Huffingtonpost says Cho bought his guns through the mail!

[mike101]

When's the last time you heard about mail order guns?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-schlatter/dear-chuck-heston-fans_b_46520.html

Dear Chuck Heston fans:

I thought now was the sickest time in our history, It just got sicker.

CHO fired 100 bullets from an automatic weapon he had just bought by mail. He had been a mental patient but the power of the NRA prohibited including that information as part of his only one minute gun clearance allowed by the NRA.


"He got one of his brand new guns on the internet ($580 on a credit card) but the power of the NRA prohibited more than a one minute back ground check, so he got his clearance, and his shinny new GUNs.

I cannot believe the discussions that are now going on with the NRA Nutzies" etc., etc.

HELP!!!!!

 

[LawBot5000]

Circa 1967 I beleive.

 

[El Tejon]

Just last Thursday. A couple of C&R guns came into the office.

Misinformation about Cho. Correct it.

 

[mike101]

"Misinformation about Cho. Correct it."

I'm trying, man! So far, I'm not seeing my post. It's been over an hour. It wasn't nasty, or anything.

I'm trying to expose these people for the steenking liars they are, but it's hard when they censor everything.

How about some of you guys joining in the fun?

 

[tmajors]

I love this comment there:

You know, I've always hated guns.
Always had them and know how to use them.

I hate them like I hate an ironing board.
If I need to use it, I know how.
The need to use it must be very great.

The person that posted it is misguided but at least she isn't completely anti-gun.

 

[mike101]

I don't believe it. They printed my post. The shock almost killed me.

"CHO fired 100 bullets from an automatic weapon he had just bought by mail. He had been a mental patient but the power of the NRA prohibited including that information as part of his only one minute gun clearance allowed by the NRA."

That is so inaccurate, I hardly know where to begin.

First, it was not an automatic weapon. It was semi-automatic. "Automatic" means it would have been a machine gun. I would ask you to learn the difference, but I have a feeling you know already.

Secondly, nobody buys guns through the mail any more. It's been illegal since the '60s. He had a dealer, in another location, send the gun to a local dealer. It's called a "Dealer Transfer". Both dealers must hold Fed. Firearms Licenses. So, he still bought it from a store. But, I'll bet you knew that, too.

Thirdly, whether or not a state includes mental health info in a N.I.C.S. check, is entirely up to that state. You can't blame the NRA for everything.
By: mike101 on April 22, 2007 at 05:02pm

 

[Axman]

Why are all of the replies flagged as abusive?

 

[Risasi]

Wow, I see that mommadonna has a problem with logic and common sense...

There are quite a few others though that have at least halfway reasonable responses for a liberal news website.

 

[Roccobro]

Don't forget to mention the one gun a month law he abided. There is no waiting period in that state? I mean, I've never been held up LESS than 2 minutes while the clerk was on the phone with an NICS agent....

Justin

 

[spocahp anar]

Mike you forgot to call them on the mandatory "One Minute Time Limit Background Check".

As I recall the ATF has up to 3 days to clear/deny you for a background check; if the ATF cannot clear or deny you in three days it goes through.

 

[Risasi]

Gaa, I'm getting "timeouts"...

I tried to reply twice. That's the problem with sound logic. When the other side runs out of arguments, they change the rules.

 

[Geno]

Dear Santa:

I would like a new rifle for deer hunting. I don't have a chimney, so please just send it through the mail in a majic envelope. By the way, cancel that A-10 Warthog. Gas prices have really gone up too much. I hope you didn't drop that in the mail yet. If you did, I'll just write "return to sender" on the envelope.


Back to reality...What a bunch of whacked-out dorks! Bought it through "...the mail"? Not since the 1930s have people bought firearms through the Sears catalog and had the firearms sent through the mail. Although, the inability to do so demonstrates just how severely the Constitution has been eroded. Seriously, I believe that they factually know better, but they though out this red herring to confuse and anger people into demanding more ignorant laws.

 

[Kael]

Axman,
I think thats a link to report the post as abusive, not indicating it's currently considered so.

 

[Elza]

Doc2005: Bought it through "...the mail"? Not since the 1930s have people bought firearms through the Sears catalog and had the firearms sent through the mail.

Not quite right. Lee Harvey Oswald got his through the mail. This was stopped by the GCA of 1968 if I recall correctly. Chime in here if I'm wrong.

 

[mike101]

You recall correctly.

 

[Autolycus]

Nothing like getting the sheep all riled up so that you can pass a new law to make something illegal more illegal.

 

[Elza]

Tecumseh: Nothing like getting the sheep all riled up so that you can pass a new law to make something illegal more illegal.

Ain't that the truth??!!

Amazing that people actually buy into the "making it MORE illegal will make the problem go away" crap.

 

[Eagle103]

I appreciate that some of you guys have the stomach to hang out and post on the Huffington, Brady, etc. message boards. I couldn't handle it. Well put reply BTW.

 

[tanksoldier]

Sigh; the comment I posted on the site:

Your post is full of factual errors:

1. The killer did not use and automatic weapon.
2. The killer did not buy his weapons thru the mail.
3. The NRA had nothing to do with Virginia failig to update the federal database as required by law.
4. This was a college, the sudents were someone's childeren, but they were adults, and many over 21.
5. Even at schools like Columbine where the students ARE children, the teachers are not. Yet they are disarmed as well and unable to protect those in their charge.
6. The colonists were armed mostly with rifles, better technology than most British Soldiers of the time, and journalists were equipped with the cylinder press instead of TV, the internet and radio. Perhaps we should adjust the 1st Amendment as well.
7. The point is, criminals by definition have no rules. Only the law abiding can be disarmed by a law. Gun-free zones just tell murderers where to look for easy targets.

 

[Elza]

Eagle103: I appreciate that some of you guys have the stomach to hang out and post on the Huffington, Brandy, etc. message boards. I couldn't handle it.

I take a large dose of Pepto Bismal first.

 

[mike101]

Tanksoldier- Nice job

Eagle- Thanks. Now you'll have to excuse me, while I take my blood pressure medicine.

 

[mike101]

Hi Risasi

Thanks for helping out, pal. Heres another gem I found over there, this morning. This one is directed at both of us.

"Lots of dumb defensive comments on this post. Here's one:

"That is so innacurate, I hardly know where to begin. First, it was not an automatic weapon. It was semi-automatic. "Automatic" means it would have been a machine gun.">mike101

That is a distinction without a difference. There are guns which use the released explosive gases to perform various gun functions. They are generically referred to as "automatic." More specifically at present, if the gases only expel the old round and load a new one, they are referred to as "semi-automatic." if they do this as well as fire the gun again (and continuously if desired), they are referred to as "automatic." Any gun, pistol or rifle, may be fully automatic, not necessarily a "machine gun" which incidentally doesn't exist any more. That refers to a very specific gun that shot .45 caliber bullets. Having said all that...what the heck is your point? And, to demonstrate how silly and tangential your objection was, let me rebut your argument by pointing out that you spelled "inaccurate" incorrectly.

Then we have: "the system dropped the ball. Now how would you suggest we fix that? Pass more laws that will not be followed ?"> Risasi

Another bright light perks up. Sure, maybe we should eliminate all laws since they may not be followed. More practically though, one notices a laxity within the gun "establishment" to take these laws seriously and follow and enforce them. The same people who claim we already have too many laws in place, break them on a consistent basis in some kind of passive-aggression/unspoken conspiracy against those who would control guns at all. In many ways, one can pin the blame for all those kids' deaths on those who insist upon worshipping the inherent rebellion in gun ownership.

In my opinion, those who need and worship guns are inherently unstable and of questionable manhood LOL "
By: traveler501 on April 23, 2007 at 01:57am
Flag: [abusive]

It never fails. They always resort to questioning our manhood. Go back there and GIVE 'EM HELL. I did, and so did a couple of other guys. But be as polite as possible.

 

[Risasi]

Hey Mike,

Yeah, I saw that too. I believe that was a personal attack. I've been called a criminal.

And I had no idea I was such a miscreant...

I answered in turn. BTW: How do you fix the formatting in your posts? I can't seem to figure out how to create paragraphs.



P.S. 2.4 million times a firearm was used in a defensive situation in 2005? I had no idea it was that high now. For 2005 there were I believe approximately 16000 homicides. That's a 15000:1 ratio of good times vs evil times a gun was used. Guns aren't evil, they're good !!

 

[Dan from MI]

Huffington Post is the most gun grabbing spot I've seen on the net. That takes work.

 

[mike101]

"How do you fix the formatting in your posts? I can't seem to figure out how to create paragraphs."

I'm not real sure what you mean. I just skip a line.

Here's the answer I gave this guy. They haven't posted yours yet.

"To noted firearms expert Traveler501-

Thank you for correcting my typo. I noticed it yesterday. That was about the only thing you said that was accurate. Is that the best you can do?

Any weapon that fires in fully automatic mode can be referred to as a "machine gun". If you don't think there's a difference between automatic, and semi-automatic, perhaps you could explain why you need a Class III Weapons License to buy or sell anything that is capable of fully automatic fire, and why they throw you in jail for 10 years if they catch you with one, unlicensed. They have been very heavily restricted since 1934. Normally, I would not use the term "machine gun", but anti-gunners aren't usually up on correct terminology, as is evident here.

And I assure you, machine guns still exist. They also come in caibers other than .45 ACP. You are thinking of the Thompson Sub-Machine Gun, which also still exists. Actually, that and the Grease Gun are the only ones I've ever heard of that come in .45. Where do you guys get your information, The Brady Bunch?

They also come in .30 caliber, and .50 BMG (Browning Machine Gun), and 30.06, like the BAR, .223 Remington (M-16) and 7.62 Russian (AK-47), and probably some that I am forgetting.

Just once, I'd like to get through one of these blogs, without having penises (page 1) dragged into it (don't you know you can go blind that way?), and our "manhood" called into question. Please, spare us the amateur psycho babble. You're wearing it out.
By: mike101 on April 23, 2007 at 07:26am
Flag: [abusive]

I'm pretty much a handgun person, mostly BP, so I know I left a lot of guns out, like the H&K, for instance.