As Jeff posted, they are treated differently, but he is not correct about the legality of ownership. I owned pistols, the ammo, and could even legally open carry as a teen. It's a very common misconception. I just couldn't buy them from a licensed dealer.

Again, this is all state by state, and is all over the map. And laws have changed dramatically since we were kids.

Here in Washington, one must be 21 to "own" a handgun, 18 to "own" a rifle or shotgun. When I was a kid, I could "own" a rifle or shotgun at any age, but the law already stated that one had to be 21 to "own" handguns. I could "possess" a handgun if accompanied by an adult, like as a sidearm when out hunting, back packing, fishing a remote stream or lake, etc. I could not, however, "possess" one in town for any reason. "Ownership" and "possession" are two different things, legally speaking here in Washington.

When my sons were young, they could still legally "own" rifles or shotguns, so when given their .22 caliber Chipmunk rifles on their respective sixth Christmases, all was perfectly legal. Even at 12, they could legally "own" the rifles I gave them for deer hunting. Not anymore...

Nowadays that has changed a bit here in Washington. One must be 18 years of age to legally "own" a rifle or shotgun. Kids can legally "possess" rifles and shotguns, like when out hunting, or plinking, so long as they are accompanied by an adult who is of legal age to "own" those rifles.

With handguns the law was revised so that those under 21 years of age can only "possess" one at a shooting range when accompanied by an adult. Technically, if under 21, one can't "possess" a handgun anymore even while out hunting, back packing, or anywhere away from a formal range.

I'm sure other states are different.

In California, I am not even sure it is legal to let someone else shoot your gun

I don't think NC has changed over the years in these matters, and the distinction between "own" and "possess" is pure semantics and I will not argue with you. I don't even know how ownership is proven or established .... unless it's because I possess them for most of my firearms ;).

Semantics that no one gives a schit about I reckon... certainly not here in NC.

You're lucky, KC - here in Washington, these b.s. semantics can land someone in jail. We recently (maybe two years ago) had an Initiative passed (I-1639) that made it illegal to "transfer" a firearm between any parties without having first conducted a background check. This "transfer" includes me handing you my gun to try out at an established range - now technically "illegal" under Washington law without a background check. Just ridiculous. Never enforced, granted, but if someone wanted to make your life miserable...

Welcome to Blue State firearms regulations... and semantics... They won't even teach proper grammar in our schools anymore, but the finer points of firearms "ownership" vs. "possession", along with "transfer" (is that ownership or possession?) have become exceedingly important, and ultimately useful to any authorities who wish to trip up a law abiding gun owner. Yet they could give a rat's ass about the black homicide rates...

Was the SUV driver just changing lanes? ...or was he trying to cut off the motorcycle?

I've seen both. One is fine - the other is attempted manslaughter.

Witness said 4 shots, one of which the officer said was by Gray.

The SUV has no apparent damage so perhaps the driver has gotten out prior and met Gray mano-a-mano or the latter was a poor shot or .... yeah, come to think of it, I say the former is closer to what happened, which is consistent with his family being in there but ... I suppose both could be true.

On a busy freeway, someone must have witnessed the showdown. The witness who appeared on TV did say he didn't see what went down.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1625638004.jpg

With cars whizzing by, it's conceivable that no one saw the exact moment of the shooting. The stopped cars could have had their view blocked. So yeah, it's possible. These things go down quickly.

Not necessarily. Had a lanesplitter, which is legal only in California I believe, hit me and it was 100% his fault.

It doesn't matter (as far as the shooting is concerned). When the punk walked up with a weapon drawn he gave up all the protection of the law to not be eliminated from the gene pool.

Are you going to publicly testify in a woke state that you saw a black person commit a crime and the white person was right to shoot him? BLM and CRT have got folks thinking twice about saying anything and then be crucified for it (or targeted by the radical left).

And this is kind of where I have been heading with this discussion. Left leaning anti-gun politicians and their friends in the media portray America as having a problem with gun violence. They want to peanut butter spread responsibility for this across all gun owners. They want to portray lawful gun owners, of all races, as contributing to the problem.

Nothing could be further from the truth. We do not have a gun violence problem in this country, we have a black violence problem. Subtract black on black "gun" violence numbers from the total and we instantly become one of the safest, most violence free nations in the world. We have a problem here that no one wants to even talk about.

Witness our own upsscott, a typical example of that breed. Page after page of discussion in which I challenged him to address this issue. He refused. Nothing but obfuscation and redirection. Which is one thing on a silly car forum like this, but it is exactly how the national discussion is going as well. We will never even begin to fix this until we can openly discuss it without fear of the "woke" or "politically correct" ostracizing us for doing so.

I remember when I was 13 riding my bike to Oklahoma Tire and Supply Company (OTASCO) and buying a box of 22 longs and going home, strapping the 22 on my back and riding to a friends property that had a 1/4 section of land and backstop to shoot all 5 rounds. I bet they 22s were less than a buck per box likely lots less, but that was a while ago.

Image the frantic calls now from people seeing a young teenager on bicycle with a rifle strapped to his back.

Take your hood off and read this....

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gun-homicide-linked-to-poor-social-mobility/

Deal with the poverty if you really want to deal with the issue of "black violence" Do you think people are born killers? They pop out the womb looking for a 9mm? Crime usually happens for a reason. Too often the reason is poverty.

And I might have missed it but I don't recall seeing your solution to the problem.

There are more white people in poverty than Black people. Yet you don’t see the same homicide rates in white poverty stricken areas than in black poverty stricken areas.

Poverty in and of itself is not the cause. It is cultural norms, hopelessness, and the root causes of poverty, that lead to violence being an everyday occurrence.

This is exactly the kind of "woke" virtue signaling to which I was referring. Play the race card any time anyone even attempts to start a dispassionate discussion on this matter.

You're kind of late to the discussion, but we have covered the poverty component at length. All races have portions of their populations living in poverty, and in those populations we do, indeed, see increases in violence. I've acknowledged that on several occasions already over the course of this discussion.

What we see, however, is a significantly higher rate of violent crime in our poor black communities than we do in communities of any other race. The statistics are readily available.

My solution is to start the conversation. We can't even begin to solve this problem so long as we have folks as ignorant, uninformed, and angry as you are when we try to discuss this. You and your ignorant virtue signaling are serving to perpetuate this problem. My "solution" begins with open, honest, dispassionate conversation. You can join in and start to help, or you can keep your own hood on and allow the problem to continue to fester while you call those of us seeking real solutions "racists".

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/black-black-homicide-psychological-political-perspective

Black-on-Black Homicide - A Psychological-Political Perspective

Annotation
Black homicide rates are seven to eight times those of whites though Blacks have a rate of poverty only four to five times that of whites.

Abstract
Today homicide is the leading cause of death among young Black men, and contributes significantly to the shortened life-span of the Black male. In about 80-90% of the cases, the Black victim was killed by another Black, and about 52% of the murder victims were acquainted with their assailant. Just as we accept that suicide victims are psychologically impaired, we must acknowledge that a murderer is similarly impaired, and Blacks -- for both environmental and political reasons -- are likely to reflect emotional predispositions that allow them to more readily become a homicide statistic. Projected self-hatred facilitates blind rage and gives the perpetrator of the violent attack a sense of legitimacy and justification. In addition, Blacks have been indoctrinated by a criminal justice system which places higher value on a white life than on a Black life. While psychological study of homicide offenders and victims is difficult and not easily quantifiable, it is important to explore such variables in Black community violence. Programs focused on crime and violence prevention, therefore, must do more than alleviate socioeconomic ills in the the Black community. They must pay attention as well to negative psychological dynamics in the Black experience that contribute to internecine victimization. The Black community in particular is in dire need of homicide prevention centers with programs of prevention, research and treatment. (Author abstract)

I think all of that doesn't matter when you have two good parents bringing you up.

That's where the focus should be.

Not all that other mumbo jumbo which tends to act more as a smoke screen than anything else.

Well done Jeff and others...Baz as well!

There are five individual behavioral traits that insure poverty if three are combined.

There are four governmental initiatives that guarantee those individual traits will be combined and encouraged.

BTW: White, black brown, doesn't matter.

This thread is pretty much all about cultural norms