Along with House of Games, one of my favorites.

Didn't like Redbelt, though. Hated him and her. :D

Dusty, I thought everyone saw that movie. oh well.

...stupid constitution

Found it! ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSm68IEDDT0

Gunsmiths requlated by ITAR
 

The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) has redefined Gunsmithing in the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) control the export and import of defense-related articles and services on the United States Munitions List (USML). Gunsmithing in nearly every case is not in the business of Exporting defense articles. This new "direction" will devastate most mom and pop small gunsmith businesses by the heavy and costly burden of having to register with the DDTC the same as a Defense Arms Exporter supplier just because they need to drill a hole or if they make a discontinued part for a gun made in the 1800's just ONE time. This will cause many small gunsmith businesses to go out of business. This new rule must be changed with gunsmithing removed and left to the ATF rules only.


Sign the White House petition to remove this overly broad regulation.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...nsmithing-itar

Signed.

Gun Executive Order
 

Come on guys. Obama has enough shit that he deserves being put on the rack without this action. All this action does is allow some (not all) people with proscribed histories from buying guns. This action has an approval over 90% of the population. It puts teeth into the mentally prohibited from getting a legal firearm. I would think having a felon acquitted by reason of insanity would not be allowed to buy a legal firearm. That is all this folderal is about, common sense.

J R sends
DOL

But what is the definition of mentally ill and insane? The DSM is updated on a regular basis to include and exclude the definitions of metal illness. Do realize BM, that Form 4473 already covers these issues?

Mental Ill
 

I think that the definition of mental defect is whatever the law dictates at the time of trial. You are right that the definition changes over time. I think that whatever differences between DSM and the law should be resolved prior to trial. If he/she is not guilty by reason of mental defect, they should be considered too sick to buy a legal weapon. There are a wide range of societal/legal issus here. It is a complex set of variables that need to be resolved. My position is how to limit being legally denied purchasing weapons. If the individual is too sick to be in the Nation Guard or USAR then they should not being able to be armed. Remember, the weapon is to be part of a "well regulated militia." I have been seen by psychiatrist, should that be a disqualifier? I think not, I could serve in USAR by any current standard. I have been convicted of spousal abuse on multiple occasions. In that case I posit, not eligible. If I would assault my wife unarmed, then I would be prone to pull a trigger. The whole buy/not buy issue is a complex one that needs an aceptable definition. I am a strong 2d Ammendment guy, but there are people that has no business with a gun. It is easy enough to get one illegally, let us not make it easier than a pack of cigarettes.

J R sends
DOL

Slippery slopes.

What is "reasonable" today, turns out to be the camel's nose under the tent.

TR

Casual remark to a pshrink when bummed about something --> "patient depressed" --> medical record info becomes available for background checking --> "hmmm, looks like suffers from depression" --> becomes prohibited person --> purchase denied.

Accelerate process if remark to a VA doc, since everyone knows how tip-of-the-iceberg whacko-dangerous those white heterosexual conservative-thinking vets are.

Yes, it is a complicated issue but is one that, all-too-often, is seen as something that needs a cookie-cutter approach. The philosophy in this country epitomized by "better a guilty man go free than an innocent go to jail" is long gone. Nowadays the politically-expedient thing is "let's jam up as many people as we can & hope we stop the bad ones." (until the next bad one - rinse/repeat.)

Some would say that people who don't "vote in their economic interest" must be crazy.

Depending on who is in power, that could be as simple as voting for the wrong candidate, donating money to the wrong organization, participating on the wrong forum or having the wrong hobby.

https://www.google.com/?client=safar...should+be+shot

https://www.google.com/?client=safar...should+be+shot

https://www.google.com/?client=safar...should+be+shot

gun rules redux
 

I agree with badger52, in that a cookie cutter approach is not the way to go. Somebody, somewhere needs to think outside the box to come up with a way to weed out those that pose a threat to society.

There are always going to be black market guns. Let's not make it easier for the dark side to legally acquire weapons. I hope we don't go the Britain route where they asked for knives to be turned in. Can we all say stupid.

J R sends
DOL