LM - posting an allegedly illegal act regarding a firearm - and to kalifornia where they are bat-shit nuts regarding weapons - not to mention the BATFE- is probably not in Ur best interest, Sir!
Intrastate transfer of a legal weapon without a federal firearms Licensee and background check is legal - Interstate transfer requires a FFL and background check.
- oeb11
- 06-07-2020, 01:26 PM
- Lucas McCain
- 06-07-2020, 01:35 PM
It's okay oeb. I have plenty of great attorneys in my family who will work for me for free. 
I didn't send him one of my rifles without considering my obvious liability. Sometimes you just do stupid shit for friends when you know you shouldn't. That's what I did. I'll be just fine. You're right though. I should not have done it and I already admitted that I was aware that it was illegal.
Edit: In my defense, he did say he had a license to carry in Cali and just could not get a gun. I took him at his word but he's kind of a bullshitter so fuck if I know whether he was being honest with me. I just know he has one of my rifles and the 40 bullets I sent him and I told him to put that rifle in his name and he can keep it.
I'll have verification by mid week that's it is out of my name. Or at least that he has applied for an application to remove my ownership of my former rifle. I'll never send a gun to anyone with it registered to me unless I can transfer all liability to you.
I didn't send him one of my rifles without considering my obvious liability. Sometimes you just do stupid shit for friends when you know you shouldn't. That's what I did. I'll be just fine. You're right though. I should not have done it and I already admitted that I was aware that it was illegal.
Edit: In my defense, he did say he had a license to carry in Cali and just could not get a gun. I took him at his word but he's kind of a bullshitter so fuck if I know whether he was being honest with me. I just know he has one of my rifles and the 40 bullets I sent him and I told him to put that rifle in his name and he can keep it.
I'll have verification by mid week that's it is out of my name. Or at least that he has applied for an application to remove my ownership of my former rifle. I'll never send a gun to anyone with it registered to me unless I can transfer all liability to you.
- Jacuzzme
- 06-07-2020, 02:15 PM
Pretty lousy choice of firearm for self defense. I’ve got a Golden Boy and the .44 and they’re both fine rifles, arguably the best built in the world, but lever action is the last thing you’d want in a gunfight.
- LexusLover
- 06-07-2020, 02:28 PM
Someone wants a rifle for home self-defense?*
This is where everyone (not actually "everyone") starts talking shit about how many "guns" they have and how large their muzzles are?
One can get a "concealed carry" in California for a "rifle"?
*Macho-Gun owners probably should do a little (or a lot) of research on "penetration" when making their firearm/ammo decisions for home self-defense with a focus on their individual responsibility for the trajectory/travel of the round when it leaves the muzzle and at what location it finally comes to rest ..... meaning just how far down range the slug will travel before it STOPS!
It's also always a good idea to check one's homeowners/renters policy to determine if "intentional" acts are covered so that you at least get attorney's fees covered for defending the wrongful death or wrongful injury lawsuits for the negligent firing of the negligently selected firearm/ammo. BTW social media (blogs on hooker sites) are an excellent source of admissions to prove prior knowledge.)
Back to The Wild Wild West!
This is where everyone (not actually "everyone") starts talking shit about how many "guns" they have and how large their muzzles are?
One can get a "concealed carry" in California for a "rifle"?
*Macho-Gun owners probably should do a little (or a lot) of research on "penetration" when making their firearm/ammo decisions for home self-defense with a focus on their individual responsibility for the trajectory/travel of the round when it leaves the muzzle and at what location it finally comes to rest ..... meaning just how far down range the slug will travel before it STOPS!
It's also always a good idea to check one's homeowners/renters policy to determine if "intentional" acts are covered so that you at least get attorney's fees covered for defending the wrongful death or wrongful injury lawsuits for the negligent firing of the negligently selected firearm/ammo. BTW social media (blogs on hooker sites) are an excellent source of admissions to prove prior knowledge.)
Back to The Wild Wild West!
- oeb11
- 06-07-2020, 02:34 PM
Defunding police: What it means and what it could look like
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/de...V6k?li=BBnb7Kz
An article from XiNN on a hot topic - another hare-brained leftists marxist idea to enable violent revolution in America!
There's a growing group of dissenters who believe Americans can survive without law enforcement as we know it. And Americans, those dissenters believe, may even be better off without it.
The solution to police brutality and racial inequalities in policing is simple, supporters say: Just defund police.
It's as straightforward as it sounds: Instead of funding a police department, a sizable chunk of a city's budget is invested in communities, especially marginalized ones where much of the policing occurs.
The concept's been a murmur for years, particularly following the protests against police brutality in Ferguson, Missouri, though it seemed improbable in 2014.
But it's becoming a shout. With the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor at the hands of police and nationwide protests demanding reform, at least one city is considering dissolving its police force altogether.
Does defunding the police mean disbanding the police?
That depends on who you ask, said Philip McHarris, a doctoral candidate in sociology at Yale University and lead research and policy associate at the Community Resource Hub for Safety and Accountability.
Some supporters of divestment want to reallocate some, but not all, funds away from police departments to social services. Some want to strip all police funding and dissolve departments.
The concept exists on a spectrum, but both interpretations center on reimagining what public safety looks like, he said.
It also means dismantling the idea that police are "public stewards" meant to protect communities. Many Black Americans and other people of color don't feel protected by police, McHarris said.
Why defund police?
McHarris says divesting funds ends the culture of punishment in the criminal justice system. And it's one of the only options local governments haven't tried in their attempts to end deaths in police custody.
Trainings and body cameras haven't brought about the change supporters want.
McHarris grew up in a neighborhood where there were "real, discernible threats of gun violence," and he said he never thought to call the police -- that was for his own safety. Instead, he relied on neighbors who helped him navigate threats of danger.
What if, he said, those people could provide the same support they showed him on a full-time basis?
To explain why he supports the idea, Isaac Bryan, the director of UCLA's Black Policy Center, points to history: Law enforcement in the South began as slave patrol, a team of vigilantes hired to recapture escaped slaves. Then, when slavery was abolished, police enforced Jim Crow laws -- even the most minor infractions.
And today, police disproportionately use force against black people, and black people are more likely to be arrested and sentenced.
"That history is engrained in our law enforcement," Bryan said.
Where would those funds go?
Patrisse Cullors, co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement, said defunding the police means reallocating those funds to support people and services in marginalized communities.
Defunding law enforcement "means that we are reducing the ability for law enforcement to have resources that harm our communities," Cullors said in an interview with WBUR, Boston's public radio station. "It's about reinvesting those dollars into black communities, communities that have been deeply divested from."
Those dollars can be put back into social services for mental health, domestic violence and homelessness, among others. Police are often the first responders to all three, she said.
Those dollars can be used to fund schools, hospitals, housing and food in those communities, too -- "all of the things we know increase safety," McHarris said.
Why disband police?
Disbanding police altogether falls on the more radical end of the police divestment spectrum, but it's gaining traction.
MPD150, a community advocacy organization in Minneapolis, focuses on abolishing local police. Its work has been spotlighted since the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis Police custody.
"The people who respond to crises in our community should be the people who are best-equipped to deal with those crises," the organization says.
Rather than "strangers armed with guns," the organization says, first responders should be mental health providers, social workers, victim advocates and other community members in less visible roles.
It argues law and order isn't abetted by law enforcement, but through education, jobs and mental health services that low-income communities are often denied. MPD150 and other police abolition organizations want wider access to all three.
Would defunding police lead to an uptick in violent crimes?
Defunding police on a large scale hasn't been done before, so it's tough to say.
But there's evidence that less policing can lead to less crime. A 2017 report, which focused on several weeks in 2014 through 2015 when the New York Police Department purposely pulled back on "proactive policing," found that there were 2,100 fewer crime complaints during that time.
The study defines proactive policing as the "systematic and aggressive enforcement of low-level violations" and heightened police presence in areas where "crime is anticipated."
That's exactly the kind of activity that police divestment supporters want to end.
Will defunding the police come to pass?
It's radical for an American city to operate without law enforcement, but it's already being discussed in Minneapolis.
City council member Steve Fletcher, in a Twitter thread, said council members are discussing "what it would take to disband the Minneapolis Police Department and start fresh with a community-oriented, non-violent public safety and outreach capacity."
"We can totally reimagine what public safety means, what skills we're recruiting for, what tools we do and don't need," he wrote. "We can invest in cultural competency and mental health training, de-escalation and conflict resolution."
Defunding is simpler than disbanding, though, and at least one mayor's already taken that step. After Californians decried a proposal to increase the Los Angeles Police Department budget to $1.86 billion, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti agreed to slash between $100 million to $150 million from the proposed funding.
It's not a significant dent in the budget, but it's proof that officials are listening, Bryan said.
"A week ago, defunding the police in any capacity would sound like 'pie in the sky,'" he said. "Now we're talking about it. Defunding police in its entirety still might sound like 'pie in the sky,' but next week might be different."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/de...V6k?li=BBnb7Kz
An article from XiNN on a hot topic - another hare-brained leftists marxist idea to enable violent revolution in America!
There's a growing group of dissenters who believe Americans can survive without law enforcement as we know it. And Americans, those dissenters believe, may even be better off without it.
The solution to police brutality and racial inequalities in policing is simple, supporters say: Just defund police.
It's as straightforward as it sounds: Instead of funding a police department, a sizable chunk of a city's budget is invested in communities, especially marginalized ones where much of the policing occurs.
The concept's been a murmur for years, particularly following the protests against police brutality in Ferguson, Missouri, though it seemed improbable in 2014.
But it's becoming a shout. With the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor at the hands of police and nationwide protests demanding reform, at least one city is considering dissolving its police force altogether.
Does defunding the police mean disbanding the police?
That depends on who you ask, said Philip McHarris, a doctoral candidate in sociology at Yale University and lead research and policy associate at the Community Resource Hub for Safety and Accountability.
Some supporters of divestment want to reallocate some, but not all, funds away from police departments to social services. Some want to strip all police funding and dissolve departments.
The concept exists on a spectrum, but both interpretations center on reimagining what public safety looks like, he said.
It also means dismantling the idea that police are "public stewards" meant to protect communities. Many Black Americans and other people of color don't feel protected by police, McHarris said.
Why defund police?
McHarris says divesting funds ends the culture of punishment in the criminal justice system. And it's one of the only options local governments haven't tried in their attempts to end deaths in police custody.
Trainings and body cameras haven't brought about the change supporters want.
McHarris grew up in a neighborhood where there were "real, discernible threats of gun violence," and he said he never thought to call the police -- that was for his own safety. Instead, he relied on neighbors who helped him navigate threats of danger.
What if, he said, those people could provide the same support they showed him on a full-time basis?
To explain why he supports the idea, Isaac Bryan, the director of UCLA's Black Policy Center, points to history: Law enforcement in the South began as slave patrol, a team of vigilantes hired to recapture escaped slaves. Then, when slavery was abolished, police enforced Jim Crow laws -- even the most minor infractions.
And today, police disproportionately use force against black people, and black people are more likely to be arrested and sentenced.
"That history is engrained in our law enforcement," Bryan said.
Where would those funds go?
Patrisse Cullors, co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement, said defunding the police means reallocating those funds to support people and services in marginalized communities.
Defunding law enforcement "means that we are reducing the ability for law enforcement to have resources that harm our communities," Cullors said in an interview with WBUR, Boston's public radio station. "It's about reinvesting those dollars into black communities, communities that have been deeply divested from."
Those dollars can be put back into social services for mental health, domestic violence and homelessness, among others. Police are often the first responders to all three, she said.
Those dollars can be used to fund schools, hospitals, housing and food in those communities, too -- "all of the things we know increase safety," McHarris said.
Why disband police?
Disbanding police altogether falls on the more radical end of the police divestment spectrum, but it's gaining traction.
MPD150, a community advocacy organization in Minneapolis, focuses on abolishing local police. Its work has been spotlighted since the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis Police custody.
"The people who respond to crises in our community should be the people who are best-equipped to deal with those crises," the organization says.
Rather than "strangers armed with guns," the organization says, first responders should be mental health providers, social workers, victim advocates and other community members in less visible roles.
It argues law and order isn't abetted by law enforcement, but through education, jobs and mental health services that low-income communities are often denied. MPD150 and other police abolition organizations want wider access to all three.
Would defunding police lead to an uptick in violent crimes?
Defunding police on a large scale hasn't been done before, so it's tough to say.
But there's evidence that less policing can lead to less crime. A 2017 report, which focused on several weeks in 2014 through 2015 when the New York Police Department purposely pulled back on "proactive policing," found that there were 2,100 fewer crime complaints during that time.
The study defines proactive policing as the "systematic and aggressive enforcement of low-level violations" and heightened police presence in areas where "crime is anticipated."
That's exactly the kind of activity that police divestment supporters want to end.
Will defunding the police come to pass?
It's radical for an American city to operate without law enforcement, but it's already being discussed in Minneapolis.
City council member Steve Fletcher, in a Twitter thread, said council members are discussing "what it would take to disband the Minneapolis Police Department and start fresh with a community-oriented, non-violent public safety and outreach capacity."
"We can totally reimagine what public safety means, what skills we're recruiting for, what tools we do and don't need," he wrote. "We can invest in cultural competency and mental health training, de-escalation and conflict resolution."
Defunding is simpler than disbanding, though, and at least one mayor's already taken that step. After Californians decried a proposal to increase the Los Angeles Police Department budget to $1.86 billion, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti agreed to slash between $100 million to $150 million from the proposed funding.
It's not a significant dent in the budget, but it's proof that officials are listening, Bryan said.
"A week ago, defunding the police in any capacity would sound like 'pie in the sky,'" he said. "Now we're talking about it. Defunding police in its entirety still might sound like 'pie in the sky,' but next week might be different."
- LexusLover
- 06-07-2020, 02:46 PM
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti agreed to slash between $100 million to $150 million from the proposed funding.Eric was actually elected "Mayor"? The first thing the LA PD will do is cut training!
- Lucas McCain
- 06-07-2020, 02:56 PM
Someone wants a rifle for home self-defense?* Originally Posted by LexusLoverI actually prefer to throw hands, but I'm cool to blow a head off with a rifle. They'll be going down either way so fuck them. It makes absolutely no difference to me old man. You can get cute all you want with me because I offended you before but I was not remotely kidding about what I said if some fool is stupid enough to try me. One person will be walking away and it will be me.
Fuck the Ivy League shit, I'm not that reserved. I'm a tall guy who will fuck a dude up in no time because I know how to throw one hitter quitters with both of my hands. People threatening to kick my ass on this board are laughable to me. I won't even say good luck. There's just no chance. I may kill them with my hands and arms depending on my mood if I ever met them. And I'm quite the moody motherfucker according to my family. LOL
- eccielover
- 06-07-2020, 03:52 PM
- Chung Tran
- 06-07-2020, 04:30 PM
I think you're interpreting that video wrong. I thought the first cop was going to reach down and pick the guy up, but then recoiled when he saw a pool of blood.nope.. I have seen the video at least 8 times, again today, and the cop didn't recoil seeing blood.. his fellow officer put his hand on the cop's back, to direct him to keep moving, and ignore a suffering old man bleeding on the pavement.
Originally Posted by lustylad
Hmm, and from all I have read you pretty much wimped out and tried to change the conditions of throwing hands when a member here called you out to do it. Originally Posted by eccieloveryup.. Lucas is a Blowhard, who alternately likes to look smart (he cites his degree(s) in about one out of three posts), and tough. he is neither.
- LexusLover
- 06-07-2020, 04:37 PM
- LexusLover
- 06-07-2020, 04:41 PM
nope.. I have seen the video at least 8 times, again today, and the cop didn't recoil seeing blood.. his fellow officer put his hand on the cop's back, to direct him to keep moving, and ignore a suffering old man bleeding on the pavement.Chan ... I agree with you on both points above .... with respect to the first point though there is one further observation I got from watching a clip of the event several times ....
yup.. Lucas is a Blowhard, who alternately likes to look smart (he cites his degree(s) in about one out of three posts), and tough. he is neither. Originally Posted by Chung Tran
... the officers were moving forward to quell a disturbance and did so ... which was their reason for moving forward .... apparently two guardsmen behind them took care of the old man.
So the police continued on their assignment and the Guard did their job of backing them up .... and not getting hands on with the public.
The police don't do first aid (unless they are cross-trained EMTs) .... and I saw none of them with any protective gear for body fluids....it's more likely the Guardsmen had some experience/training.
As for LM ... he calls his own balls and strikes. He would win every Super Bowl ....
.... or is it
- Chung Tran
- 06-07-2020, 04:49 PM
... the officers were moving forward to quell a disturbance and did so ... which was their reason for moving forward .... apparently two guardsmen behind them took care of the old man.yeah, I sort of get what you are saying, but.. that's sort of like me running over someone with my Pick up, fleeing the scene because I noticed there was an ambulance behind me that saw me strike the pedestrian, and they would stop and render aid.. my "duty" was to get to the Burger King drive-through before it closed.
So the police continued on their assignment and the Guard did their job of backing them up .... and not getting hands on with the public.
Originally Posted by LexusLover
- Lucas McCain
- 06-07-2020, 05:00 PM
Lucas is a Blowhard, who alternately likes to look smart (he cites his degree(s) in about one out of three posts), and tough. he is neither. Originally Posted by Chung TranSuch a sensitive old pathetic pervert; not sorry I hurt your wittle feewings though. What the fuck do I care about someone like you? LOL
- Chung Tran
- 06-07-2020, 05:01 PM
- LexusLover
- 06-07-2020, 05:05 PM
yeah, I sort of get what you are saying, but.. that's sort of like me running over someone with my Pick up, fleeing the scene because I noticed there was an ambulance behind me that saw me strike the pedestrian, and they would stop and render aid.. my "duty" was to get to the Burger King drive-through before it closed. Originally Posted by Chung TranNot quite .... at all.
We don't know what verbal commands were given before or after.
I did see the almost immediate subsequent arrests while the Guardsmen were tending to the old man. I can legitimately assume a Guardsmen yelling ... "we got him"! And they did take care of him! Better than the cops would have. Those cops should have been hands off.