Previous Post
Next Post

OMG! People are buying guns! Without CCW permits! OMG! NBC2 Investigation: Legally buying guns you can’t legally carry – “The NBC2 Investigators have uncovered a flaw in Florida’s gun checks system. 300,000 people legally bought guns in Florida in the last four months. Only 100,000 people got their licenses to carry in the same time frame. What does that mean for the other 200,000 people? Do they already have their licenses? Are they illegally carrying?” It apparently never occurred to these anencephalic talking heads (or their editor) that people might actually buy firearms they don’t intend to carry.

After investigation into missing guns, new bill calls for California cops to track weapons – “A state bill introduced Monday would require California law enforcement agencies to keep track of their guns and establish a reporting procedure for when police lose them. State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, said he introduced the legislation in response to investigations published this year by the Orange County Register and Bay Area News Group revealing that many law enforcement agencies make little or no effort to inventory their weapons and that officers frequently lose their firearms – some of which end up on the street.” So…California cops could he held to the same standards as the state’s beleaguered lawful gun owners? That’s an idea so crazy it just might work!

Isn’t that the reason he got a lot of the votes he did? . . . Rasmussen: Voters Say SCOTUS Will Move Right; Make 2A ‘Great Again?’ – “Today’s report also said that, heading into the election one month ago, 87 percent of Trump voters “said the high court should be guided by the Constitution and legal precedents, a view supported by 49 percent of Hillary Clinton supporters.” Some observers might draw significance from the fact that 38 percent more voters from the Trump camp think SCOTUS should be guided by the Constitution than those in Clinton’s corner.”

‘Vice’ is shocked, shocked to learn a felon may have broken the law in order to get a gun . . . How Did the ‘Pizzagate’ Shooter Get Guns with a Criminal Record? – “It appears that Welch may have not obtained legal permission to buy or carry the .38-caliber revolver found in his possession in the pizza parlor. Broadly speaking, convicted felons are not allowed to own or buy guns in the US. A federal background check form asks prospective buyers if they are ‘an unlawful user’ of drugs or ‘addicted to a controlled substance’—a vague classification that can include misdemeanor drug offenses. In the last two decades, the FBI has blocked hundreds of thousands of people with records of drug possession or use from buying firearms.”

Va. Court of Appeals rules photo ID can’t be required for concealed handgun permit application – “The Virginia Court of Appeals ruled that Circuit Courts cannot require a photo ID with a concealed handgun permit application. An attorney in the case announced that his client won in his challenge on whether the Norfolk Circut Court could require a photo ID as a part of the Concealed handgun Permit (CHP) Application.”

Allhands: We thought Trump’s win would slow gun demand. It hasn’t – “A lot of gun enthusiasts figured that Donald Trump’s win would finally ease the run on guns and ammo. Firearms and related supplies have been flying off shelves for the last eight years, fueled in large part by people who worried President Obama would restrict their ability to buy stuff. Avid shooters figured a president endorsed by the NRA would slow demand, and initially, that seemed to be the case. Some gun shops reported slow business and firearms manufacturers saw stock prices dip 20 percent immediately after the election. But a funny thing happened on the way to the ballot box.” Oh. Darn.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • “…crowds at the gunshop.”

      Maybe some of this is because of the perceived DOOM, production was kicked up, and now there’s a minor glut on the market.

      Works for me. :^)

  1. Don’t need a photo ID to vote, don’t need one to carry.

    (And what the heck is that picture? That looks nothing like the Virginia CHP.)

    • Wasn’t there a similar case in Pennsylvania not too long ago? Something about an Amish gentleman who couldn’t produce a photo ID for a background check, as having his photo taken would have been against his religion?

      • Assuming he was Amish, and my understanding of the Amish is correct, I think technically he may have pulled a fast one because of how I understand it, such things are not actually against their religion. My understanding is they operate on a if they can’t build or maintain it within there own community they won’t use it principle unless necessary. I know when I was in visiting one of the railroad museums in PA they pointed out a house with electricity running to it mentioning that they had a child with medical needs which was why they had power.

        • Much like any religion, their beliefs are patchwork. In my area, we had horse-and-buggy Amish along with driving-a-car-while-talking-on-cell-phone-leaving-fast-food-restaurant Amish

      • A few months ago, I was waiting in a hospital ER when a middle-aged long-bearded Amish gentleman came in to ask for treatment. I wasn’t able to hear what was his reason for being there, but I did hear him say that it was the very first time he had ever set foot inside a hospital.

        Now you know one of the reasons why they look so healthy: a hospital is a dangerous place to be.

    • In Virginia, you do have to have a photo ID to vote but not for a concealed carry permit. My Va. permit doesn’t have a photo but my Utah does.

      • Weird, my Virginia non resident CHL does have a picture. Had to submit a passport photo along with the fingerprints.

        • My residence permit does not require a photo or a fingerprint. The permit says “Must be carried with proper photo ID”. I guess they figure the fingerprint is not necessary because they already have it through the DMV.

      • That’s odd. They have not mentioned it and I don’ t recall it being added by law. The application doesn’t say anything about it. Mine renews next July and it says I can do it through the mail. I don’t care because I have an extra passport photo from getting my Utah permit.

  2. Am I the only one who has a hard time understanding how cops loose guns? Especially on such a large scale. This assuming “lost” doesn’t mean “honey I got a new gun… don’t worry it didn’t cost me anything.”

    • I can understand how an individual officer can lose one. It’s a very low-probability event, but there are a lot of cops, so in absolute numbers it’s a fair number.

      I have a harder time understanding how firearms can just go missing from a department’s armory, however. Unless one posits corruption, complicity, graft, good old-fashioned theft or other things one would rather not find in one’s law enforcement community.

      • Sometimes hardware gets found in an armory under stuff and no one even noticed it was ‘lost’ (i.e. hey, did anyone know we had a box of berettas under here? no?)

        But when you don’t have good inventory control I would not be surprised when guns sometimes walk. Someone retires and ‘forgets’ to turn one in, etc.

  3. lol NBC-2, really??? And now you know why we make fun of you. You are worthy of a new term: gunretarded

  4. Because cops are special people! Two people I know have found glocks on the bench after the police had been “training”. I’ve personally found police issue magazines twice

    The most dangerous people I have ever seen at military and civilian ranges are police.

    When I was in the army even on operations I could find a company’s weapons and know where they all were

  5. Over on the NBC2 web site where that “story” was published, reporter Rachel Polansky is being roasted. Literally hundreds of comments, with every single one of them in some way questioning how someone that stupid gets a job as a “journalist.”

    The stupidification of the news media continues, and they wonder why their ratings are dropping.

    • The absolute onslaught of hate for her stupidity is amazing. I read through more than half, and couldn’t find a single one saying she did anything but act like an idiot. That makes me happy.

      • I feel for her, a little, for now. It’s entirely possible that the story was one that someone else in the newsroom came up with as filler and she got stuck with the assignment. I mean, someone with the organization has an agenda, is a fool, or both, but I don’t know if it’s her.

        • The article on the NBC2 web site says, “by Rachel Polansky.”
          She owns it.

          No doubt her editor and news director were co-conspirators, but if they’re putting her name on someone else’s work, then that station has problems that go beyond the laziness, sensationalism and outright stupidity that allowed the story to air.

    • I live in NBC-2’s market area. I saw this broadcast and almost lost my mind. I don’t often shout at the TV, but……Jeezus.

    • Looks like in typical liberal fashion they nuked all of the comments last night. I guess they can’t take the heat.

        • And, they’re gone again. Also, Rachel’s Facebook page, which had the story/comments as well has now been scrubbed of the story and those comments. Main story still up on the station’s site though.

  6. “Some observers might draw significance from the fact that 38 percent more voters from the Trump camp think SCOTUS should be guided by the Constitution than those in Clinton’s corner.”

    Sounds like they wish law makers could pass whatever laws they want on a whim, like California.

  7. The trouble with legal precedents is that there are a lot of bad ones that need to go. I helped a friends study in law school and I got the distinct impression that a fair portion of the study material was presenting the twisted logic behind bad precedent. I wish I could remember the details, but there were several things that reeked of the result someone powerful wanted at one time.

    • It must have been Constitutional Law, an area in which the Court seems to decide how it wants the case to come out and then fits the standard of review to the de3sired result, rather than determining the standard of review and applying the facts to that standard. This is a “natural” result since all fifty of the state highest courts and the US Supreme Court are policy making bodies that set the rules for all the courts below them.

    • Yep. With so much law out there, you can find legal precedent for any crazy idea that you wish to move forward.

  8. All the years I had a permit in Kalifornia I never had a photo on it . But I had to list only 3 guns on the permit with serial #. If I was checked and had a gun on me that was not listed I would have been up $%#@ creek with out a paddle!!

    • Same thing in NY with the serial numbers. Someone can be fully legal to carry one gun but arbitrarily become a criminal if they borrow their friend’s gun, etc.

      • In Virginia, you get a permit and don’t worry about what gun or it doesn’t matter if you don’t even own a gun. The permit in Virginia is like a driver’s license in that it covers anything you want to use.

        • SC has this same caveat, a licensed hunter or fisherman, traveling to or from his place of hunting or fishing, may carry a gun, concealed or not, on his person. That’s not a direct quote, but it’s pretty close. So…..I have a hunting license, a fishing license, and carry a fishing pole with lures in my truck.

  9. “The NBC2 Investigators have uncovered a flaw in Florida’s gun checks system. 300,000 people legally bought guns in Florida in the last four months. Only 100,000 people got their licenses to carry in the same time frame. What does that mean for the other 200,000 people? Do they already have their licenses? Are they illegally carrying?”

    Come on guys, she’s “Just Asking Questions.”

  10. Oh man, that was a hoot!

    The cuckoo bird in my clock has more brains than some journalists.

  11. Aside from all the other reasons the report was terrible, isn’t Florida one of the go to straits for non resident permits because of the large number of states they have reciprocity with? Wonder if that played into the stats? It’s a mystery I tell you.

  12. No one wants to talk about the pedophilia ring at the top of our government?
    Just because Alex Jones is talking about it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Liars have to tell the truth sometimes or no one would believe the lies.

    • “Just because Alex Jones is talking about it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.”

      Stay away from damn pizza parlors. Stick to moon hoax conspiracies.

      • “PS, do you think I’ll do better playing domino’s on cheese than on pasta?”

        WTF does that mean? Google it and look around. I’m not saying that’s what it is, but asking the question is not moon bat conspiracy crazy.

  13. “A lot of gun enthusiasts figured that Donald Trump’s win would finally ease the run on guns and ammo…”

    I was hoping for a dramatic drop in prices on guns and ammo, for I have a lot of room left in my gun safe. Darn!

    • Yeah, same here. I’m a bit put off because I had a couple of gun purchases I wanted to make… guess I’m not alone 🙁

  14. …and establish a reporting procedure for when police lose them.

    LOL! It’s like- we know we are going to lose these guns. Let’s come up with a reporting procedure.

  15. I was at the Crossroads of the West this past weekend, good times. I think all of these “protests” have spurred gun purchases.

  16. The day after pizza parlor shooting NBC nightly news had the story and the reporter said the guy shot a ‘assault rifle’ not a .38 revolver. Can’t just say the guy fired a gun, it doesn’t get peoples attention like assault rifle. (Rolls eyes)

  17. What’s sad is that the NBC article does talk about the fact you can buy guns without the intent of carrying, and even talk to some firearms instructor about it. But what is disingenuous is the headline and opening paragraph that acts like it’s a big problem. It’s like they have some agenda to push or something. Weird.

  18. People often buy guns, because they want a new gun for:
    target shooting, no carry license required;
    hunting, no carry license required;
    house gun, no carry license required;
    Already licensed and a second carry gun is desired because a smaller gun, or a larger gun or just a back-up gun is desired.
    But does anyone expect media types to know that gun owners often have many guns and just like to have specialized guns.
    Maybe the MSM should cite a few facts, such as 99.9% of all guns are never used to commit a crime.

Comments are closed.