Guard Dog

These two guys were at the Black Panther opening. Too funny

Now reading this: And this:

So the lesson here is they don't actually read the things they publish.... or worse... the do!

On a different subject why is everyone infusing politics, and worse, racial politics in the new Black Panther movie? Nothing I've heard about it varies wildly from the source material. So what is the beef? If it sucks, and from everything I've read it does not, then let it suck. If it's great then enjoy it on it's own merits. Can't we have just one thing, just ONE that is not infected with this political disease?

The school building where that bastard shot those poor kids will be torn down. I don't blame them. It would be hard to go back in there. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article200564969.html

Not well! I've played enough post-apocalyptic games to know it helps with the looters Remember your NBC training? They had some good tips on dealing with the shockwave and radiation from a nuclear blast. Not as much to say on surviving the thermal wave when the ambient temp goes from 90 to 2k.

Not well!

How about we amend the 2nd Amendment to read as follows: The right of the people to keep and bear arms not more than .50 cal smokeless, 40 RPM, or drum fed or utilizing magazines greater than 16 rounds shall not be infringed. I'd get behind that.

In all seriousness my #1 objection to regulation is and has always been that it is only proposed as a step in the ultimate goal of total disarmament. When I hear the other side acknowledge the right is absolute and individual THEN we'll talk about regulation. Not holding be breath. I can (and have) link a hundred or more quotes and news articles over these past forty years of debate the indicate the goal is not "reasonable restriction". That is only the first step.

That's where the conversation gets scary. A subjective standard on what constitutes mental illness standards applied by police scooping people up and locking them up for "evaluation". Some psychiatrists and media figures are on record saying belief in God is a sign on mental illness. There have been countries in the world where "incorrect thought" will get you institutionalized.

That is really something the State governments should be doing if you ask me. The federal government will f--k that up six ways from Sunday. And to tell the truth not one of it's enumerated powers has anything to do with medical care, mental or otherwise. It would be fair to ask them for money for the State governments to use but you do NOT want them running it.

Agreed. That is the root cause. Still not easy though. You can only help the willing even when there is help.

Id be interested to read about this if you have any links. I'm sure there is plenty of info to had on the web. But the details I know of come from three books I've read, two of which are on the shelf right behind me. The first is The Thousand Mile War by Brian Garfield. It covers the Japanese invasion of Alaska in great detail. Most interestingly the commanders and the strategies used. The other is The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire. Anyone who has a serious interest in the War in the Pacific should give this a look. It goes into great detail about the politics and thinking of the Japanese high command, especially Hideki Tojo: The third was about the battle of Midway. I don't remember the exact name but it was from the '90's. The plan depended heavily on victories in the Aleutians (which they had, briefly) and at Midway (which is where they lost the war ultimately). The idea was to invade Midway and destroy one or both of the US Carrier groups from Hawaii there, then redeploy to block off the US naval forces in Tongo (prepping for the invasion of the Solomons, what we now call the battle of Guadalcanal) then invade Hawaii. With Midway and Hawaii as air bases they could pin assets and stir up havoc on the US West Cost while the 32nd Army (later deployed to Okinawa) landed in Alaska and invaded through Canada. The plan was later rejected by Tojo because of the logistics of supporting a land invasion and the difficulty of invading a country where nearly everyone had the means to fight back, The invasion in Alaska went on as planned but was only half the original strength, and was intended to be a diversion to pull forces away from Midway which was crucial to both sides for control over the North Pacific.

I believe the most common weapon in homicides as of 2016 was the .380 with the .40 coming in a close second. Both are handgun rounds and are used by small and relatively cheap models. Did they ever confirm what the Vegas shooter way using?

The Marlin comes with a 6 round detachable magazine but they sell 10 round versions for $37. I don't know what the AR comes with but 30 round is the biggest I've ever seen. Banning large cap magazines might be one way to go but there are a hell of a lot of them out there already and there would be a massive demand for them the moment that idea is floated.

The first clause which mentions the "well regulated militia" is the Prefatory Clause. In a number on instances in the US Constitution and in many laws written in those days the Operative Clause "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is preceded by a Prefatory clause that explains the thinking or reasoning. The Prefatory clause does not amend the meaning of the operative clause. The militia was all military aged males owning firearms to act as a partisan or organized militia in the event of an invasion. It was a hell of a deterrent to the Japanese in WW2 and today is the final resort against our own government should the need ever arise.

Another thing going on I'm 100% opposed to is Concealed Carry reciprocity being mandated by the Federal government. I'm all for concealed carry. I have a permit in three states and I do carry (where appropriate). And I'm 100% for states working together to recognize each others permits. But I'm 100% opposed to the federal government forcing them to. This is a state government issue and it is up to the government and voters of each state to work out on their own. Washington needs to butt out.

For what it's worth I don't own an AR. I have only two semi-auto weapons. Both are pistols. On is a .22LR which is only for target shooting. The other is a Browning 10mm which I never shoot because the ammo is too expensive.

Pidesco is is a right with a "but". Prohibition is not allowed (and won't be tolerated by many, many citizens myself among them) but there is room to move on WHAT is available and to who. I'm all for raising the minimum age on rifles and shot guns from 18 to 21. It has been 21 for hand guns for as long as I can remember. Where you lose me is when they start talking about things like "assault weapon" bans and silencer bans and other crap that is specious, wrong headed, or based on purely cosmetic factors. For example and AR-15 and a Marlin .223 semi auto: The both fire the exact same ammunition at the exact same rate. The former is an "assault weapon" the latter isn't. The distinguishing factors are purely cosmetic. They have nothing to do with the operation. The people who want to ban the former are not stupid. They know that. Their goal isn't to ban the former, it's to ban both. And all the rest too. So they scare people who don't know better to agree to ban the former. Then something bad happens again and they say "well we have to ban ALL semi-auto actions". Then something else happens and it's "we have to ban ALL lever actions" and on it goes. The reason why I KNOW this is how it will go is there is a fundamental disagreement between the people who want guns banned and those who don't that the Constitution didn't really mean everyone when it refers to "the People" in the 2nd Amendment but it did in the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth. Until I hear "yes we agree firearm ownership is an individual right and we promise to never attempt prohibition" I will not budge on bans of any stripe.

After a 30 minute perusal of the nations top newspapers and media outlets it seems gun control is the only solution everyone is talking about. Ironically had he rammed a car into 17 kids at a bus stop not one would be talking about banning cars... but whatever. In light of the turn in the conversation here is what everyone who wants that needs to do to make their "dream" a reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnoFKskvSq4

We have plain clothes Air Marshals on airplanes. Perhaps this idea could be used in schools. It's no joke though, I went to a high school in rural North Florida. On any given day there were plenty rifles and shotguns on gun racks in vehicles in the parking lot. 90% of the boys had pocket knives while in class. No oe was ever shot or stabbed. It was unthinkable, This situation where lone nutjob decides to shoot up a school is a new thing. The guns have ALWAYS been here and used to be much easier to get and much less expensive. We went wrong somewhere. Blaming the hardware is not going to fix the root cause.

How about doing away with "gun free" zones? I'm wondering if we have had any mass shootings in the past 20 years where people were allowed to be armed themselves? No one has shot up a police station lately have they? The "gun free zone" didn't deter this bastard did it? In fact it likely encouraged him. There is a reason why Shelby County is 3rd in the nation in home invasions but the rural surrounding areas have virtually none. You pull that s--t out here and you will be shot dead.

His Public Defenders have become targets on social media now apparently. There is no sense in that. They have a job to do, and a rather thankless one at that. They didn't choose him as their client.

Eventually education will probably be moved to an online delivery format. You know I'm surprised this isn't commonplace now.