Bite Me says he can dictate the type of weapon you own

| February 7, 2013

Personally, I wouldn’t let Joe Biden pick out my underwear, but he told House Democrats at their retreat that the government can tell you what weapons you can own says Politico;

“It is clearly within the right of the government to determine what type of weapons can be owned by the public.”

Now, I’m no constitutional scholar, but I’m pretty sure that the federal government doesn’t have any rights. I skimmed the Bill of Rights a few times, and couldn’t find any rights, per se, in there for the feds. I see the tenth amendment with States’ rights. So, I’m concluding that Bite Me doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

“Don’t tell me because we can’t solve it all, we can’t act at all. … when people tell me you can’t prevent these kinds of occurrences that doesn’t mean we can’t do something so god forbids if it happens again, diminish the carnage,” he said.

Yup, we just have to do something, anything. Of course, unfortunately for the country, he’ll still have his job in January 2015. Because if they go through with their gun ban, many of the Democrats in that room won’t be in Congress.

Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

Comments (120)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Hondo says:

    Well, Sippy, if you’re not arguing against Heller – why do you keep bringing up arguments regarding a requirement for “militia connection”? Heller v. DC clearly held there is no such requirement, and that firearms ownership is an individual right guaranteed by the Constitution to all citizens unless taken away via due process. Membership in any organized militia is thus irrelevant.

    Yet you keep bringing up that nonexistent requirement for militia connection as justification for gun control laws. Above, you cited Miller v. US – which was solely decided on the issue of militia connection and the utility of the weapon in question to a militia. (It was even incorrectly decided on that basis; a short-barreled shotgun has a role in riot control, and one of the missions of a state or local militia is riot control under martial law. That’s one of the things the CA ARNG did during the LA riots.) And you continue to claim a nonexistent requirement for militia connection to justify firearms control.

    Frankly, militia membership always has been irrelevant under the Constitution regarding firearms ownership. That’s true for two reasons. First, because the militia clause of the 2nd Amendment is explanatory vice operative; it explains why but does not prescribe what. Second, by common practice and understanding far predating the Constitution itself, at the time the 2nd Amendment was adopted the militia was understood to be every able bodied free male of military age. It didn’t matter if you were in an organized unit or not – you were still a part of the militia. Law contemporary to the 2nd Amendment formalized that definition. That definition is still true, in expanded form, today.

    You still don’t seem to want to grasp that fact because it is politically inconvenient for you to recognize that reality. Sorry, but facts is facts.

  2. the_al says:

    @49- Actually, the “ban” you’re speaking of was put into the Firearm Owner Protection Act at the last second by a Democrat from New Jersey, but I’m sure you knew that

  3. PavePusher says:

    Ronnie signed the rascist as fuck Mulford Act in California in…. 1968, IIRC.

  4. MCPO NYC USN (Ret.) says:


    First, long time no see … you friggin’ poster boy for mandatory casteration.

    Second, show some respect for Ronnie. His 102nd was yesterday.

    Third, how is the job hunting going?

  5. Hondo says:

    Sippy: au contraire, fool. Try 1934 and the National Firearms Act, signed by FDR. That was the first Federal law that made ownership of fully automatic weapons unlawful without special permit.

  6. PavePusher says:

    The 1986 law merely cut off any additional registration of full-auto weapons for legal civilian ownership.

  7. Insipid says:

    No, the 1934 act was not a ban, it just required machine gun owners to pay a hefty tax, be fingerprinted and be listed on a national registry. The 1986 act was a ban, it passed because very few people actually owned machine guns thanks to the 1934 act:

  8. Insipid says:

    @55- Yes, but that’s not a “ban”. Making something difficult or expensive is not the same thing as a ban. By your own language your admitting that the 34 act did not ban machine guns. The 86 act did.

  9. Insipid says:

    @54- the job hunt went well, which is why i don’t post here much (sorry to disillusion all you folks who imagined me cowering in fear). Thanks for asking.

  10. UpNorth says:

    Reagan was president in 1934? Is that what you’re saying sippy? Because that’s when the ban on “machine guns” was enacted.
    The he types this bullshit, “They(Republicans) don’t want to enforce the gun laws we have in place right now”. Completely overlooking the fact that Bite-Me said they(Baracka & Co.) don’t prosecute those who lie on the 4473.

  11. Hondo says:

    Uh, Sippy . . . the 1986 ban applies only to firearms manufactured after May 19, 1986. Automatic weapons manufactured before that date may still be lawfully owned.

    If, of course, the government deigns to allow you to do so by approving your request for a permit.

    You are aware that the amendment introducing that ban actually failed on voice vote, but that Rangel unlawfully ruled otherwise and refused to allow a voice vote, right?

    The National Firearms Act of 1934 effectively gave the US Government veto power over private ownership of of automatic weapons on a case-by-case basis, and made unlicensed ownership thereof a crime. Sounds like a de facto ban to me. Call it a “restrictive administration control” if you like – it’s still a legal ban in practice.

    A “right” that requires a permit from the government before one can exercise it at all is not really a right. Rather, under such circumstances it’s a privilege granted by the government – which may be withdrawn at any time.

  12. UpNorth says:

    Never mind, fingers way too slow. But he point about the Regime not prosecuting violations of existing law stands.

  13. Ex-PH2 says:

    Herewith lieth a complete copy of the National Firearms Act of 1934:

    1236 – 1240
    73d CONGRESS. SESS. II. CHS. 756, 757. JUNE 26, 1934

    [CHAPTER 757.]


    AN ACT
    To provide for the taxation of manufacturers, importers, and dealers in certain firearms and machine guns, to tax the sale or other disposal of such weapons, and to restrict importation and regulate interstate transportation thereof.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That for the purposes of this Act-

    (a) The term “firearm” means a shotgun or rifle having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length, or any other weapon, except a pistol or revolver, from which a shot is discharged by an explosive if such weapon is capable of being concealed on the person, or a machine gun, and includes a muffler or silencer for any firearm whether or not such firearm is included within the foregoing definition.

    (b) The term “machine gun” means any weapon which shoots, or is designed to shoot, automatically or semi automatically, more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

    (c) The term “person” includes a partnership, company, association, or corporation, as well as a natural person.

    (d) The term “continental United States” means the States of the United States and the District of Columbia.

    (e) The term “importer” means any person who imports or brings firearms into the continental United States for sale.

    (f) The term “manufacturer” means any person who is engaged within the continental United States in the manufacture of firearms, or who otherwise produces therein any firearm for sale or disposition.

    (g) The term “dealer” means any person not a manufacturer or importer engaged within the continental United States in the business of selling firearms. The term “dealer” shall include wholesalers, pawnbrokers, and dealers in used firearms.

    (h) The term “interstate commerce” means transportation from any State or Territory or District, or any insular possession of the United States (including the Philippine Islands), to any other State or to the District of Columbia.

    (i) The term “Commissioner” means the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

    (j) The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of the Treasury.

    (k) The term “to transfer” or “transferred” shall include to sell, assign pledge, lease, loan, give away, or otherwise dispose of.

    SEC 2. (a) Within fifteen days after the effective date of this Act, or upon first engaging in business, and thereafter on or before the 1st day of July of each year, every importer, manufacturer, and dealer in firearms shall register with the collector of internal revenue for each district in which such business is to be carried on his name or style, principal place of business, and places of business in such district, and pay a special tax at the following rates: Importers or manufacturers, $500 a year; dealers, other than pawnbrokers, $200 a year; pawnbrokers, $300 a year. Where the tax is payable on the lst day of July in any year it shall be computed for one year; where the tax is payable on any other day it shall be computed proportionately from the 1st day of the month in which the liability to the tax accrued to the 1st day of July following.

    (b) It shall be unlawful for any person required to register under the provisions of this section to import, manufacture, or deal in firearms without having registered and paid the tax imposed by this section.

    SEC. 3. (a) There shall be levied, collected, and paid upon firearms transferred in the continental United States a tax at the rate of $200 for each firearm, such tax; to be paid by the transferor, and to be represented by appropriate stamps to be provided by the Commissioner, with the approval of the secretary; and the stamps herein provided shall be affixed to the order for such firearm, hereinafter provided for. The tax imposed by this section shall be in addition to any import duty imposed on such firearm.

    (b) All provisions of law (including those relating to special taxes, to the assessment, collection, remission, and refund of internal revenue taxes, to the engraving, issuance, sale, accountability, cancellation, and distribution of tax-paid stamps provided for in the internal-revenue laws, and to penalties) applicable with respect to the taxes imposed by section 1 of the Act of December 17, 1914, as amended (U.S.C., Supp. VII, title 26, secs. 1040 and 1383), and all other provisions of the internal-revenue laws shall, insofar as not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, be applicable with respect to the taxes imposed by this Act.

    (c) Under such rules and regulations as the Commissioner, with the approval of the Secretary, may prescribe, and upon proof of the exportation of and firearm to any foreign country (whether exported as part of another article or not) with respect to which the transfer tax under this section has been paid by the manufacturer, the Commissioner shall refund to the manufacturer the amount of the tax so paid, or, if the manufacturer waives all claim for the amount to be refunded, the refund shall be made to the exporter.

    SEC. 4. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a firearm except in pursuance of a written order from the person seeking to obtain such article, on an application form issued in blank in duplicate for that purpose by the Commissioner. Such order shall identify the applicant by such means of identification as may be prescribed by regulations under this Act: Provided, That, if the applicant is an individual, such identification shall include fingerprints and a photograph thereof.

    (b) The Commissioner, with the approval of the Secretary, shall cause suitable forms to be prepared for the purposes above mentioned, and shall cause the same to be distributed to collectors of internal revenue.

    (c) Every person so transferring a firearm shall set forth in each copy of such order the manufacturer’s number or other mark identifying such firearm, and shall forward a copy of such order to the Commissioner. The original thereof with stamps affixed, shall be returned to the applicant.

    (d) No person shall transfer a firearm which has previously been transferred on or after the effective date of this Act, unless such person, in addition to complying with subsection (c), transfers therewith the stamp-affixed order provided for in this section for each such prior transfer, in compliance with such regulations as may be prescribed under this act for proof of payment of all taxes on such firearms.

    (e) If the transfer of a firearm is exempted from the provisions of this Act as provided in section 13 hereof, the person transferring such firearm shall notify the Commissioner of the name and address of the applicant, the number or other mark identifying such firearm, and the date of its transfer, and shall file with the Commissioner such documents in proof thereof as the Commissioner may by regulations prescribe.

    (f) Importers, manufacturers, and dealers who have registered and paid the tax as provided for in section 2(a) of this Act shall not be required to conform to the provisions of this section with respect to transactions in firearms with dealers or manufacturers if such dealers or manufacturers have registered and have paid such tax, but shall keep such records and make such reports regarding such transactions as may be prescribed by regulations under this Act.

    SEC. 5. (a) within sixty days after the effective date of this act every person possessing a firearm shall register, with the collector of the district in which he resides, the number or other mark identifying such firearm, together with his name address, place where such firearm is usually kept, and place of business or employment, and, if such person is other than a- natural person, the name and home address of an executive officer thereof: Provided, That no person shall be required to register under this section with respect to any firearm acquired after the effective date of, and in conformity with the provisions of, this Act.

    (b) Whenever on trial for a violation of section 6 hereof the defendant is shown to have or to have had possession of such firearm at any time after such period of sixty days without having registered as required by this section such possession shall create a presumption that such firearm came into the possession of the defendant subsequent to the effective date of this act, but this presumption shall not be conclusive.

    SEC. 6. It shall be unlawful for any person to receive or possess any firearm which has at any time been transferred in violation of section 3 or 4 of this Act.

    SEC. 7. (a) Any firearm which has at any time been transferred in violation of the provisions of this act shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture, and (except as provided in subsection (b) ) all the provisions of internal-revenue laws relating to searches, seizures, and forfeiture of unstamped articles are extended to and made to apply to the articles taxed under this Act, and the persons to whom this Act applies.

    (b) In the case of the forfeiture of any firearm by reason of a violation of this Act: No notice of public sale shall be required; no such firearm shall be sold at public sale; if such firearm is in the possession of any officer of the United states except the Secretary, such officer shall deliver the firearm to the Secretary; and the Secretary may order such firearm destroyed or may sell such firearm to any State, Territory, or possession (including the Philippine Islands), or political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or retain it for the use of the Treasury department or transfer it without charge to any Executive department or independent establishment of the Government for use by it.

    SEC. 8. (a) Each manufacturer and importer of a firearm shall identify it with a number or other identification mark approved by the Commissioner, such number or mark to be stamped or other placed thereon in a manner approved by the Commissioner.

    (b) It shall be unlawful for anyone to obliterate, remove, change, or alter such number or other identification mark. Whenever on trial for a violation of this subsection the defendant is shown to have or to have had possession of any firearm upon which such number or mark shall have been obliterated, removed, changed, or altered, such possession shall be deemed sufficient evidence to authorize conviction unless the defendant explains such possession to the satisfaction of the jury.

    SEC. 9. Importers, manufacturers, and dealers shall keep such books and records and render such returns in relation to the transactions in firearms specified in this Act as the Commissioner, with the approval of the Secretary, may by regulations require.

    SEC. 1O. (a) No firearm shall be imported or brought into the United States or any territory under its control or jurisdiction (including the Philippine Islands) except that, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, any firearm may be so imported or brought in when (1) the purpose thereof is shown to be lawful and (2) such firearm is unique or of a type which cannot be obtained within the United States or such territory.

    (b) It shall be unlawful (1) fraudulently or knowingly to import or bring any firearm into the United States or any territory under its control or jurisdiction (including the Philippine Islands), in violation of the provisions of this Act; or (2) knowingly to assist in so doing; or (3) to receive, conceal, buy, sell, or in any manner facilitate the transportation, concealment or sale of any such firearm after being imported or brought in, knowing the same to have been imported or brought in contrary to law. Whenever on trial for a violation of this section the defendant is shown to have or to have had possession of such firearm, such possession shall be deemed sufficient evidence to authorize conviction unless the defendant explains such possession to the satisfaction of the jury.

    SEC. 11. It shall be unlawful for any person who is required to register as provided in section 5 hereof and who shall not have so registered, or any other person who has not in his possession a stamp-affixed order as provided in section 4 hereof, to ship, carry, or deliver any firearm in interstate commerce.

    SEC. 12. The Commissioner with the approval of the Secretary, shall prescribe such rules and regulations as may be necessary for carrying the provisions of this Act into effect.

    SEC. 13. This Act shall not apply to the transfer of firearms (1) to the United States Government, any State, Territory, or possession of the United States, or to any political subdivision thereof, or to the District of Columbia; (2) to any peace officer or any Federal officer designated by regulations of the Commissioner; (3) to the transfer of any firearm which is unserviceable and which is transferred as a curiosity or ornament.

    SEC. 14. Any person who violates or fails to comply with any of the requirement of this Act shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $2,000 or be imprisoned for not more than five years, or both, in the discretion of the court.

    SEC. 15. The taxes imposed by paragraph (a) of section 600 of the Revenue Act of 1926 (U.S.C., Supp. VII, title 26, sec. 1120) and by section 610 of the Revenue Act of 1932 (47 Stat. 169, 264), shall not apply to any firearm on which the tax provided by section 3 of this Act has been paid.

    SEC. 16. If any provision of this Act, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of the Act, and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

    SEC. 17. This Act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after the date of its enactment.

    SEC. 18. This Act may be cited as the “National Firearms Act.”

    Approved, June 26, 1934.

    I’m going to go fix supper.

  14. Powerpoint Ranger says:

    What’s wrong, Sippy? No answers for the actions taken by awful Republicans Barack Obama and Eric Holder, as I linked in #14?

  15. MCPO NYC USN (Ret.) says:

    Sippy. Thank God you got a job. Last thing we need is another Obama phone carrying, welfare using, medicaid needing, benefit leeching, partisan voting, liberal leaning, and Godless, non-patriot protesting lacky sucking and wasting oxygen American without proper employment.

  16. cannoncocker says:

    The ownership of fully automatic firearms by private citizens is legal with the acquisition of a Class III firearms license, which is difficult to get to put it lightly. One of my instructors at school has a Class III license. But the great thing about being in a Chicago born street gang is that you don’t need any license at all to have a firearm. Only regular people do. Isn’t it wonderful?

  17. UpNorth says:

    MCPO, you think that changing the toner in the office copier is “proper employment”?

  18. Insipid says:

    @51- There’s a difference between saying that Heller is shitty law and saying that it does not govern. I believe Heller is shitty law that governs. But you seemed to be arguing with a perfectly true statement- it overturned precedent.

    You’re misunderstanding Miller. The reason why the shotgun was not necessary to the functioning of the militia had nothing to do with a gun, but to do with the fact that Miller was not a part of the Militia. Later decisons, particularly Vietnamese Fisherman v. KKK upheld that the Militia IS the National Guard.

    Furthermore, the Militia clause of the 2nd Amendment is not there for as a descriptor but is a restrictive clause. Meaning if you aint part of the militia you have no right to shit. Idiots who are saying that the militia is there to give citizens the “right” to overthrow the government have it backwards. The 2nd amendment isn’t there to protect you from the government, but to protect the government from you. Neither the Federalist papers nor the Constitution itself says ANYTHING about giving people the right ot rebel, but it says a LOT about stopping rebellion. In fact one of the very first acts put forth by the founders was the Militia act of 1792 in which they left no doubt that they were talking about a military body:

    In this act they give DETAILED information of how the militia is to be aranged what ammo they’re allowed to have, how they shall be paid etc. They did NOT think of the militia as some yahoos in pick up trucks.

  19. Just Plain Jason says:

    Sippy is now the manager of taco hut! Congratulations! He took a job from a teenage girl!

  20. Insipid says:

    @61- I’ve been exercising my right to drive a car with a permit for over 32 years now.

  21. the_al says:

    @70- that’s nice, but driving is a privilege, not a Constitutionally-protected right

  22. Insipid says:

    @69- Do you crack yourself up every time you hit me with the insipid is a minimum wage worker joke? Forget the fact that your engaging in what you claim to hate- class warfare- forget the fact that it’s an admission that you lack the ability to debate me- forget all of that. It’s just stopped being funny when…. well, it was never funny. But the fact that you keep telling this “joke” over and over is an indication of mental defect.

  23. Insipid says:

    @70- even Scalia doesn’t agree with you there. He says that restrictions are allowed. I think Scalia got it wrong, and i can’t wait till President Hillary Clinton finally brings a sane court, but the i can’t imagine Scalia not allowing licensing.

  24. Hondo says:

    Sippy: one has no Constitutional “right” to drive a car. That is a privilege administratively granted by your state of residence, based on application, through issuance of a license to operate a motor vehicle. One must demonstrate proper physical and medical qualifications, and must also apply for the license and pay required fees. Further, it may be revoked at the state’s discretion. It’s a right reserved to the states and people under Amendment 10, US Constitution, which each state has chosen to regulate as a privilege vice an inalienable right.

    States very often do terminate driving privliges. It’s called suspending or revoking a driver’s license. And it’s an administrative action, not a criminal one.

  25. Hondo says:

    Uh, Sippy – @70 was you. Scalia doesn’t agree with you on much at all. (smile)

  26. Insipid says:

    I’ll bet you the farm that Scalia will not overturn gun licenses. While Heller was a victory for your side, it won’t be as sweeping as you think.

  27. Insipid says:

    @75- Since the Republicans have lost the ability to win National Elections (can’t wait till Texas goes Blue in 2016!) Heller will be just an aberation, along with all the other decisions of this crazy court (smile).

  28. Hondo says:

    Sippy: you’re likely right in that some forms of licensing will probably be held to fall under the heading of “reasonable regulation”. I’m guessing shall issue concealed carry permits with a reasonable and affordable (e.g., not excessive) fee will probably be held to be acceptable. But mandatory registration of all firearms? Don’t hold your breath. And I do think there’s a very good chance that concealed carry will be ruled to fall under the “and bear” clause of the 2nd Amendment. Concealable pistols were rather common when the 2nd Amendment was adopted, and the practice was fairly widespread.

  29. 68W58 says:

    I can drive my vehicle on my own property without a license, tag or proof of insurance, for that matter there are vehicles I can operate on the public roads without those things as well. If I want to carry my concealed firearm out in public my state makes me get a permit (other states do not), but I am free to go armed as I please on my own property-seems pretty consistent to me.

    The right for private citizens to go armed has been advancing for the past 30 years because those of us who believe in the rights of free men to arm themselves have been winning the public debate, while sippy’s side has been losing. Rage on here all you want sippy, we’ve got the courts and public opinion on our side and we’re not giving up our hard won rights.

  30. John11b says:

    Things didn’t change after sandy hook like the media and politicians want us to think. Most people were upset and then just continued on living their lives. Those who hated guns already just hate them even more. And those who own guns have have to listen to gun haters villiainize them. A year from now, when that AWB gets skullfucked in a vote, gun haters will stil be hatin’ and gun owners will be buying rifles, ammo and mags at regular prices again.

  31. SteveS says:

    “President Hillary Clinton?” Are you shittin’ me?
    Here we go again, arguing Constitutional law with another card-carrying douche nozzle member of the Moonbats club.
    The “I’ve been exercising my right to drive a car for 32 years” quip tells me all I need to know about what this guy thinks are “rights” vs. “privileges.”
    Fuck you, Sippy. You and your government stay off my lawn and out of my gun cabinet, and there won’t be any trouble.

  32. MCPO NYC USN (Ret.) says:

    @ 72. Sippy. Thanks for not including me in your “joke warfare sh#t” statement. Because after all deep down inside I am a sensitive, caring, and emotion creature of earth, who cares for all beings.

    I am out. Blizzard inbound. Family is relocating to Fire Base Warwick, north west. By the time I get there hopefully Sippy will be schooled and the cop killer will be dead.

  33. cannoncocker says:


    If you look it the right places you can still find stuff at not outrageous prices. I bought a bunch of 30 rd. PMAGs for $30 a piece at a gun show a few weeks ago. Glock mags are still outrageous though. Can’t touch 13 rd. mags for Glocks for under $45-50 a piece everywhere I’ve looked. Good thing I bought a high cap 22 rd. mag for mine several months ago before this craziness. That mag has more than doubled in value since I got it though. But good deals are out there still.

  34. Hondo says:

    Oh, and Sippy? Methinks you need to go re-read Miller v. US (it’s short). Here’s the basis for decision:

    In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

    Further, the opinion goes on to state, after discussing militia and the history of same at some length:

    These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. “A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.” And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.

    Bottom line: Miller v. US was decided – erroneously, in fact – on the basis that the weapon in question (a short-barreled shotgun) was not suitable for militia use, not on the basis that the weapon’s owner was not a member of any militia. And it was wrongly decided because such a weapon has significant use in riot control – a known mission of any militia under conditions of martial law or insurrection.

  35. cannoncocker says:

    What I love about the “militia means the military or national guard” argument is that it still means that I get to retain my personal arms, being that I’m currently an Army Reservist. I still win.

    Now if you’ll excuse me, I have a working class to repress and a ruling class to serve and protect. You know, that whole “Military Industrial Complex” thing.

  36. John11B says:

    #83, I bet there are still good deals to be had out there. Regular stores in town are bone dry but I am going to a gun show next week and hopefully I have some good fortune. I wasn’t planning on buying anymore “assault” type weapons or accessories any time soon, but after listening to the mainstream media, politicians, and regular clowns try and decide what I am allowed to own I feel I need to show them that I am perfectly capable of browsing the available options already.

  37. Ex-PH2 says:

    Nice to see that once the actual National Firearms Act of 1934 is dropped in where everyone can see it and read it in its entirety, spiffy changes gears and goes off on another track to avoid, or in an attempt to avoid, defeat.

    And driving with a permit for 32 years? So spiffy is not actually a licensed driver? Quick! Somebody tell the local gendarmes they have an unlicensed driver in their midst!!!

    And before THAT argument starts, there is a distinct and specific difference between the two. ‘Driver’s license’ means you can drive alone and you have taken the actual driving portion of the test. ‘Permit’ is also called your ‘temp’, which means you have to have someone 21 or older in the car with you at all times to help you along with the process of learning how to drive. You have to hold these for 6 months before you can get your driver’s license. Some state laws may be different about how long you have to hold them or how old you have to be to get them but a driver’s license, meaning driving by yourself, signifies that you are a good driver and took the driving test, whereas permit means you are still learning and not allowed to drive alone.

  38. WebsterICT says:

    @68 Sippy – did you even read your reference? I will extract the pertinent info for you.
    That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia (Who is in the Militia – as stated by many others here)
    That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. (All equipment including weapons are PERSONALY owned by the member/citizen (i.e. not provided for by the government).
    all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid (Caliber 40-50 if I remember my conversions correctly)(and reiterates that weapons, ammunition and equipement is personal property provided by the militia member/citizen)
    How does that float your boat?

  39. NFA law says:

    @ 66:
    You’re kidding, right? There is no such thing as a Title III “license.” Look up the law!

    If by “license,” you mean a FFL SOT 02 03 or 07, please say so. If you don’t know what that means, please go read federal law.

    If you mean Form 4 Tax Stamps, please state so clearly.

  40. melle1228 says:

    #86 My sister in law owns a gun store in Florida. Business is booming, but they are having trouble getting stock.

  41. Just Plain Jason says:

    I never once claimed I hated class warfare…when it comes to making fun of Sippy.

  42. DaveO says:

    It is natural for human beings to game any and every system that other human beings put into place.

    So far the only factors limiting carnage are: 1) person with gun shoots the perp; or, 2) the perp runs out of ammo (see #1); or 3) perp suicides.

    The Veep Job is only Biden’s second job ever. Please forgive him the stark lack of reality and his utter divorce from the real world.

  43. Just Plain Jason says:

    Okay Sippy lets just strip things down to basics here what do you believe in as far as rights? If you were to say where do right come from, tell us where they do? Are they a collection of agreements, tacit or explicit, between people or innate? When are those rights justifiably limited? Give me something basic…101 stuff, don’t try to dazzle me with bullshit.

  44. John11B says:

    #90 I believe it. The anti-gun lobby is the greatest gun promoting organization going right now. Of course they blame the NRA for fear mongering and making sales skyrocket, but it is only because they don’t respect gun owners enough to believe we can see through their thinly veiled long term goals.

  45. Since I retired and I can legally carry in all 50 states, I often can’t decide which pistol I should wear each day (I have to wear a suit and tie now)…and my gun/ holster must match my belt, shoes and tie…or what kind of manager would I be?

    Somedays I want to pack a small 9mm, or a .45, or a 40 cal…so Biteme is going to pick my weapon for the day? whatafucknutjob

  46. PhillyandBCEagles says:

    @23 (know I’m late, but whatever)–NYC is a stone’s throw from my home state of Pennsylvania, which is among the most gun-friendly states in the country (Philadelphia County excepted). Try again.

  47. UpNorth says:

    P&BCE, sippy actually believes that article he cited that gang-bangers really do buy their guns. I wonder if they drive out to the suburbs after their day trader jobs, or if they car-pool to the nearest gun shop.

  48. Ex-PH2 says:

    Yes,they do someties buy them from corrupt Chicago cops who take them out of the evidence locker and sell them in the hope of making some extra cash.

    What? You don’t think Chicago cops are corrupt? (laughing so hard ribs hurt.)

  49. Isnala says:

    Since it’s been brought up time and time again here’s a link to the The Heller decision:

    Lets take a quick look at what the USCC said:

    1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
    Pp. 2–53.
    (a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but
    does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.
    (b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretationof the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.
    (c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous armsbearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment. Pp. 28–30.
    (d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious
    interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32.
    (e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47.


  50. Hondo says:

    UpNorth: of course they buy at least some their guns. The guy on the street corner is the middle man for the guy who stole them and the gang member who buys them.

    Unless they’re the guy who stole the gun in question, that is. Then they cut out the middle man.

    Philly: I got a chuckle out of that, too. NYC is only around 120 miles or so from southern VT as well.