Yep, though I was under the impression that once the certification expires and they fall off the list (3 years IIRC?) they must be resubmitted. If they don't meet the regs, they don't get approved. So in 3 years there will be no new S&W or Ruger handguns for sale in CA. Joy.

You walk into any shop that sells handguns in CA and there is a separate case full of new and shiny things with labels that say "LEO ONLY" on the tags. Everything else in the shop is a used gen 2/3 glock listed at MSRP, a new glock for $200-$300 over MSRP, a custom shop 1911 for $3+k or 36,000 used/consignment "Heritage" SA knockoffs or beat to shit worn out S&W revolvers.

I had to stop visiting gun shops in Arizona when I travel, it makes me illish.

I'm hearing descriptions from the night club in Paris of the gunmen coming in with their assault rifles and telling everyone to get on the floor, and then shooting them indiscriminately. It reminds me of the museum I visited in downtown Atlanta last weekend. There were metal detectors at the entrance way and a couple of young girls scanning tickets and a disinterested looking fellow in his early twenties with a hand wand. Should a couple of terrorists with guns and bombs decide to target that building there would be no one to stop them for 10 minutes maybe. Patrons would be sitting ducks because of the metal detectors and not in spite of them.

the problem was probably that they didnt require clear plastic NFL bags.

You are probably right.

They didn't control liquids in excess of 3oz. I felt at risk.

Didn't they have the "Gun free zone" sign up to protect everyone?

I like how when we have a gun-related tragedy in the U.S., the anti-gunners boldly proclaim that "of course" they should take the opportunity to push for more gun control, because as soon as we move on from the tragedy we will have lost the momentum for change.

But when a gun-related tragedy happens in another country, or in a highly restricted state or city, it's "vulgar" and "inhuman" to mention the fact that the victims had been de-armed, turned into meek subjects ready for the slaughter.

In the process of typing that post, I think I just had an insight into the mindset of the anti-gunner leftists.


What they want, more than anything, is an tidy world to navigate. They hate messiness. They don't want companies battling in the marketplace; that's messy, and people get hurt. Wouldn't it be more tidy if the government just selected the best company, or better yet, took the industry in-house to run itself?

So it goes with self-defense. The idea of citizens defending themselves...it's just too messy. What if they shoot an innocent person? Won't it just lead to more violence? Results or rights be damned, wouldn't it just be more tidy to say that no one can have weapons except duly appointed government officials?

That's it. They want a neat, tidy world that makes sense. They want a government that understands and controls all industries, all businesses, all sectors of the market. They want no weapons, because weapons are messy, but we'll give a handful of government officials weapons just in case someone else gets weapons and things turn messy. Things will be safe and predictable and above all else, tidy.

What I think is neat is how many ordinary people are clamoring for an end to immigration and an end to multi-culturalism in Europe and how hard the establishment is resisting this in the name of suppressing labor costs for the benefit of the donor class. It's happening here in the US too.

The establishment think that they can just "manage" the barbarian hordes; after a few years of big macs and network TV, and they'll become compliant wage slaves and forget all about spreading islam and murdering infidels. And if it doesn't work out, it's not like the disarmed 1% will get murdered. They live in gated communities and have armed bodyguards. Jihad is little people problems.

Trump isn't ahead in the polls because he's a good candidate in the traditional sense, he's ahead in the polls because the entire political class has lost all credibility. Bush, Rubio and Hillary talk in vague platitudes that make it seem that they're on everyone's side at the same time. They seem vaguely opposed to uncontrolled immigration or amnesty, but also strangely tolerant and understanding at the same time. Gosh, it sounded like they agree with me!

People used to see politician-speak as a sign of intellectual depth but no one is fooled anymore. They know that the professional politicians are going to sell them out when push comes to shove and things are going to continue to get worse for everyone except the politically connected 1% of the 1%.

I don't think anyone's fooled on the Democrat side either. Pretty much everyone expects Hillary to proudly embody the worst of Obama's selling out, with maybe a few token gestures to the party faithful. But nothing important will really change. Certainly not for the better.

^That was pure fucking poetry... gonna forward that to one of my off-the-deep-end rightwing buddies and watch his eyes roll back in his head as he simultaneously creams his pants and goes off on a tirade about the attack on Christianity and how we're all headed for FEMA death camps.

PS: For those of you who never get to the other gun thread, Savage Rifles has been having a $25/$50/$75 rebate on almost all of it's rifles lately... generally considered the most accurate out-of-the-box rifles for the money. Lemme know if you need some buying advice.

I rolled my eyes hard at the post and I even agree with some of it.

I don't believe it is neat and tidy they are after. It is about control.
They want absolute control over business.
They want absolute control over the individual.

They want control because it is power. Liberty is the individual and the business not being controlled, not giving away power.

Isn't this basically the same mindset that brings us accusations of micro-aggression, pleas for social justice, the "yes means no, unless it's written down, notarized, and witnessed" mentality, and so on?

Repost of a story from 2013:

Interpol says an armed citizenry is the best deterrent to terrorism. The only real substitute is an unreasonable amount of security present 24 hours a day at any location where people gather.


Interpol: allowing citizens to carry guns in public is most effective way to prevent terror attacks | 10News.dk

2 times the post, 2 times the props.

If only 5 or 6 people in the nightclub in Paris had concealed handguns there may have been only a handful of fatalities there.
Give the people a chance.

yeah but had they banned guns outright, the terrorists wouldn't have been allowed to shoot everyone, cause theyd have no guns!

:eggplant:

I took some of the grad students I work with to the range. They all shot a 22lr and 9mm pistol and seem to enjoy. The next day I come into work and I hear these fucks go around telling people that they have first hand knowledge on how easy it would be to kill people with a gun and that the gun control laws need to be strengthened.

I am never taking any of these weenies to the range again.

The zombies will go after them first.

watch this criminal in action.

(im speaking of the cop)