Evidently Daniel "lying liar" Webster is teaching a course at Hopkins

KJackson · Jun 1, 2019

Yep. Someone in the class just posted this today:

The state's licensing requirement has to meet federal standards--the licensing process has to, for example, require a background check. The ATF calls such NICS-exempting licenses "permanent Brady permits", and other federal agencies call them "ATF-qualified permits."

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/permanent-brady-permit-chart

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bcft15st.pdf

I assume that the state must ask for the exemption. I cannot otherwise imagine why, for example, the thorough carry license application process required in such anti-gun jurisdictions as MA, CA, CT, DC, NY, NJ, MD and RI don't qualify.

Now I understand.

rseymorejr · Jun 1, 2019

KJackson said:
Yep. Someone in the class just posted this today:

The state's licensing requirement has to meet federal standards--the licensing process has to, for example, require a background check. The ATF calls such NICS-exempting licenses "permanent Brady permits", and other federal agencies call them "ATF-qualified permits."

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/permanent-brady-permit-chart

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bcft15st.pdf

I assume that the state must ask for the exemption. I cannot otherwise imagine why, for example, the thorough carry license application process required in such anti-gun jurisdictions as MA, CA, CT, DC, NY, NJ, MD and RI don't qualify.

Now I understand.

If that is from another student it sounds like at least 2 of you aren't brainwashed

Kharn · Jun 2, 2019

The HQL having a 10 year lifecycle preempts it from being used as a NICS exempt permit, the alternative was 5 years and NICS exempt.

KJackson · Jun 2, 2019

One of the comments that they made in week 4 was that most mass shootings don't happen in "Gun Free" zones. They say that only about 12% of them occur in "Gun Free" zones. Of course, their definition of "Gun Free" zone is different. They consider it a "Gun Free" zone only if carry is not allowed and there are no armed security or police personnel.

rbird7282 · Jun 2, 2019

Kharn said:
The HQL having a 10 year lifecycle preempts it from being used as a NICS exempt permit, the alternative was 5 years and NICS exempt.

Actually MD legislators are what preempts the HQL from being used as a NICS exempt permit. They would never agree to it and it was brought up to them during testimony.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

KJackson · Jun 13, 2019

Finishing up the class and I was surprised at some of the numbers that they present in their poll about new gun safety restrictions. Stuff involving magazine limits, required locked storage, raising the age to 21 for handguns and "semi-automatic assault style rifles". I have a feeling that a lot of the "gun owners" in the poll were ones that have dad's old shotgun sitting in a closet somewhere. Here is what I posted today in response to their video about things to take away from the course.

The last statements from the "take aways" video strikes me as being a bunch of garbage.

"I think it's important to underscore while our course is very focused on data and evidence of efficacy, that that is not out only concern. That we are also concerned with advancing policies and programs that advance justice as well as prevent violence. We do not want to accomplish our prevention goals through ways that are unjust."

Advance justice? Really? Where is justice even talked about during the course? The whole course can be summed up in one sentence, "We want to prevent gun violence by restricting access to guns." The vast majority of the course was about restricting access to guns but very little on preventing violence, because we all know that if someone can't get a gun, they won't commit a violent act.

The actions outlined in this course remind me of teachers, who when a few students misuse their cell phones in class, decide that nobody can have a phone in class rather than punishing the misusers.

The police do a good job of arresting people who are using guns for criminal activities, but the "justice" system fails to perform their job. I can pretty much guarantee you that when criminals are in jail, they aren't using guns to commit crimes...although in Baltimore pretty much anything is possible.

KJackson · Jul 25, 2019

I have been finished with the class for a number of weeks, but others are still finishing up and posting their thoughts. Someone made a post today and I made what I thought was a reasonable and polite response. However, the student wound up deleting the majority of the post because claiming ignorance that it would be public. I guess it wasn't understood where all the other posts came from. Or maybe it was because I, apparently one of the people talked about, responded to it.

His post:

"Student Name" · 25 minutes ago

I was upset to observe in the discussion forum that apparently numerous students took this course not to learn, but to see what the "other side" was doing. I don't know how you could improve that, but it was disturbing to be on the receiving end of this hostility and barrage of so-called facts that contradicted the course materials.

I wish Dr.Emmy Betz (sp?) had not mentioned that safe storage was "usually not" a key point when dealing with violence or suicide by adolescents. Seems to me it's pretty important? I think she'd agree, it was just worded a little oddly.

It was SO GREAT to have such a variety of subject matter experts (like an ER doctor) through out the entire course. Also learned some important things by Cass' demo of gun locks. One of the biggest stumbling blocks I've had as an activist is not understanding some of the subtleties of gun technology, and the insistence of some 2nd Amendment extremists that you have no credibility if you don't know details. (You think AR stands for Assault Rifle. It doesn't, that's so dumb!! Haha, it's Armalite, I won't even talk to you.)

Speaking of which, it would have been nice to have even more detail about so-called assault rifles. It's really a generic term.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. AWESOME.

My response:

About the so-called facts that contradicted the course materials, is it possible that the course materials were wrong? I don't know exactly what so-called facts you are talking about, but if you share them, I would be glad to look into them.

You admit that you have problems with the subtleties of the gun technology. Thank you for being honest. The problem comes when people who are out there campaigning to restrict the rights of legal gun owners do not even understand the BASICS of gun technology and what they are talking about and spout off things that are absolutely incorrect.

One example was Joe BIden saying, "[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

That right there will get you arrested in most, if not all, states if you happen to hit someone while doing that.

Others are sayings parroted over and over about nobody needing an AR-15 for defense or a magazine that holds more than 'X' number of rounds. How many of these people would also be willing to offer up and agree to live by the statement of, "Nobody needs a car that can go more than 100 MPH?" After all, according to a quick web search I did, the highest speed limits in the US are in some remote areas of Texas where they go up to 85MPH. So there is no reason to need a car that goes any faster. Is there even a new car being made that doesn't have a top speed over 100 MPH?

Evidently Daniel "lying liar" Webster is teaching a course at Hopkins

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

KJackson

Ultimate Member

rseymorejr

Ultimate Member

Kharn

Ultimate Member

KJackson

Ultimate Member

rbird7282

Ultimate Member

KJackson

Ultimate Member

KJackson

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Share this page