RuledByNone

Internet firearm purchases require that the firearm be shipped to a FFL (Federal Firearms License) holder who can process the background check. You fill out an ATF form and the NICS background check goes to the FBI.
 
You also have to pass a Firearms Safety Certificate test and sign an affidavit stating that you own a gun safe and provide make/model.
 
FFLs charge a significant fee and are required to collect local state tax so it usually wouldn't make sense to buy on the internet.
 
There is a 10 day waiting period on all firearms and handgun sales require you to be 21 and show ID in addition to proof of residency (utility bill etc). Person to person transactions require an FFL and background check. Gun show transactions require an FFL and background check.
 
Weapons must be added to the roster by Ca DOJ or they can't be purchased at all. You can't purchase any glock gen 4 in Ca for example. Newer models from many manufacturers are not on roster.
 
 
From the latest CDC numbers:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf
Accidental deaths from firearms: 505
Accidental deaths from falls:  30,208
Accidental deaths from poisoning: 38,851
 
310 million guns (2009 estimate) and 100 million gun owners and just 505 accidental deaths. Which of these types of deaths make headlines? It's easier to demonize guns than trees, cliffs and rooftops.
 
 Also from the CDC docs:
Suicide accounts for 65.4% of gun violence deaths. Among white males suicide is 89.1% of gun violence deaths.
Of the remaining deaths (actual homicides), what percentage of them were gang/drug or organized crime related?
CDC doesn't keep that data point but locally LAPD classified 55% of homicides as gang related (2014) and the Sheriff Dept. as 60%. In Chicago that number is 80% (2012 estimate).
 
Among the actual homicides, including gang/drug related homicides, what percentage used rifles?
About 2.3%
From fbi.gov data, that number was just 285 (2013 stats). Of that 285 rifles used in homicides, how many were of the "assault weapon" variety and how many had extended magazines?
 
Why is it that the countries that have the highest homicide rate often have among the lowest gun ownership percentage? Mexico, Brazil, Honduras, Colombia all have gun ownership levels below 10% but have terrible gun homicide statistics. Switzerland has gun ownership rates of about 50% but has very low gun crime.
 
Could there instead be a correlation between homicide rate and a government created black market with extremely high profit motive (prohibition)? Prohibition of alcohol resulted in a huge expansion of organized crime throughout the country with a very small (few percent) reduction in alcohol consumption. Removing the prohibition also removed the profit motive and the accompanying crime. Prohibition doesn't work. If you are truly honest about reducing crime then removing a prohibition (drugs) would be more effective than increasing another.

Why would Saudi Arabia try to destroy ISIS when they are helping to support them?

This is just a wild guess but maybe it's because Turkey is sheltering a shitload of FSA and ISIS terrorist fighters along its border? It's amazing to me that people think it's ok for the United States to bomb a sovereign country whenever it pleases but if a Russian fighter jet crosses Turkey's border by a bee's dick it should be shot down immediately (potentially starting an armed conflict between Russia and NATO.)
People in this country should take a step back and ask themselves what in the heck are we doing in Syria? Are we willing to risk American lives just to get a fresh pipeline from Qatar to Europe? Do we really think our military is going to fix the endless sectarian violence that has been perpetuated for centuries? Do you feel good that we are arming Al Qaeda with anti tank missiles even though they still want to kill us? Is it a good thing that we've pissed billions of dollars down the drain and have little to show for it? Can we take pride in the fact that our biggest Muslim allies in the region still crucify people in public on a monthly basis? It's high time we packed up our things and left that armpit of the planet.

Surface tension probably. Water molecules stick together. Gasses don't. Water is a tiny sub-nanomater molecule so if whatever much larger pot molecule can exit through a defect in the polymer bag then water would be able to as well, unless it was stuck to other water molecules.
 
or
 
Gasses at room temperature are actually moving extremely fast. Hundreds of mph if I remember. A heavier pot molecule moving at high speed is much more likely to force its way out of the bag than the docile water molecule.
 
or
 
Water actually does make it out of the bag in small amounts but when it goes to water vapor, unlike the pot molecule,  it doesn't smell like anything.

Road pirates who call themselves cops are now responsible for more theft than all burglaries combined. $4.5B compared to $3.9B.
 
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/11/no_author/cop-theft-exceeded-burglaries-2014/

He'll be the first MLB front office guy to go on the DL

Which ever one promises to give them the most stuff.

"During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets."
 
I don't get to read this board very much but elsewhere the farm animals seem to be very interested in determining which psychopathic mass murderer to "vote" for next year.

Definitely a Captain Stabbin episode gone bad.

The origin of the right is founded in self ownership. If you accept that each person owns themselves then that person can choose what to do with their property(person) as long as the action doesn't harm someone else's property.
Choosing not to wear a helmet or seat belt, choosing to prostitute yourself, choosing to possess or use drugs, or even choosing to kill yourself is at the sole discretion of the owner.
None of those actions involve the initiation of force on another person. The "state" tries to prohibit those actions by threatening force (coercion) and will initiate force if any of their "laws" are broken. As the initiation of force is always immoral it is they alone that are committing a crime.

The origin of the right is founded in self ownership. If you accept that each person owns themselves then that person can choose what to do with their property(person) as long as the action doesn't harm someone else's property.
Choosing not to wear a helmet or seat belt, choosing to prostitute yourself, choosing to possess or use drugs, or even choosing to kill yourself is at the sole discretion of the owner.
None of those actions involve the initiation of force on another person. The "state" tries to prohibit those actions by threatening force (coercion) and will initiate force if any of their "laws" are broken. As the initiation of force is always immoral it is they alone that are committing a crime.

The origin of the right is founded in self ownership. If you accept that each person owns themselves then that person can choose what to do with their property(person) as long as the action doesn't harm someone else's property.
Choosing not to wear a helmet or seat belt, choosing to prostitute yourself, choosing to possess or use drugs, or even choosing to kill yourself is at the sole discretion of the owner.
None of those actions involve the initiation of force on another person. The "state" tries to prohibit those actions by threatening force (coercion) and will initiate force if any of their "laws" are broken. As the initiation of force is always immoral it is they alone that are committing a crime.

The origin of the right is founded in self ownership. If you accept that each person owns themselves then that person can choose what to do with their property(person) as long as the action doesn't harm someone else's property.
Choosing not to wear a helmet or seat belt, choosing to prostitute yourself, choosing to possess or use drugs, or even choosing to kill yourself is at the sole discretion of the owner.
None of those actions involve the initiation of force on another person. The "state" tries to prohibit those actions by threatening force (coercion) and will initiate force if any of their "laws" are broken. As the initiation of force is always immoral it is they alone that are committing a crime.

Wright actually pitched very well there. He struck out Utley twice and then Gonzalez. Better than anything I've seen from Awfulrez in a long time.

Scioscia said he would be happy to talk to any candidates, but otherwise would trust that owner Arte Moreno and president John Carpino would hire someone who is “on the same page” with him.
 
“And obviously if any potential GM wants to have those conversations with me, obviously I’d love that, just to make sure that they’re comfortable with being on the same page.”
 
In other words, he expects the Angels to hire someone to accommodate him, not the person who's in the best interest of the organization.  Unbelievable.  He's right up there with A-Rod on the narcissistic sociopath spectrum.