Search

Notices

Proud of my company

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-25-2018, 09:23 AM
  #61  
UCH Pilot
 
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: 787
Posts: 776
Default

Originally Posted by fadec
I'm tired of my employer being so politically active and opinionated. I disagree with their stance 100%. Would there be repercussions on e.g. Facebook if I listed UAL as an employer (or it was otherwise evident through photos) yet somewhere in a comment made statements to support the NRA? If I never listed UAL as an employer but still voiced opinions, would I be passed over for promotion or additional work opportunity? Political views are never good for office politics. But the difference is, I don't disagree with Bob in accounting or my dweeb leftist boss. I disagree with my company... I am in open disagreement with their policy and I am saying so publicly. Even if these worries are unfounded, the social media policy could still see me out. The time has come for us to rewrite this social media policy. If the company can play politics with impunity then so can I. My views are not those of my employer and the views of my employer are most certainly not mine.
The answer to your question is yes. The left almost immediately calls for anyone with a different view that makes it public be fired by their employer. They are doing everything they can to suppress viewpoints that are not theirs, because their views are so weak they don’t stand up under any scrutiny.
svergin is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 09:25 AM
  #62  
UCH Pilot
 
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: 787
Posts: 776
Default

Originally Posted by Floyd
All of your talking points have one thing in common which is intent. No one intended to get into a car and kill. When someone blows a hole into a hotel window thirty floors up or walks into a high school possessing assault rifles they intend to kill. The assault rifle makes their intent that much easier.

There are agendas on both sides. The extremes want to either take away all the guns or flood the country with guns. Once the NRA and the extreme left are removed from the conversation, then we might just actually solve the problem. That's my agenda.
I have no intent to kill anyone (except people who break into my house and threaten my family) with a gun, so why are my rights under assault?
svergin is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 09:50 AM
  #63  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 400
Default

Originally Posted by Regularguy
Next question:

Do you really know your gun laws?

Answer: No?

Think pre-86, serious background check and spending somewhere near $10,000 (or more).




BTW I agree with Oscar on the Wall, too bad he says such things as a representative of UAL. Just think if we pilots made such announcements on every flight.
The question was whether you can legally own it. The answer is yes.
Mover is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 10:23 AM
  #64  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 501
Default

Originally Posted by svergin
I have no intent to kill anyone (except people who break into my house and threaten my family) with a gun, so why are my rights under assault?
Despite the latest broken record "this is why you should be afraid and angry" Fox & Friends narrative you'll always be able to shoot the boogieman with a legally owned firearm. This right isn't under assault.
Barley is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 10:55 AM
  #65  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
Default

Originally Posted by Mover
The question was whether you can legally own it. The answer is yes.
Of course one can own it, but only after the strictest gun law and out of personal pocket book costs are satisfied.

That post made it seem like any of us could simply cough up $200 bucks, wait a few weeks and like magic I have a full auto.

Well that fairy tale just isn’t true.

These “conversations” become very dishonest as people attempt to prove their personal points.
Regularguy is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 11:02 AM
  #66  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,244
Default

Originally Posted by Regularguy
Of course one can own it, but only after the strictest gun law and out of personal pocket book costs are satisfied.

That post made it seem like any of us could simply cough up $200 bucks, wait a few weeks and like magic I have a full auto.

Well that fairy tale just isn’t true.

These “conversations” become very dishonest as people attempt to prove their personal points.
Took me two weeks to get two ATF stamps on one gun, $450 total.
Grumble is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 11:11 AM
  #67  
:-)
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Default

There are several schools across the country that have armed teachers, and this so far, is working well. Expanding arming of teachers would be the appropriate deterrent response.
Mesabah is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 11:20 AM
  #68  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
Default

Originally Posted by Grumble
Took me two weeks to get two ATF stamps on one gun, $450 total.
So how much did you spend on the pre-86 full auto gun, do you have previous dealings, the local sheriff contacted...

Ok you simply walked into the gun shop, ordered a cheap full auto gun, plunked down $450 and like magic you’re in!

Here’s a real summary:

For example, a private citizen can lawfully own a machine gun only if:
1. the possessor isn’t a “prohibited person,”
2. the full-auto machine gun was made before 1986, and
3. their relevant state law does not ban that the firearm (whether banning machine guns outright or any firearm with certain features).

https://rocketffl.com/who-can-own-a-...o-machine-gun/

Dude, I’m a member of the NRA, Trained Instructor, last year shot over 15k in ammo for practice and competition, reload, have two cabinets with legal stuff, so stop kidding me and the readers of this blog.

Right now I know initial buyers of a can are taking about 4-6 weeks to get their stamp.

Why spread fairy tales. This is serious business.

Basically you, Grumble, are guilty of spreading dishonesty to those that unaware of the truth. What point are you trying to mislead others about?
Regularguy is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 11:56 AM
  #69  
The NeverEnding Story
 
BoilerUP's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,609
Default

Originally Posted by Regularguy
So how much did you spend on the pre-86 full auto gun, do you have previous dealings, the local sheriff contacted...

Ok you simply walked into the gun shop, ordered a cheap full auto gun, plunked down $450 and like magic you’re in!

Here’s a real summary:

For example, a private citizen can lawfully own a machine gun only if:
1. the possessor isn’t a “prohibited person,”
2. the full-auto machine gun was made before 1986, and
3. their relevant state law does not ban that the firearm (whether banning machine guns outright or any firearm with certain features).

Nothing he has said has been false or misleading.

Can a civilian legally own a Title II weapon like a machine gun? Yes they can.

Of course, the story doesn't period/dot end there...

The high price of entry due to the Hughes Amendment, while a MAJOR factor (and the reason I don't have a machine gun myself) is largely immaterial to the reality of the stamp tax and waiting for an ATF inspector in West Virginia to approve your application (let's be honest, the background check ain't exactly a SSBI).

And once your stamp comes back, you go to the fun shop and complete a 4473 and NICS check and only then get possession of your new expensive toy.

Four weeks to an approved Form 4? That'd certainly be news to me...my last suppressor took 7 months, my brother had an SBR that took 13. NFA Tracker still shows Form 4s to be 120-150 or more days.
BoilerUP is offline  
Old 02-25-2018, 12:02 PM
  #70  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 400
Default

Originally Posted by Regularguy
Of course one can own it, but only after the strictest gun law and out of personal pocket book costs are satisfied.

That post made it seem like any of us could simply cough up $200 bucks, wait a few weeks and like magic I have a full auto.

Well that fairy tale just isn’t true.

These “conversations” become very dishonest as people attempt to prove their personal points.
My post was a fact about the gun law. You don't have to like it. The price has nothing to do with it (other than supply and demand due to the ban).

It is a fact that you can own/possess those weapons.
Mover is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Guard Dude
Delta
201720
04-06-2022 06:59 AM
flyphisher
UPS
179
05-18-2021 12:48 PM
Crawl
CommuteAir
5406
03-21-2020 06:45 AM
SpecialTracking
United
158
06-21-2019 03:59 PM
astroglider
Major
13
05-27-2012 08:04 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices