Sogaard

That's actually pretty funny.

Just to clear up some misinformation: http://blog.kingsout...g-down-a-moose/ The original story (http://www.isleroyal...kills_moose.htm) is no longer on line, but the pictures were taken in 2006, from a helicopter. The island that the pictures are from is in the northern part of Lake Superior, north of Michigan (UP part). Neither the wolves, nor the moose that live on the island are hunted.

You DO NOT need to register a MZ in NYC if you never have powder/primers/bullets in your house. The law is written like that so collectors of old (pre 1900) guns do not need to register their firearms. I'm sure they want you to register them, but you do not need a permit to own one, and you can't register them without a permit. That is the law, they can bitch all they want, its not illegal. Cabela's WILL sell you a MZ without any sort of license check. I bought one at the Cabela's in PA on 11/23/12. No ID was asked for and there was no paperwork. However, they will not sell any other type of firearm without a NYC permit present (if your driver's license is from any of the 5 boroughs, obv).

Blanket statements like this tarnish your usually well thought out and passionate points. I think there should be congressional term limits. I don't think there should be such things as career politicians. I have no problems with executives of successful companies giving themselves raises as a reward for good work. I do not agree with executives of failing companies trying to milk every last dime out of a crashing plane right before they bail out on their golden parachutes.

.223

Always nice to see a fellow SI'er on the forum. Personally I have a Rem 700 (not in 30-06, but my 300WSM kicks harder and you can still put 20-25 rounds through it before you start getting a little sore). My turkey gun is a Rem 870 12g that I love. I have a slug barrel with it too, but I've never used it because I never bothered getting it scoped.

Very impressive buck for NYS. Big Congrats.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Its scary how many people have no idea what is legal or illegal. Its also scary how many people can misinterpret even the most straight forward of regulations.

Congratulations on being able to absorb such a hit with only minor setbacks. Some people aren't as fortunate. We are talking about ~$16 an hour jobs. We aren't talking about plumber or electrician unions here. The company folded because it was poorly run, the Bakers Union's stance may have been the final straw, but it was far from the cause Hostess' problems. EDIT: Elmo - you edited your post and added that last bit while I was writing mine.

If you can't afford to live with an 8% pay cut, the difference between 8% and 100% is irrelevant, you have to get an new job either way. The exec's also voted themselves raises during the same period.

Yeah, the union had some crazy demands, like not wanting an 8% pay cut.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/29/hostess-executive-bonuses_n_2210515.html

That is one amazing animal. Thank you for sharing, and good luck getting him the rest of the season.

Ummm....you do know this is 100% false, right? The title is: Key word: Satirical, as in satire...

The ban went into effect in 1976. The ban was overturned by the SCOTUS in 2008. Here are the murder numbers from 1960-2011. Murder rate increases in DC in the late 80s and mid 90s had to do with the crack epidemic. It had nothing to do with the handgun ban. The rate rises and falls completely independently from it. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm Keep in mind, I was completely against the handgun ban in DC and I was glad it finally got struck down. The correlation you make stating that the results of the gun ban was a 200% increase in murder in DC is completely false. EDIT: I tried to list the numbers so I wouldn't have to link them, but the formatting kept coming out awful. You'll have to follow the link to see the info.

I do understand your point, however all these threads that are about 2nd Amendment rights and that treaty has been mentioned over and over again as something that is the first step to getting gun rights taken away, which as you know isn't true. Just mentioning it in a gun control thread will put that idea back into people's heads. You have a valid point about the legal exports of our major gun manufactures, and I honestly don't know the answer. Maybe once the treaty is rewritten we can have a discussion, but until then, it would be all conjecture.

Numbers may not lie, but you sure don't seem to have a problem with it. http://www.wjla.com/...ears-70861.html

I really think I'm going to have to cut and paste this into every single damn thread about gun control. Maybe we can pin it to the top with a heading of, "If you want to make a comment about the UN Arms Trade Treaty, please read first" This treaty is to stop little pocket dictators from buying crates of AK-47s, not stop people from buying a legal shotgun in Greece.

I already have to register all my guns, that's been the law in NYC for as long as I can remember. The registering part doesn't bother me, its the fee (read as: tax) to register them that bothers me.

Damn, that's pretty far from lands bordering PA.

Those guns still start out being sold legally, mostly from states that have very loose gun control laws. People buy them down south legally, transport them north, and sell them illegally. Is that really new information to anyone?

See, now if I couldn't take a joke, that would be very hurtful.

Oh come on, I took the first statement as a joke. I laughed. It was funny. If I thought he was racist, it wouldn't be funny.

As the OP, find any post, anywhere on this entire forum, where I have ever had to resort to playing the race card to defend my point or condemn someone's views. I will admit, the original post was a little bit of a gloat, because I think all the rhetoric pre-election was just so over the top and I'm looking forward to very little changing about gun ownership in the next four years. If I'm wrong, believe me, I know I will hear about it a million times over from the vast majority of Republicans on this board.

You're going to bring up the UN Arms treaty again? The one that has NOTHING AT ALL to do with selling guns inside the US? Really? I really shouldn't even re-post this since obviously you want to believe whatever you want to believe and silly things like facts are to be ignored, but I'll try one last time: 1) Congress has to ratify all treaties. It would need two-thirds of the Sentate to vote to pass it. Good luck there. 2) The content of the treaty hasn't even been finalized. The first draft was written in July, but the treaty was suspended indefinitely when the Obama administration (as well as some other countries) declined to support it. 3) The Arms Trade Treaty has nothing to do with the restricting of legal sale or ownership of guns within the US. The focus of the UN Arms Trade Treaty is to combat illegal international trade of arms through trade regulation. The current draft states that the treaty specifically "reaffirms the sovereign right and responsibility of any State to regulate and control transfers of conventional arms that take place exclusively within its territory". 4) The POTUS can not ban weapons through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. Reid vs Covert establishes the Constitution supersedes international treaties, even those ratified by the Senate. Please take the time to read points 3 and 4 again, then make a bookmark so that the next time you feel the urge to post something completely incorrect about this treaty, you can reference here and not be so wrong.