I am sure the lawyers representing firearms and firearm owners are already preparing their cases.

Preventing some one from purchasing ammunition for a legally owned firearm is a violation of the 2nd Amendment no matter how narcissistic and ignorant liberals may be.

Jees, I just cannot believe it!! The good ole 2nd rears it’s ugly head again, from the cradle to the Grave, you can get a gun.
What I want to know, is why a 73 yrs old is teaching gun safety, when he has clearly demonstrated that he himself, is not fit to hold a weapon. WHY does any 73 yrs old living anywhere, need a gun.?.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Because as recorded in newspaper reports, quoted in the NRA magazine, seventy and eighty year old persons have used firearms to shoot and kill intruders who think people of such an age are defenseless.

The instructor ignored rule one, check your weapon, the students learned a valuable lesson. although it was the hard way.

The Varshavyanka-class (Project 636M) diesel-electric subs.

Russia to Soon Float Out 2 New ‘Black Hole’ Submarines

Sweet!

Here is my thoughts on the matter:

Pilot skill is perishable and if the US intends to maintain its fighter pilot proficiency then it needs to find a stop gap measure. Meanwhile, in China, around the same time, hundreds of J-7s, many still in relatively decent shape are slated to retire. Here we have a Supply and Demand match, although politically cannot be accepted BUT – a bit of refurbishment and some changes could allow for a 5 year lease to the USAF. A win-win for everybody, the USAF keeps its force structure intact, China gets rid of old fighter planes and some smart chap who makes the deal happen gets a ton of gold. Later, the planes can be demilitarized and sold to civilian customers worldwide.

For the same money the U.S. could refit-refurbish any of the aircraft in desert storage and not have to deal with paper work of dealing with a foreign country, which in this country could deforest an entire state.

My favorite expression is `S H I T Storm`.
Apologies if it offends anyone but hopefully in this mad world I can get away with it!

I also love– back in the day– as the good old days were better.

As for the one direct above, I prefer the saying that has said same hitting the fan.

[*]Half of gun murders in the US are with hand guns and although many fewer are killed with machine guns, you can kill a lot more in one go before being stopped than with a single shot weapon. This is the reason to limit machine guns to serious (and safely secured) collections/collectors rather than allowing just about anyone to buy at the drop of a hat.— Rules for owning a machine gune have not changed since the NFA of the 1930s, with the exception, installed by doofus Reagan, one can no longer buy a new gun, without a class 2 or 3 permit.
without those permits, one can only buy one made before 1986.
Rules vary from state to state but they do not have to be safely secured but as they are now high buck investments in many cases, usually are.
I have fired enough Thompson Sub-machine guns now that last time I shot one the handler said I must have shot one before because I did not wildly spray bullets.

[*]While agreeing that screening in itself won’t stop future shootings, I believe at least some checks should be made to make access to angry nutters (sorry if too simple but you have to be mad to go round killing people) just that bit harder and some loons at least will be detected (won’t of course stop determined nutters, nothing can).
[/LIST]

LOL— so you want the government telling its populace who is sane and who is not– brilliant.

I have heard stories of other countries where this is a good way to put opponents in the slammer, just say they are dangerously nuts.
In the U.S. once you get branded that way– for any reason, including a false one– your life is permanently a living hell.

Nowadays here, if you use too nasty of language on a female, especially if you give her the evileye, you can get charged with assault; that means the State or Fed will come in and take away all your weapons.
Even if it is absolutely proven to be a bs lie on the women’s part, getting the guns back can be a night-mare.

Surely that should be the other way round, i.e. what they want is determined by what they need?— Only in desperation when one is losing a war.

Not unless they want to be lacking for what they need when they need it.

Could, woulda, shoulda is the cry of those who lost the battle, not the winners.

If you do not have it, but find out that you need exactly what some one else said you do not, letting others tell you what you need has just rewards.

A lot of soldiers died in “Nam because some paper writer decided that those who actually have to fight wars did NOT NEED x,y and z in his narrow minded self-centered little world.

The only people who are naive enough to submit to any check are those for whom checking is a waste of time and money.

I.e. airport security checks.
People who are no threat are checked for politically correct reason, whilst persons who could be a threat are ignored due to frear of political flack.

People who float the “gun problem” bs know full well it serves no purpose other than to inflame the ignorant masses paranoid fears for election purposes.