Pennsylvania Residents - This is unbelievable

[spy1]

http://www.nranews.com/blogarticle.aspx?blogPostId=208

"Tracking the Wrong Group

4/28/2007

In Pennsylvania, anti-gun politicians are trying to pass a bill requiring registration of every firearm in the state.

At a cost of ten bucks per gun, this bill would tax three million gun owners and treat them like criminals. Actually, it would treat law-abiding gun owners worse than many criminals in Pennsylvania. With registration, the state would know exactly where gun owners live and how many guns they own.

But criminals won't register their guns. And courts have actually ruled that they don't have to! Forcing a criminal to register his illegally owned firearm is a violation of his Fifth Amendment rights, believe it or not. So the Fifth Amendment rights of criminals are apparently more important than the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. That's wrong!

Besides, the cops in Pennsylvania have better things to do than keep tabs on lawful gun owners. A report issued by the state earlier this week found that there are almost 1.5 million outstanding warrants in the state, including thousands issued for violent crimes, including homicide.

Instead of focusing their attention on the people who aren't breaking the law, why don't these anti-gun politicians help cops track down these wanted criminals? Are these politicians anti-crime, or just anti-gun? And why aren't the media asking the questions?"

============================================

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=2835

Go read the bill - it's not that long. This is the most totally anti-gun bill I've ever heard of being proposed.

Total gun registration (yearly $10 per firearm fee).

If you're denied and lose your appeal - surrender your guns.

If you're caught without your "permit" after getting one - surrender your guns.

Look at the requirements:

"b) Application.--Every person who is required to register a
16 firearm under this act shall obtain an application for
17 registration of the firearm from the Pennsylvania State Police.
18 The application shall be in writing and sworn under oath and
19 shall require the following information:
20 (1) The name, home and business address, telephone
21 number, date of birth and Social Security number of the
22 applicant.
23 (2) The age, sex and citizenship of the applicant.
24 (3) The name of the manufacturer, the caliber or gauge,
25 the model, type and serial number of each firearm to be
26 registered.
27 (4) Two photographs taken within 30 days immediately
28 prior to the date of filing the application equivalent to
29 passport size showing the full face, head and shoulders of
30 the applicant in a clear and distinguishing manner.
20070H0760B0881 - 4 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 (5) Additional information as the Pennsylvania State
2 Police may deem necessary to process the application.
3 (c) Fingerprinting.--The applicant or registrant shall
4 submit to fingerprinting by the Pennsylvania State Police in
5 accordance with procedures and regulations prescribed by the
6 Pennsylvania State Police."

If this is allowed to pass in PA, look for other States' to follow suit.

It goes without saying that every single shred of information will be passed on to the Federal government agencies that request them.

What you PA residents' are witnessing is the perfect recipe for future gun confiscation.

PA gun-owners need to be screaming your heads' off about this to your local Reps - and you need to slap bumper-stickers on your vehicles that say "Hell No I Won't!" Pete

[fake oobs]

Wow, when did this forum turn into a shouting post on political issues??!

Is this a security forum or a gun forum?!?

Or S. Peter Yevchak's (SPY1) forum

[spy1]

The Mods and Admins here see fit to let me post (for which I thank them).

It should be rather obvious that gun owners in either of the two States I've mentioned lately wouldn't want to be blind-sided by the types of legislation under discussion - so if they didn't happen to see/hear about it elsewhere, hopefully they'll see it here.

BTW - If you don't like my posts so much, why do you waste your time (and definitely mine) by reading and - um - "responding" to them?

I've always wondered why people with absolutely nothing of substance by way of response - and exactly zero useful contribution to any given thread (especially when they claim to not be interested in the subject(s) ) - bother to post.

And, yes - my nic is derived from my name (Steven Peter Yevchak the 1st (or Sr.)

I'm certainly not afraid to have my name known because I'm solidly behind every single thing I say.

How about you? Pete

[fake oobs]

Peter, its because you come across as a real twunt. But you're right, the admin(s) allow you to post. Who am I to say, right?? I just get spammed by you.

I suppose in a lot of ways might be right. I could simply choose to ignore you. But in getting to where ive got in life, I've realised that I can either take the $hit like the rest of them or speak out and let the di€kheads know what I think of them. I've never been one to take it if you know what I mean. Clearly you know what I mean...

Since we're going to post off topic stuff, then why don't I post an image of a banana? I mean, its random and has absolutely nothing to do with security!



It should be rather obvious that banana owners in either of the two States you mentioned lately wouldn't want to be blind-sided by the types of legislation under discussion - so if they didn't happen to see/hear about it elsewhere, hopefully they'll see it here.

[spy1]

About the level of response I expected from you (you could have surprised me and said something intelligent...or actually applicable to the subject-at-hand...but once again you chose not to.

And, of course, you're much too cowardly to use your real name (which I totally expected, too).

Perhaps you could benefit from actually reading the description of what this particular sub-forum is all about (from the main forums page) :

"The Water Cooler
This is a general forum to discuss anything that you want. Imagine it being the office water cooler, where folks gather and discuss any topic they find interesting."

I bolded and underlined the applicable parts of that since you seem to be - at most - only semi-literate. (Look up the hard words at dictionary.com ).

Have a great rest-of-the-weekend - my grandkids are here and they're ever so much more important than you'll ever be. Pete

[infosys]

Yeah this is sort of a topical no-man's land... and depending on how the Ottawa Senator's do in the 2nd round of the playoffs... I might toss in some hockey comments to lure any other hockey nuts into posting....

On the topic of guns... well there is a very real connection to guns and security. Just twist your perception of any changes in gun laws to how they may improve or hurt physical site security and its possible impact on work place violence.

Shoot ups at schools may be the hot buzz topic in the news media - yet everyday it seems a gun makes an appearance in a work place..

The murder - suicide that took place at the NASA site is a stark reminder that there are nut jobs out there with weapons... who can find ways to enter supposedly 'secure' locations and put personnel in harms way.

Dunno... but I hope that explains why the water cooler is a neutral area that topics like guns can be discussed...

.

[fake oobs]

[infosys]

Tee hee.... I love that Chihuahua story.... the only thing that would have made the 'sickly Chihuahua' story funnier would have been if it had been accompanied with a picture of Chihuahua wearing a sombrero and a poncho aieeeee carumba...ariba ariba....



I hate to admit it.... but in my books a Chihuahua ranks right up there with Mimes when it comes to taking the title for 'most irritating thing in the world'.

But I do get your point about introducing Chi Chi the Chihuahua topics around the watercooler

.

[Anonymous Defender]

[quote="fake oobs"]
... But in getting to where ive got in life, I've realised that I can either take the $hit like the rest of them or speak out and let the di€kheads know what I think of them. [quote="fake oobs"]

Reminds me of an argument that I always had with a friend of mine. His argument was that you should let stupid people know that they are stupid. My reply was that you cannot tell a stupid person they are stupid... they're stupid!

Of course, if you take my friend's tack, the results are usually entertaining. For a bit...

[fake oobs]

[infosys]

And to prove my point about useless things in this world... Chihuahua... Mimes and can you guess what kind of dog Paris Hilton has....



The truly irritating and useless are drawn to each other like magnets....


.

[G7]

Well I see points are being made all over the place here at the water cooler so let me throw my 2 cents into the mix.

I understand the passion and points Spy1 is trying to make and I do believe we here in the U.S. should have the right to own guns without too much hassle.
I myself am a victim of workplace violence even though I was not injured I was right in the middle of all the shooting and frankly it will scare the hell out of you no matter who you are. And you will think about it for many years after the incident believe me.

Now I know you wish to get your message out to as many people as possible so they can write their senators but think about it. Is this really the forum where you would get the word out to lots of U.S. citizens who may actually take initiative and write?
I know this forum has a lot or readers and regulars so maybe that is why you post here in this forum under the water cooler but if you look closely at who is responding you will see that it is a security professional from the U.K who deals with more guns and terror over there than we here in the U.S and another Security Professional who is from Canada.
Neither of them can do a dam thing about writing to U.S. Senators because even if they do the Senators could care less because they do not count as a vote here in the U.S.

I would think you would reach more people if you did something on U-Tube or get the young involved in My-Space or post in large forums that talk about gun control.
Also there are things out there called News Groups, which if you have ever searched you will find a plethora of passionate gun owners such as yourself.

I for one say keep up the work but reach a target audience that will be with you and respond positively rather than waste time arguing over what can and can’t be posted at this water cooler.
Remember I am a gun owner in the U.S. and do believe in what you are trying to do but I myself wish to chat about technical security rather than physical security here in this forum, I’ll chat with you about guns in another forum dedicated to that subject.

::Gulp:: (Drinks down last sip of water)
Back to what I love best – Technical Security
Ed

[infosys]

I gotta agree with G7. The people who can 'act' on gun law initiatives of the United State are not really the targeted ( no pun intended ) audience that you will find on this forum.

The best example I can give you is the story of a friend of mine that owned a fairly decent size hair salon. It was not a 'chain' of hair salons... just one lone shop located in the downtown core.

The girl wanted to spend about $50k to build a 'knock em dead and take no prisoners' web site. Of that $50k she wanted to spend a good portion on Internet banner ads and stuff.

She had be convinced by all her friends that 'her business' had to get a foothold on the Internet or else her business would dwindle...

Well.. the short truth is that a beauty salon advertising globally is totally pointless. As if someone from Australia was going to fly to Pennsylvania for a hair.

And similarly, to advertise nationally or even within the State was pointless. People tend to go to hair salons within 10 miles (maximum) of their home or office.

And so the short answer was that her money would be better spent carpet bombing in a 10 mile radius of her hair salon. $50k would buy a LOT of local advertising and promotion AND MOST IMPORTANTLY it would land in the face of the people most likely to respond and take action to the advertising.

I think you would agree that the lady would have been nuts buying a 30 second advert on television's "The Tonight Show' or even "CNN". The money could not possibly be justified based on the return on the investment.

So what G7 is saying is quite right. This forum does not have a huge audience - it has a security focused audience. And our forum users represent about 48 different countries..

So your gun related postings may only be of use to about 10% of our users - and that is not really a large audience for that topic.

Like the hair salon, you have to target your postings where you will hit the largest focused audience on the topic that you are presenting or promoting.

Your efforts and focus on this topic is admirable... but we would be doing a disservice to your cause or causes if we didn't try to offer suggestions on how your efforts could reap a greater return for your efforts.

Marq

.

[spy1]

That's fine.

Please return to your regularly-scheduled programming. Pete

[fake oobs]

Spy. No need to leave the forum. You've got some good input and besides, I like a good haggle with old men who wear ladies underwear

Seriously though, this might be misconstrued as an olive branch of sorts though while I think the gun posts were a little odd, the homeland stuff you post is good quality. Don't necessarily agree with the in your face 'Contact your Rep' approach but hey, I'm English and reserved and you're not. Reserved?!?

Stick around, learn some things and post some decent content.

Cheers

FO