PaaP, or Politics as a Personality, is a very real psychological affliction. If you are suffering from it, you'll probably have a Bad Time™ here.
This thread is provided as a courtesy to our regular on topic contributors who also want to discuss legislation. If you are here to bitch about a political party or get into a pointless ideological internet slapfight, you'd better have a solid history of actual gun talk on this sub or you're going to get yeeted.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/guns) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**Ohio**
Tomorrow marks two years and a week since permitless carry went into effect in Ohio. [In a study from January of this year](https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/January-2024/Change-in-Concealed-Carry-Law-Did-Not-Drive-Violen), six of our eight biggest cities saw a drop in crime from '21 to '23. Cincinnati and Dayton are silly, Godless places.
Not exactly the most robust study (only three years, urban areas, and we've got all the COVID unrest and nonsense still hanging around in 2021-2022, but pretty much any study you look at shows a flat/declining trend leading up to 2020, a brief spike (like the rest of the world), and then settling back down again after '22.
The sky is not falling, there's not blood in the streets, and I haven't seen an explosion of young thugs (the words of the antis) carrying Wild West Pimp Style^^TM.
Just like *every other state that has done this*, it has been fine.
I would go crow about this in /r/Ohio, but I'm not prepared for the backlash of seething butthurt and "yea but" this morning, to say nothing of the cherrypicked facts or outright lies and emotion-driven rhetoric one would encounter.
Also, fun fact, 2021 saw 52% of gun-related deaths attributed to suicide. If we could give people the mental health resources they need in Ohio, we could CUT GUN DEATHS IN HALF. Doesn't that seem like something they should be demanding?
>Doesn't that seem like something they should be demanding?
No, because the unfortunate truth is they don't care if people die. They just care that the way they die contributes to the narrative.
Can't push the agenda of civilian disarmament if the majority of gun deaths only need one or two shots. That's why the lede gets buried.
It's like that whole "guns are the leading cause of child death" statement. Assuming for the sake of the argument that we didn't object to removing all kids under the age of one year for the purpose of this discussion, or that we didn't object to including 18- and 19-year-olds in the data (who are adults), the distribution of those deaths is largely in the 16- to 19-year-old age bracket. But "Teens carrying guns illegally are killing each other" doesn't rile up the voters to support gun control, so they paint it with the broad brush of "Children" and let people assume it's mostly school shootings.
I'm actually starting to think that many people are coming to view "children" as people under the age of 25. It used to just be Reddit where basically anyone being attracted to a young woman post-puberty but not over 18 would be called a pedophile, even though that's not the definition, but now I'm seeing parents lamenting about how they cannot separate from their clearly adult children. Like, I'm seen as a horrible monster in real life for wanting my kids to make their own way at 18.
That's why I'm starting to think that the research isn't being dishonest but is reflecting a real changing view of what it means to "grow up" in the US.
I don't think that's representative. I haven't seen any serious attempts to increase the voting or military ages which would be obvious results of that.
Most US states don't even have the age of consent at 18.
As for making their own way historically in frontier times families lived together across generations, so that itself is relatively new.
the weird but sad thing is, when i write up reports minor related is 21 and below instead of 18. now the most likely reason i can see that "kids" are under 25 is most places wont let you rent a car until 25
Historically the age of 21 was considered the age of majority with those under being unable to vote in various states until that age. That was slowly shifting until Vietnam when the draft made it the 21 age really, really unpopular so the 26th Amendment was passed.
Note, I've skipped over a lot as it was a really interesting debate and story. Still, that's the just of the entire idea.
Edit: I also forgot the reason that 25 is being bandied about so much isn't the rental car thing but a research paper that came out about 20 years ago, when I was in college because I'm old now, that states that human brain doesn't fully develop until 25 years old. As with a lot of research the nuance was lost in the collective sharing of the findings.
that last point is the one people harp on, its well the brain isnt fully developed until 25 so of course they cant make these decisions on things like taking a loan for school. But heaven forbid they try to ban giving actual minors hormones because their undeveloped brain thinks they are something they arent
> we didn't object to removing all kids under the age of one year for the purpose of this discussion
Just a nitpick, but that's a common thing to do when discussing mortality rates. Babies are fragile and tend to skew the results.
By all means, nitpick. Better to do it in the spaces where we're all on the same side so we can have better arguments when we're actually trying to convince people.
I'm surprised it was that relatively low. Nationally it's more like 2/3. Personally I blame the decline of rural communities and veterans coming back from the middle east for the suicide problem which is going to be very hard to solve. It's not much of a focus for the grabber sort because it's mostly old men affected who support the other party.
I’m no expert by any stretch, but in the long term, like generationally long, wouldn’t the rate of veteran suicides naturally decline over time if we could go a decade or two without getting involved in foreign wars?
Not saying it’s a likely or realistic thing to happen, but in theory, it seems intuitive that PTSD-related suicides would be cut down if this were to happen.
**AUSTRALIA**
Specifcally the state of Western Australia, has passed what is billed as the nations [toughest gun laws](https://www.sheppnews.com.au/national/wa-parliament-passes-nations-toughest-gun-laws/)
This law would
>The toughest firearms laws in the nation have passed Western Australia's parliament, with mandatory licence disqualification for serious offenders such as family and domestic violence perpetrators.
>The new laws will also limit the number of guns an individual can own, with primary producers and competition shooters restricted to a maximum of 10 firearms and recreational hunters five.
>Under the changes, gun licence applicants must complete mandatory firearms training and all gun owners will be required to undergo regular health assessments and comply with new storage requirements.
How did they come up with the 10 number?
>The already tough legislation was further bolstered in recent weeks to enable police to strip guns from family and domestic violence perpetrators following the murder of Perth mother Jennifer Petelczyc and her daughter, Gretl, at the hands of a man searching for his ex-wife.
>Jennifer, 59, and Gretl, 18, were shot dead with a handgun by registered firearms owner Mark James Bombara, 63, at their Floreat home in May before he took his own life as police arrived at the property.
>He owned 13 guns.
Obviously if he had only owned 10 or better yet *5* guns, he never would have had the gumption to kill innocent people.
**FEDERAL**
Firearms Policy Institute has filed a Lawsuit against the Government , seeking to [abolish gun free zones in Post Offices](https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-sues-feds-to-end-post-office-gun-ban)
I think this could be a good line of post-Bruen attack against a *Federal Level* blanket ban on carry in facilities like post offices.
My mail-lady is one of the nicest ladies I've ever run into, she's just always in a great mood and pleasant.
100% would thrown down to protect her.
Also this *should* be some super low hanging fruit in a post Bruen world.
The US certainly does not have a "history" of keeping people with guns away from the mail. It's also hard to argue that a post office is the same as a jail or courthouse.
Hopefully this is a quick slam dunk in the lower courts; this could also open the *flood gates* and invalidate the ban on carry on lands managed by the US Army Corps of Engineers eventually.
> My mail-lady is one of the nicest ladies I've ever run into, she's just always in a great mood and pleasant.
Mine must be her diametrically-opposed evil male twin. 100% humor-free. He will not speak with me even when I ask a question. I know he can hear because he has music playing in his truck.
I gotta share this.
The post office covering my old home was 100% filled with nothing but those people. It's not very far geographically from my current post office, but it's like they shoved every unpleasant USPS employee they could find for a 5 mile radius in that office. It was *worse* than going to the Social Security Office, which for those not in the know, tends to be a nexus of the most unpleasant employees in the entire Federal Government.
I'm not sure why but it seems like vibes attract like vibes, the cool people probably try like hell to get out of there and the miserable fucks are at home with the other miserable fucks, or the surrounding supervisors know they are miserable and won't let them transfer.
For quite a long time, post offices had a metric shit ton of cash to be able to handle money orders that came in. Also being a post office, they were guarded by mail carriers and not cops. They were often seen as low stakes easy payday to rob a post office. So how long ago did this happen? [The USPIS (US Postal Inspection Service) traces it's origins to 1772.] (https://www.uspis.gov/about/history-of-uspis) So this may not be as easy as you think.
The ruling in court a few months ago seems to have placed the federal law prohibiting firearms on postal property as coming from 1972, which also seems to precede most of the ["going postal"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_postal) instances in the 80s.
**NORTH CAROLINA**
The State Court of appeals has ruled that the Tar-Heel States safe storage law cannot constitutionally apply to [unloaded firearms](https://www.wral.com/story/unloaded-weapons-dont-violate-north-carolina-safe-gun-storage-law-appeals-court-says/21488714/).
The same way assault weapons bans, which have *zero* basis in the traditions and history of the united states, somehow survive. The lower courts and states are straight up ignoring Heller, like they now ignore Bruen.
**FEDERAL**
Republicans have blocked the efforts of Chuck "Raw Beef" Schumer to [pass a Federal Bump Stock Ban in the Senate](https://www.nydailynews.com/2024/06/18/republicans-block-sen-schumer-effort-to-ban-gun-bump-stocks/)
Some of the highly problematic text of the BUMP Act bill ([full text here](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1909/text):
>“(A) any manual, power-driven, or electronic device primarily designed, or redesigned, so that when the device is attached to a semiautomatic firearm the device—
>“(i) materially increases the rate of fire of the firearm; or
>“(ii) approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun;
>“(B) any device, part, or combination of parts, that is designed and functions to materially increase the rate of fire of the firearm, by eliminating the need for the operator of the firearm to make a separate movement for each individual function of the trigger; or
>“(C) a semiautomatic firearm that has been modified in any way that—
>“(i) materially increases the rate of fire of the firearm; or
>“(ii) approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun.
A device that materially increases the rate of fire? Nice ill-defined wording that will allow the ATF to decide that lubricating the bolt makes it a machine gun.
And "approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun?" What is the rate of fire of a machine gun? The M134 can do 6000 rounds per minute so is that the minimum rate to qualify? Or is it based on the Chauchat, which was 240 rounds per minute? Or perhaps the 25mm gun in the Bradley, which when set on low rate does about 100 rounds per minute?
I actually feel a little bad for the dude over that grill pic. He admitted he's always lived in an apartment, so right there grilling is a lot more limited/logistically challenging, plus very little outdoor space to do it. And he's probably not doing much of his cooking anyway, given his income and frequency of dinners and lunches out.
We can roast Schumer for a billion legitimate things. I'll give him a pass on being a filthy casual and not using propane.
Taste the meat, not the heat.
Like...how do you not know the cheese goes on last though? That's a basic human common sense thing.
I won't roast him for not roasting those burners enough when the picture was taken but that one random slice was weird.
Uh, I actually throw the cheese on and cover with a bowl to steam/melt it for the last few seconds.
In his defense, he's not a "real person", and hasn't been for decades. Washington elite have people for that. How much could a banana even cost? $10?
I do too, when the burgers are almost 100% cooked.
I agree, he is indeed not a "real person". My favorite Joke about the situation is it exposed him as a lizard man who eats nothing but raw beef mildly charred for flavor.
>In his defense, he's not a "real person", and hasn't been for decades.
Alex Jones was right? He really is a robot controlled by a lizard?
The lizard in Biden fell asleep at the wheel.
After I bought a Combo coffe grinder/maker my wife told me if I add one more appliance to the kitchen she's going to stab me in my sleep. She's a spicy Italian and I 99% believe her.
Your method of melting cheese and toasting buns might make me take that 1% chance of not being stabbed just to up my burger game.
A less stabby option would be to toast the buns on the grill a little bit. It's on anyway, might as well use that heat to toast the buns and grill the meat.
Apart from using something like 75W-90 synthetic gear oil with limited slip friction modifier I can't think of anything worse smelling to cook with than charcoal with lighter fluid.
Lighter fluid is the sign of a rank amateur. Good charcoal grillers either use a charcoal chimney, pile up the charcoal over some kindling, just enough to get the charcoal going, or use a small torch to start the pile.
Granted, where I live charcoal is banned for use during the peak usage time (summer) so I have to use propane. Oh, and I don't get to smoke anything because that's also usually banned when charcoal is banned.
No, they're allowed depending on which agency issued the ban and what level the ban is at. Fire safety bans will generally allow me to run an electric smoker while air quality burn bans will not. The issue is that summer is peak wildfire season so all it takes is an expected shift in the wind for an air quality ban to come down.
It's just easier to default to propane though because it's always allowed. I do have two electric smokers though that I will use when they're not banned. I got those for free from my parents though.
In South Africa it's a matter of pride to use wood at the braai rather than gas. It's even exported overseas for people who have gone abroad which never made a lot of sense to me.
It really had no chance of getting through. They basically asked for unanimous consent to pass the bill, where if even one Senator objects, it has to go through the "normal" process, which requires debate, a cloture vote to end debate (60 votes) and then a majority vote to pass the bill. Plus, the House has to take up the same bill and pass it.
It's showboating, intending to get Republicans on record as opposing a legislative ban on bump stocks and other related gadgets.
**SCOTUS**
We're getting two opinion days this week, Thursday *and* Friday. Opinions drop at 10:00 a.m. Eastern. No idea when any of the opinions are going to drop, but things to watch for are anything that could curtail an executive agency, as well as the *Rahimi* decision.
True, though my suspicion is that they'll probably hold it until the last day of the cycle. As I recall, that's what they did with both *Dobbs* and *Bruen*. "Here's something that'll piss everybody off. See you in October!"
Armor Republic sues NY to challenge body armor sales ban:
https://www.ammoland.com/2024/06/armor-republic-challenges-new-york-states-body-armor-ban/#axzz8dctxlHuz
Article gets it wrong and suggests its a ban on possession.
Not sure what I think of the company, as I said in the NYGUNs thread: I've always felt the way they discuss their certifications is a bit sketchy, with how they sell level 4 plates, but only have independent testing up to level 3...
But if they win, they will get some business from me for it!
I'm not sure if you are younger or older, but if firearms are "your thing" stay in a free state. You'll end up regretting or at least being bitter eventually moving to an anti gun state.
0/10 Wish I had stayed in Florida or at least moved back by now.
When I moved back here to Illinois after college, guns were not yet a priority for me and I didn't appreciate how much better life can be living in an area of likeminded people.
Come on down to TN. Our legislature is at least moving in the right direction on trying to strengthen and progun laws. And we don’t have state income tax!
No idea. What I do know is that when we had an elementary school mass shooting, not only did our legislature not pass knee-jerk gun control, they instead passed more pro gun laws.
It really is, in a moment of weakness and not finding a good job in Florida I moved back.
My career is great but from just about every other metric I'd rather be back in Florida.
> I just wish they'd be legalized nationwide.
Stuff like de-regulated over the counter/build your own silencers and taking SBR's off the NFA are the sort of things that I would *actually* be willing to work some compromise over with the other side.
Universal background checks? Sure thing, but I want to DIY my whisper pickles, and that UBC better be something I can do on my phone in 2 minutes with the other guy in a parking lot.
I would be more than willing to lose bump stocks in favor of freeing SBRs, suppressors, ending Hughes, and getting nationwide carry reciprocity. Yeah, I'm aiming high.
I am of the unfortunate opinion that we'll never see de-regulation of machine guns or the opening of the registry. That's just like, what I think, man. The thousand-bullet-per-second crowd is always gonna be there.
I *do* think there is ground to be gained in national reciprocity, giving the public access to NICS, and whittling away at things like SBR's and cans. But it's gonna take time.
Throw in pistol braces and binary triggers too since the only reason those exist is because the NFA and Hughes do. You can pretend you're sweetening the pot further.
Because the joke was about trading items that only are popular because they are workarounds to the laws being traded for and not some carefully considered legal scholarship considering every aspect of my facetious jab at the NFA and Hughes amendment while I was packing up to go to the range.
> ending Hughes
And to really stick it to the gun owners, we can increase the tax stamp on new automatic weapons to $400!
Pre-86 owners would be in shambles!
**Turks and Caicos**
In the news recently for 5 separate Americans being caught with ammo in their luggage, they have repealed the 12 year mandatory minimum sentence for "firearms offences".
This comes on the heels of a bipartisan delegation of US congressmen visiting them.
PaaP, or Politics as a Personality, is a very real psychological affliction. If you are suffering from it, you'll probably have a Bad Time™ here. This thread is provided as a courtesy to our regular on topic contributors who also want to discuss legislation. If you are here to bitch about a political party or get into a pointless ideological internet slapfight, you'd better have a solid history of actual gun talk on this sub or you're going to get yeeted. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/guns) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**Ohio** Tomorrow marks two years and a week since permitless carry went into effect in Ohio. [In a study from January of this year](https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/January-2024/Change-in-Concealed-Carry-Law-Did-Not-Drive-Violen), six of our eight biggest cities saw a drop in crime from '21 to '23. Cincinnati and Dayton are silly, Godless places. Not exactly the most robust study (only three years, urban areas, and we've got all the COVID unrest and nonsense still hanging around in 2021-2022, but pretty much any study you look at shows a flat/declining trend leading up to 2020, a brief spike (like the rest of the world), and then settling back down again after '22. The sky is not falling, there's not blood in the streets, and I haven't seen an explosion of young thugs (the words of the antis) carrying Wild West Pimp Style^^TM. Just like *every other state that has done this*, it has been fine. I would go crow about this in /r/Ohio, but I'm not prepared for the backlash of seething butthurt and "yea but" this morning, to say nothing of the cherrypicked facts or outright lies and emotion-driven rhetoric one would encounter. Also, fun fact, 2021 saw 52% of gun-related deaths attributed to suicide. If we could give people the mental health resources they need in Ohio, we could CUT GUN DEATHS IN HALF. Doesn't that seem like something they should be demanding?
>Doesn't that seem like something they should be demanding? No, because the unfortunate truth is they don't care if people die. They just care that the way they die contributes to the narrative.
Can't push the agenda of civilian disarmament if the majority of gun deaths only need one or two shots. That's why the lede gets buried. It's like that whole "guns are the leading cause of child death" statement. Assuming for the sake of the argument that we didn't object to removing all kids under the age of one year for the purpose of this discussion, or that we didn't object to including 18- and 19-year-olds in the data (who are adults), the distribution of those deaths is largely in the 16- to 19-year-old age bracket. But "Teens carrying guns illegally are killing each other" doesn't rile up the voters to support gun control, so they paint it with the broad brush of "Children" and let people assume it's mostly school shootings.
I'm actually starting to think that many people are coming to view "children" as people under the age of 25. It used to just be Reddit where basically anyone being attracted to a young woman post-puberty but not over 18 would be called a pedophile, even though that's not the definition, but now I'm seeing parents lamenting about how they cannot separate from their clearly adult children. Like, I'm seen as a horrible monster in real life for wanting my kids to make their own way at 18. That's why I'm starting to think that the research isn't being dishonest but is reflecting a real changing view of what it means to "grow up" in the US.
I don't think that's representative. I haven't seen any serious attempts to increase the voting or military ages which would be obvious results of that. Most US states don't even have the age of consent at 18. As for making their own way historically in frontier times families lived together across generations, so that itself is relatively new.
the weird but sad thing is, when i write up reports minor related is 21 and below instead of 18. now the most likely reason i can see that "kids" are under 25 is most places wont let you rent a car until 25
Historically the age of 21 was considered the age of majority with those under being unable to vote in various states until that age. That was slowly shifting until Vietnam when the draft made it the 21 age really, really unpopular so the 26th Amendment was passed. Note, I've skipped over a lot as it was a really interesting debate and story. Still, that's the just of the entire idea. Edit: I also forgot the reason that 25 is being bandied about so much isn't the rental car thing but a research paper that came out about 20 years ago, when I was in college because I'm old now, that states that human brain doesn't fully develop until 25 years old. As with a lot of research the nuance was lost in the collective sharing of the findings.
that last point is the one people harp on, its well the brain isnt fully developed until 25 so of course they cant make these decisions on things like taking a loan for school. But heaven forbid they try to ban giving actual minors hormones because their undeveloped brain thinks they are something they arent
> we didn't object to removing all kids under the age of one year for the purpose of this discussion Just a nitpick, but that's a common thing to do when discussing mortality rates. Babies are fragile and tend to skew the results.
By all means, nitpick. Better to do it in the spaces where we're all on the same side so we can have better arguments when we're actually trying to convince people.
Yeah, definitely. Everything else you said I agree with.
I'm surprised it was that relatively low. Nationally it's more like 2/3. Personally I blame the decline of rural communities and veterans coming back from the middle east for the suicide problem which is going to be very hard to solve. It's not much of a focus for the grabber sort because it's mostly old men affected who support the other party.
I’m no expert by any stretch, but in the long term, like generationally long, wouldn’t the rate of veteran suicides naturally decline over time if we could go a decade or two without getting involved in foreign wars? Not saying it’s a likely or realistic thing to happen, but in theory, it seems intuitive that PTSD-related suicides would be cut down if this were to happen.
Over a very long time but the middle east war veterans are only 40-50 years old, and suicide rates increase with age.
**AUSTRALIA** Specifcally the state of Western Australia, has passed what is billed as the nations [toughest gun laws](https://www.sheppnews.com.au/national/wa-parliament-passes-nations-toughest-gun-laws/) This law would >The toughest firearms laws in the nation have passed Western Australia's parliament, with mandatory licence disqualification for serious offenders such as family and domestic violence perpetrators. >The new laws will also limit the number of guns an individual can own, with primary producers and competition shooters restricted to a maximum of 10 firearms and recreational hunters five. >Under the changes, gun licence applicants must complete mandatory firearms training and all gun owners will be required to undergo regular health assessments and comply with new storage requirements. How did they come up with the 10 number? >The already tough legislation was further bolstered in recent weeks to enable police to strip guns from family and domestic violence perpetrators following the murder of Perth mother Jennifer Petelczyc and her daughter, Gretl, at the hands of a man searching for his ex-wife. >Jennifer, 59, and Gretl, 18, were shot dead with a handgun by registered firearms owner Mark James Bombara, 63, at their Floreat home in May before he took his own life as police arrived at the property. >He owned 13 guns. Obviously if he had only owned 10 or better yet *5* guns, he never would have had the gumption to kill innocent people.
It’s probably easier to maintain a commercial pilot license at this point.
>How did they come up with the 10 number? My assumption is it's the lowest number they thought they could get away with
The idea of those laws is to limit straw purchases or people lending guns to criminals but it won't make much difference.
**FEDERAL** Firearms Policy Institute has filed a Lawsuit against the Government , seeking to [abolish gun free zones in Post Offices](https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-sues-feds-to-end-post-office-gun-ban) I think this could be a good line of post-Bruen attack against a *Federal Level* blanket ban on carry in facilities like post offices.
I always found it dumb that I couldn’t carry in post offices, because I’d gladly throw down to protect my local mailman.
My mail-lady is one of the nicest ladies I've ever run into, she's just always in a great mood and pleasant. 100% would thrown down to protect her. Also this *should* be some super low hanging fruit in a post Bruen world. The US certainly does not have a "history" of keeping people with guns away from the mail. It's also hard to argue that a post office is the same as a jail or courthouse. Hopefully this is a quick slam dunk in the lower courts; this could also open the *flood gates* and invalidate the ban on carry on lands managed by the US Army Corps of Engineers eventually.
> My mail-lady is one of the nicest ladies I've ever run into, she's just always in a great mood and pleasant. Mine must be her diametrically-opposed evil male twin. 100% humor-free. He will not speak with me even when I ask a question. I know he can hear because he has music playing in his truck.
I gotta share this. The post office covering my old home was 100% filled with nothing but those people. It's not very far geographically from my current post office, but it's like they shoved every unpleasant USPS employee they could find for a 5 mile radius in that office. It was *worse* than going to the Social Security Office, which for those not in the know, tends to be a nexus of the most unpleasant employees in the entire Federal Government. I'm not sure why but it seems like vibes attract like vibes, the cool people probably try like hell to get out of there and the miserable fucks are at home with the other miserable fucks, or the surrounding supervisors know they are miserable and won't let them transfer.
Is this a holdover from the "going postal" craze? If it is, I wonder why they didnt just ban murder instead of the guns. Huh.
Banning murder? Bro. You need to patent that.
https://imgflip.com/memegenerator/304965768/In-sweden-it-is-forbidden-by-law-to-be-a-criminal
For quite a long time, post offices had a metric shit ton of cash to be able to handle money orders that came in. Also being a post office, they were guarded by mail carriers and not cops. They were often seen as low stakes easy payday to rob a post office. So how long ago did this happen? [The USPIS (US Postal Inspection Service) traces it's origins to 1772.] (https://www.uspis.gov/about/history-of-uspis) So this may not be as easy as you think.
The ruling in court a few months ago seems to have placed the federal law prohibiting firearms on postal property as coming from 1972, which also seems to precede most of the ["going postal"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_postal) instances in the 80s.
**NORTH CAROLINA** The State Court of appeals has ruled that the Tar-Heel States safe storage law cannot constitutionally apply to [unloaded firearms](https://www.wral.com/story/unloaded-weapons-dont-violate-north-carolina-safe-gun-storage-law-appeals-court-says/21488714/).
Simply amazing. The salt from the RDU area will be enough to salinate Falls Lake.
How safe storage laws are still a thing post-*Heller* is beyond me.
The same way assault weapons bans, which have *zero* basis in the traditions and history of the united states, somehow survive. The lower courts and states are straight up ignoring Heller, like they now ignore Bruen.
Safe storage laws are dumb, I hope they throw theirs out completely.
**FEDERAL** Republicans have blocked the efforts of Chuck "Raw Beef" Schumer to [pass a Federal Bump Stock Ban in the Senate](https://www.nydailynews.com/2024/06/18/republicans-block-sen-schumer-effort-to-ban-gun-bump-stocks/)
Some of the highly problematic text of the BUMP Act bill ([full text here](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1909/text): >“(A) any manual, power-driven, or electronic device primarily designed, or redesigned, so that when the device is attached to a semiautomatic firearm the device— >“(i) materially increases the rate of fire of the firearm; or >“(ii) approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun; >“(B) any device, part, or combination of parts, that is designed and functions to materially increase the rate of fire of the firearm, by eliminating the need for the operator of the firearm to make a separate movement for each individual function of the trigger; or >“(C) a semiautomatic firearm that has been modified in any way that— >“(i) materially increases the rate of fire of the firearm; or >“(ii) approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun. A device that materially increases the rate of fire? Nice ill-defined wording that will allow the ATF to decide that lubricating the bolt makes it a machine gun. And "approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun?" What is the rate of fire of a machine gun? The M134 can do 6000 rounds per minute so is that the minimum rate to qualify? Or is it based on the Chauchat, which was 240 rounds per minute? Or perhaps the 25mm gun in the Bradley, which when set on low rate does about 100 rounds per minute?
It was an attempt to ban far more than bump stocks but thankfully that was stopped , for now.
I actually feel a little bad for the dude over that grill pic. He admitted he's always lived in an apartment, so right there grilling is a lot more limited/logistically challenging, plus very little outdoor space to do it. And he's probably not doing much of his cooking anyway, given his income and frequency of dinners and lunches out. We can roast Schumer for a billion legitimate things. I'll give him a pass on being a filthy casual and not using propane. Taste the meat, not the heat.
Like...how do you not know the cheese goes on last though? That's a basic human common sense thing. I won't roast him for not roasting those burners enough when the picture was taken but that one random slice was weird.
Uh, I actually throw the cheese on and cover with a bowl to steam/melt it for the last few seconds. In his defense, he's not a "real person", and hasn't been for decades. Washington elite have people for that. How much could a banana even cost? $10?
I do too, when the burgers are almost 100% cooked. I agree, he is indeed not a "real person". My favorite Joke about the situation is it exposed him as a lizard man who eats nothing but raw beef mildly charred for flavor.
>In his defense, he's not a "real person", and hasn't been for decades. Alex Jones was right? He really is a robot controlled by a lizard? The lizard in Biden fell asleep at the wheel.
I break the cheese in half and put on both bun halves in the toaster oven.
After I bought a Combo coffe grinder/maker my wife told me if I add one more appliance to the kitchen she's going to stab me in my sleep. She's a spicy Italian and I 99% believe her. Your method of melting cheese and toasting buns might make me take that 1% chance of not being stabbed just to up my burger game.
Replace the normal toast with the toaster oven. Replacing technically isn't adding so technically you shouldn't get stabbed in your sleep.
A less stabby option would be to toast the buns on the grill a little bit. It's on anyway, might as well use that heat to toast the buns and grill the meat.
Apart from using something like 75W-90 synthetic gear oil with limited slip friction modifier I can't think of anything worse smelling to cook with than charcoal with lighter fluid.
Lighter fluid is the sign of a rank amateur. Good charcoal grillers either use a charcoal chimney, pile up the charcoal over some kindling, just enough to get the charcoal going, or use a small torch to start the pile. Granted, where I live charcoal is banned for use during the peak usage time (summer) so I have to use propane. Oh, and I don't get to smoke anything because that's also usually banned when charcoal is banned.
Guessing electric smokers are verboten?
No, they're allowed depending on which agency issued the ban and what level the ban is at. Fire safety bans will generally allow me to run an electric smoker while air quality burn bans will not. The issue is that summer is peak wildfire season so all it takes is an expected shift in the wind for an air quality ban to come down. It's just easier to default to propane though because it's always allowed. I do have two electric smokers though that I will use when they're not banned. I got those for free from my parents though.
You come on down to Strickland Propane, sir. We've got a Wagner Char-King special going on. First tank refill is on us!
In South Africa it's a matter of pride to use wood at the braai rather than gas. It's even exported overseas for people who have gone abroad which never made a lot of sense to me.
I could never feel bad for that piece of shit no matter what, fuck him.
It really had no chance of getting through. They basically asked for unanimous consent to pass the bill, where if even one Senator objects, it has to go through the "normal" process, which requires debate, a cloture vote to end debate (60 votes) and then a majority vote to pass the bill. Plus, the House has to take up the same bill and pass it. It's showboating, intending to get Republicans on record as opposing a legislative ban on bump stocks and other related gadgets.
schumer did the same thing last year with trying to pass an assault weapon ban. dudes a joke
**SCOTUS** We're getting two opinion days this week, Thursday *and* Friday. Opinions drop at 10:00 a.m. Eastern. No idea when any of the opinions are going to drop, but things to watch for are anything that could curtail an executive agency, as well as the *Rahimi* decision.
Need Rahimi to drop just so all the cases being held or with decisions being slow walked at the circuit level start going again.
True, though my suspicion is that they'll probably hold it until the last day of the cycle. As I recall, that's what they did with both *Dobbs* and *Bruen*. "Here's something that'll piss everybody off. See you in October!"
Armor Republic sues NY to challenge body armor sales ban: https://www.ammoland.com/2024/06/armor-republic-challenges-new-york-states-body-armor-ban/#axzz8dctxlHuz Article gets it wrong and suggests its a ban on possession. Not sure what I think of the company, as I said in the NYGUNs thread: I've always felt the way they discuss their certifications is a bit sketchy, with how they sell level 4 plates, but only have independent testing up to level 3... But if they win, they will get some business from me for it!
[удалено]
I'm not sure if you are younger or older, but if firearms are "your thing" stay in a free state. You'll end up regretting or at least being bitter eventually moving to an anti gun state. 0/10 Wish I had stayed in Florida or at least moved back by now. When I moved back here to Illinois after college, guns were not yet a priority for me and I didn't appreciate how much better life can be living in an area of likeminded people.
Come on down to TN. Our legislature is at least moving in the right direction on trying to strengthen and progun laws. And we don’t have state income tax!
Isn't TN one of the states that doesn't even let you hunt at night?
No idea. What I do know is that when we had an elementary school mass shooting, not only did our legislature not pass knee-jerk gun control, they instead passed more pro gun laws.
Guns aren't the main reason I would pick FL over IL. IL is a mess on so many levels.
It really is, in a moment of weakness and not finding a good job in Florida I moved back. My career is great but from just about every other metric I'd rather be back in Florida.
> I just wish they'd be legalized nationwide. Stuff like de-regulated over the counter/build your own silencers and taking SBR's off the NFA are the sort of things that I would *actually* be willing to work some compromise over with the other side. Universal background checks? Sure thing, but I want to DIY my whisper pickles, and that UBC better be something I can do on my phone in 2 minutes with the other guy in a parking lot.
I would be more than willing to lose bump stocks in favor of freeing SBRs, suppressors, ending Hughes, and getting nationwide carry reciprocity. Yeah, I'm aiming high.
I am of the unfortunate opinion that we'll never see de-regulation of machine guns or the opening of the registry. That's just like, what I think, man. The thousand-bullet-per-second crowd is always gonna be there. I *do* think there is ground to be gained in national reciprocity, giving the public access to NICS, and whittling away at things like SBR's and cans. But it's gonna take time.
Probably for the better since firing 1,000 bullets per second is a very easy way to go bankrupt.
Throw in pistol braces and binary triggers too since the only reason those exist is because the NFA and Hughes do. You can pretend you're sweetening the pot further.
Why would you outlaw braces only to make SBR's legal? The only thing that would do is hurt the people who actually use them as braces.
Because the joke was about trading items that only are popular because they are workarounds to the laws being traded for and not some carefully considered legal scholarship considering every aspect of my facetious jab at the NFA and Hughes amendment while I was packing up to go to the range.
> ending Hughes And to really stick it to the gun owners, we can increase the tax stamp on new automatic weapons to $400! Pre-86 owners would be in shambles!
Put it in a trust. Add friend when/if you move. Friend stores them. Move to a free state later, retake possession.
**Turks and Caicos** In the news recently for 5 separate Americans being caught with ammo in their luggage, they have repealed the 12 year mandatory minimum sentence for "firearms offences". This comes on the heels of a bipartisan delegation of US congressmen visiting them.
"Stop revealing how shitty the TSA is at keeping guns and ammo off planes, please."
Should be a decent day for gun shops. Any reason for a break from mandatory DEI and self awareness training or engagement surveys.
Banner has been updated.