lovely....let's blame all the actions of twisted A-holes on the NRA and guns.....
after all it's not their fault the guns made them do it.
typical, everybody needs to point the finger somewhere I guess it's human nature..
Godfather.
Your answer to fix the problems created by a few Muslims? Get rid of them.
Your answer to fix the problems created by a few guns? Don't judge the good gun owners by the actions of a few twisted A-holes on the NRA and guns.
This is narcissism at its finest. That's all I have to say about that.
Where does the Constitution say we have the right to own guns...specifically?
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope. On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment's phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this "individual right theory," the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language "a well regulated Militia" to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state's right to self-defense. Scholars have come to call this theory "the collective rights theory." A collective rights theory of the Second Amendment asserts that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and that local, state, and federal legislative bodies therefore possess the authority to regulate firearms without implicating a constitutional right.
The collective vs. individual rights are an angle I hadn't considered.
My point is that the constitution doesn't mention "guns". It says "arms".
Therefore, I don't think people have a Constitutionally-granted right to specifically own guns.
If anything, the government has violated our "right to keep and bear arms" when it banned ANY weapons...tanks, bombs, missiles, etc.
If people want to support gun ownership by pointing at the Constitution, then they shouldn't ignore the fact that they already can't own most "arms".
very smart post...
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
I find it odd and ironic that when the 2nd ammendment is used to defend against gun regulations, the first three words of the 2nd amendment are "A well regulated ..."
I find it odd and ironic that when the 2nd ammendment is used to defend against gun regulations, the first three words of the 2nd amendment are "A well regulated ..."
:fp:
Those two words mean...well, not a whole lot these days as applies to those who are fairly inept at doing much "well" at anything.
As to this particular fellow who has fucked up who knows how many lives because (ah, whatever reason he had), I'm not sure the 2nd Am. even comes into play here.
I find it odd and ironic that when the 2nd ammendment is used to defend against gun regulations, the first three words of the 2nd amendment are "A well regulated ..."
:fp:
to be fair that is referring to a militia needing to be regulated to be successful, not the weapons they can use. But I guess it is all how you want to read it, and I prefer to read it that way But that is a different argument all together.
Clear and present danger.
the only argument anyone ever needs to point to...the 2nd amendment protects the right to own weapons. As Know1 pointed out, there are more than guns that are considered weapons or arms. Just like the 1st amendment, the clear and present danger test should be used to examine what people can and cannot own. Is a gun on its own or in the hands of a trained and sane individual a clear and present danger? of course not. Is it in the hands of someone who is broken mentally or otherwise? yes. Which for me says, universal background checks are a go, but banning particular weapons are not.
but go nuts, tear each other apart over these kinds of things which seem to be used to make sure the people in mass are reminded that there are differences in the parties...because without this, abortion, and who gets the welfare (corporate, private, etc) I cannot see much of a difference...
So sad that more people were murdered, hopefully this country will gets its shit together when it comes to openness regarding treating and stigmatizing mental illness. Not sure of all the facts, but anyone willing to kill someone else or multiple people and then themselves was broken.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Where does the Constitution say we have the right to own guns...specifically?
...
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
...
Now, remember... this was written in 1776. prior to that, security for the colonies was tasked to the soldiers of King George of England. That was the force that provided the security of the colonies, not the colonists themselves.
And after the war, there still needed to be security, but, there wasn't a standing army. Those whom fought for freedom did not remain in the Army, did they? No, they went back to their jobs as farmers, shopkeepers, blacksmiths, etc... The 'Well-Regulated' militia was the citizens of the emerging nation... who were farmers, shopkeepers, blacksmiths, etc... that trainned together as local militias with a centralized command and control system.
We eventually built an Army and Navy that was paid collectively, by taxpayers. That allowed the Army to have ful-time soldiers, rather than part timers whose main job was farming. The 'Well-Regulated' militias became our standing Army and Navy made up of the peole of the colonies, not from some overseas foriegn fighting force.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
The collective vs. individual rights are an angle I hadn't considered.
My point is that the constitution doesn't mention "guns". It says "arms".
Therefore, I don't think people have a Constitutionally-granted right to specifically own guns.
If anything, the government has violated our "right to keep and bear arms" when it banned ANY weapons...tanks, bombs, missiles, etc.
If people want to support gun ownership by pointing at the Constitution, then they shouldn't ignore the fact that they already can't own most "arms".
armerment=Guns ?
Godfather.
Arms also equals knives and swords and clubs. I guess since we can still own those, we have fulfilled our rights to own "arms".
Again, the Constitution never specifically mentions guns so how can it be used to defend a so-called right to own them?
So does this mean I can have a nuke? YES!!!!
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
guitarplayer-it's hard for me to disagree with your statement about back ground checks, it would be fine if it stoped there,seems the anti gun folks just keep wanting to chip away at gun owners rights until they get what they want and that seems to be no guns at all so sad to say that even peope that agree with back ground checks feel they to have fight off any attempt to futher change gun laws just to try and keep what we have.
everytime there is a mass shooting someone wants to ban guns ...like that would fix the problem with mental wackos.
Godfather.
So what I read here is that you mostly agree with what I said, as long as it stops after the universal background checks because you think if that goes into law then anti-gun people would want even more laws, am I right? If so, I agree with you, but why can't we just allow that law, and then do whatever possible to stop any other law from coming in. The NRA is pretty good at doing that.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
guitarplayer-it's hard for me to disagree with your statement about back ground checks, it would be fine if it stoped there,seems the anti gun folks just keep wanting to chip away at gun owners rights until they get what they want and that seems to be no guns at all so sad to say that even peope that agree with back ground checks feel they to have fight off any attempt to futher change gun laws just to try and keep what we have.
everytime there is a mass shooting someone wants to ban guns ...like that would fix the problem with mental wackos.
Godfather.
So what I read here is that you mostly agree with what I said, as long as it stops after the universal background checks because you think if that goes into law then anti-gun people would want even more laws, am I right? If so, I agree with you, but why can't we just allow that law, and then do whatever possible to stop any other law from coming in. The NRA is pretty good at doing that.
guitarplayer-it's hard for me to disagree with your statement about back ground checks, it would be fine if it stoped there,seems the anti gun folks just keep wanting to chip away at gun owners rights until they get what they want and that seems to be no guns at all so sad to say that even peope that agree with back ground checks feel they to have fight off any attempt to futher change gun laws just to try and keep what we have.
everytime there is a mass shooting someone wants to ban guns ...like that would fix the problem with mental wackos.
Godfather.
So what I read here is that you mostly agree with what I said, as long as it stops after the universal background checks because you think if that goes into law then anti-gun people would want even more laws, am I right? If so, I agree with you, but why can't we just allow that law, and then do whatever possible to stop any other law from coming in. The NRA is pretty good at doing that.
if it were up to me we would.
Godfather.
I wish you were leader of that. lol
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
Most people believe it is in everyone's best interest if we do what we can to keep high powered firearm out of the hands of psychos like Holmes, Lanza and that angry nut in Santa Monica.
...
Everyone except the NRA... and Republican lawmakers.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Most people believe it is in everyone's best interest if we do what we can to keep high powered firearm out of the hands of psychos like Holmes, Lanza and that angry nut in Santa Monica.
...
Everyone except the NRA... and Republican lawmakers.
I think....nobody(NRA & gun rights activist and me) wants the government controling their right to own guns
but making a simple medical back ground check to me is no problem, also if we can spend $billions a year on illegal aliens why don't we have more help to offer for mentally ill people that walk the streets everyday,why is there so little to no documantion on these people,even if we do get a more stringent back ground check what will they find if there is no documantion on the mentally ill people that live amung us ? the physic/medical records are not open to just anybody without a warrent right ?
someone on here said "be carful of what you ask for" you might get it...so I'm asking what doors will be opened when the back ground checks get pushed thru ? how much of your/our information will be available to the police or any government agency in the name of back ground checks and how will affect our day to day lives and privicy, this could go further than your cell phone conversations.
someone on here said "be carful of what you ask for" you might get it...so I'm asking what doors will be opened when the back ground checks get pushed thru ? how much of your/our information will be available to the police or any government agency in the name of back ground checks and how will affect our day to day lives and privicy, this could go further than your cell phone conversations.
Godfather.
What exactly are you worried about, Godfather? I'm aware of the privacy issues that has people in a tizzy right now... but even if someone, somewhere in a cubicle was listening to Godfather try and pull of a fantasy football deal over his cell phone... what could possibly come of this?
The conspiracists keep talking about the government, the agents, their police, and their army as if these people weren't Americans and instead they are some external force waiting to pounce on... something? I'm not saying I'm supporting access to the privacy of your homes... but I am saying that it's not likely they'll be monitoring your boring conversations about which beer tastes better a Heineken or a Corona. I'm pretty sure they wish to keep tabs on persons of interest and if that means a building doesn't get blown up as they do so... I'd trade that for someone, somewhere listening in on a conversation I might be having about Game of Thrones.
More stringent gun policies are long overdue. Stop opposing them because you are freaking out that there is something bigger coming down the pipeline.
someone on here said "be carful of what you ask for" you might get it...so I'm asking what doors will be opened when the back ground checks get pushed thru ? how much of your/our information will be available to the police or any government agency in the name of back ground checks and how will affect our day to day lives and privicy, this could go further than your cell phone conversations.
Godfather.
What exactly are you worried about, Godfather? I'm aware of the privacy issues that has people in a tizzy right now... but even if someone, somewhere in a cubicle was listening to Godfather try and pull of a fantasy football deal over his cell phone... what could possibly come of this?
The conspiracists keep talking about the government, the agents, their police, and their army as if these people weren't Americans and instead they are some external force waiting to pounce on... something? I'm not saying I'm supporting access to the privacy of your homes... but I am saying that it's not likely they'll be monitoring your boring conversations about which beer tastes better a Heineken or a Corona. I'm pretty sure they wish to keep tabs on persons of interest and if that means a building doesn't get blown up as they do so... I'd trade that for someone, somewhere listening in on a conversation I might be having about Game of Thrones.
More stringent gun policies are long overdue. Stop opposing them because you are freaking out that there is something bigger coming down the pipeline.
it's all good by me, just say'n in order to do full back ground checks it seems to me that more of your personal records will be open to who knows who and what or how will that affect your personal life ? honestly I don't care about the phone tapping if it will help to avoid a terrorist attack, what's going to be like when you go for a job interview and find out later you didn't get the job because they were able to look at your medical records and saw that have been on some kind of mood supressent or you have a STD ? just saying man ,maybe this needs more thought.
I've given up on any more laws coming into affect on the gun issue these kinds of crimes are the norm now it's something we will have to deal from now on , we as individuals just have to be on alert mode all the time where ever you are with crowds specially it's a sad commentary but this is life as we now know it , be safe folks ...
I've given up on any more laws coming into affect on the gun issue these kinds of crimes are the norm now it's something we will have to deal from now on , we as individuals just have to be on alert mode all the time where ever you are with crowds specially it's a sad commentary but this is life as we now know it , be safe folks ...
Have to agree. This is just the sort of life the NRA and the gun manufacturers want us to lead. Be scared, be on the lookout, always be on edge...and always be armed.
I've given up on any more laws coming into affect on the gun issue these kinds of crimes are the norm now it's something we will have to deal from now on , we as individuals just have to be on alert mode all the time where ever you are with crowds specially it's a sad commentary but this is life as we now know it , be safe folks ...
Have to agree. This is just the sort of life the NRA and the gun manufacturers want us to lead. Be scared, be on the lookout, always be on edge...and always be armed.
I've given up on any more laws coming into affect on the gun issue these kinds of crimes are the norm now it's something we will have to deal from now on , we as individuals just have to be on alert mode all the time where ever you are with crowds specially it's a sad commentary but this is life as we now know it , be safe folks ...
Have to agree. This is just the sort of life the NRA and the gun manufacturers want us to lead. Be scared, be on the lookout, always be on edge...and always be armed.
Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.
Yet few Americans are aware of the dramatic drop, and more than half believe gun crime has risen, according to a newly released survey by the Pew Research Center.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.
Yet few Americans are aware of the dramatic drop, and more than half believe gun crime has risen, according to a newly released survey by the Pew Research Center.
I think....nobody(NRA & gun rights activist and me) wants the government controling their right to own guns but making a simple medical back ground check to me is no problem, also if we can spend billions a year on illegal aliens why don't we have more help to offer for mentally ill people that walk the streets everyday, why is there so little to no documantion on these people, even if we do get a more stringent back ground check what will they find if there is no documantion on the mentally ill people that live amung us ? the physic/medical records are not open to just anybody without a warrent right ?
someone on here said "be carful of what you ask for" you might get it...so I'm asking what doors will be opened when the back ground checks get pushed thru ? how much of your/our information will be available to the police or any government agency in the name of back ground checks and how will affect our day to day lives and privicy, this could go further than your cell phone conversations.
Godfather.
...
Whose talking about keeping tabs on the mentally ill?
What would be nice is to tell them, "No, you can't legally purchase a gun, you psycho as fuck mother fucker. Why not? Because you are fucking crazy, that's why".
He can still pursue illegal means... but, that automatically makes him a criminal... as well as the criminal who illegally sells a gun to a psycho.
...
And what doors will be opened to me, if I fill out background information to purchase a gun?
Answer: None, because I will never buty a gun... so, i don't need to fill out a background check data sheet.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Comments
Godfather.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope. On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment's phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this "individual right theory," the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language "a well regulated Militia" to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state's right to self-defense. Scholars have come to call this theory "the collective rights theory." A collective rights theory of the Second Amendment asserts that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and that local, state, and federal legislative bodies therefore possess the authority to regulate firearms without implicating a constitutional right.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment
this is a interesting read check it out, you can see where the anti gun people get their leverage.
Godfather.
My point is that the constitution doesn't mention "guns". It says "arms".
Therefore, I don't think people have a Constitutionally-granted right to specifically own guns.
If anything, the government has violated our "right to keep and bear arms" when it banned ANY weapons...tanks, bombs, missiles, etc.
If people want to support gun ownership by pointing at the Constitution, then they shouldn't ignore the fact that they already can't own most "arms".
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
armerment=Guns ?
Godfather.
Huh?
Arms also equals knives and swords and clubs. I guess since we can still own those, we have fulfilled our rights to own "arms".
Again, the Constitution never specifically mentions guns so how can it be used to defend a so-called right to own them?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
:fp:
As to this particular fellow who has fucked up who knows how many lives because (ah, whatever reason he had), I'm not sure the 2nd Am. even comes into play here.
(assuming we're still talking about what HE did
to be fair that is referring to a militia needing to be regulated to be successful, not the weapons they can use. But I guess it is all how you want to read it, and I prefer to read it that way
Clear and present danger.
the only argument anyone ever needs to point to...the 2nd amendment protects the right to own weapons. As Know1 pointed out, there are more than guns that are considered weapons or arms. Just like the 1st amendment, the clear and present danger test should be used to examine what people can and cannot own. Is a gun on its own or in the hands of a trained and sane individual a clear and present danger? of course not. Is it in the hands of someone who is broken mentally or otherwise? yes. Which for me says, universal background checks are a go, but banning particular weapons are not.
but go nuts, tear each other apart over these kinds of things which seem to be used to make sure the people in mass are reminded that there are differences in the parties...because without this, abortion, and who gets the welfare (corporate, private, etc) I cannot see much of a difference...
So sad that more people were murdered, hopefully this country will gets its shit together when it comes to openness regarding treating and stigmatizing mental illness. Not sure of all the facts, but anyone willing to kill someone else or multiple people and then themselves was broken.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
...
Now, remember... this was written in 1776. prior to that, security for the colonies was tasked to the soldiers of King George of England. That was the force that provided the security of the colonies, not the colonists themselves.
And after the war, there still needed to be security, but, there wasn't a standing army. Those whom fought for freedom did not remain in the Army, did they? No, they went back to their jobs as farmers, shopkeepers, blacksmiths, etc... The 'Well-Regulated' militia was the citizens of the emerging nation... who were farmers, shopkeepers, blacksmiths, etc... that trainned together as local militias with a centralized command and control system.
We eventually built an Army and Navy that was paid collectively, by taxpayers. That allowed the Army to have ful-time soldiers, rather than part timers whose main job was farming. The 'Well-Regulated' militias became our standing Army and Navy made up of the peole of the colonies, not from some overseas foriegn fighting force.
Hail, Hail!!!
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
So does this mean I can have a nuke?
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
So what I read here is that you mostly agree with what I said, as long as it stops after the universal background checks because you think if that goes into law then anti-gun people would want even more laws, am I right? If so, I agree with you, but why can't we just allow that law, and then do whatever possible to stop any other law from coming in. The NRA is pretty good at doing that.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
if it were up to me we would.
Godfather.
I wish you were leader of that. lol
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
...
Everyone except the NRA... and Republican lawmakers.
Hail, Hail!!!
I think....nobody(NRA & gun rights activist and me) wants the government controling their right to own guns
but making a simple medical back ground check to me is no problem, also if we can spend $billions a year on illegal aliens why don't we have more help to offer for mentally ill people that walk the streets everyday,why is there so little to no documantion on these people,even if we do get a more stringent back ground check what will they find if there is no documantion on the mentally ill people that live amung us ? the physic/medical records are not open to just anybody without a warrent right ?
someone on here said "be carful of what you ask for" you might get it...so I'm asking what doors will be opened when the back ground checks get pushed thru ? how much of your/our information will be available to the police or any government agency in the name of back ground checks and how will affect our day to day lives and privicy, this could go further than your cell phone conversations.
Godfather.
No. It means the 2nd Amendment is pointless and doesn't grant people the right to own guns.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
What exactly are you worried about, Godfather? I'm aware of the privacy issues that has people in a tizzy right now... but even if someone, somewhere in a cubicle was listening to Godfather try and pull of a fantasy football deal over his cell phone... what could possibly come of this?
The conspiracists keep talking about the government, the agents, their police, and their army as if these people weren't Americans and instead they are some external force waiting to pounce on... something? I'm not saying I'm supporting access to the privacy of your homes... but I am saying that it's not likely they'll be monitoring your boring conversations about which beer tastes better a Heineken or a Corona. I'm pretty sure they wish to keep tabs on persons of interest and if that means a building doesn't get blown up as they do so... I'd trade that for someone, somewhere listening in on a conversation I might be having about Game of Thrones.
More stringent gun policies are long overdue. Stop opposing them because you are freaking out that there is something bigger coming down the pipeline.
it's all good by me, just say'n in order to do full back ground checks it seems to me that more of your personal records will be open to who knows who and what or how will that affect your personal life ? honestly I don't care about the phone tapping if it will help to avoid a terrorist attack, what's going to be like when you go for a job interview and find out later you didn't get the job because they were able to look at your medical records and saw that have been on some kind of mood supressent or you have a STD ? just saying man ,maybe this needs more thought.
Godfather.
Have to agree. This is just the sort of life the NRA and the gun manufacturers want us to lead. Be scared, be on the lookout, always be on edge...and always be armed.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Sad & shameful but that is the reality ...
True, but I think you could say the handful of folks who want to ban all guns constitutes a very tiny minority.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nati ... 2693.story
Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.
Yet few Americans are aware of the dramatic drop, and more than half believe gun crime has risen, according to a newly released survey by the Pew Research Center.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rate
obviously we need to factor in the source ... but you're not in good company ...
Whose talking about keeping tabs on the mentally ill?
What would be nice is to tell them, "No, you can't legally purchase a gun, you psycho as fuck mother fucker. Why not? Because you are fucking crazy, that's why".
He can still pursue illegal means... but, that automatically makes him a criminal... as well as the criminal who illegally sells a gun to a psycho.
...
And what doors will be opened to me, if I fill out background information to purchase a gun?
Answer: None, because I will never buty a gun... so, i don't need to fill out a background check data sheet.
Hail, Hail!!!