PDA

View Full Version : Right To Keep And Bear Arms



Dagobert II
November 16th, 2015, 10:13 AM
It appears as though the right to keep and bear arms at taxpayer subsidy (it is more of a right than public assistance after all) is being facilitated in Massachusetts of all places.
The FBI was assisting authorities in Massachusetts in searching for weapons that were stolen from an Army Reserve training and recruitment facility this weekend.

Mestral
November 17th, 2015, 8:30 AM
It appears as though the right to keep and bear arms at taxpayer subsidy (it is more of a right than public assistance after all) is being facilitated in Massachusetts of all places.

The FBI was assisting authorities in Massachusetts in searching for weapons that were stolen from an Army Reserve training and recruitment facility this weekend.
Now, that is quite funny.
Wonder who they gave them to.

(Wonder what kind of security they had for those arms.)

UPDATE: http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Weapons-Missing-From-Armory-in-Worcester-Massachusetts-After-Break-in-350164441.html

Sixteen weapons are missing after a break-in at a military armory in Worcester, Massachusetts, the FBI confirms.
A source close to the investigation told necn six M4 rifles and 10 M11 pistols were taken.

The FBI said there is no indication that the break-in at the Lincoln Stoddard U.S. Army Reserve Center had any ties to terrorism. The agency is working with state and local police to recover what was taken and to determine how the weapons were stolen.
Additionally, the missing weapons have been listed in the NCIC database.

Further UPDATE: http://www.wcvb.com/news/army-reserve-armory-broken-into-saturday-night/36464176

WORCESTER, Mass. —More than a dozen weapons, including six M4 assault rifles and ten handguns were stolen from a secure vault in the break-in at the United States Army Reserve armory in Worcester Saturday night, the military confirmed.

Watch report

Both the FBI and local police are investigating the break-in at the Lincoln Stoddard Army Reserve Center on Lake Avenue.

The break-in and theft occurred between the hours of 6 p.m. Saturday and 1 a.m. Sunday, according to Worcester City Manager Edward M. Augustus Jr., who said police are looking for one man.

5 Investigates reported the suspect went in through the roof and once inside cut a hole in the roof of the vault.

That kind of attack on the vault is probably the most common successful attack,
simply because all other avenues of approach are more difficult.

just2cents
November 23rd, 2015, 10:50 AM
Near the stadium? Did someone have plans to pick them up and use them later?


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/11/23/homeless-man-finds-stolen-massachusetts-armory-guns-near-yankee-stadium/?intcmp=hplnws
Homeless man finds stolen Massachusetts armory guns near Yankee Stadium
Three of the guns stolen from a Massachusetts armory earlier this month were found in a black garbage bag near Yankee Stadium in the Bronx on Friday morning, police told Newsday.
The weapons – one rifle and two pistols – were found by a homeless man collecting cans and bottles in Mullaly Park, cops told Boston.com.
James Walter Morales, 34, has been charged by the U.S. attorney’s office in Massachusetts with taking six M4 rifles and 10 Sig Sauer M11 9-mm. pistols from the Army reserve armory vault in Worcester on Nov. 14. The other 13 guns have not yet been located.
Morales was arrested in Westbury, N.Y., on Wednesday and has been ordered back to Massachusetts to face charges.
Gov. Charlie Baker said last week he was concerned about the theft of the weapons.
"I'm especially concerned about it," Baker said. "Separate and apart from anything that has to do with terrorism, I'm just concerned about the fact that some high-caliber weapons were stolen from a military facility in the first place."

Mestral
November 23rd, 2015, 11:39 AM
I had heard he was arrested, but didn't know about him dumping the weapons near the stadium.
Also didn't know he had run to NY. Until I heard those two things, I just assumed from the mistakes
he made, he wanted to go to prison. (Can't make it on the outside, go for the free room and board.)

Ludwig
November 23rd, 2015, 12:14 PM
He would have been better off robbing a bank, a federal offense. Federal prisons are country clubs compared to state lock-ups.

sojourner truth
November 23rd, 2015, 12:32 PM
Do not concern yourself... Nobody was killed, so it is a minor offense and the perp will be out on the street in no time... Then he can commit a crime that will ensure he has all of the federal amenities.

Dagobert II
November 23rd, 2015, 6:11 PM
Hey, guess who would appear to have reversed her views on the unconstitutional policies of her jurisdiction?
D.C. police Chief Cathy Lanier urges public to ‘take down’ active gunman if they can

Ludwig
November 23rd, 2015, 6:27 PM
Hey, guess who would appear to have reversed her views on the unconstitutional policies of her jurisdiction?What good is her "urging" if she takes their guns and thus ability to "take down" active shooters.

Mestral
November 23rd, 2015, 6:33 PM
Hey, guess who would appear to have reversed her views on the unconstitutional policies of her jurisdiction?
I suspect there is No Change and that she wants them to take down the armed gunman
by throwing chairs or other heavy items at him.


WASHINGTON — Sunday night on “60 Minutes,” Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier said it’s unrealistic to think police will make it to an active shooter situation in time to save lives, so victims will have to prepare to “run, hide or fight.”
This is the same doctrine of stupidity the collectivists have been preaching to our schools for the past 3 years.

sojourner truth
November 23rd, 2015, 8:18 PM
Maybe she was referring to the PD as armed gunmen..

Like they do in Baltimore and Chicago...

But then, she knows as well as all of us that making guns illegal is not going to actually stop them from being on the streets.

Mestral
November 24th, 2015, 2:20 PM
...
But then, she knows as well as all of us that making guns illegal is not going to actually stop them from being on the streets.
Doesn't matter what she "knows." She is paid to say that guns in the hands of civilians is the
problem (in between saying that Global Warming is the main threat) and that we will be safe
from the guy 50 feet away with the AK-47, if we throw chalk board erasures at him,

Dagobert II
November 26th, 2015, 7:01 PM
Members of law enforcement in the Bay Area and beyond are having trouble holding on to their weapons, and one of them was used to kill a man September 29 in Oakland while he painted a mural of nonviolence.
Oakland police arrested Marquese Holloway in the killing of Antonio Ramos and on Wednesday confirmed that the Glock 26 semi-automatic pistol used in the shooting once belonged to a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (http://www.allgov.com/departments/department-of-homeland-security/us-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-ice?agencyid=7352) (ICE) officer. The gun was reportedly stolen from a rental car in mid-September. ICE said in a statement the theft was properly reported.
It is not an isolated incident. NBC Bay Area reported last week that its investigation found 497 weapons have turned up missing at eight law enforcement agencies since 2010. That includes the California Highway Patrol (http://www.allgov.com/usa/ca/departments/california-state-transportation-agency/california_highway_patrol?agencyid=114) (CHP), the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (http://www.allgov.com/departments/department-of-justice/us-drug-enforcement-administration-dea?agencyid=7195) (DEA) and six area police departments.

Grammar Rules
November 27th, 2015, 3:27 PM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.

sojourner truth
November 27th, 2015, 4:29 PM
Why don't you ask them?

I'm sure none of us around here can imagine any reason on earth why they would do something like that.

Rick
November 27th, 2015, 4:37 PM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.


Someone needs to tell us how terrorists got into this country. Some liar says that people are properly vetted before being allowed into the country. It's so funny how his minions trust absolutely everything he says.

We know that you would just love having a convenient way to forbid Americans from owning guns.



From the ACLU.

Terror Watch List Counter: A Million Plus (https://www.aclu.org/terror-watch-list-counter-million-plus)


Why are there so many names on the U.S. government's terrorist list?

In September 2007, the Inspector General of the Justice Department reported that the Terrorist Screening Center (the FBI-administered organization that consolidates terrorist watch list information in the United States) had over 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007 - and that the list was growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month.1 (See also this new March 2008 report.2 )

By those numbers, the list now has over one million names on it. Terrorist watch lists must be tightly focused on true terrorists who pose a genuine threat. Bloated lists are bad because they ensnare many innocent travelers as suspected terrorists, and because they waste screeners' time and divert their energies from looking for true terrorists.



The NRA Is Absolutely Right to Fear the ‘Terrorism Watch List’ (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/427266/nra-absolutely-right-fear-terrorism-watch-list-charles-c-w-cooke)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/427266/nra-absolutely-right-fear-terrorism-watch-list-charles-c-w-cooke

And now, some idiot named Hussein, whose unconstitutional actions you have supported for many many years, wants to keep those people from owning firearms.

Dagobert II
November 27th, 2015, 6:28 PM
What is the legal process by which one is put on the "terrorist" watch list? Is it similar to the process that puts infants on the no fly list?

Night Owl
November 27th, 2015, 6:46 PM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.
Well I think the reason is because there is no checks and balances to determine who is placed on the list.it seems in many cases it's a gotcha list with no evidence that a person on the list is a terrorist or is in contact with terrorists. Your name could be on the list.

sojourner truth
November 27th, 2015, 7:11 PM
There was an article today that said the number of illegals coming across the Mexican border has spiked tremendously in the last few weeks.

I'm sure that Obamas ICE guys are fully vetting all of those folks just fine...

Like they did the guy in SF that was a 5 time loser who killed a woman with a stolen gun.. And deported many times... ANd found his way into a sanctuary city... Yeppers............... These are not the terrorists you are looking for. You may go on your way.

Mestral
November 28th, 2015, 7:46 AM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.
Maybe a better question would be: why would you deny a citizen their God given, and
Constitutionally protected rights without any indication they have done anything wrong.

Dagobert II
November 28th, 2015, 8:43 AM
Maybe a better question would be: why would you deny a citizen their God given, and
Constitutionally protected rights without any indication they have done anything wrong. The neat thing about rights is that they exist even if a legal entity tries to deny them. That authority can create all the laws and kill all the people it wants but rights will still prevail like leaks in a dyke. Just look at how many folks had Kalashnikovs and RPGs at the fall of the Soviet Union in spite of the Soviet's best arms control efforts. Of course American liberals think they can do better than the commissars when it comes to controlling people in spite of new technology that allows anyone to machine a firearm using a computer-contrlled device from the comfort of their living room. ....or we will just get all the weapons the government losses like the Russian people have done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmZ0wiP71t8

Rick
December 7th, 2015, 8:53 AM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.

One thing my son reminded me of when we were talking about this. I was on the "no-fly" list several years ago. For no other reason than I had a common name and I had to prove that I was who I said I was and it was cleared.

So according to the anti-American leftists like Barack Hussein Obama and his minions like LauraA, Obama's gestapo should come into my house and take my firearms along with my right to protect myself and my family away from me, a twenty year honorably discharged veteran of the United States Army.

Damn shame that that's where we are in this country today. Give rights to terrorists, take them away from veterans.

Ludwig
December 7th, 2015, 9:11 AM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.Because to do so is to remove a Constitutionally guaranteed right and negating another Constitutionally guaranteed right, the right to due process.

Of course, the Administration has never let some minor thing as the US Constitution get in the way of achieving its goals.

Mestral
December 7th, 2015, 12:30 PM
I still want to know why she would deny a citizen their God given, and Constitutionally
protected rights without any indication they have done anything wrong.

mac
December 7th, 2015, 12:47 PM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.

I don't particularly know why the NRA opposes it, but I oppose it because the Government can simply put anyone on your "terrorist watch list" they choose to without any cause or transparency what so ever. Hell, they could just pull a zip code and then add any and all citizens with that zip code to the list....kapich?.....it seems to me that the more logical question is why do we have anyone who is on your "terrorist watch list" in the Nation in the Nation?....mac

Mestral
December 7th, 2015, 1:45 PM
but I oppose it because the Government can simply put anyone on your "terrorist watch list" they choose to without any cause or transparency what so ever. Hell, they could just pull a zip code and then add any and all citizens with that zip code to the list....kapich?
That was my point also, but she doesn't seem to want to answer my question.

mac
December 7th, 2015, 1:53 PM
That was my point also, but she doesn't seem to want to answer my question.

maybe she's thinkin' 'bout it and doesn't want to answer too.....rashly...personally, I kind of 'ppreciate it when someone thinks about their answer before responding...there has been plenty of times when I responded to a question too quickly and wish I could 'recall' my answer......mac

Mestral
December 7th, 2015, 1:58 PM
maybe she's thinkin' 'bout it and doesn't want to answer too.....rashly...personally, I kind of 'ppreciate it when someone thinks about their answer before responding...there has been plenty of times when I responded to a question too quickly and wish I could 'recall' my answer......mac
I have typed and canceled a number of them, myself.
But I just went back and noticed it has been more than seven days. (since I posted #19)
Seems long enough to think about an answer.

sojourner truth
December 7th, 2015, 3:51 PM
Well the thing that bothers most of us who are pro 2nd is not the wanting to vet gun owners, but more about who it is that gets to make the list.

As stiff as the gun laws in Ca. are, you will notice that the 2 murdering Muslims had 2 Ar15s that they bought from a neighbor. Now, how he got 2 banned Ca. weapons is the next step in the investigation. Not to mention the number of illegal mods on the weapons like targeting aids, forward handgrips, and illegal magazines.

And that doesn't even cover the pipe bombs, which are so outside the realm of legal it hurts to think about it. All done while these 2 sweethearts were known about, known to be radicalized, and known to be frequent fliers to the hotbeds of radicalization. AND, one who was vetted simply through the use of a fingerprint profile.

But then, it isn't important really since the president is saying that it is probably some sort of work related violence, ISIS is contained, and the ones who are left are the "JV" team.

Fear not America... Obama and Kerry are on top of things..........:)):)):)):))

kantwin
December 7th, 2015, 6:06 PM
5953

CenTexDave
December 8th, 2015, 9:19 AM
The day is coming when the average American will say "enough" and the aftermath will decrease the Muslime population by 200K or so.

mac
December 8th, 2015, 10:10 AM
The day is coming when the average American will say "enough" and the aftermath will decrease the Muslime population by 200K or so.

in some cases I wish this were so but......I'm just not so sure that it is. hell, look at all the dust up that's taken place simply because one of our politicians stated that he thinks we should stop all muslim entry into this Nation for a while.....only long enough for all of us to catch our breath and to get a grip on things and figure out just where the hell we are and what we really need to do now. Seems as if the whole dadgummed Nation thinks that's absolutely horrid and outrageous....meanwhile, of course, I sit here in my little ole bubble and say "hell yeow, let's do it!" and sort of feel like I'm surrounded by ......insanity.....sometimes, Dave, I just don't think our people are up to the mark any longer......that we've been measured and found wanting....we may be a completely dissolute people now, that we've 'shot our wad'....Hell, even the pathetic French are showing more backbone (and resolve) than we are....mac

sojourner truth
December 8th, 2015, 1:03 PM
Not so sure about that Mac... They had a piece this morning about Trumps announcement yesterday and it seems it has spiked his poll popularity numbers a ton... And the MSM libs are flabbergasted and just can't understand why.

Thing is, most folks have seen what this feely-nicey progressive stuff is getting us and have had enough; So much so that it may turn into a political disaster on election day... Bad for us... Good for the lefties.

The Main stream republicans do not want Trump to be the nominee, but they will have to tell him to his face at the worst possible time, and when that happens he will take over half the party with him and give Queen Hillary the seat.

But maybe that is just the sort of wake up call America needs... Too bad we may not survive it.

Mestral
December 8th, 2015, 1:19 PM
When talking about Trump and his ability to whip up the right wing, I am reminded of a conversation
I saw between Jeff Foxworthy and some others. They told Jeff: you can't talk about Red Necks that
way! you are talking about the least common denominator of Americans. Jeff responded: have you
seen my bookings and book sales? Not the least common, but the most common denominator.

I think we are finding out that a larger percentage of people in the US have been quietly outraged
at the way this country has been driven off into the LEFT side ditch, that what we thought. And now
that they have a voice in Donald Trump, they might just be outraged enough to put him into the
Presidency.

I, for one, am not too worried about a Trump presidency, after all, if Obama could not destroy us in the
past 7 years, Donald should not be able to do too much damage, and he might do us a lot of good.

fchafey
December 8th, 2015, 2:28 PM
If the people get up and vote for Trump, then maybe. sooner or later Trump is going to spout off about welfare and the other free handouts the voters from the few important counties in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania et al get and the full force of the media will portray Trump as an ogre, who has got his and the heck with the rest of you. This will happen come late spring early summer so it will be fresh in the minds of the voters when they flip the lever for Hillary. Nasty little progression of themes happening to the Donald. Mexicans are bad, Muslims suck, and no more freebies for loafers. The only people left to vote for Donald will be old white people and I don't think there are enough of them.

sojourner truth
December 8th, 2015, 4:28 PM
Well, you have to remember that the people who don't like Trump aren;t going to vote for any republican regardless. And to try and win them over is not only a wasted effort, but would transform the candidate into someone his own party would never vote for.

I would like to also see someone other than Trump in the white house, but having said that, if it comes down to him or a democrat, he's getting my vote for sure. What I don't want to see is a party split by a rogue candidate and the democrats win by default..... In the end, if he does win, I will still feel better about the possibilities than I would otherwise.

I only hope he isn't a secret part of a bigger Clinton plot... That theory has been floated a few times as well. Crazy? Maybe.

fchafey
December 9th, 2015, 7:07 AM
Interesting about the Clinton plot. I buy that to a point because Trump is the face of the Republican party on the TV and when the media shoves a mike in some ones face and asks why they love Trump, the person is almost always older and white. Part of the reason Obama got elected, besides the democratic party not liking Clinton, in my opinion was the country was tired of old white men running the place. I believe Clinton will get disqualified when the time comes and it will be Joe Biden saving the country, he will be all done mourning and his son told him before he died to run for president. By then the Republican party will have been royally painted as mean, border closing welfare stopping Muslim barring people.

Ludwig
December 9th, 2015, 7:33 AM
... By then the Republican party will have been royally painted as mean, border closing welfare stopping Muslim barring people.I agree with the scenario. I disagree with who is doing the "painting." It is unfortunate but the paint is their own, as are the brushes and paint guns.

sojourner truth
December 9th, 2015, 10:50 AM
Well, that is what is all over the media since yesterday... The democrats are salivating over this last statement of Trumps as they see a huge conflict and party split at convention time..

Trump, by saying this, has done so at the best and worst possible time. Best for them, worst for us. Which I find highly suspect.

And I watched as, for the first time, Trump actually used notes as he made a statement. Which means it was carefully worded and thought out prior to release...

Someone needs to check Hillarys emails again today... And the Donalds.

Mestral
December 9th, 2015, 11:57 AM
party will have been royally painted as mean, border closing welfare stopping Muslim barring people.
Wow, that could just be translated to: the lawful party.

fchafey
December 9th, 2015, 1:10 PM
The in fighting in the Republican Party is horrible and the Narcissists that they are cant help but getting whatever words out of their mouth and into the microphone. Granted there are like 25 people running for the nomination compared to three for that other party. Cant wait to the next debate on Tuesday night where the fair and balanced Wolf Blitzer gets to ask the questions. Thank goodness Moonshiners is on.

Mestral
December 9th, 2015, 2:05 PM
The in fighting in the Republican Party is horrible and the Narcissists that they are cant help
The trouble is that the Republican Party has largely moved way to the Left, though no where near as far as the Demoncrats.

There are only a dozen worthwhile Republicans on the national scene, and the "establishment" undermines
them and their ideas at every chance they get.

gnatsum
December 9th, 2015, 3:42 PM
I remember hearing one conservative on a radio show a few weeks ago, making the observation that maybe Trump is being set up as a 'decoy' candidate. The Democrats will spend all of their time, effort, and money trying to bring him down, and at the last moment, Trump will probably declare "OK, I'm done! I'm out of here! You don't want me as President? Fine! I'm out of the race!", which will shock the Democrats so badly, they'll start planning their inaugural parties...leaving whoever the 'second-place' GOP candidate is (Carson? Cruz? Rubio? Fiorina?) to pick up the mantle, say something like "The Democrats think they've won? I don't think so! I'M here for the long haul!", and hopefully score big with voters who don't want the Democratic candidate--whoever IT is--to get to the White House.
And the Democrats won't have the money to respond...

Ludwig
December 9th, 2015, 9:24 PM
There is not an establishment Republican worth the sweat off my gonads albeit even the worst is worth 100 times what the average Democrap is worth. We need a Constitutional or Founder's or National Party. Independent has been tried and found wanting.

mac
December 9th, 2015, 11:30 PM
There is not an establishment Republican worth the sweat off my gonads albeit even the worst is worth 100 times what the average Democrap is worth. We need a Constitutional or Founder's or National Party. Independent has been tried and found wanting.

Nope! If our party is broke, we need to fix it but, the last thing we need in this nation is another party....mac

Mestral
December 11th, 2015, 8:41 AM
We need more congresscritters like this (even though I don't agree with her on some issues).
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2015/dec/08/las-vegas-republican-michele-fiore-christmas-card-weapons

Fiore, a Republican assemblywoman for Nevada, probably doesn’t share the view that she has shot herself in the foot with her defence on Fox News. “I think getting firearms as a present and giving firearms as presents is a great present, and I think again because Christmas is a family affair, our ultimate responsibility is to protect and make sure our family is safe,” she said.

To European onlookers, Fiore resembles the stereotypical gun-toting redneck but she is more interesting than that. Her mother Lill is gay and Fiore is the only Republican to vote to lift the ban on same-sex marriage in Nevada. She also backed the legalisation of medical marijuana.

But guns will define her career. Last month, she greeted the Paris attacks with a tweet to fellow Americans: “Be Aware & Armed, CARRY YOUR GUN.” She later threatened to fly to Paris and shoot Syrian refugees “in the head”. In 2014, she supported a Nevada rancher Clive Bundy in a confrontation with US federal agents. “Don’t come here with guns and expect the American people not to fire back,” she said. She has also lobbied for a bill to allow students to carry concealed weapons on campus.
The article goes on to reveal the libtard attitude of the writer, and the
headlines reveals the perverted anti-gun idiocy of the editor who wrote it.

But at least she teaches her family about the Constitution, and what it means to be a citizen.

fchafey
December 11th, 2015, 8:49 AM
Who was the genius that made the crack about Republican women being old, braless and floppy obviously hasn't seen Michele Fiore (R) from Nevada. Happy Friday!
5959

Ludwig
December 11th, 2015, 9:11 AM
Who was the genius that made the crack about Republican women being old, braless and floppy obviously hasn't seen Michele Fiore (R) from Nevada. Happy Friday!
5959Yuck! How can I unsee that? I'll be having some bad dreams over this.

Mestral
December 11th, 2015, 10:18 AM
Yuck! How can I unsee that? I'll be having some bad dreams over this.
I never thought you would be the delicate one. She don't look bad at all,
in fact, with that sidearm, she looks pretty alluring :)

Mestral
December 11th, 2015, 10:49 AM
http://www.ammoland.com/2015/12/huffpo-academic-invites-civil-war

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “No one wants to take your guns” has been a common and longstanding talking point employed by the gun-grabbers to mask their true goals of total citizen disarmament through gun confiscation.

That’s usually followed by ridiculing those suggesting that’s the case with accusations of being “paranoids.” A Huffington Post article, posted on Pearl Harbor Day of all days, takes the mask off and reveals the end game, and why not one inch can be ceded to the totalitarian lobby under the deception of “compromise.”

Responding to a different pinko-commi-degenerate, David Codrea gave an answer that fits here too.



I want much more rigid and well enforced gun control laws immediately. [More]
No. Your move.
Posted by David Codrea (http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2015/12/what-can-brown-do-to-you.html)

sojourner truth
December 11th, 2015, 2:47 PM
Nope... Don't want to take your guns... Everyone should have ONE... as long as it loads from the front.:))

fchafey
December 12th, 2015, 11:26 AM
My mom asked me why I had so many guns last time I was up visiting. I asked her why she had so many pairs of shoes. She got up walked over and slapped me in the head. She is 87, I am 52. Some things never change.

Mestral
December 12th, 2015, 11:34 AM
My mom asked me why I had so many guns last time I was up visiting. I asked her why she had so many pairs of shoes. She got up walked over and slapped me in the head. She is 87, I am 52. Some things never change.
Ever noticed the Midway USA advertisement on the Outdoor channel?

She says: "how many guns does one man need"
and walks away (all you see is her shoes)
And He says: "at least one more"

He does this for other things too, like deer stands.

gnatsum
December 12th, 2015, 12:01 PM
I can see multiple pairs of shoes, and gun cabinets that are full of guns, but...

WHO THE HELL NEEDS MORE THAN ONE DEER STAND?!?

If a hunter "needs" more than one, then maybe he ought to buy one of those four wheelers with a stand mounted on it, so he can transport it from place to place. Having multiple deer stands is like a travelling salesman having a wife at every city he visits...:)

And besides, empty deer stands are often an "invitation" to other hunters who see it and say "Hey now, Jim's off in Menard hunting. I'm sure he won't mind if I use it today...

Mestral
December 12th, 2015, 12:12 PM
I can see multiple pairs of shoes, and gun cabinets that are full of guns, but...

WHO THE HELL NEEDS MORE THAN ONE DEER STAND?!?You would have to listen to him (Larry Potterfield) tell it. It is humorous.


If a hunter "needs" more than one, then maybe he ought to buy one of those four wheelers with a stand mounted on it, so he can transport it from place to place. Having multiple deer stands is like a travelling salesman having a wife at every city he visits...:)
Well, now, there's a thought :)
(Actually used to know a couple of those)


And besides, empty deer stands are often an "invitation" to other hunters who see it and say "Hey now, Jim's off in Menard hunting. I'm sure he won't mind if I use it today...
While I am off in Menard, you are welcome to use it, as long as you leave it like you found it.
And as long as you don't disturb my cache...

Mestral
December 12th, 2015, 12:31 PM
I still want to know why she would deny a citizen their God given, and Constitutionally
protected rights without any indication they have done anything wrong.
Still needs to be answered.

Meanwhile, for those who wish to see it, here is a political comic with a bit of discussion on the topic.
Warning, not safe for Puritans.
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/comic/toast/

Dagobert II
December 12th, 2015, 1:08 PM
http://www.centextalk.com/vb/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Mestral http://www.centextalk.com/vb/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.centextalk.com/vb/showthread.php?p=400947#post400947)
I still want to know why she would deny a citizen their God given, and Constitutionally
protected rights without any indication they have done anything wrong.

Ooh, ooh, I know, I know. She's a treasonous tyrant wannabe that doesn't want any peasant to interfere with her marvelous plan to drag us all into the gulag.

Mestral
January 1st, 2016, 10:12 AM
Someone tell me why the nra opposes barring those on the terrorist watch list from legally buying guns.


Maybe a better question would be: why would you deny a citizen their God given, and
Constitutionally protected rights without any indication they have done anything wrong.


Still needs to be answered.

Meanwhile, if we hear again about possible ammo restrictions, keep this in mind:
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2015/12/its-1774-all-over-again-how-are-your.html
http://www.guncite.com/journals/rev-hal.html#fnb88

As reprinted in the Conn. Courant, Dec. 19, 1774, at 3, cols. 2-3:
At the Court at St. James's the 19th Day of October, 1774.
PRESENT,
The KING'S most excellent MAJESTY in Council,
Earl of Rockford, Lord Viscount Townshend,
Earl of Dartmouth, Lord Mansfield,
Earl of Suffolk, Lord North.
WHEREAS an Act of Parliament has passed in the Twenty Ninth Year of the Reign of his late Majesty King George the Second, intitled, "An Act to empower his Majesty to prohibit the Exportation of Saltpetre, and to enforce the Law for impowering his Majesty to prohibit the Exportation of Gunpowder, or any sort of Arms or Ammunition, and also to empower his Majesty to restrain the carrying coastways of Saltpetre, Gunpowder, or any sort of Ammunition."
And His Majesty judging it necessary to prohibit the Exportation of Gunpowder, or any sort of Arms or Ammunition, out of this Kingdom, doth therefore, with the advice of his Privy Council, hereby order, require, prohibit and command that no Person or Persons Whatsoever (except the Master General of the Ordnance for his Majesty's Service) do, at any time during the space of Six Months from the date of this Order in Council, presume to transport into any parts out of this Kingdom, or carry coastways any Gunpowder, or any sort of Arms or Ammunition, on board any Ship or Vessel, in order to transporting the same to any part beyond the Seas or carrying the same coastways, without Leave and Permission in that behalf, first obtained from his Majesty or his Privy Council, upon Pain of incurring and suffering the respective Forfeitures and Penalties inflicted by the afore mentioned Act....
Signed, G. Chetwynd.

sojourner truth
January 1st, 2016, 2:48 PM
I was listening to some talk about the no fly list... Seems about 20% of the people on it don't belong on it in the first place. This would put the burden of disentangling themselves from gun ownership restrictions in a court of law. Call it a tax to own a gun, if you want to put the liberal spin on the matter. Plus, ot is totally unconstitutional.

And the other 80$? Unless they are guilty of some felony that precludes them from owning a firearm, then they are just as free to buy one as anyone else. Besides, does anyone actually think that being on the no fly list is going to stop anyone from getting a gun. The shooters in San Bernadino just had a friend buy them for them.

Simply put, you can enact all the laws you want about guns, ammo, magazines and every other aspect of firearms and a determined soul will still find an illegal way to get them. The only people it really restricts are law abiding citizens.

But then, that is who the lefties are really trying to limit anyhow. In the end, only the government will have guns, if they have their way. And from looking at the way they are doing the military, they may not have much for long either. If there even is a military.

Shotgun Jeremy
January 1st, 2016, 5:37 PM
Good part of the day is over. Everybody ok with all those open guns in public??

sojourner truth
January 2nd, 2016, 6:50 AM
That was yesterday... Take a look at this mornings KDH and you will see that evidently, the liar in chief has been doing some thinking while out on the links in Hi. about what sort of unconstitutional mischief he may be able to provide before he leaves his throne.

The old presidential ink pen is being dipped in the well even as we speak.

All I have to say is that he had better fly right over Texas on his way back home... And at a safe altitude.

fchafey
January 2nd, 2016, 7:31 AM
What Texas is doing is even getting a crazy spin up north. Was talking to mother for new year and she asked "Oh my god what is going on down there?" I told here Texas has become the 45th state to enact open carry, it is about time. Of course the news up there failed to mention that, they would rather spin it is the wild west down here. Todays paper also has a big scary article by a writer from the Texas Tribune about all the impending lawsuits and confusion from open carry. I guess it only ok for the left to use the same fear and scare tactics the right is famous for.

Mestral
January 2nd, 2016, 10:13 AM
I guess it only ok for the left to use the same fear and scare tactics the right is famous for.
Scare tactics that the Right is accused of.