Jump to content

El Jefe

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    82

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

Posts posted by El Jefe

  5. Posted

    6 minutes ago, Scorpio64 said:

    So, the question is "how long did it took [sic] you guys (misogynistic for sure since women get them too).  It taked me hust over to weaks.

    There must be something wrong with you application that they are investigating.

    Thanks. Did you apply recently? 

    And apologies to all members of the fair sex that applied and felt slighted by my use of guys!

  7. Posted

    7 hours ago, pbcarch said:

    ok so can anyone explain to me the differences between these "other" ARs? they vary in price so much that its ridiculous. 

    Ones that are in the mix: Radical, MM, DSI, Troy, lwrc ( i am sure there may be more) 

    I am a bolt guy (archery as well) and i know the differences there but ARs are all new to me and some of these guys make their own parts others do not. 

    The AR platform is one example when the price is not always tied to quality. Most of the players buy the receivers, BCG, Barrel and almost all the other parts from a few companies, and even many parts that are branded as a specific brand name come from same large manufacturers that offer branded parts to their clients. If you look at the parts installed in the AR that you like and figure out who made them that will give you a good idea about quality...

  8. Posted

    On 11/1/2020 at 11:56 AM, Sniper said:

    See, this is why I know you won't provide any evidence. You don't even know the size of the Dem base. It's approximately 30% of the population, NOT 50%.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

    (see, that's called evidence)

    I'm rarely wrong, and I back up most of what I post with evidence... you, on the other hand, back up what you post with.... nothing... but hyperbole or "Truth by Proclamation", like most other Dems..

    Let's assume for a minute that the "40% independents" is the real number and that they somehow divide on the gun issue. According to the poll you quoted there are 31% democrats and 29% republicans. So if the independents divide equally or if we ignore them you have to concede that there are at least the same number of people in the US that share the same views as me as they are people that share your views. 
    So let me paste my original remark to you....

    Sniper - are you questioning the fact that 50% of the US population disagrees with you view that "the right to own guns trumps any other topic" really? you are asking for studies and facts on this little tidbit? 

    Now you can argue till we both are blue in the face, but your opinion about gun rights is just that an opinion, one that I'm willing to listen to, but you condescending self righteousness needs to be curbed. There are no facts on your side that training is not a good idea. As someone who spent over six years of his life in military service I am a firm believer in being trained on the use of weapon and the respect of said weapon. If you are comfortable with your weapon your chances of shooting your foot or emptying a clip into the air or worse in time of need are exponentially smaller. And once more, I welcome an opposing view from people that are actually trained in using guns, whether through military, law enforcement, or seasoned NRA instructors that will voice there opinion why training is not a good idea, and not regurgitate the old "I have a right" that has nothing to do with training...

  9. Posted

    On 10/31/2020 at 11:40 AM, Sniper said:

    I would love to see the facts, studies and data to prove that, but if I had to guess, they probably don't exist.

    I agree..

    I wonder how much that safety training would help with deaths in the hoods of Chicago, Baltimore, etc..

    He won't. The Dems always think the government and more laws are the answer.

    o_yXIAf1bHyRXAS9FZ8L2_g0netNyLmj6D0vgIx3

    Sniper - are you questioning the fact that 50% of the US population disagrees with you view that "the right to own guns trumps any other topic" really? you are asking for studies and facts on this little tidbit? 

    You can't say in one sentence that all democrats are gun haters that are looking to limit your rights and then on the other sentence claim there is no proof that 50% of Americans disagree with you on gun rights. Unless you believe that there is no real democratic party base and all the ballots of the last 5 elections where democrats were 50% of the votes are all fake?

    Which makes me wonder, were you ever wrong about anything in your life. If you cannot even accept this little fact that many oppose your point of view, and cannot admit to yourself that you are wrong about anything, my guess is that you are wrong a lot : )

  10. Posted

    19 hours ago, RUTGERS95 said:

    there is little doubt he's sitting on the other side of the screen laughing and musing at pulling at your stings.  He's ignorant, myopic, narrow minded and jaded.  Move on, he's better off slipping on ice and not getting up imho

    You are a true defender of free speech here, aren't you RUTGERS95, wishing me to "slip on ice and not get up" just because I do not see the world in the exact shade of stupid you believe in.

    I on the other hand wish you good health, as someone who is comfortable in their views I have no problem debating the opposition. And while you think I'm ignorant and myopic 50% of this country, and over 70% of the western world population share my views and not yours. So you have to stop and think, is there half a percent chance you didn't get it right on any topic?

    And as a reminder what we are really on about, this is not a philosophical debate about every single thing in life, this is just about guns. I'm 100% pro gun ownership with the caveat of mental health and background check and mandatory safety training for the first weapon of a kind you buy. E.g. first hand gun - get training. First rifle - get training.

    One single item I disagree with most here, and I'm the enemy. If it makes you that angry making you think your neighbor is your enemy, this indicates more about you then about the topic - FEAR, you just live in fear.

  11. Posted

    It seems that many here agree that training is good, but some object to the mandatory part. 

    Now without raffling anyone's feathers, the constitution doesn't say that personal ownership without training is granted. It mentions Militia, which one could argue that in a Militia training is implied as part of what makes a Militia, a militia. 

    So without trying to belittle the constitution most of what people are saying here is an interpretation of a very general notion, so sticking to the most general interpretation doesn't make it necessarily the right one.

    As to the whole "right" concept. If we have to get a permit and pay for the gun and permit is it really a right?

    Voting is a right and it is free, if you are trying to equate gun ownership to voting, should that be free as well?

    I would argue that in a capitalistic society anything you have to pay for is not a right, it is a privilege : ) 

  12. Posted

    4 minutes ago, Sniper said:

    Why is it Democrats are so fearful of certain inanimate objects over others. I gave a perfect example above of another inanimate object used for nefarious reasons. Have Democrats ever called to ban them? But guns... run and hide, protect the children, because... reasons...

    So does your answer means that you are a law enforcement / military and you think there shouldn't be any training or you just obsessed with Democrats? 

    And for those who do chime in with an actual input, I thank you for your point of view.

  13. Posted

    46 minutes ago, USRifle30Cal said:

    " I found the answer in Federalist #29 in which Alexander Hamilton explained the meaning of the phrase “a well-regulated militia.”

    In the ratification debate, the Anti-Federalists opposed to the Constitution. They complained that the new system threatened liberties, and failed to protect individual rights. The Anti-Federalists weren't exactly a united group, but instead involved many elements.

    One faction opposed the Constitution because they thought stronger government threatened the sovereignty of the states. Others argued that a new centralized government would have all the characteristics of the despotism of Great Britain they had fought so hard to remove themselves from. And still others feared that the new government threatened their personal liberties.

    During the push for ratification, many of the articles in opposition were written under pseudonyms, such as "Brutus," " Centinel", and "Federal Farmer," but some famous revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry came out publicly against the Constitution.

    Although the Anti-Federalists were unsuccessful in the prevention of the adoption of the Constitution, their efforts were responsible for the creation and implementation of the Bill of Rights.

    Anti-federalist Patrick Henry

     

    Curious - seems the Anti-Federalists - had it right - no?

     

    Ya'll may continue - 

     

    :popcorn:

    Prior to the Gun Control act of 1968 - as I recall.  Many a .22 rifle had no serial - as well as other arms.

    I took the 5 minute to read the link. And of course there is no mention of safety training. And of course it all refers to a militia, which means an organized group with some structure. Are you suggesting that every person that buys a gun becomes a militia?

    I'm pro guns, I'm against self entitled close mindedness. You want to own a gun. Get a permit, get trained and own a gun. I would accept the NRA "basics of pistol shooting" as safety training and an equivalent course for a rifle.

    You can't pass a 4 hour training that costs $100 you have no business owning a firearm and ask for the rights of a militia.

  14. Posted

    7 hours ago, Gabesdad said:

    This right here is exactly why I will never pull the lever for a Democrat.

     You don’t like those evil black rifles, so let’s impose stupid restrictions on law abiding citizens in the name of safety.  
     

    The mandatory training should be the parents choice, not the government.  Should women take mandatory classes prior to their first abortion?  

    You are saying the exact same thing as I am, but let yourself get angry and then go blind. Other then the gun issue, which is really not that important for us in our daily life as we clearly have guns and no one is stopping us from owning as many as we want, there are so many issues and on 99% of them were theoretically a democrat candidate may be to your advantage.

    As to infringement. If you show me where in the constitution it says that training is not allowed or is a direct infringement, I will join you in objecting it. But the fact of the matter is that the constitution was written in a time when the world was a lot simpler.

    One could also say that having to pay for a gun is against the constitution, or that mental health check is also against the constitution. Or even needing a permit. Heck let's just have guns sold in the supermarket.

    Now as loaded as the abortion subject is, no one accidently killed their next door neighbor when having an abortion, and we could argue whether it should be legal or not, but equating this to a weapon is a false equivalency.

    I suggest that we have an informal poll here among people that were / are law enforcement and military and see who thinks it is a good idea to give people guns without any training whatsoever, as one of those I certainly think that you should train people, and my army training from almost 40 years ago is so engrained that when I go to the range, looking at the way some people handle their guns makes me want to cry.

  15. Posted

    11 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

    just left the 2 statements that i have issue with.

     

     the ONLY control of "assault" rifles should be....well.....none.

     who would set the standards for said mandatory training? who would administer it? how would we prevent it from being used to infringe on us? oh wait.....making it required to own IS infringement.,

    If you want to have an intelligent discussion don't copy only half of what someone said 

  16. Posted

    7 hours ago, CMJeepster said:

    What needs to be reformed?

    What doesn't need to be reformed?

    Allowing Carry in all states equally would be the first thing that jumps to mind. As well as creating a smarter way to try and control assault rifles that is not based on silly things as we have in NJ. If I will have a retractable buttstock is my AR really more deadly then with the fixed one? Or why is a silencer forbidden? 

    And yes - I think there should be mandatory safety training for first time gun owners.

  17. Posted

    OK for the last time.

    I didn't say he didn't mean it. I'm just saying that it is close to impossible for any president to do it. Now this has nothing to do with my political inclination, the price of tea, or any other irrelevant sad story. I just believe that it will take a political coalition that none of the sides can amess. 

    Now you can keep hating me for voting Biden, I don't care. I stand by my forecast, not because I'm trying to change anyone opinion here to vote for someone other then whoever they were going to vote to, just because I do not see a way for any serious gun reform in either direction for the foreseeable future.

    1 hour ago, bennj said:

    El Jefe? Where have I heard that name before? Oh, I believe that was one of Fidel Castro's nicknames. Guns are dangerous, but so are votes. Just ask those who had relatives die in nursing homes because of the actions of two other well known dictators, Murphy and Cuomo. I actually have no problem with your comment about asking someone to take a 2 hour class and shoot 30 rounds, as long as it is a request and not a requirement/infringement. Furthermore, to suggest that since something hasn't occurred in the past won't occur in the future seems to ignore the rabid proclivity of members of a certain political party towards socialism.

    Man you are on to me, it is me Fidel : )

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    1 minute ago, Sniper said:

    See, you don't get it. It isn't my opinion, if you've been here long enough, it's based on Facts and Evidence. Unlike you, emotions don't rum my life.

    Trump being President is the biggest joke going. But want to know why we got him? It's a response to having Obama for 8 years, and shitty Hillary and an alternate choice. Trump is a symptom to the major problem in this country.

    Absolutely not, just pointing out the hypocrisy your friend, that guy, Rachel Maddow, does EVERY night. Blasting Trump for what he says and tweets.

    Do you think it's fair to hold Trump's feet to the fire for what he says/posts, but we shouldn't be allow to do the same for Biden?

    Dude, you have got to chill. Not anything that you think or heard is a fact. It is a fact that in all the years when democrats ruled the white house, we never turned into a communist state.

    My point is that I forecast that nothing will be done by Biden if he is elected to restrict gun ownership. If you have an intelligent contribution please chime in, if not I don't care about Rachel Maddow, or Wolf Blister, or Barbara Streisand or anyone else you do not like and has nothing to do with this topic..

    Peace Brother : )

  19. Posted

    3 hours ago, YankeeSC said:

    So here is what I propose:

    • When you register to vote, you must also register for the voter education/civics class.
    • The civics class will be 8 hours in length and will cover topics necessary to understand about the history of our country, the structure of our government and purpose of each branch, the constitution and its principals, and the reason for the electoral college.
    • After the class you must pass a 50 question exam and score over 80% to be eligible to vote.
    • Upon passing the exam you will receive a voter ID card.
    • The voter ID card will be required to actually vote.
    • When you go to vote, you must retake and pass the 50 question exam (NJ only - to mirror their FID/P2P process)
    • You must pass a background check before you take the class and every time you vote (NJ only) (we don't want criminals voting!)
    • You must obtain your voter ID card 30 days before voting (waiting period).
    • Prior to issuing your voter ID card you must have positive  response from 3 references (again, NJ only).
    • When you move, you must update your voter ID card and the state has 30 days to process it. (NJ residents must pass the exam and background check again).

    Sounds about right?  Very fair - after all, this is for "our safety" in the election process right?

    Did I miss anything?

    When is the last time someone shot themselves in the foot with a voter card?

    This is just false equivalency. Guns are dangerous, just like cars, motorcycles, boats etc. If you cannot agree that asking someone to take a 2 hour class on gun safety and shooting 30 rounds is too much then you are just following some propaganda you heard and not thinking for yourself.

    Would you like to allow your kids school teacher to carry a gun to school and have it in their purse when you kid is in the class, if they never learned how to handle a gun? of course not.

    Do you let your kids play with a gun without teaching them how to use it? also no. So why is the issue of safety training so hard to talk about?

  20. Posted

    6 hours ago, Sniper said:

    Really?

    Is that why you Liberals blast Trump for all the things he says? And try and hold him literally to each crazy statement? Try watching CNN for an hour.

    Liberals... if it wasn't for double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all... Can you say hypocrisy?

    Is there a topic that you will not make into the same old rhetoric? You think democrats are evil incarnate, and in a democracy you are entitled to your opinion, but come on. Listening to you, one would think that Donald Trump was the president that took over from George Washington and democrats never had any majority or a president, and if god forbid they will, they will give the country to the Russians.

    As to your other post. So you honestly believe that everything that a politician says they will do is 100% going to happen?

    Notice I never said he didn't say it, I just said that he cannot make it happen. 

    • Like 1

  21. Posted

    18 hours ago, always_an_eagle said:

    I disagree with your statements. Even if a majority Democrat control house and senate won't touch the gun control topic (which is unlikely, they would push to pass univerisal background checks and a system for a national registry of firearms to enforce UBC) the executive branch can still do alot of things to affect our gun rights. A Biden/Harris administration can effectively ban imported "assault weapons" and ammunition like Zastava AKs and cheap steel case ammo for example. Also ban accessories such as pistol braces also. 

    Also with terms of our laws, its too strict. With the amount of people applying for their first guns and buying guns, the typical wait to get a firearm (which was too long to begin with) has been longer than watching paint dry! NICS been taking a week to get back and permits have been taking months for some! Seems unreasonable to me!

    Also it takes one term for a congressmen to vote and pass anti gun laws and it takes 10 lifetimes to reverse the negative effects!

    I agree with you 100% that taking 30 days or more to approve a gun purchase is unacceptable. I want to point out that to get a car license you need a test. Both theoretical and practical. I would support legislation that makes sure that ALL new gun owners will get their gun permit within 5 business days as long as it includes training and a practical test.

    • FacePalm 1
    • Disagree 2

  22. Posted

    18 hours ago, Sniper said:

    So, you're saying that Biden is lying about this on his web site, like everything else he's lied about? Or, does he just not remember what's on his site? Here's just one, there's a whole lot more at the link.

    ...."End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts."

    https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

    Let's take a breath here...

    Just because a politician says something on his web site and means it with his little hart, doesn't mean it will happen. Hell I want to make love to Angelina Jolie, and even got a theoretical pass from the wife. Does that mean it will happen if I post this on my web site?

    My point is, and if you let your blinding hate for Biden or anyone that is not Trump aside for a minute you may find it valid, that changing the gun laws is not something that the president can do. Further more with state rights, it is not clear if even congress and senate can do a significant change. Just try and count on you hand the actual major changes to gun laws done in the last 20 years....

    • Agree 1

  23. Posted

    While I cannot forecast the election results, I can with great accuracy forecast what Biden, if he wins, will do to the gun and ammo availability. Nothing!

    Absolutely nothing, sure there will be a lot of sheep running to stock on guns and ammo for a couple of months but any of us that owns guns in case of needing to use them for real, already have enough guns, and probably enough ammo.

    And the sad truth is that nothing can be done about gun laws in the US, sad because in a state like New Jersey there are so many  restrictions that do not make any sense, while on some other states the laws are way to loose. I'm sure we all here agree that to check for mental health and criminal record, and have you a day or two when you get your first gun, are not unreasonable expectations. 

    I doubt you have enough democrats that will take on the gun issue at the risk of alienating their voters. And the republicans are sure not touching this.

    So I forecast, nothing, no actual legislation, but there will be some talk and some sound bites.

    • Agree 1
    • Disagree 2

  24. Posted

    2 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

    I'm not sure why you're quoting a LOP question. 

    Regardless, the diagram is fine... anyone with a brain can figure out what its outlining. Pin and and weld the damn thing if its under 26" OAL. 

     

    People just routinely need to make this harder than it is... a) make sure its over 26" b) use a brace that is found in an ATF letter head, or even the SBA3 and SBA4 braces don't let you use position 6 for max LOP. 

    Sooo many non issues...

    I quoted the last time the diagram was …

    I have a non NFA and understand the rules, it just seems that with all these questions that people have, it is not as easy to understand for everyone....

  25. Posted

    On 10/16/2020 at 9:08 PM, JAM3 said:

    Doesn't length of pull factor in when building a non NFA? Is so, wouldn't a longer buffer tube affect length of pull?

     

    The diagram needs to be fixed, there is a typo there, on the left green box it says  - under 26" - it should say over as with the pinned and welded device you are over 26" 

×
×
  • Create New...