Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=saden1;329989]You're in essence saying:


What an absurd and fallacious argument.[/QUOTE]

No...that's not what he's saying. He's saying there is an overraction going on. You can't use the argument that it kills people. It doesn't. People kill people.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;329958]Yes, I would
If you are asking me if I would advocate the banning of all weapons in the hands of the citizens in this country under the same scenario, I would not.
Actually, for me (and I have hunted, fished, etc. all my life) the older I get the less importance actually killing something takes on. Don't get me wrong, I love to eat our wild friends. It's more of the experience rather than the act of killing.
Possibly in your eyes, you see that as something of an atrocity. In my eyes, it's more of a harvesting issue, or something akin to it. I always feel a little guilt. Like it or not somebody has to do. We as humans have continued to encroach wild habitat. It does not go well for the animal world. They cannot all survive, if left to do so.
Something as a sidebar. Revenue generated from Hunting, and fishing licensing and associated expenses paid by outdoorsmen, and women foot the bill for the lions share of conservation efforts in this country.
PS, I find it VERY relaxing to go to the gun range for a couple of hours. Not sure why, but it has that effect on me

Thankyou Charlton Heston[/QUOTE]

We have a gun range outside of town in the middle of nowhere. It's just an open area of dirt with piled dirt at around 150 yards. You can set stuff up and use it as target practice, it's actually quite fun, and very beneficial to understand how your gun works and how to tweek it's site.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=jsarno;329999]No...that's not what he's saying. He's saying there is an overraction going on. You can't use the argument that it kills people. It doesn't. People kill people.[/QUOTE]

Well, that's certainly the impression I got from Hog's quote. Further, I think Saden's sentiment is correct.

Saden's point (I think) is that, even though the use of each can result in death (as correctly asserted by Hog), guns, alchohol and planes pose different problems for and different types of the threats to public safety [I]and [/I]to assert (as Hog does) that the possible solution for the threat/problem posed by guns is equally applicable to the different threats/problems posed by planes or alchohol - is illogical.

Fact is, because of the [I]inherent[/I] danger presented by the use and/or availability of guns, they should be heavily regulated just like any other inherently dangerous machines/objects/devices.

Last I checked the private use of airplanes is heavily regulated (FAA anybody) - Can't fly a plane through the middle of town, can you? Same with alchohol - Can't buy alchohol unless your of a certain age. can you? Given the danger presented by guns, it seems perfectly reasonable for the public to expect, just as with planes and alchohol, that limitations be placed on who can have them and restrictions exist as to the public places you can carry them.

As I said before, people kill people - guns just make it easier to do so. For that reason, their use and availability should be subject to strict regulation AND unlawful ownership or their misuse of them should be severely punished.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;328427]LOL outnumbered in the streets? Where do you live? Gotham?[/QUOTE]

Not too suck up, but that's the funniest thing I've read today.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=saden1;329989]You're in essence saying:


What an absurd and fallacious argument.[/quote]

It is pure fantasy, and fallacy, regarding my alleged absurd, and fallacious arguement.
HOWEVER, I think your outrage blinded you to the larger message. Inanimate objects are not evil, and they don't kill people. That is what people do. Until something changes with...........people, People will always find a...........weapon to kill with

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330000]We have a gun range outside of town in the middle of nowhere. It's just an open area of dirt with piled dirt at around 150 yards. You can set stuff up and use it as target practice, it's actually quite fun, and very beneficial to understand how your gun works and how to tweek it's site.[/quote]

We had the same thing in an area just South of I-75 (Alligator Alley) on the West side just out of Naples, that was not regulated by anyone(really). It was part of a govt project that stalled. Sort of like no-mans land. I must say, the first time I went, I thought it would be a bunch of drunken toothless locals, shootin' up the area on the bad side of a case of Busch. It was very civil and in general good safe range practices observed. A you say you could do what you wanted within reason. Naturally, it no longer exists as of a year ago. I am now relegated to the "pay" ranges.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;330015]We had the same thing in an area just South of I-75 (Alligator Alley) on the West side just out of Naples, that was not regulated by anyone(really). It was part of a govt project that stalled. Sort of like no-mans land. I must say, the first time I went, I thought it would be a bunch of drunken toothless locals, shootin' up the area on the bad side of a case of Busch. It was very civil and in general good safe range practices observed. A you say you could do what you wanted within reason. Naturally, it no longer exists as of a year ago. I am now relegated to the "pay" ranges.[/QUOTE]

I think I went there about 4 or 5 years ago. My best friend lives in Fort Myers, and I travel there at least once a year. He's an avid gun collector.
I remember him getting pissed about something closing and he could no longer just take his guns outside.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;330013]It is pure fantasy, and fallacy, regarding my alleged absurd, and fallacious arguement.
HOWEVER, I think your outrage blinded you to the larger message. Inanimate objects are not evil, and they don't kill people. That is what people do. Until something changes with...........people, People will always find a...........weapon to kill with[/QUOTE]

Very true...so instead of blaming the object, why not blame the person and create stiffer penalties for people that abuse them?
For instance, drunk driving...those are some of the most leinant laws in the country, yet they are a driving around in a killing machine. Most of the time, a 1 time offender gets a slap on the wrist.
We need more jails, and we can afford to build and maintain them...we need to go back to chain gangs etc, and we need to make people pay for their mistakes.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330030]I think I went there about 4 or 5 years ago. My best friend lives in Fort Myers, and I travel there at least once a year. He's an avid gun collector.
I remember him getting pissed about something closing and he could no longer just take his guns outside.[/quote]
If it was just off Everglades Blvd, that's it

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin;330010]Well, that's certainly the impression I got from Hog's quote. Further, I think Saden's sentiment is correct.

Saden's point (I think) is that, even though the use of each can result in death (as correctly asserted by Hog), guns, alchohol and planes pose different problems for and different types of the threats to public safety [I]and [/I]to assert (as Hog does) that the possible solution for the threat/problem posed by guns is equally applicable to the different threats/problems posed by planes or alchohol - is illogical.

Fact is, because of the [I]inherent[/I] danger presented by the use and/or availability of guns, they should be heavily regulated just like any other inherently dangerous machines/objects/devices.

Last I checked the private use of airplanes is heavily regulated (FAA anybody) - Can't fly a plane through the middle of town, can you? Same with alchohol - Can't buy alchohol unless your of a certain age. can you? Given the danger presented by guns, it seems perfectly reasonable for the public to expect, just as with planes and alchohol, that limitations be placed on who can have them and restrictions exist as to the public places you can carry them.

As I said before, people kill people - guns just make it easier to do so. For that reason, their use and availability should be subject to strict regulation AND unlawful ownership or their misuse of them should be severely punished.[/QUOTE]

While you make valid arguments, and I respect your view, alcohol is worse than guns. It kills and hurts more people than guns do well more than triple fold. The ONLY restriction on alcohol is to be 21. I forget what the age is for guns, but it's at least 18...maybe 21 too.
There are likely just as many if not more stabbings in america as gun related issues. Does this mean we should regulate the knives too? A 5 year old can by a set of steak knives.
Point is, anything can kill or hurt someone. I can throw a rock at your head and hurt or kill you. You don't blame the object, you blame the person. We have become a society that points the finger at anything and everything, when we need to hold each other accountable. I am for MUCH stricter penalties and like I said before, there needs to be waaaay more jails to teach people a lesson.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;330035]If it was just off Everglades Blvd, that's it[/QUOTE]

I don't remember exactly where it was...but I knew it was near aligator alley, so it had to be it.
I love that area. It's very pretty, and relaxing. Even when I got caught in N. Fort Myers when hurricane Charlie hit, I still enjoyed my time there.
Real Estate has gotten out of hand though.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330033]Very true...so instead of blaming the object, why not blame the person and create stiffer penalties for people that abuse them?
For instance, drunk driving...those are some of the most leinant laws in the country, yet they are a driving around in a killing machine. Most of the time, a 1 time offender gets a slap on the wrist.
We need more jails, and we can afford to build and maintain them...we need to go back to chain gangs etc, and we need to make people pay for their mistakes.[/quote]

This guy knows......

[url=http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/joearpaio.html]Arizona Sheriff Uses Soldiers' Sacrifices to Rebuke Inmate Complaints - BreakTheChain.org[/url]

[url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195083,00.html]FOXNews.com - Arizona Sheriff Uses Anti-Smuggling Law to Target Illegal Immigrants - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News[/url]

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;330041]This guy knows......

[url=http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/joearpaio.html]Arizona Sheriff Uses Soldiers' Sacrifices to Rebuke Inmate Complaints - BreakTheChain.org[/url]

[url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195083,00.html]FOXNews.com - Arizona Sheriff Uses Anti-Smuggling Law to Target Illegal Immigrants - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News[/url][/QUOTE]


NIIIICE, we need to vote him in for President!!! It's nice to know there are still people in the world that teach consequences to actions.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

If you check him out, he gets crucified in the press for enforcing living conditons to prisoners that our troops would love to have. Only in America....go figure

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

Building jails and prisons is not that easy. People don't want to pay for them. Guilford County (where I work) has been told repeatedly by the State that we have to reduce overcrowding and need to build a new jail in Greensboro. However, our dumbass democratic commissioners have dug their heels in and they contend we simply need more "programs" in order to reduce overcrowding. It's all politics with them and it will most likely take one of our officers getting killed before someone will realize the seriousness of the situation.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;330046]If you check him out, he gets crucified in the press for enforcing living conditons to prisoners that our troops would love to have. Only in America....go figure[/QUOTE]

That really doesn't surprise me. Like I've said before, we live in a country that no one wants to take self responsibility. We don't teach it, and we don't enforce it. It's no wonder there are those pussies out there that complain about a guy like that.
He should have a freakin statue built in his honor.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330051]Building jails and prisons is not that easy. People don't want to pay for them. Guilford County (where I work) has been told repeatedly by the State that we have to reduce overcrowding and need to build a new jail in Greensboro. However, our dumbass democratic commissioners have dug their heels in and they contend we simply need more "programs" in order to reduce overcrowding. It's all politics with them and it will most likely take one of our officers getting killed before someone will realize the seriousness of the situation.[/QUOTE]

I don't think we should put jail in highly populated areas. We have plenty of space out here in the desert!
Also, people shouldn't be able to vote on it unless it would be within 1 mile of them, or schools. We NEED more jails...people shouldn't bitch and moan so it doesn't happen.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330054]I don't think we should put jail in highly populated areas. We have plenty of space out here in the desert!
Also, people shouldn't be able to vote on it unless it would be within 1 mile of them, or schools. We NEED more jails...people shouldn't bitch and moan so it doesn't happen.[/quote]
You're confusing jails with prisons. Jails have to be built near a courthouse. The voters vote on bonds to build the jails. We have been trying to avoid putting it before the voters because we know it won't pass. It's not a popular issue and the press has not been on the Sheriff's side either. Our democrat commissioners want to dance around and say that we don't need a jail and that our republican sheriff doesn't care that the people will have to pay more taxes. Politics. If Guilford County keeps screwing around the Feds will eventually come in and tell us where and how we will build a jail. We won't have any say at that point and the County will end up paying more for it.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

I'm sure you DO NOT want the kind of help the Fed is going to give you?

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330057]You're confusing jails with prisons. Jails have to be built near a courthouse. The voters vote on bonds to build the jails. We have been trying to avoid putting it before the voters because we know it won't pass. It's not a popular issue and the press has not been on the Sheriff's side either. Our democrat commissioners want to dance around and say that we don't need a jail and that our republican sheriff doesn't care that the people will have to pay more taxes. Politics. If Guilford County keeps screwing around the Feds will eventually come in and tell us where and how we will build a jail. We won't have any say at that point and the County will end up paying more for it.[/QUOTE]

Well, #1- who says it HAS to be near the courthouse (rhetorical)? #2- Build UP.
I am not mistaken prisons for jails...to me I think it's moronic that we have restrictions on jails, there is no need for them. They should be and could be anywhere. There will always be someone there to complain, so if that happens, then move them outside of town where no one is.
While I do think we need more prisons, we need more jails even more.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330060]Well, #1- who says it HAS to be near the courthouse (rhetorical)? #2- Build UP.
I am not mistaken prisons for jails...to me I think it's moronic that we have restrictions on jails, there is no need for them. They should be and could be anywhere. There will always be someone there to complain, so if that happens, then move them outside of town where no one is.
While I do think we need more prisons, we need more jails even more.[/quote]
We can have 50-75 inmates scheduled for court everyday, not to mention the federal inmates we house for federal court. They have to be in close proximity to the courthouses due to transportation/security issues. We have 2 courthouses/jails in our county. It would be a nightmare transporting them all over the county everyday. People complain that the courts don't run efficiently enough. If the inmates weren't close by it would slow them down even more.

Most jails like ours are old and aren't rated for expansion. Plus, where do you put the inmates while you're renovating? The newer jails being built today are being built with expansion in mind.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330075]We can have 50-75 inmates scheduled for court everyday, not to mention the federal inmates we house for federal court. They have to be in close proximity to the courthouses due to transportation/security issues. We have 2 courthouses/jails in our county. It would be a nightmare transporting them all over the county everyday. People complain that the courts don't run efficiently enough. If the inmates weren't close by it would slow them down even more.

Most jails like ours are old and aren't rated for expansion. Plus, where do you put the inmates while you're renovating? The newer jails being built today are being built with expansion in mind.[/QUOTE]

You make good points LB, but to transport criminals 1 hour (say), is no big deal. It can easily be done.
I'm not saying to house N.C's criminals here in the desert, I was just pointing out that we have a ton of space here...I know the east coast is tougher, but you have areas with plenty of space too.
Cambridge, MA houses a lot of criminals, it is right outside of Boston, and it looks like a normal building. If you didn't know any better you would just think it was an average building. A lot of cities should think about building multi level jails. You go up a good 20-50 floors to house these people, but make the building blend in with other buildings.
Build a jail outside of town, a large one, then move all the inmates...when they are moved, then you renovate the old one, now you have 4 times the room to house these people.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330125]You make good points LB, [B]but to transport criminals 1 hour (say), is no big deal. It can easily be done.[/B]
I'm not saying to house N.C's criminals here in the desert, I was just pointing out that we have a ton of space here...I know the east coast is tougher, but you have areas with plenty of space too.
Cambridge, MA houses a lot of criminals, it is right outside of Boston, and it looks like a normal building. If you didn't know any better you would just think it was an average building. A lot of cities should think about building multi level jails. You go up a good 20-50 floors to house these people, but make the building blend in with other buildings.
Build a jail outside of town, a large one, then move all the inmates...when they are moved, then you renovate the old one, now you have 4 times the room to house these people.[/quote]
Ok, that made me LOL.

Two questions:

Have you ever worked in detention?

How do you pay for a jail when no one wants to raise taxes to pay for it?

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330131]Ok, that made me LOL.

Two questions:

Have you ever worked in detention?

How do you pay for a jail when no one wants to raise taxes to pay for it?[/QUOTE]

No, I have not...why have you?

Well, there comes a time when you should do it for the sake of the community. It could be "required" if need be.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330144]No, I have not...why have you?

Well, there comes a time when you should do it for the sake of the community. It could be "required" if need be.[/quote]
I thought you knew about my background. 8 years as Criminal Superior Court Clerk. In my current position (5 years) I do two jobs -Administrative Assistant to the Captain of a Detention Facility and I run background checks/process handgun permit applicants.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

Sorry to hi-jack, but LB... that youtube vid on your sig is hilarious!

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=itvnetop;330148]Sorry to hi-jack, but LB... that youtube vid on your sig is hilarious![/quote]
It is funny. Kinda weird, but funny. :)

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330147]I thought you knew about my background. 8 years as Criminal Superior Court Clerk. In my current position (5 years) I do two jobs -Administrative Assistant to the Captain of a Detention Facility and I run background checks/process handgun permit applicants.[/QUOTE]

You probably said it, but my memory isn't the greatest.

So why would it be so hard to escort people from an hour away? At least now I can get a good answer as to why rather than speculation.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330150]It is funny. Kinda weird, but funny. :)[/QUOTE]

That is pretty gay.
While it does sound like common arguments here, it's still pretty damn gay.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330151]You probably said it, but my memory isn't the greatest.

So why would it be so hard to escort people from an hour away? At least now I can get a good answer as to why rather than speculation.[/quote]
It's basically about efficiency. We need to get the inmates in and out of court as fast as possible. I'll give you one example. Let's say the DA starts a trial, but the case breaks down and he decides to start calling jail cases. If those inmates are a considerable distance away it would take too much time to round them up and transport them. Also, some inmates don't like to go quietly so that adds more time. The DA doesn't usually plan ahead for a trial breaking down because that would mean putting too many defense attorney's on stand by. Feeding them would be a nightmare.

Counties typically don't want to spend money on the extra transportation cost and man power it would take to transport the inmates. Attorney's, agency reps, probation officers and visitors don't want to have to go multiple locations to conduct court/jail business. They tend to like one stop shopping.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330163]It's basically about efficiency. We need to get the inmates in and out of court as fast as possible. I'll give you one example. Let's say the DA starts a trial, but the case breaks down and he decides to start calling jail cases. If those inmates are a considerable distance away it would take too much time to round them up and transport them. Also, some inmates don't like to go quietly so that adds more time. The DA doesn't usually plan ahead for a trial breaking down because that would mean putting too many defense attorney's on stand by. Feeding them would be a nightmare.

Counties typically don't want to spend money on the extra transportation cost and man power it would take to transport the inmates. Attorney's, agency reps, probation officers and visitors don't want to have to go multiple locations to conduct court/jail business. They tend to like one stop shopping.[/QUOTE]

Wow...I didn't realize all that...thanks for the insight.

So why not move the court room outside of town where the jail is then?

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330167]Wow...I didn't realize all that...thanks for the insight.

So why not move the court room outside of town where the jail is then?[/quote]
It's not a case of the public not wanting a jail built downtown because of the proximity, they just don't want to pay for it. They think overcrowding is fine. They don't care about inmates. They would rather their taxes be spent on education. But what they don't realize is that it's not all about the inmates. They don't ever consider the conditions the officers have to work in and the danger of the situation when your officer to inmate ratio is 100 to 1. These inmates are on lockdown 21 hours a day. Tensions run high and if you keep piling them on top of each other your going to have a greater risk of rioting, inmate on inmate or inmate on officer assaults. We've actually had two inmates die recently and now the county is facing a huge lawsuit. If they don't do something about it they're gonna be spending a considerable amount of money either way.

I say all of this for one reason. People are very quick to say we need more jails, but they simply don't understand all the factors that go into making that a reality.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330178]They would rather their taxes be spent on education. [/QUOTE]

People may say that, but they never vote on initiatives that would benefit education (especially here in CA). Anything related to education that would raise taxes gets shot down pretty quickly. I wish it were different... if we could spend more money on education, i think the trickle-down effect on a bunch of other problems would be positive.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;329878]Well, I like dynamite. I have a right to own dynamite. Dynamite should be prohibited in certain areas such as schools, hospitals, and Goverment buildings. Other than that you should be allowed to cary it anywhere that you want. The amount of dynamite that I own should be of no concern of anyone else so long as I do not use it in a manner that is not in conjunction with the law.

Okay, so I jest - my point is, that just b/c we have a right to something doesn't mean it is of no concern to others. Guns are inherently dangerous. When used properly by good people they pose little threat to others. However, the careless use or misuse (whether accident or intentional) of guns poses a threat to all around them.

Sorry, if ur packing, I don't want my 4 year old around you. Further, I live in the city with about 150-200 people living w/in a 100 foot radius of my home with about 30 kids. I believe there is a legitimate interest prohibiting people from carrying concealed weapons as they travel around in high density areas. You want a gun in ur home, okay. You want to carry it around where my and others kids live and play - not as thrilled with that concept.[/quote]

You missed the point. I am not going to bother trying to argue with you, because you took it to a whole new extreme.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

What do you guys think about limiting the number of handguns a person is allowed to own? If we're only talking about protecting one's life and property, do you really need an arsenal of weapons to do that?

I for one do not think handguns should be a "collectible" item. As I said before, if your going to purchase weapons for collecting purposes you should be accountable for the amount of weapons you own (i.e. a collector's license). I know several people I deal with who literally own hundreds of handguns and they are constantly trading/selling their weapons.

Currently, I am required to report to ATF anyone who requests 4 or more handgun permits. In the beginning, I didn't typically report the older retired gentlemen who came in my office who got 10 permits at a time because they were considered collectors. To my surprise an ATF agent told me retirees were the worst offenders for selling weapons to criminal offenders and making straw man purchases. Who knew Gramps wasn't so innocent after all?

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330178]It's not a case of the public not wanting a jail built downtown because of the proximity, they just don't want to pay for it. They think overcrowding is fine. They don't care about inmates. They would rather their taxes be spent on education. But what they don't realize is that it's not all about the inmates. They don't ever consider the conditions the officers have to work in and the danger of the situation when your officer to inmate ratio is 100 to 1. These inmates are on lockdown 21 hours a day. Tensions run high and if you keep piling them on top of each other your going to have a greater risk of rioting, inmate on inmate or inmate on officer assaults. We've actually had two inmates die recently and now the county is facing a huge lawsuit. If they don't do something about it they're gonna be spending a considerable amount of money either way.

I say all of this for one reason. People are very quick to say we need more jails, but they simply don't understand all the factors that go into making that a reality.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but it seems the issue is always 1 of 2 things.
1- They don't want a jail around them.
2- They don't want to pay for it.
I think we should pay for it. It's a problem and it needs to be addressed. Of course, I don't think they should have the luxuries of modern day living, they should be fed slop (so to speak), they should have no TV, no weight room, no rights. We coddle inmates, and I think the general public knows it and therefore is unwilling to pay for a state of the art facility.
If the people are too dumb to pay for it, it should happen anyway.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330223]What do you guys think about limiting the number of handguns a person is allowed to own? If we're only talking about protecting one's life and property, do you really need an arsenal of weapons to do that?

I for one do not think handguns should be a "collectible" item. As I said before, if your going to purchase weapons for collecting purposes you should be accountable for the amount of weapons you own (i.e. a collector's license). I know several people I deal with who literally own hundreds of handguns and they are constantly trading/selling their weapons.

Currently, I am required to report to ATF anyone who requests 4 or more handgun permits. In the beginning, I didn't typically report the older retired gentlemen who came in my office who got 10 permits at a time because they were considered collectors. To my surprise an ATF agent told me retirees were the worst offenders for selling weapons to criminal offenders and making straw man purchases. Who knew Gramps wasn't so innocent after all?[/QUOTE]


Problem is, they are collectables.
[i][b]The Single Action Army is still being manufactured today, although antique Peacemakers are obviously rare and highly regarded as collectors items.

All original, good condition first generation Single Action Armies, those produced between 1873 and 1941, are among the most valuable to the collector. Especially valuable, often going for well over $10,000[/i][/b]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Single_Action_Army_handgun]Colt Single Action Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330237]Yes, but it seems the issue is always 1 of 2 things.
1- They don't want a jail around them.
2- They don't want to pay for it.
I think we should pay for it. It's a problem and it needs to be addressed. Of course, I don't think they should have the luxuries of modern day living, they should be fed slop (so to speak), they should have no TV, no weight room, no rights. We coddle inmates, and I think the general public knows it and therefore is unwilling to pay for a state of the art facility.
If the people are too dumb to pay for it, it should happen anyway.[/quote]
The majority of people who are housed in local jails have not been convicted of an offense. There is a slight difference in how those inmates are treated as compared to those who have been convicted of an offense and are serving active time. However, those who are in state prisons have more personal freedoms than those in local jails.

Our inmates have TV and that's all. They are not even allowed to play any type of games due to betting and fights breaking out. I've eaten the food. It's slighter better than slop, but not by much. :D

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;330238]Problem is, they are collectables.
[I][B]The Single Action Army is still being manufactured today, although antique Peacemakers are obviously rare and highly regarded as collectors items.[/B][/I]

[I][B]All original, good condition first generation Single Action Armies, those produced between 1873 and 1941, are among the most valuable to the collector. Especially valuable, often going for well over $10,000[/B][/I]

[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Single_Action_Army_handgun"]Colt Single Action Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL][/quote]
Just to clarify, I'm not talking about weapons classified as antiques, relics or curios. Those weapons are not subject to the gun control or brady act.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;330241]The majority of people who are housed in local jails have not been convicted of an offense. There is a slight difference in how those inmates are treated as compared to those who have been convicted of an offense and are serving active time. However, those who are in state prisons have more personal freedoms than those in local jails.

Our inmates have TV and that's all. They are not even allowed to play any type of games due to betting and fights breaking out. I've eaten the food. It's slighter better than slop, but not by much. :D[/QUOTE]

Alright...since we obviously can't fix the local jails, how about more state institutions? They are overcrowded too.