June 24, 2018
Bangor Latest News | Poll Questions | Lone Star Ticks | Foraging | Bangor Pride

Comments for: Call volume shuts down FBI’s firearm background checks, stops Maine sales on Black Friday

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    Think the government would get it together with all the revenue guns generate.

    • Anonymous

      Yes , increased sales mean extra govt revenue.
      And with gun sales to Mexico going unchecked, well…..

      • Anonymous

        We have as federal sales tax?? Since when ?

        • Anonymous

          I am guessing what redheaded-stepchild meant was export tariffs?

          • My guess is it was right wing talking point 17, Fast N Furious

        • JLRLY

          We have a federal income tax meaning every gun sold increases the income of the businesses and tax revenue. Are you unaware of this?

      • Lazerus Phoenix

        You can thank obama and holder for that!

  • westshores

    We’re right down to our last 250,000,000 guns….what will we do until Monday to defend ourselves?

    • Anonymous

      You are so right, one person who does not have one of those “250,000,000 guns” who wants their own could die from some punk jacked up on drugs trying to take whats theirs (including their life). Good point

      • westshores

        I have a loaded pump next to my bed.I’m not ant gun in any way. I’m simply stating that we should not panic because we can’t buy guns for a small time period. We’ll be fine.

        • Anonymous

          My view point is a reflection of government inefficiencies
          and economics of legal sales. You are correct; “We’ll be fine” all
          told, and I certainly believe a “cool off” period isn’t a bad idea,
          especially for handguns. It’s the technology failure aspect and if so the feet dragging that I take issue with that delay’s law abiding citizens their right.

          • westshores

            As Black Friday has become the number one retail day in America I’m not sure that we can design any of the backed up systems associated with a huge retail time period for just one day a year. The highways are packed just like the computer system. It’s one day.How much money can the country spend during ultra peak periods for airports, highways, electrical transmission lines etc. It just can’t be done.

          • County Escapee

            Just ask for a rain check. Businesses usually extend sales when these type things happen.

          • Anonymous

            Sanity in these words.

      • County Escapee

        Do you live in South Central LA or Maine?
        Guess that I won’t be going back to the County anymore if it’s that bad up there. I’ll stay gunless here in Boston where I don’t have to be so paranoid.

        • Anonymous

          You are smart. The paranoia is pathetic in some parts of Maine. It’s sad.

          • Lazerus Phoenix

            Must be the parts that voted for obama! They bought into his paranoia about Romney!

          • County Escapee

            Since most of my comments are considered controversial here, I’m not touching that with a 10ft ballot! Lets just say I didn’t vote for him, the inexperienced Kennedy to fill Barney Frank’s place or to replace Scott Brown with that Uber liberal Liawatha (aka Elizabeth Warren). :)

        • Anonymous

          Its bad, many more home invasions, murders then years ago and much more use and involvement of drugs of those committing crimes across this state. You say your from the county, even in Presque Isle, a meth lab shut down and pharmacist stealing drugs this year alone. I must have missed all this action ten, fifteen, or even thirty years ago. You are correct if you have been conditioned to Boston you should stay within its comfortable safety zone.

          • County Escapee

            Home cooked meth has been a favorite of rural areas across the country for years but I don’t remember the stuff in Maine 30 years ago either. Even though the drug is pretty much passe now, It seems to be coming to Maine now with labs even found in the woods off Houlton’s roads.

            People that stay away from all the drugs (mostly manufacture, sales), don’t try to break up families, don’t rip people off and generally keep their noses clean really don’t have any reason to fear their home being invaded. One can be a victim of a burglary by desperate addicts of course, but it’s in the rough areas of Boston that the invasions and shootings occur over drugs and their sales turf of the stuff to suburban folks. They’re the only ones that venture into those hellholes.

          • Anonymous

            Have you seen Walter?

          • County Escapee

            I’m going to assume it’s a movie. Can I find it on utube or Wiki? Will I find it relevant or insulting? :)

          • Anonymous
          • meth only started gaining a foothold on the east coast in the last 6 or 7 years. It was a midwest/southwest problem at first but it has branched out for sure.

          • County Escapee

            Yup

        • Lazerus Phoenix

          YES, please do stay there! We all know Boston is a bastion of safety, with absolutely NO violent crime!

          (And the fact that Mass. does not allow it’s citizens to own firearms for that very reason!)

          • County Escapee

            You apparently don’t know much about the area if you believe we ban guns (or could even try to) plus I can’t remember the last time a drug store was hit up for drugs.
            The ‘violent crimes’ you mention almost exclusively occur in Mattapan, Roxbury, etc where only drug buyers from the burbs bother to go. Once in awhile some come out of those holes to steal a phone from a pedestrian late at nite or grab some female student silly enough to jog solo on the Esplanade at 2 am.

          • County Escapee

            Come spend a little time and maybe you won’t be such an isolated troll. There’s a whole world of reality out here that’s not just perceived from your angle of misinformation. Do you know what sections of Providence or Baltimore to avoid or are they both crime ridden?
            I learned that when I spent time or lived there.

          • though I find your sarcasm funny. they do allow citizens to own firearms but make it very difficult. the FID system is silly.

          • County Escapee

            It’s no harder to buy in Mass than anywhere else. It’s the Concealed Wearing permit that is difficult as the individual town Police Chief that knows the town is the one who passes out those permits.

            Wrong information is worse than half information.

    • westshores

      deleted

  • Anonymous

    I have no problem with people interested in purchasing handguns having to wait an extra day or two.

    • Anonymous

      …in fact I think it is advisable .

    • Anonymous

      That person with a handgun might save your life someday. Im thankful for our second amendment right.

      • Lazerus Phoenix

        Not Bangorian’s life, he’s on his own!

      • Anonymous

        Hard to say. George Zimmerman had a handgun.

        • Anonymous

          Good thing he did. It is called Self defense.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, chasing after someone with a gun while they are walking away from you, and the police have told you to stop, is “self defense”. Gimme some of whatever you are smoking.

        • Lazerus Phoenix

          So did the average 100,000+ people that use them to defend their lives from violent crime every year. You mention one person, how about the other 99,999+?

        • cougar 64

          so you are saying that we no longer have the inherent right to self defense.

    • Lazerus Phoenix

      With the half-dozen they already have, why wait at all? Oh that’s right, political correctness!

    • cougar 64

      What part of “shall not be infringed” do you fail to understand and comprehend.

      And what part of “Every person has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned (Maine State Constitution, Article 1, Section 16). This part of the Maine Constitution goes all the way back to 1819.

      So tell me, what part do you fail to understand and comprehend in either the 2nd Amendment or our own State Constitution.

      • Anonymous

        What part of “guns don’t kill people, people with guns kill people” don’t you understand?

        • Anonymous

          so do people with cars
          …actually a lot more than guns on an annual basis

          • Lazerus Phoenix

            Stop confusing Bangorian with reason and facts! He has a hard enough slog without them!

        • cougar 64

          nice try there. your lack of understanding is its usual self. a firearm will not kill or wound anyone without human intervention and that is the same for automobiles.

          people have been killing people without the use of firearms for thousands of years. firearms are nothing but another tool in which to utilize to achieve a means.

          not everyone that has firearms kill people and the same thing goes for those who drive automobiles. not everyone who operates one kills people.

          does this mean that all law enforcement officers are bad because one of them exceeded his authority and abused their power. no, so stop lumping all in the group. one bad apple does not spoil the bushel. you are nothing but a pure liberal that tries to exercise logic and you end up voting for oblowme.

        • cougar 64

          and as usual bangorian you fail to address the 2nd amendment and the maine state constitution. if those documents mean nothing to you, are you too afraid to educate yourself so you can stop being uninformed and uneducated. scotus has ruled that the 2nd amendment is an individual right. why dont you read the following case law: UNITED STATES v. CRUIKSHANK et al., Presser v. Illinois, Miller v. Texas, Lewis v. United States, United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, District of Columbia v. Heller, United States v Tot, Cases v. United States, Stevens v. United States, United States v. Decker, United States v Cody, United States v Johnson, United States v. McCutcheon, United States v. Synnes, and Dred Scott v. Sandford. I can keep listing case law for you to read and comprehend, but you will not even make the effort. it is all a waste of air just like you are shooting off at mouth.

          the only way to remove firearms from the equation is to remove them from all law enforcement officers, all military personnel, all criminals and all civilians. but of course this will never work. there will always be firearms on the streets legal or not. all this does is setup for the law abiding citizen to be killed by those criminals that still possess said firearms.

          putting more laws on the books is not the solution to the problem. the problem is how do you prevent the criminals from obtaining firearms. you cannot, unless you lock everyone up behind bars.

          how are you going to protect your family from someone that breaks into your residence. you gonna call 911 in hopes that law enforcement will be there within the next minute or so. very highly unlikely. a bullet leaving the barrel will hit its target long before law enforcement will ever show up to help you.

          i own firearms and i am also a credentialed firearms instructor, but based on your bias i have killed people because simply i own firearms. you are right now sitting on the surface of the moon with your oxygen supply running out due to your flaws and failures.

          • aheathen

            You say putting more laws out there is not the solution, Yet, I look at statistics from two countries (England and Wales) who have had very strict gun control laws for years now and they have had a 13.6% drop in homicides since 2003. Also overall their crime rates have been dropping over that same time span, specifically violent crimes are down 9%. For the cherry on top, the vast majority of their police force carry nothing but taser…no firearms.

            Now, don’t get me wrong I am not saying no one should be able to own a firearm. I just think we need to be careful who gets those weapons and make them difficult to obtain legally and illegally for the safety of everyone.

          • Lazerus Phoenix

            US crime rate have dropped also, in spite of the fact that MORE firearms are injected into the population every year! So much for laws.

          • aheathen

            If that is true, then why (according to the US census) have deaths by firearm increased from 8,661 in 2000 to 10,218 in 2006. It has however lowered since 2006 to 9,203 in 2009 but that is roughly a 6% increase over that 9 year span.

            Do you have anything else?

          • cougar 64

            so even thou you are a closet 2nd amendment supporter, you still feel that it should be infringed. you are either for the 2nd amendment or you are not. you cannot have it both ways. as i have stated many times to liberals who fail to comprehend “shall not infringe” do you not get.

            so tell me how you are going to stop the criminal element from obtaining said firearms. you cannot effectively achieve this goal or standard. criminals will always find a way to obtain firearms and no amount of law(s) will stop them. only the law abiding citizen will obey said laws as they do not want to be labeled as criminals. therefore what you have is an undefended population that will be getting murdered by firearms that are in the possession of criminals. so with this you are saying that the people of the united states do not have the right to self preservation and self defense.

        • Lazerus Phoenix

          Like the police?

          • cougar 64

            especially the cops in nyc killing and wounding civilians who are not even involved in the response. so much for their firearms qualifications and discipline.

      • Did someone question the right?

    • Lazerus Phoenix

      We would expect nothing less from you!

  • Anonymous

    Lots of people voting with their feet and going to the gun store
    to buy a little bit of security.
    Apparently lots of folks dont think big brother will keep them safe.

    • Anonymous

      apparently lots of people are ‘bat crap crazy’.

      • Lazerus Phoenix

        You have to be ‘bat crap crazy’ to buy a gun?
        How stupid do you have to be to NOT own one!
        Or is it just old-fashioned cowardice!

      • cougar 64

        Apparently you disagree with the 2nd Amendment of our United States Constitution then.

        • Anonymous

          who cares if you do disagree with the 2nd amendment? It was written by a few old white men, kinda like how your republican party operates. They also wrote in the constitution that every man is free, yet clearly that wasn’t followed was it? I own guns but I don’t think it is my god given right to do so because of a constition that bares very little resemblence to today’s world.

          • cougar 64

            then move your lanky bollocks over to iran or egypt.

          • Anonymous

            Your response makes no sense? Why would I move over to iran or egypt?
            Are you trying to imply that if I disagree with the 2nd amendment i should live in a country with a dictatorship? I hate to break it too you but america is not the only democracy and if you knew anything there are a lot more democracies functioning better then ours with a lot tougher gun laws.

            The constitution has been added onto an changed quite a bit so clearly it is not written in stone and there is a lot our founding father’s never knew.
            The 2nd amendment was never intended for self defense from individuals but in the second amendment they sought to guarantee to the people the right to own and bear arms if necessary against a renewal of the tryranny they had just defeated.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, there are a lot of democracies out there. Democracy is defined as the will of the majority or mob rule – the minority do not have a chance.
            The uSA has a Republican government, a form of democracy subject to the rule of law. This is supposed to guarantee that we do not have mob rule. Or another way to put it, in the uSA if two wolves and a sheep are voting on the dinner menu, the sheep is armed and therefore has a veto on a mob rule vote.

          • Anonymous

            The United States of America is not a democracy. It is a Republic. Look it up. There is a difference. Canada is a democracy.

      • While paranoia is indeed the gun salesman’s best friend, haven’t you said before that you are a gun owner?

      • Anonymous

        Apparently lots of people are sheep.

      • Anonymous

        C’mon, that’s not fair and you shouldn’t make light of peoples’ fears.

    • Anonymous

      lots of people think big brother is the problem, Who’s to argue with them.

    • cougar 64

      The government is not here to keep you safe and its not their job. That is up to each individual to keep them and their families safe. Why don’t you educate yourself by not only reading the United States Constitution, its Bill of Rights and Amendment, but also to understand what those documents mean and are saying.

      • Anonymous

        “When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty.”
        Thomas Jefferson
        True then, even far more true now.

        • I like that quote a lot. Though the vote, and not the gun, is we the people’s biggest leverage against the government. The fear is of losing re-election, not fear of being killed.

          • Anonymous

            And remember this:
            “There are five boxes to use in defense of Liberty, the Soap Box, the Mail Box, the Ballot box, the Jury Box and the Ammo Box” and should be used in that order.

      • Anonymous

        Cougar , you jumped the gun and
        You missed the target with your comment to me.
        I DID NOT say I was hoping to have big bro keep me safe.
        I know better than that.
        Please reread my closing comment above.

        I am familiar with the documents you mention and believe they are too important to be watered down and adjusted for the feelgood crowd.
        I wish some of the people in leadership positions would take the time to read them and understand them also.

        See you at the range.

      • Anonymous

        I daresay the United States Constitution has a good deal to do with this but not for the reason you think. I, too, have decided, at the age of nearly 60, to purchase a gun. I don’t worry about the government not protecting me. I worry about Barack Obama using executive fiat to take away my right to bear arms. This may sound ridiculous to you but there are millions of people who share this fear. Look at the executive orders he has written. Look at the end run his administration has done around Congress through the EPA, Department of Energy, ICE, and Homeland Security. Even if you think this is great because you are an Obama supporter, you might want to re-think applauding these moves because it’s just a matter of time before someone you don’t support, with whom you don’t agree gets elected and you then have a precedent that has been set. Things aren’t as cut and dried as they used to be. I’m not much on conspiracy theories but I think something very sinister is afoot in Barack Obama’s governance of this once great nation. I actually fear losing my liberty at this man’s hands.

        • Anonymous

          “Look at the end run his administration has done around Congress through
          the EPA, Department of Energy, ICE, and Homeland Security. Even if you
          think this is great because you are an Obama supporter, you might want
          to re-think applauding these moves because it’s just a matter of time
          before someone you don’t support, with whom you don’t agree gets elected
          and you then have a precedent that has been set.”

          100% correct. Couldn’t have said it better.

        • Anonymous

          And you are well served to harbor that fear.

  • Anonymous

    Republicans worked long an hard to make sure that “the people we don’t like” (wink wink) waited in long lines to vote on Election Day.

    But wait a few minutes extra to clear their background checks to buy a gun?

    IT’S THE END OF THE WORLD!!!!!

    Crybabies.

    Yessah

    • Anonymous

      yea and wait till Obama and the International Community takes away the right, though I doubt you will be crying. How that song go blinded by the light (Obama)

      • Anonymous

        Obama isn’t going to take away your guns.

        And there are no monsters under your bed.

        Yessah

        • Frank Church

          Re-elected Obama Pushes Anti-2nd Amendment Gun Grab

          • Guest

            The sky is not falling. Your second amendment rights are not being threatened.

          • Anonymous

            Says who?

            The National Republican Association?

            Send them more money, please! LOL.

            Yessah

        • Anonymous

          You are right they are in Washington. Funny he has not said much about Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhoods grab for power. Interesting to say the least.

    • Anonymous

      I didn’t see one mention in the article about the purchasers complaining about the wait. Just the sellers.

      • Anonymous

        Maybe that’s how the reporter wants it? You are being manipulated by the news. Believe me there were plenty of pissed people.

      • JLRLY

        HA you can’t go into a gun store without hearing complaints from purchasers about the laws regulating guns.

    • Lazerus Phoenix

      Only YOUR Federal Government would consider ‘instant’ to mean three days!

      • Anonymous

        The purpose of background checks is to make sure the buyer can legally own one – to to make to make sales “fast and furious”.

        Yessah

    • Anonymous

      Presumably, then, progressives are now as against gun-buyer ID checks as they were against voter ID checks? Or now as in favor of voter IDs as they are of gun-buyer IDs?

      • Anonymous

        Umm…when I bought my first gun and registered to vote, we did not have “photo-ID”.

        George Washington didn’t need voter ID to vote.

        Only repubicans that hate democracy want photo-ID to vote.

        Did you hear that Obama transported dozens of unknown black people to vote in rural Maine this month?

        LOL

        Yessah

        • Anonymous

          Republicans don’t “hate democracy” and I’ve had it with you libs hijacking every discussion or disagreement by accusing your detractors of being anti-gay, racist, or anti-immigrant. People who vote and are in this country illegally are breaking the law. Period. The argument that people will be prevented from legally voting is ludicrous. You get asked for an ID to board an airplane, buy booze, and even pick up some prescriptions from their physicians. “Black people” coming to Maine have nothing to do with this. It’s about enforcing the law consistently, across-the-board. You can’t cherry pick laws and decide which ones you’ll obey and which ones you won’t. If you don’t like the immigration law, work to change it, not cheat it.

          • Guest

            We are tired of you people thinking the world is ending and that the poor and the liberals are the reason behind it.
            It sounds like you are pi$$ed because what you wanted wasn’t what so many others didn’t.
            Yes tea publicans only like the laws that serve them best.

          • Anonymous

            These folks are really struggling with the fact that soon, white males will be the largest minority in this country. The right sees this, along with a black president as a threat to their grip on power. I truly believe this is the driving force behind the hatred of Obama. The fact is, these same folks were never going to give 0bama a chance regardless and are making baseless claims against him. Obama has been somewhat of a disappointment as president, but he is not the devil that he is portrayed to be. Conspiracy theories, like him coming for our guns just feeds the paranoia machine. Please accept the fact that the world is changing, Reagan is not coming back from the dead, and Obama is not going to initiate the repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

    • Anonymous

      The Republicans were not the ones behind the 140% – 151% voter registration above the population. Nor were the Republicans behind those precincts in Ohio where Romney did not get one vote. Can you say “stolen election”?

  • Lazerus Phoenix

    Anyone surprised? This is how obama (America’s best gun salesman) intends to curtail sales.

    Before the election, Walmart in Ellsworth was lucky to sell one gun a week. Right after the election they were selling 7-8 a day! Now they are doing about 5 a day! Thank you obama!!!!!!!!!!

    • Anonymous

      A new spin of the right wing BS that Obama wants to take away our guns. Can’t you come up with something original, and maybe based on at least some fact?

      • Anonymous

        Doesn’t matter. This is not the same country with the same value system of even a decade ago.

        Its all been redefined.

        Success is failure.

        Taxpayers don’t pay enough.

        People who don’t pay tax are victims.

        Druggies are state/city funded.

        Employers are exploiters.

        Private property owners are thieves.

        Poor are victims of the rich.

        IMO. The loonies run the asylum.

        Why wouldn’t a person stick a gun in the closet?

          • Anonymous

            First, in 1960 the 91% rate applied to the portion of non-exempted
            income exceeding $400,000. In today’s dollars, that would be equivalent
            to a married couple making more than $3 million.

            In 1960 a person making $4,000 had an effective tax rate of 20%.
            Do you suggest that now? Today a family of 4 needs to make about $35k give or take in order to pay ANY income taxes.

            In 1960 there were so many deductions and exemptions even people making
            far above that $400k rarely paid at the 91%. In fact you had to be
            really stupid to pay that much.

            Your race baiting doesn’t deserve a response. It really doesn’t.

          • Ah, the last frame wasn’t a dig at you personally, that was a dig at the “champion” of traditional American stuff, Mr O’Reilly. No offense intended.

            The point is, there has been no seismic shift. You are greatly exaggerating, just as the lefties greatly exaggerated when Bush won re-election and what it supposedly meant for the country.

            Taxes for the lower and middle classes have remained fairly level, while taxes for the highest income earners have plummeted since the so-called best generation.

            http://www.mymoneyblog.com/images/0901/nyt_tax.gif

          • Anonymous

            I expect there is no reason for a point counterpoint here. Suffice it to say there is a large percentage of the population that does believe there has been a seismic shift. IMO Only a lefty-type wouldn’t recognize it.

          • No need for a counterpoint because your argument has more holes than swiss cheesecake? :)

            I’m not a lefty type really. I’m a fiscal moderate and not at all partisan. I dislike the Republicans more admittedly, because in so many ways they’ve gone off the deep end (hence why the election went the way it did.) Though I’m driven by facts and pragmatism, not wild speculation. If it gives you comfort to make such statements, by all means do so, though stating it doesn’t make it fact.

          • Anonymous

            I understand how you lefties define “fiscal moderate”. It is some variation of we will tax everyone as much as we can so we can spend as much as we can and pretend to balance the budget.

            No holes in my argument, just not enough time in the day to explain the errors of your way.

          • Tax everyone as much as we can? Where have I suggested such a thing? For instance, I believe the current proposal to keep the Bush cuts in place for all but the highest earners is common sense compromise that just about everyone but the far left and far right can agree to. If the GOP is about everyone and not just the wealthy, they will jump at this chance. If they are, as many say, slaves to the 1%, they will refuse it. What do you think they’ll do?

            I would love to see more restraint on spending, particularly in regards to “defense” spending, though also in social spending, where possible. Your presumptions, just because I am not part of the doom and gloom set, are misplaced.

          • Anonymous

            I expect I get that from the BDN editorial that claimed to be fiscally moderate while wishing to raise every tax that came down the pike.

            Whenever someone says they are fiscally moderate the image of balancing a budget on the backs of the taxpayer come to mind.

          • Anonymous

            If that family of four is a married couple with two children under 17 the income at which they start paying income tax is higher than $35K. At $40,000 they paid no income tax and received a check for $2,543 in 2010. In 2001 they paid federal income tax of $1,924.

          • Anonymous

            That $2,543 is likely about the same as their fica/medicare contribution as well.

          • Anonymous

            You folks have a problem with math?

            The fica/medicare contribution for $40k is $1460 for the employee. If we assume the number Billy provided is accurate… that family of 4 took $1,083 more in a “refund” than they contributed in taxes including Fica/Medicare.

        • Anonymous

          Excellent!

      • Lazerus Phoenix

        You need to expand your world! obama has made no attempt at hiding the fact he wants to ban guns. He’s said so openly his entire political career. He even said so again on the last debate!

        This is what happens when you blindly follow The Messiah without really listening to what he is saying! For me and most on here, words from his own lips ARE facts!

        Or are you saying obama is lying?

        • Anonymous

          Show me one bill Obama has introduced to ban guns. You need to expand your world and stop listening to the right wing pundits who are almost always lying. Stop believing the BS from the NRA. BTW, I am a gun owner so don’t try to paint me as anti-gun. I am anti-right wing BS. For four years the right has been making their claims, and the only result has been higher gun prices, making it harder for gun owners to buy.

          • Anonymous

            Yep because we are packing em away.

          • Anonymous

            I’m still waiting for someone to show me one bill Obama has offered that restricts guns or wants to take them away.

          • Anonymous

            Nothing yet, but the attitude of his supporters indicate something could happen in the second term. After all Obama has not made clear his second term agenda yet.

    • Anonymous

      Please tell me of any new laws the obama has signed for more gun control.

      • Anonymous

        how about the new treaty being worked out. Oh right you guys never hear about those things.

        • I heard a few days ago that the US military was being signed over to the UN. It was on the internet, so it has to be true.

          • cougar 64

            the united states military was signed over to the united nations under the watchful eye of president clinton.

            why dont you read “freedom from war – the united states program for general and complete disarmament in a peaceful world” written by the united states state department in september 1961.

            go visit the united nations office for disarmament affairs website to obtain all that information about the upcoming ban on all small arms and ammunition. that alone is a complete violation of our 2nd amendment.

          • Anonymous

            If you do a little more research you will find that a treaty can not over ride the US Constitution. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

          • The NRA is opposed to it because the NRA is heavily involved in the gun sales business – they’ve essentially become lobbyists for the gun manufacturers (under the guise of 2nd amendment and freedom! ™ ). So, of course they are making noise, and all their dutiful members are clucking too. But no, 2nd amendment rights will certainly not be compromised.

            “We seek a treaty that contributes to
            international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and
            proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct
            legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been
            articulating throughout,” the official said.

            “We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms,” he said.

          • Anonymous

            You are absolutely correct. That is why I, as a gun owner, will never support the NRA. They are less interested in protecting the 2nd amendment than in protecting the gun manufacturers. This is why they have continually spread the lie that democrats are against guns.

          • Anonymous

            YGTBSM!

          • Anonymous

            who is the “he” who said that?

          • It is an unnamed US official, per the following Reuters story:
            http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-arms-treaty-un-idUSBRE8A627J20121107

            It’s essentially a reiteration of what’s been said all along. Of course others have different interpretations…though best to make your own conclusions.
            http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/61/89&Lang=E

          • Anonymous

            Thanks!

          • cougar 64

            read article 2, section 2 of the united states constitution; He (the president) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; all treaties must be ratified by the senate.

          • Anonymous

            What is your point? A treaty can not over ride the US Constitution, period.

          • cougar 64

            bollocks! a treaty can override the united states constitution as long as it is ratified by the senate.

          • Anonymous

            Unfortunately you are incorrect! This is why we must firmly resist any attempt in the new senate to abolish the filibuster. We must preserve the ability to resist cutting off debate with less than 60 votes!

          • Anonymous

            The Senate can ratify a treaty. Neither house of Congress, nor the President, can over ride (read amend) the Constitution. It takes 3/4 of the states to change the Constitution. Any one who believes a treaty can amend or over ride the US Constitution is just demonstrating their ignorance. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the country, period.
            You need to actually read article 2, section 2. No where does it state the treaty amends the Constitution. It only delineates the power of the President and Senate to make treaties.
            Read article 5 on how the Constitution gets amended.

          • Anonymous

            Thanks! I most certainly hope that you are correct. However, has the SCOTUS ever ruled on this specific question? After the SCOTUS ruling on the ACA, I would not be sure of anything!

          • Anonymous

            Yes, the Supreme Court has issued a number of rulings that confirmed the supremacy of the Constitution. You will have to do a google search such as “US Constitution supremacy” to find out the details. You can start with article 6 which dealt with the its supremacy, and treaties and laws derived under its authority, over state constitutions and laws.
            The ACA was ruled constitutional because they determined it is a tax. To me it is a question of semantics, but it has legal consequences.

          • Anonymous

            Thanks again!

          • Ah yes, the military is under the command of the UN and has been since Clinton. Thank you friend, I am now enlightened.

          • Anonymous

            But remember Abraham Lincoln’s warning: “Do not believe everything you find on the Internet!”

          • Lincoln was a wise man. :D

          • Anonymous

            LOL!

            Good One!!

        • Anonymous

          Yes – the Black Helicopters have landed and the Blue Helmets are running amok grabbing guns!!!!

          The remake of Red Dawn is coming soon!

          Back to the X-box!!!!

          Yessah

          • Anonymous

            sarcasm can be such a blight to seriousness.

      • Lazerus Phoenix

        He couldn’t in his first term, and openly said so! Ask that again in 4 years and see what the answer is (since you obviously haven’t been paying attention)!

        • Anonymous

          Well said!

  • Anonymous

    Gun shopping on Black Friday? I wonder how many people were doing that before lining up for the cheap TVs?

    • cougar 64

      having a firearm is an individual right and having a firearm will provide me with food whereas the t.v. nothing but worthless junk.

  • Anonymous

    Get your gunns before Obama and the International Community takes away your rights.

    • Anonymous

      The sky is falling, the sky is falling. I don’t care for oboma, but lets stick to the facts please.

      • Anonymous

        The facts on the new Treaty being worked on. Yea we know.

    • Anonymous

      Les than 12 hours after winning the election, Obama was signing onto the United Nations gun ban. This is his first step.

      • Anonymous

        First step was people re-electing Obama. Seems the Muslim Brotherhood is doing well in Egypt. Where too next.

      • Anonymous

        Absolutely correct! But you won’t convince the “believers” who are posting on this thread! They, like Jim Jones followers in Guinea, will continue to believe – until they taste the cool Aid!

    • You really believe 2nd amendment rights will be challenged, don’t you bruce? I suppose actually taking a look at what the nefarious UN resolution is about (the international illegal arms trade) would be too much to ask. Yep, Obama is coming fer yer guns and he wants yer tin foil too buddy.

      • Lazerus Phoenix

        Will you still be laughing when they come to take YOUR guns?

        • No, but I will laugh when 2016 comes around and Americans still have their 2nd amendment rights, the nation’s economy hasn’t collapsed among all the other absurd claims people are making that won’t come to pass. ;}

          • Anonymous

            When government run economies collapse, they do it quickly. The government run-share of the economy has grown quite a bit in the last four years.

            Healthcare, Finance, Automobiles, Student loans, 99% of Home mortgages… all grown in the last four years. Add to that Government spending in excess of 40% of GDP

            It may not collapse by 2016 but at sometime the weight will be too much.

          • Well, that’s a reasonable answer. Though surely you’ve seen some of the predictions from other righties (to use your terminology), that have suggested a much more dire and immediate meltdown. I’ve heard 2013 is the year we should expect to start living in a post apocalypse style world. What would you say to such a prediction?

          • Anonymous

            I would only say that I believe 2013 will be a tough year. My business always sees a fall off in the year after a Presidential election. The reason? I think government spends a lot more in election years to give the impression that the economy is doing better and that aids re-election.

            We should probably watch the stock market… We are in an asset bubble created by the Federal Reserve.. bubbles burst… no signs yet… but bubbles always burst and there were not any signs of the housing bubble or tech bubble bursting either.

            When the stock markets falls get ready for very high unemployment.

            Just signs on the horizon.

          • As they say, I suppose we shall see. I’ve never thought that we were out of the woods and that a few more years of stagnation may be our destiny, though an economy as large and resilient as ours just simply won’t go the way of Greece as I’ve heard I don’t know how many times.

      • JLRLY

        Sad-statute…. gun rights were challenged in DC. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. Both of Obama’s appointed Justices (Kagan and Sotomayor) believe that we do not have an individual right to bear arms like the constitution says. They would prefer to lay a groundwork for state by state firearm bans like the unconstitutional bans in Chicago DC, NYC, etc. For a gun owner you really are clueless about the threat to your rights. You’re like an author who doesn’t realize that his rights to free speech are being attacked in court on a daily basis by appointed judges who are hostile to your rights.

        • Anonymous

          brendan,

          you have it wrong. gun rights were not challenged in Heller or MacDonald. those cases overturned the decisions and laws which originally abrogated the 2nd amendment.

          and when you throw in the newly reaffirmed right to carry in national parks, all the paranoid talk about abridged rights and ceded jurisdiction to the U.N. makes me wonder if perhaps more tin foil isn’t needed for the hat.

          • JLRLY

            “gun rights were not challenged in Heller or MacDonald” No I have it right. They were 5-4 decisions. The fact that four justices challenged the second amendment is very bad,. Two cases is not a strong enough precedent to protect against a complete reversal with another far left anti-second amendment Justice on the court. The dissenting opinions made it very clear that if they had their way the second amendment would not be an incorporated right like the other individual rights.

        • I support all constitutional rights, though I’ve never been a gun owner. The brady bill and other common sense checks sit fine by me, though I don’t believe any law abiding citizen should be denied their right to own a gun.

          I’m certain there are some in the US that would like to institute European style controls, though the overwhelming majority do not – and there are no serious movements that will put the right at risk.

    • Anonymous

      A perfect example why we need literacy tests to buy guns.

      Yessah

      • Lazerus Phoenix

        AND TO VOTE! That alone would disqualify half the obama voters!

        • Anonymous

          Why stop at half?

      • Anonymous

        I am glad I never said I was perfect.

  • Ben Hutchins

    … and that has what to do with the FBI’s phone system being overloaded?

    • I think he’s just suggesting that an ultrasound be performed before one is allowed to buy a gun? Maybe? :P

      • Anonymous

        I’m a she. And yes I agree with the ultrasound idea.

        • Being penetrated by an ultrasound wand would certainly deter gun sales! Bend over big boy, we gotta check your prostate before you can get that Beretta you want so bad. :D

    • Anonymous

      Lots, you are naively being manipulated. You have bought into the argument that waiting periods should only be around for buying a gun ( a constitutional right) but the government should mind its business on everything else. So what if a woman wants to destroy a human life, It has become a badge of honor to have an abortion in our culture. At one time someone would have felt same for doing something so awful. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfgq7WiHbh4

      • Ben Hutchins

        a) I never said Thing #1 about agreeing or disagreeing with gun purchase waiting periods; b) this article has nothing whatsoever to do with anything else you are talking about; and c) that “badge of honor” thing is batcrap crazytalk on top of being completely irrelevant to the matter at hand, which was a minor inconvenience for a handful of people on one day. Not exactly the end of human freedom as we have come to understand it.

        I’m not sure whether you need to increase or decrease the voltage, but some adjustment clearly needs to be made, because it’s not workin’.

  • Good I’m glad less people will have guns

    • Ryan Robbins

      Yep because the people that buy guns the right way and go through the process are usually the criminals.

    • Lazerus Phoenix

      Than you should be very frightened to know they all will get their purchases, it will just take a little more time.

      Quiver in fear and dread!

  • Anonymous

    Who are all these fools that want a registered gun? They will come after them eventually!! (I know, you say they won’t!)

  • Anonymous

    you mean the end of the baby. They don’t want facts, just destroy.

  • Anonymous

    Who cares. Buy your gun tomorrow.

  • Rob Grant

    Cry some more !! If they want to buy a gun and they are legal to do so a few days wait won’t stop them… Crying and whining over nothing… Greedy as hell…

  • Anonymous

    Get Big Republican Government out of women’s wombs.

    Yessah

    • Anonymous

      Yep. Get big Democratic Government out of my healthcare and hands off my body.

      Yessah

    • Lazerus Phoenix

      YEA! That’s the job of democrats!

    • Anonymous

      The government didn’t get her pregnant. We answer in the end to God not the government.

  • And so it begins!

  • JohnR

    “Most potential buyers who went away empty-handed from Buyers and Van
    Raymond on Friday can return………..”

    Okay now how would you feel if one of those buyers was someone intent on harming another person then it would not feel so bad if they had to wait a day or two to calm down would it. People need to come back to reality NO ONE is trying to take away guns from anyone that has a right to own one.

    • Lazerus Phoenix

      SO, by your reasoning, that one demented person, pent on doing harm, picked the busiest shopping day of the year to go out, stand in line, fill out all the federal paperwork, wait for the background check, just to get a gun and run right out and shoot someone! Really?

      You really came up with that scenario all by yourself?

      • JohnR

        Question for you, is there a waiting period for rifles or shotguns? As far as I know you can walk in and walk out with a rifle or shotgun same day in most cases. So the only thing this delayed was the background check, it had nothing to do with the waiting period. My Gawd if you need the gun that badly go pick up an Uncle Henrys or look in the paper.

  • Anonymous

    There’s no good reason that purchasers cannot wait for background checks to be completed. I’m sure no self respecting gun owner wishes firearms to end up in the wrong hands.

    • Lazerus Phoenix

      No, we don’t. But we WOULD like the National Instant Check System to work like the name implies – INSTANT! As it’s currently implemented, they have 3 days for the ‘instant’ check. Only the Feds could define ‘instant’ as taking 3 days!

      You really want this kind of inefficiency running YOUR healthcare?!

      “Yes Mr. Badactor, you can see a doctor, but you must wait 2 more weeks because we have an unforeseen back-up in the system. If you are seriously ill, a short 2 weeks shouldn’t be problem, right? If we are able to get to you sooner, and you are still alive, you MIGHT be notified”

      • Anonymous

        A.m. Superior, you are guilty of wishful thinking.

        Your position is alarmist. All systems experience less than optimal performance from time to time. That’s just a fact of life. Get over it.

        When have you ever been told to wait three days for medical treatment? If you were truly in need of emergency care, you would receive it. Of course our current health care system is overloaded by patients and staffed by doctor shortages. I expect to make appointments to see physicians.

        Why interject health care into a firearm discussion? Whiner.

      • Anonymous

        The primary purpose of background checks is to make sure the buyer can legally own a gun.

        That they do well.

        Background checks are designed not to make gun purchases “fast” or “convenient”.

        Furthermore, background checks should be applied to ALL gun sales – including private person-to-person.

        After all – the primary source of guns for criminals begins with the “law abiding” gun owner.

        We need to make sure they only sell to other “law abiders”.

        Stop the straw buyers and sellers.

        Stop the violence.

        Yessah

  • Anonymous

    Government restricting legal commerce by over regulation.

    • Anonymous

      …because insane people purchased guns legally and then committed crimes or negligently allowed them to injure.

      these onerous regulations which prevent you purchasing guns by the gross from your local convenience store were put in place legally by our elected representatives as a response to several specific high profile incidents.

      the laws concerning gun ownership and sales are a direct reflection of our democratic system at work. if you would like to live in a less regulated country, flights are leaving BIA everyday for places like Somalia and Libya … you won’t find much government regulation in those places, in fact no government. you should love it.

      oh, bring your guns. in those places you’ll actually need them.

      • Anonymous

        I was implying the Government is manipulating the program to interfere with legitimate sales. Boy, talk about going off the deep end…….

  • AGENDA 21

  • Anonymous

    I can’t wait until the same government is running our healthcare…

    • It ought to be a real show!

    • ARE INSURANCE COMPANIES BETTER?

    • Anonymous

      I know, the Govt couldnt even run a yard sale and make money..

  • Anonymous

    I was wondering why I was feeling a bit safer early Friday morning…fewer guns out and about.

  • Guest

    Sounds like a conspiracy against gun owners……. sure.
    Big deal, a few people had to wait another day.

    • which part of “shall not be infringed” dont you understand?

      • Guest

        No one is being infringed upon. Wait until it’s up and running and go buy your gun. I’m not anti gun, just anti doom and gloom theories and spiel being spread here.
        No one is abusing your right.

        • Guest

          It’s a glitch that was intermittent. Big deal.

        • If you’re a law abiding citizen and you are denied a firearm purchase…YOUR RIGHTS HAVE BEEN INFRINGED!

          • Guest

            You can buy one today! It was a temporary thing!
            YOUR RIGHTS WERE NOT HURT!!!!

          • Anonymous

            WAH WAH WAH !! NOT A CRISIS !!!

          • JohnR

            Law abiding citizens don’t have this conversation……
            “Stevey__Dee • 16 hours ago
            Easy
            way around the back ground check is to buy a 80% finished lower
            reciever, just got mine finished for my AR-15….. Totally
            unregistered….
            Bill Peters to Stevey__Dee • 16 hours ago
            Got a website?…thats a good idea!”
            Ps You will never be able to sell these guns minus the serial numbers don’tcha know. Also if any LEO ever check this gun without serial numbers you know they will confiscate it to see if it was stolen or altered, this sounds like a retards way to avoid paperwork and end up with a much bigger headache. LOL! I am all for owning guns just not having BATF beating down my door for such a stupid omission. Now that we know Mr Bill Peters and Stevey Dee are probably wanna bee survivalists, I can just imagine they are now on some watch list somewhere. ROFLMAO @ the stupidity of announcing your plans. Good ones guys way to keep it hush hush…………….

          • Anonymous

            I see, another anti-gun wack job….

        • I think Bill wants them in vending machines.

  • Anonymous

    When a consumer applies for credit at a retail establishment, the customer’s information is entered into a computer. Once the “apply” icon is clicked….within a few nano seconds the approve or disapprove is received.
    Another example of government efficiency…stay on hold loose slaes and profits

  • Anonymous

    Easy way around the back ground check is to buy a 80% finished lower reciever, just got mine finished for my AR-15….. Totally unregistered….

    • Anonymous

      SSSsshhhhh!!!

      • Anonymous

        LOL, the anti-gun nuts will be mad….:)

        • JohnR

          Yeah I laugh that you needed a jig, shows what kind of gunsmith you would be.

          • Anonymous

            You havent a clue do you..The jig aids in how much metal has to be removed for the triger pieces….

          • JohnR

            So you spent what 300 bucks for a jig that wouldn’t be necessary if you knew how to properly measure and set up equipment, and you say I haven’t got a clue? LOL! I’ll match my machining and toolmaking skills against yours any day. But no jigs allowed ok????

          • Anonymous

            Did I say I spent 300 bucks for a jig?? A little different milling off a drill press. buddy… Back wood stuff…. You are barking up the wrong tree here…

    • Got a website?…thats a good idea!

      • Anonymous

        I would have to search, we bought 5 80% lowers at $109.00 each……Then we chipped in for a jig and finished milling ourselves….

    • Anonymous

      All the cool criminals know that trick – thanks for sharing!

      Yessah

      • Anonymous

        Criminasl steal guns, they dont buy them…

        • Anonymous

          Yes they do – straw buyers purchase them and sell them to criminals in unregulated no-background-check “private sales”.

          All the cool criminals know that trick too.

          Yessah

          • Anonymous

            Fo Sho….

  • Anonymous

    Personally I’m glad the guns didn’t sell. That means less guns on the streets and less crime. Think of the lives saved…god bless

    • Criminals dont get the backround checks….Law Abiding Citizens Do! So how is there “less crime”?

      • Anonymous

        because criminals steal guns from homes and when less homes have guns less guns get stolen from homes?

        just my guess as to the “logic’ involved there. not my personal opinion.

        • Anonymous

          Criminals will get guns no matter what…..Never will stop them.

          • Anonymous

            When times get tough they can get them from the DEA.

      • Anonymous

        they how to guns get in the wrong hands hmmmm?

  • Anonymous

    “Lozier… said the
    outages cost him at least half a dozen customers…”

    not really. those customers did not go somewhere else and buy the gun. the system was down for everyone. if they really needed and wanted the gun they’ll be back when the system is up again.

  • Anonymous

    Thankfully we didn’t lose ANY sales as the sales we had were Black Friday mark downs on a the Youth 410 single Shot Break Down Shotgun (99.00) , The Pistle Grip 12 Gauge Home Defense Pump Shotgun(18 1/2 inch barrel)(169.00) and The Ruger American Rifle (in many calibers)(327.00) and I had the customer just put them on layaway to get the price..They will ALL be “on the street” by Sunday…LOL…

    • Anonymous

      Good deal…Glad you sold some guns, the American way…

  • Anonymous

    I love reading the comments from the anti-gun fruit cakes, dont take much to get them stirred up….Some people see a gun and they cower……Scares them stiff..

  • Anonymous

    Obama’s attack on the 2nd amendment has started!

    • Guest

      Keep spinning those tall tales. More right wing spin on a treaty that won’t affect your second amendment right.
      pfffttt.

  • Anonymous

    call your US Rep or Senator and complain…totally unnecessary in this day and age

  • Anonymous

    in texas it was down for us at texasgunblog.com but those with valid texas concealed handgun licenses still got to leave with their firearm purchases as we are not required to call nics when the customer has a valid CHL

  • Anonymous

    For those who doubt Omama wishes to disarm the American people One simply has to listen to what he has said. Unless you think Bush was pulling string to make him say what he has said of course.

    That aside Omama and the fear of what he may do based on what he has said drove firearm sales the first time he got elected and this time being his last possible term has drove sales WAY up….

    He stated CLEARLY doing the debates he supported a stricter Clinton type ban. In the next breath he says his home town of Chicago was not effected by those “assult weapons” but by handguns. As we all know the clinton ban did NOTHING to prevent crime.

    For those who think making laws pertaining to ownership of firearms prevent crime I point you two read two things. First the FBI crime statics by state then go read the Brady bunches website by state. The states Brady says have the best gun laws have the highest crime rates amazingly enough the state that put little or no restrictions on the peoples right to bear arms have the lowest..

  • Anonymous

    I see Johnny cakes wins the award as the biggest whiner of this thread, he must be missing Veto….. Always have a anti-gun fruitcake get spooled up….

You may also like