RichardR

Just more laws that criminals will ignore ...

So he fended off a burglar, only to be robbed by the Medford police? It is starting to get difficult determining the difference between the good guys & bad guys these days.

Robert, probably because homosexuals always seem to be unrepentent about their sinful lifestyle, in fact they (the openly gay homosexuals) tend to be very vocal about advertising, promoting and defending their sexual proclivities. I cannot think of any other Biblical sin which is promoted and defended by it's sinners so vehemently as homosexuality is, so if I had to guess, that is what I'd say the reason for that is.

That will depend on how many of the folks who supported this decision will actually put their children, their money & their time into the Scouts. Because a great number of folks who opposed the decision are going to withdraw their children, their money & their time from the Scouting program. My guess is that (by a very very large margin) many more families & host organizations will withdraw their kids & resources from the BSA than the hand-full who will join it. We shall see.

Hey you guys won, I'm just pointing out the consequences of that victory. You can argue semantics & split hairs all day long, but the fact is that the BSA's majority of supporters, leadership & membership pool are of the Christian faith. It's no secret to anyone that homosexuality is a "sin" in Christianity (as well as in most other major religions) & the two lifestyles simply are not compatible, no matter how "unfair" you think that it was for the BSA to have banned openly gay homosexuals from participating. Now that the BSA is yours, do with it what ever you want, we (those of us who actually participated in Scouting prior to this decision) don't care anymore, we are just sad to see everything that Scouting once stood for destroyed.

Gotcha, I just didn't want you to "get pop'd" for not having a license, anyway it's ok to hook something you don't have a stamp for, as long as you don't keep them. I hook Alligator Gar all of the time, in fact they are a pain in the butt around here, wouldn't eat them even if it was allowed because they are all bone aand teeth & there isn't anything that they won't strike on. Gotta run a 12" braided steel lead-line on everything or else they will take all your tackle one strike at a time. They are good fighters & can get pretty big, so they are a blast to catch but I'd rather not have to take them off my line all of the time, they almost always manage to draw blood.

The BSA has been relentlessly hammered by the homosexual activist organizations for the last 30 or so years, defending themselves from lawsuit after lawsuit, along with any corporations or organization that dared to donate any funds to the BSA have also been under constant assault, but the biggest hit to the BSA has been the homosexual activists success at keeping the BSA from being able to use public parks, land & buildings for their activities & meetings. Well congratulations comrades! the BSA was finally brought to their knees &"forced" to capitulate to the homosexual agenda, now the handful of openly gays who want to join the Scouts can, and (guestimating) hundreds of thousands of devote Christian children can't.

I believe that a person still needs to be licensed even if that person is just "catching & releasing". Or at least that was the case in Indiana, TN might be different.

*shrug* a lot of people find homosexuality "repugnant". But hey those folks are just bigots & homophobes so their feelings & religious convictions shouldn't matter, slap a label on them & then dismiss them. That whole freedom of association thing was way over-rated anyway, eh comrade?

Welcome to TGO Yard Dawg!

You must have over-looked or ignored the "de-facto" part of my reply, anyway I am not really intersted in splitting hairs or arguing about it, I was just offering up an explaination to the question of why the BSA had implimented the "no gays" policy when they did.

Polytech Legend iffin you can find one.

Homosexuality wasn't banned in the BSA earlier because it was already illegal in most States & considered a mental disorder by mental health professionals, so it was already de-facto. Once it was starting to be "taken off the books" in various States as both a criminal offense & was declassified as being mental disorder in 1973, the BSA had to decide an official policy on whether or not to allow "openly gay" Scouts.

Well if homosexuals didn't go around telling everyone that they were homosexual, no-one would know or care, the problem is that they always seem compelled to grab the nearest bull-horn & make their personal lives public service announcements for some odd reason.

What about Trayvon's mother kicking him out of her house? I'd say that goes a long way with regards to the defense showing how "out of control" Trayvon was, I mean his behavior had to have been really bad for his mother, to throw her own kid out of their house.

Folks keeping their sexual preferences to themselves? Instead of announcing it publically & demanding everyone "accept" them as "normal"?

I am not surprised that Holder would (after being turned down by the first judge) keep shopping until he found a judge who was/is just as corrupt as he is. This nation has become a cesspool, and unfortunately there is no possible way to drain the swamp, far too many of our fellow American's fully support the corruption & will defend it at all costs.

I don't have any first hand experience with any of the above mentioned "knock off" clone shotguns but I have owned a lot of other Norinco/Polytech manufactured firearms, all of which have been very serviceable weapons. Budget wise however I'm not sure if there is enough of a price difference to recommend going the "clone shotgun" route unless the buyer simply cannot swing the difference & doesn't want to buy a used Mossberg or Remington.

I have specificly designed/angled highway bars & hinged mini-wing floor boards on my motorcycle, which helps prevent that sort of thing. I usually don't try to scrape them around corners, but it happens sometimes out of neccessity, especially if I go into a corner a little hotter than I had intended because I wasn't paying full attention to the road ahead or if it was a blind corner that I had never rode on before. I have a couple of buddies (3 actually) who just bought motorcycles within the last week, none of them have any riding experience so I'm a bit worried for them especially since I live 9 hours away from them all now & cannot "babysit" them their first season in the saddle. I did hammer them on taking the ABATE safety course ASAP repeatedly, they all say they are going to take it but you never know ...

No two gays sharing a tent will not "automatically" have sex, but yes it will undoubtedly happen. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.

I was born & raised in Indiana so I have been a "shotgunner" since the day I was old/big enough to be able to shoulder a .410 properly (the late 1970's), and to this day I still love shotguns & I am especially fond of pump-action shotguns for their reliability. I currently own a Mossberg 590A1, two Mossberg 500's & a Remington 870, all of them chambered in 12g except for one of the 500's which is a youth model chambered in 20g. As you can see I prefer the design of the Mossberg 590/500 action's over pretty much any other pump-action design, there are multiple reasons for this but I'm just going to skim over a couple of the more important reasons behind my preference for Mossberg. 1.) The most drastic & important is (IMHO) the design of the action itself, the "always open" design of the Mossberg's loading gate in particular. This makes the Mossberg's quicker & easier to slank shells into than the Remington "always closed" design & also there is no "pinch-potential" to your thumb like with the Rem 870's. There however a trade-off, Mossberg's always open loading gate design makes the Mossberg 590/500 series action's "feel clunky" when the action is cycled when compared to the Remington 870 design. 2.) Second most important difference is that the Mossberg 590/500 design has dual extractors, while the Remington 870's only have a single extractor, this is almost never a problem for the vast majority of shooters, but when/if it ever does become a problem it literally takes the Remington 870 "out of the fight" so to speak. The single extracor on the Remington doesn't even have to break for this to be a potential problem, I'll give you an example, granted this is something that doesn't happen very often but has happened to me a couple times using my Remington 870 while shooting trap & skeet with it. Anyway one of the times it happened was toward the end of a trap tournament, we had been at it all day & we were running our last few go arounds as quickly as possible trying to finish up so we could all go home. So at this point the Remington 870 had no down-time between rounds so it was getting hot & dirty and this caused a hull seized up real nice and tight in the chamber, I knew the reason why the moment I yanked the pump back to cycle the action & it wouldn't budge. The next yank on the pump was of course much more forceful & the action of my 870 opened but no empty hull came out, the single extractor of the 870 ripped the rim of the hull & now the chamber was obstructed & I of course had to forfit that go around to go fetch a cleaning rod in order to push out the stuck empty hull. Like I said, it doesn't happen often but when it does happen it takes the Remington completely out of action, granted its an easy fix but in a fire-fight it could be the difference between surviving it or dying in it. This has never been an issue with my Mossbergs, the dual extractors have always dislodged a stuck hull, no matter how hot &/or dirty the gun gets, even if I have to slam the pump in order to open/cycle it. 3.) Third most important difference is the ergonomics, just a couple of the more important to me ones are... A.) the Mossberg's tang mounted location of the safety allows me to "thumb" the safety on/off without having to "break my grip" on the weapon, this is with traditional rifle stocked shotguns, if you are using pistol griped shotguns the cross-bolt design & location of the safety on the Remington 870 is more ergonomic. B.) Next main ergonomic difference between the 590/500 & the 870's is the position of the action/slide lock release, on the Mossberg's it is behind the trigger guard which allows me to activate it without having to "break my grip" on the weapon, on the Remington's it is in front of the trigger guard & opn the opposite/wrong side, making me break my grip in order to activate/release it. Don't get me wrong, I still like Remington 870's & wouldn't hesitate to use one in an "life or death emergency" &/or SHTF scenario, I just personally like the Mossberg 590/500 design a lot better. I am not a fan of Winchester 1200/1300's, I had one years ago, used it a couple of times when the welds broke on the pump action arms, so the pump wouldn't work the action at all, it was a brand new shotgun too. I asked around while looking for replacement parts & that seemed to be a common problem with those shotguns (at that time) I am not sure if Winchester ever corrected that problem or not, it was a sweet looking & it had a silky smooth feeling actioned shotgun though. Anyway G'luck, everyone should own at least one shotgun, they are super-versitle w/regards to hunting & extremely effective for CQB, especially if loaded with 00 buck. Out of the pump-action shotguns that I currently own the 590A1 is easily my favorite out of the bunch, especially for HD/SHTF purposes, capacity is 8+1, with an extra +4 more shells in it's Speedfeed stock, it also has GRS (ghost ring sights)

Same on this end. I learned a long time ago to leave any disagreements on a forum, in the thread where it happened & not drag it outside of either the thread or into "the real world" so to speak. I enjoy a spirited debate, occasionally a participant can get a little hot under the collar but for the most part I've found my fellow TGO'ers to be respectful even while vehemently disagreeing. There have been a couple of incidents where I've seen some folks resort to using "personal attacks" but they seem to be few & far between.

I'm just not afraid to point out the obvious, & wasn't refering directly to any of our fellow forumites doing that though, just the media and race-hustlers like Al Sharpton & Jesse Jackson who apparently needed to manufacture another incident/cause to milk. If Trayvon had been white or hispanic or asian or whatever, &/or if Zimmerman would had also been black, everyone would have said "well, if you brutally assault & repeatedly bash another person's head with or against something really hard, you should be shot". This discussion would had been 2 pages with everyone in agreement. For me this is really simple (and should have been for everyone). 1.) Did Trayvon brutally assault & repeatedly bash Zimmermans head into the sidewalk? Yes/no. 2.) Did Zimmerman have a "reasonable belief" that he was in immediate danger of sustaining SBI &/or possibly being killed by Trayvon's actions when he discharged his weapon Yes/no See how easy & uncomplicated that is? The ethnicity of the participants, their age, their height, their weight, their backgrounds, their gender, their religious or political beliefs, none of that other irrelevant garbage is in those two above equasions. I don't care if it was Mother Teresa &/or the Pope on top of me violently bashing my head into the sidewalk, I'm going to do whatever I have to to keep my brain-bucket from being busted open.

If it doesn't fit the "Justice for Trayvon" narative they'll just ignore it, doesn't matter if Zimmerman was on the phone to 911, it doesn't matter that he was ambushed by Trayvon, it doesn't matter that he was having his head smashed repeatedly into the sidewalk or that he was screaming for help when he discharged his weapon. A *white* hispanic killed a black, that's all that seems to matter.

A little leeway is one thing, ... brutally assaulting & repeatedly bashing another person's skull into a cement sidewalk is another. I have no sympathy for Trayvon, karma wasted no time in rewarding him with what he earned. And this whole "Justice for Trayvon" thing has been racially motivated, the sickening claims of "Trayvon would still be alive if he had been a white kid!" nonsense started from the very beginning. I have no doubt that Zimmerman (or anyone else in that situation) would have shot a white or hispanic or asian or whatever if they were the one who had been on top of him trying to spill his brains all over that sidewalk that night. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Zimmerman didn't shoot Trayvon because he was black, Zimmerman shot Trayvon because Trayvon was attempting to smash Zimmerman's head open.