Background checks at gun shows?

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

What if we assume that 1 person protects his property or family each year with a gun purchased from a gunshow with no background check?

Why couldn't he submit to a background check?

Why couldnt your person that murdered with a gun from a private seller at a gunshow not have obtained a gun somewhere else?

You are assuming that person would be alive if we closed that loophole. You can go to downtown LA and get a piece rather easily if you talk to a couple people.

Alright, if that's true, what's the harm in closing the loophole then?

EDIT: It was a crime of passion. He has a felony arrest record for domestic violence and he didn't like the way his wife made his coffee. He shot her with the gun he bought at a gun show for home defense.

Because it would be useless legislation. It wouldnt effectively do ANYTHING. Private gun sellers can meet anywhere. Hell...they could post a billboard and rent space somewhere and have a city-wide private show.

Oh wait. That would be a gun show....

edit: Let me put it this way. A guy sees a gun for sale (craigslist, paper, whatever.). He calls the seller and arranges to meet at Denny's parking lot for the sale. He shows up and buys. Now, there are some who would say the seller should be required to do a background check first...but realistically that isnt going to happen so lets deal with what IS.

Now. Put up a tent and invite 100 private sellers to all get together at the same place. There you have a gun show. Why should it be any different than meeting in a Denny's parking lot?

The fuck it would. It would make these transactions illegal...which they should be.

You are arguing for a situation in which someone can buy countless firearms legally (with a background check) and then go sell them privately to complete strangers with no impunity. No fucking way that should be legal.

It is already illegal for prohibited persons to even attempt to buy a firearm. So the situation you're worrying about (guy selling guns to strangers who turn out to be bad guys) is already illegal. Sadly the criminal in this situation doesn't really care about breaking the law, so it sounds like you want to punish the non-criminal.

If he's selling guns to complete strangers then yes, I do. You're selling a weapon that is heavily regulated...it's not a fucking coffee table. I own firearms and I wouldn't dream of selling it to a complete stranger without going through the proper channels. Hell, I look at it as part of a cost of enjoying the freedom to even own guns...and I've owned many guns over the years.

What this loophole does is allow people with no criminal background to fence weapons legally.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

What if we assume that 1 person protects his property or family each year with a gun purchased from a gunshow with no background check?

Why couldn't he submit to a background check?

Why couldnt your person that murdered with a gun from a private seller at a gunshow not have obtained a gun somewhere else?

You are assuming that person would be alive if we closed that loophole. You can go to downtown LA and get a piece rather easily if you talk to a couple people.

Alright, if that's true, what's the harm in closing the loophole then?

EDIT: It was a crime of passion. He has a felony arrest record for domestic violence and he didn't like the way his wife made his coffee. He shot her with the gun he bought at a gun show for home defense.

Because it would be useless legislation. It wouldnt effectively do ANYTHING. Private gun sellers can meet anywhere. Hell...they could post a billboard and rent space somewhere and have a city-wide private show.

Oh wait. That would be a gun show....

edit: Let me put it this way. A guy sees a gun for sale (craigslist, paper, whatever.). He calls the seller and arranges to meet at Denny's parking lot for the sale. He shows up and buys. Now, there are some who would say the seller should be required to do a background check first...but realistically that isnt going to happen so lets deal with what IS.

Now. Put up a tent and invite 100 private sellers to all get together at the same place. There you have a gun show. Why should it be any different than meeting in a Denny's parking lot?

The fuck it would. It would make these transactions illegal...which they should be.

You are arguing for a situation in which someone can buy countless firearms legally (with a background check) and then go sell them privately to complete strangers with no impunity. No fucking way that should be legal.

It's not legal. You can't deal without a license. If you're buying and selling, the ATF will bust your balls for it. They do it every day. It's what they do.

ATF Form 3310.4, Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Pistols and Revolvers

Filled out by the dealer any time he sells more than 1 handgun within a time frame (can't remember how long it is).

If the same handgun is being purchased in quantities, it's a no-brainer what is going on. And the ATF will come a knockin'.

So, are the people doing these private "parking lot transactions" filling out those forms? Are they being punished if they don't?

How hard would it be for several "law abiding citizens" to buy and sell guns in this manner and never draw the attention of the ATF? I'm sure there are some people who would know this and exploit it. Illegal guns are like drugs. It's just a matter of finding out the easiest way to transfer them from legal gun owners to those who cannot own guns legally...which obviously isn't much of a problem in this country.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

What if we assume that 1 person protects his property or family each year with a gun purchased from a gunshow with no background check?

Why couldn't he submit to a background check?

Why couldnt your person that murdered with a gun from a private seller at a gunshow not have obtained a gun somewhere else?

You are assuming that person would be alive if we closed that loophole. You can go to downtown LA and get a piece rather easily if you talk to a couple people.

Alright, if that's true, what's the harm in closing the loophole then?

EDIT: It was a crime of passion. He has a felony arrest record for domestic violence and he didn't like the way his wife made his coffee. He shot her with the gun he bought at a gun show for home defense.

Because it would be useless legislation. It wouldnt effectively do ANYTHING. Private gun sellers can meet anywhere. Hell...they could post a billboard and rent space somewhere and have a city-wide private show.

Oh wait. That would be a gun show....

edit: Let me put it this way. A guy sees a gun for sale (craigslist, paper, whatever.). He calls the seller and arranges to meet at Denny's parking lot for the sale. He shows up and buys. Now, there are some who would say the seller should be required to do a background check first...but realistically that isnt going to happen so lets deal with what IS.

Now. Put up a tent and invite 100 private sellers to all get together at the same place. There you have a gun show. Why should it be any different than meeting in a Denny's parking lot?

The fuck it would. It would make these transactions illegal...which they should be.

You are arguing for a situation in which someone can buy countless firearms legally (with a background check) and then go sell them privately to complete strangers with no impunity. No fucking way that should be legal.

nvm its been answered by others.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit. No businessman would turn away easy money like that...unless they were complete fucking morons. They don't have to do anything except file some paperwork and hold onto a gun for a week.

Gun store owners are morons. Many, will NOT transfer a gun. Several of the local ones here won't. It takes 2 minutes to fill out the paperwork. A free $25 or whatever, and they don't do it, because they want you to buy from them.

Many charge $50+, just to keep people from buying elsewhere. Markup on guns isn't much as it is. Which is why so many go out of business.

So, are the people doing these private "parking lot transactions" filling out those forms? Are they being punished if they don't?

How hard would it be for several "law abiding citizens" to buy and sell guns in this manner and never draw the attention of the ATF? I'm sure there are some people who would know this and exploit it. Illegal guns are like drugs. It's just a matter of finding out the easiest way to transfer them from legal gun owners to those who cannot own guns legally...which obviously isn't much of a problem in this country.

[/quote]

They aren't filling out the forms. But when the ATF comes knockin' and they can't explain why they no longer have the guns, they get to go to federal prison for dealing in firearms without a license, tax evasion, etc.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit. No businessman would turn away easy money like that...unless they were complete fucking morons. They don't have to do anything except file some paperwork and hold onto a gun for a week.

And deal with the risk of the buyer not following through.
And deal with the risk of the buyer bouncing a check.
And deal with the hassle of the buyer trying to return the item.
And deal with the increased paperwork and BATFE audits.
And deal with potential legal issues if the firearm is defective.

If you want to make the NICS system free and available to private individuals and require that it be used for every sale, I'm OK with that. And you have a fighting chance at seeing compliance. But pushing it only through FFLs isn't going to increase compliance in any real way.

To everyone who is saying that everyone should go through the background check, how many of you keep track of every internet purchase every year so you can report it on your taxes and pay the appropriate sales tax? Almost no-one complies with the laws that require this because they are impossible to enforce.

Similarly, there is no practicable way to force compliance with a law requiring all firearm sales to go through an FFL. The best that can be done is opening the NICS to private individuals and making it free to use. That would minimize the inconvenience and maximize the likelihood of compliance.

ZV

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
First, explain what you think this means.. because I have a sincere doubt you truly understand what the "loophole" is.

I don't - that's why I'm asking. There's a loophole?

Well, educate yourself then. Its 100% illegal for firearms dealers to sell people guns at gunshows without background checks etc. Now, if you go and do a little research you will find out what the 'loophole' is, and how it doesn't really apply to gunshows specifically but ALL private sales of firearms. Why would I argue with you why it should be allowed when you don't even know what it is?

Okay, now he knows. So let's hear your argument?

BTW-I think it's absolutely ridiculous that you can sell guns privately and at a gun show without doing a background check. WTF is the point of having background checks if you can just go buy a gun at a gun show and avoid that all together?

I think you're looking at this the wrong way.

The part that folks don't like is that the government won't let people use the system to check. They will only let people they license use it.

And licensees aren't going to do the phone call for you for free (or even do it period a lot of the time).

So what you'd end up with is a people wanting to sell a product, but an artificially limited group that those products would have to go through. As with anything, there is money involved. Follow the trail.

Yeah, so what? We have this where I live and I've bought and sold guns this way privately. You go to a licensed dealer with your buyer and fill out the necessary paperwork, the buyer pays the fees for the background check and the dealer holds the firearm until the background check is completed and the waiting period is over.

As a law abiding gun owner I'd be ashamed to sell a gun to a complete stranger without them first going through a background check.

Until your dealer tells you to piss off. Or charges you $200. Then what? They aren't obligated to do anything by law.

Cash and convenience are king in the US. Why bother going to a dealer who is going to charge you money, when you could just follow the law already in place without any hassle?

If you want to fix it, either open the check system to individuals, or regulate fees that dealers can charge for the transfer.

So regulate the fees. I'm fine with that. It's a far better solution than allowing private owners to sell guns completely unregulated.

If you regulate the fees you're just going to wind up with FFLs putting up signs saying "BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR WEAPONS PURCHASED HERE ONLY." Basically they'll give the public the finger if they can't charge a fair market price for their time and effort. We'd be in the same situation we're in now.

Bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit. No businessman would turn away easy money like that...unless they were complete fucking morons. They don't have to do anything except file some paperwork and hold onto a gun for a week.

Raise your hand if you've held an FFL in your lifetime. *raises hand*

The paperwork is HORRENDOUS. You are constantly subject to the ATF coming in, rifling through your bound book, your receipts, your files, etc. Typically dealers charge $30-50 to transfer a firearm. That means one person or FFL transfers the firearm to your FFL. Then your FFL transfers the weapon to you (with a background check.)

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
60 Minutes had a segment on how the brother of one of the killed in the VT massacre was able to go to a gun show and buy $5k worth of guns(assault rifles, pistols, etc) and ammo within a hour without a single verification/background check. He was even able to buy in the parking lot. Only one person asked for a drivers license and when he told the seller he didn't want to show it to him, the seller asked for an additional $100 and sold it to him.

This segment occurred in VA where I guess folks from all over the eastern seaboard (based on the license plates in the parking lot) come b/c the ease to purchase guns.

I thought all that was proven to be a lie? Yeah, that 60 minutes segment was full of bullshit and misinformation.

How?

I'll have to look it up but it turns out the VT brother DID get background checks for what he bought and he lied about all of it. As far as the misinformation it was the whole "You mean I can buy a SEMI-AUTOMATIC firearm!" As if there is something special about a semi-automatic firearm when almost all are semi-automatic, there's few that aren't.

Any decent hunting rifle or target shooting rifle that i know of is bolt action. Of course, i have a very selective taste when it comes to rifles. On hand guns i agree, all of my one single favourite is a semi automatic.

Only difference is the rate of fire, and it takes about as long to reload a bolt action rifle as it takes to target a semi again so it doesn't matter really, it's just that semis are usually much lower quality rifles made for those who care more about semi-automatic loading than accuracy.

Now John, there are a number of semi-automatic rifles out there that are among the most accurate in the world. Off the top of my head, Barret and Cheytac spring to mind as the most accurate long range weapons in the military or civilian worlds. I own an H&K PSG-1, and a competition AR-10 that are both capable of 1/2" MOA.

Remember that thread where you spent about 10 posts claiming you could shoot a quarter sized group at 700 meters with any 30.06 bolt action rifle? And those of us that actually have a clue about firearms, competitive shooting and long range shooting quickly put you in your place, calculating your claim out to be somewhere around .0025" MOA? I'm sure I can drag that thread up. You eventually abandoned it to save face when you realized everyone was seeing through your lies.

But you know what, I'm probably way out of line, questioning a guy that just finished snorting spoonfuls of brandy with his SAS sniper buddies.

Yeah. I remember the thread. Which is why I don't bother to reply to his posts.

Except nothing that he says is actually true, it was ONE shot, not a series, the gun type was not specified (i did not say it was a bolt action gun, it is a bolt action gun though), i provided links to prove my point and everyone just abandoned the thread, you included. I believe someone even brought up the point that a .30-06 is more accurate than a .308 and i provided links that it's not (under usual circumstances) as correct as a .308. But let's hid all info, let's forget all links i provided, lets pretend that all threads were ONE thread.

But other than that, you're all completely correct in that i used the word "and".

Anyone can PM me about the thread if i did miss something, we were transiting from Kabul to another area at the time so it's possible i might have missed something. i'd be happy to reply whenever i can, just PM me a link and i'll drag it up for you as soon as i have the time to actually go through all of it.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Raise your hand if you've held an FFL in your lifetime. *raises hand*

The paperwork is HORRENDOUS. You are constantly subject to the ATF coming in, rifling through your bound book, your receipts, your files, etc. Typically dealers charge $30-50 to transfer a firearm. That means one person or FFL transfers the firearm to your FFL. Then your FFL transfers the weapon to you (with a background check.)

*raises hand*

Prior 01, current 03

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


If you don't care what i say, don't give a fuck about my opinion and don't give a fuck about Afghanistan (the WOT) then why the fuck are we even having this debate?

I sure as fuck don't know, but you can rest assured that in the future, i won't reply to your constant parading of your ignorance, i'll leave that up to others.

Cheerio.

Because this thread isnt about you, your (non American citizen) opinion, or Afghanistan. Get it sparky?

That wasn't the point i was trying to make, the point was that he brought up that the Brits were wusses and i pointed out that we were first on the ground in both Irak and Afghanistan.

Read and understand son, after that, try posting but do it in that order, it'll work much better.

 

[Triumph]

I was interested in this thread, until I saw JohnofSheffield coming in here insulting Americans as pussies, when he's perfectly happy to be secure beneath the watchful eyes! of his government, who are doing their best to control I mean...protect their citizens. Since he's perfectly happy to live under that type of government he is either A: also a pussy because he puts up with that sort of nonsense or B: he's happy with that kind of government intervention in his life, and is thus so far removed from what it means to be an American that his opinion really holds little merit.

He'll probably reply to this by saying how he's fought hand to hand with dozens of insurgents in the back alleys of Mazar-e-Sharif and thus knows more about the "real world" than anyone here. Ok John, we get it, you were in Afghanistan, you're cool, and certainly you NEVER put for the the e-thug attitude on this forum. Thanks for your thoughts, but no thanks. Where's the option on this forum for me to block specific users?

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: Triumph
I was interested in this thread, until I saw JohnofSheffield coming in here insulting Americans as pussies, when he's perfectly happy to be secure beneath the watchful eyes! of his government, who are doing their best to control I mean...protect their citizens. Since he's perfectly happy to live under that type of government he is either A: also a pussy because he puts up with that sort of nonsense or B: he's happy with that kind of government intervention in his life, and is thus so far removed from what it means to be an American that his opinion really holds little merit.

He'll probably reply to this by saying how he's fought hand to hand with dozens of insurgents in the back alleys of Mazar-e-Sharif and thus knows more about the "real world" than anyone here. Ok John, we get it, you were in Afghanistan, you're cool, and certainly you NEVER put for the the e-thug attitude on this forum. Thanks for your thoughts, but no thanks. Where's the option on this forum for me to block specific users?

Don't you find it odd that there's Blacksburg and a Lynchburg in Virginia?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: Nebor

Raise your hand if you've held an FFL in your lifetime. *raises hand*

The paperwork is HORRENDOUS. You are constantly subject to the ATF coming in, rifling through your bound book, your receipts, your files, etc. Typically dealers charge $30-50 to transfer a firearm. That means one person or FFL transfers the firearm to your FFL. Then your FFL transfers the weapon to you (with a background check.)

*raises hand*

Prior 01, current 03

I gave mine up when I realized it was a chain around my neck since I wasn't actually making a business of it.

An old fraternity brother of mine has his 03, and 3 months ago recieved permission to manufacture full autos for experimental purposes. All of this at a kitchen table FFL. That stuff didn't fly back under Clinton....

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Triumph
I was interested in this thread, until I saw JohnofSheffield coming in here insulting Americans as pussies, when he's perfectly happy to be secure beneath the watchful eyes! of his government, who are doing their best to control I mean...protect their citizens. Since he's perfectly happy to live under that type of government he is either A: also a pussy because he puts up with that sort of nonsense or B: he's happy with that kind of government intervention in his life, and is thus so far removed from what it means to be an American that his opinion really holds little merit.

He'll probably reply to this by saying how he's fought hand to hand with dozens of insurgents in the back alleys of Mazar-e-Sharif and thus knows more about the "real world" than anyone here. Ok John, we get it, you were in Afghanistan, you're cool, and certainly you NEVER put for the the e-thug attitude on this forum. Thanks for your thoughts, but no thanks. Where's the option on this forum for me to block specific users?

First of all, i have never said i am content with the PRIVATE security cams that are about 90% of all cams, unfortunantly they allow private businesses to put them up, the rest of the 10% i can live with, me and OCguy have already had this discussion, it ended with him leaving the thread.

Secondly, i never said that ALL Americans are pussies, i most certainly don't think so and those who know anything about me know that, unfortunantly you take some words out of context and you run with that, i think it's because you're a weakling and a coward afraid to respond to a real argument, IME that is how all of you act. You take some here and there and puzzle it together and WHAM you have yourself a strawman to use.

We've never fought insurgents, that was never our task, i already gave more information than needed to simply do a google search, try that and you'll understand the words i'm typing extra slowly just for you.

There are people on this forum who can both verify who i am and where i am but they shouldn't have to, if you paid any attention to my posts you'd KNOW that.

You will find losers on here that pretend, god knows i have accused others of doing that and been proven wrong, perhaps one day you'll learn too.

Until that day, cheerio.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: fisheerman

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
I consider myself pro-gun, but I believe that back-ground checks and mandatory waiting periods are critical to prevent gun owners from getting a bad name. Although, I do not like the idea of registration.

How do you propose that we "regulate" private sale of firearms without creating a nation registery of all firearms in america and who owns them with access to the system by everyone?

See were that goes? Nobody's business what i own and how much I own of it.

The starts the end around of the 2nd Amendment don't ya think.

Why would you NEED to own an unregistered firearm? And please, the 2'nd amendment is just bullshit, what would your plink gun do to choppers, jets and tanks? The only reason it was instituted was because AT THE TIME it was a state of the art weapon, today you wouldn't stand a chance against a government wanting complete power if they had control over the military forces, if they didn't, then your plinking guns wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Truth is that you'd accept it if you were to be probed up your arse ever single day by the government as long as you could keep your gun, you've become a nation of wimps, mostly and the most vocal on keeping gun rights are the biggest wimps of this forum i know of.

Can you POSSIBLY make a point without insulting people?

We don't NEED unregistered firearms, but the governement does not NEED registered firearms either. What good does a registry do if the guns just end up getting stolen and sold on the black market? Or imported from somewhere where they are not registered and sold? If people want to commit a crime with a gun and not have it traced to them its quite easy to do.

Also, if it government does happen to break down to the point where its fighting its own citizens, I doubt there will be a lot of tanks/planes/and choppers. If there are, it will be a slaughter.. but then whats the point of being an oppressive government if you have no citizens to control?

But, the main reason I own a gun is that people like YOU are not going to protect me with someone comes into my house looking to harm me or my family. The police, the military, etc are not designed to prevent something like that from happening. I guess if wanting to have a gun and not have to depend on my government to protect me makes me a 'wimp' then so be it.

I define a wimp as someone who refuses to accept responsibility for themselves. If you Brits want the government to hold your dick while you piss, so be it.. I'd prefer to hold it myself thank you very much.

He's British. He's enlightened because he has crooked teeth. He so smart. OH LOOK AT ME I'M BRITISH ME SO SMART WOULD YOU LIKE SOME TEA??

 

[JS80]

CHEERIO CHEERIO OH LOOK I HAVE A BRITISH ACCENT SO IT MAKES ME SOUND SOPHISTICATED. I'M A LIBERAL AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD I MUST BE SMARTER THAN YOU.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

First of all, i have never said i am content with the PRIVATE security cams that are about 90% of all cams, unfortunantly they allow private businesses to put them up, the rest of the 10% i can live with, me and OCguy have already had this discussion, it ended with him leaving the thread.

:roll:

You mean when you left the thread when you said the US doesnt control Afghanistan, and I posted the story about us appointing a new Prime Minister?

Why are you the only one who doesnt know that the UK is the biggest Western nanny-state in the world?

They dont even trust you with a gun unless you submit to the mental breakdown/build-up of the military.


Your posts are condesending, comical, and devoid of fact.

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: JS80
CHEERIO CHEERIO OH LOOK I HAVE A BRITISH ACCENT SO IT MAKES ME SOUND SOPHISTICATED. I'M A LIBERAL AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD I MUST BE SMARTER THAN YOU.

So do you think your kid will end up like you? A sad, lonely forum troll?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Triumph
I was interested in this thread, until I saw JohnofSheffield coming in here insulting Americans as pussies, when he's perfectly happy to be secure beneath the watchful eyes! of his government, who are doing their best to control I mean...protect their citizens. Since he's perfectly happy to live under that type of government he is either A: also a pussy because he puts up with that sort of nonsense or B: he's happy with that kind of government intervention in his life, and is thus so far removed from what it means to be an American that his opinion really holds little merit.

He'll probably reply to this by saying how he's fought hand to hand with dozens of insurgents in the back alleys of Mazar-e-Sharif and thus knows more about the "real world" than anyone here. Ok John, we get it, you were in Afghanistan, you're cool, and certainly you NEVER put for the the e-thug attitude on this forum. Thanks for your thoughts, but no thanks. Where's the option on this forum for me to block specific users?

First of all, i have never said i am content with the PRIVATE security cams that are about 90% of all cams, unfortunantly they allow private businesses to put them up, the rest of the 10% i can live with, me and OCguy have already had this discussion, it ended with him leaving the thread.

Secondly, i never said that ALL Americans are pussies, i most certainly don't think so and those who know anything about me know that, unfortunantly you take some words out of context and you run with that, i think it's because you're a weakling and a coward afraid to respond to a real argument, IME that is how all of you act. You take some here and there and puzzle it together and WHAM you have yourself a strawman to use.

We've never fought insurgents, that was never our task, i already gave more information than needed to simply do a google search, try that and you'll understand the words i'm typing extra slowly just for you.

There are people on this forum who can both verify who i am and where i am but they shouldn't have to, if you paid any attention to my posts you'd KNOW that.

You will find losers on here that pretend, god knows i have accused others of doing that and been proven wrong, perhaps one day you'll learn too.

Until that day, cheerio.

N O O N E C A R E S! Can you try staying on topic? If you would have stayed on topic rather than going on your anti-American rant this thread would be somewhat useful. But you've complete derailed it with your Afghanistan crap..

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: JS80
CHEERIO CHEERIO OH LOOK I HAVE A BRITISH ACCENT SO IT MAKES ME SOUND SOPHISTICATED. I'M A LIBERAL AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD I MUST BE SMARTER THAN YOU.

So do you think your kid will end up like you? A sad, lonely forum troll?

As long as he doesn't end up as a wannabe actor who's day job is a public school teacher I will be fine with however he ends up :laugh:

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: JS80
CHEERIO CHEERIO OH LOOK I HAVE A BRITISH ACCENT SO IT MAKES ME SOUND SOPHISTICATED. I'M A LIBERAL AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD I MUST BE SMARTER THAN YOU.

I have no idea where this inferiority complex of yours come from but this may be the most intelligent post you've ever written yet.

Cheerio JS80.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

First of all, i have never said i am content with the PRIVATE security cams that are about 90% of all cams, unfortunantly they allow private businesses to put them up, the rest of the 10% i can live with, me and OCguy have already had this discussion, it ended with him leaving the thread.

:roll:

You mean when you left the thread when you said the US doesnt control Afghanistan, and I posted the story about us appointing a new Prime Minister?

Why are you the only one who doesnt know that the UK is the biggest Western nanny-state in the world?

They dont even trust you with a gun unless you submit to the mental breakdown/build-up of the military.


Your posts are condesending, comical, and devoid of fact.

First of all, we were discussing cameras on the streets, you posted a couple of blogs and then you left, that's all there is to it.

Second of all, we don't disallow people named Nicholas from flying because we have a first name system saying that every one named Nicholas need to be checked before flight.

Third, we didn't crawl inside our prime mininsters arse to protect ourselves, we fired him, he got the boot after going against the peoples will, not even a fucking vote needed to boot the twat.

Fourth, the biggest nanny state in the west is the US, no doubt about it, as long as you get to keep your guns as teddy bears you really don't give a shit of the rest of the rights you're stripped off, like warrantless wiretapping, please give us a heads up on that in England because it sure as FUCK isn't legal there (as i'm not there at the moment even though i am a Brit i'll say there).

Fifth, next time, don't go crying to the MI6 for evidence the CIA should already have, don't falsify it to something that not even your own secretary of defense can stand behind but have to leave because he has more integrity than the rest of the government put together.

Most of my posts are condescending when i talk to people like you, Zendari, Winnar and the rest of the twats that are idiots, it's for a very good reason too.

I really couldn't care less what you think about my service here, it just goes to show the über alles idiocy of your kind, you think you know shit but you honestly don't know your arse from your elbow.

I thought it had gotten better but obviously it didn't.

Get back to me when you are of some use to anyone but your own arse.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: JS80
CHEERIO CHEERIO OH LOOK I HAVE A BRITISH ACCENT SO IT MAKES ME SOUND SOPHISTICATED. I'M A LIBERAL AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD I MUST BE SMARTER THAN YOU.

So do you think your kid will end up like you? A sad, lonely forum troll?

As long as he doesn't end up as a wannabe actor who's day job is a public school teacher I will be fine with however he ends up :laugh:

At least you didn't suggest that i am going to murder my children this time.

There are few comments like that and few people who'd make them, even fewer if they know me. I won't forget that.

I give you my word, i will not forget that.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Why would you NEED to own an unregistered firearm? And please, the 2'nd amendment is just bullshit, what would your plink gun do to choppers, jets and tanks? The only reason it was instituted was because AT THE TIME it was a state of the art weapon, today you wouldn't stand a chance against a government wanting complete power if they had control over the military forces, if they didn't, then your plinking guns wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Truth is that you'd accept it if you were to be probed up your arse ever single day by the government as long as you could keep your gun, you've become a nation of wimps, mostly and the most vocal on keeping gun rights are the biggest wimps of this forum i know of.

That's funny, a Brit calling somebody else a wimp. Go drink tea with your pinky out Nancy.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Why would you NEED to own an unregistered firearm? And please, the 2'nd amendment is just bullshit, what would your plink gun do to choppers, jets and tanks? The only reason it was instituted was because AT THE TIME it was a state of the art weapon, today you wouldn't stand a chance against a government wanting complete power if they had control over the military forces, if they didn't, then your plinking guns wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Truth is that you'd accept it if you were to be probed up your arse ever single day by the government as long as you could keep your gun, you've become a nation of wimps, mostly and the most vocal on keeping gun rights are the biggest wimps of this forum i know of.

That's funny, a Brit calling somebody else a wimp. Go drink tea with your pinky out Nancy.

We've already gone over this once, read the thread next time.

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: JS80
CHEERIO CHEERIO OH LOOK I HAVE A BRITISH ACCENT SO IT MAKES ME SOUND SOPHISTICATED. I'M A LIBERAL AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD I MUST BE SMARTER THAN YOU.

So do you think your kid will end up like you? A sad, lonely forum troll?

As long as he doesn't end up as a wannabe actor who's day job is a public school teacher I will be fine with however he ends up :laugh:

Hey sparky, any time you want to put your money where your undoubtedly quiet-in-real-life-so-the-only-outlet-I-have-to-get-away-from-my-unattractive-nagging-Jewish-wife mouth is, you just give me a holler. I'll meetcha at Barney's on the promenade. First round is on me.

Besides, no one would put you on television.

EDIT: They might put your kid on though. He's a cute Asian baby and they do well, commercially.