Gun Confiscation Now Beginning in California

[Hawk]

First, a Winchester High-Wall is not a bolt-action, its a single shot. With very little practice a person can get off
3 shots at short range hitting their target quicker with a High-Wall then a shooter with a bolt action using a scope. Back in 1964 the Italian 6.5 as Oswald used was sold for $10. My step-dad bought one. I was 15 at the time. He couldn't come anywhere near my Grandad for accuracy or speed of reloading when my Grandad used his high-wall. Could Oswald have done what they say he did with a Corcana Carbine? No way!!!!!
Hawk

[Tony10]

I hear that! You don't have to convert me on anything to do with JFK or Oswald's so-obvious-it's-laughable patsy status!

[Edited by Tony10 on 10-17-2000 at 05:18 PM]

[Mickey Finn]

Originally posted by Hawk
Could Oswald have done what they say he did with a Corcana Carbine? No way!!!!!
Hawk

Now that is a subject that fascinates me. I wonder if we will ever know what really happened that day. Cubans? The CIA using mafia shooters? That has to be one of the ugliest, darkest little secrets in this country’s history.

[Tony10]

Well, now we're getting into one of my territories.

Mickey--the best thing, if you want a thorough and non-sensational account of the whole thing is a BBC-produced series titled The Men Who Killed Kennedy, which often airs on The History Channel (I think it's a four or five part deal).

Most probable: there were three shooters--one in the train yard shooting over the fence; one from somewhere behind (NOT Oswald), and one in a curb sewer drain (at ground level) ahead of the motorcade--which, you will see in the series, you could walk into and out of through a tunnel. Triangulation.

Yes, mafia and Cuban exiles who hated him for leaving them out to dry in the Bay of Pigs. The series suggests the mafia imported at least one of the shooters from France.

FUN FACT: One of the Dealy Plaza "tramps" was a dead-ringer for a police sketch of a police-uniform-clad shooter who took out MLK in Memphis!

Notice, also, how much the MLK/JFK assassinations resemble each other in many ways. Some will tell you that certain groups more or less hired the mafia to do these kinds of hits because they got the job done, that's for damn sure.

Yes, in my opinion the deepest and most horrific secret--which to this day still poisons our nation's collective psyche...

[Hawk]

Tony & Mickey,
I've read and researched a ton on this. There is so much proof and yet nothing has ever been done. I'm bad on names however the guy who wrote Rush To Judgement defended a magazine that was sued by Howard Hunt. Under oath in a depo a female operative said to have been a mistress of Castro, names the actual shooters or at least some of them. The name of the book is Plausible Denial. The jury found against Hunt and that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. I think the trial took place in Florida, however I'm not sure. Read the book if you haven't already. I became addicted for awhile, however had to let it go because I was so aggravated by the lack of action. I come back to it now and then.
Hawk

[Linden]

>>Linden, What in the world are you talking about. First, there is no debate about gun regulation. Its been going on for awhile. Gun owners are registered when they buy a weapon and have been for a long time. You can sell or give a gun away, but it will always come back to you. A vehicle is the same way. There isn't a whole lot of difference and that's not what anyone is complaining about. They are complaining about confiscation of guns and not being able to buy certain types of rifles.<<

First off Hawk, I came to this thread to give my opinions on the issues in general. I am not debating the laws on the books now, I simply said if they are there then enforce them. I am aware of gun registration. I am not debating that.

And to correct you on one thing Hawk, there are debates over gun registration and licensing. Maybe not among you, but among others, so it is a relevant issue.

As for the NRA, my point was that their sole concern is apparrently not with gun safety, but with control, and power. They objected to Smith & Wesson's shipping of safety locks with their handguns because they were not consulted, which resulted in diabtribe over the slippery slope issue. So you are wrong Hawk, even amongst your fetished fraternity of gun lovers there are issues such as regulation being debated.

>>Obviously you know very little about guns if you feel they are only used to kill.<<

If you read my post closely Hawk, I stated that the purpose of guns is for self-defense, or killing, and that the sport aspect of purchasing assault rifles should be highly regualted. Guns are indeed used for either sport, self-defense, or just killing something.

>>As to banning of cars, knives, and bats being weak as opposed to guns and it being obvious shows a real ignorance on your part of the risks, especially with knives, that these things run when used in an offensive manner.<<

Again Hawk you are not understanding. Guns are manufacturfed for the sole purpose fo destruction. Whether it be self-defense, murder, or sport, guns are inevitably used for the high powered destruction of some sort. You don't hang them around your neck for aesthetic purposes, or widdle wood blocks with them Hawk.

Bats, knives and etc. can be outrun, guns cannot. Again this whole argument is rather simple and weak, and can be torn down each and every time. Guns serve a different purpose in society, and can perform much different feats than other weapons Hawk.

>>In fact a car doesn't have to be used in an offensive manner because of its size and power.<<

And your point?

>>My obsession isn't with guns, but with freedoms.<<

No, after reading your posts, I am fairly sure your obsession is with guns. If you wanted to fight freedoms Hawk, then look at issues like big business and how it corrupts our politics, and our lives. That is an immediateley present problem in democracy, not an imaginary one. Your priorites seem somewhat out of alignment.

>>Mainly, that's what this country is all about. The bottom line is this. If someone intends to kill someone else, they are going to do it. If they intend to kill a lot of people, they can do that too, without the use of a gun.
That has been proven time and again. If you took away all the guns, then people that wanted to kill would knock a cop in the head & get his, get one on the blackmarket, or use something else. "Stout regulations" aren't going to stop anyone from killing.<<

Again, this shows the almost tunnelled visioned, narrow- mindedness of people obsessed with the owning of guns. No one is saying they want to take away your precious collection of weapons Hawk. It's not happening, and even if it did happen there is nothing you can do about it. There is reality, and a separate rality in this country, and you are functioning on that past cold war, separate reality. And you refuse to relinquish it because it probably makes you feel as if you actually have something stand for.

Without any major wars taking place I do see how the withdraw can affect you.

And finally Hawk, it's very simple, we disagree that gun laws cannot help save lives. They won't save every life, regulations are not meant to do that, they are simply meant to regulate. At the very least they will save some lives, and even if it was only one it is still worth doing.

It's very simple, people who sit under this whole paranoia of gun confiscation need to move on with their lives, and address the real issues in our country that are corrupting our freedom, and future. Issues lke foreign policy, NAFTA, WTO, and campaign finance reform. Get away from the paranoia, and start to address real and immediate issues.

I would have to say that staunchly conservative people out of all politically minded people seem to have the weakest grip on reality. They are much too busy concerning themselves with juvenile fantasies, and notions of wealth and power that they fail to see the reality of the world and people around them.

As for you John, I'm sitting here wondering how long to took you to look up the information on the book I suggested to you.

To blindly state that that any book was dismissed by every single historian was a comically reaching statement.

I suggested a book to you, I never said it was deifnitive, but exhaustively researched and that it contained some interesting information that I think you should look over.

No book on the history of guns would ever be definitive. History of any sort is as much debate as it is fact.

Again, righteousness and narrow-mindedness only makes you appear bothered and desparate.

This was all very fun fun though.

[John Bennett]

Originally posted by Linden
Guns are manufacturfed for the sole purpose fo destruction. Whether it be self-defense, murder, or sport, guns are inevitably used for the high powered destruction of some sort. You don't hang them around your neck for aesthetic purposes, or widdle wood blocks with them Hawk.

So what's your point? We know that. That's why we want guns. They're weapons. They kill people. That's what they are for.

You think Momma Government knows best. Unwashed proles like JB & Hawk don't need weapons. They're just uneducated neandertals. We live in a "modern" society. We're more advanced than that because I have DSL and a 401K.

No one is saying they want to take away your precious collection of weapons Hawk. It's not happening, and even if it did happen there is nothing you can do about it.

That's bullshit. They've stated very plainly that total gun abolition is their ultimate long-term goal. They are working toward that goal every day. That's what they do. That's what they get paid for. We're fighting it because we DO see the big picture.

Linden YOU don't see the big picture. You think America is some special magical place where naughty things like military seizure of the government, totalitarian oppression, and genocide CAN'T HAPPEN. Ugly things like that only happen in those yucky "other" places they show on CNN. Not here. We're special. We're Americans! We're Modern! We're Progressive! We have the SuperBowl every year for goodness sake!

I can understand how really difficult this is for you to comprehend while sitting in your air conditioned apartment eating Domino's Pizza flipping through the latest Sharper Image catalog, but I got news for you my friend. We ain't that special.

I would have to say that staunchly conservative people out of all politically minded people seem to have the weakest grip on reality.

Reality? HA! This coming from a guy who wants to vote for Ralph Nader. Oh man.

You've got quite a bit of reading and living to do.

Reminds me of this old classic....

"A liberal is a conservative who's never been mugged."

The really perncious thing about the gun control advocates is that they honestly believe that by removing the citizenry's abilty to defend itself from criminals and government gone way wrong, they are doing everyone a big favor.

The other day I tried to convice a woman that she was wasting her time by saving the pull tabs off soda cans. She'd heard they could be traded for kidney dialysis for poor kids. She had milk jugs full of the things and had half the people where I work dropping them off at her office.

It's an urban legend. You've never seen anyone so pissed.



[Edited by John Bennett on 10-17-2000 at 11:23 PM]

[Ronin]

Y'know what? I'm finally sick of arguing about this.

There are lots of better topics to argue about, such as:
Could Rickson beat a Silverback Gorilla?

I think he could.

As far as guns go, I tap.

[Hawk]

Linden,
As I said before, you know nothing about guns. Check out the number of single shot .22s weighing 12-15 lbs. and tell me how these are built only for destruction. These are target rifles and about all they are good for doing is punching little holes in paper, yet there are a ton of them, and its an Olympic sport. Plus Linden, I have an excellent memory so don't start backing up about "the sport aspect of Assault rifles". You never mentioned "sport" or
"assault rifles", you said guns, period. Maybe YOU better go back and read your posts. Next, the NRA could care less about gun locks. They are mad at S&W because S&W sold out to the Clinton administration, as are most people mad at S&W that believe in the 2nd amendment. In fact, S&W are coming out in all shooting magazines now whining that they would have been put out of business by the gov. if they hadn't gone along. As to my gun collection, I'm not a gun collector, I'm a prosecutor and a cop. All of my pistols have a certain purpose in my job. I have 4. As to rifles or shotguns, myself and family deer hunt, hog hunt, duck hunt, squirrel hunt, and rabbit hunt. As to me personally, I now have one rifle and one shotgun. It wouldn't matter to me if I had a gun collection or only had one old antique pistol, I do not intend to give up the freedom to have either that has been a part of this country for many years. Make all the posts you want and give all the opinions you want. Whether I agree with you or you agree with me doesn't really matter, however at least be straight with what you say and don't try to tell me you said something in a post when you didn't.
Hawk

[Tony10]

Hawk:

Mark Lane wrote both Rush to Judgment and Plausible Denial; he also even co-authored a book on the MLK assassination, which of course is no coincidence.

To those who are interested, I would also recommend Murder in Dealy Plaza: What We Know Now That We Didn't Know Then, by James Fetzer.

And that concludes my Book of the Month Club recommendations...

[Hawk]

Thanks Tony 10,
I have an excellent memory for everything except names.
Lane was also the guiding force in getting JFK murder brought back before Congress.
Hawk

[Ronin]

If Oswald wasn't the shooter, why kill him?

The facts on this case have become so murky and distorted that we may never know the truth.

In light of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I will choose to believe that Oswald was a superhuman sniper who got lucky, and Ruby was an attention-seeking loser.

Anything else reminds me too much of people who believe in "critters" from outer space descending on their trailer park.

[Ronin]

If ANYONE was behind it, I think it might have been the KGB.

Oswald had KGB connections, and the Soviets might have still been pissed about the Cuban Missile Crisis. I am skeptical that they would risk nuclear war to punish an ideological enemy, but hey, you never know.

[Hawk]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
Well, Ronin, I called that one over on the thread Pit Dog did to Linden, however I was joking and feel (hope) you are too. Seriously though, Oswald was not the first, nor the last to die in covering that little shindig up.
Hawk

[Edited by Hawk on 10-18-2000 at 01:29 PM]

[Tony10]

Well, Ronin...

How 'bout if he could prove he wasn't the shooter?

Ruby was in fact a Dallas strip joint owner with links to the mob (there they are again!), the police, Castroites, anti-Castroites and intelligence circles.

A famous reporter named Dorothy Kilgallen--who covered the Sam Shepard murder case (on which "The Fugitive" was based)--was the only person to ever interview Jack Ruby alone (during his trial). Based on her interview and subsequent digging, she suggested to friends and colleagues that the forthcoming Warren Report was "laughable" and that she was going to break the whole story wide open.

Before she could do that, she was found dead in her bed in November of '65, with an open novel next to her (which she had already finished reading) and without her reading glasses (which she could not read without) nowhere nearby. The cause of death was first "barbituate poisoning," then "heart attack" and then "accidental." Whatever. Her notes and files on the Ruby story disappeared.

Coincidence?

Too much to post here; one of the above books might change your mind.

Bring on the space critters!