HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » What's the big deal with ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:29 PM

What's the big deal with drama in this group?

Are there folks here that want to walk down the street with AR10 hanging from their shoulder vs. folks who want to do away with all firearms including the police?


I think in the current state of affairs our gun laws we have in place are just fine. Just about the right mix...

I do think the "Stand your ground" laws are too much, we should just keep the castle laws. On your own property, in your own house, fine. Walking down to your neighbor and actiing like you are under threat and shooting him doesn't work. (As noted by a good Texas jury recently)

Also, the big gun shows/sales should be better regulated...



But outside of that, the laws on the books right now are good. There really shouldn't be too much to bitch about. So what's with all the drama I hear? I'm perfectly in the middle for you folks so if you have confusion or a specific question I'll answer it and state how it should be.

117 replies, 9029 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 117 replies Author Time Post
Reply What's the big deal with drama in this group? (Original post)
snooper2 Jun 2012 OP
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #1
snooper2 Jun 2012 #6
pipoman Jun 2012 #56
oneshooter Jun 2012 #61
PavePusher Jun 2012 #2
safeinOhio Jun 2012 #13
PavePusher Jun 2012 #29
safeinOhio Jun 2012 #43
Glaug-Eldare Jun 2012 #47
PavePusher Jun 2012 #77
NewMoonTherian Jun 2012 #31
OneTenthofOnePercent Jun 2012 #3
LineLineReply .
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #4
OneTenthofOnePercent Jun 2012 #8
Starboard Tack Jun 2012 #44
pipoman Jun 2012 #60
Starboard Tack Jun 2012 #72
pipoman Jun 2012 #76
ileus Jun 2012 #5
OneTenthofOnePercent Jun 2012 #7
gejohnston Jun 2012 #32
OneTenthofOnePercent Jun 2012 #91
gejohnston Jun 2012 #92
Hoyt Jun 2012 #9
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #10
Hoyt Jun 2012 #12
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #14
Hoyt Jun 2012 #16
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #18
Hoyt Jun 2012 #21
snooper2 Jun 2012 #24
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #25
NewMoonTherian Jun 2012 #34
Hoyt Jun 2012 #40
NewMoonTherian Jun 2012 #64
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply .
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #68
ellisonz Jun 2012 #100
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #101
ellisonz Jun 2012 #102
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #103
ellisonz Jun 2012 #107
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #108
ellisonz Jun 2012 #110
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #112
ellisonz Jun 2012 #113
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #114
sarisataka Jun 2012 #104
ellisonz Jun 2012 #105
sarisataka Jun 2012 #109
ellisonz Jun 2012 #111
PavePusher Jun 2012 #42
DonP Jun 2012 #50
Hoyt Jun 2012 #71
DonP Jun 2012 #81
Hoyt Jun 2012 #83
Glaug-Eldare Jun 2012 #86
NewMoonTherian Jun 2012 #87
Common Sense Party Jun 2012 #89
DonP Jun 2012 #90
snooper2 Jun 2012 #11
safeinOhio Jun 2012 #15
Trunk Monkey Jun 2012 #19
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #20
Trunk Monkey Jun 2012 #33
sarisataka Jun 2012 #37
Remmah2 Jun 2012 #22
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #27
Remmah2 Jun 2012 #28
DonP Jun 2012 #30
Hoyt Jun 2012 #49
gejohnston Jun 2012 #52
Hoyt Jun 2012 #54
Glaug-Eldare Jun 2012 #58
Hoyt Jun 2012 #63
Glaug-Eldare Jun 2012 #65
Hoyt Jun 2012 #69
cherokeeprogressive Jun 2012 #55
Hoyt Jun 2012 #57
Glaug-Eldare Jun 2012 #74
Hoyt Jun 2012 #46
Glaug-Eldare Jun 2012 #53
PavePusher Jun 2012 #78
Hoyt Jun 2012 #79
PavePusher Jun 2012 #80
Hoyt Jun 2012 #84
PavePusher Jun 2012 #93
Hoyt Jun 2012 #95
Straw Man Jun 2012 #26
MicaelS Jun 2012 #82
sarisataka Jun 2012 #38
Starboard Tack Jun 2012 #45
Hoyt Jun 2012 #51
mvccd1000 Jun 2012 #85
Hoyt Jun 2012 #97
mvccd1000 Jun 2012 #98
L0oniX Jun 2012 #96
spin Jun 2012 #17
Clames Jun 2012 #23
Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2012 #35
Clames Jun 2012 #39
Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2012 #41
Clames Jun 2012 #66
Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2012 #73
Starboard Tack Jun 2012 #48
MicaelS Jun 2012 #59
Clames Jun 2012 #67
gejohnston Jun 2012 #70
Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2012 #75
MicaelS Jun 2012 #62
Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2012 #36
Trunk Monkey Jun 2012 #88
PavePusher Jun 2012 #94
ileus Jun 2012 #99
jeepnstein Jun 2012 #106
Bum_Whisperer Jun 2012 #115
snooper2 Jun 2012 #117
AtheistCrusader Jun 2012 #116

Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:46 PM

1. Why don't people outside their home have a right to self-edefense?

People go to work, out for an evening on the town, shopping, etc. I'd like to think they have a right to self-defense if they're at these places doing nothing harmful to anyone.

Chasing people down to play vigilante? Provoking a confrontation? Yeah, I'd be against those as well but those few instances don't negate the legitimate need for legal protection/recognition to those people genuinely defending their safety and others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #1)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 01:28 PM

6. CCL are fine...no change required to law

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #6)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:50 PM

56. Except if you ever use your CCL

you also loose your life savings defending yourself criminally and civilly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #56)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:14 PM

61. Not always.

In Texas you can not be sued in civil court if you are no billed by a Grand Jury, found innocent or not guilty in a criminal trial.

A law that needs to in place in all states (and DC)!

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:48 PM

2. SYG does not cover this:

 

"Walking down to your neighbor and actiing like you are under threat and shooting him doesn't work."

Nor should it. However, no-one should be forced, by law, to give an actual criminal anything, anywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #2)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:18 PM

13. That all depends on your

paint job. Some folks get to claim SYG, while others don't get too.

You seem to be advocating shooting someone that steals something in the back to keep your stuff.

I'm all for the original post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #13)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:19 PM

29. "You seem to be advocating shooting someone that steals something in the back to keep your stuff."

 

Then you need to get your eyes checked.

Holy. Shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #29)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:43 PM

43. You said it.

"no-one should be forced, by law, to give an actual criminal anything, anywhere." I'm sure you didn't mean it the way it sounded.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #43)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:21 PM

47. I believe I have (and should have) the right to refuse any criminal request

Last edited Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:22 PM - Edit history (1)

without being criminally or civilly liable for doing so. If the criminal decides to respond to my refusal with violence, then self-defense can come into play. Simply put, no criminal demand should carry the weight of law.

That said, compliance is sometimes prudent, and an important tool in many circumstances. For instance, if a criminal wants cash or something petty, it's not cowardly to comply in order to avoid violence. If he wants you to get into a car or allow yourself to be restrained, it's extremely dangerous and foolish to comply. BUT, prudent or not, it should not be mandatory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #43)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:07 PM

77. It surely didn't sound like "shoot them in the back".

 

Quit playing Hoyt's game, you're no better at it than he is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #13)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:59 PM

31. But what you describe isn't a problem with the law as written.

It's a problem with law enforcement, and one that I wholeheartedly acknowledge. Police discrimination is a problem we've been dealing with since long before SYG laws appeared. It's unacceptable, but duty-to-retreat never did anything to address it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:52 PM

3. I don't mind the Stand Your Ground laws.

 

I think the most important about the SYG and CD laws is the civil immunity granted from the determination of legitimate self-defense. If the law determines that someone committed no crime, then why should they be held in what is essentially double jeopardy in a civil court (which has very low standards of proof).

I could probably live without the fact that SYG makes the shooter's claim of self defense the truth until proven otherwise. But overall I think that the laws are fine and this is no big detriment because before we had SYG/CD any shooting without a witness could simply be claimed "self defense" anyways... if the prosocutor bought your story then it didn't go to trial anyways. SYG just codifies this prosecutorial reasoning. So there was nothing stopping people from claiming "self defense" before we had SYG laws. In fact, in the whole Treyvon fiasco, zimmerman is not delcaring his defense to be under protection of SYG... he's merely pleading regular old self defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #3)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:59 PM

4. .

"I could probably live without the fact that SYG makes the shooter's claim of self defense the truth until proven otherwise."


Yeah, I get where you're coming from but the presumption of innocence is also given to actual criminals as well. I'm comfortable assuming you agree with presumptions of innocence and that leads us to ask just how much heat should "the system" bring down on a person who genuinely defends their safety? Going to trial for a homicide charge of any sort can be devastating to a person's life, career, marriage, family, emotional and physical health. If that person was acting in self defense then they will be ruined just for being innocent and "the system" can bring more resources to bear than the average citizen.

Something to consider.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 01:37 PM

8. Ambiguous circumstances cas ensnare anyone, really.

 

I don't mind the presumption of innocence. It's absolutely necessary. I just don't think it is too much to ask that someone in a self defense shooting provide at least *some* corroberating evidence to their story. And in other situations, where you have circumstantial evidence that contradicts a self-defense story... SYG can basically throw that evidence out without further investigation because in and of itself it's not sufficient evidence to warrant a trail.

If I had to pick one way or the other, I would keep SYG as-is with the solid presumption of innocence. I was just saying that I feel the immunity is a much more critical part of the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:49 PM

44. Definitely something to consider.

I hope everyone who straps on a gun in the morning considers the possibility that they may not be coming home tonight, if they decide to use that gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #44)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:14 PM

60. Or even if they are faced with use it or parrish,

they will go to jail and spend their home equity, savings, and kids college fund defending themselves criminally and civilly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #60)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:35 PM

72. Rights don't come with a free pass through the judicial process.

What kind of libertarian Utopia do you aspire to?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #72)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:05 PM

76. I aspire to, in fact have achieved in most states,

a standard of innocent until proven guilty, rather than having to prove innocence...civil libertarian I am, and will always be, right along with a good many other Dems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 01:25 PM

5. AR10's are just too damn big.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 01:31 PM

7. Tell me about it... my "AR10" bench rifle is over 15 pounds with scope, bipod, and 20rnd mag.

 

It's big and bulky and accurate. Probaby not the best rifle to hump aorund town... or even hunting the woods, for that matter. If I ever have to bug-out... I'm bringing the AK clone or MAC-11/9 SMG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #7)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:59 PM

32. Memories of Belfast perhaps?

just a guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #32)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 09:53 AM

91. I'm missing the reference, here... ?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #91)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:26 AM

92. My bad, I was thinking of the AR-18

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 01:54 PM

9. Really pretty simple -- who wants a bunch of yahoos like this parading around in public, around kids

etc. We live in a developed society and people should act like it.

http://citizensvoice.com/polopoly_fs/1.1264440.1327889027!/image/2563182605.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_240/2563182605.jpg







?w=468&h=352

?w=500&h=530

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:05 PM

10. Well

One sees all sorts of anti-social, self-aggrandizing behavior in public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:16 PM

12. Except this is that, PLUS a gun or two strapped to their bodies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #12)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:21 PM

14. Should I be scared?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:26 PM

16. Apparently you are if you carry a gun on city streets. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:30 PM

18. None of the pictures you showed are from city streets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #18)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:41 PM

21. Do you want militia, cowboy, bigoted, or basement arsenal types walking around armed in the city?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #21)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:54 PM

24. You can't complain about something that isn't happening..

So far the biggest gathering of as some put it "gun nuts" is a teabagger party where 20 60+ something idiots show up...

It's not reflective of society in general so it shouldn't really be a concern...


Middle of the road common thought man here


Next!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #21)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:00 PM

25. From the pics you posted it's not an issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #21)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:11 PM

34. "Militia" isn't a pejorative.

Neither is "cowboy". I don't know how you define a basement arsenal, but I imagine some of my favorite uncles have more than you'd be comfortable with. I didn't see anything in any of the photos you posted that suggests any kind of bigotry, except for your own. All I see coming from you is bigotry, arrogance and a vast ignorance regarding other people's way of life.

To answer your question; I guess sticking strictly with your definitions as I've been able to garner them from your posts, my answer is yes. I'm perfectly fine with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewMoonTherian (Reply #34)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:06 PM

40. The militia types are such wonderful folks camping out hoping to shoot people from Mexico and stuff.


Randy Weaver was a saint. Ayran Nation, etc., are just fine citizens because they like guns. All the fuckers that overran gun stores after Obama was elected are just normal, good, law-abiding citizens. The NRA does such wonderful things for the gun culture by supporting right wing candidates, and pledging to defeat Obama. Just look at the vast majority of folks promoting more guns and arming up in this country and the groups they fear/hate.

You need to take a look around at what is going on.

And, yes, I admit that I am "bigoted" toward the stuff described above.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #40)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:48 PM

64. I've got no love for the Minuteman project.

But if any of them had intended to shoot someone coming across the border, they had plenty of opportunities. Yet the only shooting I ever heard of them doing was with a camera.

I never said everyone who likes guns is a fine citizen. There are some real freaks and dangerous monsters who do. As for the surge in firearms sales after Obama's election, yes, almost all of the people buying them were perfectly normal, trustworthy, law-abiding citizens who haven't done anything dangerous with those guns since buying them. The NRA is an organization with a great history, whose leadership is sadly radically right-wing, and an organization that does great work as well as terrible work.

I don't know what kinds of ideas the vast majority of pro-gunners have. I know the ideas the pro-gunners here on DU have, and the ideas of those I know personally. I agree with some and disagree with others. You haven't presented anything that compels me that my friends, peers and the majority of the United States population are not trustworthy to carry firearms, pretty much wherever and whenever they choose. You've shown me lots of pictures of overweight white men with combat gear and guns. I know you're trying to express your disdain for this type of person, but I don't share it, so it really isn't effective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #40)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:07 PM

68. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #68)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 02:51 PM

100. You think the majority of people thought violence was the answer to racism?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #100)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 02:55 PM

101. I'm not sure which post you're replying to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #101)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 02:57 PM

102. I'm replying to your posting of an image of the Black Panthers...

...in regard to the question of wing-nut extremist militia groups promoting gun love.

Even in the African-American community - the violence advocated by the Black Panthers was thoroughly rejected, which is why the message of peace and anti-militarism of Martin Luther King. Jr. was so widely rejected. Whatever your purpose in posting that image in this thread, it was a poor one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #102)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:00 PM

103. And the violence advocated by militias is pretty thoroughly rejected by whites as well

Ditto racism etc. So I don't know why you're lecturing me while giving Hoyt a free pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #103)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:18 PM

107. The anti-government violence is denounced...

...the run-of-the-mill shoot the burglars on the lawn is pretty thoroughly accepted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Horn_shooting_controversy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #107)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:22 PM

108. What does Mr Horn have to do with Hoyt's assertion that pro-2A = support for

white, racist, anti-government militias?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #108)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:34 PM

110. First off: "pro-2A" is a silly notion. No one is opposed to the Constituion.

Secondly, can you show me an anti-government militia type who isn't thoroughly immersed in the gun culture/nuttiness? I don't think you can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #110)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:41 PM

112. Hoyt was painting, via false association, that to be pro-2A is to be pro-white racist militia

That's patently absurd and false.

Nor is it a basis for granting Hoyt the policy agenda he would impose (in opposition to the Constitution, no less). The number of armed radicals is minute compared to the number of people who simply wish to protect themselves or enjoy legitimate sports. Some people abuse free speech -- with racist intent, no less -- but that should in no way impugn the proper enjoyment of that right for every else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #112)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:49 PM

113. I think the entire premise of "pro-2A" is nonsensical.

And part and parcel of extremist politics...

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Why are so many opposed to "regulation" when it is clearly the basis of the entire proposition?

I'll tell you why, they're deluded about the intent and words of the Founding Fathers in this regard because to them it means that they get to have whatever weapon they went wherever they want with little or no meaningful qualification for possession. That's just fucking nuts and it's all too prevalent in this "pro-2A" canard cooked up by a bunch of quacks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #113)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:57 PM

114. I still don't see what this has to do with Hoyt's dishonest assertion

or why you seem intent on obfuscating in favor of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #102)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:06 PM

104. I believe you meant

MLK's message was accepted.

There is an analogy however. What the BPs were to civil rights is what the RW militias are to gun owners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #104)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:14 PM

105. And that would be a very poor analogy.

Comparing grapes with oranges, and pineapples with watermelons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #105)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:31 PM

109. So are you claiming...

You believe most gun owners are arming for a battle against the government?
I was pointing out the BPs were a extreme fringe of the civil rights movement as the militias are an extreme fringe if the 2A rights movement.

Or was I wrong and you meant MLK's message was rejected?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #109)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:35 PM

111. I believe the gun culture...

...supports laws that enable the reckless arming of anti-government militias and other violent types.



This the mainstream politics of the gun culture:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewMoonTherian (Reply #34)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:37 PM

42. Hoyt knows the truth....

 

the Truth according to Hoyt.

And he won't let anyone sway him from the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #42)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:29 PM

50. He doesn't tolerate people that don't look or think like him

I have yet to see any of these pictures of his with a Romney button on them or an "I hate Obama" sticker on their gear. Hell, they could be solid Dem voters, he has no way of knowing. To him anyone with a gun must be a GOP/NRA shill wing nut.

I haven't ever seen him provide any support that his cut and paste pictures are right wingers, have any of you?

He'd have a real problem at the ranges I go to. Lots of people that are different colors there, very confusing to people like Hoyt.

He obviously just hates people that don't look like him, spend their time the way he does or think the way he demands everyone else think. Pretty intolerant for DU.

There's a word for people like that, but very few of them are allowed to stay on DU, just down here in the Gungeon where I guess he can call people any names he wants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #50)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:21 PM

71. I "tolerate" almost everyone except those carrying guns in the city.

I am also quite suspicious of people who buy a lot of guns, certain types of guns, and any requirements that might tie them to a gun.

But, the minute they lay down their guns, I will hug them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #71)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:44 PM

81. Thank you for illustrating my point so well.

You tolerate everybody, except of course anyone who doesn't agree with you on firearm ownership.

That's the point - sailing way over your head.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #81)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:26 AM

83. Well, I don't tolerate criminals, particularly those who abuse with a gun (whether convicted).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #83)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:01 AM

86. Hoyt's Gun Abuse Severity Test

1. Have you ever considered purchasing a gun?
2. Have you ever purchased a gun?
3. Have you ever considered purchasing ammunition?
4. Have you ever purchased ammunition?
5. Have you ever fired a gun?
6. Have you ever obtained a carry permit for a gun?
7. Have you ever owned more than ten cartridges at one time?
8. Have you ever felt that you couldn't enjoy yourself with ten or fewer cartridges?

If you answer "YES" to any of these questions, you are a severe gun abuser. You are also an unconvicted criminal and should immediately report to Judge Harry Stone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #83)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:17 AM

87. I'm not sure I understand.

"Well, I don't tolerate criminals, particularly those who abuse with a gun (whether convicted)."

I couldn't agree with you more. I won't stand for people committing crimes with guns. I won't stand for people using guns to harm innocent people. But for the rest of this sub-thread(and generally for the rest of the time I've been reading your posts), you've been ranting against people who carry guns in public without harming anyone. Why are you so firmly against civilians carrying weapons when it is so very rare for these people to do any harm? There are other ways that you could prevent violent crime. There are things that would have the support of almost everyone here. I want to help keep people safe, while protecting personal freedom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #71)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 09:18 AM

89. Maybe they don't want a hug from you.

That would be assault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Common Sense Party (Reply #89)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 09:48 AM

90. Based on the pictures he keeps posting he doesn't seem to like overweight white people.

I bet he doesn't want to hug them.

Of course ... we don't know if he has a weight issue either. It could be a case of projection.

And we know he can't ride his bike for exercise anymore, because he uses the front wheel as a weapon when he confronts concealed carriers and demands to see their papers while he holds them for the local police.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:16 PM

11. I've been alive for 37 years and don't remember seeing folks like that parading around in public...

Are you okay with all the laws regulating firearms as they are?


remember, I'm right in the middle representing most of society-

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #11)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:25 PM

15. I think if it is OK to do a criminal

background check on a person buying a handgun from a licensed dealer, it should be the same for a private sale. A few years ago I bought a handgun at a garage sale, legally and with no questions asked. Just think what cities would be like if anyone could go into a gun store like Walmart and do the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #15)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:34 PM

19. To be fair

 

Several states allow private sales with no background check and it doesn't seem to be that much of an issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #19)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:40 PM

20. Taking your statement at face value

Why is that?

Honest question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #20)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:04 PM

33. Because the criminal elemnet of Colorado

 

Doesn't appear to be scouring the Denver Post or The Gazette to purchase their weapons. Private sales don't appear to be providing a large percentage of firearms to criminals

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #15)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:51 PM

37. Many pro-gun people think so too

Right now NCIS is only available to licensed dealers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:47 PM

22. Pretty much a racist collection of pictures.

 

Diversity is lacking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:15 PM

27. I know! Right?

People of color also own guns. How come Hoyt only portays whites as crazed gun owners?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #27)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:41 PM

28. and sexist.............

 

Wimmins like to plink and shoot too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #28)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:50 PM

30. Simple answer

Of course there are plenty of pictures of gun owners that are Hispanic, African American, Native American or that represent pretty much any other group in the US.

But if he used pictures of gun owners of color, women or both, like Otis McDonald, Rhonda Ezell etc. and made the same rude, condescending remarks he makes about overweight white people, he'd be long gone from DU. There's a double standard and we all know it.

He gets away with it only because he carefully chooses only those pictures for maximum offensiveness and to cover his ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #27)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:27 PM

49. Cause those are only militia and TBag types who arm up.


Why don't you go find some photos of minorities who worship guns? Because they have better sense.



?w=300

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to gejohnston (Reply #52)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:42 PM

54. Just more ancient BS to scare the gun culture into buying more guns.


At least those guys had reason to take up weapons -- the gun culture people were lynching them, denying them jobs, educational opportunities, etc. Maybe I ought to post photos of what the gun carrying/worshiping Klan did. Or more recent photos of militia groups, Ayran Nation, white supremacists, TBaggers -- all big into to guns -- hate-dancing with their lethal weapons.

Nowadays, I'd like to see equal restrictions on carrying guns in public.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #54)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:00 PM

58. Ah, white supremacists

The good folks who brought us gun control in the first place!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glaug-Eldare (Reply #58)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:41 PM

63. Their mistake was they didn't restrict the hell out of guns for everyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #63)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:51 PM

65. No mistake, and no oversight.

Gun control is never written to apply for everyone, and never has been. From the very beginning, it's been written to create a privileged class and an unprivileged class. They can be (have been, and are,) divided up by race, religion, wealth, political status, ZIP code, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glaug-Eldare (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:10 PM

69. I think we could cover most people, at least begin transition to saner gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #55)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:54 PM

57. Post # 54 is for you too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #49)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:46 PM

74. No pictures, but there's a black gun club round my way

called the Maryland Tenth Cavalry Gun Club

There are many, many gun owners of every description and background, and essentially none telling them they're not allowed on account of their skin color. Shooting sports are being discovered by more and more people every day, and I enjoy doing my bit by volunteering at town fairs. I particularly enjoy teaching immigrants from Central and South American about their rights, and helping them to exercise them. As for the dearth of photos, it seems to me like white people disproportionately adore uploading pictures of themselves, especially when they look ridiculous.


Looking up "black gun owners" and "black bike riders" gave me about the same lackluster results.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:18 PM

46. Bingo -- Diversity is definitely lacking in the gun culture.


Obviously, there are exceptions. But go to a gun show, or range, and look around. Go to an armed TBagger rally. Go to NRA. Go to Republican meetings.

Worse, one of the main reasons folks arm up is their fear/hatred of minorities.







Source -- Tactical-Life.com

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #46)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:40 PM

53. Gun shows around here have plenty of non-whites and women.

The Tea Party people are a political bunch, not gun-related. Same with your odd assertion that guns = Republicans. As for "going to NRA," I've been to their HQ in Fairfax (if that's what you mean by "go to NRA") and it's fairly diverse as well. Shooting sports are a primarily white activity, I'll admit that in a heartbeat, but the demographics vary tremendously from place to place. It's really easy to find pictures of white gun owners in a majority-white country with mostly majority-white states and majority-white municipalities. Nothing incriminating about that, unless you want to assert that Islam is racist because it don't meet your diversity requirements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #46)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:19 PM

78. Hoyt, you need to get out more.

 

The "gun culture" you stereotype looks very little like your fevered ramblings and cherry-picked media photos, once you step outside your own doors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #78)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:22 PM

79. Please provide a photo of you and GC buddies.

Would love to see photos of people carrying that you think represents carriers. Please, not a bunch of photos of Winter Olympics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #79)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:37 PM

80. You are always welcome to come to Tucson and take in a gun show or two. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #80)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:28 AM

84. At your expense? Otherwise photos please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #84)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:45 PM

93. Generally speaking, taking photos at those events is restricted.

 

But I'll see what I can do. The ones here are often on the County Fairgrounds. This would be public property, and I have no problem with photography there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #93)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:57 PM

95. I bet it is restricted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:08 PM

26. Simple?

Really pretty simple -- who wants a bunch of yahoos like this parading around in public, around kids

None of your photographs depict people "in public" -- I see one person in what appears to be a private residence, a group of men in paramilitary clothing standing in a clearing in the woods, two men who are in a large meeting room, a lone individual in the desert, and another lone individual in another private residence. Furthermore, I don't see one child anywhere in these photographs.

Or was this mean to be illustrative of "yahoos"? What besides the guns qualifies these people as "yahoos" to your way of thinking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #26)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:46 PM

82. Most gun owners are "yahoos", according to Hoyt....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=45225

I "tolerate" almost everyone except those carrying guns in the city.

I am also quite suspicious of people who buy a lot of guns, certain types of guns, and any requirements that might tie them to a gun.

But, the minute they lay down their guns, I will hug them.


So in other words the possession of a gun makes a person a yahoo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:11 PM

38. Don't see any parades

Picture 1 seems to be a shoulder rig for field use while hunting
Picture 2 not that different from a group getting ready for paintball. I doubt that is their daily dress. Maybe they are the parade clowns?
Picture 3, the guy on the right bothers me. I see very little retention capability with his holster placement and strap
Picture 4 has spent too much time watching the Schwarzenegger marathon. heat stroke will shortly remove him from the gene pool
Picture 5 looks to be the interior of a gun shop. The text indicates it may be a personal collection, but my German is pretty weak. In any case it appears to be mostly pre-1960's weapons and I believe personal collections are not against any law.


So if the 'yahoos' wish to parade, let them. It creates a teaching moment for the kids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:53 PM

45. I wonder if the huge beer guts are part of the qualifying process.

Maybe they need the guns. They obviously can't run very fast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #45)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:32 PM

51. I've noticed the tendency, and think there is a correlation.


I think TBaggers (big percentage into guns) tend to to over-eat/drink. Not much exercise either, other than standing still at a range squeezing off shots into silhouette targets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:44 AM

85. Why do you single out overweight persons?

You have no pictures of slender gun-toters... is there some bias showing through?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mvccd1000 (Reply #85)

Thu Jun 21, 2012, 02:45 PM

97. There aren't that many. How many calories do you burn standing, squeezing a trigger -- not a lot.


Heck, it seems to be popular around here to buy hi-cap mags so you don't even have to expend energy reloading. And, the supposedly ergonomic features of "assault" weapons, allow one to sit in a recliner and blast away.

There may also be some correlation in being out of shape, and feeling the need to carry a gun for protection. I've heard that rationale from several here.

Just saying -- because you asked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #97)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 01:33 AM

98. Cool answer.

If there's one thing I respect about your position, it's your devotion to it; you find a way to mold any statement into a supporting argument for your side. While that's often frustrating to someone who expects you to see the light when presented with actual facts, it also makes for some entertainment, and even - from time to time - awe at the laser-like way you maintain your focus on your message.


Don't change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Thu Jun 21, 2012, 11:54 AM

96. Over weight people will kill for food if need be?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:28 PM

17. Your example of the Texas incident ...

may have involved a claim of self defense and stand your ground but was rejected by the jury. Rightfully so.

The law was designed to be used in cases where an innocent person was in a place he had a right to be, was not engaged in criminal activity and was attacked or faced imminent attack from an individual who intended to inflict serous injury or to kill and had the ability to do so. A reasonable man standing in the shoes of the person using this defense should agree that his actions were appropriate under the circumstances.

The law was never intended to allow a person to start a fight and then say that he feared for his life and had to use lethal force.

Obviously the laws were poorly written as occasions have happened when the legal system allowed a person who was undoubtedly guilty of murder or manslaughter to walk free. This fact will lead to an attempt to reword the law in states like Florida in order to any remove confusion or antiquities.

I would go further then better regulating gun shows as you suggest. I would require an NICS background check for the private sale of any firearm.

I disagree with the laws currently on the books for the regulation of firearms in some states but I also feel that as long as the laws do not forbid honest citizens the right to own firearms and do not impose fees that would discourage an average citizen from owning such weapons, each state should be allowed to have its own regulations.

I personally like the firearm regulations in Florida where I live and find them fair and reasonable.








Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:50 PM

23. To answer your initial question...

 

...the source of the drama in the group stems from a small but vocal cadre of DU'ers who feel that this group should be deleted from DU or at least moderated to a point that anyone who's opinion differs from their extremist flavor of gun-control advocacy can be branded a "RW troll" and banned immediately. They are usually disruptive, insulting, technically incompetent, and deliberately misrepresent posts to effect their abuse of the jury system. They don't mind making this little part of DU suck because they feel this group's existence makes DU as a whole suck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:38 PM

35. actually these same people are going all over DU with their vitriol and making all of DU suck.

it is tiresome and I would rather shut this place down so that they won't have it to whine about anymore. How else can we get rid of these trolls?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #35)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:43 PM

39. Let them whine, let them complain, let them make DU suck...

 

...as with iverglas, they'll be dealt with given enough time. They seem to have gotten the message a little bit after their last attempt failed to garner the general support of DU they thought it would....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #39)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:35 PM

41. what last attempt?

lost me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #41)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:00 PM

66. When elisonz protested a few threads made here in Meta.

 

Lots of whining and not much else on his part. Seemed to even bug those that don't even post in this group as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Clames (Reply #39)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:24 PM

48. "Let them whine" LOL.

"Let them whine, let them complain, let them make DU suck..."

That sounds like a major whine to me and DU does not suck. Sorry to disappoint you.
Technical expertise has nothing to do with DUers ability or eligibility to participate in this group. Sorry to disappoint you again, but this group comes under Justice and Public Safety, not Gun Nuttery. There are lots of places out there for gun nuts to compare their weapons, talk about how comfortable their new holster fits in their speedos and how great it feels. This is not the place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #48)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:13 PM

59. Certain people TRY "to make DU suck", iverglas was the most notorious..

Last edited Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:58 PM - Edit history (1)

Skinner said so himself when he PPR'd her. And I quote:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=100133&sub=trans

More hidden posts than any other DU member, a position she held consistently for weeks (also a position she held regularly on DU2). Numerous attempts to drive a wedge between LGBT DUers and Feminists. Did not seem to like LGBT DUers very much; defended transphobia on a number of occasions. Tried to bypass being blocked out of threads by repeatedly editing her remaining posts. Tried to bully potential Jurors into leaving her disruptive posts alone by repeatedly posting rude callouts of Jurors in the Help & Meta-discussion forum. Was a constant fixture in flame wars in that forum. Repeated attempts to badger the Admins into banning people via the alert function. Constantly surly and rude, iverglas had become pretty much the epitome of "making DU suck." She received an enormous amount of feedback from other DUers indicating that she was disruptive and divisive and was given ample opportunity to modify her approach, but instead chose to believe that the problem was everybody else on DU.


And, just to be crystal clear, I do not believe DU sucks as a whole. I think people who constantly criticize other Jurors, or the Jury System, suck. I think trolls suck. iverglas was a troll of the first order.

I like DU or else I would not spend time posting on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #48)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:04 PM

67. No whining, just observing a fact here.

 

You, ellisonz, Hoyt, safeinohio, DanTex, bongbong, and a few others contribute little here other than constant complaints and gripes. And that's the least of it. As for this "not being the place", I suggest you look up page....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #67)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:20 PM

70. I disagree

I have to give ST, safeinohio, and even DanTex more credit than that. Although, pseudo academia is kind of old but...
One question I have is, isn't Starboard Track kind of an oxymoron or ironic on a Democratic site? I'm not a sailor, but starboard is the right side facing the bow of a boat or cockpit of a plane.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #70)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:47 PM

75. and to tack in that direction ... I think I am getting your drift.

odd choice....and bad puns aside ...I agree that those are more worthy adversaries than some others on here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:16 PM

62. Agree 100% n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:48 PM

36. in your opinion has the drama gotten worse since the move to DU3 and if so, why?

Do you have any suggestions (besides this sensible, pragmatic thread) on how to defuse the drama?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 07:02 AM

88. Just from my brief time here

 

I've noticed that if you look through the threads it's the same few people arguing the same few points over and over and over again. It gets kind of boring kind of quick that's why I hope the scope of this forum does get expanded it would be nice to have someplace to talk about guns with out all the right wing bullshit you hear on other gun forums

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #88)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:52 PM

94. Exactly. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #88)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 08:09 AM

99. first topic....dedicated 22lr uppers.

I have a lower that's wanting to be a plinker for the whole family to enjoy from my 7yo son, to my 10yo daughter, the wife and I.

My daughter thinks the 556 is too loud and she won't shoot it that often. My son loves to shoot the AR's too much, and my wife bought her own AR so she wouldn't have to share.


AnYwaY that's for another thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #99)

Fri Jun 22, 2012, 03:17 PM

106. First purse fight...

9mm versus .45 auto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Sat Jun 23, 2012, 09:53 AM

115. Judging by the question content of the original post...

The poster doesn't own firearms, has had no reason to defend himself and has not purchased a firearm at a gun show. This reads like all of the garbage being spewed out from the media. The post is intended to create MORE drama from nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bum_Whisperer (Reply #115)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 10:13 AM

117. LOL, I killed a sow when I was 13 with a thirty-aught-six

About four years ago an ex-asshole from my wife wouldn't leave our house/property but did so after he saw a POS 22 I had laying in the garage..

Juding by the content of your post, you are a tool (see how easy that was )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Original post)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 02:42 AM

116. What's wrong with my AR-10?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread