bulpup

double posted but I don't want anyone to miss it. An Op-ed Piece in the NY Times about the failures of Mental Heatlh care in the U.S. http://www.nytimes.c...od=myyahoo&_r=0 BTW, I feel the failures of Mental Health care should be every gun owner's focus. We have much support on this.

http://www.nytimes.c...od=myyahoo&_r=0 40 years too late, the NY times starts talking about the abysmal failures of the mental health care system. IT'S ABOUT friggin TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The main reason I own a gun is for everything in this article. The NRA should have said, "talk to us about crazy people on the streets first, then we can talk about gun laws."

To me, if the resulting legislation has nothing to do with the things behind crazy people shooting up schools then we have all been hood-winked. The lead pony needs to be whatever helps a family see and find help for mentally ill family members and looking into the anti-psychotic drugs provided to young people. And an honest discussion about what does a family do with their guns if they realize a child is turning to drugs, going insane or any other problem. Frankly, if a child is so mentally ill that one would consider putting them in a hospital, as Lanza's mother reportedly did, there should be a plan for a person to voluntarily and temporarily remove and secure firearms that does not involve the police. Something that would allow someone to clear the house of firearms while a situation is dealt with and ensure prompt return of the firearms when it is over that wouldn't cost an arm and a leg. Gun stores could do this now if we were allowed to come up with ideas on our own instead of waiting for politicians to get their take. This should be discussed by the gun groups long before what laws we want to concede. Additionally, everyone that owns a gun should be be taking a hard look at who they are allowing access to their guns. To say to themselves honestly that SECURE means SECURE. Not "I have it locked up but if someone really wanted to they can gain access to them in my sleep." If the above is true and there is an unstable person in the house and you can't afford the giant safe then the previous idea would help everyone- get your guns out of your house, then deal with that unstable person. I would much prefer this kind of self reflection on what a responsible gun owner does or should do to this ridiculous sideshow of "providing volunteer armed guards." or making laws that would have stopped nothing. Me personally, the only thing I want to be pushing on my elected officials is what the President already said, getting mental health care should be as easy, if not easier, than getting a gun. That is all there is to it. Securing your guns should be a self-policing act. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And that right there is where we are coming apart . Booker speaks from the heart, LaPerre does his best imitation of a politician ducking questions about an impeachable offense. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I first joined the NRA when I read in their ILA magazine about a city doing just this but in a newspaper. That was 1998 and they sued to get the practice stopped. Looks like the same old shit. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True datI am not an AR guy but I had my eye on a CX4 for the longest. I wonder, does the recent craze effect the 9 mm variety?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Done and with at least 3 likes.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am in a strange and maybe a little enviable position. I am from New York, work there in media, know people in news and eat lunch with documentarians. I have told many a story as a video editor and have made big ideas palitable and smaller by taking the main points and emphasizing them. That said, I don't think the "who needs cars that go over the speed limit" has legs. Your point makes absolutle sense and I get it, but it doesn't get in. That's because those same people would agree with it. So for me, I walk amongst these people and they know I have been to the war, I am not a nut and when I talk about assault rifles I have have carried one, as well as a belt fed, in a combat zone and they know this. They know it because I was with them when I got the mobilization order. Other people's mileage may vary, but this has had some great effect: I say this- "You know me. I own a gun or two. I have trained with and carried an assault rifle. I know what it is capable of in my hands. I got more training with it than with a handgun. I know that in defense of my own home there would be no better choice than a replica AR-15 m-4 variant in my hands because I know it was designed to do what I would need it to do in defense of my home, my family and my country. When I hear you say why do I NEED one I say why would I use anything but? Do not let those that take that weapon on the offense stop you from thinkng that it has no other use." Inevitably they will say "well yea, you were in the Army and you are the exception". I always respond, "there are millions more that are better than me". I will do that. Thanks for letting us know.

I want to repost this to facebook. Any problem with that? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What i mean is, I feel like I just explained where they could "improve" it. They don't agree it was ridiculous, they see how it could have been more effective. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Every time I explain why the AWB was ineffective to the point where the anti-gun person finally gets it, I feel like I have made things worse. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yea. Vlad has been saying this a lot and really do have to agree. If our goals as gun owners is to protect ourselves and families then it should also include not allowing criminals access. The latter accomplished the former without firing a shot. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good god I just saw him choke on the Piers Morgan town hall show. For fugg's sake where is the media savvy? Did the NRA get all its gains in backroom deals? Do any of them ever come out into the light and talk like human beings? That NRA press conference was a joke and John Lott is the perfect punching bag. BUT ANY GUN OWNER I KNOW COULD DO BETTER THAN WAYNE LaPIERRE!! This is really starting to piss me off. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's the first thing about his that has made me laugh.

me too. And I mean that sincerly.

Blind ideology has once again forced the hands and meaningful dialogue has died like a dog

One thing I think is either not clearly stated is that although nearly all recent mass shootings are at schools and other areas that are called "gun-free" is that _not_ marking the area as "gun-free" does not mean I expect all teachers and faculty to carry a firearm. As a gun owner I am fully aware that educators and many other people have no interest in carrying a gun. Thus, the idea of no "gun-free" zones is simply to end advertising the fact - to stop putting up signs that direct predators to the guaranteed sheep. I feel the "no gun free zones" discussion has two facets, yes there could be an armed person that might have stopped it, but for sure there would be no certainty of defenseless pray. That doubt can be very valuable even if no one actually has a gun on them. Perhaps others see it this way, but I really don't feel that message is properly conveyed.

I know if I am standing in NYC where I work and I or anyone else says comic book instead of assault rifle,all those non-gun carrying people might stone me to death. Funny thing is, i would feel I deserved it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Two things, don't presume to speak for everyone and you might consider that what he's saying might actually make sense and "wanting" an idea isn't the same as "acceptable" given the climate in Washington. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He may have helped in the research department, but he is NOT ready for primetime.

25 funniest auto corrects of 2012. It is well worth the click on the link http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/the-25-funniest-autocorrects-of-2012

sitting on your ass and clicking your fingers is nothing like training for combat. Years ago I was part of some CQB training with my Army Reserve unit with the 101st airborne giving the class. A kid started sidestepping as he was attacking and the guy was like "What the fugg is that?" The kid told him he was "straffing" and I had him explain to our teacher that this was a video game tactic. This 101 abn guy went straright to the CO and they pulled all our video games from the barracks saying "that stuff will get you killed."

That kind of thinking actually plays into the anti's hands.

I agree with all of this. When I first thougth about applying for a pistol permti in NYC I had co-incidentally started a relationship with a woman who I gradually found to be legitimately unstable. What her problem was I will never know but I stopped the process and took some time to think through what this person and and a gun in the house would be like. I couldn't do it. Rights or not, I didn't want to blindly walk into a situation where I am giving access to a person that the state would have denied or that I thought was irresponsible. Yes. True. But being an adult and a responsible gun owner has its own definitions. Take the idea of a law requiring it out of it. We have a person that likes and collects guns and takes their son out to bond at the shooting range. As he gets older there are signs of a disorder of some sort. Still, the time at the range is bonding time, and their little baby isn't violent, eerything will work out right? You might think I am talking about this woman and her son, but I am talking about anyone here in this forum. We need to able to recognize and react to what hasn't happened yet, i.e., see the issue and make sure that our guns are not used in something like this. The idea that someone just snapped, there were signs. You have to be looking. You don't have to look and see "wow, this guy might kill 20 kids" either. All I am saying is, if you think there would be a time where you have to decide if you should shoot an intruder and that you can make that judgement call, you should very well be able to determine if your guns and the people you live witth should be together.