Red Mosquito

i saw that, reid...

doug rr wrote:i saw that, reid...

I didn't frame the post the way I wanted to before I took it down the first time. I've got a more fleshed out version below.

I was at a church picnic yesterday. We all take my grandma there once a year because it brings her lots of joy. They have an auction and the items are often hilarious. YETI full of meat that goes for $800, many many quilts, Christmas decor that goes for $500...etc. Well this year they had a wall cross made out of shotgun shells but I left before I could see how much it went for.

washing machine wrote:I was at a church picnic yesterday. We all take my grandma there once a year because it brings her lots of joy. They have an auction and the items are often hilarious. YETI full of meat that goes for $800, many many quilts, Christmas decor that goes for $500...etc. Well this year they had a wall cross made out of shotgun shells but I left before I could see how much it went for.

How much?

Simple Torture wrote:

washing machine wrote:I was at a church picnic yesterday. We all take my grandma there once a year because it brings her lots of joy. They have an auction and the items are often hilarious. YETI full of meat that goes for $800, many many quilts, Christmas decor that goes for $500...etc. Well this year they had a wall cross made out of shotgun shells but I left before I could see how much it went for.

How much?

I don't know.

toddlers birthdays are getting rough:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/man ... y-65169969

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pu ... story.html

We found Bush’s specific comments on Fox News Sunday a little jumbled and hard to fact-check, though he mimics similar claims by House Speaker Paul Ryan and other pundits. So here we’ll lay out what you need to know about current gun laws and what people mean when they talk about a loophole.

Our findings show that there is, in fact, an exemption in the law. But the exemption pertains to who sells the guns rather than where they sell them.

1. Federally licensed gun sellers are required to run background checks. But not all sellers are required to be licensed. Some of those unlicensed sellers sell at gun shows.

Federal law requires that persons who are engaged in the business of dealing in firearms be licensed by the federal government. Obama’s goal with his new plan is to tighten the screws on who is included in that group.

Announced Jan. 5, Obama’s plan requires those in the business of dealing in firearms -- including sellers at stores, gun shows and on the Internet -- get a license. Once they’re licensed, they are required to conduct background checks on all buyers.

But private sellers without a federal license don’t have to meet the same requirement. Though this exception is often referred to as the "gun show loophole," it actually applies more broadly to unlicensed individuals, whether they are selling at a gun show or somewhere else. (Some states have implemented their own background check requirement beyond federal law.)

Bush’s argument centers on the fact that the loophole doesn’t single out gun shows.

A Bush spokesman pointed to a 2000 article by David Kopel, a policy analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute. (The spokesman also cited a brief from Politico that made a similar argument to Kopel’s.) Kopel wrote that for decades, dealers have been required to obtain a federal firearms license. But those who sell firearms from time to time -- such as to a relative -- aren’t required to obtain such a license.

"Existing gun laws apply just as much to gun shows as they do to any other place where guns are sold," he wrote. "If you walk along the aisles at any gun show, you will find that the overwhelming majority of guns offered for sale are from federally licensed dealers. Guns sold by private individuals (such as gun collectors getting rid of a gun or two over the weekend) are the distinct minority."

Kopel, a law professor at Denver University, told PolitiFact that his own research was based on gun shows in Colorado in the 1980s and 1990s.

PHATJ wrote:Honestly, it’s a bit overwhelming when there are several people going after a particular post and it often feels like there is no one but myself there to defend my point of view. Maybe I should be less dismissive.

Posting an obvious troll meme from some Don't Even Think About Dating MY Daughter facebook group is certainly one way to be less dismissive of other peoples' opinions.

Phat's back baby!

BurtReynolds wrote:Phat's back baby!

I feel like Sisyphus rolling this balding Midwestern stone up the hill again.

Those points...

Lol at the genocide one especially. Come on.

I feel like we’ve probably exceeded this numbers in the 2013 research done by the Justice Dept the last couple of years.

I find the 2.5 million uses of guns for self-defense, a bit dubious, especially because the graphic is a picture of soldier. The reference is to a Russian website, and the specific document isn't there.

Looks like an actual low-end estimate is 55,000 which I find shocking as well.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Lol at the genocide one especially. Come on.

Indulging folks who get the bulk of their "information" from Facebook memes their uncle shared is colossal a waste of fucking time. I found out when I waded in the waters of "the Republican party freed the slaves and Democrats founded the KKK." They either "don't have time" to respond or refuse to when presented with facts which counter their words picture's narrative.

Spoiler: show

Congrats, btw. Looks like you'll be happy again, after all.

Why aren't you a mod anymore? I mean, I'm sure that's contributing to your happiness quotient, but wtf did they do to you?