Sorry, Gunner. Every one of those states, except for Vermont, has a list of "Prohibited Persons" who are not allowed to buy a handgun -- or a gun of any kind, in many states. The list ranges from felons, to people who have a restraining order on them, to adults who were convicted of possessing pot as a kid, to people who are addicted to painkillers (Ohio), depending on the state.
You can get the whole list compiled in one place from the DoJ's "Survey of State Procedures to Firearm Sales," which is compiled for several recent years. If you can't find it, I'll send you a PDF file of it.
(Vermont, FWIW, doesn't allow sales to buyers under 16, but it otherwise defaults to the federal NICS background check.)
Ah..every state has a Prohibited persons list..at the least related to federal law where a felon whom has not has his/her rights restored may not posess or own a firearm.
Including Vermont which defaults to Federal standards.
It was assumed that the In 25 states comment, that only those not prohibited from owning (GCA 68 IRRC) were the ones in discussion. Of course in all 50 states and assorted territories, those prohibited persons will obtain a firearm from less than legal sources and carry any which way they chose, no matter how unlawful their status makes the practice.
Symantic word games are where you are going as some form of disproof? Or simply changing the rules in mid game?
If so, "anyone can simply drive from LA to New York."
Gunner
No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith
And many of them quite a bit more extensive. 'Want to see the list?
"Assumed"? By whom? Isn't that what Richard and you were getting on my case about in the first place?
And as I said, want to see the list?
Wait a minute. I thought the discussion was about those states that ALLOW "anyone" to buy a gun, etc. Now you want to switch it to criminals?
If your argument has any meaning here, it's that the laws don't matter anyway, and that everybody can buy a gun anywhere, etc. In which case, "Ford's" point about those states that ALLOW you to buy a gun, etc., is completely meaningless. Is that where you really want to go? I didn't think so.
No, symantic word games is where YOU and RICHARD are going as some form of proof. Richard seems to want to follow exactly what the words mean, including his strict definition of "permit." So, you can stick to what "anyone" means. Fair enough?
Not me. I simply used the sig, which is true, with the exception of criminals or those judged to be a danger to another or society as stated by various state and Federal rules
The part the argument want off on..was about the 4/5 murders being done in the other 25 states, or do you not recall that? Recent head injury?
Gunner
No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith
Sorry, idiot. I only give idiots so many chances, and if yours doesn't start off with something to the effect of "here's the data I claimed", you get shitcanned just like this last post of yours.
In other words, Gunner, he's backpeddling and spouting bullshit excuses now. His argument went from "your quote's wrong because...." to "it's wrong because it doesn't include aliens etc...."
I'm stunned that he didn't try to argue your quote wrong on the excuse that some folks are missing their hands and so can't strap on their own gun".
Yeah, it was. Richard didn't like my evaluation of "permit."
What Vermont law? There is no state law in Vermont prohibiting any adult from buying a handgun. Not even felons. And there is no state law in Vermont that defaults to, or that even copies, the federal law. The default restrictions, for anyone wanting to buy a gun in Vermont, are the federal restrictions. But that isn't state law. That's federal law that *supercedes* state law.
That's why I excluded it, because I'm sticking to what your quote said, and it said state, not federal. Are you now arguing this point?
No it's not. There aren't "25 states that allow anyone to buy a gun." There is one such state. "Andrew Ford's" statement is a crock of crap from the very first phrase.
In some states it includes people who were in mental institutions three years ago; in others, people who renounced their US citizenship; in still others, former pot smokers, and soldiers who were given a dishonorable discharge. There's more to it than being a "danger." Some of it is flatly punitive. You really should take the time to look at the list.
Yeah, I think there's a head injury here somewhere, but it isn't mine. I made some judgments about which states "Ford" probably intended, and Richard produced a list that was somewhat different. His included Virginia, for example, even though it has grandfathered-in local laws requiring permits or excluding open carry, or both.
We could have had a reasonable discussion about this but, like many of the cranks you drag in here with your cross-postings, Richard turned out to be more interested in personal insults than in discussing a potentially interesting issue.
So, if you guys want to stick to the letter of "permit," then we'll also stick to the letter of "anyone." Any chance this discussion could have illuminated anything interesting or useful evaporated a long time ago.
Same here, d*****ad. You never did come up with the "4/5 of the murders" that "Ford" claimed in the statement you were defending. The closest you came was 3/4, so he must have used a different list of states than you did -- d*****ad. So there was your first strike.
Then you included states that have no preemption and lots of local permit and/or no-carry laws, but you glossed them over because you're sticking to the letter of *state* laws. In Kansas and Ohio, there are a lot of "streets" you can't walk down with a gun on your hip. There's strike two.
Show us the 25 states that allow "anyone" to buy a gun, d*****ad. Can't do it? Of course not. Blustering idiots like you just keep changing your story trying to get off the hook. What part of "anyone" don't you understand? You can't come up with 2 states, let alone 25. That's strike three. You're out.
You started off defending "Ford" and you couldn't do it, even when you came up with a different number than he did, and then you defined the terms to suit yourself, and then you edited his statement because you know it's something you can't defend. It's time for you to get lost, Richard, and go home to misc.paranoids. You've proven yourself to be dishonest, a phony, and a fool.
No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith
Now c'mon Ed. Gunner gave you that great list of states that fit - with nearly each one footnoted, with all the various restrictions that actually apply.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
So..you are once again unable to answer a simple question?
Typical of the emotionally driven useful idiots.
Btw..did you see where your buddy Sarah Brady just got nailed by the Government for illegal campaign contributions? particularly interesting since they put out this statement....
formatting link
"Brady Campaign Denounces NRA Rhetoric that Campaign Finance Reform Bill Jeopardizes Free Speech"
but hey..they always did lie...
formatting link
?ID=2885
formatting link
?ID=1707
formatting link
More is available..lots more...chuckle..you Lefty nutters keep droning on and on, spewing your lies hoping desperately that someone, somewhere will believe you...laugh laugh laugh
Gunner
No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith
I think what we have here is a failure to communicate.
Notice, connoisseurs of ideological bullshit, how one is supposed to "assume" that one word in the original quote was figurative ("anyone"), while another is supposed to be taken in a particular, literal way ("permit").
Maybe if they passed out rules of gun-nut grammar. No, that won't work. Tomorrow, in another context, it could all be reversed...
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.