GlockSpock

Yep. And admit it or not, those kids went through a more traumatic experience than most of us here at TGO ever have. Grab a group of them who or either anti-gun or undecided and give them travel, room, and food, and that is exactly how you get to where we are right now. Making fun of them isn’t going to help anything. That will only help convince others that the extreme pro-gun side is the wrong, uncaring, heartless side. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another thing that is extremely underrated is simply education. For example, I've noticed that a lot of neutral people lean anti-gun simply because their entire knowledge base regarding firearms has came from Hollywood. I little education and demonstration and sometimes these neutral people actually turn out to at least be somewhat pro-gun. That's a step in the right direction.

"What is" complaining about how Democrats want to take our guns? I fear Dolomite is right. For a while I've hoped that perhaps the younger generation would be more pro-gun. My thoughts? I was leaning on the theory that perhaps FPS (first person shooter) games would create a generation of people interested in guns. To an extent, perhaps this has happened. At this point, I don't know. Although every single example was tragic, this latest school shooting was not the "worst". Perhaps it is because Trump is in office that the opposition (in this case, that being anyone in favor of to any extent stricter gun laws) is simply louder. After Sandy Hook, I was very, very concerned about what Obama would do if he could. The result? Generally nothing. Trump, in my opinion, has already "accomplished" more "anti-gun" stuff than Obama did in eight years. He claimed to be our ally, and perhaps on paper he was better than Clinton, but I never trusted his 2nd Amendment rhetoric. But I think at least with Clinton we would have seen more Republicans opposing restrictions rather than suggestion them. Wow. Sandy Hook was nearly six years ago. What has changed since then? I don't remember a voice so strong, unified, active as it is now. Someone realized that enabling and allowing/using the younger generation could be very effective. It's working from what I can tell. However, don't believe for a second that there isn't a sector of the younger generation that is a counter to gun restrictions. The sad truth though is that their viewpoint isn't being promoted and their agendas are not being financed. Who else finds it ironic that the Justice Department proposed rule changes the day before the "Money Bomb" to the NRA? I suggested in this post that the scheduling for the money bomb may be too far out, if you even assumed it would be helpful at all. I don't know the exact percentage of gun owners in the United States relative to the population. I'd be curious to see the statistics of "Pro-Gun" people that don't take the time to vote. I think those numbers alone would be eye opening. This entire struggle could be much easier if people took 5% of the time they spend complaining about things and use that 5% to vote, write letters/emails, participate, etc. I'm not just talking about main elections either, but rather primaries even. If you think our only options were Trump or Hillary, somehow you've missed the way the system works, period. I am 100% sick of people, reporters, anyone else referring to our country as a "Democracy". It was and is not. Some would love to see it that way but it is not. We have a Representative Republic. One of the benefits of having what we have is the the rights of minorities can also be taken into account. It is terrifying to me to fantasize about where we would be if we were a true democracy. I guarantee that between women's suffrage, civil rights, etc; Most of that would have never came to pass if left up to the popular vote. All of this is relevant because if not already, it is likely that true gun owners are becoming the minority. I'm to the point that if enough of the country desires disarmament of the general population, fine lets do it. But we have that pesky thing called the 2nd Amendment. Don't infringe it. Amend the Constitution. I am as pro-gun as they come, period, no questions asked. But if our country, through culture wars, progressive thinking, "progress", etc has reached the point that the 2nd Amendment is no longer valued/cherished, then lets take the "correct" course of action and amend the Constitution instead of just ignoring it. Personally, I do not understand how the Justice Department can force a "rule change" regarding bump stocks. In my opinion, the first person that ever gets arrested for possessing one that is charged for an unregistered machine gun should be able to hire the best lawyer in the country and win. The definition of a machine gun is clear; a bump stock does not fit that definition. And to anyone that is "ok" with bump stocks disappearing because you don't want one, don't you at least think it is terrifying precedent to allow the Executive branch to deem things Kosher or not Kosher? Perhaps it's wasting my time, but if the bump stock banning actually takes place, I'm tightly crossing my fingers that it gets struck down by the courts. One last thing: The NRA called over the weekend asking for money to fight the "anti-gunners". I had been hoping for this call for months now. Sadly, the call dropped as I didn't have a strong cellular connection. I was very let down over this. I was so pleased with the thought of telling the NRA representative that they themselves were too anti-gun for me and I currently do not feel right donating to their organization and instead would be supporting the GOA. On second thought, I think I'll call (perhaps multiple times), noting that I'd like to speak to someone about becoming a life-member and then venting to that person about how dissatisfied I am with their handling of current events. Waste their time, let them see that some people are paying attention to them, maybe some of the pressure would makes its way up the ranks. /// Side Rant: 1) NRA suggests that the ATF review Bump-Stocks 2) Justice Department considers and proposes to ban Bump-Stocks 3) NRA calls and asks for money to combat the "anti-gunners" 4) People send money on 3/24 to the NRA

I finally got around to listening to the first episode. David, I didn’t realize you have such a great radio voice. Content was great. Definitely was pro 2nd Amendment but came across as decently objective as well, which is a good thing when trying to reason with people whom hold differing opinions. Great job! I look forward to hearing more. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did we just see the Dolomite from today go back in time and post the same thing then too? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. And die for our country via military service. But not vote or own firearms. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The only real problem I see is that for some reason you keep going back. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I haven’t read much of anything other than this thread, but I wonder the mindset percentages of those participating? How many are advocating gun control? How many are simply advocating for something (armed teachers, security, etc)? How many are doing it just to get out of class with no other real heart in the issue? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dang. I had not interest, at all, in the 19x. Now you have me wanting to buy one. Glock should hire you as their spokesperson. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, I’m saying if he fought in WWI, there wouldn’t have been a WWII:) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See, here's the thing... I fully believe Dolomite could start with a larger shovel and: Use it to collect some bat guano Manufacture a crude but appropriate strength powder load for AK's from the guano Use it to collect sand Manufacture a crude but effective set of lenses from the sand Split shovel into thirds Use 1/3 of shovel paired with lenses to create combat ready 4x optic Use 1/3 of shovel to cast 30 steel AP 7.62x39mm bullets and casings Use 1/3 of shovel to form not only the receiver but also a 30 round magazine Use handle as stock as shown in photo, but use the handle to dig holes to discard of any bodies needed Of course this would all take time, but he'd still be finished in time for lunch In other news, Chuck Norris once met DOLOMITE. Guess which one lived long enough to join TGO?

Was talking to a co-worker yesterday about this, I figured there are likely a lot of members here at TGO that have never seen this. If this is your first time, make sure to read all of the captions with the photos, they are WONDERFUL. https://www.northeastshooters.com/xen/threads/diy-shovel-ak-photo-tsunami-warning.179192/

Ouch, solid thinking point. I see that nobody has responded to this directly, I take it that they are all afraid. Here are my thoughts. Honestly, the cake baker probably should have baked the couple a cake, but I fully respect their right not to. They should have baked a cake and then allowed the couple to top the cake however they wished. In my further opinion, they should have simply stated that they would bake and sell them a cake but that their personal beliefs did not allow them to decorate the cake as the couple desired, and then the couple should have went somewhere else. However, we all know that the couple wanted to make a big deal out of it, so that's how it went down. After thinking about it, the Walmart and Dick's story isn't much different overall. Businesses (Walmart and Dick's, etc) are attempting to restrict sales of firearms to people 18-20 years of age because of their "morals". Now, anyone could claim that these morals are unfounded and dumb, and I would happen to agree with you, but if an entity believes that it is doing a good thing by reserving firearms to those 21 and over, then that is their belief just as the cake shop believes that certain marital combinations are wrong. I think on one hand you could have an argument regarding age discrimination, but I believe that in the same paragraph as age discrimination is the subject of discriminating upon sexuality. Two entities, both private (Walmart/Dicks and then the cake shop) taking it upon themselves to restrict who their customers are. Two entities, whom I believe should have the right to do so, making a decision about who they choose to do business with. Someone could claim the 2nd Amendment all day, but doesn't that refer to infringement by government? If Walmart and Dicks simply stated "We aren't going to sell guns anymore, period", then I don't think there would be near as much stink as them proclaiming "We aren't going to sell certain guns anymore and will only sell to certain people now". At one time, when I was approximately 18 or 19, I had a local gun shop refuse to sell me .22lr ammo "because it could fit in a handgun". I even told him that it was not for a handgun but for a rifle, but he refused the sale so I went elsewhere. I desired to purchase something crazy like 30-06 or somewhat similar and then after the transaction boast I was going to go shoot it in my pistol that night, I did not. I suspect that this mindset, coupled with possible other factors, could be why they are no longer in business. I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that FFL's have the right to refuse any firearm transaction they desire. I would think this would extend to ammunition as well. Honestly, people just need to remember that Walmart, Dick's, etc are not and have not really ever truly been our friends, but rather just making a small amount of profit off of a few types of firearms and accessories when convenient politically. Throw your money to other, stronger companies that support the 2nd Amendment. This makes me think back to when I was 17 and Walmart refused to sell me a knife sharpener. Not the knife, bear you, but just a sharpener to make a pre-owned knife sharp. I showed the knife I was carrying in my pocket and simply stated it needed sharpening, they still refused. Dumb. Something else that cracks me up are the people at gun/knife shows that tell minors you have to be 18 or older to even touch any of their knives. I suppose it all comes down to liability, but we sure have "progressed" a lot from even a few decades ago.

So, according to some of the left leaning blogs, the NRA met with Trump and Pence last night and reconciled his views to theirs. https://splinternews.com/the-nra-warns-america-its-still-in-charge-when-it-comes-1823455624 I personally find it quite humorous myself. Wednesday Trump makes claim that politicians are "Afraid of the NRA". Thursday Trump meets with NRA, quickly changes stances. At least, that's what I hope. I'm not a HUGE fan of the NRA, but they are something. In my opinion, they are just too anti-gun for my views Hopefully though, what literally happened was that Cox politely informed Trump that the views Trump were forming would alienate a meaningful portion of the people that put him into office. One can hope.

Schadenfreude Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It may be childish - but I would have paid $5.00 to be able to witness exactly what you described.

I will admit that I haven't personally read into all of the times police had been called to Cruz's house, but all Trump had to do to "polish" that statement was say "I think police would have been justified based on existing evidence had they confiscated Cruz's weapons". That sounds a lot better. From my understanding, he made verifiable threats and to some of the calls had to do with domestic violence. Is this correct? If those are true, wouldn't police have been justified in confiscating his weapons based on existing law?

Just a hair over two weeks left for this. Door Devil was kind enough to grant us this discount code, so I'm simply encouraging others to take part.

"Missed" is an opportunistic way of putting it. Just wanted to say, thanks for joining up. Hopefully we can encourage a few other TGO members to do the same and also write/call their congressmen.

But it’s dumb to begin with. You would either see sub-21 aged people steal guns for their crimes or a greater influx of of crime for just-21 aged people. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Brings up a good point. If legal via both State and Federal law, isn't it age discrimination if someone is legally allowed to purchase a firearm at age 18? FFL's can refuse any firearm transaction from what I understand, but "We don't sale to anyone under 21" could theoretically be construed as age discrimination. To some extent, it would be the same as "We don't sell to Muslims" or "We don't sell to women". Interesting thoughts. Which may null considering there's a decent chance the Federal age limit gets raised to 21.

In my opinion as well as many others here at TGO, GOA is a much better organization that the NRA. I've heard a lot of people at work making claims about supporting or donating to the NRA, I just started putting it quite bluntly: The NRA is too anti-gun for me. They do not represent my views. The GOA is much better currently. As such, I signed up to be a life member, you can do so here: Normal Membership ($20 Minimum Donation) Life Membership ($500, can be split up into payments. I did $50/Quarter) But even more importantly, in my opinion, is their "Current Action Alerts" page where they show you various ways to contacts your US Senators and US Representative regarding specific issues. They make it very easy to do so via email, but also give numbers to call as well. https://gunowners.org/current-action-alerts/

https://gunowners.org/current-action-alerts/ This shows you relevant ways to contact your Senators/Representatives for corresponding bills and the like. This makes it so easy that there is zero excuse for anyone truly 2nd Amendment not to contact their congressmen.

I truly hope you are 100% wrong. No matter what the rides going to be bumpy for awhile. Well, considering that ultimately the only "anti-gun" thing that was ever accomplished under Obama was that trusts changed a bit. If I recall correctly, that's about it. So in my opinion, something as simple as getting "bump stocks" banned is already shadowing Obama by my counts. I'm more curious the methods that are tried in all of this. If they try and garner support for legislation and do it that way, at least maybe we stand a chance in either the House or Senate. We shall see, I suppose.