• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


billeisele last won the day on October 1 2022

billeisele had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

107 Good

1 Follower


  • Main Canopy Size
  • Reserve Canopy Size
  • AAD

Jump Profile

  • Home DZ
    Skydive Carolina
  • License
  • License Number
  • Licensing Organization
    USPA 5618
  • Number of Jumps
  • Tunnel Hours
  • Years in Sport
  • First Choice Discipline
    Formation Skydiving
  • First Choice Discipline Jump Total
  • Second Choice Discipline
  • Second Choice Discipline Jump Total
  • Freefall Photographer

Ratings and Rigging

  • AFF
  • Tandem
  • USPA Coach
  • Pro Rating
  • Wingsuit Instructor

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. A great example of an issue that could be legislatively addressed without conflict from the 2nd. There's no reason that handguns should not be secured in some type of safe or with a lock/cable system in homes where kids are present. This was in Indiana. The dad was a convicted felon and possessing a gun is illegal. He knew that and denied the existence of the gun. Is this type law not "sexy" enough to pass? Is this the convo the legislators have - Let's make a big splash and outlaw those scary black guns, require registration and eliminate ammo sales unless one has a State issued gun card. Is there no value in doing the mundane things that will limit gun access by kids? Virginia, where the 6-yr old shot the teacher, does have some type of law that makes it a misdemeanor for a child to be able to access a gun. We'll see how that plays out.
  2. No doubt there are plenty of nut jobs out there and that a "gun culture" exists. I think that a lively discussion would occur if the referenced behavior was defined as what gun culture is or means. Most would argue that it has a broad definition. I haven't read this fully but will.
  3. Hey Jerry - To me there's a difference between a law that is lawful, and one that wasn't/can't/won't, or whatever, be upheld in court as legal. When (legal) laws are broken then prosecution can be successful. No doubt that laws can and are broken. That's why properly operating LEOs and court systems are needed.
  4. That could be a normal reaction when accused criminals are let off by the court to repeat offend. Although relevant, that's not what u r getting at. If no laws then is there a need for law enforcement officers? IMO - yes, laws are needed, as are LEOs. Without either, it would be anarchy.
  5. You are welcome to start another conversation with your thoughts. Mine were directed at the IL law. Suggest you start by listing those strict guns laws so all of us can learn. Then tell us how the US can transition to meet those laws. I'm interested.
  6. 6 criminals caught in Kentucky and 8 guns seized. There was a shootout with 600 rounds fired. Most likely there were more people involved and more guns. One clear fact is that some had previous criminal records and were prohibited from possessing a gun. Why were these two on the street?!? Are judges, lawyers and the court system part of the problem? Two of the suspects -- Walls and Smyzer -- were recently arrested on murder charges for a fatal shooting that occurred last month, police said. Five of the seized guns are in this pic. Two would be considered "assault weapons." They are the scary looking semi-auto guns (pistols?) with the high-capacity magazines. The two rifles don't have the ammo capacity or the firing speed of the pistols but some would consider them more deadly due to their accuracy and ability to be lethal at a greater distance. Neither of these would have been banned under any proposed or passed legislation. The one with the scope is a common hunting rifle owned by thousands if not millions.
  7. Joe - Unfortunately, I don't have any helicopter hog hunting buddies. It's simple. It's fruitless to pass laws that can't be upheld. If legislators want to pass laws that conflict with the 2nd then they will need to change the 2nd. It seems that it would be easier for a State to ID effective laws that would be upheld and pass those first. One could conclude that they don't really want to pass laws. They just want their voters to think they want to pass laws. There are parts of the legislation that could be upheld. But things like the 100 specific guns that are listed and their knockoffs, the inability to buy any type of ammo without a state issued Firearms Owners ID card, inability to have a pistol with a threaded barrel, etc., will, most likely, not be upheld in court. Reading their pleas and fear mongering it's clear that some don't have a clue what they are talking about or how to actually do something effective. One would think that if someone wanted to be an outspoken critic they would take an hour and be educated so they wouldn't be and sound ignorant. Gov Pirtzker has already passed some laws that one would think would work. I'm wondering if those laws have been effective at reducing gun violence. Governor Pritzker has also signed legislation to ban unserialized, privately made "ghost guns," the first Midwestern state to do so (HB 4383). In 2021, Governor Pritzker signed legislation expanding background checks on all gun sales in Illinois and modernizing and strengthening the Firearm Owners Identification Card System (HB 562). Additionally, Governor Pritzker signed legislation (SB 337) to combat the scourge of illegal gun trafficking, making Illinois the 16th state to require gun dealers to be certified by the state after more than a decade of work. Governor Pritzker's Reimagine Public Safety Act also established the first ever Office of Firearm Violence Prevention, providing a historic investment in community-based violence prevention for the communities most affected by firearm violence
  8. Since my comments were solely focused on the gun laws that were passed by IL, none of that is relevant. The majority of gun violence in YOUR city is committed with handguns. The vast majority of which would not be impacted by the IL law, even if criminals magically decided to obey the law.
  9. Jerry - That is also how it works here in SC. We've had 3 sheriffs, that I know of, removed from office in the last 5 years. All were for some type of illegal activity; drug use, fraud, stealing, etc. In this case the law went into effect as soon as it was passed. I suspect that objections to the law will be quickly filed so that no one will lose a job. There is a political cost to those actions.
  10. Taking a page out of the Democrat playbook, IL passed gun legislation that is clearly unconstitutional. No doubt this will be challenged and struck down. The recent OR attempt at gun control was blocked by the court until arguments are heard and a ruling issued. Seventy-four sheriffs have publicly stated that they won't enforce it. The Gov Pritzker says, "yes you will." The law bans the manufacture or possession of dozens of semi-auto rifles AND pistols, 50 caliber guns, high capacity mags and makes it illegal to own an item that increases the rate of fire. The law requires that existing owners register the items with the State police including the serial number. "No Illinoisan, no matter their zip code, should have to go through life fearing their loved one could be the next in an ever-growing list of victims of mass shootings," the governor said. "However, for too long people have lived in fear of being gunned down in schools, while worshipping, at celebrations or in their own front yards. This legislation will stop the spread of assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and switches and make our state a safer place for all." Opponents of the legislation have said it would do nothing to reduce violent crime in Illinois. People who break the law, people who commit violent crime are not going to register their firearms, are not going to turn in their magazines. This will not stop that crime. What will happen is law-abiding gun owners will be yet again impacted by laws in this General Assembly, yet again have their Second Amendment rights restrained," The problem with these attempts is there is no credible evidence that they will be successful in reducing gun violence. They seem to ignore the fact that mass shootings are not the primary problem and that criminals don't follow the law. It seems that politicians continue to pander to their voters so they can say they tried even though they should know it was meaningless. I'm all for effective legislation but it must be legal. It seems that banning items that increase the rate of fire should be doable. Stiffer background checks, red flag laws and more.
  11. Background info
  12. Joe, "How one anyone could be that irresponsible? And I thought, what data was in there that may compromise sources and methods, just totally irresponsible." VP's have no authority to declassify anything except items that they had classified. The documents had been there for years. Some were moved, twice. One location was accessible by anyone including the drunk/druggie party boy with the famed laptop, and a key was given to a Chinese spy. One location was funded by China and accessible by anyone including students. Of note, there is a young woman sitting in prison for taking CI documents home. She took them during COVID because access to the info was limited because the building wasn't often open so she took them home so she could work. Not smart. There have been Washington staffers instantly fired for mishandling CI. Yes there are differences. Yes, Trump had many more documents that we're still waiting to hear about. And many other differences that are bad for Trump. Trumps docs were locked up but still not in a "SCIF" as required by the National Security Act. None of Joe's docs were locked up, protected and definitely not a SCIF. It's difficult to believe his statement that he takes this seriously. Deliberate or not, obstruction or not, all instances are a violation. Let the spinners spin away, deflect and all the other things they do. The DOJ has some fact finding and unraveling to do.
  13. "What else is there that we don't know?" Second set of classified documents recovered. And one honest person, "not authorized to publicly discuss ... ... spoke on condition of anonymity", stepped forward to report it. Seems that hiding the first one wasn't a good idea. Let's keep going with this transparency thing. None of the political wrangling is good for the country.
  14. Jakee - yes, there are some significant differences. But so much is the same. Regardless of who is doing it, it shouldn't be occurring. And there's the "you people" thing as if everyone fits into certain convenient boxes. The world is not that simple. Folks could say the same about you but then they would be guilty of the same silliness.