List of gun owners in the US?

[thperez1972]

I read the thread title again...because somehow we went from a list of gun owners to a list of everything Fred sold to Joe Public? Or did I miss more than that?

Yeah...what idiot first mentioned the idea that the government might be collecting a list of what firearms you buy?

I’ve had this conversation with quite a few gun owners over the years and I’m still surprised by what many believe and what they don’t. It’s my belief that the US government has been attempting to compile a list of gun owners since the 90’s, when background checks became law.

Would it be too far a stretch to presume that the info on what firearms you buy can indeed be stored?

Oh...um...nevermind.

 

[Horrible]

You know, a Heater, Blaster, Cannon, Strap, Hammer, Burner, Piece, Hardware, Rod.. That.

LOL. Well said, sir!

 

[Magdump]

Yeah...what idiot first mentioned the idea that the government might be collecting a list of what firearms you buy?





Oh...um...nevermind.

But you’re not calling anyone an idiot, right?

As to the question, anything electronic is stored and can be accessed at any time. Think about how much digital information there is to do with purchases of firearms from credit and debit cards to shipping and tracking etc. Every keystroke a person enters into a system when making a purchase, info on what FFL it goes to and then confirmed when the background check is done. Same deal in a store when the card is charged for the firearm just after a background check on the same person comes back cleared. Can you say with 100% certainty that none of that info associated with anyone and what firearms they buy is being stored and cannot be accessed at any time? Would it be too far a stretch to presume that the info on what firearms you buy can indeed be stored?

 

[thperez1972]

But you’re not calling anyone an idiot, right?

It was a jab because your post made it apparent you weren't sure how the conversation went from the specific topic to the broad topic when it was you who made the transition.

As to the question, anything electronic is stored and can be accessed at any time. Think about how much digital information there is to do with purchases of firearms from credit and debit cards to shipping and tracking etc. Every keystroke a person enters into a system when making a purchase, info on what FFL it goes to and then confirmed when the background check is done. Same deal in a store when the card is charged for the firearm just after a background check on the same person comes back cleared. Can you say with 100% certainty that none of that info associated with anyone and what firearms they buy is being stored and cannot be accessed at any time?

No, I cannot say that with 100% certainty in much the same way you cannot say with 100% certainty that the info is definitely stored. Since we are not dealing with absolutes, we must deal with probabilities. Your scenario makes a number of assumptions. You're assuming that the government has hacked the credit card companies or that the credit card companies are feeding the information for every transaction to the government. Not just the credit card transactions but also any debit card transaction. So banks would either need to be in on it as well or they would all be victims of hacking. And the transaction information would need to be itemized to increase the probability the information is accurate. Otherwise, your stripped lower purchase after an approval would look the same as my ammo purchase after an approval. And all this would have to happen without anyone in the government, at the credit card companies, or at any of the banks leaking the information. Do you think all that is more probable than the government isn't tracing the information?

Would it be too far a stretch to presume that the info on what firearms you buy can indeed be stored?

Can it be stored? Sure, it is physically possible. But the fact that something is possible does nothing the further the proof that something is being done.

 

[Danny Abear]

Yall forget what Eric Snowden proved, showed, releashed, or whatever terminology you want to use

 

[thperez1972]

Yall forget what Eric Snowden proved, showed, releashed, or whatever terminology you want to use

He was mentioned earlier. He showed that secrets will eventually come out.

 

[DAVE_M]

Did we start talking about digital footprints yet?

What about tin foil?

 

[MOTOR51]

I always wondered why it matters if it’s a long gun or handgun when they call it in. I guess it could be redundancy for the age


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Magdump]

It was a jab because your post made it apparent you weren't sure how the conversation went from the specific topic to the broad topic when it was you who made the transition.



No, I cannot say that with 100% certainty in much the same way you cannot say with 100% certainty that the info is definitely stored. Since we are not dealing with absolutes, we must deal with probabilities. Your scenario makes a number of assumptions. You're assuming that the government has hacked the credit card companies or that the credit card companies are feeding the information for every transaction to the government. Not just the credit card transactions but also any debit card transaction. So banks would either need to be in on it as well or they would all be victims of hacking. And the transaction information would need to be itemized to increase the probability the information is accurate. Otherwise, your stripped lower purchase after an approval would look the same as my ammo purchase after an approval. And all this would have to happen without anyone in the government, at the credit card companies, or at any of the banks leaking the information. Do you think all that is more probable than the government isn't tracing the information?



Can it be stored? Sure, it is physically possible. But the fact that something is possible does nothing the further the proof that something is being done.

Take your jabs Perez. Show us all who you are. That’s the same question I posed earlier in the thread and now you answer it in stead of taking a jab. The information is stored. Believe it or not. It won’t affect me at all if you choose not to. Just don’t. So taking jabs is pointless. But you go right ahead.

 

[thperez1972]

Take your jabs Perez. Show us all who you are. That’s the same question I posed earlier in the thread and now you answer it in stead of taking a jab. The information is stored. Believe it or not. It won’t affect me at all if you choose not to. Just don’t. So taking jabs is pointless. But you go right ahead.

Yes, I'm sarcastic. I've always been so. I see no reason to change. I don't care who knows. It's not something I'm trying to hide. In fact, I'm quite proud of my sarcasm.

You're welcome to believe what you want to believe, however improbable it may be. The only thing you've offered to back up your opinion is "you can't prove me wrong" and "computers can store information." Those are logically invalid arguments that don't show your opinion to be facts. My opinion is it's not being done. Am I 100% certain I am right? No, I'm not. But, given all of what would need to happen for your opinion to be true, I believe my opinion is much more probable than your opinion.

 

[John_]

Take your jabs Perez. Show us all who you are. That’s the same question I posed earlier in the thread and now you answer it in stead of taking a jab. The information is stored. Believe it or not. It won’t affect me at all if you choose not to. Just don’t. So taking jabs is pointless. But you go right ahead.

Mag, the simple fact is perez enjoys taking jabs and sneers at you. Seems to have a hard on for you. And he's a mod so he can get away with it. Another member posted the same very recently, Motorman. Its so obvious to most anyone reading. Like Motorman commented, there are 2 or 3 here who feel superior to most mortal men, and let it be known regularly and with impunity. It gets old, why I stayed away from BS for quite a while. I notice the daily post count is pretty low these days.

You know what they say, power corrupts.

I'll probably pick up another suspension for typing the obvious here.

 

[thperez1972]

Mag, the simple fact is perez enjoys taking jabs and sneers at you. Seems to have a hard on for you. And he's a mod so he can get away with it. Another member posted the same very recently, Motorman. Its so obvious to most anyone reading. Like Motorman commented, there are 2 or 3 here who feel superior to most mortal men, and let it be known regularly and with impunity. It gets old, why I stayed away from BS for quite a while. I notice the daily post count is pretty low these days.

You know what they say, power corrupts.

I'll probably pick up another suspension for typing the obvious here.

Unfortunately for your case, I don't enforce any rules that I don't follow myself. And I don't target magdump. I target what appears to be bad information. If it appears I'm targeting someone in particular, perhaps you should look at the information that person has posted. Let's look at this thread as an example. One of magdump's discussion techniques is to say other people are welcome to disagree but then question why someone even bothers to reply to the thread if that person's opinion differs from his. Usually. If he likes the guy, he doesn't target the guy. See post #48, my first post in this thread btw. A few posts later, when he decided to not reply to the points I made, I didn't keep piling on. My next post wasn't until #69 and it wasn't even replying to magdump. Someone else made a claim and I asked him to back it up. That lasted a couple of exchanges then I see they seemed to express more of a belief than a fact. And it wasn't until post #101 that I pointed out, quite sarcastically, that magdump was the one who shifted the discussion after magdump stated he missed when the discussion went from lost of gun owners to lists of guns. He responded and asked some questions. I responded and made some points. And, again, rather than having a discussion about the points that were raised, he mae the conversation about how he is a victim.

Should I mention another thread where he presented wrong information that was pointed out by multiple people, including myself? When he went back to the source of his information and they acknowledged their information may not be accurate, magdump stated that in the thread. I thanked him for following up on it and that was it.

And there's plenty of other posts from him that I don't target. So is it possible you may be mistaken in your assessment of my actions? That maybe it's the information rather than the person delivering the information?

 

[John_]

Unfortunately for your case, I don't enforce any rules that I don't follow myself. And I don't target magdump. I target what appears to be bad information. If it appears I'm targeting someone in particular, perhaps you should look at the information that person has posted.

And there's plenty of other posts from him that I don't target. So is it possible you may be mistaken in your assessment of my actions? That maybe it's the information rather than the person delivering the information?

And that is your perception. You are not completely objective as you are a party in the discussion. We all have a perception of any statement or comment. One guy may "perceive" the same statement completely different that another guy. Its especially challenging to decipher connotation in a typed comment. Not the same as face to face dialog by any means.

I'm not gonna sit here and argue the point with you ad nauseum. Why did Motor51 just make the very recent statement that your comments (make that you and ur buddy) on Magdump posts frequently turn into a **** storm? And that is his perception, and he is objective to the specific discussion, not involved in it before his post.

The purpose of this forum is to have discussion of firearms and more. Healthy positive discussion. There are no stupid questions, and yes sometimes people are incorrect in their responses/posts. Hopefully they learn from their time on the forum. And there is nothing wrong with correction, discussion, and proving your point. But belittling others with derogatory comments, or suggestive negative comments is just plain wrong. Hey sometimes i am tested by what I feel is just ignorance in a post, but you have to use restraint.

You can best believe out of some 27,000 members on BS, many are intimidated to post a question or comment because they don't want to get "beat up" by "the local experts" here.

And further, your job as a moderator is not just to police the forum for bad behaviors/actors, rule violations, trolls, or spam, but to encourage a healthy, positive, and friendly discussion environment. To encourage engagement by its members. Austin is really good at that. Clearly you are a smart guy and well versed on firearms related material/info/experience/discussion, that is obvious. Just my opinion as i see it.

And that last temp ban I drew from you, I deserved it. I was way out of line, personal attack. I own it.

BS is a really cool and informative forum, but it could be better.

 

[Magdump]

Unfortunately for your case, I don't enforce any rules that I don't follow myself. And I don't target magdump.

All I can say to that is, you gave me 2 infractions for the same for sale thread where I bumped it to say what was left but you said I was bumping it to say what was sold, the same day I found you’d bumped your for sale ad like 11 hours early? Or is it not on a 24 hour clock?

 

[thperez1972]

All I can say to that is, you gave me 2 infractions for the same for sale thread where I bumped it to say what was left but you said I was bumping it to say what was sold, the same day I found you’d bumped your for sale ad like 11 hours early? Or is it not on a 24 hour clock?

https://www.bayoushooter.com/forums...es-Sig-Brace-AD-Riser-and-Remington-870-Stock

That's the thread you took screenshots from.

07/06/2020 - ad posted
07/07/2020 - bumped
07/09/2020 - bumped
07/10/2020 - bumped

From the marketplace rules

3) Bump Post: Replies to your thread are allowed once per day. You may NOT bump your AD the same day you have listed it.

I did not bump the ad the same day I posted the ad. I did not bump the ad more than once per day. Keep trying.

This is the post you got a warning for.

Sale pending
Laser may be available tomorrow if anyone is interested

You didn't say the laser would be available. You said it may be available. That would mean it might be sold. You got a warning that a number of people have received. You were not singled out. You were treated as anyone else who bumps an ad to say there might not anything available. Here's the message you got.

Please do not reply to an ad to indicate a sale is pending. When you do that, you move your ad to the top of the list to let everyone know there may be nothing available in that ad. Please just follow the procedure in the marketplace rules.

So you followed up by immediately bumping your ad to let people know there may be nothing available.

Sale pending but laser may still be available.

You then got an infraction. You didn't get 2 infractions. You got one warning then one infraction.

When you do something wrong and get called on it, even in private, you take it as a personal insult, despite the fact you were treated the same way anyone else is treated. When someone insults a product you like, you take it personal. When someone disagrees with something you say, you take it personal. You've not shown that I treat you any different than I treat anyone else. You've not shown that I break any rules that I enforce for others.

And just to give you an idea, since that day, I have given 53 warnings/infractions with 14 if them being for what yours were for. You're not the only one that does it. Most people just try to recognize what they've done and why the rule benefits everyone.

 

[thperez1972]

And that is your perception. You are not completely objective as you are a party in the discussion. We all have a perception of any statement or comment. One guy may "perceive" the same statement completely different that another guy. Its especially challenging to decipher connotation in a typed comment. Not the same as face to face dialog by any means.

I'm not gonna sit here and argue the point with you ad nauseum. Why did Motor51 just make the very recent statement that your comments (make that you and ur buddy) on Magdump posts frequently turn into a **** storm? And that is his perception, and he is objective to the specific discussion, not involved in it before his post.

The purpose of this forum is to have discussion of firearms and more. Healthy positive discussion. There are no stupid questions, and yes sometimes people are incorrect in their responses/posts. Hopefully they learn from their time on the forum. And there is nothing wrong with correction, discussion, and proving your point. But belittling others with derogatory comments, or suggestive negative comments is just plain wrong. Hey sometimes i am tested by what I feel is just ignorance in a post, but you have to use restraint.

You can best believe out of some 27,000 members on BS, many are intimidated to post a question or comment because they don't want to get "beat up" by "the local experts" here.

And further, your job as a moderator is not just to police the forum for bad behaviors/actors, rule violations, trolls, or spam, but to encourage a healthy, positive, and friendly discussion environment. To encourage engagement by its members. Austin is really good at that. Clearly you are a smart guy and well versed on firearms related material/info/experience/discussion, that is obvious. Just my opinion as i see it.

And that last temp ban I drew from you, I deserved it. I was way out of line, personal attack. I own it.

BS is a really cool and informative forum, but it could be better.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. Perception and perspective can easily distort what has been posted. As far as the last ban, I was only partly responsible. I didn't ban you. I gave you an infraction. The ban came from that infraction and 2 others from a few years ago.

 

[Magdump]

https://www.bayoushooter.com/forums...es-Sig-Brace-AD-Riser-and-Remington-870-Stock

That's the thread you took screenshots from.

07/06/2020 - ad posted
07/07/2020 - bumped
07/09/2020 - bumped
07/10/2020 - bumped

From the marketplace rules


I did not bump the ad the same day I posted the ad. I did not bump the ad more than once per day. Keep trying.

This is the post you got a warning for.



You didn't say the laser would be available. You said it may be available. That would mean it might be sold. You got a warning that a number of people have received. You were not singled out. You were treated as anyone else who bumps an ad to say there might not anything available. Here's the message you got.



So you followed up by immediately bumping your ad to let people know there may be nothing available.



You then got an infraction. You didn't get 2 infractions. You got one warning then one infraction.

When you do something wrong and get called on it, even in private, you take it as a personal insult, despite the fact you were treated the same way anyone else is treated. When someone insults a product you like, you take it personal. When someone disagrees with something you say, you take it personal. You've not shown that I treat you any different than I treat anyone else. You've not shown that I break any rules that I enforce for others.

And just to give you an idea, since that day, I have given 53 warnings/infractions with 14 if them being for what yours were for. You're not the only one that does it. Most people just try to recognize what they've done and why the rule benefits everyone.

I got 2 infractions about an hour apart. In between the two was our PM conversation where I explained to you that I was trying to let folks know that hey, I might be selling this pistol tonight, but the laser may still be available. So yes, I did take it personally. I thought 2 infractions in an hour for the same thread when I’m trying to clarify was personal.
Glad to know I no longer have to wait 24 hours to bump a post tho.

 

[thperez1972]

I got 2 infractions about an hour apart. In between the two was our PM conversation where I explained to you that I was trying to let folks know that hey, I might be selling this pistol tonight, but the laser may still be available. So yes, I did take it personally. I thought 2 infractions in an hour for the same thread when I’m trying to clarify was personal.
Glad to know I no longer have to wait 24 hours to bump a post tho.

Look at the pictures you posted. They will show you where you are mistaken. The first one at 8:24 was a warning. You can see in the list of emails where the older one, the one at the bottom, says you have received a notification. The second on, the one at 9:45, says you have received an infraction. You did not get 2 infractions. You were given a warning first. The only reason the laser MAY be available is if it might be sold. Otherwise it WOULD be available. So you were letting people know you may have nothing to offer. Hence the warning. And while you were explaining to me that the item might be available, you went ahead and reposted the bump because how dare I moderate you. So despite being given a warning, you turned around and immediately did it again. Hence the infraction. You pushed the issue because you took it personal. It wasn't. I issue an average of about 2 infractions/warnings a day. Yours was just another in a line of them.

 

[John_]

That seems like a pretty legit explanation above by perez, first a warning then the actual infraction for 2nd re-posting. I too caught a warning a few weeks ago in the classifieds for for a second post within 24 hours, same thread but i didn't ignore the warning and repeat. It was a classified rules brain fart on my part.

 

[Magdump]

My mistake, I have a total of 2 infractions and they never go away so I assumed they were both at that time. And it does say that those rules are open to interpretation by the mods, so you can say I broke the rule no matter my explanation and disbelief of having done anything wrong, for all the harm I caused by informing people. I’ve never called anyone an idiot on here. And that’s against the rules.