Pat Mac stance on 3-day Background and Universal background check

[BWT]

I wanted to post this because I noticed the other thread was locked on the topic was locked. I PM'd Tom asking about it and he said feel free to start a new thread.

So, Pat went on Primary and Secondary and explained his views and how the interviewing process over the day went. He's indicating they manipulated his words regarding Universal Background Check and he misspoke about the 3-day waiting period. He indicated his stances clearly on both issues in this video posted earlier this morning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2qDScsyo5c

Here's the entire episode

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zprBAwjdgBM

As I said in the other thread I have a lot of respect for him, and with all things considered I feel comfortable giving him the benefit of the doubt. I was interviewed once by a reporter and my words were taken out of context; the lady also hid her voice recorder under her bag she had over her arm and didn't indicate she was recording me or any others present (thankfully it was nothing disparaging or damaging but it gave me some insights on what I already suspected).

In the video one of the guys mentioned talking about the potential of getting the B-Run of the video via a legal letter to try to get out of this quagmire he's gotten into (I don't think he's going to).

Wish the best for the dude.

God Bless,

Brandon

ETA: I meant to start the first sentence with "I wanted to post this in the other thread regarding Pat Mac but it was locked, and I PM'd Tom asking about it. He said feel free start a new thread.".

[Peally]

I think it's sad a guy like him has to defend himself from the internet commandos regardless.

[Robinson]

I watched it when it was streaming live. Pat Mac indicated that a combination of creative editing and being tired from a long day of filming led to things being presented as they were. I'd like to see this whole thing soon turn into a non-issue if it hasn't already.

[guymontag]

Wasn't there an instagram comment fueling the fire as well? I didn't know if that was real or not.

If it is real I like this supposed Gandhi quote: All compromise is based on give and take, but there can be no give and take on fundamentals. Any compromise on mere fundamentals is a surrender. For it is all give and no take.

[octagon]

The whole thing is odd. I wasn't a Pat Mac fan before hearing his comments on CC and am not a fan now after reading and hearing his responses online and on P&S. It seems suspect to me. That said I can respect the man for his accomplishments,service and ability regardless of his opinions and whether they agree with mine or not. He is just a man. The only reason I think he should be held to any higher standard is because he chose to be on a known liberal media outlet and knew this going in AND as a more recognized gun personality/Instructor he has more influence on more people than the average Joe/Jane does. He could have recorded in audio or video the entire shoot to prevent or defend his comments being taken out of context due to creative editing but he did not. He could have requested to review the final edited version before agreeing it be distributed or for adding clarification but he did not. His reply to a post asking for clarification didn't counter the initial statement he made on CC and his discussion on P&S is what I see as suspect. None of it really matters in the big picture other than how it can adversely affect his business but as I stated earlier he knew the risk going in.

The concern I have is how some who make similar mistakes are defended and others are attacked or denigrated for their opinion or stance on an issue.

[JohnO]

Pat is a Solid Dude! No worries.

"Gas it up and Burn it Down."

[Totem Polar]

I dunno. Anyone who has been involved with media/tv knows that shit gets edited down to little bits and pieces. You're trading accuracy and depth for exposure, every time. And if YOU (meaning PM, this time) don't do it, someone else will, so... I'm willing to give PM the benefit of the doubt until/unless more evidence of his alleged Chamberlain-esque appeasement comes up in print somewhere else. I won't hold my breath on that, either.

On a related tangent, this can go both ways. If PM had said too much that could be percieved as hard-line "shall not be infringed" propoganda, it ALL would have been edited out, and the whole day would have been a waste of time. I've been left out of interviews before for not giving the reporter the sound bites they wanted. It happens.

I'll finish with an anecdote: I've had the opportunity to text back and forth with trainer Matt Graham about this very issue of balance between representing our side while addressing the masses, while he was prepping for his appearances on Fox. Matt is very good about using concise impact statements to answer any on-air questions, so they CAN'T be edited down. Left out, sure, but not easily chopped or reworked. That led to some great moments, including his on-air answer when asked what we can do to fight the sort of terrorist events we've been seeing. A short bite stating "send people in the night to do work and put bullets on bone" is pretty much edit proof, but will undoubtably cause some execs to pinch whole loaves of rubber chicken. That's the trade off. To Fox's credit, they ran the answer, leading to a decidedly awesome tv moment... at least in my opinion. You can bet that OMMV on that, however.

But I digress. Let's wait until PM signs an endorsement deal with Springfield Armory, or something, before heating up the tar.

[okie john]

He could have recorded in audio or video the entire shoot to prevent or defend his comments being taken out of context due to creative editing but he did not.

Fair statement.


He could have requested to review the final edited version before agreeing it be distributed or for adding clarification but he did not.

TV and radio outlets won't let you approve the story before they run it. Of course they have limitations on air time, etc., so they can't air your unedited remarks, but they also have a story to tell, and they tell that story to attract advertisers. They care very little about the people involved in the story, only that the story itself draws viewers. As a result, Mac probably had to sign a bunch of stuff that included a release of rights to the material they recorded, which would effectively prevent him from ensuring that he's quoted correctly.


The concern I have is how some who make similar mistakes are defended and others are attacked or denigrated for their opinion or stance on an issue.

Another fair statement.

Mac and I overlapped in 3/1 SFG(A) for a year or so. I know from personal interactions with him on and off duty that he's as solid as they come, and that he's on our side. He got caught up with some scumbag TV folks and now has to clean up the mess. I seriously doubt he'll ever make that mistake again, and suspect that Comedy Central's dishonorable conduct will become a speaking point for him and many others going forward.


Okie John

[Drang]

I have no particular opinion about Pat Mac one way or the other. That said, I'm not surprised, and actually thought this might be the case.

Merely reinforces my conviction that one should always have your own recording going, so you can prove the editing. {Edit to add: Not that I'm sure that they would agree to it.}

I can't decide which concerns me more, that folks on our side continue to let themselves be put in a position where their statements can be edited/taken out of context, or that it has become so commonplace that someone could have a "slip of the lip" and claim creative editing as the easy way to get themselves out of a jam. I am not saying that happened here. I'm just saying that it could happen.

[Chance]

Honestly, the strangest thing about this is why CC chose Pat for this segment.

They easily could have chosen that Voda guy, Yeager, or some other turbo ass hat. Instead they chose a guy with an extensive, no-shit background that's written three books.

I've never met Pat, but I'll happily take a course from him if the opportunity arises. I really wish our community could have disagreements on aspects of the 2nd Amendment without people immediately losing their shit and going full Yeager.

[Hambo]

I have no idea how this went, but if I prepped questions ahead of time and edited just right, I could have people saying they like sex with monkeys. With phones now, almost anything you say or do could be the talk of the Internet.

[DocGKR]

Like many, I know PMac. He is squared away and is undeniably pro-2nd Amend. Anyone that ignorantly thinks otherwise is an idiot and clearly does not know the man.

[TXBK]

Watching the first video linked in the OP will answer many of the questions being asked here. It is only 13:31 min. long, unlike the full episode which is ~4 hr. long. It will give you a chance to hear the explanation in his own words. As far as I know, his words did not instantly pass any legislation. Non-issue to me.

[octagon]

Like many, I know PMac. He is squared away and is undeniably pro-2nd Amend. Anyone that ignorantly thinks otherwise is an idiot and clearly does not know the man.

I could have just as easily said he was stupid for knowingly doing a segment with CC and not having his own recording to refute any editing and that he should have known better and not done the segment in the first place. That doesn't help improve the discussion in a mature. reasonable manner to address the mistake he made or what it means.

[LOKNLOD]

Honestly, the strangest thing about this is why CC chose Pat for this segment.

They easily could have chosen that Voda guy, Yeager, or some other turbo ass hat. Instead they chose a guy with an extensive, no-shit background that's written three books.


I think Pat made total sense for them to use. One could say Pat is very cartoonish and over the top in his intensity and style. Yet he is well respected and does have an impressive background. It wouldn't take much of a search to find that many other YouTube clowns are controversial and easily dismissed as "outsiders". Pat's recent association with the NRA Carryguard video and general level of respect means "we" can't disavow him easily. Plus he's entertainingly macho to the extreme -- a stark contrast to the to metro sissy host who's probably not gay (even though his boyfriend might be).

The only reason I can think of for them not to use Pat is because they knew they intended to burn him with edits and that about as smart as killing the dog his late wife left him and stealing his muscle car.

[Mr. Goodtimes]

Quite honestly the whole three day wait and universal background check thing doesn't bother me weather his words were miscommunicated or not. I think we have bigger fish to fry.

RE the 3 day wait: would I like to see it go away? Sure, absolutely. Do I think that it's that big of a deal? Not really. The whole crimes of passion thing is a retarded argument, but I also think it's retarded to say it should be gone because people have died not being able to obtain a gun. If you've waited until your psychotic ex is likely going to murder you to buy a gun, you're way behind the 8 ball. If you had much common sense you'd already own one. Not to mention this group of people represents an extreme, very minute minority, as does the crimes of passion crowd.

"Universal Background Checks": I think it's fairly reasonable, especially in this day and age of instant internet access to require an FFL to perform a background check and insure the Dip shit with his pants around his ankle isn't a felon. Private parties are another thing... I don't believe private parties should have to go through a background check.


Now what really confuses me is... PMac is an incredibly intelligent person, so wtf was he thinking doing a segment with communist central?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

Well said.

I am very tired of internet social media drama by folks who literally do not know what they are talking about.

[HCM]

"Universal Background Checks": I think it's fairly reasonable, especially in this day and age of instant internet access to require an FFL to perform a background check and insure the Dip shit with his pants around his ankle isn't a felon. Private parties are another thing... I don't believe private parties should have to go through a background check.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Terms have meaning. If it exempts private parties it isn't "universal".

"Universal Background Checks" means all transfers, sales, gifts etc whether from a dealer or between private parties. CA's DROS (Dealer Record of Sale) system is an example of a "UBC" system.

Basically if you want to sell, transfer or even gift a gun to someone you have to pay to run a background check and have the transfer recorded by the state.

[HCM]

The only reason I can think of for them not to use Pat is because they knew they intended to burn him with edits and that about as smart as killing the dog his late wife left him and stealing his muscle car.

This a great idea - Pat Mac needs a cameo in John Wick 3.

[idahojess]

Quite honestly the whole three day wait and universal background check thing doesn't bother me weather his words were miscommunicated or not. I think we have bigger fish to fry.

RE the 3 day wait: would I like to see it go away? Sure, absolutely. Do I think that it's that big of a deal?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does Florida have a three day waiting period? Heck, even Washington state doesn't have a waiting period if you have concealed pistol license and are buying a pistol. If you don't have a cpl, there is a waiting period for handguns. There is no waiting period for a long gun so long as you pass a background check.

I think this just illustrates how "universal background checks" which Washington now has (meaning I can't loan a gun to my friend, even if they have a cpl), and "three day waiting periods" can confuse people as to what the heck people are talking about.

[Mr. Goodtimes]

Does Florida have a three day waiting period? Heck, even Washington state doesn't have a waiting period if you have concealed pistol license and are buying a pistol. If you don't have a cpl, there is a waiting period for handguns. There is no waiting period for a long gun so long as you pass a background check.

I think this just illustrates how "universal background checks" which Washington now has (meaning I can't loan a gun to my friend, even if they have a cpl), and "three day waiting periods" can confuse people as to what the heck people are talking about.

There is no three day wait if you have a CWP. Without a CWP all counties have a 3 day wait on handguns and some have it on long guns as well. In many counties, though, you can cash and carry a long gun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LOKNLOD]

This a great idea - Pat Mac needs a cameo in John Wick 3.

It could work.

Scene: Pat and John at the bar in the Continental. Both bloodied and tired looking.

John: They kill your dog too?
Pat: Nope. Misquoted me on TV.
John: Ouch. Gas 'em up?
Pat: And burn 'em down.

*Pat and John clink whiskey glasses, drain the final drink, and turn away, each drawing a customized Glock.*

Movie Tickets: SOLD.

[Totem Polar]

Does Florida have a three day waiting period? Heck, even Washington state doesn't have a waiting period if you have concealed pistol license and are buying a pistol. If you don't have a cpl, there is a waiting period for handguns. There is no waiting period for a long gun so long as you pass a background check.

I think this just illustrates how "universal background checks" which Washington now has (meaning I can't loan a gun to my friend, even if they have a cpl), and "three day waiting periods" can confuse people as to what the heck people are talking about.

Somewhat OT, but Washington is a great example of what can go sideways with population influx in just a few generations. I don't know how long WA state has had shall-issue, but it's a lot longer than Florida, Utah or Idaho. My Dad had a permit in the early 70's, I know that. WA's libertarian leanings is part of what brought him to the state in the 60s. At this point, we have the wait (as noted, waived with valid CPL), and all sales and transfers (exempting immediate family) have to go through not just an FFL for NICS, but also require a form sending all your shit to the WA State DOL for record keeping. Not good, IMHO. There are guns in my safe that I will never sell purely because they aren't papered.

But I digress.

[LOKNLOD]

At this point, we have the wait (as noted, waived with valid CPL), and all sales and transfers (exempting immediate family) have to go through not just an FFL for NICS, but also require a form sending all your shit to the WA State DOL for record keeping. Not good, IMHO. There are guns in my safe that I will never sell purely because they aren't papered.


"Universal back ground checks" = registration. You can't require a background check on private transfers unless you have a way to track private transfers. You can't do that unless you know to whom the guns belong.

Tam nailed how background checks ought to work in her blog (http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2017/06/cooldown-period.html) recently:

As far as Universal Background Checks, here's the correct and constitutional way to implement those: Since the right to keep and bear arms is a civil right, the default setting is that everyone has it. If someone becomes a felon or is otherwise debarred from arms, then make a NO GUNS ALLOWED black mark on their DL/ID/passport/whatever.


It's almost like "innocent until proven guilty" applies or something weird like that.

[Drang]

I don't know how long WA state has had shall-issue...

Early 60s. Shall issue should be called "Washington-style permits", just like "Constitutional Carry" used to be called "Vermont Style Carry."

/Digression

[BWT]

I think it's good to hear it from the man himself and watch the video as others have said.

I was thinking about it a bit later on this afternoon (and I think that's about as much time as I'm going to give it to be honest). He was interviewed in a hit piece on Gun Owners by people that hate conservative individuals. He did his best to get out there and give us some good representation.

Did he make a few mistakes and/or get directly misquoted? Yes. He also indicated that they tried to get the reporter to go into a pawn shop with Pat Mac to buy a gun and Pat Mac indicated he absolutely would not go into that Pawn Shop with them because he knew he was being setup as far as they probably cherry picked some guy. ETA: He re-directed them into a gun shop that he was familiar with.

I dunno, the analogy that I finally came to was he tried to wrestle with a pig in a pig pen and despite how good you are at wrestling; you're going to get some crap on you. They will find a way to misquote you or misrepresent you. They do it to the President, Senate, or anyone who they disagree with. Why would Pat Mac be different? Why would they suddenly change their status quo? It's a show on political satire that will continue to do stuff like this.

We'll see how it all shakes out, but I genuinely wish the best for the dude. God knows he's done enough for our country and at this point is doing way more than I am to promote firearm ownership, self-defense, the 2nd Amendment, etc. and continue to contribute to the gun community.

God Bless,

Brandon

[StraitR]

There is no three day wait if you have a CWP. Without a CWP all counties have a 3 day wait on handguns and some have it on long guns as well. In many counties, though, you can cash and carry a long gun.

And some Florida counties have a 5 day waiting period on all firearms without a CWP. As per the FL constitution, it's a statewide 3 business days (no weekend or holidays) on handguns and firearms classified as "other" such as PG shotgun, but allows up to 5 days. Palm Beach County is one such place with 5 day wait on all firearms without a CWP. Even sworn LEO's are currently subject to the same waiting periods if they do not possess a FL CWP, as it's part of the state constitution. That said, the House just passed a proposal to exempt LEO's and make a formal change to the constitution which requires a statewide vote. We should see the question on the ballot in 2018.

This is all I could find on it with a brief search.. http://www.guns.com/2017/05/05/florida-house-passes-exemption-for-police-from-3-day-handgun-waiting-period/


As far as PatMac, the guy has my respect contrary to whatever progressive-biased production Comedy Central spins up with his words.

[Mr. Goodtimes]

I hope pat mac is writing down the names of all the mouth breathing gun Press that wronged him so quickly...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trooper224]

Nothing to see here.

[ffhounddog]

I like training with Pat have done it three times, he made sure I had the motivation to get to the gym after training but he did I still the love of the Glock 19 back into me when I was thinking Sig, sig, sig. I ran a Beretta 92g Vertec in his class the first time. Then the next two were Glock 19s. I went from mediocre shooter to just acceptable with a laugh so, it's not bad training you just need to know who you are training with.

[JHC]

Pat is a Solid Dude! No worries.

"Gas it up and Burn it Down."

That's the long and short of it as far as I'm concerned. Maybe he should just drop the topic and ignore the chatter. Let it be a filter on his open enrollment registrants.

[Tamara]

Early 60s. Shall issue should be called "Washington-style permits", just like "Constitutional Carry" used to be called "Vermont Style Carry."

/Digression

Indiana's dates to the late '30s.

ETA: Looking at WA, OR, CO...all I can say is thank God Indiana has no mountains and hardly any beach to speak of. Don't anybody move here, it's dull and sucky.

[Hambo]

Indiana...it's dull and sucky.

Indiana should come with a prescription for anti-depressants. The clip is about PA, but the prediction is the same for Indiana.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWmbuKSWLDE

[Drang]

Indiana's dates to the late '30s.
Because Dillinger?

[OlongJohnson]

Indiana's dates to the late '30s.

ETA: Looking at WA, OR, CO...all I can say is thank God Indiana has no mountains and hardly any beach to speak of. Don't anybody move here, it's dull and sucky.

There used to be a cool automobile race in some town there. Then someone decided it was no good having the whole world care about it so much, and made it dull and sucky, too.

[Tamara]

Because Dillinger?

Actually, in this case, it's really true. :)