If he has a NYC permit for 5 rifles, he's an upstanding citizen *according the city itself*.
The process for obtaining a rifle permit is virtually identical to the one for a pistol permit, except that the latter is twice as expensive and requires an in-person interview.
But both require extensive background checks, fingerprinting, notarized character references, and signed affidavits from any "adult co-habitants." They have to be renewed every three years, to the tune of hundreds of dollars in non-refundable fees.
He has "assault weapons," "high capacity magazines," and body armor which he likely legally purchased prior to NY's respective bans and just never got rid of...probably because those are thousands of dollars in personal property.
We've been told over and over again that no one wants to punish peaceable citizens for merely possessing firearms and defending themselves. We've been called crazy every time for saying that's a lie and we all know it.
But here we are.
If the mugger had lived, he'd be facing infinitely less time in prison than the peaceable citizen who had the *audacity* to defend himself in public without begging the government's permission and schlepping it countless hundreds of dollars.
What dystopian hell is this?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Any roommates or cohabitants? Yeah, they have to sign an affidavit.
Hope you have your original social security card and two passport-quality photos. And don't forget about those two non-familial character references (who must be lawful U.S. residents).
People think I'm being dramatic about just how big of a problem these giant teen "house parties" are becoming...but let me present a short rundown of recent times they turned into shootings. And by recent, I mean "just this year."
The article calls 2 victims "children" and states the incident took place at a party with "50 to 60 kids." You'd think someone opened fire on an 11-year-old's mid-day birthday party with that framing, and that it's just random violence killing our kids during low-risk activities.
But let's dig a little deeper. Some parts of this article should raise suspicions that something else is at play.
The "children" were "doing donuts" in a parking lot "nearby the party," when "shortly before midnight" some masked gunmen opened fire on them.
Gun owners, let's talk about the many ways this tragedy could have been prevented. I understand being elderly and feeling vulnerable in general, but we have to make better decisions - and set ourselves up to avoid costly mistakes.
(1) Install a peephole so you can see who's there without having to physically open your door. I'm not suggesting that this teen was inherently threatening. But let's say you're uncomfortable for whatever reason - a peephole allows you to be uncomfortable BEHIND the locked door.
If you can't install a peephole, look through a window first. If you have a blind entryway, install a ring camera. If you can't install a ring, get a locking storm door or barred security door. You have many options to seriously lower the odds of feeling like you HAVE to shoot.
Because they're not "weapons of war." They're incredibly useful for defending innocent life from criminal threats in noncombat zones like...say...downtown Louisville. Which is exactly why the peace officers responding to that civilian-context threat used them, too.
But while I have everyone's attention, let's have a history lesson and reality check at the same time.
Gather round, children, and let me tell you the tale of how mass public shooters have ALWAYS been able to kill a lot of people with far more...rustic...guns.
In 1903, in Winfield, KS, a man opened fire on a weekly outdoor music concert attended by thousands of people. He killed 8 and wounded 25 more before either taking his own life or being killed by the night watchman. He used a double-barrel shotgun.