• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

The gun issue

zz0468

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,957
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
And yet without the second it's gone, poof, like magician's flash paper. Kiss your rights goodbye.

But knowing your damn dumbass logic you can't even figure that out except to blame the gun for everything.
As usual, you miss the point.

I didn't blame guns on anything in my last post, and I never have. I'm just pointing out thst, at the same time you're supporting the second amendment, which I support as well, you're sporting a president who is doing his best to suppress the first amendment.

You would probably agree with him, based on how you react to criticism directed to Trump. But it takes the first amendment to keep the second amendment, and vice versa.

You guys only focus on one, and that's going to be a grave mistake.
 

poltergeisty

Deep Thinker
Joined
May 7, 2004
Messages
3,808
Location
RLG, Fly heading 053, intercept 315 DVV
The thing with Trump is that he's putting up with a lot of media one sided backlash and he doesn't put up with that garbage. If I were president I'd try and laugh it off and just ignore it all, but when you have so much "fake news" out there like Trump points out, you can't blame him for going after most of the media and their blatant misinformation and dagger pointing. Now I'm willing to bet that if a majority of the media were on his side, whether that be print, TV, radio or Internet, his poll numbers would be a good 20 or more points higher. You didn't see this kinda of garabge with Obozo's two terms. There really was a slobbering love affair. and I and several other astute people firmly believe that the media died during the campaign of Obozo. Now they don't even try hiding it. Turn on CNN or MSNBC and it's Russia, Russia, Russia or some other utter stupid crap. Once in a while I tune in just to see what nonsense they are spouting on about and withen about 3 minutes or less I'm back to FoxNews. I just can't watch that illogical bullcrap. I feel like a lose a few braincells just listening. Trump will tune in to those clowns to see what they are saying though. I don't know how he stands it. I mean, the man's family is attacked on a day by day basies. You can't fault the president for being pissed off at the media.
 

poltergeisty

Deep Thinker
Joined
May 7, 2004
Messages
3,808
Location
RLG, Fly heading 053, intercept 315 DVV
I didn't blame guns on anything in my last post, and I never have.

I went over two pages of your post's and your jest seems like it's about banning the gun which is NOT the solution. As I already stated in my opening post, it's a problem of a culture of corruption helped by Congress themselves. They are in fact the catalyst in more ways then one. It requires deep thought. And it's not a major mental health issue either. Go back to say the 1970's and there were many people with mental health issues, but I doubt you heard about shooting after shooting back then. It's the culture, it's corrupt, and it's been spurred on by yours truly Congress.

Just one example. Because of the constant tax and spend to oblivion policies, inflation is through the roof. So the dollar isn't worth sht, wages haven't meet the cost of living and due to Congress and high taxation, jobs are going over seas. Now this has a direct impact on families in more than one facet. It now takes both parents to make ends meet, and because of that the family structure is broken. So you have family issues, etc. Or there's only one parent in the household, often times a mom and no dad. This really is a trickle down effect and as I said, Congress is the catalyst. Now combine that with our culture of corruption with the music, TV shows, movies and Internet crap that's out there and you have a real problem. I think Paul Harvey summoned it up quite well long ago.




What's happening now?
 
Last edited:

zz0468

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,957
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
I went over two pages of your post's and your jest seems like it's about banning the gun which is NOT the solution.
You don't seem to comprehend things very well. Maybe that's why you vote Republican.

I have repeatedly said....

I support the second amendment.
I don't want guns banned.
I think most Americans should be able to have whatever the hell guns floats their boats.

But...

Gun owners need to stop denying that guns are inherently dangerous.

Gun owners need to stop denying that the existence of guns presents a unique challenge, due to their inherent danger.

Gun owners need to participate in finding solutions, rather than denying problems exist.

Nowhere in any of that do I say "ban guns". Nowhere. Ever.

I'm only saying that gun owners need to help, not hinder, finding solutions to the problems these inherently dangerous devices are an integral part of.
 

prcguy

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
7,821
Location
So Cal - Richardson, TX - Tewksbury, MA
This reoccurring statement that gun owners need to participate in finding solutions is like having car owners participate in finding solutions to car crashes, or drunks participating in cutting down on drunk driving or whatever. If I were a gun owner my obligations would be to make my house and anyone in it safe with a gun inside and beyond that, I have nothing to add. I don't rob people at gun point, I don't shoot up schools, I don't shoot guns in the air on 4th of July, I don't do anything, so what can I possibly add to the confusion?

You don't seem to comprehend things very well. Maybe that's why you vote Republican.

I have repeatedly said....

I support the second amendment.
I don't want guns banned.
I think most Americans should be able to have whatever the hell guns floats their boats.

But...

Gun owners need to stop denying that guns are inherently dangerous.

Gun owners need to stop denying that the existence of guns presents a unique challenge, due to their inherent danger.

Gun owners need to participate in finding solutions, rather than denying problems exist.

Nowhere in any of that do I say "ban guns". Nowhere. Ever.

I'm only saying that gun owners need to help, not hinder, finding solutions to the problems these inherently dangerous devices are an integral part of.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,080
This reoccurring statement that gun owners need to participate in finding solutions is like having car owners participate in finding solutions to car crashes, or drunks participating in cutting down on drunk driving or whatever. If I were a gun owner my obligations would be to make my house and anyone in it safe with a gun inside and beyond that, I have nothing to add. I don't rob people at gun point, I don't shoot up schools, I don't shoot guns in the air on 4th of July, I don't do anything, so what can I possibly add to the confusion?

finding solutions to car crashes = Govt mandated FHSMV regulations. Federal regulation of MV standards. Seatbelts, airbags, Mandatory drivers training and drivers tests. Restrictive licenses. Car owners got no say in fixing problem.

cutting down on drunk driving = Govt mandated drunk driving laws. Mandatory license revocation, mandatory breathalysers in vehicles. Drunks got no say in fixing problem.

See where this is going...

guns and shootings = Govt mandated restrictions on gun ownership. Gun owners WANTED NO SAY. - Tough **** for them I say.
 

zz0468

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,957
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
This reoccurring statement that gun owners need to participate in finding solutions is like having car owners participate in finding solutions to car crashes...
They do.

...or drunks participating in cutting down on drunk driving or whatever.
They do. Just about every activity that American's participate in, actively supports safety and regulation. As a pilot and aircraft owner, my AOPA membership helps fund aircraft safety. Gun owners seem to be the only such group that actively opposes participation in making that activity safer.

If I were a gun owner my obligations would be to make my house and anyone in it safe with a gun inside and beyond that, I have nothing to add.
Then you should have no objection to others stepping in and making rules and regulations about gun ownership as they see fit.

Quit being an ass about it. You guys can participate and help out, and increase support in your activities and gun ownership, or you can shut down every discussion that comes along, and when the chips are down, lose out big time.

It could happen.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,080
They do.



They do. Just about every activity that American's participate in, actively supports safety and regulation. As a pilot and aircraft owner, my AOPA membership helps fund aircraft safety. Gun owners seem to be the only such group that actively opposes participation in making that activity safer.



Then you should have no objection to others stepping in and making rules and regulations about gun ownership as they see fit.

Quit being an ass about it. You guys can participate and help out, and increase support in your activities and gun ownership, or you can shut down every discussion that comes along, and when the chips are down, lose out big time.

It could happen.
You would think the NRA would be all over this, tripping over themselves to fix the problem. They could do so and still advocate for 2A. . But they got greedy and became a lobbying group focused only on making money for those running the freak show.

I have to have license for my radios that could not do any damage. A microwave oven is more dangerous. Go figure.
 

zz0468

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,957
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
You would think the NRA would be all over this, tripping over themselves to fix the problem. They could do so and still advocate for 2A.
Collectively, the gun lobby just isn't that intelligent. They're supporting a president who would be happy to see the 1st amendment go, but when that happens, they won't have the freedom to argue against taking the 2nd amendment away, and that WOULD be the second thing to go.

They're not smart enough to see the need to link the two, and they're not smart enough to see that they need the support of EVERYBODY to maintain their right to bear arms.

I have to have license for my radios that could not do any damage. A microwave oven is more dangerous. Go figure.
You have to have a license to catch a fish.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,080
Collectively, the gun lobby just isn't that intelligent. They're supporting a president who would be happy to see the 1st amendment go, but when that happens, they won't have the freedom to argue against taking the 2nd amendment away, and that WOULD be the second thing to go.

They're not smart enough to see the need to link the two, and they're not smart enough to see that they need the support of EVERYBODY to maintain their right to bear arms.

You have to have a license to catch a fish.
I understand the 2A argument, what baffles me is the "well regulated militia" words. I don't see anything resembling a well regulated militia in these modern times. I don't think folks like Bobby in his Mommy's basement are who the founding fathers imagined, as being a "well regulated militia".

More likely they were thinking the Sheriffs Possee, and those folks were certainly hand selected and probably took guns away from dangerous fruitcakes, wife beaters, drunks, thieves and traitors on a regular basis. I wish SCOTUS would take a look at this.

I am on another board that is for "survivalists". I joined because I figured there would be a radio communications element. But mostly it is hardcore 2A nut cases who still cry about "Obama taking all their guns away". Really, they should be complaining about paying way too much money buying "the last remaining" guns and ammo while he was in office. The folks on this board are on average, quite a bit smarter and well balanced.
 

zz0468

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,957
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
I understand the 2A argument, what baffles me is the "well regulated militia" words. I don't see anything resembling a well regulated militia in these modern times. I don't think folks like Bobby in his Mommy's basement are who the founding fathers imagined, as being a "well regulated militia".
I agree. I've seen the gun nuts argue that a "well regulated militia" doesn't have the same meaning that it did 240 years ago that it does now. But I haven't seen how that does anything but hurt their argument.

More likely they were thinking the Sheriffs Possee, and those folks were certainly hand selected and probably took guns away from dangerous fruitcakes, wife beaters, drunks, thieves and traitors on a regular basis. I wish SCOTUS would take a look at this.
The SCOTUS is afraid to rule on that one. I think a ruling to interpret the "well regulated militia" could only serve to constrain gun rights. Everyone is better off if it's left alone as much as possible. A militia is an army compost of non-professional civilians. Nothing more and nothing less. Well regulated? That could mean anything. Tight voltage control and less than .001% ripple? I think the NRA would like to think it means them. It surely doesn't mean any AH on the street that wants to own a gun, but that genie is out of the bottle already.

I am on another board that is for "survivalists". I joined because I figured there would be a radio communications element. But mostly it is hardcore 2A nut cases who still cry about "Obama taking all their guns away". Really, they should be complaining about paying way too much money buying "the last remaining" guns and ammo while he was in office. The folks on this board are on average, quite a bit smarter and well balanced.
We need to start a list of the biggest lies that Republicans told us about Obama. That he would take all your guns away is the first, and biggest one. The folks on this board may be smarter, but there's a handful of members here that are way out there on a limb.
 

prcguy

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
7,821
Location
So Cal - Richardson, TX - Tewksbury, MA
Barack Hussein is on record telling outright lies about guns in America and if you don't think he could have waived a magic wand and eliminated all of them if he could get away with it then you are blind and deaf.

Next are you going to tell us that Pelosi and Newsom have no plans to take guns away? They are also on record with some pretty serious gun confiscation comments. But I guess the deaf and blind missed that too.










I agree. I've seen the gun nuts argue that a "well regulated militia" doesn't have the same meaning that it did 240 years ago that it does now. But I haven't seen how that does anything but hurt their argument.



The SCOTUS is afraid to rule on that one. I think a ruling to interpret the "well regulated militia" could only serve to constrain gun rights. Everyone is better off if it's left alone as much as possible. A militia is an army compost of non-professional civilians. Nothing more and nothing less. Well regulated? That could mean anything. Tight voltage control and less than .001% ripple? I think the NRA would like to think it means them. It surely doesn't mean any AH on the street that wants to own a gun, but that genie is out of the bottle already.



We need to start a list of the biggest lies that Republicans told us about Obama. That he would take all your guns away is the first, and biggest one. The folks on this board may be smarter, but there's a handful of members here that are way out there on a limb.
 

zz0468

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,957
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
Next are you going to tell us that Pelosi and Newsom have no plans to take guns away?
No, but I will tell you that if gun owners don't start constructively participating in solutions to solve problems that guns are an integral part of, someone else will do it for them. Ignorance and ridicule isn't going to make the threat to your guns go away.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,080
Barack Hussein is on record telling outright lies about guns in America and if you don't think he could have waived a magic wand and eliminated all of them if he could get away with it then you are blind and deaf.

Next are you going to tell us that Pelosi and Newsom have no plans to take guns away? They are also on record with some pretty serious gun confiscation comments. But I guess the deaf and blind missed that too.
But amazingly, he didn't....

Meanwhile NRA spread a lot of fear uncertainty and doubt and gun dummies spent too much of their meager retirement funds buying excess guns and ammo.

Who won? The gun and ammo manufacturers and the overpaid NRA execs including Wayne Lapoopoo who receive advert dollars and donations from them.


Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 

trentbob

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
916
Location
Bristol, Pa.
One thing I distinctively remember when Obama got into office.

It wasn't long before nobody could get ammo for Target practice.

Even stuff like 38 caliber 158 grain semi wad-cutters were always out of stock, you just couldn't get it. Sales were off the charts.

I also remember that gun sales went up tremendously. Nobody knew what this jerk-off was going to do and everybody went out and got what they wanted just in case. I didn't really feel like he was going to do what everyone thought but you never knew..

Gun sales skyrocketed under Obama.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,080
One thing I distinctively remember when Obama got into office.

It wasn't long before nobody could get ammo for Target practice.

Even stuff like 38 caliber 158 grain semi wad-cutters were always out of stock, you just couldn't get it. Sales were off the charts.

I also remember that gun sales went up tremendously. Nobody knew what this jerk-off was going to do and everybody went out and got what they wanted just in case. I didn't really feel like he was going to do what everyone thought but you never knew..

Gun sales skyrocketed under Obama.
Just idiots reacting to their own misguided fears.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 

trentbob

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
916
Location
Bristol, Pa.
Absolutely, there's no question about it and it was expected, citizens panicked. Nobody knew what was going to happen but I did have a feeling myself that nothing was going to happen to me. I've had a full Carry Permit for protection my entire adult life.

Things are different in different parts of the country, I'm on the East Coast in Pennsylvania, a state that has very strict gun control and New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts and Connecticut have highly regulated gun rules and it's different than other states that have little restrictions, gun show sales, open carry.

So for me no worries but I think a good part of the country did overreact as they should have.

After all these years I would not want to lose that privilege of protecting myself. I live right on the filthadelphia border and it is a crime-ridden toilet.

As much as some would like to think big things are going to happen with gun control I think it will be much less than you expect but most of the restriction and rules will apply to those areas that don't have any now, I don't think they can do any more where I am than they have already.

You know I've got to say it but the highest crime rates and the most shootings and murders are in Chicago and they have the strictest gun rules in the country. Had to say it LOL.
 
Last edited:

Squad10

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
918
CPD took 77 "if I had a son" sh*theads off the streets in a pre-holiday gun and drug take down

Memorial Day weekend was CPD's first big test under Lightfoot's administration. Seven people were killed and more than 30 injured in shootings that weekend.

Mayor Lightfoot, police reveal safety plan for July 4 weekend; 77 arrested in pre-holiday gun, drug take down

I say at least 12 shootings and at least 3 murders during July 4th weekend.

Chicago Crime 2019 | Chicago Murder, Crime & Mayhem | HeyJackass!
 
Top