Gun Control & RKBA

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)

172. Bzzzzzzt!! Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance... again.

Wed Dec 28, 2011, 10:24 PM

Dec 2011

B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—

(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

So I'm covered in a number of states.

And how that law applies to "the public business of Federal officials", you'll have to explain. That should be a good contortion show.

I note that you've now conflated me with assassins. I'd sure like to see the evidence you cast these accusations from.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

209 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Foreign Policy by the NRA? The Prospect of Gingrich and Bolton. [View all] ellisonz Dec 2011 OP

What was Howard Dean's NRA rating during most of his career, again? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #1

Hmm. Your thread seems to have lost direction... SteveW Dec 2011 #2

Dude, that's the title of the article... ellisonz Dec 2011 #3

It was your content that wandered. Dude. SteveW Dec 2011 #10

You're the one bringing up Howard Dean...Dude. ellisonz Dec 2011 #59

Me? Howard Dean? Please reference where I brought him in... SteveW Dec 2011 #192

Define "dangerous amounts of arms". nt rrneck Dec 2011 #4

Sure. ellisonz Dec 2011 #5

An articulate non answer. rrneck Dec 2011 #6

That was a pretty damn clear answer. ellisonz Dec 2011 #7

I call it bullshit. rrneck Dec 2011 #11

I call such lines of attack repetative. ellisonz Dec 2011 #12

That's what I thought. rrneck Dec 2011 #13

I'm not comparing gun ownership to golfing. n/t ellisonz Dec 2011 #16

Actually, you are. rrneck Dec 2011 #17

"people's personal recreational activities" ellisonz Dec 2011 #18

So what is the difference rrneck Dec 2011 #21

None. ellisonz Dec 2011 #27

Are members of any militia you care to name rrneck Dec 2011 #83

Oh man, not Michael Moore's huge pile of shit again. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #96

And they were able to use a straw buyers to obtain... ellisonz Dec 2011 #97

You cannot pre-emptively 'stop' straw buyers. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #118

You may be right, but we're not even trying hard to deter it... ellisonz Dec 2011 #180

Oh please. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #181

Oh yeah... ellisonz Dec 2011 #182

New poll for ya.. X_Digger Dec 2011 #186

What if we need to pass new laws to enforce the current laws? ellisonz Dec 2011 #189

Then you're screwed. :) n/t X_Digger Dec 2011 #208

Bowling for Columbine was embarrassing DissedByBush Dec 2011 #125

Agreed. Have you read Kopel's outstanding scene-by scene takedown of Moore's garbage? Simo 1939_1940 Dec 2011 #148

Interesting read, thanks n/t DissedByBush Dec 2011 #184

"Damn right we'll confiscate." PavePusher Dec 2011 #32

Government has such rights. ellisonz Dec 2011 #68

Not without compensation, it doesn't. How will you pay for them? And hypothetically.. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #72

Considering the public cost of the current regime of laws... ellisonz Dec 2011 #84

And from whence do you derive this figure of $100 billion? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #88

Here you go... ellisonz Dec 2011 #139

"They said it, I believe it, and that settles it." friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #166

"I object to the tyranny of a few over the rights of the many." PavePusher Dec 2011 #105

That's your opinion. ellisonz Dec 2011 #140

Fixxed it for you. beevul Dec 2011 #111

Wait a minute. rrneck Dec 2011 #207

Tax's on new sales. ellisonz Dec 2011 #188

Gun and ammo sales already Federally taxed at 11%. PavePusher Dec 2011 #197

The government has no rights DissedByBush Dec 2011 #185

You gonna be the one to come pick them up? rl6214 Dec 2011 #203

Nice cartoons. Remmah2 Dec 2011 #41

You're welcome. ellisonz Dec 2011 #69

No ex post facto laws. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #95

Oh there's plenty of wiggle room on this one... ellisonz Dec 2011 #98

You propose to tell 80 million people that you're going to take their property? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #101

You propose to do little or nothing it seems... ellisonz Dec 2011 #102

No, people like YOU will make sure of that. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #121

What "festering problems" would those be? Can't be the violent crime and murder rates... friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #129

Simplification and obsfucation. ellisonz Dec 2011 #149

Nice of you to highlight the 'status offense' part I already pointed out. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #119

Minneapolis Star v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue, for another. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #128

There is literally zero percent chance of that happening. Union Scribe Dec 2011 #113

Welcome to the United States of Fear! ellisonz Dec 2011 #152

...was that a reply to my post? Union Scribe Dec 2011 #183

Yes. ellisonz Dec 2011 #187

Right, I know that part. I wrote it. Union Scribe Dec 2011 #190

"Damn right we'll confiscate." Common Sense Party Dec 2011 #114

"we" will confiscate? Do you have a turd in your pocket? You are more than welcome to Fair Witness Dec 2011 #133

He won't volunteer for the job. PavePusher Dec 2011 #167

Cheeto-munching fatass keyboard kommandos never do. Fair Witness Dec 2011 #198

"Damn right we'll confiscate" beevul Dec 2011 #156

"Damn right we'll confiscate." MicaelS Dec 2011 #194

Not such inane ideas at all. Maybe some of you need to get your "head" out of your gun barrels. Hoyt Dec 2011 #19

Their ideas wont be clear at all rrneck Dec 2011 #20

Most folks don't know anything about bombs, poisons, etc., but we regulate them. Plenty of examples. Hoyt Dec 2011 #22

You're funny. rrneck Dec 2011 #23

We are talking about private explosives, etc., not military. Besides, you want to arm populace. Hoyt Dec 2011 #28

Awwwwww. rrneck Dec 2011 #65

Militarism according to Merriam-Webster. ellisonz Dec 2011 #30

Sounds about right. nt rrneck Dec 2011 #81

I would add that I've been around guns... ellisonz Dec 2011 #29

Sounds like part of your gun phobia is based on fiction. Remmah2 Dec 2011 #39

Well that and the front page of the newspaper... ellisonz Dec 2011 #70

Another variation on "some of my best friends are..." Fair Witness Dec 2011 #134

Are you saying I'm a liar? ellisonz Dec 2011 #158

Feel free. I said you were not the first person to preface a bigoted comment with a disclaimer. Fair Witness Dec 2011 #163

I'll take that as a gruding apology. n/t ellisonz Dec 2011 #169

Post removed Post removed Dec 2011 #199

Of course you have rl6214 Dec 2011 #204

I just don't sleep with one ellisonz Dec 2011 #205

Sort of like your "long-range laser sniper sights", or whatever hoodooo you claimed? n/t PavePusher Dec 2011 #34

How many arms do you have, of the biological type? DissedByBush Dec 2011 #115

Reductio ad absurdum. ellisonz Dec 2011 #138

"Free state" DissedByBush Dec 2011 #155

It's only "treason" if you lose. PavePusher Dec 2011 #202

You won't win. ellisonz Dec 2011 #206

You can hold your rofl, as I am not endorsing such activity.... PavePusher Dec 2011 #209

I'm prepared to advocate reasonable security of firearms. Remmah2 Dec 2011 #36

Why should the tax payers at large pay for this? ellisonz Dec 2011 #37

Only the ATF provides that level of government support. Remmah2 Dec 2011 #40

So do I own a "dangerous number" of firearms? Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #62

Ron Paul is in the lead now...time to switch your focus. ileus Dec 2011 #8

Ron Paul is in league with the pro-gun lobby too. ellisonz Dec 2011 #14

Why should we give the GOP the opportunity to use gun control as a wedge issue.. spin Dec 2011 #9

"I suspect that you favor the incremental approach to eventually banning all firearms." ellisonz Dec 2011 #15

There is absolutely no reason to support any form of new draconian gun law... spin Dec 2011 #25

I don't think it's going to be Romney. ellisonz Dec 2011 #31

#3.... How about 5 years after you have licences... PavePusher Dec 2011 #35

I don't understand what the heck you're arguing for. ellisonz Dec 2011 #42

"The First Amendment says nothing about regulation." PavePusher Dec 2011 #47

... ellisonz Dec 2011 #52

"well-regulated.. X_Digger Dec 2011 #55

Sophistry. ellisonz Dec 2011 #71

He doesn't have to convince you- you need to persuade the Supreme Court of your stance. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #79

How many far-right Republican judges did you need to get that Supreme Court case? ellisonz Dec 2011 #82

Of course it's the government limiting itself- see the anti-federalists' writings. X_Digger Dec 2011 #116

#4... So, you agree with this guy: PavePusher Dec 2011 #38

Not perhaps that exact phrasing of 1,000 feet...but yes, in principle... ellisonz Dec 2011 #45

Mere exercise of a Constitutional Right within sight of a political figure.... PavePusher Dec 2011 #49

Bullshit. ellisonz Dec 2011 #53

Those "Federal agents" would be there to protect the president.... PavePusher Dec 2011 #66

Dingbat. ellisonz Dec 2011 #73

I haven't asserted anything other than that the SS is there to do a particular job... PavePusher Dec 2011 #104

That's quite the delusion... ellisonz Dec 2011 #106

Again you accuse me of nefarious intent. PavePusher Dec 2011 #108

I will not... ellisonz Dec 2011 #136

Bzzzzzzt!! Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance... again. PavePusher Dec 2011 #172

I've said you're belief enables them... ellisonz Dec 2011 #173

Well, your opinion of legal carriers is now well known. Nothing I can add to your vitriol and fear. PavePusher Dec 2011 #174

Now you're just obsfucating... ellisonz Dec 2011 #175

"How does this not violate the First Amendment right to peaceable assembly?" PavePusher Dec 2011 #67

Well then denounce your previous position... ellisonz Dec 2011 #74

What position? That the indeterminate proximity of a elected public servent... PavePusher Dec 2011 #107

"indeterminate proximity" ellisonz Dec 2011 #135

Addition in response to your edit: ellisonz Dec 2011 #86

Firstly, no-one claimed any legally armed person can guarantee anyones' safety... PavePusher Dec 2011 #109

"No-one appeared concerned by my sidearm." ellisonz Dec 2011 #137

You've moved all your goal-posts (yes, we saw that), and again accused me of making threats. PavePusher Dec 2011 #168

Please make an OP declaring your belief that you should be allowed... ellisonz Dec 2011 #171

"this was the Democratic position in 2008" -- selective amnesia? Or just ignorance? X_Digger Dec 2011 #43

You object to the Democratic Nominee's and Current President's position? ellisonz Dec 2011 #48

Disagreement on one issue =/= "don't like our candidates". PavePusher Dec 2011 #50

So tell me what positions of our candidates do you like? ellisonz Dec 2011 #54

The president has changed his tune. X_Digger Dec 2011 #51

What if it's in the platform again? ellisonz Dec 2011 #57

Shall I remind you? X_Digger Dec 2011 #61

The President is not that stupid hack89 Dec 2011 #191

What possible threat is a man with 200 guns? Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #63

Don't give Republicans so much credit. ellisonz Dec 2011 #75

I would think he has a nice collection and disposable income. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #123

"I don't know anyone who leaves firearms "strewn about"." ellisonz Dec 2011 #151

Really? Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #157

Please use the google. ellisonz Dec 2011 #159

No thanks. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #193

And at what point does a firearm stray from a "antique" oneshooter Dec 2011 #132

At what point does the spoken word become obscenity? n/t ellisonz Dec 2011 #150

It will be an interesting election year... spin Dec 2011 #130

"Gun rights were not the prime issue driving the Tea Party in the midterm election." ellisonz Dec 2011 #147

Post removed Post removed Dec 2011 #200

Yet less than an hour before, it was "Damn right we'll confiscate". friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #60

Whoops! His agenda is showing. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #64

What's your agenda? n/t ellisonz Dec 2011 #76

With regards to what? Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #124

Twisting my words. ellisonz Dec 2011 #77

Why should I denounce him for something he did not say? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #85

So you support the right to carry near Federal officials and politicians? ellisonz Dec 2011 #87

I'm also not denying that I'm better looking than George Clooney and smarter than Stephen Hawking... friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #89

Dodge. ellisonz Dec 2011 #92

It sure is a good thing those Secret Service guys don't carry guns Fair Witness Dec 2011 #201

Gee, then I guess the Dems had better stop being anti-gun... krispos42 Dec 2011 #24

+1000 (n/t) spin Dec 2011 #26

They are going to play the gun card no matter what we say... ellisonz Dec 2011 #33

LOL Remmah2 Dec 2011 #44

So you don't support the NRA and its positions? ellisonz Dec 2011 #58

One can be pro2A, be a labor democrat and think the NRA is crazy. Remmah2 Dec 2011 #122

So denounce the fuckers... ellisonz Dec 2011 #143

right, denounce the gejohnston Dec 2011 #146

Lol, check this list.. X_Digger Dec 2011 #46

They give far more to Republicans... ellisonz Dec 2011 #80

They give more to Democrats than the Brady Campaign ever has. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #90

There are more powerful means of support than money you know... ellisonz Dec 2011 #91

Money aside, why on Earth can't the Bradys get more members? They're outnumbered 80:1 by the NRA friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #100

You're seriously justifying mob logic... ellisonz Dec 2011 #103

So is democracy "mob logic"? nt Remmah2 Dec 2011 #126

So here's my question to you: ellisonz Dec 2011 #145

dumb question gejohnston Dec 2011 #162

I endorse electoral reality. Telling 80 million voters they need political and psychological tests.. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #127

He was 10 years old in 1996. Of course he doesn't remember. X_Digger Dec 2011 #131

IOW, he was watching Zoom when I was picketing Newt Gingrich's residence with ADAPT. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #164

It's okay. One day this country will be tired of this nonsense... ellisonz Dec 2011 #144

How many members does the youth wing of the Brady Campaign have? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #165

Seriously? ellisonz Dec 2011 #170

There's a job for you! Start the Department of Scientific Disarmament Instruction friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #176

You think you're funny... ellisonz Dec 2011 #177

No biggie- You're not the first "Billy Sunday of gun control" to show up here... friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #178

You do realize of course... ellisonz Dec 2011 #179

When where you appointed to speak for "the majority of DU"- or any other DUer, for that matter? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #196

Hahaha look at you. 8 PAGES of data and naaaa nahananahahana I can't hear you AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #94

I must be getting to you... ellisonz Dec 2011 #99

Endorsements aren't spam. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #120

Shall I start posting the names of victims of the NRA's promotion of gun violence... ellisonz Dec 2011 #142

Candidates or voters? AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #154

Will do... ellisonz Dec 2011 #160

"now they pretty much just stand for Republicans" -- you agree that you misspoke? X_Digger Dec 2011 #117

Numbers don't lie. ellisonz Dec 2011 #141

Why would they endorse democrats over republicans then? X_Digger Dec 2011 #153

The NRA sucks like a neutron star krispos42 Dec 2011 #56

The seizure of power by GWB had quite a lot to do with such issues. ellisonz Dec 2011 #78

Yawn AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #161

I disagree. DanTex Dec 2011 #110

"Gun militancy is a way of saying FU to the supposedly liberal elite" MicaelS Dec 2011 #195

No, they aren't going to 'no matter what we say'. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #93

Thanks to this thread I decided to spring for a couple of AR stripped lowers. ileus Dec 2011 #112