A couple days ago, ed good made the claim that I am an anti-gun mole. That's a pretty interesting charge coming from someone who frequently comes here to tell us how he personally believes that our own Right to Keep and Bear Arms should be restricted, and how he feels that extreme Anti-Gun politicians should be elected to high office in the U.S.

It is tedious and time consuming to go back through old threads to keep track of his anti-gun rhetoric, so I am beginning this thread as a convenient one-stop online archive of ed good's anti-gun statements. Please feel free to add any that I might miss. Once they are here, he can't go back and delete them and pretend that he supports the Second Amendment.

Post # 400299

Post # 400300

Post # 400310

Post # 400316

Thanks ed. If Obama, Joe Biden, or Michael Bloomberg typed in all lower case letters, we might think these words came from them. We have plenty of laws to keep guns out of the wrong hands. For those of us who are law abiding citizens, we have the Second Amendment, and do not wish to discuss your idiotic notions that it is subject to any further infringement by you or anyone else.

Oh yes, I don't want to forget to include anti-hunting and pro-PETA posts by ed good, since most of us use firearms to hunt wild game. Dedicated anti-gunners will attack any and all uses of guns whether it be for recreation, sport hunting, or personal defense.

we law abiding citizens are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms, as per the second amendment to the u.s. constitution...

however, long standing laws at the local, state and federal level do restrict and prohibit our right to keep and bear certain classes of arms.

if society, via our law makers, deem it necessary to restrict or prohibit our possession of certain classes of arms, then every good citizen should obey the law for the good of the majority.

and if some here wish to discuss further restriction and prohibition of certain classes of arms here, then why not?

what are you afraid of?

and for those who argue there should be no restriction or prohibition of any class of arms, anywhere...well that is a rather selfish, self focused and unrealistic view, in my opinion.

they ignore the rights of others in our society who may hold views different than there own; plus they ignore the advances in weapons technology and proliferation in recent years.

to claim that the second amendment is an unalienable right is one thing... but to claim the second amendment guarantees our right to possess any arm we want is delusional?

and to demonize here those who wish to discuss controversial topics here, is a weak attempt at demagoguery.

some here are hung up on the interpretation of the second amendment.

a review of the interpretation of the first amendment seems to be in order.

lets start with this:

Justice Louis Brandeis wrote several dissents in the 1920s upholding free speech claims. here is one:

" Those who won our independence ... believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government."

Good thread,
the solution is to ignore his babble-he has mental issues and need the "attention" of the internet.
I do agree he Ed Good,is antigun-perhaps that helps explain his "flawed" (non compliant ) business model-sell tarted up guns to pro gun buyers,taking advantage of "newbies" and scare them away ?
Bloomberg would be happy with the plan!

did i say the word demagoguery?

look what surfaced...works better than a crow call...

and least others forget, 1535 and counting...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewUserFeedback.aspx?User=128526

plus, now that spring is in the air, new consignment inventory is coming in...take a look...

I hate to admit it but a week or two ago while looking at the Gunbroker site, I saw a gun that I could refinish into nice shooter and fill a space in my safe.
Sent a couple emails asking about the gun...and never got a answer.
After seeing these past posts by Mr. Good, I feel that I must thank him for not answering.
I would much rather spend my money, someplace else.



.

"After seeing these past posts by Mr. Good, I feel that I must thank him for not answering.
I would much rather spend my money, someplace else."

thankfully many others do the same,a "search" on any of the common search engines reveals his anti gun,anti hunt and anti sanityrants.

'Any' huh ed, that's whole lot of them, eh. What's left to discuss when you selfishly and unrealistically fabricate a boogey man that does not exist. Don't attempt demagoguery, respect hobbies.

gee gary, my new undesirable buyer blocking software must be working.

you must have less than 10 positive feedbacks on gunbroker?

if you like, pm me your gunbroker user name and i may email you a one time access code.

Ed Good in the rip off stories thread :

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=366710&page=6

another customer taken by ed;

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=348207&Searchpage=6&Main=30460&Words=%2Bfriend+%2Bed+%2Bagain&Search=true#Post348207

maybe we should post some of those deceptive adds with the action still partially open to make it look like the lever is still right of center-here is a new fuzzy attempt ;

No thank you Sir, no need for a one time access code.





.

what kind of tools were used by the blind man on this "restoration",a butter knife and a mallet,nope I bet its a can opener and rock ?Check out the rib extension, thats the Ed Good tightening method,pound the crap out of it till its stops wiggling-then sell it fast.

Aww, come on Dave, you know you can't make the rib extension look right when you're trying to make the top lever stay to the right!...Geo

dave k: please do provide us with more info...

like where did you get these pictures?

especially when your holding the camera with one hand trying to keep the lever to the right and not let the gun close all the way with the other.
He must not have ANY friends to help him

So fancy work on that second one,he will be along to blame Landers, the lighting ,the second amendment supporter or me shortly (but I won't see it as he is on ignore !)

without specific reference, none us here know nor care what you malcontents are talking about...

I see exactly what they are talking about. And you do too.

I think ed might be a Buddhist. And I think ed might believe he is PT Barnum, reincarnated.

But the First Amendment was to prohibit the Central government from prohibiting speech. This BBS is private property, owned by Dave Weber. Should Dave decide to delete every post you ever made here he would not be violating the First Amendment.

And if you showed up at my house with a gun and I told you you couldn't come in my house with that gun I wouldn't be violating the Second Amendment. Because I am not the central government. The Bill of Rights was written to protect citizens from the central government. A later amendment, enacted after the civil war, wound extending the Bill of Rights down to the state level. Giving citizens the same protections from the state government. Was it the Fourteenth Amendment? But since Dave and I aren't central or state governments in either example we would not be violating the Bill of Rights.

Keith quotes you earlier in this thread about semiautos. So tell us, are you advocating restrictions of semiauto pistols or semiauto rifles or semiauto shotguns? Or all three?

well, sorry, i do not know where the pictures came from nor do i know what the questions are...nor do i care.

et tu mikie?

now, i find these pictures far more interesting...

http://www.rantsports.com/clubhouse/2013...medium=Referral

here is the great "it works for me" return policy

Another bad deal from Ed Good exposed !

"This was posted recently on another forum that I browse.

"posted 12 December 2013 23:52
If you're into older SxS shotguns, I have a head's up. Ed Good in NH is an appraiser, and lists many older classic SxS shotguns on Gun Broker. I bought a vintage SxS from this company, but when I mounted the barrels, they were loose. I tried to return it, but was told that since the action is tight when the forend is attached, it is "shootable", and no return would be accepted. The forend is a part of the action's lock-up (???). I sent him several articles on checking a SxS for wear looseness just as I had done, and he said that was a matter of opinion. I wouldn't be surprised if most of his listings are beater guns, waiting for sale with no chance of return, to become someone else's headache. Steer clear.

Posts: 8161 | Registered: 14 June 2009"

and who posted it, when and where?

you and harry reid seem to use the same tactics to deceive and misinform.

shame on you and him...or are you one in the same?

and here is the truth, again...1535 and counting...


http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewUserFeedback.aspx?User=128526

many new items recently listed on gunbroker. take a look.

and den der is dis...



http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/sports/...ntcmp=obnetwork

ed I'll I tell you what. I'll make you a $100 wager. If those pictures didn't come from one of your gun ads I will make a $100 donation to Dave. If they did come from your ads you make a $100 donation to Dave.

I checked the donor list and you aren't on there. I am sure you meant to donate and it just slipped your mind. Here is your chance to put things right.

mikie: they may have come from my ads or they may not. if they did, why is it so difficult for those who posted the pictures to give us a reference and if they have interest in purchasing the items, then why not contact me via the appropriate venue and ask their questions.

anything else is just mean spirited personal attacks for no good purpose...

and then there is this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteveryt...say-about-them/

What is the 1535 number ed? Is that the number of times you have posted anti-2nd Amendment bullshit? Or is that the number of times you supported anti-gun politicians?

If that number is GunBroker feedback, I hope you cherish it. Do you really think many, if any, of those customers would have bid on a gun being sold by an anti-gun gun dealer? You and I both know they wouldn't. But now, thanks to you being so open about your real attitudes toward gun ownership, many will know.

Thanks for cutting your own throat ed. Thanks for all your help, and thanks for adding even more proof that you think the 2nd Amendment should be restricted and infringed upon. Maybe you should sue yourself for screwing up your own business and your own reputation with your own words. What a complete idiot.

we law abiding citizens are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms, as per the second amendment to the u.s. constitution...

however, long standing laws at the local, state and federal level do restrict and prohibit our right to keep and bear certain classes of arms.

if society, via our law makers, deem it necessary to restrict or prohibit our possession of certain classes of arms, then every good citizen should obey the law for the good of the majority.

and if some here wish to discuss further restriction and prohibition of certain classes of arms here, then why not?

what are you afraid of?

and for those who argue there should be no restriction or prohibition of any class of arms, anywhere...well that is a rather selfish, self focused and unrealistic view, in my opinion.

they ignore the rights of others in our society who may hold views different than there own; plus they ignore the advances in weapons technology and proliferation in recent years.

to claim that the second amendment is an unalienable right is one thing... but to claim the second amendment guarantees our right to possess any arm we want is delusional?

and to demonize here those who wish to discuss controversial topics here, is a weak attempt at demagoguery.

ed I'll I tell you what. I'll make you a $100 wager. If those pictures didn't come from one of your gun ads I will make a $100 donation to Dave. If they did come from your ads you make a $100 donation to Dave.

I checked the donor list and you aren't on there. I am sure you meant to donate and it just slipped your mind. Here is your chance to put things right.

some here are hung up on the interpretation of the second amendment.

a review of the interpretation of the first amendment seems to be in order.

lets start with this:

Justice Louis Brandeis wrote several dissents in the 1920s upholding free speech claims. here is one:

" Those who won our independence ... believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government."

mikie: are we havin fun yet?

So, again I ask you.

Do you want to restrict semiauto pistols, semiauto rifles, semiauto shotguns, or all three?

ah, at last a real question...

assuming this is a genuine effort on your part to have a respectful adult conversation, lets give it a try...

i am not sure. lets discuss the pros and cons...

first we need to agree on the goal of restricting certain classes of firearms.

mine is to reduce the misuse of firearms.

seems like the most prevalent misuses of firearms involves semi automatic hand guns? do you agree?

What is the 1535 number ed? Is that the number of times you have posted anti-2nd Amendment bullshit? Or is that the number of times you supported anti-gun politicians?

If that number is GunBroker feedback, I hope you cherish it. Do you really think many, if any, of those customers would have bid on a gun being sold by an anti-gun gun dealer? You and I both know they wouldn't. But now, thanks to you being so open about your real attitudes toward gun ownership, many will know.

Thanks for cutting your own throat ed. Thanks for all your help, and thanks for adding even more proof that you think the 2nd Amendment should be restricted and infringed upon. Maybe you should sue yourself for screwing up your own business and your own reputation with your own words. What a complete idiot.

well now keith, the 1535 number is my total number of feedbacks on gunbroker, since i first registered there in 2001.

so, lets see what happens this 2015 selling season, shall we?

an by the way, have you ever sold anything to anyone anywhere?

do you have a gunbroker account? if so, what is your feed back record?

A good place to start would be for you to tell us which semiautos you want more restrictions on. For the third time, what class of semi-autos do you propose to restrict further. Pistols, rifles, shotguns? All three?

well mikie, this is not going well already...

like i said above, i dont know what additional firearms restrictions i would support.

what do you think should be done to reduce the number of incidents involving the misuse of firearms?

ed you are the one advocating more restrictions on semautos. Why don't you tell us what you think might work? I don't believe any gun law will stop the thugs from using guns on each other and us. More gun laws might effectively disarm the honest citizens, as those laws did in New York City, where it is about impossible to get a concealed carry permit in order to actually bear an arm.

well, ok, let me put out this idea...

amend the gun control act of 1934 to include semi automatic handguns?

what do you think?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act

What is the 1535 number ed? Is that the number of times you have posted anti-2nd Amendment bullshit? Or is that the number of times you supported anti-gun politicians?

If that number is GunBroker feedback, I hope you cherish it. Do you really think many, if any, of those customers would have bid on a gun being sold by an anti-gun gun dealer? You and I both know they wouldn't. But now, thanks to you being so open about your real attitudes toward gun ownership, many will know.

Thanks for cutting your own throat ed. Thanks for all your help, and thanks for adding even more proof that you think the 2nd Amendment should be restricted and infringed upon. Maybe you should sue yourself for screwing up your own business and your own reputation with your own words. What a complete idiot.

wow keet, what a guy!

But that firearms act doesn't apply to police, so Officer Slagger would probably still have had a semi-auto pistol with which to shoot the fleeing unarmed citizen, Mr. Scott, in the back multiple times. That is the context you brought this up in on the other thread.

And what do you get when you cut a semi-auto rifle barrel and stock? A handgun. Easily done alteration for sure. Can do it with semiauto shotguns too. But that is illegal, but it is illegal to use a semi-auto pistol in a crime too. So it doesn't make any difference. Except that the criminals will be better armed than the honest citizens, as is the case in Chicago now.

And a 12 gauge pump shotgun is pretty awesome at putting multiple deadly projectiles in the air, say 1-1/4oz of double ought buck in Winchester model 12 bird gun, five shot magazine. I bet if I practiced I got get fifty or so projectiles downrange in less than five seconds.

gee mikie: guess you dont like dat one...

got no mo ideas for you at the moment.

I don't know specifically what this guy "Ed" posts as I put him on my ignore list a long time ago. But from what I can infer from others comments the fact that Dave Weber hasn't permanentely tossed him off this forum is incredulous to me.
Jim

Well Jim, I started this thread as a place to keep ed good's anti-gun rhetoric in one convenient place. Several of his anti-gun statements will still be visible to you on page 1 of this thread.

When the time does come for Dave Weber to weigh whether ed should be permanently banned from this forum, one would think that him seeing dozens of anti-gun statements made by the anti-gun idiot ed good all in one convenient place may help him with his decision process.

Dave was kind enough to establish a "Second Amendment Informational thread" on the main forum. I don't think a pro-gun guy like Dave will be happy with an "ed good anti-Second Amendment Informational thread" here.

ed has gotten himself banned from several forums in the past for being an idiot. It is only a matter of time before his own words bite him in the ass again.

this guy james, aka sxs seems to have his head so far up his you know where that he cant see da light o day...nor much of anything else that might enlighten his semi numb brain...

i mean, when was the last time this guy expressed an original thought here?

ed I'll I tell you what. I'll make you a $100 wager. If those pictures didn't come from one of your gun ads I will make a $100 donation to Dave. If they did come from your ads you make a $100 donation to Dave.

I checked the donor list and you aren't on there. I am sure you meant to donate and it just slipped your mind. Here is your chance to put things right.

Time to bring this one back up,keeping a record of ED Good's shady business practices and his antigun posts !

dave k wheeler: internet thug!

Ok, from what you have there at best someone could describe Ed Good as gun owner that is not against to some reasonable gun regulations. Someone unfamiliar with this forum looking at info you provided would consider him responsible gun owner.

I looked at several pages of posts by Keith and lack of posts regarding gun knowledge is thunderous. Based on lack of evidence to the contrary one could easily label you "mole" on this forum.

Here is some basic books that should help you brush up on your gun knowledge.....

[img:left][/img]




We look forward to seeing some quality posts about firearm info from you...

The classic Ed Good CON job, of a bad picture and not closing the action to make the lever look to the right !

more nonsense.

do not recognize this gun. please provide specific reference to listing and what is your question?

no response...that figures.

here is another hack job, damn Ed do you have anything but can openers and butter knifes to tart these POS crap you try to pawn off on unknowing buyers ?

ware you gittin dees pitchers?

dont look like no gon i am sellin?

Man those guns are so trashed tarted up POS that even the seller Ed Good won't own up to selling them !

So Ed you put the can opener in the stock and pry that upper tang loose hey ?

Dave, have you heard about the Feedback for ed good's support of the 2nd Amendment?

It's all negative. ed thinks Americans own too many guns, and he also supports anti-gunners like Cuomo and Bloomberg.

jes cause you two say its so, dont make hit so...

you both seem to act like typical dema crat operatives...

you actually seem to believe that if you tell lies often enough, that some will begin to believe them...which is sadly true.

pa is an example...

This thread contains multiple anti-gun gun quotes made by Ed Good. I saved them in this thread so that he cannot later deny them as he is attempting to do now. I also dedicated a thread to anti-2nd Amendment quotes made by King Brown.

It really pisses them off that they can no longer run away from their own words. It's not me saying it... it is them saying it. The anti-gunners in our midst can no longer hide behind lies and denial. Tough shit!

baloney!

Ed is dirtier then a Lab Monkey's ass and he is indeed anti-gun,the statement prove it Keith !

tripe!

Ed, are you seriously denying your own anti-gun words which I took the time to save and quote in your own dedicated thread?

If so, you are not only an idiot, but a liar as well. You and the closet anti-2nd Amendment clown King Brown make quite a pair.

But neither of you is fooling anyone anymore.

keet: you are beginning to sound like...bill burkett?

ed: you are beginning to sound like... King Brown.

Hey Jagermeister, do Ed Good's words above sound pro-gun to you?

This is an I.Q. test just for you.

How he should be perceived depends who he is proposing things or talking to. If he engaged some members of: PETA, the "Brady Bunch", Diane Finestein,....then he would be an anti-gunner, but if he wants to discuss gun control issues with people here he can not be considered an anti-gunner. He thew you "curve ball" by mentioning "here".
In most circles he would be considered "responsible and sensible gun owner" and good proponent of democracy. That Democracy is highly over-rated is another matter.

Thank for showing us that you have the I.Q. of an idiot Jagermeister. It is well known that anti-gun organizations use the words of anti-gun trolls like Ed Good to "prove" their assertion that even pro-gun people actually desire more restrictions on the 2nd Amendment.

Ed Good's "discussions" about gun control center around his opinion that Americans have too many guns, and that we should not be able to own or shoot what he considers the wrong type of gus... including your own AKM and any high capacity semi-automatic handguns that you might own.

King Brown's "discussions" center around the silly idea that we should be willing to give up high capacity "clips" or magazines, that Infringements upon the Second Amendment must be OK simply because Liberal Left politicians and Liberal Left Judges have done so. He also advances his LULLING advice that we have nothing to worry about even when the Anti-Gunners are actively attacking our rights, and he still thinks the NRA was wrong to fight back when Anti-Gun legislation was being debated and voted upon. Do you recall when King Brown said, "Lead is dead.", as an answer to the backdoor approach to gun control by making ammunition illegal and/or prohibitively expensive?

Did Ed Good also throw us a curve ball by suggesting that Michael Bloomberg or Andrew Cuomo would be good choices for President?

You act a lot like King Brown when he attempts to use his so-called "craft of Journalism" to look for wiggle-words or weasel-words in order to justify and excuse something which has been stated clearly, and often repeatedly... just like the anti-2nd Amendment, anti-gun, anti-NRA statements that he and Ed Good have made again and again.

Of course, we all know where you are coming from because you proudly voted for Obama twice in spite of his well known 100% anti-gun voting record.

All I know about Bloomberg is that he was the mayor of NYC and Cuomo Jr is the governor of NYS. I'm done with national elections and will only vote in state elections now. I suspect Ed brought their names up just to upset people like you.

Thank for showing us that you have the I.Q. of an idiot Jagermeister. It is well known that anti-gun organizations use the words of anti-gun trolls like Ed Good to "prove" their assertion that even pro-gun people actually desire more restrictions on the 2nd Amendment.

Ed Good's "discussions" about gun control center around his opinion that Americans have too many guns, and that we should not be able to own or shoot what he considers the wrong type of guns... including your own AKM and any high capacity semi-automatic handguns that you might own.

King Brown's "discussions" center around the silly idea that we should be willing to give up high capacity "clips" or magazines, that Infringements upon the Second Amendment must be OK simply because Liberal Left politicians and Liberal Left Judges have done so. He also advances his LULLING advice that we have nothing to worry about even when the Anti-Gunners are actively attacking our rights, and he still thinks the NRA was wrong to fight back when Anti-Gun legislation was being debated and voted upon. Do you recall when King Brown said, "Lead is dead.", as an answer to the backdoor approach to gun control by making ammunition illegal and/or prohibitively expensive?

Did Ed Good also throw us a curve ball by suggesting that Michael Bloomberg or Andrew Cuomo would be good choices for President?

You act a lot like King Brown when he attempts to use his so-called "craft of Journalism" to look for wiggle-words or weasel-words in order to justify and excuse something which has been stated clearly, and often repeatedly... just like the anti-2nd Amendment, anti-gun, anti-NRA statements that he and Ed Good have made again and again.

Of course, we all know where you are coming from because you proudly voted for Obama twice in spite of his well known 100% anti-gun voting record.

You know nothing about the anti-gun activities of Bloomberg and Cuomo because you are what we call a Low Information Voter. These anti-gun politicians prosper because idiots like you believe it when they say they support our Gun Rights.

If you really think that Ed Good only voices support for anti-gunners to upset the pro-gun people here, then you are admitting and offering proof that he is indeed an internet troll, and his sole purpose is to only bait us as AmarilloMike has said.

That is likely true, but he also has consistently made statements which call for restrictions on the number and type of guns we may own.

As you claim to only own one shotgun which is not a double barrel, it is apparent that you are in the same category as Ed Good... another idiotic internet troll.

Interesting, discuss means dictate, then sprinkle in pc excuses. You can really tell, designer hillbilly is like taking the high road.

my gunbroker feedback is now at 1540 and counting...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewUserFeedback.aspx?User=128526

not bad for a so called, anti gunner...don ja no...

A lot of drug dealers have happy customers Ed. That doesn't make them good people or respectable businessmen.

Your anti-gun and anti-2nd Amendment words speak for themselves, and say a lot more about you and your anti-gun attitudes than Gunbroker feedback from unsophisticated gun buyers. It's too bad folks cannot go back and edit their feedback once they found out that they paid too much for tarted-up crap.

I wonder how many of those 1540 would have even placed a bid with you if they knew how you actually feel about their right to own and shoot certain legal classes of firearms.

The simple fact that you can be in denial of your own words shows us that you are probably mentally ill, in my opinion.

keet: sadly, it is you who are in denial...of the fact of my many years of successful hobby gun dealing, as evidenced by my many satisfied customers...

and you exhibit evidence of delusional behavior, when you appear to believe your own bs...

you continue you to remind me of bill burkett...

Go play on the railroad tracks ed. Maybe we will be lucky and the 9:15 west bound freight will be on time.

Here again are a few of Ed Good's Anti-Gun and Anti-Second Amendment quotes. Would you buy a gun from an anti-gunner? Would you buy a gun from someone so dishonest as to deny their own words?

Thanks for keeping this on top Ed. Your equally anti-gun troll pal King Brown at least has the brains to attempt to let things cool off after he shows his true colors. That ploy used to work pretty well. Not anymore.

Is Bill Burkett some NRA member who simply got sick of two-faced people who claim to be pro-2nd Amendment, but constantly undermine it by supporting anti-gun laws and politicians?


Post # 400299

Post # 400300

Post # 400310

Post # 400316

....ed good....it is you who are in denial...of the fact of my many years of successful hobby gun dealing, as evidenced by my many satisfied customers...

and you exhibit evidence of delusional behavior, when you appear to believe your own bs....[/quote]

Yup, all we need is a hobby for unrelated evidence, I guess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Burkett

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2004/09/17/two_stories_on_bill_burkett

This isn't about Bill Burkett. This is about your own anti-gun words Ed Good. I have no plans to look at your off-topic links. Try to stay on topic you old rule-breaker. Speaking of breaking rules, what are your regular business hours as required by your FFL?

But hey everyone... check these out!

Post # 400299

Post # 400300

Post # 400310

Post # 400316

And here's yet another... post # 407727

Ed is old just like Kingfish his brain is sick....

Joe, please read what Ed said, not go off half-cocked like the little fella. Do you disagree with Ed's opinion that there are too many guns in dangerous hands?

As for illness, is there anything more sick than believing that anyone who doesn't believe as they do are idiots, not deserving of American citizenship?

Think of it: Half your country voted for Obama, arguably a majority for other reasons than gun control. They love their country as much as other citizens.

I posted there would be only "cosmetic" changes to gun regulations under Obama because Americans are in love with their guns, and the president said last week he would do nothing until there's a "new normal."

Please read, eh? ed demonized the gun, called it super dangerous. Because he FEELS that some item was 'super dangerous' he FEELS it should be removed from all citizens including the super safe, the super liberal, the super progressive and the other than super white. Is that fair?

'In dangerous hands', eh? There are laws against that, maybe you should question selective law enforcement based on political agenda, eh. How come only law abiding citizen are 'dangerous', aren't they the ones targeted for compliance. How come there's no such thing as dangerous islam, or dangerous 'immigrants', or even dangerous healthcare. How come ed or yourself isn't offended and comment with consistency when Jm show pictures of semiauto handguns.

Please read, eh? Love, love, love a whole bunch of times. Is that half-cocked, idiotic, deserving, or maybe cosmetic? Please explain though, re the prez, when can we count on what the lil half-cocked fellow has to say.

Yes King, we all know that enough people voted for Obama because they wanted the free ride to continue, and even dramatically increase. If they loved their country, they would not want to see it spent into bankruptcy. They want the goodies and they mock the words of your make-believe friend John F. Kennedy who famously said "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." But we also have so-called gun guys and people like you who pose as gun guys... yet they vote for extreme anti-gunners.

As craigd notes... but you cannot get through your thick head, we already have laws that deny possession and purchase of guns by criminals and mentally ill people. They still manage to get their hands on them by breaking the law. So you think that more laws infringing upon the Constitutional Rights of the law abiding are the answer? Guys like you and Ed Good want to ban the inanimate object, but you would object to stop and frisk searches of the criminals who kill more every week in Chicago than a lone nutter killed in South Carolina in an isolated incident. So glad you are not a citizen here. We have enough idiots.

King,
have to throw the BS falg on that comment. Flat out wrong. In 2012 Obama only got 29.32% of the eligible voters in the US. he got 51% of the popular vote; but that was from only 57.5% of eligible voters voting in that election. (hardly a mandate)
As far as "they love their country as much as other citizens (the ones who didn't vote for Obama) that is a pretty cavalier statement that is not supportable by anything other than opinion. I believe that quite a few Obama voters voted for him because of White Mans Guilt, free phones, Obama care and other hand outs.


http://bipartisanpolicy.org/library/2012-voter-turnout/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2...to-win-51-twice

disarm...seems to work for the rest of the civilized world...

why not us?

How about leading by example Ed? You would be a good place to start because you are mentally ill and should not even have a BB gun.

Brian, you make a great and valid point. Because of that, don't expect an answer from the big liar King Brown.

Brian, I was addressing the Terrible Twins' notion that anyone who voted for Obama is a liberal, an idiot, an unAmerican supporter of gun control. Obama got half of the popular vote.

Governments change when voters change their minds about platforms and candidates. Conservatives also voted for Obama or stayed home partly because of the No. 1 fear of any campaign: a completely unexpected issue.

In this case, the 47 per cent blunder. So much for only liberals voting for Obama. Conservatives and liberals who gave Obama half of the popular vote would, according to issue preferences, most likely voted for other reasons than gun control.

Half of the popular vote for Obama was as loyal to the country as the half that voted differently. Not a bit of difference. Members who despise those who don't make gun control their principal motivation to vote have problems.

I agree with your last sentence.

The other half of the people who voted for Obama were either illegal aliens or were residing in our nation's cemeteries.

I don't agree with any of your bullshit.

Forgive him his brain is sick...

jOe, he's probably drunk on that award winning Mad Dog 20-20 wine he brews.

anyone who voted for Obama did support gun control, whether they wanted to or not. By virtue of voting for him , they voted for his agenda and forthcoming agendas, whether they liked that particular part of his agenda or not.

and saying that "members who despise those who don't make gun control their principal motivation to vote have problems" could be compared to the Democrats stance on anyone who is against abortion. As we all know, abortion is the litmus test for any democrat candidate.

guess no body here has the balls to answer my question:


disarm...seems to work for the rest of the civilized world...

why not us?

ed you trolled this pond once too many times. Nobody is interested in the bait anymore.

Go over to the PETA forum and advocate competitive pigeon shooting. Should be able to get some shit going there.

The anti-gun brain damaged agenda driven idiot King Brown obviously does not see support for the U.S. Constitution as a valid litmus test for being American. This country was built on Liberties that Canadians don't have if it is true that one could expect a visit from the RCMP for voicing an opinion about a Nazi collaborator as King told us that Jim would have to fear if he was Canadian. I'll bet that's the kind of bullshit that all those brave Canadian soldiers fought to protect in the World Wars. Too bad Libtards like King would trade Liberty for a false sense of security.

I don't care if one supports a politician who would gut the 2nd Amendment or any other. That voter is a fool and Un-American. Since we are on a firearms related website, it is natural that our focus is on gun rights. King Brown has never once been critical of a Liberal Left politician who would restrict the rights of law abiding gun owners. King is an anti-gunner who thinks we should just roll over and give up our Constitutional Rights. To me, he is an ignorant piece of shit with a Socialist agenda.

"anyone who voted for Obama did support gun control, whether they wanted to or not. By virtue of voting for him , they voted for his agenda and forthcoming agendas, whether they liked that particular part of his agenda or not."

Brian, I don't think voters anywhere buy the party-line letter, chapter and verse, particularly with omnibus bills where the controversial is slipped in with the promised to ram it through.

It is specious to say Obama voters support gun control "whether they wanted it or not"---in the sense gun control was their preference. It could have been of little significance compared to other reasons or the last thing on their minds.

As for abortion, it seems to me as much a litmus test for Republicans as Democrats. Similarly to gun control, I haven't noticed unanimity on the issue among liberals and conservatives there and here or in their parties.

Take a look at Wisconsin voters who elected presidential hopeful Scott Walker. Republicans there are divided by his activities, as all parties are from time to time, not least the Hilary supporters.

Voters holding their nose is common.

You must'n been eating the same Pork holes as big Tex....cuz you got the same chit for brains thing he's got.

C'mon, Joe. You can do better than that. You've been clear in that you don't buy everything your party says. No one does.

Hey ed, bet you could read with just one ball. Did you know if you look up wiki, then bam like magic, you get a 'list of rampage shooters (Europe)'. Why europe, oh cuz I'm supposing it's part of the other than America, civilized world. Please note, per your request, they're duly disarmed.

Well what's it say. Since bo's been in office there have been seventeen nut case shooter killers, wasup wid dat. Can I share with you the kicker, they, wiki, says the number does not include, school massacres, work place killings, hate crimes or mass murder that took place primarily in a domestic environment. Was up wid dat?

Does ya thunk a feller like y'all like them there skewed stats to make your self feel better. Really makes it seem like those gun controlled civilized folks just watch wild west shoot 'em up TV shows about the US. Where have I heard this before, probably just another one of those echo's.

Here you go......

Listen real close...I don't have a party.

I like a lot of others just pick the lesser of two evils.

jager: repealing any of the bill of rights would be unamerican. however, a more conservative interpretation of the second amendment, in light of the times and recent developments in firearms technology and proliferation, is certainly warranted?

and perhaps, amending the firearms law of 1935, to include semi auto hand guns might help? or not?

I don't have a party. I like a lot of others, just pick the lesser of two evils.

however, with the exceptions of jimmy carter and george wallace, that lesser of evils for me has been the republican candidate.

jOe, what we all know for certain is that King Brown is a shit-for-brains Liberal Left anti-gunner. We have a whole thread here where anyone who douts this can go to read Many of the recent anti-2nd Amendment and anti-NRA quotes made by King Brown in his own words. Here's a link to that thread:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=371736#Post371736

King is always looking for excuses to support Left Wing Socialist anti-gun politicians. And he is always dishonest about his activities here meant to undermine our rights. King has done absolutely nothing to advance or defend firearms rights in Canada. If he had, we'd never hear the end of it. He claims to have spoken before the legislature, but no amount of internet searching can uncover a transcript.

King Brown is an anti-gun liar, and everyone who visits Misfires needs to understand that.

Isn't it an amazing coincidence that the three most prolific anti-gun Liberal left trolls here all rush in to support each other when their anti-gun activities are noted? King Brown, Ed Good, and Jagermeister will all do everything they can to deny the exact words of their cohorts. King is not as generous in his support of Ed and Jag as they are to him, but King is pretty self-centered. Of course, we often see others chime in, but some of them are deathly afraid that they will out themselves as RyanF recently did. I've got news for them... we already know. They are not fooling anyone.

It's kind of creepy, but in a way, it serves to prove how the Libtard mind works in a way that no one would believe without actually seeing it in action.

what is really creepy is that some here are permitted to post repetitive childishness with impunity...

I agree Ed... When do you, King Brown, and Jagermeister plan to stop?

And yet another anti-gun post from none other than Ed Good:



Ed Good still has not accepted the Heller and McDonald Supreme Court decisions that say the 2nd has precedence over the 10th. Thanks for showing us where you stand on gun rights Ed.

"the Heller and McDonald Supreme Court decisions that say the 2nd has precedence over the 10th."

so does this mean that we no longer have enforceable state or local laws governing firearms? of course not...

this anti gun mole makes yet another lunny statement here...

hope the nra shuts this creature down soon...it is bad for bidniss...

"Since background checks began in 1994, those rejections have stopped more than 2.4 million gun sales, helping to keep guns out of the hands of people such as felons, fugitives, drug users, and people a judge has found to be mentally ill or requiring a restraining order for domestic abuse."

Yea, watch that list of crimes that negate gun ownership grow beyond comprehension once they get universal background checks.

58: from wince do you quote? and what proof do you present to back up the validity of your quote?

and how many criminal convictions have resulted from all those rejections?

seems like back ground checks at the federal level are a waste of time and money...better to have the states do it as they require. none of the feds bidness...

They always have pilot programs, test beds. Ocare, requiring kids to be questioned in the docs office if there are guns in the house, veterans denied because of flags the va created.

That USAToday article in your post quoted by Keith.

Let's see, back in 1994 when they passed the assault weapon ban, what did they say? "This is only the beginning." Then they started with the so-called 'Sniper Rifles" (Bolt action rifles) and said "What do you need them for?"

Do you remember that?

So tell us Ed, when the Supreme Court ruled in the Heller and McDonald cases, which amendment took precedence... the 2nd or the 10th?

Local laws that prohibited the ownership of certain firearms were struck down in D.C. and Chicago. The individual right to keep and bear arms for self defense was affirmed by the High Court. Have you bothered to read the 10th amendment to see what it says?

Oh sorry, I forgot you are an idiot who cannot understand even the most simple things.

so then, why do state and local gun laws through out the land continue to be on enforceable?

could it be that those laws do not prohibit the ownership of certain classes of firearms, but only regulate ownership? duh...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

The anti-gun laws in D.C. and Chicago were considered legal within those jurisdictions, and unfortunate people were prosecuted for violating them until a couple people named Heller and McDonald decided to fight it... and eventually these cases were decided by the Supreme Court.

You don't need to give me a link to the 10th Amendment idiot. I know what it says and what it means. If there was no 2nd Amendment, then under the 10th, states would be perfectly within their rights to regulate firearms which were not so regulated by the U.S. Constitution.

We have plenty of laws which reasonably and justifiably regulate ownership. Felons for example are not allowed to own or even attempt to purchase a firearm. Illegal immigrants like the one who shot and killed Kate Steinle may not possess guns. But the anti-gun politicians you support refuse to go after them, and instead concentrate their efforts on law abiding citizens.

What are the business hours of your gun shop Ed? What hours of business did you lie about on your FFL license application?

what you dont seem to want to acknowledge is that state and local laws that regulate ownership of firearms, without directly forbidding ownership of firearms, are not a violation of the federal charter...and these statutes have been settled law for many years.

for example, new york's sullivan law, which regulates ownership of handguns, has been in affect since 1911.

Well, Brown Vs. Board of Education had been in effect for decades. But Earl Warren's SCOTUS tossed it out.

The current SCOTUS tossed out several state and city laws restricting citizens' right to keep and bear arms; Including Chicago's, Illionois', and Washington DC to name but a few.

mikie: doubt if the sullivan law will ever be repealed...but after reading the following, one does wonder why it has lasted so long?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Act

eD none of the jurisdictions I listed repealed their gun laws. Their gun laws were declared unconstitutional by SCOTUS.

mikie: as the sullivan law has been on the books since 1911, doubt if the court will declare it null and void...

more likely, the court would rule against another, more recent, ny gun law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NY_SAFE_Act

the key issue is and should be prohibition vs regulation.

weapons prohibition can be a violation of the second amendment. weapons regulation is not.

Well, Plessy v. Ferguson had been in effect for decades. But Earl Warren's SCOTUS tossed it out in Brown vs. Board of education.

The current SCOTUS tossed out several state and city laws restricting citizens' right to keep and bear arms; Including Chicago's, Illionois', and Washington DC to name but a few.

Here's Anti-Gunner Ed Good, arguing in favor, once again, of Universal Background Checks:



Of course, Ed Good is an FFL Dealer who is probably salivating at the idea of earning an easy $40.00 or so doing transfers every time a father or grandfather gives or passes down a gun to his kid or grandkid. And 10 guns equals $400.00 to the greedy torch artist who makes stupid excuses for cheating people who buy his loose doubles with a next to impossible return policy. This is also a guy who violates the BATF rules on having a brick and mortar business with regular store hours.

Why don't you lick my SCOTUS you pervert

jOe I've told you before I like women. I know you have a crush on me but you are of the wrong sex for me.

And no; If you get a sex change I still wouldn't find you attractive.

And if fRank catches you sending love notes out to other men agin he's agonna whop you good agin!

Here's a couple more anti-2nd Amendment posts by Ed Good.

oh really? ah don tink so...

Here is the contact info for the Manchester New Hampshire BATFE Field Office for anyone who is concerned about Ed Good's lack of regular store hours under his FFL requirements for his Francistown New Hampshire gun shop.

Suspected criminal activity involving explosives, tobacco or arson
Any other law enforcement matter

Manchester Field Offices

Resident Agent in Charge
55 Constitution Drive, 2nd Floor
Bedford, New Hampshire 03110
USA View Map (link is external)
Voice: (603) 471-1283

ah don tink so...

Here is the contact info for the Manchester New Hampshire BATFE Field Office for anyone who is concerned about Ed Good's lack of regular store hours under his FFL requirements for his Francistown New Hampshire gun shop.

Suspected criminal activity involving explosives, tobacco or arson
Any other law enforcement matter

Manchester Field Offices

Resident Agent in Charge
55 Constitution Drive, 2nd Floor
Bedford, New Hampshire 03110
USA View Map (link is external)
Voice: (603) 471-1283

Here's anti-gun troll Ed Good telling us that the Well Regulated Militia of the 2nd Amendment has been replaced by unarmed volunteer firemen, and local cops.

You are an idiot Ed, and conveniently leaving out the part about "...the Right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed.

Have you been taking lessons in creative and selective editing from your anti-gun friend King Brown?

Maybe King is hawking loogies and spit down ed's throat to train him.

It might be worth a try J.R.B.

Nothing else has broken Ed of the habit of eating turds.

I'll bet hawkers and loogies are considered a delicacy where Ed and King's anti-gun troll pal Jagermeister comes from.

Here is Ed Good once again proposing that we talk about giving up part of our RKBA:



This was my reply to him:

Here is anti-gun Ed Good advocating for restricting our RKBA to single shot shotguns since they take longer to reload and are not easily concealable.



Of course, the first time some insane maniac managed to kill several people with a single shot shotgun, the anti-gunners would naturally go after them as well. Anti-gunners really hate all guns, and they won't be happy until all are outlawed. That is why it is foolish to give them even a fraction of an inch.

Ed Good is an anti-gun troll who is too stupid to understand this.

i view the second amendment as the founding fathers attempt to prohibit the central government from prohibiting the people and the states the right to keep and bear arms. they knew that if only the central governments troops were armed, then the people and the states would be ultimately defenseless against the power of the central government...and the desire to preserve the power of the states is why the second amendment is framed in the context of a well regulated militia...

however, my view also, is that although the second amendment protects the people from any government prohibition of arms possession, it does not prohibit government from regulating the possession of certain classes of arms...the regulation of fully automatic firearms at the federal level is an example. and the fact that many states regulate the possession of handguns, is a more common example.

So where does it say that idiot? Or where in the writings of the Framers do they leave the impression that their intent was to permit the central government to prohibit certain classes of arms?

We don't care what your opinion is Ed because you have no brains.

keet: do you see a difference between government regulation and prohibition of arms ownership?

does government regulation of arms violate the constitution? and if so, specifically how?

and does the long standing federal firearms act of 1934 violate the constitution?

do state laws regulating arms violate the constitution?

and finally, does licensing of semi auto handgun owners violate their constitutional rights?

Keith,

Why do you even bother? You can't argue with a sociopath, they always rationalize their opinions. They lack the intellectual objectivity to even comprehend the arguments.

I can understand why you do it, I do the same thing with Comrade Sralin, if only for the benefit of others.

It can be fun, but it does get tedious responding to the same sociopathic claptrap and mumbo-jumbo over and over.

so, anybody else care to answer the questions above? plus this one:

is there a need to reduce the firepower in the hands of the people?

Ken, it is fun although I don't think you're saying your opinion is always better, more rational and reasonable than others.

It was especially humorous to read Keet and your posts of voting holding your noses and then vilifying others for doing the same thing. Talk about statists!

Keet believes the only true American is a Republican in love with his guns. You don't believe that but are corrupted by going along with him.

You're always calling for compromise and get'in along. When literally the only example of it shows up, you poke fun at it. All they want to do is help break the ungovernable barriers.

Is this a strategy or a mean streak? I hope your tactics aren't intended to intimidate those that have a different opinion than yours. Hey, good news, dal didn't really adios.

More good news. In that Iranian deal, the iranians can appeal a request to start the twenty-four day count down to an inspection. All inspectors, non US because it's the US' deal, are vetted by the iranians. And, any samples that inspectors may want to test, are provided by the iranians. The prez sez that helps ensure they won't get the bomb, ever or on his watch, weird huh?

It's compromise on Iran. The big powers and Germany got what they could get. The difference now and before is that the debate is about a process to hold back the bomb, not its production this year.

Compromise and "get'in along" is about tolerance. I'm not sure what you mean by poking fun. If it's holding their noses when Keet and Ken vote Republican, it is humorous that when others do it they are condemned as idiots and filfthy scum!

No party can draft a platform that supports everyone's beliefs and needs. Americans who voted for Obama had more on their minds than guns as a priority. To insult fellow citizens for different opinions is unintelligent.

I'm reminded of Cuomo's San Francisco speech to the Democratic convention many years ago on the abortion issue. He said I'm a Roman Catholic and governor of all the people of New York. Who am I to tell others what to do when our church members aren't following the rules themselves?

That's intelligent.

The farmer got up one morning and decided he wanted bacon and eggs. After a heated negotiation with the chicken he settled for two of her eggs instead of three.

But the hog? That hard headed and intolerant rascal refused to budge an inch.

(jOe alert. jOe I was not making fun of you when I wrote the above. I know you are very stUpid and will probably misinterpret the intent and meaning of that comment so I am explaining it to you. This is to save you the embarrassment of making another very stupid post that doesn't have anything to do with anything. No need to thank me).

Ed, you'll not likely get answers. True believers know the answers and don't want to be accountable. They know the Second is a right of enduring debate.

To state the obvious here, the difference of opinion among originalists and living documentarists, makes a member anti-Second and anti-gun to zealots.

That assumption of itself is a lie. How many times have we heard it here?

The upper third best prez ever got what he qud eh? How come the misogynistic iranian torturer/murderer soleiamani got on a commercial flight to moscow in late July to discuss what russia gets in the deal. Just prior, during his hard sell sales tour, kerry, for bo, said about the quds forces strong man that the argreement specifically names him as not EVER coming off the high terror list. russians were completely aware he can't even travel, but they reap the rewards?

Speaking of those health-o-the-mom bunch. Did you catch the latest vid. Worker has to listen to a pp abortionist discuss the 'fine specimen' that's removed to a different room from the 'abortion' with heart beating to harvest the brain. Probably rape or incest, eh?

I'm a little disappointed King. ed says the 'right' is intact, doesn't he? Isn't he saying that 'licensing' means only those that can afford to pay, can play?

I would've thought you'd have a bit more compassion for those of modest means. And yes, good tactic, trivialize it so it's not really a right, just a football to kick around. Weird, huh?

"licensing' means only those that can afford to pay, can play?

no, not if a license was only required to possess a semi auto handgun...think of it in the spirit of the firearms act of 1934 and the no chil lef behin ed ucation law of 2001...and unlike the act of 1934, the licensing process would be administered by the states and not by the feds...an like no chil, compliance to a national standard would be mandated by the feds, but achieving compliance to the licensing act would be the responsibility of the states.

King Liar, once again you are lying about me and others who vote for pro-gun candidates. I have voted for many Democrats in my life, but unfortunately, most Democrat politicians support the same Leftist Socialist ant-gun dogma that you support. The 2nd Amendment is hardly the only litmus test we apply when choosing a candidate, but refuting, twisting, and rejecting one Constitutional Right naturally leads anyone with a brain to conclude that such a candidate would show a similar disrespect for the rest of the Constitution. And this has been borne out time and time again.

You, King Brown, keep pushing this notion of a living tree or living document interpretation of the Constitution. That would reduce the value of the document to nothing better than toilet paper, but it would allow Liberal Left Statists such as yourself to advance your agenda. People need to understand that those of your mindset are not our friends. Now why don't you go back to the King Brown Anti-Gunner thread where you wrongly accused me of lying about your illegal transport of a pistol in Canada and admit that it was you who once again lied to us? You really are a low class fraud.

Ed, I have answered your idiotic questions repeatedly in the past. You are obviously too stupid to comprehend. The local, state and federal measures that gunners and the NRA have ceded to in the past, or had rammed down our throats, have not worked and only emboldened the anti-gunner to always come back for more. There is no rational reason for debate or ever giving them another inch or another shred of our freedoms.

well keet, your post above is another example of your evasive rhetoric and smoke here... and your refusal to answer simple, yes, no or i'm not sure questions, is typical of your subversive performance here...it is a typical demacrat operatives tactic, where one does not say anything directly, but attempts to influence the opinions of others via suggestion and innuendo...first example i saw of this tactic was during the pres election of 1952, when da dems sent a flyer out that trashed the reputation of one dwight david eisenhower...low down then. low down now.

cum on keet, man up and answer da questions...

for your convenience, here are the questions...again:

do you see a difference between government regulation and prohibition of arms ownership?

does government regulation of arms violate the constitution? and if so, specifically how?

and does the long standing federal firearms act of 1934 violate the constitution?

do state laws regulating arms violate the constitution?

does licensing of semi auto handgun owners violate their constitutional rights?

and finally, is there a need to reduce the firepower in the hands of the people?

Hmmm, dialog. Trade a right for a license. My mistake, you intended the spirit of a free shall issue license, because that would decrease firepower. Yes or no?

Aside from the 'licensing' problems we have in regard to traffic fatalities, how about calif? Do you ship out that way? For the good of their residents, they run their own 'licensing' program. How come in kali if an illegal felon 'immigrant' is caught committing a felony with an illegal finearm, the charges are reduced to a misdemeanor and the perp walks. A shining example of states responsibility? Yes or no?

I answered your idiotic questions in the past Ed and will not waste my time doing so again just because you are too stupid to comprehend.

Our 2nd Amendment rights are not a topic for debate or discussion with someone who wishes to give up some or all of those rights. You are a complete idiot.

What do you think of your cowardly buddy King Brown running away from his lie about illegally using and transporting a pistol throughout Canada and even across the border, and then calling me a liar for writing about it? Here's a link to it:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=371736&page=26

I provided PROOF that it was King that was lying again, and he refuses to respond. If King lives another 84 years, he still will not be a man.

nap time!

I answered your idiotic questions in the past Ed and will not waste my time doing so again just because you are too stupid to comprehend.

Our 2nd Amendment rights are not a topic for debate or discussion with someone who wishes to give up some or all of those rights. You are a complete idiot.

What do you think of your cowardly buddy King Brown running away from his lie about illegally using and transporting a pistol throughout Canada and even across the border, and then calling me a liar for writing about it? Here's a link to it:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=371736&page=26

I provided PROOF that it was King that was lying again, and he refuses to respond. If King lives another 84 years, he still will not be a man.

King did you really carry an illegal firearm all over Canada even across our border ?

King Brown does not wish to further incriminate himself because he knows that the next Mountie who comes to his door may not be a Liberal Left Dudley Do-Right, but rather one who sees King as the radical rump he is... an extreme Liberal Leftist Race Hustler, sympathizer of Nazi collaborators, and one who makes excuses for radical Islamists. Someone like that who is also a mentally unbalanced pathological liar should not possess any type of guns.

Clearly, King should be held accountable and should suffer the same penalties as any other Canadian who wantonly disregarded Canadian laws concerning possession and transport of pistols. He bragged about it on this International board several times. I have the other post numbers where he did so. It is a bit tedious to search for things over a year old here, but it can be done. Also, I was cursed with a pretty good memory which King Brown dislikes very much. King doesn't worry about onerous Canadian gun laws very much because he has felt he is above the law and ignored them. I think he should do the right thing and turn himself in here:

Royal Canadian Mounted Police
6080 Riverside Dr E, Windsor, ON N8S 1B6, Canada
+1 519-948-5287

But I predict that King Brown will not do the right thing. He never does. He will do like Hillary and so many other Liberal Democrats and attempt to lie, deny, and demonize. Too bad that King cannot erase Dave Weber's server.

Here's another Anti-2nd Amendment post by Ed Good... and a brilliant reply from craigd.





How does it feel craigd... engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed man?

"i view the second amendment as the founding fathers attempt to prohibit the central government from prohibiting the people and the states the right to keep and bear arms. they knew that if only the central governments troops were armed, then the people and the states would be ultimately defenseless against the power of the central government...and the desire to preserve the power of the states is why the second amendment is framed in the context of a well regulated militia...

however, my view also, is that although the second amendment protects the people from any government prohibition of arms possession, it does not prohibit government from regulating the possession of certain classes of arms...the regulation of fully automatic firearms at the federal level is an example. and the fact that many states regulate the possession of handguns, is a more common example.

and a restrition is not the same as a prohibition"

Yo suck'ah iffen yo gonna typo a change, shouldn't you change the other parts that you mention regs?

Don't you think a license for semi autos is a restriction? If not, why would you exempt revolvers?

About the most cartridges modern centerfire revolver can be loaded is eight cartridges and re-loading one is difficult plus reloads like strips and "speed loaders" are not easy to carry and or access. I think calling rubber or leadther strips speed strips for revolver cartridges is a joke. The only easy way is called NY re-laod where second loaded revolver is carried as spare weapon. Glock 17, 19 or double stack subcompact (don't remember the model) can be fed using THIRTY THREE round magazine. Now do you understand?

Joe, I explained earlier my legal firearms transport as a pilot and trapper. I mentioned that I forgot that one was in my survival kit when I attended the Experimental Aircraft Association convention in Oshkosh in '83. Sixty years ago American and Canadian pilots used small airports on both sides as if the border wasn't there. There was no customs. We'd land in bad weather or put money in an honour box for fuel if there was no one around, and fly on. The Mounties took a liberal view of responsible use of firearms---and still do. It was a different time of different people.This peculiar American curiosity of a Canadian's relationship with the law is amusing! Never broken the law, Joe? You should try it.

Still flailing, eh King? After you called me a liar for bringing up your illegal transport of a pistol, you first came up with the cock and bull story that it was a Savage model 24 survival gun.

Even after I produced a quote by you admitting to crossing the border "several times" with a pistol, you still claim you only did it once. So tell us... which story is the lie? They both can't be true.

You went positively apoplectic about Jim giving an opinion, and claimed he may have broken laws that would have the Mounties at his door in Canada. Yet you make silly excuses for illegal transport of a handgun... something canvasback warned you could result in a permanent loss of gun ownership rights.

Once a fraud, always a fraud.

Only 9445 people have tuned in to view your anti-gun posts and words Ed Good. I don't think you'll ever catch up to this extremely popular thread which now has 41,769 views.

Is KING BROWN AN ANTI-GUNNER?

Of course, this thread serves a very useful purpose. King Brown repeatedly tells us that he has read your anti-2nd Amendment words and your calls for banning entire classes of legal firearms. And even after reading them, King Brown still claims there are no anti-gunners in Misfires.

What better proof can there be that King is a compulsive liar who supports and defends anti-gunners?

yawn...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewUserFeedback.aspx?User=128526

Here's some feedback for you Ed. Over four times as many viewers are interested in King Brown's anti-gun rhetoric as yours. You are even a loser at being anti-gun.

ANTI-GUN POSTS by ED GOOD

9618 views compared to 42,233 for King:

IS KING BROWN AN ANTI-GUNNER

Now there's something King Brown can brag about to his anti-gun Liberal Left friends that is actually the truth.

yawn...

It looks like Ed Good is trying to surpass King in terms of anti-gun rhetoric. I don't think he can.

snore...

The brain-dead anti-gunner Ed Good just can't stop asking the same stupid anti-gun questions:



Somehow, in his dried up pea brain, banning semi-auto handguns "ain't about banning guns."

I didn't know it was possible to be so brain-dead without being on life support.

Isn't that a requisite for owning a Pitt bull ?

I'd like to see Ed Good teach his Pit Bulldog obedience by hawkering a loogie or two down his throat. That could turn out well for all of us.

I thought pit bulls were different. Don't you train 'em by holding a fuzzy critter with your teeth and play tug of war with them. Get down on all fours and practice the head shake before your buddy releases the pup.

"I am accustomed to hearing malicious falsehoods about myself ... But I think I have a right to resent, to object, to libelous statements about my dog."

Maybe we could all pitch in a little and get Amerillio Mike to hawker a loogie down a Pitt bulls throat...

I'd donate a dollar.

now jOe, dat aint nice...specially fur da pittie...

The same thing could happen with a clip fed bolt action, a Model 88 Winchester, and any number of non-semi-automatic firearms which utilize a clip or detachable magazine. There's no substitute for safe gun handling. But if you are Ed Good, the only thing to consider is banning an entire class of firearms. But in Ed Good's puny brain, prohibiting the manufacture, sale, or possession of an entire class of firearms is not a ban.

You can't fix stupid.

Several years back a guy at my gun club was fooling with a loaded 1911 Colt in the office....it went off went through a wall and came pretty close to hitting a women office worker in the next room. In my opinion he should have been thrown out of the gun club.

The immediate reaction of the club was to put up signs "banning loaded firearms in the office" and promote this guy to head of gun safety...figure that one out.

Bottom line is stupid people shouldn't handle or own semi-autos.

"Bottom line is stupid people shouldn't handle or own semi-autos."... or any other any other arms...

Mr. Good,

"Stupid people" will also kill/hurt themselves with cars, butter knives, rocks, boat oars and candles.

Don't be so naive as to think that by offering the "controllers" a pre-text to confiscate more of our Liberty under the guise of some nebulous "safety" ...we shall all be better off.

For far too long, the Left in America has used "stupid people" as the denominator by which the rest of us must all be divided. Not for the good of us all...but for the good of the stupid people. Such is the world view of the Left. That we must all be defined and delineated by the machinations and abilities of the least capable people around us.

Be smarter than to give them yet another entre into absconding from us our natural rights defined in the Constitution..."for our own good."

- Nudge

It is too early to tell, but I suspect after today we may have to take a hard look at high capacity magazines. My most offensive handgun came with two seven cartridge magazines. Five of those magazines should be plenty for any one individual to own.

Jagermeister,

It is a hard heart that kills. Not the weapon. Go read about ancient wars where sometimes a hundred thousand men crowded into a valley and swung swords until they were either too exhausted, or dead.

Some of the earliest human remains ever uncovered by archaeologists have skulls with cracks or holes from blunt force trauma from a club or a rock to the head.

So do not allow the foolishness of a relatively tiny minority of over-medicated, under-parented, video-game obsessed, Hollywood-influenced, everyone-gets-a-trophy-for-nothing...generation of killers to give cover to control-obsessed safety-Nazi's who are so short-sighted as to believe that the unrealistic promise of ever-present safety...is worth exchanging our basic God-ordained liberties for.

When some sick person does what this guy did today, or some gang-banger kills each night any major city, or whatever...they are fulfilling the evil desires of their OWN hearts. The method and means by which they do it would simply shift if guns didn't exist.

The Founders understood the trade-off. Are you so fat and happy after only 200+ years that you forget what they fought for and why?

GET OUT of your EZ-Chair, put down those Cheetos, and pick up some history books.

** ps Per your comment about high capacity mags...it was a quietly reported fact of that mentally ill + medicated Newtown kid's evil deed, that MOST of it was done with a Remington 870 pump shotgun, NOT an AR with a high capacity magazine (although he had those with him).

The hard heart kills with whatever if can find. And human kind has no shortage of people with evil deeds in mind. But no more, or less, than there has ever been. We're just seeing more of it today with the speed of information coupled with an increasingly amoral population.

- Nudge

nudge: agreed, it is the hard hearted individuals that kill others...

so, what can we do as a society to minimize the impact of hard hearted individuals bent on committing mass murders?

nudge: agreed, it is the hard hearted individuals that kill others...

so, what can we do as a society to minimize the impact of hard hearted individuals bent on committing mass murders?

what do other countries, such as canada, france or brazil, do in order to minimize mass murder?

We stop medicating every little thing. That's first. After that it gets tougher. Because the culture has been changed over a long time. It's tough to put back in the bag.

I hope it's not too late.

- Nudge

nudge: you just said a lot without saying anything...

nudge said quite a bit actually. He also made the common mistake of attempting to reason with two idiots and anti-gun trolls.

Ed Good's latest:



And my reply to him:

More of Ed Good's Anti-Gun and Anti-NRA posts:

the federal government has no constitutional authority to prohibit any citizen their right to keep and bear arms...that authority is retained by the states or the people...

the 10th amendment, protects the states and the people from the federal government usurping powers that are not specifically delegated to the central government by the constitution.

dozens of states have long standing laws and policies that regulate and restrict firearms possession. few state firearms regulations have been judged to be a violation of the second amendment.

with the exception of the second amendment, the federal constitution does not address firearms or other arms. so all federal gun control laws may be judged as a violation of the 10th amendment, as the federal constitution does not delegate the power to regulate firearms to the central government.

Ed, you are no Constitutional Scholar.

But you are an anti-gun idiot.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

and here is my favorite...

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The post above, coming from an idiot who believes that we should give up semi-auto handguns because he feels there are too many guns in the hands of the people, is simply more of his stupidity on display.

america, what a wonderful country...why we even have freedom of speech...

Here's some simple logic from a simpleton named Ed Good:



The U.S. has over 300 million guns and a 2012 murder rate of 4.7 per 100,000. Russia has only 13 million guns, and a 2012 murder rate of 9.2 per 100,000. So we have 23 times as many guns and a murder rate about half as high as Russia. It would seem that the problem is cultural rather than due to the availability of guns.

Imagine how much lower our murder rate would be if we cracked down on certain extremely violent and criminal subsets of our society instead of making excuses for them as King Brown does by referring to Gang Bangers as children.

Anti-Gun Trolls like King and Ed Good would much rather see restrictions on the rights of law abiding gun owners.

Anti-Gun moles like keet would much rather see bans on firearms, without regard the rights of law abiding gun owners.

Ed, I think this would be more effective if you actually showed us where I ever proposed any firearms bans or disregard for the rights of law abiding gun owners.

Or are you just a simple idiot who thinks he can sway the discussion of your anti-gun rhetoric by attempting to transfer your behavior on to me?

well keet, certainly the weird pro gun persona that you project here disregards and threatens the rights of law abiding gun owners...

course we all know that you are not real and therefore what ever you post here is... also not real.

If what I post is not real, and I am not real, why on earth would you respond to me Ed?

Are you tilting at windmills, or are you simply a simple idiot?

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIIa9ihWegIAmYc0nIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByZ2N0cmxpBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDBGdwb3MDMg--?p=peter+o%27toole+sings+dulcinea&vid=6dc3759c9abd837ade27b337281aba69&turl=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DWN.1ju4BuLWefUBep9l05seHw%26pid%3D15.1%26h%3D160%26w%3D300%26c%3D7%26rs%3D1&rurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D7-1aCoRqRO4&tit=Man+of+La+Mancha+-+Dulcinea+-+Peter+O%26%2339%3BToole+%281972%29&c=1&h=160&w=300&l=271&sigr=11bpu2i4r&sigt=11mv5toce&sigi=12llsq8ul&age=1348144986&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Av&fr=yhs-iry-fullyhosted_003&hsimp=yhs-fullyhosted_003&hspart=iry&type=wncy_dnldwz_15_34&tt=b

If what I post is not real, and I am not real, why on earth would you respond to me Ed?

Are you tilting at windmills, or are you simply a simple idiot?

P.S. I have no intention of clicking on your Gay Anti-Gunner links.

keet: like much of your other posts here, which are narrow minded and short sighted, you might wish to reconsider viewing the above clip, which certainly features peter o'toole, but also treats us to sophia loren, in all of her earthy glory...

but then, as you are not real here, you probably dont care one way or the other?

Here's some simple logic from a simpleton named Ed Good:



The U.S. has over 300 million guns and a 2012 murder rate of 4.7 per 100,000. Russia has only 13 million guns, and a 2012 murder rate of 9.2 per 100,000. So we have 23 times as many guns and a murder rate about half as high as Russia. It would seem that the problem is cultural rather than due to the availability of guns.

Imagine how much lower our murder rate would be if we cracked down on certain extremely violent and criminal subsets of our society instead of making excuses for them as King Brown does by referring to Gang Bangers as children.

Anti-Gun Trolls like King and Ed Good would much rather see restrictions on the rights of law abiding gun owners.

"Imagine how much lower our murder rate would be if we cracked down on certain extremely violent and criminal subsets of our society..."

violent crime is a direct result of poverty...reduce poverty, reduce violent crime....trouble is, we as a society cannot seem to reduce poverty...in fact, it has increased dramatically in recent years and there appears to be no hope or plan to reduce poverty in the near future...since the 1960's the "war on poverty" has been a dismal failure...sorta like the "war on drugs"...when all is said and done, we do not have the will to win these wars...it is just not there.

Here's a list of ten millionaires who committed murder. Once again, Ed Good shows us that he is a simple idiot who doesn't have the brains he was born with:

http://listverse.com/2013/09/10/10-millionaires-who-committed-murder/

Hundreds of millions of poor people have never engaged in violent crime. If poverty was a cause of violent crime, Nuns should all be violent killers.

Ed Good has started numerous threads claiming he wishes to "have a discussion" about gun control. But clearly, Ed Good totally ignores the facts that people take the time to show him, and instantly reverts back to his calls to reduce the number of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens. You have to include law abiding citizens in his bans and reductions of semi-automatics because violent criminals often get their guns by stealing them.

Ed Good is an anti-gun idiot who, like his anti-gun pal King Brown, thinks he is fooling us.

well keet, betcha a higher percentage of the poor peoples commit more violent crime than do either the middle class types or the richuns...

Well dead head Ed, I'll have to dismiss that argument out of hand for now because you refuse to discuss or explain how the murder rate in Russia can be almost twice as high as the U.S. even though we have over 23 times as many guns.

After you do that, then you can break down the distribution of violent crime by age, race, and sex and give us your analysis of the root societal causes. Hint: wealth or poverty isn't it or Nuns would be overflowing our prisons.

Don't feel like there's too much pressure Ed because no one here is expecting much from an idiot like you.

so keet, are you now suggesting that there is no direct connection between poverty and violent crime in my country?

What country are you talking about Ed? Why are you suddenly interested in what I have to say? What makes you think I will respond to your question when you still choose to ignore the facts about murder rates and numbers of gun in Russia vs. the U.S.?

I do think there is a direct connection between your idiotic ideas and your lack of intelligence. You will always be an idiot.

well keet. my country is the us of a...sounds like yours is russia?

Backwards again ed but I've come to expect that from a senile old fart who belongs here-----> http://www.genesishcc.com/PheasantWood

Ed, I did you a favor and defended you from the unfair assertion that you only type in all capital letters in your recent DROP AT HEEL thread in the Main DoubleGun forum. Here it is. No need to thank me!



Ed Good does not always type in all capital letters. When he makes his frequent anti-gun posts calling for large reductions in the number of guns in the U.S., he typically uses all lower case letters.

hopefully, the resident heal here will disappear...soon...

I agree Ed. Here's a couple of the resident heel's... (not "heal" as illiterate Ed spells it) recent anti-gun posts. He is even worse than you Ed.




Then there's this little gem where King attempts to link our Constitutional RKBA to an insane allegation that we "accept" mass murder and mass school shootings:



When I posted this anti-gun rhetoric in another thread, King's immediate response was, "Evidence please."

Only King could be caught with the smoking gun in his hand and proclaim innocence. The whole exchange can be read in the "300,000,000, Yes 300,000,000" thread beginning with King's post #421751. Pathetically sick.