Leaderboard

I had a FTF with a business owner that has a gun buster sign on the door. First it started with him having to meet me outside his restaurant and me buying him lunch at another restaurant within walking distance of his. He seemed a little thrown off that I would even offer that. During our conversation he pulled out a business card that was handed to one of his door guys. The card was an IOU for $20.00 redeemable when this person is legally able to carry in his resturant. It said " I was intending on spending money at your business but you do not allow legal gun carry. This is an IOU for $20 redeemable as soon as the gun buster sign comes down and I can legally carry in your business." It also left contact info for that person. I have never seen this before and apparently it got his attention. I think i might make up some of these cards. He said he contacted me because of an email I sent him letting him know that I would answer any questions he has about why I will not spend any money at his restaurant. Also during that discussion I found out that he has never even held a firearm, and knew a buisness owner that was killed by a robber with a gun. It was a long lunch that seemed very productive. He is meeting me at the range next Friday. He said he is rethinking the gun buster, especially after I asked him to point out where my gun was and he could not. I told him that most people are not OC'ing, they want it to go unnoticed. I will update after we meetup next week.

Reasonable gun control would be a law requiring every able-bodied adult male to own a serviceable rifle in a military caliber as well as a basic load of ammunition and equipment for it.  Hmmm, that sounds familiar.  Oh, wait!  We already did that once with the Second Militia Act of 1792!  Maybe it's time to dust that one off.   More Reasonable Gun Control would be a law requiring a citizen to shoot the Army Rifle AQT course with a passing score in order to vote. Even my 80 year-old Mom can qualify on the AQT, so this should be a no-brainer.  Maybe make some kind of allowance for those who are blind, though.   Here's some more Reasonable Gun Control that I REALLY like!  Allow tax credits for those who have more than the minimum rifle and equipment in the first paragraph!  How about a $1000 credit for owning a long-range rifle and completing a 800 yard qualification course?!  And a $2000 credit for owning a belt-fed machine gun and completing a qualification course!

You can't legislate responsibility.  If you could there would be fewer traffic fatalities, teenage pregnancies, and stray dogs.  But our elected officials sure do try, God love 'em.  They really try. 

I'm beginning to understand James Yeager's ire, because I'm truly beginning to hate these people. From my head to my toes.

" Feinstein said that the bill’s fate will rest heavily on public pressure."   This is the key and she knows it...   Everyone needs to keep up the pressure on their elected officials.

Just keep up those tests while your demoralized population starves. If it ever came to blows with NK again we should just carpet bomb their troops with steaks, potatoes and American flags. The war would be over in a day.

There were also thousands of people notifying Reed that because of their stance towards modern firearms, they would not be attending! This is going to make some businesses take notice and I hope Congress as well.  If we all don't stand together we will get steamrolled!  I'd rather be doing the steamrolling of the other side!!!

NSSF Statement on the Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show Clarifies the (soon to be former) role of Reed Exhibitions regarding the SHOT show. Someone asked in the other thread.  

Wouldn't it be wonderful if their efforts backfired and more people got involved and informed.     Definitely not a time to get lax in our efforts to protect the 2ed amendment.

He has the IQ of an extra-bright turnip.   Like many other guntarded liberals, he honestly thinks people can own machine guns by walking into walmart & buying them.   By the way my copy of the 2nd says arms and IMHO I DO have the right to an F16.  More of a right than any american hating muslim in egypt anyway.

1 filisbuster, 1 planes and tanks, calls to Alexandes and Corker, 1 from the NRA site, 4 from the Gov site on firearms. And 1 to Minneapolis reveals General Mills' support of gun summit    http://minnesota.pub...ous-gifts.shtml   Here tell them what you think about it! http://www.generalmi.../ContactUs.aspx   Told them they lost over 2 million customers today for this.

Did somebody get a new gas can today ?

I think the real question is "does he care?" My guess is that he is well aware of the law and banks statements like that on the bulk of the populations ignorance. The guys a bigger tool than Gore.

He does know the law. But he will not obey the law.He belongs to the " Elite". They are above the law. It's all about control.

Not surprised he couldn't pray in "Jesus name" as instructed in the Bible. :shake:

Better deal here if you don't mind waiting....   http://www.themakogroup.com/product_p/earm30%20w.htm

If the owner does in fact take the sign down, you HAVE to tell who it was so all the TGO'ers in the area can swing by and have a meal.  Everyone that does needs to make a point to ask for the manager and personally thank him.  

  Fortunately that is not possible. I am NOT OK with ANY law that tells me I have to buy something, even if I already own it, regardless of the tax or other financial implications. It is not within the government's authority to tell me what I must buy, yet they already do so and so I must comply under the threat of violence. 

Good job. And thanks for representing gun owners in a positive way. Keep us posted.

Concur.    Nothing in the Employee Safe Commute bill allows any person to carry a firearm anywhere, it does however allow the Keeping of a legal firearm in an individual's personal property, it must be unhandled, not displayed, and out of sight.   This mantra that the Constitution only guarantees Rights not be infringed by Government is ludicrous.  A business property owner can not imprison an individual that crosses his property that is open for business, they can ask them to leave.  If that individual does not leave, a property owner can not, just because they are on said property, whip out the 9 and drop them, which, if unlimited ability to control the space existed would be in the purvey of the owner.

The show is "postponed".   :surrender: oops...   http://washingtonexaminer.com/nra-boycott-kills-outdoors-show-that-banned-assault-weapons/article/2519579#.UQFiKr_AexV

No, you're spewing the wrong information. This crap is from over a month ago and it has already been proven wrong. I didn't insult you, so don't start with the crap talking. I'm sorry that Google is broken on your computer. And I don't see where the billy badass thing comes from. I don't think I would have an issue telling anyone to their face that this story is complete BS and why.

I think we should ban shooting victims, then there would be no need for gun control.

its not always that easy to move, get a new job, etc.  There are a LOT of pro gun people in NY and CA and other places.  They are in the minority and they get screwed every which way, but they do exist.  Look again at the thread showing off CA complient AR15s ---- they may have to obey stupid laws, but a number of folks want to own these guns and do own them, and shoot them.     While I understand where you are coming from, its attacking the wrong people.  Refuse to bulk sell guns to their PD/guard/etc -- fine.  Refuse to sell to the folks that live there individually, not so hot.   The only ones who would suffer would be the folks that cannot afford to move to a better state.    Remember: they would not have to BAN AR15 in NY if no one had them.  They would not have to ban mags over 10 if no one had those.  Someone up there has these things, and those someones are probably a lot like you & me.

No matter how much you don't want it to be true, he used an AR15. Get over it. It doesn't matter if he used it or not though; it changes nothing in regard to what law abiding folks should or should not have. Continuing to spread this BS is what makes our side look like conspiracy loons and hurts our cause. Using a report as fact (which was wrong because they didn't have hardly any facts, but they wanted to report stuff) makes as much sense as using media reports of Japanese peace goals on December 6, 1941 as proof that they didn't attack us at Pearl Harbor.

The constitution restrains the government, not individuals, groups, associations or businesses.   You'll note you have a right to the freedom of speech, which restraints the government from using your protected speech against you, or punishing you for exercising your right to free speech.  But, that does not extend to private sector....   More importantly, there is a fundamental right, freedom of association which allows individuals to form groups or associations (ie business).  This right is violated when the government attempts to force somebody to belong to a group (or business) against the wishes of that group. IE the government can't force the NAACP to allow members of the KKK into their organization.   Also, we have the fundamental right to property, which is enshrined in the declaration of Independence (also in the constitution under the taking clause) , which is also a God given right as well...  Again this natural right is violated when the government forces you to do something with your property against your wishes.   So yeah IMHO me asking the legislature to pass a law banning company dress codes is on the same level as you asking them to ban anti-gun policies.  They're both silly and unconstitutional. That is not to say the government won't pass this law and some court may very well uphold it as constitutional, only that we should not be asking the legislature to pass it in the first place, it's a bad law that violates the rights of others to treat us as a special interest group.   There are LOTS of bad gun laws in this state that we should focus on, and the repeal or modification of which would not violate God given rights...  including removing governments from 39-17-1359 or removing 39-17-1359 altogether.  Removing exceptions to park carry, or removing laws covering the wearing of firearms in schools and universities.  Providing for true constitutional carry (whether limited to open or allowing CC).  All of these are laws when repealed would not take away rights from individuals, associations, and businesses... but would further constraint government, which is a good thing.    Finally, we're all members of a loose group which supports freedom and God given rights, it's a fundamental violation of our core principals to fight for taking others rights away!  The same legislature (or the federal one) may one day pass laws to violate our rights to own/carry firearms...  and courts may very well uphold those bad/immoral/unconstitutional laws on us.   We must have core principals as supporters of the second amendment, and the key to those principals is to not infringe on others natural rights in the process of restoring our rights to keep and bear arms.  Supporting this law is incompatible with that core principal!  

  Nah. They're natural born killers.

Now that would be a shocker, huh? They've rolled over on everything else. I swear I think I prefer Democrats right now. At least they are being up front about their intentions. H3ll, you don't ever know when or how the Repubs are gonna hit ya.   Rand Paul is the only man left in D.C. with a pair.

What good was probable cause anyways?

  Is a frog's ass watertight?

Much like yesterday, today Charlie Rangel can kiss my a$$.

Its a bad idea. Sexual assult claims, rape claims, and in country pregnacys will go through the roof if they put women in grunt units. Not to mention now needing seperate facilites in a combat zone. And not to be sexist, but it takes a lot of upper body strength to pull a man out of a bad situation in a full combat load. Woman are naturally weaker in the upper body. They need to be able to pass the same PT test as the men before serving in a line unit. I don't know about know, but when I got out of the Marines last year it was still curved heavily for women on the PFT, and CFT.

WOW, I cant believe I miss this. I KNOW HOW TO BREAK IN A BARREL you must send it to me, with ammo, O, lets say 500 rounds of each weight you want to shoot. I will break it in slow, ya know, 50 rounds a day till the ammo is gone. I will then give it back to you, ready for you to shoot. :wave:

I sure am glad Obama is showcasing this yoyo.

I saw most of it......bunch of bedwetters No statistics of any kind,just sob stories    Not ONE statistic or reference to support any of their assumptions or assertions.  Not ONE time did they recite the Second amendment. Not ONE reason to rebuke, "Shall Not Be Infringed". Not ONE word about how to fix the root problem, damaged people.     Its a buncha bull @%#%$$

LOL one belt fed rifle?  How many people are dropping $8600 on a TNW M3HB?

YES! I love that the WTF even backed out. Good to see the groups that are usually just about hunting getting in the game.

This represents a sea change in second amendment activism.   It's heartwarming to see so many vendors, many of whom aren't even firearms related, pulling out in support of second amendment rights.   Probably having a completely different effect on the Cheaper Than Dick's of the industry...

That's funny, but MRE's and a modern version of a liberator pistol air dropped with a note in Korean saying "There's more where this came from."  would be hilarious to watch.  

  Me too!  :woohoo:

Its nothing personal, its just with their rocket "technology" they needed a very big target to test on.  The continental US is about right, though they may try for the ocean again like the last few if they need a sudden change of plans.

I have decided that if an overgrown 22 is a high powered rifle my 30-06 must be artillery.  From now on I shall call it my assault artillery piece.

When I store rice I use quart ziplock bags. I fill the bag but do NOT seal the ziplock. I put the ziplock into a foods aver bag and vacuum seal it. Now it will keep longer AND when I do actually open it, I have a way to close it back while I consume the contents. By dating each vacuum sealed bag I can rotate inventory. If you've got 50 lbs in one container, that sucks because how you gonna eat that much and keep it sealed up. Hard to rotate large amounts.

RF, huh? Jammer time.

No I'm not missing anything here, I as a business owner invite you onto my property under certain terms and conditions, you're free to dislike my terms and conditions and stay off my property...  that includes the terms and conditions of where, how, and what you park in my parking lot.  If you violate those terms and conditions I'm free to ask you to leave and not return.  If you refuse to leave or return after being asked to leave, I can have you charged with the crime of trespass.   First, property rights aren't granted by the government anymore than your 2nd amendment rights are granted by the government...  Life, Liberty, and Property are inalienable rights granted by our creator, and only protected by the constitution.  So you right to self defense (life), is the same as your right to property.   Second, we don't need to restrict rights where equals are free to contract between each other...  This is a problem of convenience not a problem of your rights being infringed.  You have other less drastic options open to you as a permit holder and 2nd amendment supporter...  your lack of desire to select those options should not be a cause for me to loose my property rights (more than they've already been eroded today).   I find companies asking me to wear a tie offensive...  I just hate ties :)  So I should get the legislature to prohibit companies from firing employees that don't follow their dress code just because I don't like to wear a tie everyday?  Frankly, this is the level of silliness built into the current parking lot bill.     You know how I resolved by dislike for wearing ties?  I don't work for a company that requires I wear a tie everyday :)  Just like I don't work for a company that requires that I travel to and from work (or at work in my case) as an unarmed sheep.  Could I make more money if I'd go to work someplace that required I wear a tie everyday?  Yes.  Just as I could make more money working someplace that required that I be unarmed everyday...  but I prioritize my security (and hatred for ties) over my paycheck amount, and take the effort to live below my means.   Put on your bigboy pants, start looking for a job at a pro-gun company (there are a lot of them out there), and make the move away from a company that doesn't have your best interests at heart...  Sure you might be able to shoot a little less often, or have to drive your car for a few more years...  but it's a great freedom to wake up every morning and know you set your own destiny (except for the huge hand of big brother breathing down your neck constantly).   And it's that huge hand of big brother (government) that we should be working against not businesses and their private property rights.      

Second coming is right!     The first time he tempted Jesus on a mountain for 40 days.

Where on earth are they basing this 4 year life span for Glocks? I'm not trying to go full fanboy but that's ridiculous. Most cops only shoot twice a year so there is no way they are worn out in that time.   I would rather have the .45 over the .40 though.

Chewbacca's favorite snack was bananas. I bet when I get to the Pearly Gates he will meet me there dragging a bunch of bananas. I just hope he has some peanut butter to go with them!