1,200 Guns Found in Pacific Palisades Home After Discovery of Man’s Body in Car

[Captain Obvious]

This is why I support reasonable gun control legislation.

Sorry Nuge, f-you

http://ktla.com/2015/07/20/1200-guns-found-in-pacific-palisades-home-after-discovery-of-mans-body-in-car-lapd/


Inside, they found more than 1,200 firearms — including handguns, rifles and shotguns — as well as more than 2 tons of ammunition. An LAPD bomb squad was sent to the home to determine that the search was safe to proceed.

https://tribktla.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/11227756_861339890611868_2406323936544401326_n.jpg

[del]

hobbyist is all

[Cletus]

Is there some reason why he should not be allowed to have 1200 guns if he does not use them in an illegal manner?

[Common]

Police have always uncovered huge caches of illegal guns that were for sale

[Bo-4]

Wayne's dream couple.. everyone needs at least 1200 guns to defend their home.

Btw, i'm tellin' ;-)

http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Ted-Nugent-Moar-Gunz.jpg

[Common]

I doubt that in LA county those guns are legal. If you read the article the LA Det bureau is determing legality of the weapons and will be checking to see if the ballistics match any known crimes.

[Cletus]

Police have always uncovered huge caches of illegal guns that were for sale

Is there evidence that was the case here?

[Cletus]

Wayne's dream couple.. everyone needs at least 1200 guns to defend their home.

Btw, i'm tellin' ;-)

http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Ted-Nugent-Moar-Gunz.jpg

So, you are basing on what you consider to be his "need".

Okay, let's do that. We will start by sending someone by your house to take away everything they decide you don't need.

[Cletus]

I doubt that in LA county those guns are legal. If you read the article the LA Det bureau is determing legality of the weapons and will be checking to see if the ballistics match any known crimes.

And if they do not... what will your position be then?

[Private Pickle]

This is why I support reasonable gun control legislation.

Sorry Nuge, f-you

http://ktla.com/2015/07/20/1200-guns-found-in-pacific-palisades-home-after-discovery-of-mans-body-in-car-lapd/



https://tribktla.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/11227756_861339890611868_2406323936544401326_n.jpg

Why? Did he use one of the guns to kill himself? Did the guns he have cause problems before? What is the magic number of guns that is acceptable to own?

[Captain Obvious]

Why? Did he use one of the guns to kill himself? Did the guns he have cause problems before? What is the magic number of guns that is acceptable to own?

Somewhere between 1 and 1,200

[Bo-4]

Is there some reason why he should not be allowed to have 1200 guns if he does not use them in an illegal manner?

You HONESTLY believe they weren't selling them illegally and that every one of them was a legal firearm in a heavily regulated state?

https://jabscoffeeadventures.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/most-gullible-award.jpg?w=265&h=292

[Private Pickle]

Somewhere between 1 and 1,200

Right...

[Cletus]

You HONESTLY believe they weren't selling them illegally and that every one of them was a legal firearm in a heavily regulated state?

https://jabscoffeeadventures.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/most-gullible-award.jpg?w=265&h=292

I don't know what he was doing with them. Nor do you.

I am also much more interested in the Constitution than the laws of California, but my real interest here is why some people on this forum believe a person should not be allowed to own 1200 guns.

Can you explain that to me in rational terms? If all you are going to do is stomp your feet and cry "They just shouldn't", don't bother. If you have a sound, well thought out reason for it, I would be interested in hearing it.

[Captain Obvious]

I don't know what he was doing with them. Nor do you.

I am also much more interested in the Constitution than the laws of California, but my real interest here is why some people on this forum believe a person should not be allowed to own 1200 guns.

Can you explain that to me in rational terms? If all you are going to do is stomp your feet and cry "They just shouldn't", don't bother. If you have a sound, well thought out reason for it, I would be interested in hearing it.

Pardon me then if I use my common sense first before I use my institutionalization.

[Cletus]

Pardon me then if I use my common sense first before I use my institutionalization.

I have no idea what you mean by that.

Does it mean you do not have anything other than an emotional response?

[Captain Obvious]

I have no idea what you mean by that.

As anticipated


Does it mean you do not have anything other than an emotional response?

See point #1

[silvereyes]

I guess the guys with a kilo of cocaine are going to snort it, right?

wake up, 'murica.

[Cletus]

Okay. I accept that you have no reasoned response. That was not unexpected, although I didn't really anticipate you admitting it so quickly.

Anybody else?

[sachem]

The 2 tons of ammo impresses me.

[Captain Obvious]

The 2 tons of ammo impresses me.

You mean all those penis shaped things, like hundreds of thousands of them?

[Vilifier of Zombies]

Is there some reason why he should not be allowed to have 1200 guns if he does not use them in an illegal manner?

If he were a mongoloid that couldn't read 'see spot run' -or a criminal -or hopped up on anti-depressants -or if he were an albino hillbilly that loved ass rape and banjos equally are just some reasons.

[Bo-4]

Okay. I accept that you have no reasoned response. That was not unexpected, although I didn't really anticipate you admitting it so quickly.

Anybody else?

One thing for certain .. this dude was a batshit crazy gun nut.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lapd-guns-20150720-story.html

Several neighbors said the man was known only as “Bob” in the local area and described him as a gun fanatic who claimed to have worked covertly for either the FBI or the CIA. His fiancée had lived in the town home on Palisades Drive for years, they said.

“He'll say crazy things to people like he does night missions swimming to Catalina,” said one neighbor, who declined to give her name, saying she was afraid. “He would come … and tell us he would show us self-defense moves.”

[sachem]

You mean all those penis shaped things, like hundreds of thousands of them?Yup. Them.

[silvereyes]

Yup. Them.

as long as they shoot blanks?

(see, what capn did? my minds in da gutter)

[Bob]

This is why I support reasonable gun control legislation.

No, why?

Does the 2nd amendment come with a list of rules?

[PolWatch]

No, why?

Does the 2nd amendment come with a list of rules?

well, it actually does....'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state', but since that is pretty much disregarded as having any significance, what the hey....

[Bob]

well, it actually does....'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state', but since that is pretty much disregarded as having any significance, what the hey....

Supposedly that is a 2nd amendment rule. But really, as it turns out, it is not a rule. it is part of an explanation.

OverviewOn June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller (http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf) (PDF), the United States Supreme Court issued its first decision since 1939 interpreting the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution confers an individual right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense. It also ruled that two District of Columbia provisions, one that banned handguns and one that required lawful firearms in the home to be disassembled or trigger-locked, violate this right.
The Second Amendment, one of the ten amendments to the Constitution comprising the Bill of Rights (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html), states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The meaning of this sentence is not self-evident, and has given rise to much commentary but relatively few Supreme Court decisions.

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/second-amendment.php

[BB-35]

This is why I support reasonable gun control legislation.

Sorry Nuge, f-you

http://ktla.com/2015/07/20/1200-guns-found-in-pacific-palisades-home-after-discovery-of-mans-body-in-car-lapd/



https://tribktla.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/11227756_861339890611868_2406323936544401326_n.jpg ? was any crime broken?

[BB-35]

You HONESTLY believe they weren't selling them illegally and that every one of them was a legal firearm in a heavily regulated state?

https://jabscoffeeadventures.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/most-gullible-award.jpg?w=265&h=292You have evidence to the contrary?...other than your incredulity,that is

[BB-35]

I guess the guys with a kilo of cocaine are going to snort it, right?

wake up, 'murica.
Strawman.

[BB-35]

You mean all those penis shaped things, like hundreds of thousands of them?
So your dick is small and pointed?


Explains a lot

[BB-35]

well, it actually does....'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state', but since that is pretty much disregarded as having any significance, what the hey....
That's about the militia,not the people

[zelmo1234]

well, it actually does....'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state', but since that is pretty much disregarded as having any significance, what the hey....

Well in looking at that stash of guns, he was well regulated, he should get an award?

Or were you trying to use the modern liberal definition?

As a side note I would like to volunteer to be the one to shoot all of the weapons for ballistic testing. Sounds like fun.

[zelmo1234]

Hey! Peter, I wonder if this is the guy that took our guns, you know the Guy?

Seriously. Looking at the pile of Guns, it certainly does not look like a collection. Lots of the same gun.

I would guess that this person was up to no good and at the very least should be checked out.

Now if you go into a home that there are 1200 turn of the century Side by Sides, most likely a collector.

If they are all legal and have not been used in a crime they should be returned in the condition they were found it.

[jimmyz]

I would have liked to have seen this man on an episode of Hoarders. Would have been much more interesting than the usual cat-ladies and guys who save newspapers and pieces of aluminium.

[Bo-4]

Sane response?

Kudos zelmo1234

[decedent]

Is there some reason why he should not be allowed to have 1200 guns if he does not use them in an illegal manner?

I'm also sure this fellow is a fine, upstanding citizen. That dead body was likely a plant.

[jimmyz]

If I had 1200 baseball bats or hammers would you all convict me before being proved guilty of a crime.

[Ivan88]

All those guns are legal under American Law, unless they were stolen.
And, any politician or public servant that talks about or takes action limiting the rights of Americans to possess and use implements of defense, is committing a crime, unless the Congress or the states pass a Constitutional Amendment to abolish the 2nd section of the Bill of Rights.
120921209312094

[PolWatch]

I'm sure the body in his car was a liberal trying to embarrass the conservatives....another covert operative from the militant branch of the PTA...another hit piece by the liberal media, victimizing those poor, law-abiding supporters of the 2nd Amendment! Every sane person keeps a dead body in the family vehicle & 1200 guns in the basement.

[Cletus]

well, it actually does....'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state', but since that is pretty much disregarded as having any significance, what the hey....

It is generally disregarded because it really doesn't have a whole lot of significance to the right to keep and bear arms.

Do you understand the purpose the Second Amendment? I am not trying to sharpshoot you here, I am asking a serious question. Why was the Second Amendment included in the Bill of Rights?

[del]

If I had 1200 baseball bats or hammers would you all convict me before being proved guilty of a crime.

in a heartbeat

[Cletus]

I'm also sure this fellow is a fine, upstanding citizen. That dead body was likely a plant.

What you are "sure" of is of no importance. The only questions that matter are "Were the guns purchased legally?" and "Were the guns being used for an illegal purpose?"

[Bo-4]

If I had 1200 baseball bats or hammers would you all convict me before being proved guilty of a crime.

How about removing your hate symbol avatar.

THEN, perhaps we might have a convo.

[Cletus]

How about removing your hate symbol avatar.

THEN, perhaps we might have a convo.

Your avatar is far more offensive than his. Why don't you remove it?

[jimmyz]

How about removing your hate symbol avatar.

THEN, perhaps we might have a convo.

Before the libtards and race hustlers made it a symbol of derision I would never have used the symbol. But since the SJWs of the world have made it a thing? Sure, in your face. I hope it makes your butthole pucker with rancor.

"The left hates the right. The Right just thinks the left is mistaken" - I don't know whom said it.

The hate mostly comes from people like you.

[PolWatch]

It is generally disregarded because it really doesn't have a whole lot of significance to the right to keep and bear arms.

Do you understand the purpose the Second Amendment? I am not trying to sharpshoot you here, I am asking a serious question. Why was the Second Amendment included in the Bill of Rights?

Because the purpose of allowing citizens to have arms was to provide troops & weapons for the militia....citizen soldiers to defend the nation from internal & external threat. SCOTUS has interpreted the law to allow individuals to have weapons unrelated to a militia....which is why I said that portion of the 2nd is disregarded.

I seriously doubt that the Founding Fathers intended that individuals have 1,200 guns in their basement. I seriously doubt they anticipated the capacity of modern guns.

I am a gun owner & agree with private ownership of guns. However, I believe that licensing restrictions are a necessity. Possession of 1,200 guns (with a dead body in the family car) is suspicious to say the least. Those that wish to defend this incident are being silly.

[BB-35]

How about removing your hate symbol avatar.

THEN, perhaps we might have a convo.
Only YOU think hate needs a 'symbol'

[BB-35]

Because the purpose of allowing citizens to have arms was to provide troops & weapons for the militia....citizen soldiers to defend the nation from internal & external threat. SCOTUS has interpreted the law to allow individuals to have weapons unrelated to a militia....which is why I said that portion of the 2nd is disregarded.

I seriously doubt that the Founding Fathers intended that individuals have 1,200 guns in their basement. I seriously doubt they anticipated the capacity of modern guns.

I am a gun owner & agree with private ownership of guns. However, I believe that licensing restrictions are a necessity. Possession of 1,200 guns (with a dead body in the family car) is suspicious to say the least. Those that wish to defend this incident are being silly.

,
So let me understand.....Unless I own a Goss Metroliner press,I can't exercise my freedom of the press?

[Captain Obvious]

? was any crime broken?

Broken crime?

Did you read the article?

I'm as pro-gun as they come, nobody needs 1,200 guns, period. If someone feels the need to amass 1,200 guns and two tons of ammo, they need taken away to special assisted living.

[PolWatch]

,
So let me understand.....Unless I own a Goss Metroliner press,I can't exercise my freedom of the press?

http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=JN.BxQgUfmr/Eg2JHMyND9crg&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0

[Bo-4]

You have evidence to the contrary?...other than your incredulity,that is

Congrats, you strung together 11 (sorta-coherant) words after your previous high was seven!!

[Bo-4]

So your dick is small and pointed?

Explains a lot
@Captain Obvious (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=3).. thinkin' that our friend BB COULD be the missing link!

:rofl:

[Captain Obvious]

@Captain Obvious (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=3).. thinkin' that our friend BB COULD be the missing link!

:rofl:

That or he's the authority on small, pointed dicks.

[Bo-4]

as long as they shoot blanks?

(see, what capn did? my minds in da gutter)

IN the mouth is no good for me.. ON the neck, boobs or tummy?

Perf!! ;-)

[Captain Obvious]

IN the mouth is no good for me.. ON the neck, boobs or tummy?

Perf!! ;-)

Say what...

[Bo-4]

That or he's the authority on small, pointed dicks.

Give the dude a break.. think he just hit his record ELEVEN words in a response.

More than teeth? Time'll tell. ;-)

http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/30368017cbhgb_sm.jpg

[Bo-4]

Your avatar is far more offensive than his. Why don't you remove it?

Well super-cool Gomer. We'll put you down as a supporter of racism & hate and me as one who makes light of Ted Cruz.

Can you GET any more fucking AWESOME?

:rofl:

[Bo-4]

Before the libtards and race hustlers made it a symbol of derision I would never have used the symbol. But since the SJWs of the world have made it a thing? Sure, in your face. I hope it makes your butthole pucker with rancor.

"The left hates the right. The Right just thinks the left is mistaken" - I don't know whom said it.

The hate mostly comes from people like you.

Dude, i've an AWESOME new board for you where you'll find your kin who also post to AmericanRenaissance and Stormfront.

PM me! ;-)

[Bo-4]

Only YOU think hate needs a 'symbol'

That made no sense, but congrats on an ELEVEN word post!

[Bo-4]

I'm sure the body in his car was a liberal trying to embarrass the conservatives....another covert operative from the militant branch of the PTA...another hit piece by the liberal media, victimizing those poor, law-abiding supporters of the 2nd Amendment! Every sane person keeps a dead body in the family vehicle & 1200 guns in the basement.

Hey now, are you suggesting that i am not entitled to the 12,000 guns in my 3 car garage or something? ;-)

Uh oh

http://www.prestashop.com/forums/uploads/profile/photo-905511.jpg?_r=1423215502

[Bo-4]

Say what...

Clearly we need a new SEX forum.

[Captain Obvious]

Clearly we need a new SEX forum.

The Hole

Aptly named too.

[Cletus]

Broken crime?

Did you read the article?

I'm as pro-gun as they come, nobody needs 1,200 guns, period. If someone feels the need to amass 1,200 guns and two tons of ammo, they need taken away to special assisted living.

How many guns does somebody need? Give me a number.

Do you really think the rights protected by the Constitution are about need? If so, who should determine that need? What criteria should be used to determine "need"?

If you have some possession it is decided by someone else you don't need, should the authorities be allowed to prevent you from owning it?

[Cletus]

Well super-cool Gomer. We'll put you down as a supporter of racism & hate and me as one who makes light of Ted Cruz.

Can you GET any more $#@!ing AWESOME?

:rofl:

Actually, I support Cruz and if he gets his party's nomination, I will vote for him.

Do you know Cruz's position on the Second Amendment?

[Captain Obvious]

How many guns does somebody need? Give me a number.

Do you really think the rights protected by the Constitution are about need? If so, who should determine that need? What criteria should be used to determine "need"?

If you have some possession it is decided by someone else you don't need, should the authorities be allowed to prevent you from owning it?

Already answered this question, somewhere between 1 and 1,200

[Cletus]

Already answered this question, somewhere between 1 and 1,200

That is not an answer. It is a copout.

So, would you be okay if he had owned 1,199 guns? How about 1,000? 800? 500? 100?

You have obviously decided 1200 is too many, which means you should have an idea about how many would be acceptable.

[Captain Obvious]

That is not an answer. It is a copout.

So, would you be okay if he had owned 1,199 guns? How about 1,000? 800? 500? 100?

You have obviously decided 1200 is too many, which means you should have an idea about how many would be acceptable.

I'm pretty sure you shouldn't be playing with slingshots let alone firearms.

[zelmo1234]

Because the purpose of allowing citizens to have arms was to provide troops & weapons for the militia....citizen soldiers to defend the nation from internal & external threat. SCOTUS has interpreted the law to allow individuals to have weapons unrelated to a militia....which is why I said that portion of the 2nd is disregarded.

I seriously doubt that the Founding Fathers intended that individuals have 1,200 guns in their basement. I seriously doubt they anticipated the capacity of modern guns.

I am a gun owner & agree with private ownership of guns. However, I believe that licensing restrictions are a necessity. Possession of 1,200 guns (with a dead body in the family car) is suspicious to say the least. Those that wish to defend this incident are being silly.

Actually, if you read the federal papers that recorded the debates, you would find that the founding fathers had 2 reasons for the 2nd amendment. #1 You won't like, but is was so that the people could over throw the Government if they started to become a tyranny. #2 Was so the people could defend themselves and their states.

The founding fathers would actually want the people to be well regulated. Meaning have access and training in all modern weapons, not just guns.

Add to that the fact that every other time that the constitution mentions "the people" it refers to the citizens. With that care that the founding fathers put into the constitution, it is highly unlikely that they would have made such a mistake.

The sad issue of today is, we need not wonder with the founding fathers thought about the issues, as it is recorded for prosperity So a little research and we can have an understanding of the facts.

[Cletus]

I'm pretty sure you shouldn't be playing with slingshots let alone firearms.

So, you have no answer.

Okay.

[Cletus]

Actually, if you read the federal papers that recorded the debates, you would find that the founding fathers had 2 reasons for the 2nd amendment. #1 You won't like, but is was so that the people could over throw the Government if they started to become a tyranny. #2 Was so the people could defend themselves and their states.

The founding fathers would actually want the people to be well regulated. Meaning have access and training in all modern weapons, not just guns.

Add to that the fact that every other time that the constitution mentions "the people" it refers to the citizens. With that care that the founding fathers put into the constitution, it is highly unlikely that they would have made such a mistake.

The sad issue of today is, we need not wonder with the founding fathers thought about the issues, as it is recorded for prosperity So a little research and we can have an understanding of the facts.

Well spoken.

I might add that what a lot of people don't seem to understand is the use of the word "shall" in the Constitution. Wherever it says something shall or shall not be done, that is not a suggestion. It is a COMMAND.

[Tahuyaman]

There is an endless supply if things which outrage liberals.

[BB-35]

Broken crime?

Did you read the article?

I'm as pro-gun as they come, nobody needs 1,200 guns, period. If someone feels the need to amass 1,200 guns and two tons of ammo, they need taken away to special assisted living.Why,exactly?

Someone died and made you arbiter of what others 'need' now?

[BB-35]

http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=JN.BxQgUfmr/Eg2JHMyND9crg&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0 didn't understand the question?

[PolWatch]

didn't understand the question?

don't understand hyperbole?

[BB-35]

Congrats, you strung together 11 (sorta-coherant) words after your previous high was seven!!
And libs favorite tactic,Ad Hominem

[BB-35]

@Captain Obvious (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=3).. thinkin' that our friend BB COULD be the missing link!

:rofl:Ad Hominem,,,,,what a shock

[BB-35]

That or he's the authority on small, pointed dicks.
I know what ammunition looks like.....NOT dicks.

[BB-35]

Give the dude a break.. think he just hit his record ELEVEN words in a response.

More than teeth? Time'll tell. ;-)

http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/30368017cbhgb_sm.jpgSorry chump,closest thing to overalls I own is some carpenter jeans

Kepp up the ad hominem though

[Tahuyaman]

well, it actually does....'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state',


Why did you omit the part which comes after the comma?

[decedent]

12093

http://www.scottbieser.com/images/Sept11_c540.jpg


Physics is for commies, and bullets can't penetrate wafer-thin aluminum.

Planes would be so much safer is everyone was armed. Just look at gun shows, where everyone is packing, but there are almost no shootings... almost.

[BB-35]

Physics is for commies, and bullets can't penetrate wafer-thin aluminum.

Planes would be so much safer is everyone was armed. Just look at gun shows, where everyone is packing, but there are almost no shootings... almost.
ever hear of frangable Ammo?


And the only ones armed at gun shows are the security

[Private Pickle]

ever hear of frangable Ammo?


And the only ones armed at gun shows are the security

No...and no...

[maineman]

Why did you omit the part which comes after the comma?

the dependent clause which refers back to the militia, you mean?

[Cletus]

Physics is for commies, and bullets can't penetrate wafer-thin aluminum.

Planes would be so much safer is everyone was armed. Just look at gun shows, where everyone is packing, but there are almost no shootings... almost.

Explosive decompression, which is what I am assuming you are referring to, would not occur if a bullet penetrated the hull of a commercial aircraft. That's a fact.

[BB-35]

the dependent clause which refers back to the militia, you mean?
What of the part that refers to the right of the people?

[BB-35]

No...and no...
Frangible,my mistake.....gun shows here I've been to the only ones armed were the police

[William]

Frangible,my mistake.....gun shows here I've been to the only ones armed were the police

Ummm ...


An 8-year-old boy died after accidentally shooting himself in the head while firing an Uzi submachine gun under adult supervision at a gun fair.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27399337/ns/us_news-life/t/boy-accidentally-kills-self-gun-show/#.VbCAZLX4TQw


A VENDOR accidentally shot a woman in the leg while demonstrating a gun and holster at a gun show in Pennsylvania.

http://www.news.com.au/world/woman-accidentally-shot-by-vendor-at-pennsylvania-gun-show/story-fndir2ev-1226972411609


Gun activists designated last Saturday “Gun Appreciation Day” in an attempt to highlight their opposition to gun safety laws. The PR stunt proved to be more of an embarrassment, however, when 5 people were shot at 3 different gun shows on Gun Appreciation Day (http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/19/1473881/two-people-accidentally-shot-at-a-gun-show-safety-checkpoint-on-gun-appreciation-day/). On Friday afternoon, an Iowa gun dealer closed out the week by becoming the sixth person shot at a gun show.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/26/1500431/for-the-sixth-time-in-one-week-man-shot-at-gun-show/


Five people were wounded in accidents at gun shows in North Carolina, Ohio and Indiana on Saturday, according to authorities.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/19/16603029-5-accidentally-shot-at-gun-shows-in-north-carolina-ohio-indianahttp://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/19/16603029-5-accidentally-shot-at-gun-shows-in-north-carolina-ohio-indiana


Our title story this week comes to us from Muscle Shoals, Alabama, where we found the first accidental discharge at a gun show in 2014. How often does this really happen? Well, this latest incident continues the streak stretching back to 2012 during which we've averaged about one such accident per month, according to the stories I've been able to find.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/19/1276171/-First-gun-show-accident-of-2014-continues-avg-1-per-month-streak-into-3rd-year-GunFAIL-LVII#


Gun Appreciation Day hasn’t gotten off to such a great start: two people were shot in Raleigh, North Carolina after a gun accidentally discharged at a safety check point before the show. Both victims were taken to a hospital immediately and the fire department shut down the show for the rest of the day.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/two-people-accidentally-shot-at-gun-show-in-honor-of-gun-appreciation-day/


Raleigh, N.C. (http://www.wral.com/news-near-me/13696752/?map_asset_id=12000843) — Officials said the Dixie Gun and Knife Show (http://dixiegunandknifeshow.com/pages/Raleigh-Show.html) will continue Sunday without private gun sales after three people, including a retired sheriff's deputy, were injured Saturday when a gun brought in by a patron who planned to sell it accidentally discharged.


http://www.wral.com/private-gun-sales-at-gun-show-on-hold-after-three-hurt-in-accidental-shooting/12000843/

So I guess gun shows are not totally safe. :smiley:

[GrassrootsConservative]

Ummm ...


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27399337/ns/us_news-life/t/boy-accidentally-kills-self-gun-show/#.VbCAZLX4TQw


http://www.news.com.au/world/woman-accidentally-shot-by-vendor-at-pennsylvania-gun-show/story-fndir2ev-1226972411609


http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/26/1500431/for-the-sixth-time-in-one-week-man-shot-at-gun-show/


http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/19/16603029-5-accidentally-shot-at-gun-shows-in-north-carolina-ohio-indianahttp://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/19/16603029-5-accidentally-shot-at-gun-shows-in-north-carolina-ohio-indiana


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/19/1276171/-First-gun-show-accident-of-2014-continues-avg-1-per-month-streak-into-3rd-year-GunFAIL-LVII#


http://www.mediaite.com/online/two-people-accidentally-shot-at-gun-show-in-honor-of-gun-appreciation-day/


http://www.wral.com/private-gun-sales-at-gun-show-on-hold-after-three-hurt-in-accidental-shooting/12000843/

So I guess gun shows are not totally safe. :smiley:

No less safe than anything else.

[BB-35]

Ummm ...


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27399337/ns/us_news-life/t/boy-accidentally-kills-self-gun-show/#.VbCAZLX4TQw


http://www.news.com.au/world/woman-accidentally-shot-by-vendor-at-pennsylvania-gun-show/story-fndir2ev-1226972411609


http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/26/1500431/for-the-sixth-time-in-one-week-man-shot-at-gun-show/


http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/19/16603029-5-accidentally-shot-at-gun-shows-in-north-carolina-ohio-indianahttp://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/19/16603029-5-accidentally-shot-at-gun-shows-in-north-carolina-ohio-indiana


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/19/1276171/-First-gun-show-accident-of-2014-continues-avg-1-per-month-streak-into-3rd-year-GunFAIL-LVII#


http://www.mediaite.com/online/two-people-accidentally-shot-at-gun-show-in-honor-of-gun-appreciation-day/


http://www.wral.com/private-gun-sales-at-gun-show-on-hold-after-three-hurt-in-accidental-shooting/12000843/

So I guess gun shows are not totally safe. :smiley:I did say HERE

[Cletus]

So I guess gun shows are not totally safe. :smiley:

What is?

[William]

I did say HERE

Yeh, I know you did, and I'm not saying you are wrong about your gun shows. But your post gave the impression that all gun shows are safe cos no one except the police or armed guards can fire guns.

[maineman]

I did say HERE

initially, in post #83, you did NOT.

[Private Pickle]

Frangible,my mistake.....gun shows here I've been to the only ones armed were the police

You can openly carry, with a tie in the chamber, or CC carry.

[BB-35]

initially, in post #83, you did NOT.
And in a later post,I corrected that,junior.......jeeze!

[maineman]

What of the part that refers to the right of the people?

as I said, that part is contained in a dependent clause which refers back to a well ordered militia. Were you smoking pot during high school grammar?

[BB-35]

as I said, that part is contained in a dependent clause which refers back to a well ordered militia. Were you smoking pot during high school grammar?



Were you? there IS no 'dependent clause,Rights need not 'depend' on anything,as they do not depend on the constitution for their existence