Not the Pine Box City.
A few companies are raffling items to raise money for the Chamber for its task and one of those is Black Rain Ordnance.
The item Black Rain Ordnance is raffling is referred to only as a "gun," but it is noted that the gun is worth $2,500 and Neosho's intrepid citizen reporter/activist Rebecca Williams revealed on her Facebook page Friday that the gun that is being raffled is a semi-automatic rifle.
That should really help Neosho "bring back the bloom."
31 comments:
Hysteria?
@4:13 AM: Blatant bigotry. Randy is one of those "I support the 2nd Amendment, but..." types where every specific thing people actually want to do with guns is covered in the second clause. He doesn't even want us to be able to carry concealed, and obviously didn't learn anything in his history classes which covered the 20th Century, thus his opposition to us owning rifles with military utility.
Not a bit of it. Military weaponry has no place on the streets of America and you had best get used to the idea that we are going to get those weapons off those streets.
That will never happen ma'am
Looks like Randy has triggered the gun nuts since he’s getting accused of bigotry. There are no requirements to buy a gun through a private sale. None, any felon allowed if he has cash. These wackos exhibit the same sense as the moron in Springfield that thought he would dress up in body armor, pistol, AR-15, and tactical gear to enter a WalMart only a few days after a mass shooter in one in El Paso. If you feel you need all that gear to go out in public, then you should probably stay home in your safe place. There is absolutely nothing in the Second Amendment that allows automatic weapons, grenades,lasers, rockets or whatever you think you need, it says you have the right to bear arms, not try to claim it was meant for weapons that didn’t even exist at the writing of the Amendment. The same kind of stupidity exhibited by the Neosho Chamber shouldn’t be taxpayer funded, if the City funds them.
Your generalizations of gun owners is funny... kind of. It is what the left does though, isn't it? Categorize people? Put them in nice tidy little groups so they are easily labelled? I am not sure how anyone with an ounce of personal dignity or respect could fall into the trappings of an ideology that doesn't recognize individuality.
Go on, continue calling names and trying to bully. It all fits the leftist mindset.
>>>Your generalizations of gun owners is funny... kind of. It is what the left does though, isn't it? Categorize people? Put them in nice tidy little groups so they are easily labelled? I am not sure how anyone with an ounce of personal dignity or respect could fall into the trappings of an ideology that doesn't recognize individuality.
Go on, continue calling names and trying to bully. It all fits the leftist mindset.<<<
Rush Limpballs!
Is that really you?!
If it isn't really Rush Limpballs it sure sounds like one of the dittoheads!
Give us a sign?
Liberals are so fun when they are triggered. Name calling and what not. Showing how rational they are. How mature they are. How they are completely unable to have any intelligent dialogue with anyone who disagrees with them. Such fragile, delicate little things.
"Rush Limbaugh says things I don't agree with. I will call him Limpballs. Then when other people say things I don't like I will say they must be Limpballs because... LIMPBALLS!" says the liberal because they are incapable of thinking like an adult.
With all these gun raffles, the winner must complete an ATF form and go through the backround check just like any other store purchase before taking the gun home. I have not come across ONE of these raffles (and I enter many) where the gun is just handed to the winner.
Why not just do what other communities do, like raffle off an automobile or such?
Because someone donated a gun to be raffled. If someone donated a car, they would raffle a car and a gun. The big bad gun seller made a DONATION to help raise money. A car dealer did not make a donation.
@1:50 PM:
There are no requirements to buy a gun through a private sale. None, any felon allowed if he has cash.
Lie, it's every bit as illegal as a felon trying to buy from a gun store. The gun grabbers won't assent to allowing normal people to use the NICS because they want to require it, and in the process forbid all loaning of guns without going thought the process twice to for example decrease our ability to teach and thus create new gun owners, see for example the Washington State law.
There is absolutely nothing in the Second Amendment that allows automatic weapons, grenades,lasers, rockets or whatever you think you need, it says you have the right to bear arms, not try to claim it was meant for weapons that didn’t even exist at the writing of the Amendment.
Why don't we apply that principle to modern high rate assault printing presses, laser printers, and forums like this blog?
11:09 conveniently forgets that if the winner of the raffle chooses to sell his rifle to a felon, that there is absolutely no reason he can’t do so as he is not required to report a private sale for a background check or an ATF form. Gun nuts and the NRA can’t even agree to close that loophole.
@ 7:00
I see that like the NRA, you refuse to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. There is absolutely no requirement that a private seller of firearms determine if a buyer is a felon. He can sell to anyone that has the money. “Gun Grabbers” have no authority to allow or disallow NCIS (not NICS) checks on private sales. There SHOULD be a requirement that if a private sale is to be made, then a background check must be completed as is required for dealers, but gun nuts and the NRA actively fight such a requirement. If citizens that sell a weapon to a felon were held responsible by requiring registration, then they would open themselves up to criminal charges as well as lawsuits. Many gun nuts are not responsible and thus the “accidental” shootings of children playing with improperly stored weapons, stolen weapons, etc...did you know you’re not required by law to report a stolen weapon? Responsibility is something gun nuts and the NRA fears.
Not going to let you move the goalposts, although of course who's at fault for not letting normal people use NICS is more a matter of opinion than easily discerned fact.
"Requiring registration"? Besides that being another flypaper law only designed to ensnare the law abiding, can't require it for those forbidden to own guns just like they can't be forced to self-incriminate on ATF 4473s (that may not make any sense, but it's the law of the land from when the Federal courts were particularly crazy in the cultural '60s), history tells us the #1 reason to do it is to facilitate confiscation, which the gun grabbers are completely open about demanding today (like the government can "buy back" something it never owned, except of course our betters think they own us). Like our host, you prove that the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history.
Many gun nuts are not responsible and thus the “accidental” shootings of children playing with improperly stored weapons, stolen weapons, etc...did you know you’re not required by law to report a stolen weapon? Responsibility is something gun nuts and the NRA fears.
This would be why we lowered the annual total number of fatal gun accidents from around 800 in 1980 to 486 in 2017, while the total population increased by over 50%, and the number of guns owned by it by over 2 times? You never heard of the NRA's Eddie Eagle program? Hunter safety courses? Sure thing, keep on hating us, we're used to it.
10:07 cites gibberish, speaking of moving goalposts, flypaper laws, and facilitating confiscation directly from the NRA’s propaganda. He doesn’t dispute the fact that millions of guns are sold yearly through private sales or the fact they are not subject to a background checks. He doesn’t cite that more people were killed by firearms in 2017 than in any year since 1968 according to his own source. Instead of attributing the decrease in child deaths to prosecution of negligent gun owners or free locks provided by police and citizens, he cites freaking Eddie Eagle and the NRA as a factor which is total bullshit. He knows full well the El Paso shooter was denied purchasing a weapon through a licensed dealer and instead obtained one through private sale. This is not disputable facts, loopholes are responsible for the El Paso gun nut’s assault despite the fact that open carry is allowed in Texas and there were no “good guys” with guns there to stop it. You don’t have the authority to stop the public from moving the goalposts to stop the insanity.
@11:59: He doesn’t cite that more people were killed by firearms in 2017 than in any year since 1968 according to his own source.
Because it wasn't a topic of discussion, and it's a bogus metric, what's the per capita rate, or as its commonly expressed, the number per 100,000 people. There are over 50% more people in the US since 1968, if all things were equal, you'd expect the total number to be higher. Which is why it's absolutely remarkable that the total number of accidental gun deaths is now much lower.
And if you want to continue that thread of discussion, subtract suicides, if they weren't available other means would be used, as seen by a bunch of disarmed societies with higher suicide rates.
In your blind hatred of gun owners you can't even admit a possibility that the NRA and the much more numerous "gun nuts" of this country have played a role in bringing down accidental gun deaths. Which again moves the goalposts, for the original point you were making was "Responsibility is something gun nuts and the NRA fears.", and this points out how we take responsibility for thoroughly teaching real gun safety.
While I'm at it, let me evangelize the best set of rules, Jeff Cooper's 4:
1. All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
3. Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.
4. Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.
He knows full well the El Paso shooter was denied purchasing a weapon through a licensed dealer and instead obtained one through private sale.
A born illegal private sale, you're allowed to make your own guns, but you need a license and have to do paperwork if you want to sell them.
Hey, I've got a great idea! Why don't we make murder illegal, that'll surely stop this problem!
the El Paso gun nut’s assault despite the fact that open carry is allowed in Texas and there were no “good guys” with guns there to stop it.
Open carry is irrelevant when the whole complex was a gun free zone thanks to the land owner, and most of the clientele is Mexicans disarmed by their own government from across the boarder. Both per his manifesto explicit reasons the shooter chose this location. Strange how that works, almost all these shootings are done in places where the perpetrator knows the law abiding won't be carrying guns.
@12:44
You seem to ignore the topic of private sales of firearms being an unregulated free for all, although it was the topic of discussion. Stranger yet, you assume I have a blind hatred of gun owners despite the fact that my brother has been a lifetime member of the NRA for over 46 years. Even he agrees that the loophole should be closed, probably because he doesn’t make private sales. Jeff Cooper is even more out of left field, we are not talking about his rules or his shooting ability despite your hero worship. The El Paso shooter didn’t make his own weapon, but he did shoot the assault rifle in a city and state that allows for open carry in a store that didn’t ban people from wearing them inside so your argument that the shooter knew there would not be armed citizens there is more bullshit. I didn’t read his racist manifesto and if you think these citizens were all from Mexico, then you are ignorant of the reports on the shooting. If you can’t agree that private sales should be subject to background checks, then you better just stay out of the way while the majority of citizens makes our lawmakers do just that.
How bout we stop all this bickering and figure out how we can stop these mass shootings. Nobody is changing anyone’s mind. It’s all just hot air from both sides. How can we feel safe shopping at Walmart or sending our kids to school.
Good ol Libs, in all their grandeur, never let a little thing like facts get in the way of a good arguement.
Done. I do feel safe in public areas. Only a paranoid loon would fret everytime they are in public that they are about to be shot. It is irrational to honestly believe that people don't feel safe. If we were all afraid that any time we went to Walmart we were in danger, Walmart would be out of business.
If you feel afraid of being in public because someone owns a gun, you should see a doctor.
@2:21 AM:
@ 8:00
Ok, we have one side saying background checks on all gun sales could have prevented the El Paso shooting, we have another side saying no background checks as the shooter had a manifesto with explicit racism toward Mexicans.
Don't lie, I said background checks would not have affected this shooter's ability to get a gun since the guy who sold it to him was not legally able to sell it to anyone. The idea that making this sale even more illegal would have changed the outcome is ludicrous, at best telling us you have other reasons to demand this, like strangling US gun culture as I outlined above.
@8:00 pm: How bout we stop all this bickering and figure out how we can stop these mass shootings.
Liars are going to promote bickering, so they're best ignored unless you feel compelled to directly reply to them.
"Stopping" these mass shootings is not a realistic goal, unless you widen it to mass murders, since plenty of recent incidents overseas show methods like trucks and arson can kill as many or more people. In the US, our worst mass murderers used arson or explosives (and of course see OK City).
So we should look at root causes, and guns, gasoline and explosives are inanimate objects until they're put to ill use by people. The most significant thing I observe is that the vast majority of modern era US mass murderers come from broken homes, for example the El Paso shooter's parents divorced in 2011 when he was 13.
How could we change American society so that divorce is rare instead of 50% of all marriages, so that the institution of marriage is once again primarily oriented at providing a stable environment for raising children?
9:58
If you feel you need to strap on firearms to go to WalMart you should probably see a doctor.
@6:03 AM:
If you feel you need to strap on firearms to go to WalMart you should probably see a doctor.
I don't know, there's a couple of Walmarts in Joplin I avoid precisely because I "feel a need to strap on a firearm" and wear body armor if I were to visit them....
But the general principle is correct, you should carry all the time unless it's illegal, which in Missouri is essentially only Federally prohibited locations, or places you "must" visit like medical facilities, or not carry at all. You can't pick and chose if and when crime will find you. Any place you feel a "need" for extra protection is best avoided altogether, and carrying shouldn't change your behavior, including where you go and where you don't go.
@ 4:27
You are a liar, 7 of the victims of the El Paso shooter were Mexican nationals, the other 15 were Americans. Why does it matter if they were Mexican, the shooter was an equal opportunity killer. He killed a German, 13 Americans, and 7 Mexicans and one undetermined. He was denied purchasing a gun by the ATF in the past, so he got one through a loophole that private sellers are not required to determine if the buyer is a felon or had mental issues.
90% of Americans believe all gun sales should be subject to a background check, 72% of NRA members believe all gun sales should be subject to a background check. The background check prevented the El Paso shooter from obtaining a firearm from a licensed dealer.
https://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2018/feb/27/tim-ryan/after-parkland-shooting-ohio-congressman-said-70-8/
6:25
I will not succumb to the paranoia that I must arm myself to go out in public, be it the highly dangerous WalMart or anywhere else, but that is my decision. If you feel the need to have a firearm on you at all times that is legal, but all sales including private sales, should be subject to a background check.
@7:22 AM, this would be the same polling community that told us Hillary had a 98% or otherwise "certain" lock on winning in 2016? The same community that told her she didn't need to campaign in some upper Midwest states, and could afford to spend money on increasing the popular vote so she wouldn't end up like her husband who never got more than a plurality?
But your link was very useful, it showed in detail just how bad the individual polls were that resulted in that claim, including a good "What polling experts said about the polls" section. What some people are willing to say to a noisy phone caller about as sensitive an issue as guns doesn't turn out to be their revealed preference when they mark their ballots in private.
And while it looks like you can drill down to the polling questions, I don't need to do that to guarantee none of them said "and such 'universal background checks' proposed by gun control organizations, as in fact enacted in states like New York, Colorado, and Washington, would respectively make it illegal for you to lend your gun to a family member or friend you trust, store it with a friend during a natural disaster like a flood, or allow you to supply a gun for target practice under your direct supervision". Although there are ways to get around the NY state issue, thus making it another flypaper law. And the authorities in Colorado and Washington state assure their subjects they won't enforce those parts of their laws.
But all of this is irrelevant, since it seems to have escaped your notice that our country is a republic where the written Constitution and its amendments are the highest law of the land.
@ 8:19
There is nothing in the Constitution that bans felons from owning a firearm, but it is against the law. The Odessa mass murderer was deemed unfit by ATF to make a purchase from a licensed dealer due to mental issues, he wasn’t arrested for attempting to do so, so he obtained a weapon from a private sale where background checks on felonies or mental impairment are required. Just like felons and mentally impaired individuals are prohibited from buying through a licensed dealer, they should also be denied by requiring a background check on private sales. It’s that damn simple, so more people do die needlessly.
People screaming for a ban of guns need to take a deep breath.
Let's say that the government issues a buy back of all weapons they deem unfit for the average citizen to have. Does anyone really believe that people who are suspicious of the government or simply want to keep their guns are going to comply with the buy back? No. Which means there is a black market for illegal guns. Kind of like what goes on in areas like Chicago. You now have guns that aren't being monitored at all.
Post a Comment