Gun Talk

[Lord Ratner]

15 hours ago, HeloDude said:

I don’t…if someone is so dangerous that we can risk them illegally obtaining a firearm then they should remain in prison (ie fufill their sentence).  Once they do the time and are deemed able to rejoin society, they’re free, and should have the their rights restored.  If not, we run the risk of a tyrannical government (even worse than we currently have at the federal and state levels) charging people for BS crimes, and giving them a “plea deal” to avoid prison (or a very light sentence), and there goes your gun rights.  If you’re a free person, you’re free.   
 

As for background checks, same type of thing above…it is essentially asking for permission to exercise freedom.  I think it’s hilarious that people still trust the feds after what we’ve been seeing that last several decades.

While I agree in principal, recidivism is a real problem with crime and we simply don't have the resources (or will power) to keep that many people locked up forever. 

I don't have a great answer, obviously, but a background check is relatively painless and there are definitely people you don't want having guns. For example, a murderer/rapist/gang banger awaiting trial out on bail. Abolishing the entire bail system isn't realistic. 

 

More controversially, I am open to limited waiting periods. Far more than background checks. No more than 7 days, but maybe an even lower limit. Crimes of passion are real and demonstrated, and cooler heads often prevail with time. I can think of no constitutional scenario where a gun needs to be purchased *now* as opposed to next week. You aren't forming a functional anti-tyrannical-governmental force in 24 hours. Concerns about self-defense (which are arguably not what 2A addresses) might require a gun sooner, but I think you can allow police the option to waive a waiting period and you wouldn't have a worse outcome than we have now. 

 

I think state-funded gun safety courses would be a brilliant move for the cause. Conservatives are so against spending money, but if you really wanted to change the narrative and get more people comfortable with the 2A, this would be a low cost way to make gun owners safer, make more people gun-friendly, and take away many liberal arguments against gun ownership. 

[Smokin]

The words "well regulated" are interesting to think about given that words change meaning over time.  Just take the term "decimated".  Nearly everyone uses that word to indicated something along the lines of 'nearly annihilated', but that's not even close to what it originally meant.  Used to mean killed 10% (notice the 'deci' in it).

Similarly, 99.9999% of Americans would think "well regulated" means it is ruled by a lot of laws.  But there are many reputable people that point to 1780's contemporary uses of the word regulated much more like the clock example stated earlier, meaning 'it works well'.  That would entirely change the implications of gun laws today.

https://www.americanrevolutioninstitute.org/video/a-well-regulated-militia-history-of-the-second-amendment/

On the topic, it would be interesting to know how many crimes are solved with the serial number being a significant aid to the investigation.  My guess would be near zero.  Think about the scenario that it would actually help in; you'd have to have a murder scene where someone threw the gun away at the scene.  And that person would have had to have bought the gun legally in order for the serial number to be associated with them.  Seems unlikely.

Finally, as technology continues to evolve, the manufacture of ghost guns will only get easier and nearly impossible to manage.  Go buy a few thousand dollars worth of equipment and you can print or mill guns.  In just the last 10 years, 3D printed guns have gone from curiosity pet projects that fail after shooting a couple rounds to being able to last hundreds of rounds.  More than enough for a criminal.  That's just the 3D printing, you get a mill that cuts out receivers from aluminum blocks (a set up you could easily do in your garage) and you could make guns better quality than many gun manufacturers.  Technology will continue to evolve faster than 80 year old legislators and 85 year old presidents can keep up with.

[uhhello]

22 minute mark is nuts

Edited May 5 by uhhello

[Lawman]

Stumbled upon this randomly and while I’m not a big shotgun guy I know a lot of people that slug hunt.

If you don’t want to sit through the whole video just jump to about the 16min mark where they shoot the ballistic gel.

These might be the most wickedly destructive round I’ve ever seen when thinking about the potential wounding capacity to a target.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

13 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Stumbled upon this randomly and while I’m not a big shotgun guy I know a lot of people that slug hunt.
 

 

 

If you don’t want to sit through the whole video just jump to about the 16min mark where they shoot the ballistic gel.

These might be the most wickedly destructive round I’ve ever seen when thinking about the potential wounding capacity to a target.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

There are hundreds of crazy rounds that guy tests. One of my favorite channels to run in the background while I'm cleaning the kitchen.

[Smokin]

So, where can I buy these?  Someone please take my money!  Put this in a 410 round to be shot with the judge and I think you have a solid bear gun.

[Lawman]

So, where can I buy these?  Someone please take my money!  Put this in a 410 round to be shot with the judge and I think you have a solid bear gun.

Apparently some crazy guy in Oregon with some machining capacity that we should probably all check on…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gearhog]

 

[uhhello]

1 hour ago, gearhog said:

 

What's more sad is that someone is sitting there filming without correcting her.  Gotta be a training environment.  Not much training going on.   

Edited May 21 by uhhello

[Lawman]

What's more sad is that someone is sitting there filming without correcting her.  Gotta be a training environment.  Not much training going on.   

So the STRAC drives what a unit can or can’t do with regard to ammunition for training.

It is based off the type of unit in classification, and swings a very wide arc in how much or how little incentive is placed on weapons qualification. Echelon of that unit also changes it. I’m for example in a position where they allot exactly 0x5.56 for me in the grand total of rounds, same as grenades, AT4 rounds or HMG rounds are 0 for anybody in a flying paragraph number because wtf there are other people to train. We used 40k rounds of 9mm for a reflexive fire event and another 15k of 5.56…. That two week 70 person event was two years of 9mm for an aviation battalion of ~500 soldiers. Meanwhile your regular light infantry unit will have tens of thousands of rounds of small arms for a similar number of troops…. But they also don’t get a strac of ammunition for aircraft or main gun rounds for tanks. They’ll also get a buttload of 81mm mortar and grenades compared to a mech unit which gets more 120mm and 25mm for the Bradleys to train with.

I don’t need my quartermasters or Chemo’s to shoot like infantry though…same as I don’t need cyber guys doing that. I need them good at their job. But if you want to play the “look at the dumb Army game” posting some support troop (seriously look at her kit) I’d be happy to post videos of some of our AF weather kids the next time we have a range. I mean when they hit the ECP at Bagram and all the kids in the CJOC were running around losing their shit, there is a reason all the Army guys just went outside to the wall. That was the safe place to be.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[busdriver]

8 hours ago, Lawman said:

But if you want to play the “look at the dumb Army game” posting some support troop (seriously look at her kit) I’d be happy to post videos of some of our AF weather kids the next time we have a range. I mean when they hit the ECP at Bagram and all the kids in the CJOC were running around losing their shit, there is a reason all the Army guys just went outside to the wall. That was the safe place to be.

Lighten up Francis.

You entirely missed uhhello's point.  

[uhhello]

10 hours ago, Lawman said:

So the STRAC drives what a unit can or can’t do with regard to ammunition for training.

It is based off the type of unit in classification, and swings a very wide arc in how much or how little incentive is placed on weapons qualification. Echelon of that unit also changes it. I’m for example in a position where they allot exactly 0x5.56 for me in the grand total of rounds, same as grenades, AT4 rounds or HMG rounds are 0 for anybody in a flying paragraph number because wtf there are other people to train. We used 40k rounds of 9mm for a reflexive fire event and another 15k of 5.56…. That two week 70 person event was two years of 9mm for an aviation battalion of ~500 soldiers. Meanwhile your regular light infantry unit will have tens of thousands of rounds of small arms for a similar number of troops…. But they also don’t get a strac of ammunition for aircraft or main gun rounds for tanks. They’ll also get a buttload of 81mm mortar and grenades compared to a mech unit which gets more 120mm and 25mm for the Bradleys to train with.

I don’t need my quartermasters or Chemo’s to shoot like infantry though…same as I don’t need cyber guys doing that. I need them good at their job. But if you want to play the “look at the dumb Army game” posting some support troop (seriously look at her kit) I’d be happy to post videos of some of our AF weather kids the next time we have a range. I mean when they hit the ECP at Bagram and all the kids in the CJOC were running around losing their shit, there is a reason all the Army guys just went outside to the wall. That was the safe place to be.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Indeed relax.

In my career, we were lucky enough to get range time as a unit so our 'refreshers' were more like pro shoots.  In those sessions though, we would have loads of first time shooters (support jobs) and never in a million years would anyone with any sort of experience would have allowed someone to shoot the way she was shooting. You don't need ammunition to correct this issue.  We also just see a snippet of her shooting experience so maybe someone jumped in after the video finished and instructed her on proper technique.  

[uhhello]

 

https://www.kark.com/crime/bryan-malinowski-the-little-rock-airport-executive-shot-by-atf-agents-dies-from-injuries/

 

https://www.kark.com/crime/released-search-warrant-affidavit-shows-details-of-atf-case-against-little-rock-airport-executive-bryan-malinowski/

[BFM this]

1. …yeah, that was a hit.

2. I can see zero ways in which that might not happen to anyone, at any time.

[herkbier]

What the fuck. I realize I’m only seeing one side and I’m going to look for the full testimony.. how is this remotely ok to ATF and PD leadership? How come there isn’t rioting in the streets over this?
 

Do the cops and agents executing this warrant truly not see the difference between this guy and the gang-bangers in North Little Rock? 
 

All that thin blue line bullshit and the flags, fuck those guys. I used to give the benefit of the doubt to the cops and agents. They have a dangerous job, have to deal with the violent and the crazies. It’s more and more apparent, *they* are creating the violent situations.

Can’t wait to see what “justice” is served here. 

 

[herkbier]

Found the full hearing.. waste of time, the summary: 

Democrat ranking member spends his time stroking the ATF Director’s dick.  ATF director answers few if any questions from Republican congressmen.

 

[Lord Ratner]

On 5/31/2024 at 9:47 AM, BFM this said:

1. …yeah, that was a hit.

2. I can see zero ways in which that might not happen to anyone, at any time.

Hang on. A hit?

 

This dude was (allegedly) operating an illegal gun trafficking operation, with some pretty damning evidence. Jail forever type of crimes. 

 

He got caught, and when the world was collapsing in on him, he committed suicide by cop. That's not even remotely hard to believe. 

 

If he took a shot at the ATF agents, he 100% earned his death. 

 

What am I missing here? Did he not shoot at the police? Was he not an illegal gun-runner? Anyone got an article that supports any evidence of innocence?

Edited June 2 by Lord Ratner

[uhhello]

27 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Hang on. A hit?

 

This dude was (allegedly) operating an illegal gun trafficking operation, with some pretty damning evidence. Jail forever type of crimes. 

 

He got caught, and when the world was collapsing in on him, he committed suicide by cop. That's not even remotely hard to believe. 

 

If he took a shot at the ATF agents, he 100% earned his death. 

 

What am I missing here? Did he not shoot at the police? Was he not an illegal gun-runner? Anyone got an article that supports any evidence of innocence?

I'm definitely not debating his guilt on whether he was doing what the ATF said he was doing but....

They purposely waited until he was home to execute a search warrant.  Not an arrest warrant.  They no knocked and kicked in the guys door at 0600.  They knew what was going to happen.  You awaken to someone kicking in your front door at 0600, what is your response?  

[herkbier]

47 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Hang on. A hit?

 

This dude was (allegedly) operating an illegal gun trafficking operation, with some pretty damning evidence. Jail forever type of crimes. 

 

He got caught, and when the world was collapsing in on him, he committed suicide by cop. That's not even remotely hard to believe. 

 

If he took a shot at the ATF agents, he 100% earned his death. 

 

What am I missing here? Did he not shoot at the police? Was he not an illegal gun-runner? Anyone got an article that supports any evidence of innocence?

Are you for real? Based off the limited information released, the conclusion you came to is suicide by cop? Sure would be nice to see the body cams.. oh wait. 

[Smokin]

Yes he allegedly shot at cops.  Cops that apparently didn't announce themselves, cut the power, covered his camera, and smashed in his door.  All of which are the same thing a gang might do.

Are you really going to say that if you hear a crash at your front door and walk out of your bedroom in the dark to see the outline of multiple armed individuals dressed in dark clothes walking in the front door that they just smashed in, your first thought is "I bet this is a group of peace officers executing a lawfully attained search warrant".  BS.  Based on the available info, he fired warning shots at a group of people that just broke into his house.  He showed more restraint that morning than the ATF did.  If the current evidence is even close to correct, it was absolutely not suicide by cop, it was an execution by cop.  Every single individual that was even remotely involved in the decision to execute the "raid" in this manner this should go to prison.  It would be difficult to figure out a way to execute a search warrant that would be more likely to result in death.

The ATF allegedly has evidence that he commuted many gun law violations.  Trafficking sounds like a stretch, more like he was acting as a firearms dealer without a license.  A big deal? Yes.  Worthy of dozens of armed agents murdering him in the dark?  Absolutely not.  And we'll never know because they killed the one dude that really knew what he had done and apparently intentionally prevented any video evidence of the act. 

By the way, the same ATF just published an administrative rule that grossly expanded the definition of acting as a firearms dealer.  Not Congress, not a law, but a bureaucrat published a rule which opens up tens if not hundreds of thousands of Americans to the same horror as this.

[Lord Ratner]

24 minutes ago, Smokin said:

Yes he allegedly shot at cops.  Cops that apparently didn't announce themselves, cut the power, covered his camera, and smashed in his door.  All of which are the same thing a gang might do.

Are you really going to say that if you hear a crash at your front door and walk out of your bedroom in the dark to see the outline of multiple armed individuals dressed in dark clothes walking in the front door that they just smashed in, your first thought is "I bet this is a group of peace officers executing a lawfully attained search warrant".  BS.  Based on the available info, he fired warning shots at a group of people that just broke into his house.  He showed more restraint that morning than the ATF did.  If the current evidence is even close to correct, it was absolutely not suicide by cop, it was an execution by cop.  Every single individual that was even remotely involved in the decision to execute the "raid" in this manner this should go to prison.  It would be difficult to figure out a way to execute a search warrant that would be more likely to result in death.

The ATF allegedly has evidence that he commuted many gun law violations.  Trafficking sounds like a stretch, more like he was acting as a firearms dealer without a license.  A big deal? Yes.  Worthy of dozens of armed agents murdering him in the dark?  Absolutely not.  And we'll never know because they killed the one dude that really knew what he had done and apparently intentionally prevented any video evidence of the act. 

By the way, the same ATF just published an administrative rule that grossly expanded the definition of acting as a firearms dealer.  Not Congress, not a law, but a bureaucrat published a rule which opens up tens if not hundreds of thousands of Americans to the same horror as this.

This is all well and good, right up until the point that he was illegally dealing in firearms. 

If that turns out to be an unfounded allegation, then this is all relevant. But if it's not, we're now operating under the assumption that he had was an illegal arms dealer who had no idea why his house was being raided. That's bridge too far.

 

Agree completely with the argument that he should have been apprehended at his place of work. And I also agree that the no-knock shit has to end. 

 

"According to the warrant, Malinowski purchased more than 150 guns between May 2021 and Feb. 27, 2024, which he then resold. "

 

"He would then resell the just-purchased guns in as little as 24 hours through gun shows where he maintained a table or through private sales."

 

If that's true, and I'll bet anyone here (limit one bet) a bottle that it is, then the entire situation tilts against him. 

 

There is a huge difference between this and the dead airman.

[uhhello]

18 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

This is all well and good, right up until the point that he was illegally dealing in firearms. 

If that turns out to be an unfounded allegation, then this is all relevant. But if it's not, we're now operating under the assumption that he had was an illegal arms dealer who had no idea why his house was being raided. That's bridge too far.

 

Agree completely with the argument that he should have been apprehended at his place of work. And I also agree that the no-knock shit has to end. 

 

"According to the warrant, Malinowski purchased more than 150 guns between May 2021 and Feb. 27, 2024, which he then resold. "

 

"He would then resell the just-purchased guns in as little as 24 hours through gun shows where he maintained a table or through private sales."

 

If that's true, and I'll bet anyone here (limit one bet) a bottle that it is, then the entire situation tilts against him. 

 

There is a huge difference between this and the dead airman.

So you agree the no knock 'search' warrant was improper but that the dead guys reaction to said actions were also improper?  He should have assumed these were Feds coming to search his house?  I'm not following.  

[HeloDude]

46 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

This is all well and good, right up until the point that he was illegally dealing in firearms.

According to SCOTUS:

”The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The ATF would make criminals out of all of us if they could get away with it.  

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, uhhello said:

So you agree the no knock 'search' warrant was improper but that the dead guys reaction to said actions were also improper?  He should have assumed these were Feds coming to search his house?  I'm not following.  

Was this no-knock improper? I don't know. Are many of them improper? Absolutely. They are certainly not always improper. When I say "the no-knock shit" I mean the indiscriminate use of no-knocks for non-time-sensitive crimes. Very useful for kidnappings, known armed gangs, etc. Ridiculous for raiding the homes of Trump associates or non-violent criminals. 

His reaction is colored by his status as a law-abiding citizen. If you are a drug-runner, murderer, gun-trafficker, etc, then you have a reasonable expectation of having your door beat down, announced or otherwise. Your participation in certain crimes removes your moral authority to respond to a police breach with deadly force. There is a reason we have the term "law-abiding citizen." The distinction matters. He was not one, if the above evidence is substantiated.

If you are illegally selling firearms, and you know you are doing it, then you have a reasonable expectation of having your door kicked in. Is that the best choice for the ATF to make? I don't think so. But that doesn't make it wrong, or the same as other cases. The crimes alleged and the evidence supporting the allegation determine if the risk is justified. As an example, in the Florida Airman incident, there was no evidence and the alleged crime was "loud domestic disturbances." In that instance, law enforcement should do everything to avoid a potentially fatal encounter, to include calling the apartment first, staying in clear view of the door peephole, loudly announcing your status as police, or simply leaving the scene. This was not that. 

49 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

According to SCOTUS:

”The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The ATF would make criminals out of all of us if they could get away with it.

All well and good, but the SCOTUS has very intentionally not struck down background checks, limitations on felons, the NFA, and FFL regulations. Some of those should be changed, but they aren't at the moment. 

 

2 hours ago, Smokin said:

By the way, the same ATF just published an administrative rule that grossly expanded the definition of acting as a firearms dealer.  Not Congress, not a law, but a bureaucrat published a rule which opens up tens if not hundreds of thousands of Americans to the same horror as this.

I'm very familiar with the new ATF rule, and it is sloppy and improperly sourced. This should come from congress. But unless you believe someone should be allowed to buy guns using their legal status and sell them to someone without a legal right to own the firearm (I do not), some variation of this rule will have to exist. Or, we can just mandate background checks for all private firearms purchases, make the check free, and then private sales are good to go. 

 

2 hours ago, Smokin said:

All of which are the same thing a gang might do.

If you are law-abiding, it is reasonable to assume a gang attack. If you are a gun-runner, it is unreasonable to be surprised by a police raid. Not literally surprised, that's the point obviously. But confused as to why police, as opposed to gang bangers, are busting down your door? No. 

 

2 hours ago, Smokin said:

more like he was acting as a firearms dealer without a license

Nonsense. Dealers have to do background checks. They have to verify the legal right to a firearm. He was intentionally subverting that process. He was acting exactly as a gun-runner. 

[HeloDude]

15 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

All well and good, but the SCOTUS has very intentionally not struck down background checks, limitations on felons, the NFA, and FFL regulations. Some of those should be changed, but they aren't at the moment.

SCOTUS wrote it so that lower courts could use it to overturn gun control laws if they are not in accordance with the decision, and some laws have been overturned.  Just because one hasn’t been overturned yet since Bruen doesn’t mean one won’t be in the future.  

But what bothers me more with your argument is that someone who says they support the 2nd Amendment is also supportive of victimless crime gun control laws and the ATF enforcement of these laws by force.