Carlos Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 The fat guy from the band "Blues Traveler" was arrested after his Mercedes SUV was pulled over doing over 100 MPH (link below). Turns out the guy is a pot head (big surprise there). He should and will answer for the drugs and the speeding - I have no issue with the arrest for that. But what I hate is that the media - even fox news - considers "4 rifles and 9 handguns" to be an "arsenal" (notice they forgot the shotgun?!). If they make this guy out to be a kooky gun-nut for simply owning 13 firearms (i.e. - "its an ARSENAL!!") - then what does that make those of us who may own the same number of guns? (or more). LINK here http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257638,00.html Once we get the Zumbos of the world on the same sheet of music, we will still have a lot of work to do to preserve our rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outerlimits Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 The fat guy from the band "Blues Traveler" was arrested after his Mercedes SUV was pulled over doing over 100 MPH (link below). Turns out the guy is a pot head (big surprise there). He should and will answer for the drugs and the speeding - I have no issue with the arrest for that. But what I hate is that the media - even fox news - considers "4 rifles and 9 handguns" to be an "arsenal" (notice they forgot the shotgun?!). If they make this guy out to be a kooky gun-nut for simply owning 13 firearms (i.e. - "its an ARSENAL!!") - then what does that make those of us who may own the same number of guns? (or more). LINK here http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257638,00.html Once we get the Zumbos of the world on the same sheet of music, we will still have a lot of work to do to preserve our rights. they should have a film crew in the tulsa area at the beginning of october... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genghis Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I was just going to the Forum to post this! Fox's headline said, "Rock Star Pulled Over With Arsenal in Trunk." I was wondering how he fit an entire weapons factory in his vehicle - figured I might find out where I could buy the same setup. Funny how the headline is over guns, not drugs or speeding, and the guns are the only thing he wasn't charged with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 i have around 35, but i don't carry all of them in my truck! lynn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganShootist Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Where I grew up... that number was considered a "starters set" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Apparently some people are just not very well armed Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 (edited) I don't think owning"4 rifles and 9 handguns" is a big deal ....... but "4 rifles and 9 handguns" hidden in secret compartments inside your SUV for daily driving is kinda weird. Almost a little scary. I'm no anti-gun guy by any means, but if I was a cop and pulled this guy over, I would have to scratch my head and wonder just what he was doing with all the guns. I'm assuming they were loaded ???. Maybe not. But he would have been fine if he hadnt been speeding, and / or had drugs in the vehicle. Oh and I forgot about the NIGHT-VISION goggles. That has to make a cop scratch his head. Basically what I'm saying is this guy didnt do himself or "gun-owners" in general any favors, because now the media is making 14 guns to sound like "an arsenal". The world dosent want to see or hear about guns at all (outta sight - outta mind) so even 1 would have made the news, with an emphasis on the gun, but with the 111 mph speeding & drugs in the background of the story. Edited March 8, 2007 by CHRIS KEEN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanM Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I don't think owning"4 rifles and 9 handguns" is a big deal ....... but "4 rifles and 9 handguns" hidden in secret compartments inside your SUV for daily driving is kinda weird. Almost a little scary. I'm no anti-gun guy by any means, but if I was a cop and pulled this guy over, I would have to scratch my head and wonder just what he was doing with all the guns. I'm assuming they were loaded ???. Maybe not. But he would have been fine if he hadnt been speeding, and / or had drugs in the vehicle. Oh and I forgot about the NIGHT-VISION goggles. That has to make a cop scratch his head. Basically what I'm saying is this guy didnt do himself or "gun-owners" in general any favors, because now the media is making 14 guns to sound like "an arsenal". The world dosent want to see or hear about guns at all (outta sight - outta mind) so even 1 would have made the news, with an emphasis on the gun, but with the 111 mph speeding & drugs in the background of the story. I have to agree with Chris here. I have an "arsenal" many times over but the only time I've ever driven with all of them in the truck was last summer when I moved from CA to WA. I drove the speed limit the entire way Even when I carry, I drive a bit nicer. My wife can tell I'm carrying just by how much nicer I drive, lol... Sounds like this guy is a few donuts short of a dozen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 You guys see the latest from Zumbo? February 28, 2007Mr. Alan Gottlieb, Chairman Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms 12500 N.E. Tenth Place Bellevue, WA 98005 Dear Alan: They say that hindsight is always 20-20. In my case, hindsight has been a hard teacher, like the father teaching the son a lesson about life in the wood shed. I was wrong when I recently suggested that wildlife agencies should ban semiautomatic firearms I erroneously called “assault rifles” for hunting. I insulted legions of my fellow gun owners in the process by calling them “terrorist rifles.” I can never apologize enough for having worn blinders when I should have been wearing bifocals. But unlike those who would destroy the Second Amendment right to own a firearm – any firearm – I have learned from my embarrassing mistake. My error should not be used, as it has been in recent days by our common enemies, in an effort to dangerously erode our right to keep and bear arms. I would hope instead to use this spotlight to address my hunting fraternity, many of whom shared my erroneous position. I am a hunter and like many others I had the wrong picture in mind. I associated these firearms with military action, and saw not hunting as I have known it, not the killing of a varmint, but the elimination of the entire colony. Nothing could be further from the truth, but I know from whence it comes. This ridiculous image, formed in the blink of an eye, exerts an unconscious effect on all decisions that follow. In seeking to protect our hunting rights by guarding how we are seen in the public eye, I lost sight of the larger picture; missed the forest for the trees. My own lack of experience was no excuse for ignoring the fact that millions of Americans – people who would share a campfire or the shelter of their tent, and who have hurt nobody – own, hunt with and competitively shoot or collect the kinds of firearms I so easily dismissed. I recently took a “crash course” on these firearms with Ted Nugent, to learn more about them and to educate myself. In the process, I learned about the very real threat that faces all American gun owners. I’ve studied up on legislation now in Congress that would renew and dangerously expand a ban on many types of firearms. The bill, HR 1022 sponsored by New York Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, is written so broadly that it would outlaw numerous firearms and accessories, including a folding stock for a Ruger rifle. I understand that some of the language could ultimately take away my timeworn and cherished hunting rifles and shotguns as well as those of all American hunters. The extremist supporters of HR 1022 don’t want to stop criminals. They want to invent new ones out of people like you and me with the simple stroke of a pen. They will do anything they can to make it impossible for more and more American citizens to legally own any firearm. Realizing that what I wrote catered to this insidious attack on fellow gun owners has, one might say, “awakened a sleeping giant within me, and filled him with a terrible resolve.” I made a mistake. But those who would use my remarks to further their despicable political agenda have made a bigger one. I hope to become their worst nightmare. I admit I was wrong. They insist they are right. Enclosed, you will find a check that is intended to be used to fight and defeat HR 1022. I also hope it inspires other gun owners to “do as I do, not as I say.” I’m putting my money where my mouth should have been, and where my heart and soul have always been. I know the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting and never has been. My blunder was in thinking that by working to protect precious hunting rights I was doing enough. I promise it will never happen again. I don’t know what lies over the horizon for me. I am not ready for the rocking chair. I’m going to devote every ounce of my energy to this battle. I will remind my fellow hunters that we are first, gun owners. Whether we like it or not, our former apathy and prejudices may place that which we love, hunting, in jeopardy. I will educate fellow outdoorsmen who mistakenly think like I talked, even if I have to visit every hunting camp and climb into every duck blind and deer stand in this country to get it done. I was wrong, and I’m going to make it right. Sincerely, Jim Zumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 (edited) It gets worse ................ the link below points to a paper out of Washington, that got a little more of the story ............. LINK "The Spokane Regional Drug Task Force and the ATF have been called to assist in the investigation. DEA agents seized Popper's vehicle and he could face federal charges of possessing a vehicle with hidden compartments." Me thinks every govt. agency within 100 miles is fightin' over who gets to keep that sweet black Mercedes SUV equipped with flashing emergency headlights, a siren and external public address (PA) system, with multiple hidden compartments ........ complete with Night vision goggles, a taser, 9 handguns, 4 rifles (one of which was a .50 cal), and 1 shotgun. It's a freakin ARESENAL! Who wouldn't want that ??? Edited March 9, 2007 by CHRIS KEEN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 "Arsenal"? I think the standards for an "arsenal" are largely defined by geography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
open17 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 "The Spokane Regional Drug Task Force and the ATF have been called to assist in the investigation. DEA agents seized Popper's vehicle and he could face federal charges of possessing a vehicle with hidden partments."[/comcolor] "Possessing a vehicle with hidden compartments?" That's a crime? A FEDERAL crime? Anybody want to cite a statute here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 (edited) Yeah but with the drugs they can confiscate it easily, and who woudn't want that sweet ride? They're just trying to make it sound more o-fish-al Edited March 9, 2007 by CHRIS KEEN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Pot + "some guns" = ARSENAL Damn that reefer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanM Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 "Arsenal"? I think the standards for an "arsenal" are largely defined by geography. Here in Washington, that wouldn't even begin to be an arsenal for most folks. That's just going out to the range for a few hours of fun. I'd like to see his gunsafe at home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Pot + "some guns" = ARSENALDamn that reefer Reefer Madness..... Still my favorite educational movie..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitman Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I havent been that low on fire power since I was 10. Shoot my kid has more than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malak Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Where I grew up... that number was considered a "starters set" Pot + "some guns" = ARSENALDamn that reefer +1 for both... 13 guns is no arsenal, by any stretch.. they mentioned no shotguns, supressors, class III SBRS, full autos, '50cal long range weapons of mass destruction' you must has atleast 3 of the 5 to be considered for the arsenal club... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 since when is a Truck Vault a hidden compartment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanM Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 This is an arsenal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 This is an arsenal wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajarrel Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 This is an arsenal Yes it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotm4 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 This my 'Arsenal' AK-106FR. I'll be using it at this weekends Larry Vickers AK class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Sierpina Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 This is an arsenal Nah....that's a COLLECTION!!! And, an impressive one it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 "Possessing a vehicle with hidden compartments?" That's a crime? A FEDERAL crime?Anybody want to cite a statute here? This is similar to the French law that outlaws the possession of any encryption software or hardware unless the French government possesses the decryption keys (even multinational corporations have to register their keys). Kind of makes one wonder how Microsoft Vista bitlocker plays in France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now