, a short cab ride-

Virginia A permit is not required to purchase a firearm. A permit issued by a circuit court is needed to carry a concealed handgun.

people in parking lots don't check ID.

stevie could get one in less than 12 hours even in Cali.
because the laws aren't good enough even in cali

Oregon Oregon does not require a permit to purchase firearms but does require a license to carry a concealed weapon.

Nevada State law does not require a permit to purchase firearms. A permit is required to carry a concealed firearm.

Arizona Arizona does not require a permit to purchase firearms. Carrying a concealed weapon requires a permit.

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/17/states-take-action/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #61)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:59 AM

62. Why would he go all the way to Idaho or Arizona to make an illegal purchase, when he could easily...

 

...do the same thing in any neighborhood in the Los Angeles area? I'm sure you could find a criminal willing to sell you a black market gun anywhere from Whittier to Santa Monica or Beverly Hills.

You're talking about private-party sales of used firearms. Gun dealers in all states have to obey not only federal laws, but applicable laws of every state. No person can legally buy a handgun from anyone in other than his or her state of residence.

Some states allow residents of adjacent states to purchase rifles or shotguns. However, both states have to allow the transaction, and California does not.

stevie could get one in less than 12 hours even in Cali.
because the laws aren't good enough even in cali


What would you change in existing California law to make it "good enough?" We already have full registration of handguns, universal background checks on all transfers, extraordinary requirements for proof of residence, proof of safe handling, safe storage, and a waiting period.

How hard would you make it for a person to exercise the right to acquire a weapon?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #62)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:37 AM

63. you should have said 'a cali resident can buy a gun in MANY other states'

“In Florida, you can go ahead and buy, sell, and trade anything—as long as it’s not an illegal weapon,” he said. “You can just find somebody or something that you like, work out a deal with him, meet them in a local parking lot, do a third-grade trade with some money and a gun. Nothing else needed.” Alaska, Arizona, and Vermont are similarly lenient when it comes to these types of transactions.
http://www.vice.com/read/guns-in-the-sun-004469-v19n12

one might go to AZ to get a bigger, nastier gun cheaper, for instance.

gun dealers obey ffl? not on this planet:
In fact, there are a number of sources that allow guns to fall into the wrong hands, with gun thefts at the bottom of the list. Wachtel says one of the most common ways criminals get guns is through straw purchase sales. A straw purchase occurs when someone who may not legally acquire a firearm, or who wants to do so anonymously, has a companion buy it on their behalf. According to a 1994 ATF study on "Sources of Crime Guns in Southern California," many straw purchases are conducted in an openly "suggestive" manner where two people walk into a gun store, one selects a firearm, and then the other uses identification for the purchase and pays for the gun. Or, several underage people walk into a store and an adult with them makes the purchases. Both of these are illegal activities.

The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. Several recent reports back up Wachtel's own studies about this, and make the case that illegal activity by those licensed to sell guns, known as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), is a huge source of crime guns and greatly surpasses the sale of guns stolen from John Q. Citizen. Like bank robbers, who are interested in banks, gun traffickers are interested in FFLs because that's where the guns are. This is why FFLs are a large source of illegal guns for traffickers, who ultimately wind up selling the guns on the street.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html

that ^^^ is probably because the batf still fills out forms BY HAND, thanks to the NRA, among other things.

improvements-

While federal background checks are required to buy a gun from a licensed dealer, the law does not cover sales at gun shows or among private sellers.

The letter was posted on the agency's website hours after President Barack Obama asked Congress to close legal loopholes that allow about 40 percent of gun sales to be done without background checks.
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_22386626/atf-urges-background-checks-private-gun-sales?source=pkg

***

SB 249 is dead. And that’s great news for Second Amendment advocates in the state of California.

The bill, introduced by State Senator Leland Yee, sought to make California’s gun control laws more restrictive by prohibiting semi-automatic firearms with “easily changeable magazines.”
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/21/shocker-gun-laws-fail-to-pass-in-california/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #63)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:42 AM

64. Because the point is what can and cannot be done LEGALLY, which is the real topic of this thread.

 

While federal background checks are required to buy a gun from a licensed dealer, the law does not cover sales at gun shows or among private sellers.

You've contradicted yourself here. If you buy a gun at a gun show from a licensed dealer, a background check is required. If you edit out "at gun shows or" then your sentence would be correct, but only for federal law.

Private-party transfers are regulated in California, and Stevie Wonder would be limited to making a purchase in the state if he wishes to stay in compliance with the law, so as to point out its ridiculousness. You don't point out ridiculousness of the law by breaking it - You show its ridiculousness by OBEYING it.

SB 249 is dead. And that’s great news for Second Amendment advocates in the state of California.

The bill, introduced by State Senator Leland Yee, sought to make California’s gun control laws more restrictive by prohibiting semi-automatic firearms with “easily changeable magazines.”
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/21/shocker-gun-laws-fail-to-pass-in-california/


Bullet-button type rifles can have their magazines unloaded with a simple tool such as a round of ammunition. That has been a standard way of unloading firearms for well over 100 years. For safety, there MUST be an expedient way of removing live rounds from a firearm without cycling them through the chamber, which presents a risk of an unintended discharge.

SB 249 would have resulted in weapons that lack this basic safety feature. It was a stupid bill and deserved to fail. Senator Yee doesn't have a clue what he's doing. That's why his bill got shut down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #64)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 11:23 AM

65. yes, the point is what can be done legally is bad enough to allow 40% of sales illegally

it doesn't really say where he's going to go buy the gun in the OP- i'm assuming at the inauguration means DC.
not important.

look at the chart (2nd link) and tell me gun laws even start to approach sanity. CA and NY are the only states that come close.

and Stevie could still walk into a store and buy one- is there a law against blind people having guns?

the PBS link is not a contradiction-

Unfortunately, current federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which account for just 60% of all gun sales in the United States. A loophole in the law allows individuals not “engaged in the business” of selling firearms to sell guns without a license—and without processing any paperwork. That means that two out of every five guns sold in the United States change hands without a background check.

Though commonly referred to as the “Gun Show Loophole,” the “private sales” described above include guns sold at gun shows, through classified newspaper ads, the Internet, and between individuals virtually anywhere.
http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/gun-show-loophole

***

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/17/states-take-action/

***

so if the guy's CA law sucked they should make a better one, like in NY- 7 round mags. period. buyback all the bigger ones. no reason for them at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #65)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 11:29 AM

66. The context of the discussion is what can be done legally in California by a California resident.

 

...and Stevie could still walk into a store and buy one- is there a law against blind people having guns?

He owns cars. Why shouldn't he be able to buy guns as well?

BTW, I suspect that if he actually does try to buy a gun in a gun store in California, he's going to have a hard time providing adequate proof of residence. Do you think he has a state-issued ID and two other documents establishing residence, all in his real legal name? I doubt it. Wealthy people typically have their assets all vested in the name of an LLC or trust. The probability that he has a gas and electric bill in his real name is slim to none.

so if the guy's CA law sucked they should make a better one, like in NY- 7 round mags. period. buyback all the bigger ones. no reason for them at all.

Why do police officers in California carry bigger ones?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #66)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:25 PM

67. the point is it would only be slightly harder for him in CA than VA

you are making less sense than before

rich people can't buy guns in CA?

this is one place the guns/cars thing is interesting-

i'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that Mr. Wonder doesn't have a CA driver's license. i believe there is a chart you have to read.

resisdence? wha? i'm also going to guess he has a state ID, to buy booze and get into clubs. there are people who have never heard of him, sadly enough.

he PROBABLY has a birth certificate and SS# too. (i'm sure he has connections on the birth cert. thing. that was a joke)

i think his point was, he'd have to get a friend to drive him to a wal-mart in almost any state, where he could buy a gun easily.

blind people COLLECT GUNS. they shoot in the paralympics.

they maybe should be allowed to use them in self defense IN THEIR HOMES, but that is approaching insanity.

i think the answer to why cops have bigger guns is fairly self-explanatory. like protecting themselves and others.

from the fact that there are way too many guns

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #67)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:16 PM

81. Buying a firearm in California is more than twice as much hassle as it is in Virginia.

 

rich people can't buy guns in CA?

A firearm dealer has told me that he has had to deny sales to people because they couldn't produce the documents required to prove residence in the state.

i think his point was, he'd have to get a friend to drive him to a wal-mart in almost any state, where he could buy a gun easily.

If that was his point, he was mistaken.

i think the answer to why cops have bigger guns is fairly self-explanatory. like protecting themselves and others.

Many people who are not police officers own firearms for defense of themselves and their families.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #81)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:03 PM

118. twice as much as zero is still zero

see#117

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #118)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:07 PM

121. You are very persistent in conflating legal transactions with unlawful ones

 

The people who are doing unlawful transactions will continue to do so as long as the laws are not effectively enforced.

Adding more layers of laws won't change that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #121)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:11 PM

122. you're good at ignoring everything i post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022225060

explain ^^^ that.

making laws that work instead of BS nra-bribed loophole crap will certainly work

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #81)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 08:15 PM

134. That last sets my teeth on edge.

Cops SHOULD ABSOLUTELY have better arms. Anyone who thinks otherwise wants to turn this country into another Somalia.
You can't have a nation of laws if anyone can be better armed than law enforcement. It's not self-explanatory; it's self-evident. Well, to anyone but someone in the grip of the NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Benton D Struckcheon (Reply #134)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 08:53 PM

136. I think anyone who thinks the police must necessarily be better armed than the general public...

 

...wants to turn this country into literally a police state.

The self-defense needs of non-police are just as important as the self-defense needs of police, unless the purpose of police is to control the general public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #136)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:14 PM

140. No, it's just common sense.

1. Otherwise you put the police in an arms race they can't win. I don't know how you come up with the idea that's a good thing.

2. Like it or not, and I get the feeling you guys don't, this is a legitimately elected republic, from the President all the way down to your local mayor and sheriff. The vast majority of the general public wants to see that legitimate government able to enforce the laws it promulgates. This really ain't Somalia, you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:37 PM

3. Wonder what the response would be if he shows up at a shooting range?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftInTX (Reply #3)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:40 PM

25. Hehe. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftInTX (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:35 PM

68. Someone would probably help him.

ADA applies to gun ranges too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:39 PM

4. Target shooting for blind people is a Paralympic event

SH1 – Shooters able to support a gun without a stand
SH2 – Shooters requiring a gun support to shoot
SH3 – Blind Shooters (sights seek sound-emitting targets)

Sub-classifications A, B and C define wheelchair backrest height depending on back and pelvic strength per athlete.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paralympic_shooting

The things I learn through DU.

On edit: The International Blind Sports Federation has a shooting website

http://www.ibsa.es/eng/deportes/shooting/presentacion.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #4)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:43 PM

5. Well dang, now it's not nearly as funny, but I think it's awesome theres a

sport for the blind. Ofcourse i'm also thinking that all those sight impaired athletes seem to be able to train, assemble and compete without shooting any one nearby. Gun shows, not so much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:00 AM

56. Blind people play many sports that might surprise you. I knew a blind guy who slaughtered on the

golf course. Used sound cues. Won the money of those who said 'ha ha, you want to golf with us? Sure!'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #4)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:12 PM

80. And believe it or not, some states allow the blind to hunt. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:49 PM

6. if you read stats on how most people use guns in the home, he can't be any worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Reply #6)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:54 PM

7. Reminds me of this Ray Charles joke:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:03 PM

10. Ray can shoot!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:05 PM

11. wow--I can't believe I set that up for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 10:42 PM

49. And for those who don't know...

The young man stealing the guitar in this film went on to play Argyle, the limo driver from Die Hard.

Blues Brothers...one of my favorite movies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to the devil (Reply #49)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:57 AM

54. It is hard not to love.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #10)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 03:33 PM

115. This scene was the first thing that I though of when I saw the post. EOM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:55 PM

8. Kay and Are!

Love you Steveland!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:07 PM

12. As long as he's not a member of a prohibited class of people, he has every right to buy one

 

As long as he's in his state of residence, which I believe is California.

He may be surprised at the amount of paperwork that's required - We have both federal and state forms that have to be completed and signed. He'll need help with all of that - There are no Braille versions AFAIK.

In addition to a state-issued ID card, he'll need two additional documents to establish that he lives in the state. For example, a vehicle registration and a utility bill. He does own vehicles.

Along with the firearm he will be required to either buy a state-approved trigger lock, or provide evidence that he owns a state-approved firearm storage device.

If he wants a handgun, he'll have to take and pass the California Handgun Safety Certificate test, and pay the fee for that. I don't believe that there is a Braille version available, so he'd probably get the questions and answers read to him.

He'll also have to demonstrate that he knows how to unload the weapon that he buys. He's a very intelligent man and has sensitive hands. I think he might be able to pull that off with some coaching.

He may also be surprised that he'll have to wait 10 days to pick up the firearm.

I suspect that when he made that remark on Piers' show he didn't really understand what he was in for. I hope he follows through and comments honestly about the experience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #12)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:32 PM

19. Or he could just go to Arizona and buy one of the street from anyone. He can buy a Barrett 50 cal

and take it onto a college campus. Clearly CA has gone a little red tape crazed but it is a rare exception.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #19)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:37 PM

21. He could not do that legally

 

I'm assuming that Stevie Wonder has no criminal record, and that he wouldn't violate the law to make a point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #12)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:51 PM

73. california has nothing to do with it, really

he didn't say where he was when he was 'talking to his friend'

in truth, he could have ridden from the inauguration in Obama's limo to a wal mart in VA and the President could have stood there and watched him buy a hunting rifle.

really. that would be the easiest way. and a good example of how mixed up gun laws are.

or, he could meet somebody from craigslist in a parking lot in any state, which is the real problem.

you are being disingenuous by saying 'if everybody obeyed the law, there wouldn't be a problem'

as if that has happened yet in the history of humanity...

if he didn't want to wait 10 days in CA, he could zip over to Vegas, not a long drive.

you don't seem too understand Stevie's point, it seems.

he is saying 'i could go buy a gun anytime i want. easily.'

which is odd. are you really saying you are ok with blind people carrying guns around? in public?

in the paralympics they aim at sounds...not really the best self-defense technique...

i myself am legally blind w/o glasses, and trying to shoot w/o them them would be berzerk.

i couldn't drive faster than 5 mph w/o, so shooting- definitely a no-go.

everything past 6 inches is a blur- no possible way to aim unless i put my nose on a pistol grip- get it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #73)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:57 PM

75. There are blind people who target shoot

It's actually an Olympic event -- I've seen it on TV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #75)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:11 PM

78. yes, but they don't usually walk into wal marts and buy guns

even though they can easily.

which is a little weird, i'd say.

it is pretty cool (as a sport), they shoot at sounds. like Daredevil, kinda...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #78)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:01 PM

137. But they legally can

As long as they follow all state and Federal laws when purchasing. I don't think any states nixes anyone blind or deaf from owning a firearm.

I know! It was really interesting to watch. Daredevil is a good analogy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #137)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:46 PM

139. they only can since the year 2000 (bottom link)

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/feb/12/kansas-law-change-may-allow-even-blind-carry-conce/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/26/nyregion/blind-new-jersey-man-challenged-again-on-guns.html

i guess Daredevil was right, wow... (first blind guy to get a carry permit in usa)

http://www.careymcwilliams.com/faq.htm
What is facial vision and do all blind people have it?

Facial vision is a scientifically proven way that blind people use sound waves to detect objects in their paths at a distance. It is something on the order of echolocation that bats and whales use, but is far less developed in humans. Some, not all, blind people have this sense and the degree that they have it varies from person-to-person. I myself can gage the size of the object and its range to a certain degree as sound waves bounce off my facial muscles. This can make it appear as if I have some vision, but any doctor will tell you that I am totally blind.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10296505/ns/msnbc-the_ed_show/t/blind-marksman-upset-nds-lax-gun-laws/#.UP9Lk2d8NoE


msnbc.com
updated 12/2/2005 1:09:11 PM ET
Five years ago, Carey McWilliams became the first completely blind person ever to obtain a concealed weapons permit in this country. McWilliams passed the required written and shooting tests in his home state of North Dakota.

CARLSON: Well, it sounds, you know, indisputable that you passed the test, but if you can’t see the target, how do you know you are hitting the target and not a crowd of people, say?

MCWILLIAMS: Well, it’s the same way that snipers in the military work. Anti-sniper patrols are, of course, going to try to get a sniper who wants to remain hidden to pick off soldiers, so, therefore, they have to operate guns, and so forth, without being able to see their target. And the way I do it is I use body positioning and gravity, which are always constant to everybody. And then I also use basic sound, if I can get it, would be fine, but I visualize the target in my mind, and I can actually see it then in front of my eyes, and I visualize where the gun is in relation to the target. And with that, I was able to place 10 out of 10 in a half-silhouette from seven yards away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #73)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:12 PM

79. Nonsense.

 

in truth, he could have ridden from the inauguration in Obama's limo to a wal mart in VA and the President could have stood there and watched him buy a hunting rifle.

No, that is not the truth. If he tried to buy a rifle at Wal Mart, the transaction would have been stopped when the sporting goods counter person asked for his ID, or when he got the question on the federal paperwork about his state of residence.

Are you suggesting that Stevie Wonder was saying he would be willing to violate both state and federal laws in order to demonstrate some deficiency in the laws?

are you really saying you are ok with blind people carrying guns around? in public?

Please try to stay on topic, farminator3000. The subject is buying guns legally, not carrying them in public, not buying them illegally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #79)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:22 PM

86. you are inventing a subject that has nothing to do with the OP

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/17/states-take-action/

look at the chart-
VA- no background check, no license req. for dealer, no reg. with LE, no waiting period, no AWB

both open AND concealed carry.

oh, but look how restrcitive VA is, you apparently can't shoot anyone you want you vaguely threatens you on the street

since when is VA a communist state?

so you are ok with any blind person buying a gun at any time?

including those blinded with rage, jealously or insanity?

get it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #86)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:26 PM

87. You're jumping all over the place here. In your last post in this sub-thread you wrote about buying

 

...a rifle at Wal Mart.

This conversation is too ridiculous to pursue. After watching the video I think Stevie Wonder was blowing smoke. He has no intention of attempting to acquire a firearm.

But if he did try to do so legally, the results would not be what he or most people expect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #87)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:36 PM

94. you are the one stuck in CA, which has no bearing whatsover

stevie could walk into a wal mart or gas station or barber shop (yes he's almost bald) in VA and buy a gun

without an ID.

and fed ex it to himself in CA, without breaking laws.

too bad, huh?

frankly, you being responsible doesn't help when there are 2 criminals for every three non-crims buying guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #94)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:37 PM

95. Not at a Wal Mart, and not legally

 

If he bought a used gun from a private seller at a gas station or barber shop in ANY state including California, he would be committing a crime.



and fed ex it to himself in CA, without breaking laws.

Your ignorance on this subject is stunning, but I'll give you kudos for clinging to it so forcefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #95)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:43 PM

100. and again, look at the chart

and explain how gun laws are even in existence in the majority of states.

oh, sure there's a law somewhere and nobody EVER breaks laws.

certainly not every 45 minutes when someone gets KILLED BY A GUN every day...

i think you are hurting your 'cause' at this point.

stevie has way more cred than you.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #100)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:45 PM

103. People break laws, so your solution is more laws?

 

That's where it gets really weird.

stevie has way more cred than you.

Stevie was blowing smoke. He doesn't know what's legal, and he's not going to try to buy a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #103)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:53 PM

107. worked for drunk driving and smoking, didn't it?

where people are getting blown away every 45 minutes and you don't seem to think it sucks,

is the weird part.

of course he isn't buying a gun- don't be obtuse.

his point is 'I AM BLIND> I CAN BUY A GUN EASILY> WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH INEFFECTIVE GUN LAWS.'

which is true, according to the majority of people. and a minority of nra members, even.

"he doesn't know what's legal'

The Moment for Action on Guns
New York Times-Jan 14, 2013
Requiring background checks at gun shows, parking-lot sales and Web sites would reduce the cash-and-carry anonymity of millions of gun ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #107)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 02:05 PM

110. He may have SAID he can buy a gun easily, but he hasn't DEMONSTRATED that he can do so.

 

He's going to have some problems filling out the paperwork, providing the required documentation, and passing the California Handgun Safety Certificate test.

But I'm afraid it's moot, because he's not really going to try. I wish he would.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #110)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 02:57 PM

112. no, i demonsrated how easy it is for him to buy one, and you refuse to admit it

why, i have no idea.

for the 3rd or more time CA has nothing to do with it. he didn't say where he 'might' buy a gun.

like i said, he could have gone to VA right after he said it and had one in a couple of hours.

also, he ran for mayor of detroit, probably has a house in NY or FL, too, so whatever

http://famousdaily.com/history/stevie-wonder-runs-for-mayor-detroit.html

you are cherry picking CA, because it has the 'best' gun laws.

but anyone can drive to vegas or AZ from LA, so whatever

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #112)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 03:03 PM

113. You showed how a person might acquire a firearm ILLEGALLY.

 

like i said, he could have gone to VA right after he said it and had one in a couple of hours.

Not legally. A California resident cannot legally buy a firearm from any person in Virginia.

you are cherry picking CA, because it has the 'best' gun laws.

No, I brought California into the mix because Stevie Wonder is a resident of the state of California. That has a major influence over what he can and cannot do LEGALLY.

If Stevie Wonder wants to show how easily it would be for HIM, not some random person, to acquire a firearm LEGALLY, he'll have to do so LEGALLY. A person's state of residence matters. Stevie Wonder's comment wasn't about how easy it would be for some hypothetical person somewhere to acquire a firearm - It was about how easy it would be for HIM to acquire one. That is based on his own words, in the interview.

I think it would be very interesting for all parties to this discussion to see what would happen if Stevie Wonder were to do that. I HOPE HE DOES!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #113)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 03:33 PM

116. and 40% of guns are bought illegally. in reality.

so what if you need to show an ID at an HONEST dealer.

gun dealers also break laws.

in VA-
Pay a small processing fee if you are a Virginia resident. The fee is slightly higher for out-of-state residents.

so, whatever.

stevie said ZERO about legal or illegal. he said 'i'm blind, and i can go buy a gun really easily'

he said ZERO about geography.

apparently where you live ONLY MATTERS for handguns and machine guns(see below), so get it together, please.

i mean, here i am, i don't give a flying f about your interpretation of the laws or 2nd amendment, or protecting guns, and i'm explaining the laws to you, the 'responsible' one.

what is your motivation for trying to hide the FACT that guns laws are too weak?

and the ridiculous idea that people don't try to avoid laws for selfish reasons? like money?

why don't you start a petition on the WH site for the Prez to take stevie gun shopping if you are so excited about it?

from a PA gun forum-
Under federal law, you can buy a shotgun or rifle at a FFl Dealer in any state, following that federal and state laws.

Handguns may be purchased, but must be shipped back to a FFL dealer in your own state, and transferred to you via your home state law.

NFA items have to be trasferred to a dealer in your own state for transfer to you.

Under no circumstances is it legal to purchase/sell any handgun/rifle/shotgun face to face from a resident of any other state without involving a FFL in the buyers home state.

thats how it works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #12)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:26 PM

88. Hey slackmaster.

I never had to work in California so I didn't know the laws there. I'm impressed. Especially with the trigger lock or storage device part. Out of curiosity, which do you prefer and why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DevonRex (Reply #88)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:28 PM

89. A real gun safe is far superior to any kind of movable trigger lock

 

Trigger locks can be defeated easily, and do nothing to prevent theft or loss due to fire.

It's a no-brainer to me, if you have a place to put a safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #89)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:35 PM

93. Thanks.

That's my preference for people to use as well. It keeps children safe from the firearms and keeps the firearms from being stolen, which is equally as important.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DevonRex (Reply #88)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:03 PM

138. Trigger locks actually suck

I watched a video in my CCW class where they showed children getting them off guns in literally seconds.* Guns need to be stored in a locked safe/case.


*The point the instructor wanted people to get was: get a safe, and keep all guns away from kids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:09 PM

13. He can probably get a concealed-carry permit, too

When I had one in South Dakota "can you see?" was not a question on the form!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #13)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:11 PM

14. I doubt that he could pass the California shooting test with his vision

 

Some people who are legally blind (which is a tax term, not a medical one) have.

Blind doesn't always mean profoundly blind (which is a medical term.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #14)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:54 PM

36. I think I would be legally blind without my glasses or contacts

I can read the print in a book maybe 8 inches in front of my eyeballs, but no further.

But with my contacts, I'm 20/20.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #36)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:57 PM

38. I am legally blind in one eye with or without correction. The other corrects to 20/20.

 

Without correction it's close to the threshold of legal blindness. It's scary, but that's what I've put up with my whole life.

I'll turn 55 in 13 days.

I really hope Stevie Wonder goes through with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #38)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 10:02 PM

45. I'm 36, and I've had bad eyes since middle school

Although it wasn't until high school that my eyes really turned to shit and I began wearing contacts as an alternative to the coke-bottle thickness glasses I had otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:21 PM

16. He could get them online, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #16)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:22 PM

17. Yes, but that doesn't relieve him of any of the obstacles I describe in reply #12

 

Unless it's a muzzle-loading black powder weapon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #17)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:57 PM

39. It sounds like a good first step then is for all states to adopt CA laws.

What are the odds of that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #39)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:59 PM

43. Slim to none in most states. Ditto on getting CA-style laws passed in Congress.

 

At least for a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #39)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:37 PM

70. Zero in Washington.

Hell, we added silencers to the 'legal' list last year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #16)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:36 PM

69. No different than if he went to a local gun store.

All the restrictions that apply to the gun stores, apply to FFL's that would make the transfer from an internet purchase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #69)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:56 PM

74. it is completely different

you are doing the same thing as slackmeister

so either there is someone checking every sale on the internet or nobody would ever break a law?

which one?

i saw somewhere that~25% of guns used in crime come from 1% of LICENSED dealers.

i guess the other 75% come from those people you don't seem to think exist?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #74)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:18 PM

82. Internet sellers will not ship a firearm to a non-licensee in another state

 

If you buy a firearm online and you are not yourself a licensee, you have to have the firearm shipped to a licensee in your state.

That person, that dealer, will go through all the paperwork and procedures required by state and federal law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #82)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:30 PM

91. see #90

you can't just make stuff up.

too serious an issue

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #91)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:33 PM

92. There's nothing wrong with the law, then.

 

There might be an enforcement problem, but we have no information at hand about how big of a problem it really is. Or if it even really exists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #92)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:39 PM

96. 'enforcement problem' is stock NRA doo-doo

look at the chart- 2 states have anything near reasonable laws.

period.

less people get shot in states with more laws.

the BATF fills out forms BY HAND (because of the nra) and you're idea is 'monitor the internet'

really?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #96)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:40 PM

98. Please don't falsely attribute words to me

 

and you're idea is 'monitor the internet'

I've posted nothing of the kind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #98)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:47 PM

104. well what does this mean, then

There might be an enforcement problem, but we have no information at hand about how big of a problem it really is. Or if it even really exists.

so you are saying do something,

or don't do anything?

you seem to be implying that everything is OK, when it obvioulsy isn't, if harvard, the batf, and the president, to name a few, see some issues to address

and who is WE, exactly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #82)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:44 PM

102. thank you

I have completed such a transaction, They will only ship to an FFL with a copy of license on file and you must then complete background check and transfer at the receiving dealer.

from the site

Below you will find offers from the 7 closest* Gun Genie Retailers. Be sure to consider store location, previous good experience, special promotions as well as the sales price offered. Simply click "ACCEPT OFFER" and we will arrange the shipment of this firearm to the selected retailer.

(Additional fees include all shipping fees to the retailer, applicable state/local background check fees, and other processing fees.)

this also applies to lower receivers as that is what is serial numbered and tracked as the gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #74)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:22 PM

85. Pardon me for knowing how internet firearms transfers work.

If it crosses state lines, yes, it must go through an FFL, or someone is breaking the law. Stevie Wonder's apparent point is that it is not illegal for him to purchase a firearm. So, this is completely uninteresting to this thread. Yes, it is possible someone could buy a gun online illegally without it going through an FFL, just like it is possible to buy a gun, in some cases, from a dealer without a proper background check. In both cases, a law was broken. Actually, several. Some of them felonies.

The BATFE does monitor online sales for this reason, and monitoring them is pretty easy to do. (keeping tabs on gunbroker and whatnot)


A lot of that 75% comes from smaller dealers, either used directly by the purchaser in a new crime, or transferred to a criminal by the purchaser. It can also be lost or stolen. Guns do get stolen. They are small, high value, and easy to move, so they are priority targets right up there with jewelry and electronics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #85)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:29 PM

90. that sounds like how you WISH they'd work. or you're just wrong

"Under current law, there's a gaping Internet loophole which enables gun websites to facilitate illegal gun sales that result in gun crimes and gun deaths," said Jonathan Lowy, director of the Legal Action Project at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and a lawyer representing Vesel's family. "Felons, the dangerously mentally ill and domestic-violence abusers can buy guns, no questions asked."
http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Survivors-suit-targets-online-gun-sales-4150517.php

Craigslist, eBay, Amazon.com and Google prohibit listing guns for sale, according to Vesel's complaint.

there's 4 that do, how many are there that DON'T? 40? 400?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #90)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:43 PM

101. What are you even talking about?

So there are four sites that don't deal in guns at all. Ok, that's entirely separate from your other point.

For those sites that DO sell firearms, or facilitate the sale of firearms, there are legal requirements for direct FFL transfers. Why would you even bring up Ebay as an example? Ebay won't send something to an FFL because they don't allow firearm sales AT ALL.

What happened on that Armslist sale, the owner of the firearm committed at least 2 felonies, and withdrew the gun from sale on Armslist, to sell it directly (private transfer, KNOWINGLY to an ineligible recipient) to the purchaser. Had the purchase been completed THROUGH Armslist, it would have been sent to an FFL, and the FLL would have conducted the check, and rejected the purchaser.

They are not "buying guns no questions asked", the Brady flack is full of shit. There WERE questions asked, and that led to the seller abrogating the controlled, law abiding sale, and going 'back alley' instead/, outside of Armslist, as it were. All illegal from stem to stern, and he's in jail now.

What is Armslist supposed to do? Report all canceled sales to the BATFE for follow up? The BATFE doesn't even follow up when someone swears to be an eligible recipient, tries to buy a gun, and fails the background check due to felony conviction. That's a straight up perjury charge, with evidence signed by the criminal committing the crime, and they do fuck-all with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #101)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:01 PM

117. your completely false statement that buying a gun on the internet is the same as at a store

1st page of google-

How to Buy a Gun Online - YouTube

www.xxxxxxxxx.com presents: How to purchase a firearm online, an easy step by step process ...

Guns for Sale - Online Gun Auction - Buy Guns at xxxxxx
Find guns for sale at xxxxxx.com, the world's largest online gun auction. At xxxxx.com, you can sell and buy guns such as shotguns, pistols, rifles from ...

xxxxx- How To Buy a Gun Online
www.xxxxn.com/.../How-To-Buy-A-Gun-Online-Page-1....
So you want to buy a gun online? You're in luck! There are dozens of websites out there prepared to supply you with whatever gun you're looking for. Whether ...

hunting.about.com › ... › Shop For Your Gear › Shop: Guns & Such
Some tips and advice on buying a gun online, from someone who's been there and done it. It sometimes makes a lot of sense to buy a gun on the Web.

Buying a Ton of Guns on the Internet Is Cheap, Legal, and ...
Jul 26, 2012 – If you're a terrorist, a guerrilla, or are aspiring toward either,XXXXXXX might be your gun depot of choice. But for anyone not on the ...

Discount Guns for Sale - xxxxxx
wwwxxxxxxxm/
We have guns for sale at xxxxxxx.com. Please ... Customers Currently Online ... It may be on display and is available for immediate purchase and pick-up.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #117)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:07 PM

120. Uh, you didn't post one goddamn thing that is contrary to my statement.

It is the same as a store even for private transfers that cross state lines.
I didn't say you couldn't buy guns online. I said the requirements are the same. And they are PRECISELY the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #120)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:18 PM

123. yes, i did, you didn't look hard enough. or at all?

Unlimited purchases and free shipping? It sounds disturbingly like Amazon Prime, only for deadly weapons instead of books and socks.

If you know someone who's willing to privately sell you a gun—someone without any kind of license to deal, whatsoever—that's even easier in almost every state. "Federal law only requires persons who are "engaged in the business" of dealing in firearms to be licensed," explains Van Houten. "Private sellers are not subject to the federal laws regulating gun dealers." A recent NYC government report cited the same fact before stating that private online sales were rampant and dangerous:

Only licensed gun dealers, also known as federal firearms licensees (FFLs), are required to conduct checks and keep paperwork on buyers. Because private sellers
– individuals who are not "engaged in the business" of selling firearms but who make "occasional sales" from private collections – are presumed to be hobbyists, they have no obligation to conduct checks.

You can even use Craigslist.


from the first page of google.

i'm not gonna post a bunch of actual links on how to buy guns.

try this one:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022225060

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #123)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:24 PM

124. Have you looked in your local newspaper? It's called the Classified Ads.

No background checks there either.
Nor at the water cooler at work, talking to your co-workers.
Nor at the pub.
Nor at a garage sale.

You don't seem to understand the difference between a private transfer and a dealer. Moreover, you don't seem to understand the laws that apply when you sell a gun even privately, across state lines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #124)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:56 PM

128. great. so the BATF should start buying every gun in every ad in the country and melting them

that's an excellent idea, thanks!

http://www.wfsb.com/story/20649735/groupon-to-cancel-all-offers-related-to-guns

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/01/time_warner_cable_bans_guns_ads.html

you don't seem to understand there are thousands of shady LEGAL dealers, 10s of thousands of dealers with no FFL who go to stores to stock up and sell them at those places you mention.

they should go to jail for that.

you seem to deny the FACT there are basically NO laws on private sales, and that what few laws there are are broken constantly.

and yes, more laws is the answer. of course less laws is a foolish idea and the current amount obviously aren't enough.

what do you think of my opinion of the FACT that there are more guns than people, yet ~33% of people own all those guns, so gun owners are being selfish, and gun lobbyists and makers are being greedy?

or that fact that america's murder rate is 8 times higher than similar countries?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/chart-the-u-s-has-far-more-gun-related-killings-than-any-other-developed-country/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #128)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 06:28 PM

130. That's illegal.

"you don't seem to understand there are thousands of shady LEGAL dealers, 10s of thousands of dealers with no FFL who go to stores to stock up and sell them at those places you mention."

That's called a straw purchase, is a felony, and has specific criteria that defines it so.

"you seem to deny the FACT there are basically NO laws on private sales, and that what few laws there are are broken constantly."

I didn't say that at all. There ARE some, for instance, crossing state lines, use an FFL. For local, you cannot knowingly sell to an ineligible recipient. Is that a weaksauce set of protections? Sure I suppose. But lacking registration, and the government not allowing private sellers to access NICS, it's difficult for anyone to do much about it. Requiring FFL transfers would be fine, Congress just needs to do it. That will solve the 'internet gun sales' and local private transfers in one gasp. They aren't different issues.

"what do you think of my opinion of the FACT that there are more guns than people, yet ~33% of people own all those guns, so gun owners are being selfish, and gun lobbyists and makers are being greedy? "

I think you don't understand why people own guns. One gun does not serve all purposes. For someone 'in the field' of firearms ownership, it is pretty normal to have more than one type of weapon. Is it selfish? Strange choice of words. Are there people trying to buy guns that can't get any because they are all sold out? (Well, NOW there are.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #130)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 06:56 PM

132. someone should arrest these cops then-Police destroy guns bought in buyback program

NEW ALBANY, Ind. (WHAS11) -- More than 250 firearms surrendered to police officers last month as part of a gun buyback program in New Albany, Indiana have been destroyed.
Police had given money to the people who turned in their firearms. The event was so popular that they distributed all of their allocated money.
Officers destroyed the guns Monday morning using a powerful metal shearing machine.
Now, that metal will be recycled for other uses.

***

The collected firearms were destroyed Tuesday afternoon, said Sgt. Maria Hawke, a Tucson Police Department spokeswoman. The guns were shredded by a private company, Hawke said.
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/tucson-gun-buyback-draws-a-big-crowd/article_b5c7b8c6-59ac-11e2-94d1-0019bb2963f4.html

***

As Luce was turning over his weapon, other gun owners were wheeling and dealing in the parking lot.

Adam Rodriguez sold several of his weapons to other gun enthusiasts. He says this program might help, by getting weapons out of the house where their children, or out of an elderly person's house.

"As far as getting guns out of the hands of bad guys I don't think this is the type of program that is going to do that with any kind of effectiveness," he said.

City Councilman Steve Kozachik disagrees. He says the folks who held their own gun sales in front of TPD proved a point.

"Buying guns for cash and walking away with no background check if that just doesn't scream for legislation to fix that loop hole they couldn't have made that point any better for me," he said.
http://www.kvoa.com/news/gun-buy-back-nets-tpd-206-weapons/

***

The threat brings light to a series of laws, pushed by the NRA and ALEC, that prevent states from destroying guns, and instead require law enforcement to auction them off (or, in some states, use the guns themselves). Arizona’s version of the law was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer, R-Ariz., herself a former member of ALEC, in April, 2012, as Brendan Fischer from ALEC Exposed points out.

But, as Bloomberg News reported in August, 2011, Arizona was not the only state to receive the model legislation, a “brainchild” of the NRA that was adapted by ALEC. The law, called the ”Firearms Destruction Prevention Act” and occasionally the “Disposition of Firearms in State and Local Custody Act,” also passed in Kentucky, Tennessee and Alaska, for instance, though failed in Alabama.

From Bloomberg at the time:

The model legislation was drafted and approved by ALEC’s public safety task force, which included representatives from stun-gun maker Taser International Inc. (TASR), energy conglomerate Koch Industries, the American Bail Coalition, and the NRA, according to ALEC documents. Corporate and special interest group members seeking to serve on task forces charged with writing legislative language can pay as much as $35,000 or more to get a seat at the table, according to ALEC’s web site.

ALEC’s public safety task force, which was also responsible for the “Stand Your Ground” laws, was technically broken apart in April of 2012 after some bad press in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting in Florida. The group said it would instead focus on economic issues and job creation.

But, Republican State Rep. Jerry Madden of Texas, who chaired the task force, admitted that work on the same issues will be transferred to other committees. ”ALEC’s decision won’t impact the important issues we’ve worked on,” Madden told the Christian Post.
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/nras_threats_over_gun_buyback_tied_to_alec_legislation/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #132)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 07:23 PM

133. If they broke the law, well, sucks for them. They should be prosecuted.

And by all means, change the buyback/resell law. If the point is to get them off the street, buy them back and destroy them.

IIRC, New York got around that by having the guns 'bought' from a pool of money that came from private contributions, so while the police destroyed the guns, they are immune because they didn't actually buy the guns. They are just disposing of them. Creative solution. But yes, change the law. That is the appropriate solution to the problem.



To the best of my knowledge, the gun buyback headhunters that set up their own table didn't violate any laws. There are laws about how many you can privately sell, but none about how many you can privately buy. These people are usually looking for high collector value weapons. Some of the guns turned in at these events are worth tens of thousands of dollars. I doubt they are poaching weapons that are dangerous, like illegal full-auto weapons, being that they are doing it right in front of the cops. In fact, I've heard of cops privately doing exactly the same thing, to poach high value weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #133)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 08:21 PM

135. why would a bunch of cops announce in the newspaper they were breaking a law???

Answer: It looks like you covered all your bases. In Arizona it is perfectly legal to do a private sale of either a handgun or a long gun as long as the transaction is done face-to-face between two Arizona residents. Actually the age minimum is 18 years of age for a private transaction. You must be 21 to buy a firearm from a federally licensed dealer. There is no witness or bill of sale required, but both are a good idea. A bill of sale provides a written record of the transaction. I would recommend a bill of sale in ANY private transaction, whether or not it involves firearms. The fact that you had someone witness the transaction is not bad, but not required either.
http://azccwpermit.com/?p=215

so people could have been poaching guns in AZ that had been used in crimes right in front of the cops.

literally, stolen or murder weapons sold to be resold right in front of the cops?

how is that good?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #135)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 12:08 AM

144. I have the same issue with Gun Buybacks by the police in general.

Actually, that could work in our advantage. If the cops suspect a weapon those headhunters bought is stolen or was used in a crime, they can check it.

They cannot check the guns they buyback. That is part of the 'deal' when they say no questions asked. I think that's a terrible idea. Guns collected in that manner should be open to inspection for serial numbers and a ballistic print to see if it was used in a crime. I don't know that it happens, but logically, the gun buybacks are a potential disposal method for crime guns.

Totally agree with you there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #144)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 12:30 AM

145. they have potential

TPD ran the serial numbers of the weapons to make sure they were not stolen or used in any crimes. A different person checked guns purchased through Antenori’s effort.
The guns exchanged for the gift cards, that haven’t been used in crimes, have already been destroyed.



that 'different person' thing sounds a bit sketchy. more than a bit. he can check the seller's background if he's a dealer, but how can he check on the gun if he isn't a cop?

***

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_buyback_program#In_Australia


Unlike the voluntary buybacks in the United States, Australian gun buybacks of 1996 and 2003 were compulsory, compensated surrenders of newly-illegal firearms.

The 1996 Buyback took 600,000 newly illegal sporting firearms, including all semi-automatic rifles including .22 rim-fires, semi-automatic shotguns and pump-action shotguns. Because the Australian Constitution prevents the taking of property without just compensation the Federal Government decided to put a 1% levy on income tax for one year to finance the compensation. The buyback was predicted to cost A$500 million and had wide community support.

***

After the Sandy Hook massacre on Friday, Murdoch wrote on Twitter: ''Terrible news today. When will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons? As in Oz after similar tragedy.''

That, says the Morning Herald, prompted a none-too-subtle comment from Australian Liberal Malcolm Turnbull about Murdoch's U.S. cable network. "I suspect they will find the courage when Fox News enthusiastically campaigns for it.''
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/17/australia-gun-reform-buyback-us-national-firearm-agreement/1774549/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #145)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 12:59 AM

146. That Arizona buyback is highly unusual.

The ones performed in California are 'no questions asked' and the guns are destroyed, period. They do not check them for criminal evidence. (California also does not have the obnoxious 'you must resell it' law)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #146)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 01:15 AM

147. getting less unusual, i hope...

The first of three planned events by a church outreach program Tuesday ran out of $100 gift cards, then gave people IOU's for guns after nearly 100 cards were given out. Cincinnati police detectives will check the weapons to see if any have links to cases they are working. Otherwise, they will be melted into scrap.
http://www.wdtn.com/dpp/news/ohio/Gun-buyback-in-Cincinnati-collects-135-weapons

Of the weapons that came in, Whitlow said there were two assault rifles, with the others either pistols, shotguns or rifles. Whitlow said after the guns were taken in, police would cross-reference them with a national database to make sure they weren’t stolen or affiliated with a crime investigation. If they cleared, police would destroy the weapons.

The program was billed as no-questions-asked. Whitlow said typically, buyback programs are marketed that way.

“The safety factor far outweighs any law enforcement issues whether it was stolen or used in a crime,” Whitlow said. “I would expect 90 percent of these guns, if not 99 percent,will come back with no record on them.”
http://newsandtribune.com/x2056569114/FUNDS-FOR-GUNS-New-Albany-gun-buyback-empties-cash-clip-quickly-50-000-spent-in-90-minutes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:37 PM

22. Precisely the point.

And in a world in which people are allowed to carry guns, what is to happen to those of us who have no business carrying guns?

Unfortunately, while some people who like guns are not bad, you can be sure that the bad guys like guns, will get guns and will use guns just because they can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:39 PM

23. I need a link! Hot shit! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:44 PM

28. LOL Anyone remember this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:44 PM

29. So now people with physical disabilities can't own guns? I don't think he sees the real issue, here.

 

I'm sure he can go buy a car if he wanted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #29)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:48 PM

31. He collects cars. Oprah Winfrey gave him a Rolls Royce in about 2004.

 

He has other people drive them, of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #31)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:58 PM

41. So then there's no problem with him collecting guns. Someone else can shoot them. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #41)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:59 PM

44. I agree completely.

 

Lots of musicians collect guns. Elvis Presley did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #44)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 10:33 PM

48. I agree

Being blind is no reason to deny him. S

I just don't see us saying "sorry, your blind, you don't enjoy rights"

Does he need to be cautious, yes.

To me, it's like saying "you are mute, you don't have the freedom of speech". Maybe not exactly the same, but hopefully most get the idea.

As a disabled vet, I would hate to have a govt that says " sorry about your leg being gone, you now lose 'x' right" due to disability.

My 2 cents

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #41)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:37 PM

71. Or someone can assist him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #29)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:44 AM

59. Buy it, sure, use it is a different story

Not all disabilities are created equal...

For example-

I believe if your vision is 20/200 or worse no state will let you have a license to drive-

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #29)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:09 PM

77. no, you are trying to deflect from the issue he is raising

you don't think he SEES the real issue, that such a bad pun it's almost insulting!

he sure can't drive a car in public.

pretty sure the dealer takes your licenswe number when you buy a car.

um.

the issue isn't discrimination against the blind, it is that anybody can buy a gun anytime they want, almost anywhere.

no ??s asked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #77)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:19 PM

83. A California resident cannot buy a gun any time they want, almost anywhere, LEGALLY.

 

A California resident can only buy a firearm from a licensed dealer in California.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #83)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:06 PM

119. again, see#116

Last edited Tue Jan 22, 2013, 06:00 PM - Edit history (1)

anybody can get a gun, that's why there are MORE guns than PEOPLE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #119)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:30 PM

125. I obviously understand reply #113 a whole lot better than you do

 

Because I wrote it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #125)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:58 PM

129. #116. whatever.

try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #119)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:50 PM

127. Anybody can get heroin too.

Doesn't mean it's legal and that's the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #77)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 05:37 PM

126. No, not always actually.

A vehicle only has to be licensed to be operated on a public road. So if Stevie Wonder wants to have the largest collection of Rolls Royce vehicles on the planet, who cares. As long as he's not driving them in public, he can buy all the cars he wants no questions asked, no license, no nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:52 PM

34. Wow I love him!

I mean I love him more now

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:53 PM

35. It's that vision thing people have, it happens in one's own mind

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:55 PM

37. I love that guy!

I bet he gets it done too. What a hoot!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #37)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:58 PM

40. It will be very educational for a lot of people, if he documents his experience honestly.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #40)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 10:26 PM

47. Yes, it will.

I saw Stevie Wonder once on Letterman, when he lifted his sunglasses a little and pretended to be reading a label. It was so convincing that Letterman actually said:

"So you can really . . ., " and then he caught himself.

It got a huge laugh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 10:14 PM

46. Once upon a time, he was "Little Stevie Wonder"

who sang about "Castles In the Sand."

Loved him then, still love him now.



Sam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 10:56 PM

50. Lol!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 11:00 PM

51. Is he saying that he shouldn't own a gun?

 

And that someone like him shouldn't own a gun and should not be sold one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Reply #51)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:04 AM

52. I'm assuming that is his position. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Reply #51)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:37 AM

58. I believe he's going to find that the laws are indeed ridiculous, but not for the reasons he thinks.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Reply #51)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:39 PM

72. I'm impressed by the number of people yucking it up on the confirmation bias in this thread

in that a blind person should not be allowed to purchase XYZ. Particularly where that thing intersects with an enumerated constitutional right.

I'd be more annoyed if he was prohibited, based upon a 'disability'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 12:12 AM

53. The time Little Stevie Wonder spent with Don Rickles is paying off

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:08 AM

57. Stevie was the first person who organized me into something political who was outside my family.

I met him when I was a teen, and he asked me to write a letter to a man named John McCain who was a Congressman from Arizona who opposed the holiday we observed yesterday, Martin Luther King Jr Day. Stevie asked me to write him and let him know that I thought he was wrong to block the recognition of one of our greatest Americans. I'd never heard of John McCain, but I knew who Stevie was, of course, and I knew he was trying to get that holiday recognized. I was happy to oblige.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:48 AM

60. Here's the interview with Piers Morgan.

 

He starts talking about the idea of acquiring a firearm just before the 2-minute mark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:01 PM

76. Right after he gets his new car.



- K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:22 PM

84. Guns For The Sight-Impaired Is A Perennial Gun Militant Cause.


Seriously. It is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #84)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:48 PM

106. Einstein was right.

“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:39 PM

97. Woo hoo, love you, Stevie! Great idea. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to valerief (Reply #97)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:41 PM

99. He won't go through with it.

 

If he was even half serious when he made the remark to Piers Morgan, when he finds out how much of a hassle it would be for him to buy a gun legally, he'll blow it off and never say another word about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 01:57 PM

108. Is there a blind celebrity in a red state?

California does a lot to control gun sales, and I applaud them for that. The laws in red states are unbelievably lax. You can get a gun in 20 minutes or less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 02:02 PM

109. He'll just have to get a laser site....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 03:14 PM

114. In Kansas, the Republican controlled legislature deliberately removed the

restriction to the concealed carry law that prevented blind people from qualifying for a CC permit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Original post)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:31 PM

141. He should do target practice with Ted Nugent

Ted seems nimble enough to dodge bullets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread