Doug & Scott
Top
disagree.
Doug asked from my name and last unit. I responded via email. You
choose to not respond via email or respond with any of your personal
info. That's okay I don't make a habit of giving mine either although
some people in this NG have my info. You now have my email address.
That doesn't bother me.
Now do we continue to sling shit at each and continue to clog this NG
or do we respectfully agree to disagree.
For the record I do not use my rank on anyone. I am proud of my
military service and what I accomplished. I went in a 17 yo street punk
and came out a little better than that. If that bothers you so be it.
If any one else in this NG is bothered by my reference to my rank I'd
like to know it. If it is a problem I'll chose a screen name that does
not reflect anything military.
--
Top
Live Life and Enjoy It....
Scott
"Top" <T...@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96FADAB6B4...@65.24.3.135...
> Fellows we can continue to butt heads or respectfully agree to
> disagree.
That respect thing goes both ways.
Give it and you'll get it.
> Doug asked from my name and last unit. I responded via email. You
> choose to not respond via email or respond with any of your personal
> info. That's okay I don't make a habit of giving mine either although
> some people in this NG have my info. You now have my email address.
> That doesn't bother me.
You would have to have a little more history than you do to understand why
the question was asked.
As a brief outline, I will offer the following;
We had an individual who liked to not only brag up his service (allegedly a
combat vet in Viet Nam), but to use it to belittle others, including men
that Pops and I both knew personally who were active duty. As you know,
there are a huge number of assholes who were REMF's that didn't see an inch
of combat, although their feet were in the dirt in Viet Nam, and like to
suck a living and that monthly check out of the taxpayers, simply because
they can.
This individual saw fit to slander (libel, legally) anyone who crossed him.
He is an "ex-pat" that claims disability and gallivants all over Laos,
Cambodia and Thailand, but claims to be "disabled".
In other words, a shitbag.
We put our info up, expecting to see his, not only to see it twisted and
raped, but to see it used by this shitbag who went as far as contacting
employers, etc.
One of our buds got given a free 3 month gig with AOL for the fact that they
terminated his service on this shitbags word.
Your concerns aren't invalid.
Doug and I both are avid Americans, into both freedom and freedom of choice
and into the legal system making those who commit crimes pay for them, not
the innocent.
Gun control is like prohibition and the War on Drugs.
Impotent.
You cant address the fact that a 3 year old killed his kid sister with an
unsecured weapon by attenuating the rights of other Americans. Not only
should the "parents" of that tragedy be feeling bad, but sitting in prison.
PERIOD.
What happens to a soldier under you who pulls off an AD that results in harm
or death of a soldier?
In the Marine Corps, they go to Leavenworth, and if no one got killed or
wounded, it is an immediate discharge, without fanfare or ceremony.
Done.
Bye.
> Now do we continue to sling shit at each and continue to clog this NG
> or do we respectfully agree to disagree.
You can add a bit of respect to your diatribe, if you want some back, or we
are fine with the idea of continuing as is.
You wont wear Doug or I out. We already done bends and motherfuckers till we
puked a long time ago.
> For the record I do not use my rank on anyone. I am proud of my
> military service and what I accomplished. I went in a 17 yo street punk
> and came out a little better than that. If that bothers you so be it.
You should be proud, and we are also proud there are men in America who are
willing to make that sacrifice.
However, you aint alone, you aint the only one, and now you aint anything
better or worse than either of us or any other American who's rights are
protected by the Constitution.
> If any one else in this NG is bothered by my reference to my rank I'd
> like to know it. If it is a problem I'll chose a screen name that does
> not reflect anything military.
Don't be a bitch,
Your handle is Top, we'll call you Top.
Just don't use it to impose.
I work with and for LEO every day, and I build and design weapons.
Get 100 cops in a room and ask them their take on the matter.
You'll get a different answer from cops in LA than you will from cops in
Gatlinburg.
Cops in LA have to deal with Crips, Bloods, Mongols, etc.
Cops in Gatlinburg have no such issues.
Top
news:7dqdnTbjYuo...@wavecable.com:
I treat everyone the same as they treat me. We've all had bad
experiences at one time or another. I could tell you what it's like
to be a victom of identity theft, but unless you ask I won't bore you
with it.
I've been in the NG for a good while. I've been under the impression
that most people respect me as I respect them.
Now you and Doug come in the group and you don't know anything about
me or probably anyone else here. We get off on the wrong foot with
each other. This medium makes it hard to judge what people intend. We
don't hear changes in voice inflection, we don't see body language.
It is hard to determine what people mean. I don't think the 3 of us
understand what the other means in this case and maybe we all believe
in the same thing but haven't seen that for whatever reason.
Here's what I believe:
1. Guns of any kind have to be controlled. By that I mean they have
to be secured. Restrict access by locks or whatever technology you
want and it is that much harder for the wrong person to get ahold of
it.
2. Some guns cause more casualties than other. They should be secured
to a greater degree than others. Greater security just as you apply
more security for a TOP SECRET message than you do a SECRET message.
3. Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon. If
we are to have automatic weapons at all the owner must go through
stringent checks to make sure he will secure them from theft to a
reasonable means. Nothing is totally secure but there are reasonable
means to secure these weapons.
4. We have to keep developing new means to secure firearms. Thieves
come up with new ways to steal things everyday. We have to keep up
with them, so to speak.
5. We have to bang on desks to draw attention. If we sit on our ass
and do nothing we will lose this country.
6. Under no circumstance do I advocate disarming America. Number one
that would be an impossible task. Second, look as you have said, at
CCW states. I don't see a major over through of law abiding citizens
there. I DO advocate disarming criminals at every chance we get. I do
believe we have to develop technology to defeat criminals be they
terrorist or a drug dealer or drug addict.
Does that put a burr under your saddle?
7. Spell check does wonders.
Scott
news:Xns96FAE491D7...@65.24.3.135...
I will reply tomorrow, point by point.
Sleep well.
BTW, he doesnt answer my phone calls either.
Top
news:0sadnYyF59Owd8Pe...@wavecable.com:
>
> I will reply tomorrow, point by point.
>
> Sleep well.
>
> BTW, he doesnt answer my phone calls either.
>
>
>
Hahaha ... meant in humor.
Doug Frederick
"Top" <T...@fuzzplucker.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96FAE491D7...@65.24.3.135...
> "Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> 1. Guns of any kind have to be controlled. By that I mean they have
> to be secured. Restrict access by locks or whatever technology you
> want and it is that much harder for the wrong person to get ahold of
> it.
With respect, I don't think this is realistic.
We have gun locks now, of all kinds.
Given time, any lock will be defeated.
If you make it difficult to get your gun, ---------------------->which you
should, no argument,<-------------------------------------- they will go the
thousand other places they can to get one.
So while this is fine for keeping your gun out of the neighbors' kids'
hand, it won't stop criminals from getting a weapon.
> 2. Some guns cause more casualties than other. They should be secured
> to a greater degree than others.
I think any gun should be secured to the greatest degree you have
available.
> 3. Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon. If
> we are to have automatic weapons at all the owner must go through
> stringent checks to make sure he will secure them from theft to a
> reasonable means. Nothing is totally secure but there are reasonable
> means to secure these weapons.
Here again you need to learn some things.
You must know the difference between a fully automatic weapon and a semi
automatic weapon, and your paragraph has completely different meanings for
the different weapons.
There are 100 THOUSAND legally owned fully automatic weapons by private
citizens, including MP5s, Pigs and Ma Dueces and Thumpers.
You know what those are, correct?
These weapons have a spotless record of being kept out of trouble.
These owners go through your stringent checks, and also pay exorbitant
taxes on these weapons.
If you don't know what a Class 3 license is, please go learn.
It is the constitutional right of these Americans to own these weapons,
and it's not open to debate.
As far as semi-automatic weapons, this applies to a variety of hunting
rifles and shotguns above and beyond assault rifles, which we also have a
constitutional right to have.
Please explain which "automatic weapons" you meant.
> 4. We have to keep developing new means to secure firearms. Thieves
> come up with new ways to steal things everyday. We have to keep up
> with them, so to speak.
I have a gun safe bolted to the floor, but some people can't afford that.
I agree with what you say, but it won't be available to everybody.
> 5. We have to bang on desks to draw attention. If we sit on our ass
> and do nothing we will lose this country.
No we won't.
The legal system exists as it is because the lawyers make their money off
of it.
I woudn't wait for a change.
I simply make myself responsible for my own self defense, usually to
include those around me.
I have spent money and taken -extesnsive- self defense training, over a
period of nearly three decades.
I also compete in competitions with weapons you say I don't need.
> 6. Under no circumstance do I advocate disarming America.
I do not understand what you mean when you say that, then say this:
"Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon. "
It's contradictory.
> Number one
> that would be an impossible task. Second, look as you have said, at
> CCW states. I don't see a major over through of law abiding citizens
> there. I DO advocate disarming criminals at every chance we get. I do
> believe we have to develop technology to defeat criminals be they
> terrorist or a drug dealer or drug addict.
>
> Does that put a burr under your saddle?
No, it all sounds great, but the majority of it will have absolutely no
effect on the problem we're discussing.
Top
news:11lts5g...@news.supernews.com:
>
>"Top" <T...@fuzzplucker.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns96FAE491D7...@65.24.3.135...
>> "Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> Here's what I believe:
>>
>> 1. Guns of any kind have to be controlled. By that I mean they
>> have to be secured. Restrict access by locks or whatever
>> technology you want and it is that much harder for the wrong
>> person to get ahold of it.
>
> With respect, I don't think this is realistic.
>
Thank you. Now I can look at what you have to say with no bias. I
could have been at fault in that area before, who knows.
> We have gun locks now, of all kinds.
>
> Given time, any lock will be defeated.
>
> If you make it difficult to get your gun,
> ---------------------->which you
> should, no argument,<-------------------------------------- they
> will go the thousand other places they can to get one.
>
> So while this is fine for keeping your gun out of the neighbors'
> kids'
> hand, it won't stop criminals from getting a weapon.
Of course, I agree any lock can be defeated. That doesn't mean we
shouldn't use them. I know my home can be broken into but I still
lock the door when I leave, even in this low crime area. Some say
that will only keep and honest man honest. I still want to make it as
hard for the criminal as I can.
>
>> 2. Some guns cause more casualties than other. They should be
>> secured to a greater degree than others.
>
> I think any gun should be secured to the greatest degree you
> have
> available.
That has been my point all along. I might leave an old single shot 22
hidden away. An M16A1 I put under heavy lock and key, maybe even not
in my home.
>> 3. Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon.
>> If we are to have automatic weapons at all the owner must go
>> through stringent checks to make sure he will secure them from
>> theft to a reasonable means. Nothing is totally secure but there
>> are reasonable means to secure these weapons.
>
> Here again you need to learn some things.
>
> You must know the difference between a fully automatic weapon
> and a semi
> automatic weapon, and your paragraph has completely different
> meanings for the different weapons.
I know the difference between auto and semiauto, give a break here. I
also the difference between heavy and light. Crew served and
individual.
>
> There are 100 THOUSAND legally owned fully automatic weapons by
> private
> citizens, including MP5s, Pigs and Ma Dueces and Thumpers.
>
> You know what those are, correct?
>
Honestly the MP5 I would recognize but not the others. Wouldn't take
much homework to find out but I'll take your word.
> These weapons have a spotless record of being kept out of
> trouble.
>
> These owners go through your stringent checks, and also pay
> exorbitant
> taxes on these weapons.
>
> If you don't know what a Class 3 license is, please go learn.
>
> It is the constitutional right of these Americans to own these
> weapons,
> and it's not open to debate.
> As far as semi-automatic weapons, this applies to a variety of
> hunting
> rifles and shotguns above and beyond assault rifles, which we also
> have a constitutional right to have.
>
> Please explain which "automatic weapons" you meant.
I mean as a broad term any weapon that normally fires automatically,
you hold the trigger and it continues to fire till it runs out of
ammo or malfunctions. I do not include semi-auto at all in that
category.
>> 4. We have to keep developing new means to secure firearms.
>> Thieves come up with new ways to steal things everyday. We have
>> to keep up with them, so to speak.
>
> I have a gun safe bolted to the floor, but some people can't
> afford that.
>
> I agree with what you say, but it won't be available to
> everybody.
Then if they can't afford the means to safely store something maybe
they need to look at what they can afford.
>
>> 5. We have to bang on desks to draw attention. If we sit on our
>> ass and do nothing we will lose this country.
>
> No we won't.
>
> The legal system exists as it is because the lawyers make their
> money off
> of it.
>
> I wouldn't wait for a change.
>
> I simply make myself responsible for my own self defense,
> usually to
> include those around me.
>
> I have spent money and taken -extesnsive- self defense training,
> over a
> period of nearly three decades.
>
> I also compete in competitions with weapons you say I don't
> need.
>
>> 6. Under no circumstance do I advocate disarming America.
>
> I do not understand what you mean when you say that, then say
> this:
>
> "Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon. "
>
> It's contradictory.
I mean the average person has no need for an automatic weapon. People
in some lines of work will need them. I really think LEO's should
have access to them. The shootout at the California bank would leave
me to think SWAT type units would need them. It would also leave me
to think some police forces need more firepower than they have. From
a quick look at your site I would hazard a guess that you line of
work would need the same or more access.
Correct?
>
> > Number one
>> that would be an impossible task. Second, look as you have said,
>> at CCW states. I don't see a major over through of law abiding
>> citizens there. I DO advocate disarming criminals at every chance
>> we get. I do believe we have to develop technology to defeat
>> criminals be they terrorist or a drug dealer or drug addict.
>>
>> Does that put a burr under your saddle?
>
> No, it all sounds great, but the majority of it will have
> absolutely no
> effect on the problem we're discussing.
Doesn't mean we should discuss it. Maybe it is not relevant today but
maybe around the corner. I understand you when you speak of the
constitution but I'm not sure where in the constitution it says I can
have an automatic weapon? Legitimate question here, so educate me
here. Do you take the constitution to mean that we should all be
allowed to have handguns with no restraints?
Should I leave you another voicemail?
--
Top
Freedom, enjoy it, someone is paying for it.
Top
news:11lts5g...@news.supernews.com:
BTW - You look more like Brutus than Popeye.
Doug Frederick
That's a direct contradiction.
If you put the M16 under lock and key, why not the .22?
>>> 3. Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon.
>>> If we are to have automatic weapons at all the owner must go
>>> through stringent checks to make sure he will secure them from
>>> theft to a reasonable means. Nothing is totally secure but there
>>> are reasonable means to secure these weapons.
>>
>> Here again you need to learn some things.
>>
>> You must know the difference between a fully automatic weapon
>> and a semi
>> automatic weapon, and your paragraph has completely different
>> meanings for the different weapons.
>
> I know the difference between auto and semiauto, give a break here. I
> also the difference between heavy and light. Crew served and
> individual.
Then, as I clearly asked, which one were you talking about?
>> There are 100 THOUSAND legally owned fully automatic weapons by
>> private
>> citizens, including MP5s, Pigs and Ma Dueces and Thumpers.
>>
>> You know what those are, correct?
>>
> Honestly the MP5 I would recognize but not the others. Wouldn't take
> much homework to find out but I'll take your word.
You were in the Army 21 years and you don't know what an M-2 .50 caliber
maching gun is?
The longest continually used weapon in the -world- history of modern
warfare?
You don't know what a .40mm grenade launcher is?
An M-60 machine gun?
All these terms are everyday common terms in every armed force since
Vietnam.
This gets curiouser and curiouser.
>> These weapons have a spotless record of being kept out of
>> trouble.
>>
>> These owners go through your stringent checks, and also pay
>> exorbitant
>> taxes on these weapons.
>>
>> If you don't know what a Class 3 license is, please go learn.
>>
>> It is the constitutional right of these Americans to own these
>> weapons,
>> and it's not open to debate.
>> As far as semi-automatic weapons, this applies to a variety of
>> hunting
>> rifles and shotguns above and beyond assault rifles, which we also
>> have a constitutional right to have.
>>
>> Please explain which "automatic weapons" you meant.
>
> I mean as a broad term any weapon that normally fires automatically,
> you hold the trigger and it continues to fire till it runs out of
> ammo or malfunctions. I do not include semi-auto at all in that
> category.
Then differentiate, because those people educated in this subject, need to
know what you're talking about.
Fully automatic weapons are perfectly legal to own with the proper
license.
You need to learn more about this subject.
>
>>> 4. We have to keep developing new means to secure firearms.
>>> Thieves come up with new ways to steal things everyday. We have
>>> to keep up with them, so to speak.
>>
>> I have a gun safe bolted to the floor, but some people can't
>> afford that.
>>
>> I agree with what you say, but it won't be available to
>> everybody.
>
> Then if they can't afford the means to safely store something maybe
> they need to look at what they can afford.
A locked & cocked 1911A1 on the coffee table in my living room -is- safely
stored.
Other people should stay the hell out of my house.
Once felons enter your house, there's little or nothing you can do to keep
them from your guns.
They'll find your hiding place and open your safe.
If you store the weapon off premisis, then when people, like you, not to
put to fine a point on it, decide that whatever type of weapon you have is
one that -they- think you don't need, auto-loading shotgun perhaps, then it
will be confiscated.
>>> 5. We have to bang on desks to draw attention. If we sit on our
>>> ass and do nothing we will lose this country.
>>
>> No we won't.
>>
>> The legal system exists as it is because the lawyers make their
>> money off
>> of it.
>>
>> I wouldn't wait for a change.
>>
>> I simply make myself responsible for my own self defense,
>> usually to
>> include those around me.
>>
>> I have spent money and taken -extesnsive- self defense training,
>> over a
>> period of nearly three decades.
>>
>> I also compete in competitions with weapons you say I don't
>> need.
>>
>>> 6. Under no circumstance do I advocate disarming America.
>>
>> I do not understand what you mean when you say that, then say
>> this:
>>
>> "Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon. "
>>
>> It's contradictory.
>
> I mean the average person has no need for an automatic weapon.
Then you advocate confiscation of legally owned weapons due to your lack
of knowledge.
Like I've been saying.
>People in some lines of work will need them. I really think LEO's should
> have access to them. The shootout at the California bank would leave
> me to think SWAT type units would need them. It would also leave me
> to think some police forces need more firepower than they have. From
> a quick look at your site I would hazard a guess that you line of
> work would need the same or more access.
I'm a retired auto mechanic, and an OTR driver.
Although I have done and still do some bounty hunting, I have
an -extensive- criminal record (all MVV), and have never been a LEO.
> Correct?
>
>>
>> > Number one
>>> that would be an impossible task. Second, look as you have said,
>>> at CCW states. I don't see a major over through of law abiding
>>> citizens there. I DO advocate disarming criminals at every chance
>>> we get. I do believe we have to develop technology to defeat
>>> criminals be they terrorist or a drug dealer or drug addict.
>>>
>>> Does that put a burr under your saddle?
>>
>> No, it all sounds great, but the majority of it will have
>> absolutely no
>> effect on the problem we're discussing.
>
> Doesn't mean we should discuss it. Maybe it is not relevant today but
> maybe around the corner. I understand you when you speak of the
> constitution but I'm not sure where in the constitution it says I can
> have an automatic weapon?
I gave you the cite.
You didn't read it, or couldn't understand it, but yes, the Constitution
does, and always has, said you have the right to an automatic weapon, and,
this was very recently re-affirmed.
>Legitimate question here, so educate me
> here. Do you take the constitution to mean that we should all be
> allowed to have handguns with no restraints?
The Constitution clearly states that.
In fact, it's arguable that any state reqiring you to get a permit is
violating your civil rights.
I'm not a RKBAs guy, or a strick Constitutionalist.
I arm myself as I feel necessary, and don't give a damn what the state,
local, or federal laws are.
I stay as legal as I can, and don't get " whoopin' it up" drunk and shoot
street signs.
After almost 30 years of carry, I've been caught precisely 3 times with a
weapon when or where I shouldn't have one, once in a bar, once in a court
room, and once on the Delaware Memorial Bridge.
Not a word was said.
> Should I leave you another voicemail?
We've covered that.
Top
gashauler
Of course you know it doesn't bother me. I've had the same type of jealousy
happen to me too. Maybe it's because we draw an extra check every month. Or
the fact we still have medical benefits. I had one driver tell me he didn't
think it was right that his tax dollars would pay for my tax free toys at
the exhange. ( I couldn't even explain that his tax dollars were spent
elsewhere) I laughed and asked him where was he when I spent all those years
on the high seas? I would appreciate if you still kept your name and not
change it because someone doesn't like it. You've earned it and should only
change it if YOU want to.
Doug Frederick
"gashauler" <sword...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0OWdnQ-fl-8...@comcast.com...
> Of course you know it doesn't bother me. I've had the same type of
> jealousy happen to me too. Maybe it's because we draw an extra check every
> month. Or the fact we still have medical benefits. I had one driver tell
> me he didn't think it was right that his tax dollars would pay for my tax
> free toys at the exhange. ( I couldn't even explain that his tax dollars
> were spent elsewhere) I laughed and asked him where was he when I spent
> all those years on the high seas? I would appreciate if you still kept
> your name and not change it because someone doesn't like it. You've earned
> it and should only change it if YOU want to.
So what you're saying is that you're a bullshit artist as well?
>
gashauler
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
news:11lv06l...@news.supernews.com...
>
You know pal I don't even know you and really don't care to. But what I've
seen about you you're as fucked up as Hogen's Goat. You use these terms to
try to impress people and it only dates your ignorance. Sure there's 100
thousand people that own a "Ma Deuce" (saw that on the history channel did
ya) out there and they just carry around the 100 some pound weapon. And they
have no problem finding ammo and are glad to fire burst at $5 a round. Oh
and BTW a crew served weapon is one that needs more than one person to
operate, like the Browning 50cal machine gun and the M-60.
And what really kicked me in the ass is your reference to "thumpers". Ya
there's tons of people that own those too. And just for your info there are
no longer any "thumpers" in the inventory. The M-79 was replaced by the
M-203 years ago. So tell me can you fire a M-203 round in a M19 gun?
You're completely hosed up in your thinking on automatic weapons. There are
places that automatic weapons are banned. And the few places where you can
have one you can't fire it because of local laws. Anyone with a clean record
can get a FFL and buy the weapon. That doesn't make it legal to own in all
areas of the country.
Now I'll play your game on knowledge.
1. What does the caliber of a round mean?
2. What is a cook off?
3. What's the difference between max range and max effective range?
4. What is the difference between a magazine and a clip?
5. Explain sustained rate of fire.
6. On the M-2 how many dog tags do you use for a no fire tool?
7. Which one of the machine guns M-60 or M-2 is gas operated?
There's some real simple questions for you. And please don't show your
ignorance by asking what is a automatic weapon.
Scott
<snip>
> And what really kicked me in the ass is your reference to "thumpers". Ya
> there's tons of people that own those too. And just for your info there
are
> no longer any "thumpers" in the inventory. The M-79 was replaced by the
> M-203 years ago. So tell me can you fire a M-203 round in a M19 gun?
You mean an Mk19, right?
> Now I'll play your game on knowledge.
> 1. What does the caliber of a round mean?
> 2. What is a cook off?
> 3. What's the difference between max range and max effective range?
> 4. What is the difference between a magazine and a clip?
> 5. Explain sustained rate of fire.
> 6. On the M-2 how many dog tags do you use for a no fire tool?
> 7. Which one of the machine guns M-60 or M-2 is gas operated?
> There's some real simple questions for you. And please don't show your
> ignorance by asking what is a automatic weapon.
Getting popcorn and sitting down with a beer.
gashauler
"Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:h4qdnd1-5oT...@wavecable.com...
>>
> You mean an Mk19, right?
>
Scott
news:Xns96FAE491D7...@65.24.3.135...
> Here's what I believe:
>
> 1. Guns of any kind have to be controlled. By that I mean they have
> to be secured. Restrict access by locks or whatever technology you
> want and it is that much harder for the wrong person to get ahold of
> it.
Obvious, but you cant legislate it.
If someone is such a dickhead that they allow an unsupervised child to get
their hands in a loaded weapon, they should be prosecuted, every time.
Happened to my two boys at a neighbors house. My kids have been taught since
they were old enough to pick one up what the rules and the dangers are. The
kid they were playing with after school took them downstairs and pulled out
Dads .375 H&H bolt action, and my kids came straight home and told me. I
went over there after the parents came home, and told them what happened,
and they simply denied it (typical response) until I had my oldest describe
the weapon and where it was stored (unlocked).
I called the cops and reported it, and *nothing* was done, except an entry
was made in the records. If you want to write a piece of effective
legislation, write something that would allow for the prosecution of those
parents for recklessly endangering their kid and mine. This is the same kid,
BTW, who was the bus stop bully until he got his little ass kicked by my
kid.
All the legislation on earth wouldnt keep that little asshole from doing
what he did, nor will it teach asshole parents who are more concerned with
appearances than facts, but ongoing education may have very well kept one of
my kids alive that day.
Seeing as firearms rights are a constitutionally protected right, it seems
that firearm safety and law should be taught in school.
Try running that past the Democrats and the NEA.
There are guns in the world, always will be, that Genie is out of the
bottle, and all the laws you can write wont change that.
> 2. Some guns cause more casualties than other. They should be secured
> to a greater degree than others. Greater security just as you apply
> more security for a TOP SECRET message than you do a SECRET message.
So, an axe should be treated differently than a machete, a golf club
differently than a baseball bat?
Poor choice of parallel, IMO.
> 3. Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon.
Again, not your place to dictate to others.
If he can pass the background and licensing requirements, he sure has every
right.
Since the GCA of 1938, there has been no felonies committed with a legally
registered NFA firearm, hence the lack of precedent to restrict ownership
any more than is restricted now. Different states have laws that affect who
can own what, but that changes all the time.
> If we are to have automatic weapons at all the owner must go through
> stringent checks to make sure he will secure them from theft to a
> reasonable means. Nothing is totally secure but there are reasonable
> means to secure these weapons.
This is already in place, Top.
http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/index.htm
Again, legally registered automatics are a zero incident issue.
Dopers and street gangs are the problem.
> 4. We have to keep developing new means to secure firearms. Thieves
> come up with new ways to steal things everyday. We have to keep up
> with them, so to speak.
That's an individual responsibility that comes with responsible ownership;
additional legislation is worthless.
> 5. We have to bang on desks to draw attention. If we sit on our ass
> and do nothing we will lose this country.
Taking away firearms from law abiding citizens does *zero* to address
criminals.
> 6. Under no circumstance do I advocate disarming America. Number one
> that would be an impossible task. Second, look as you have said, at
> CCW states. I don't see a major over through of law abiding citizens
> there. I DO advocate disarming criminals at every chance we get. I do
> believe we have to develop technology to defeat criminals be they
> terrorist or a drug dealer or drug addict.
We have the technology, what we dont have is a working anti drug program of
any kind. We have revolving doors on our prisons, because we fill them with
the wrong people, the majority of whom have a horrible health and social
problem.
The Bar Association does more to screw this nation and the taxpayers than
any other single entity.
And reactive legislation like all that you propose, or are simply unaware
of, is already in existance and does nothing to address the problem, because
it cant.
> Does that put a burr under your saddle?
WTF is that supposed to mean?
> 7. Spell check does wonders.
You mean like your use of "over through" to communicate what we have to
assume was meant to be "overthrow"?
Scott
> Yes Mark19
Being an old BB stacker, I'd be happy to provide the answer, but I think
Pops will have a lot more fun with it.
BTW, the M79 is still in the inventory for Marines (commonly deployed for
crowd control and embassy security) and Navy SEAL teams, if they want one.
My cuz is with DEVGRU.
Top
gashauler
1903's around too. But why would any force want the M79 when a M203 does the
same job with a kicker.
Top
I'd take the M203 anytime. If you take M79 you have to take your
personal weapon as well. Extra weight to carry. My son tells me he is
carrying the M16A4 now. Times change.
I think it was 1975 I qualified with the German army and carry their
marksmanship badge. To get that badge you have to qualify with their
rifle AND pistol. I think at the time their pistol was the 9 MM. Nice
sidearm but I'd still take the 45 for the stopping power.
In 1982 the embassy guards in Beruit didn't carry the M79. At least
not on the Ambassador's residence. They evacuated the Embassy and
operated from the Amassador's residence. That was assigned to JCSE.
In 1992 when I retired I was the First Sergeant of D Co 447 in Fort
Gordon, Ga. If anyone wants check my bonafides.
gashauler
> "Top" <T...@fuzzplucker.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns96FAE491D7...@65.24.3.135...
>
>> Here's what I believe:
>>
>> 1. Guns of any kind have to be controlled. By that I mean they have
>> to be secured. Restrict access by locks or whatever technology you
>> want and it is that much harder for the wrong person to get ahold of
>> it.
>
> Obvious, but you cant legislate it.
>
> If someone is such a dickhead that they allow an unsupervised child to get
> their hands in a loaded weapon, they should be prosecuted, every time.
> Happened to my two boys at a neighbors house. My kids have been taught
> since
> they were old enough to pick one up what the rules and the dangers are.
> The
> kid they were playing with after school took them downstairs and pulled
> out
> Dads .375 H&H bolt action, and my kids came straight home and told me. I
> went over there after the parents came home, and told them what happened,
> and they simply denied it (typical response) until I had my oldest
> describe
> the weapon and where it was stored (unlocked).
I've got to step in and agree with that 100%. I taught my son that the most
dangerous gun is a unloaded gun. He doesn't touch them until he makes sure
they're 100% safe for his own safety. He's 17 and does not go around any
other person's firearms. If a kid finds one or produces one he'll get away
from that kid. He doesn't even like toy guns because they can cause problems
too. But he'll go to the rifle range and shoot my M1 Garand all day long.
>
> I called the cops and reported it, and *nothing* was done, except an entry
> was made in the records. If you want to write a piece of effective
> legislation, write something that would allow for the prosecution of those
> parents for recklessly endangering their kid and mine. This is the same
> kid,
> BTW, who was the bus stop bully until he got his little ass kicked by my
> kid.
I have a problem with your kid fighting. Sure the other kid probably
deserved it but what if the kid fell and hit his head? It's not like in our
day when fighting was the way to settle problems then it was over. Look at
those four kids in Agoura CA that was out drinking and raising hell one day
and they went to a fort to buy some pot. They all got into a fight and one
kid pulled a knife and a kid died. All four of them got life without parole.
Today it's scary what can happen. My kid is no whimp by no means but he uses
his head and avoids stupid problems.
>
> All the legislation on earth wouldnt keep that little asshole from doing
> what he did, nor will it teach asshole parents who are more concerned with
> appearances than facts, but ongoing education may have very well kept one
> of
> my kids alive that day.
>
> Seeing as firearms rights are a constitutionally protected right, it seems
> that firearm safety and law should be taught in school.
That's a good idea and I think it is on a small scale. They teach the kids
to not touch it and tell an adult. But more is needed
>
> Try running that past the Democrats and the NEA.
>
> There are guns in the world, always will be, that Genie is out of the
> bottle, and all the laws you can write wont change that.
>
>> 2. Some guns cause more casualties than other. They should be secured
>> to a greater degree than others. Greater security just as you apply
>> more security for a TOP SECRET message than you do a SECRET message.
>
> So, an axe should be treated differently than a machete, a golf club
> differently than a baseball bat?
>
> Poor choice of parallel, IMO.
>
>> 3. Joe Snuffy on the street has no need for an automatic weapon.
>
> Again, not your place to dictate to others.
It's his opinion and I agree. Leave the heavy stuff to the police.
>
> If he can pass the background and licensing requirements, he sure has
> every
> right.
I can see the fun going to the rifle range but no where else.
> Since the GCA of 1938, there has been no felonies committed with a legally
> registered NFA firearm, hence the lack of precedent to restrict ownership
> any more than is restricted now. Different states have laws that affect
> who
> can own what, but that changes all the time.
>
>> If we are to have automatic weapons at all the owner must go through
>> stringent checks to make sure he will secure them from theft to a
>> reasonable means. Nothing is totally secure but there are reasonable
>> means to secure these weapons.
>
> This is already in place, Top.
>
> http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/index.htm
>
> Again, legally registered automatics are a zero incident issue.
So are hand grenades!!
>
> Dopers and street gangs are the problem.
That is the problem along with the crazies.
>
>
> The Bar Association does more to screw this nation and the taxpayers than
> any other single entity.
That's the truth!!
>
Scott
> Sure I can believe that but it's not standard issue. They still have some
> 1903's around too. But why would any force want the M79 when a M203 does
the
> same job with a kicker.
As I said, the main reason is to be able to use the multi-baton round, which
is too long to load into the M203.
Now, this is going back to 1978 to 82, so things have changed, but the M79
still has a place and purpose.
The make multi-baton rounds now that only have 3 batons, instead of 5, so
they are shorter.
We had to qualify with both.
Scott
> I've got to step in and agree with that 100%. I taught my son that the
most
> dangerous gun is a unloaded gun. He doesn't touch them until he makes sure
> they're 100% safe for his own safety. He's 17 and does not go around any
> other person's firearms. If a kid finds one or produces one he'll get away
> from that kid. He doesn't even like toy guns because they can cause
problems
> too. But he'll go to the rifle range and shoot my M1 Garand all day long.
Mine have fired everything from a .22 single shot Lakewood (their first
rifle, at age 13) to a 7.5" M16, to a MAC 10 in a briefcase.
In handguns everything from Beretta M21, to MkII Rugers, to my Smith model
57 to 1911's in every flavor.
They *never* had a toy gun, there is no such word in our vocabulary.
My grandson will be brought up the same way.
> It's his opinion and I agree. Leave the heavy stuff to the police.
Not a single cop I know has that sentiment. They would prefer that a 10 or
20 years sentence for firearms violence is just that.
1st strike, you get ten, if no one was maimed or killed.
2nd strike (which would include simple possession), you do 20, if no one was
harmed or killed.
3rd time, they weld the door shut, you just dont get it.
> I can see the fun going to the rifle range but no where else.
So where is the harm in that? If I pay my taxes and want to go out and burn
up $500 worth of ammo and watermelons, no foul.
And since when is it OK to deny law abiding citizens access to force of arms
that the police and military use?
We are the police and military.
> > Again, legally registered automatics are a zero incident issue.
>
> So are hand grenades!!
Legally owned, yes. Taxes are pretty heavy on those, but with the right
paper work, you can own one.
Top
> news:l6KdnUlApcm...@comcast.com...
>> I've got to step in and agree with that 100%. I taught my son that
>> the most dangerous gun is a unloaded gun. He doesn't touch them
>> until he makes sure they're 100% safe for his own safety. He's 17
>> and does not go around any other person's firearms. If a kid finds
>> one or produces one he'll get away from that kid. He doesn't even
>> like toy guns because they can cause problems too. But he'll go to
>> the rifle range and shoot my M1 Garand all day long.
> Mine have fired everything from a .22 single shot Lakewood (their
> first rifle, at age 13) to a 7.5" M16, to a MAC 10 in a briefcase.
> In handguns everything from Beretta M21, to MkII Rugers, to my Smith
> model 57 to 1911's in every flavor.
> They *never* had a toy gun, there is no such word in our vocabulary.
> My grandson will be brought up the same way.
I taught mine firearm safety around 10 with a simple BB gun. Then a
year later I stepped up to a 22. Since then we've fired 9 MMs, shotguns
and .223s.
My son joined the Army in April and he was amazed at the number of
people that had never been exposed to firearms.
>> It's his opinion and I agree. Leave the heavy stuff to the police.
> Not a single cop I know has that sentiment. They would prefer that a
> 10 or 20 years sentence for firearms violence is just that.
> 1st strike, you get ten, if no one was maimed or killed.
> 2nd strike (which would include simple possession), you do 20, if no
> one was harmed or killed.
> 3rd time, they weld the door shut, you just dont get it.
I can agree with that and my little brother is a 2 time loser. It took
2 trips to Huntsville to set his head straight. All his offenses were
drug related. I think he served 7-8 years. I am proud of him now, he's
been clean 13 years.
For drugs dealers at any level from street dealers to the ones
manufacturing or smuggling them in I would like to see them put away
for a minimum of 20 years. Smugglers I'd fry. I'd like to see the laws
simplified, no pleading down. Concrete sentences that the judges can
alter.
>> I can see the fun going to the rifle range but no where else.
> So where is the harm in that? If I pay my taxes and want to go out
> and burn up $500 worth of ammo and watermelons, no foul.
> And since when is it OK to deny law abiding citizens access to force
> of arms that the police and military use?
> We are the police and military.
>>> Again, legally registered automatics are a zero incident issue.
>>
>> So are hand grenades!!
> Legally owned, yes. Taxes are pretty heavy on those, but with the
> right paper work, you can own one.
>>> Dopers and street gangs are the problem.
>>
>> That is the problem along with the crazies.
>>>
Gang members, if caught dealing or committing violent crime I would
have no mercy on. For the gangs in the pen, I don't have answer for.
Maybe somebody with experience can share their thoughts.
>>>
>>> The Bar Association does more to screw this nation and the
>>> taxpayers than any other single entity.
>>
>> That's the truth!!
Amen!!
For lawyers bringing a legal action against another I think the losing
lawyer pays the fees of the wining lawyer. We really need restructuring
of our civil legal system.
SloRide
Slo
Scott
"SloRide" <SloRi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1130373166.467a4cc02c3ab29f3e7e11f499b92e27@teranews...
> Why is this being argued in a TRUCKING newsgroup?
Dont read it.
gashauler
Bulldozers. What more could you ask for?!!! I retired in 1990 and since then
the SAW's came out and what a sweet weapon that is. That weapon could be the
answer to my fire discipline (which I had none!)
Scott
> I was a Seabee in the Navy. We only had M16A1's, M60's, M203's, motars and
> Bulldozers. What more could you ask for?!!! I retired in 1990 and since
then
> the SAW's came out and what a sweet weapon that is. That weapon could be
the
> answer to my fire discipline (which I had none!)
Ever see a "Barney Google" go?
Walker
SloRide <SloRi...@aol.com> typed:
> Why is this being argued in a TRUCKING newsgroup?
>
>
> Slo
You see, Slo...
The people that complain that the group is going off-topic, not talking
about Trucking, and responding to Roger W. (Or quoting Roger W.)....
Seem to fill the group with a silly arguments about military service, or
other off topic subjects.
I frankly, need a score card or some sort of MTT instruction booklet to know
how to post.
Heaven forbid I cross the elite MTT posters.
I'm lost :)
--
Walker.
topper
> The people that complain that the group is going off-topic, not talking
> about Trucking, and responding to Roger W. (Or quoting Roger W.)....
> Seem to fill the group with a silly arguments about military service, or
> other off topic subjects.
>
> I frankly, need a score card or some sort of MTT instruction booklet to know
> how to post.
>
> Heaven forbid I cross the elite MTT posters.
>
> I'm lost :)
I couldn't agree more.
-=>Topper<=-
--
Odometer Keeper 3.0 now available at http://clik.to/topperware
My Photoshops and Other oddities at: http://tinyurl.com/bsaam
The Email address attached to this post is NEVER checked. Reply in NG
Correcting Walker
That makes twice that SloRide has hijacked threads and you blame Rocky.
SloRide might have hijacked more threads, but I don't look at all his
post.
In one thread, both you had him hijacked it. That was a thread started
by Amy, where you both read her post wrong. She wasn't complaining
about Rocky or Rookie, yet you changed it to make it look like she was.
Oh well, we will so who is left after I send in the information on Dave
Ruff's constant violations of his "Acceptable Use Policy."
Have a good one and cool it dude, this NG does not need your crap
either.
TNX
Concerned
"SloRide" <SloRi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1130373166.467a4cc02c3ab29f3e7e11f499b92e27@teranews...
>
>
> Slo
Huh? That question coming from the person that has hijacked three threads
four days.
Doug Frederick
>
> "Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
> news:11lv06l...@news.supernews.com...
>>
> You know pal I don't even know you and really don't care to.
Oh, poor me.
>But what I've seen about you you're as fucked up as Hogen's Goat. You use
>these terms to try to impress people and it only dates your ignorance. Sure
>there's 100 thousand people that own a "Ma Deuce"
I never said that.
> (saw that on the history channel did ya) out there and they just carry
> around the 100 some pound weapon. And they have no problem finding ammo
> and are glad to fire burst at $5 a round. Oh and BTW a crew served weapon
> is one that needs more than one person to operate, like the Browning 50cal
> machine gun and the M-60.
So, uh, when there's 6 M-2s on, say, a P-51 Mustang, how many A-gunners
does the pilot have with him?
How about 14 on a YB-40 Gunship?
> And what really kicked me in the ass is your reference to "thumpers". Ya
> there's tons of people that own those too. And just for your info there
> are no longer any "thumpers" in the inventory. The M-79 was replaced by
> the M-203 years ago.
Wrong.
And it wasn't the point.
You missed the entire point of the questions, and the success of the
exercise, but it's just a reflection of your intellect.
> So tell me can you fire a M-203 round in a M19 gun?
Scott already corrected this.
> You're completely hosed up in your thinking on automatic weapons. There
> are places that automatic weapons are banned.
Wrong.
>And the few places where you can have one you can't fire it because of
>local laws.
Wrong.
>Anyone with a clean record can get a FFL and buy the weapon.
Wrong.
>That doesn't make it legal to own in all areas of the country.
While I never said any such thing, you are still...
Wrong.
> Now I'll play your game on knowledge.
I wasn't playing a game.
> 1. What does the caliber of a round mean?
> 2. What is a cook off?
> 3. What's the difference between max range and max effective range?
> 4. What is the difference between a magazine and a clip?
> 5. Explain sustained rate of fire.
> 6. On the M-2 how many dog tags do you use for a no fire tool?
> 7. Which one of the machine guns M-60 or M-2 is gas operated?
Any Marine recruit can answer all but one of these.
I could answer them when I was a Boy Scout in the early 70's.
But I don't argue with anonymous churls.
You're retired career military like I'm figure skating champion.
Identify yourself in a verifyable fashion, and I'll prove you wrong, line
by line, up top, and answer your simple questions.
> There's some real simple questions for you. And please don't show your
> ignorance by asking what is a automatic weapon.
It wasn't my ignorance I was showing.
I gave a succinct explanation of the difference.
Is english your second language?
Walker
Thought I heard something, and got a wiff of something that stinks.
--
Walker.
Doug Frederick
>
> "Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:r8ednVTx0If...@wavecable.com...
>> "gashauler" <sword...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:4_udnenGaZJ...@comcast.com...
>>
>>> "Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:h4qdnd1-5oT...@wavecable.com...
>>
>>> > You mean an Mk19, right?
>>
>>> Yes Mark19
>>
>> Being an old BB stacker, I'd be happy to provide the answer, but I think
>> Pops will have a lot more fun with it.
>>
>> BTW, the M79 is still in the inventory for Marines (commonly deployed for
>> crowd control and embassy security) and Navy SEAL teams, if they want
>> one.
>>
>> My cuz is with DEVGRU.
>>
> Sure I can believe that but it's not standard issue.
That's not what you said.
"And just for your info there are no longer any "thumpers" in the
inventory. The M-79 was replaced by the M-203 years ago."
Thanks for setting me straight on that, gasbag.
Doug Frederick
"Top" <Top@ bitme.neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:SsT7f.69$ye4.1...@news.sisna.com...
>> "Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> In 1992 when I retired I was the First Sergeant of D Co 447 in Fort
> Gordon, Ga. If anyone wants check my bonafides.
Now if you'll just give us your name and the town you enlisted in, we'll
get right on it.
Concerned
"Walker" <walke...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:C0Z7f.7230$7h7....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
If there is nobody around you, it must have been you again.
I think it is funny that someone just called gazhauler, gasbag. I guess
someone else knows he is full of it now. Too bad it isn't Joyce, Dave
Smith, SloRide or tscottme.
Concerned
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
We know his name is Ed P. Wouldn't it be ironic if the 'P' stood for
Private?
gashauler
"Walker" <walke...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> In > The people that complain that the group is going off-topic, not
> W.)....
> Seem to fill the group with a silly arguments about military service, or
> other off topic subjects.
>
> I frankly, need a score card or some sort of MTT instruction booklet to
> know how to post.
>
> Heaven forbid I cross the elite MTT posters.
>
> I'm lost :)
>
> --
> Walker.
>
>
>
I've been trying with ABS and such. We've had some good treads on brakes in
the "when is the group going back" and a good post on hearing and the truck.
The anti idle law in CA was good and so was "I never knew my job was so
dangerous. Maybe if you'd forget that rule book and pass along some of your
knowledge it might get even better. Forget the elite MTT posters (if there
are some) and tell the group what you think. I'd like to hear more from you.
So you can be part of the fix. We all know what the problem is and we all
know how to respond. To me it's no big deal if the group gets off topic once
in awhile because if it didn't what would be next? Only truck drivers can
post here? I appreciate what anybody has to say on any topic as long as it's
not the RTQ.
gashauler
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
>
>>
> Is english your second language?
>
>
gashauler
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
>
>>>
>> Sure I can believe that but it's not standard issue.
>
> That's not what you said.
>
> "And just for your info there are no longer any "thumpers" in the
> inventory. The M-79 was replaced by the M-203 years ago."
>
are in the know. But now since you know about as much as a piss ant I'll
explain for your information. The M-79 is NO longer used as a weapon in a
squad. It has been replaced by the M203. I wouldn't know about crowd control
using the M79 to launch gas. But since you find it necessary to tear apart
every sentence I'll make it simpler for you. Go to any active duty fighting
force and ask the armor for an M79.
I'd like to know how much time you spent in the service? Or is all your
ramblings from internet studies? You pop up in this NG with the same
personalty as Roger the Queer. Could it be the same or just RTQ boyfriend?
gashauler
Concerned
This abuse will be reported also. Gee, you ever wonder why you just can't
stop with the defamation you started? It is because you have too much fun
with it. There you go, another symptom that you sir, are a troll.
Concerned
You did it for me in that post. Sheesh, next time you call me, might as
well introduce me.
Hey, I got a joke.
I was listening on the CB and I heard some preacher say something to the
effect: "Every time I turn on this CB someone is always swearing. It can't
go a fucking minute without it."
Other drivers started calling him a hypocrite. That was obvious. I just
had to get on the CB and say "That is funny." As a matter of fact, it was
so funny I laughed for miles and miles.
Concerned
I think you have Rocky on the brain.
Don't worry, you might even have more time to think about him if Comcast
unplugs you.
Doug Frederick
I could have been your father but a dog beat me up the stairs.
>
>
Doug Frederick
>
> "Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
> news:11m0nbh...@news.supernews.com...
>>
>>>>
>>> Sure I can believe that but it's not standard issue.
>>
>> That's not what you said.
>>
>> "And just for your info there are no longer any "thumpers" in the
>> inventory. The M-79 was replaced by the M-203 years ago."
>>
> I didn't realize that I would have to explain that statement to people
> that are in the know.
Us experienced internet fighters call this spinning.
You spin like a ballerina.
What you said was clear, cited, and in black and white.
Your attemps at spin are sophomoric and pathetic.
>But now since you know about as much as a piss ant I'll explain for your
>information. The M-79 is NO longer used as a weapon in a squad. It has been
>replaced by the M203. I wouldn't know about crowd control using the M79 to
>launch gas. But since you find it necessary to tear apart every sentence
>I'll make it simpler for you. Go to any active duty fighting force and ask
>the armor for an M79.
Flap your gums all you want.
I made no remarks about current TO&E.
My question was aimed at someone who said they were in the military from
around 71 to 92. but thanks for playing.
And it was obviously well aimed.
Your remarks and questions show not only ignorance and stupidity, but
someone who is proud to be that way.
All your comments about selling, owning and shooting Class 3 weapons are
completely incorrect.
> I'd like to know how much time you spent in the service?
77-81, 3 years regular, one reserve.
Long enough to recognize a lying pussy like you.
>Or is all your ramblings from internet studies?
I own an small collection of the weapons in question, 9 rifles and 33
1011A1 pistols.
>You pop up in this NG with the same personalty as Roger the Queer. Could it
>be the same or just RTQ boyfriend?
Anytime you'de like to say that to my face, let me know.
But you and I know that your fear will never let you post your true
identity and address here, because then all the bullshit you post will come
to light.
Doug Frederick
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
>
>> I own an small collection of the weapons in question, 9 rifles and 33
> 1011A1 pistols.
Make that 1911A1s before gasbag gets all foamy at the mouth for a reply.
SloRide
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
> Anytime you'de like to say that to my face, let me know.
OOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, doesn't that just make you quake in your
boots, another internet Rambo!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just what MTT needs, another punk.
Where would I have to go to say it to your face?
Slo
Top
All you have to do is pick up the phone.
Doug Frederick
(Oh, about 30 miles. Stubbed your little dick, this time, badass)
Who the fuck are you, and, I'm OTR.
I'll be happy to come to you...
Must be another anonymous prison bitch, ankle grabbing for that buttsurfer
gasbag.
Let's see what your loser AOL profile says:
Name Slo
Location Knoxville, TN
Gender Male
Marital Status Divorced since '86
Favorite Gadgets this computer
Occupation Independent trucker
Personal Quote oops
Oh, it -is- my birthday.
So, slobitch, how'd you like to say that -right- to my face?
Doug Frederick
And what?
I have no desire to talk to you.
You're obviously afraid, for some reason, to post it here.
That's a little odd for career military.
>
>
Top
> And what?
>>
>>
Seems your sister didn't want to post anything here. Also made a
comment about trusting me. If you think I'm posting more personal
information in a NG that had recent problems with a troll and a stalker
you're fruity as a berry patch. I am willing to trust you with my email
address, I've been trusting enough to give your my home phone number
but you for some reason are to scared to talk to me. That leaves me
with the logical conclusion that you are some snot nosed, pimple faced
17 year teenaged girly boy.
Now, as was said to me, do we have an understanding?
For MTT regulars, I apologize for this crap that I've responded to.
These girly boys have enough information to contact me on other
platforms. I won't respond to them again in MTT.
Top
SloRide
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
I'd love to!
Tomorrow morning, (Friday October 28th) 11am at the Waffle House on Lovell
Road across from the old T/A.
Slo
Concerned
"Walker" <walke...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:tTX7f.8524$tV6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>
After thinking of your line, I see now you were caught in a lie.
Amy is an "elite" poster. Maybe for not what she post, but the simple fact
that people care about her.
Look how many posters were concerned about her after Katrina. Look how many
posters replied when she finally posted after Katrina.
Look at all the posters that wanted to help her out, in her last post, only
to find out they, and you were one of them, had miss read her post.
You miss read her post by missing the word "NOT." In other words, by your
carelessness and vain attempt to get rid of the object of Dave Ruff's
attention, you overlooked Amy's biggest concern. Her own life.
So, now I can add a "Liar" to your portfolio.
Concerned
Just look for the little green guy.
Slo, gaspasser, realitytrucker are the biggest trolls in this NG.
Me, I don't know what good it will do, but this weekend, I plan to take the
Case ID number, I was given for Dave Ruff and show that he has constantly
defamed other posters. Then that the damage it has done, has been to new
and existing posters. Not to mention the waste of time, his flame war has
caused. Even if my e-mail does nothing, I think it'll make a pretty good
web site.
Rock
Doug Frederick
Sorry, I'll be in Tampa.
Something about a job and a big truck.
I post from on the road.
I thought you were a trucker?
But next time I'm home, which is Gatlinburg, I'll be sure to shoot you an
e-mail.
Soon, Skippy, soon.
>
>
> Slo
>
Doug Frederick
>> "Top" <Top@ bitme.neo.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:KD48f.4548$5W3.3...@news.sisna.com...
>>>> "Top" <Top@ bitme.neo.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:SsT7f.69$ye4.1...@news.sisna.com...
>>>>>> "Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>>> In 1992 when I retired I was the First Sergeant of D Co 447 in Fort
>>>>> Gordon, Ga. If anyone wants check my bonafides.
>>>
>>>> Now if you'll just give us your name and the town you enlisted in,
>>>> we'll get right on it.
>>>
>>> All you have to do is pick up the phone.
>
>> And what?
>
>> I have no desire to talk to you.
>
>> You're obviously afraid, for some reason, to post it here.
>
>> That's a little odd for career military.
>
>>>
>>>
> Seems your sister didn't want to post anything here. Also made a comment
> about trusting me. If you think I'm posting more personal information in a
> NG that had recent problems with a troll and a stalker you're fruity as a
> berry patch.
You're a retired Master Seargent and you made your living with a gun for
21 years, and you're afraid of some pussy MMT stalker?
Unbelievable.
So e-mail me the name you enlisted under, and where it was.
What state are you in, so I can tell which number is yours?
>I am willing to trust you with my email address, I've been trusting enough
>to give your my home phone number but you for some reason are to scared to
>talk to me. That leaves me with the logical conclusion that you are some
>snot nosed, pimple faced 17 year teenaged girly boy.
I already posted my name, phone number, address, and pictures of myself.
Apparently, like the gun control information, you can't click on a
hyperlink.
> Now, as was said to me, do we have an understanding?
We sure do.
Top
> Unbelievable.
Done.
SloRide
"Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
> Sorry, I'll be in Tampa.
>
> Something about a job and a big truck.
>
> I post from on the road.
>
> I thought you were a trucker?
>
> But next time I'm home, which is Gatlinburg, I'll be sure to shoot you an
> e-mail.
No, you won't send me an email; my address is blocked to all but family,
friends and business.
I leave Saturday afternoon for a Monday morning appointment. I should be
back Wednesday evening or Thursday morning.
By the way, I'm not a badass, and judging by your pics I'm about 1/3 your
size. But I'm a man whose not the slightest bit intimidated by a large PUNK,
and I'm going to meet you if you have the guts to show and look you right in
the eye and tell you you're a fucking PUNK.
Bring it on PUNK. I've had my ass whipped by MEN, I'm not gonna worry about
some two bit internet PUNK.
Slo
Top
You're so smart I gave you the rank and duty position you should be
able to find out what you want.
Doug Frederick
I'm not that smart.
Just smarter than you, at the subject at hand.
If I wasn't, I wouldn't be arguing it.
>
>
Top
>>
>>
As long as I'm better looking that's alright.
Top
Doug Frederick
Then you'll have another asswhipping to add to your collection.
I take a man at his word, and you'll have it to do, now.
If you were in a wheel chair and ran your mouth, I'd push you out into
traffic.
Send your name and address, Mr. Stand up tough guy.
Or since you're "retired military", are you afraid too as well?
Oh, and Skippy, since your factual knowledge of Class 3 activities would
roll around in a gnat's ass like a golf ball on a garbage can, why don't
you take a trip down to Craig's Firearms on Chapman Hwy, and tell them they
can't own, sell, or shoot Class 3 firearms like they have been for 25 years,
right in your home county...
Maybe that's where we'll meet..
Be real nice, and maybe, if they still have it, they'll show you the
privately owned Ma Duece in the vault.
Speaking of Internet soldiers, when and where did a Navy Seabee (as if)
get all this infantry weaponds training, I wonder...?
Inquiring minds, and all that.
Ciao.
>
>
> Slo
>
Doug Frederick
That ain't a big claim, you almost have to be.
probably better hung, too, that's what makes me so mean.
>
> Top
>
>
Top
Well I have no ambition to compare . hahaha...
You received my email? Gave you the name but no SSN. I dealt with
idenity theft before. Don't intend to go through that again. I will
trust you to a degree but I won't go beyond what can be easily found on
the internet. Hopefully you will post when you find out I am who I say
I am. Verify I am not a weekend warrior? No ofense to National Guard or
the reserve is intended.
Top
Doug Frederick
We're checking.
>
> Top
>
>
gashauler
>
> You received my email? Gave you the name but no SSN. I dealt with idenity
> theft before. Don't intend to go through that again. I will trust you to a
> degree but I won't go beyond what can be easily found on the internet.
> Hopefully you will post when you find out I am who I say I am. Verify I am
> not a weekend warrior? No ofense to National Guard or the reserve is
> intended.
>
> Top
>
>
I don't understand Top. Why do you have to prove to anyone your time in the
service? It's doesn't go to creditability. And besides if you want proof you
can post you ID card with all the sensitive info blocked out. You have to do
the time for the ID to read retired.
Top
I don't have to prove anything. This is not about that. This is calling
the bluff of these two. They've spouted off a lot that I haven't
responded to. When they find out I am who I say I am, then I've have a
reponse for them.
Top,
First Sergeant, Retired
US Army
Doug Frederick
>
> "Top" <Top@ bitme.neo.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:uB98f.4604$ZV3.3...@news.sisna.com...
>>
>> You received my email? Gave you the name but no SSN. I dealt with
>> idenity theft before. Don't intend to go through that again. I will trust
>> you to a degree but I won't go beyond what can be easily found on the
>> internet. Hopefully you will post when you find out I am who I say I am.
>> Verify I am not a weekend warrior? No ofense to National Guard or the
>> reserve is intended.
>>
>> Top
>>
>>
>
> I don't understand Top. Why do you have to prove to anyone your time in
> the service? It's doesn't go to creditability.
Actually, he based his credibility upon that.
So now he should establish that point.
As should you, since you referenced -your- career.
Like you, however, once that point is established, it won't make his
argument any more credible.
Yours is a joke.
I still don't have your name and address, tough guy.
Might as well toss in that "I'm in your face" phone number, too.
And remember, while you're getting your ass kicked, you're the one that
jumped in here with a vitriolic anonymous argument, attacking me.
>And besides if you want proof you can post you ID card with all the
>sensitive info blocked out. You have to do the time for the ID to read
>retired.
Sounds good to me.
>
>
Doug Frederick
> I don't have to prove anything. This is not about that. This is calling
> the bluff of these two. They've spouted off a lot that I haven't responded
> to. When they find out I am who I say I am, then I've have a reponse for
> them.
Not really.
Unlike gasbag, I've been wrong on Usenet many, many times in my seventeen
thousand four hundred posts.
If you're what you say you are, I'll apologize for that one point.
Happily.
That won't change the several times you've contradicted yourself, your
stated intention to ignore the Constitution and the civil rights of others,
or your documented advocacy of gun confiscation.
And, your stunning lack of comprehension about what the American gun
problem really is.
A Teamster
news:l6KdnUlApcm...@comcast.com:
>
> "Scott" <pugetso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ULCdnYraduN...@wavecable.com...
>
> I've got to step in and agree with that 100%. I taught my son that the
> most dangerous gun is a unloaded gun. He doesn't touch them until he
> makes sure they're 100% safe for his own safety. He's 17 and does not
> go around any other person's firearms. If a kid finds one or produces
> one he'll get away from that kid. He doesn't even like toy guns
> because they can cause problems too. But he'll go to the rifle range
> and shoot my M1 Garand all day long.
>>
You have a Garand also? I have one my Dad gave me a long time ago, never
fired it myself.
M1 Garand tanker style, short barrel, also have the bayonette that goes
with it. I want to get it cleaned up, not that it is in bad shape, and
have it placed in a glass case for hanging in my family room.
Russellmania
and an M1 carbine? I qualified on the carbine back in the mid sixties
and was told that the Garand was the same weapon only with a longer
barrell...Of course I'm sure it wasn't the only time
that Uncle lied to me.LOL
Scott
"Russellmania" <russ_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130494573.4...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
M1 Carbine shoots .30 Carbine round and is selective fire, and M1 Garand
fires .30 06 semi auto only.
Joyce
Please do not give your physical address
over the web...as it is not secure, and
you will be bombarded with all kinds
of garbage.....I don't put much info on
the web. due to that...
joyce
Joyce
You served in the services of America
when they needed you, and you deserve
any and all that is yours for giving your
time, and health, due to it...
Some yahoo's come in, and start with
you because they don't believe you,,,to
hell with them...who can believe them??
I can think back to the days of Vietnam,
and a very nice young man who lived in
the apartments we did, he was a LT..not
sure wich branch, tho but he had knowlege of the new tanks, and was
shipped overseas, my then l0 year old
daughter had a crush on him, and he
thought it was cute, before he left for
the place he was to go and train the men
about this new tank, he left a present for
her..it was wrapped in paper and bow, and ribbon, and a card, To Deb, my
best
girlffriend, (he already had a girl friend,
who helped him with the purchase and
wrapping of it.)..and he left it at the door.
That was the last time we saw him, 30
days later it was reported that he was
missing and the tank was bombed..they
found his body a month later. He was
shipped home and buried, My daughter
wanted to go the funeral, we thought it
would be to much for her, but she
was determined, We went to the funeral
and she did come along, with her gift.
a toy tiger. that you wound up and the
tail wagged and his head turned..
She wanted to put it in his coffin, but his
parents talked to her and said, Debbie,
I think that Steve wanted you to have the
tiger,, please take it home, as a memory of steve....well Steve has been
gone many
years now, but Debbie still has that tiger.
yes, and it still works....
.
Maybe it's a bit off the track of what is
going on....but I remenbered it, and
figured what the heck, I didn't ask
his rank, and serial number what did
he do overseas. I just remember my
little girl crying for weeks, about losing
her friend Steve.
We had one other friend, he was
in the airforce, and we all had
dinner one night at my daughters
house, and the next day he was
to leave for California, he was a pilot
several weeks after he left, we heard from
a friend of his, that his plane went down
and they never found his body.. he didn't
make it home...
Top and David, God bless you for
your service to America, and any
others who post here. you deserve
what ever you need and receive for
you made it home, and should receive
all the promises you were given when
you joined the forces...
So, if anyone wants to make remarks
about this post...that's ok, just so they
aren't nasty remarks...
joyce
Joyce
Gee, don't choke on the popcorn, and
don't drown on the beer....
Joyce
Joyce
Why,,???? maybe they were boring
everyone to death....
What is with this...? when this is trucking
and all the boring people plop here...
Maybe they worked their way down the
many ng's...and got kicked to the curb.
and so argumentative aren't they..
Joyce
Joyce
Gee Slo,,,sounds like they are trying to
take over the ng.....again, why dont they
get their own ng..and let us alone...huh...
joyce
Top
news:16584-436...@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net:
>
> Top and David, God bless you for
> your service to America, and any
> others who post here. you deserve
> what ever you need and receive for
> you made it home, and should receive
> all the promises you were given when
> you joined the forces...
>
> So, if anyone wants to make remarks
> about this post...that's ok, just so they
> aren't nasty remarks...
>
> joyce
>
Thanks Joyce. I try not to sweat the small stuff and this ( this
argument over who I am) in the end is small stuff. I shouldn't have
let myself get drawn in.
As far as my address, I won't give that out nor will I give out my
social security number. I was a victim of identity theft and do not
intend to go through that again.
Top
Joyce
Your crazy if you give them anything
who the hell are they and why do they
want to check your ID.?
I wouldn't give them my spit..
there are kooks out there who
use any information they can to
illegally obtain paper on anyone.....
Maybe you ought to check them out
if they are so nosey...
Joyce.
Joyce
Joy's Kitchen Lost Pets
 |
|
Scott
news:16584-436...@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net...
Joyce,
I didnt.
Nice of you to come to the aid of your buddies.
I dont have aproblem with you, yet, dont make one, eh?
gashauler
"A Teamster" <bel...@the.bar> wrote in message
news:SJmdnStucJT9d_ze...@comcast.com...
>
> You have a Garand also? I have one my Dad gave me a long time ago, never
> fired it myself.
> M1 Garand tanker style, short barrel, also have the bayonette that goes
> with it. I want to get it cleaned up, not that it is in bad shape, and
> have it placed in a glass case for hanging in my family room.
Soooo it's really not worth much and you can go ahead and send it to me and
I'll get rid of it for you!!!! Man O Man you've got a find. Please get it
cleaned and protected. Mine was made in Jan 1945 and is in perfect shape.
There's a book out there where you can look up the serial number and it
tells you when it was made. I have that book around here somewhere. It also
tells who made it.
gashauler
range is much shorter. The carbine is lighter and was usually carried by an
officer and not the rifleman. Now they are very collectable but some years
back they were a dime a dozen. Some M1 carbines were automatics but not all,
in fact the ones that were fully automatic took on a different designation
as M2 or M3. So you could argue that the M1 was only semi automatic.
Doug Frederick
I've regularly posted my name, address and phone number on the web for 8
years without any such problems.
>
> joyce
>
gashauler
the service. It was my career for myself not the public. I didn't do it for
medals or parades just for myself. I will never say anything derogatory to
anyone that did not serve. My service to my country was my choice and was my
deal. Whatever anyone else did was their deal. I don't look down on anyone
that chooses not to serve but I do get bothered with self-righteous idiots
that judge before they know any facts. I would tell other sailors you stay
in as long as you like going to work. When the day comes and you dread
getting up to go in then it's time to get out. It took me 20 years to get to
that point and now I wished I would have done 10 more. Now I look at their
pay and think the pay is good and the job is exciting and I'd do it all over
again. But that's me.
Doug Frederick
>
> You served in the services of America
> when they needed you, and you deserve
> any and all that is yours for giving your
> time, and health, due to it...
>
> Some yahoo's come in, and start with
> you because they don't believe you,,,to
> hell with them...who can believe them??
<snip rambling manifesto>
I didn't come here and "start" with anybody.
The OT thread was started by regulars and was in progress when I joined
it.
I'm not new to Usenet, and probably have ten times the posts that you do.
Neither am I anonymous out of some wildly paranoid fear.
I am also a verifiable veteran.
I am an OTR trucker that's been posting here for going on a year, and
wasn't aware I needed your permission to post here.
And sloride started with me, not the other way around as he would have you
believe.
Top has backed his incorrect, or at least very naive, position with
assertions of his military service, and could not answer some extremely
basic questions of verification.
Thus a call to verify this point.
Likewise sloride has posted some highly unlikely information, and attacked
me ad hominem without provocation, making anything he says further suspect.
Get your facts straight.
Doug Frederick
"Top" <T...@fuzzplucker.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96FD717491...@65.24.3.135...
> Thanks Joyce. I try not to sweat the small stuff and this ( this
> argument over who I am) in the end is small stuff. I shouldn't have
> let myself get drawn in.
>
> As far as my address, I won't give that out nor will I give out my
> social security number. I was a victim of identity theft and do not
> intend to go through that again.
>
> Top
Neither has been asked for.
Doug Frederick
Dare to dream.
>
> Joyce
>
Doug Frederick
In your ignorance, you seem to have missed where I posted my complete
information.
>
> Joyce.
>
Top
news:11m4moh...@news.supernews.com:
Have you ever posted your SSN (honest question)? I haven't and won't.
Someone, about 12 years ago, got my name and SSN. With those together
he was able to obtain 5 credit cards, plus a line of credit with TWA.
One of the credit cards was Citi Bank, at the time the largest Visa
card establishment. You would think they would have some checking
before they issued a credit card but they didn't. At the time if it
involved over $12,000 the secret service was notified. By the time it
was over the Postal Inspectors were involved as well. I had to write
letters to the 3 major credit bureaus as well as numerous credit card
companies. The only way I found out about it was one credit card
company noticed the address on the credit application did not match
the home address from the credit report bureau. He called me and
asked if I had applied for the credit card. I got a copy of my credit
report and there ware credit cards I had never heard of. I spent the
better part of the next 6 months getting all straightened out. Now I
have a statement on my credit report with the 3 major bureaus that
states voice verify before extending any credit. After that I found
Citi Bank had issued another credit card without verifying I had
requested the card. I urge everyone to get a copy of your credit
report at LEAST once a year. The only thing that saved me was that no
one had my signature. Because of that I never had to pay for
anything. During the investigation one place was able to produce a
tape of the bastard picking up a VCR at their pickup door. Even with
all that I don't think the bastard ever spent a day behind bars. The
only justice I felt I gained was when I was able to get him home
phone number. I called his wife and told I was his gay lover and he
was leaving her for me. Not much but it was the only thing I was left
to do. NEVER LET ANYONE LET ANYONE YOU DON'T THINK HAS A REASON TO
NEED IT HAVE YOUR NAMED AND SSN TOGETHER!!
Top
Top
> F
That is correct, you haven't. How's your checking coming along? What
all is included in your checking as far the information you get?
Top
Doug Frederick
> Thanks Joyce. You're right we don't have to prove to anyone what we did in
> the service.
Especially when you can't.
>I don't look down on anyone that chooses not to serve but I do get
>bothered with self-righteous idiots
Funny, you jumped into the thread with accusations and ad hom, not to
mention being cluelessly incorrect.
Wouldn't that make -you- the self righteous one?
Just checking.
> that judge before they know any facts.
Of course, first those facts would have to exist.
Then... you'd have to make them available.
After -that-...
We'd know 'em!!!
What an epiphany.
Top
Let me explain something. The weapons terrms you used were not
familiar to me. Had you asked about a 50 cal I would have known that.
Can you tell me how to set the head space and time on it? That
question alone would tell you I know something of it. When tracers
are used they are every 5th round in the belt.
If you ask me about the M60 I can tell you it fires a 7.62 mm NATO
round.
If you had asked about an M79 I would tell you that one effective way
to use it is to lay the butt of the weapon in your elbow and start
ranging in. Adjust it as you would a mortar.
If you ask me about the M16A1 I can tell the maximum range is 2672
feet.
The difference in terms is the difference in branch service and
career fields. Can you tell me what a tripack is? What is the level
of test tone? What is DBRNC? What does DBNR refer to? What is impulse
noise? I spent my first 8 years in a Track and Wheeled vehicle
mechanic/shop foramen/motor sgt. The rest of my career was in
communications.
Before you judge someone you need to ask find out someone background.
You and your friend went off on me and had not one ideal of what my
background nor MOS was. I at least went to your web site to get some
ideal of what and who you were. Now before you judge again ask better
questions. Did you even know what the term "Top" refers to?
Now "Get YOUR facts straight."
Signed by a true First Sergeant.
Doug Frederick
> "Doug Frederick" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in
> news:11m4moh...@news.supernews.com:
>
>>
>>"Joyce" <JoyceI...@webtv.net> wrote in message
>>news:16584-436...@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net...
>>> Top,,,,
>>>
>>> Please do not give your physical address
>>> over the web...as it is not secure, and
>>> you will be bombarded with all kinds
>>> of garbage.....I don't put much info on
>>> the web. due to that...
>>
>> I've regularly posted my name, address and phone number on the
>> web for 8
>> years without any such problems.
>>
>>
> Have you ever posted your SSN (honest question)? I haven't and won't.
> Someone, about 12 years ago, got my name and SSN.
Oh, hell no.
Doug Frederick
>Let me explain something. The weapons terrms you used were not familiar to
>me. Had you asked about a 50 cal I would have known that.
I did.
> Now "Get YOUR facts straight."
Then how could you possibly not know what a Ma Duece is?
You still haven't answered the Union Switch & Signal question.
I didn't claim to be career military, and my enlisment is easily
verifiable.
I don't know -anything- about communications, but, I don't say that I do.
Ma Duece, Pig and Thumper are common terms in any service, including the
Coart Guard.
Even Gasbag the Seabee knew what they were.
Ma Duece, fer chissake, is a term from the second world war.
If anyone here is questioning your bonafides, it's because you've cited
them without establishing them.
That's not my fault.
Gasbag is -definately- a windbag, spouting things he looked up on the
internet that have -nothing to do with Seabee duties.
Why don't you tell me, for instance, how you learned to time an M-2 during
your career in tracks and comm?
> Signed by a true First Sergeant.
Signed by a true Corporal.
Joyce
Well thank you, yes I consider them
my buddies,
And it's nice of you to warn me, but
I don't scare easily..been thru a lot in
my years, so I'm not concerned with
your (warning)...so what I mean is
I'm not going to sweat your comments.
joyce
Joyce
your message to Top, you said
I regularly posted my name,address and
telephone number on the web for
8 years without any problem,
but my name is just under what you
wrote..I didn't write my name or say
that.
.
I said, "I don't do it because the web
isn't secure"...ok. ,,Joyce..