Chucktshoes

There's a reason why I drove all the way across town to Range USA when I live five minutes from Rangemasters.

Why is it that I am kinda hoping he gets wind of this thread and comes on the board to try and defend himself? We haven't had one of those bread in a while. :lol:

I generally prefer to stick to whiskeys of the Irish or Scottish variety. Bourbons just don't do it for me.

And I would gladly spend the gas money to make the drive to Detroit and guzzle Stroh's over spending $10 on the swill they produce in Lynchburg.

And some you can't! :lol:

My vote is for both not only being totally acceptable but kinda hot. You do raise a very valid point with regards to what folks find acceptable and personal values. For example, I would say the majority of men do find girl on girl action to be exciting, yet most women do not feel the same way about guy on guy action. I would wonder is that do more to cultural norms or to the inborn differences in what men and women find exciting with regards to sex?

I have the BCM Gunfighter grip. Essentially the same thing. I definitely prefer it over the standard A2.

Y'all have a whole lot of faith in a whole lot of government employees if you think those laws will have any meaning when the rubber hits the road. The only real question to their worth is if they will provide any cover against charges after the fact to a citizen who uses all available and appropriate force to resist unlawful actions by LE who were "just doing their job" during a state of emergency.

This meme is applicable to many of the discussions here.

Roads and officer salaries funded through extortion and larceny. The type of reasoning you use here can and has been used to justify literally any and every type of government regulation. It is the antithesis of liberty.

In case it wasn't clear, I don't think it is a particularly prudent idea, but that's not really what we are discussing here. Of course, if an officer really wants to find some way to charge you with something, he/she can and will. I don't think that's ever been much in dispute. I'm pretty sure I unknowingly commit a couple of felonies a day, as do most folks. All the examples you mentioned require an officer to perform some type of reasoning gymnastics to twist the item to fall under a different statute. The clarity of the old statute is gone and has not been replaced by anything so clear as "swords are illegal". You look to laws to see that something is specifically prohibited, not specifically allowed. To me it just speaks to the unjustness of these laws that they can be used in such manners. I wouldn't dispute any of this at all.

This was actually brought up during discussion of the bill. A legislator asked if this law would make it legal for someone to carry a sword and the response was yes, it would. While I agree it isn't advisable for the kilted to strap on a claymore or the anime nerds to grab their katanas, it is legal to do so.

^^^ What he said. Carry what you want how you want.

Or maybe the idea is to hire immigrants from more authoritarian cultures who are less likely to question orders to violate constitutionally protected rights? :tinfoil:

(Disclaimer-Here is where I am going to get a bit more controversial. Please take my following statements as they are intended, to further reasoned discussion and to explain a philosophical position, not as a inflammatory attack for trolling purposes.) I would posit that it is the nature of the beast more so than having the right/wrong person in the job. Something I believe and have said before is that if your system depends on having the right person in power, it is a bad system. So to put it succinctly, the idea of the "good cop" is a useful myth that helps keep the rabble placated. The nature of the job of LE makes the idea of the "good cop" an impossibility. What I mean by that can be best explained with a quote from Robert Higgs. Thus my dislike of LE agencies isn't based on a bad experience with a cop due to my own or an officer's bad behavior, but from a moral and philosophical objection to the application of violence against people for unjust reasons. I have friends in local LE agencies and have met many folks who work LE who seem like really good people. They probably truly believe that they are and that they doing good for the community. They have been fooled just the same as everyone else. As for my friends, the way I balance my like for them with their holding a job I find very morally bankrupt is simple. I just pretend they are really bad at being a cop. It's cognitive dissonance at its finest, I know, but it gets one through the day.

Oddly enough, those are all the same reasons I view them as no different than any other LE agency. Go figure.

True, but then the g43 hasn't been released yet either. :lol:

Like several others here, I am greatly looking forward to the G43 simply for the effect it will have to the secondary market for the M&P Shields. I have no interest in owning a Glock but will be looking for the Shields the Glock fans will dumping to buy a G43.

The posted article contains links to two summaries of the report. They do a far better job than I could.

This article is worth a read. http://m.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/conservatives-start-to-take-the-ferguson-report-seriously/387835/?utm_source=SFFB Most especially read the Red State article it references and uses as source for quotes such as "Even if you read only the parts of the Ferguson DOJ report that come directly from the files of the FPD (which is to say, files that would be most favorable to the Department), the report paints an incredibly damning picture of the Ferguson Police Department. No conservative on earth should feel comfortable with the way the Ferguson PD has been operating for years, even according to their own documents." And "I am not going to sugar coat this or engage in a lot of pointless throat clearing here - the report, taken as a whole, even in terms of material collected exclusively from FPD documents, is incredibly damning of police and municipal court practices in Ferguson. Anyone who can read the actual report itself and be comfortable with the fact that citizens of an American city live under such a regime is frankly not someone who is ideologically aligned with me in any meaningful way. The practices of the FPD and Municipal Court are destructive to freedom and in blatant violation of our constitutional rights, and they depend for sufferance on the fact that most people are not willing (or, in the case of most of Ferguson's residents, able) to mount an expensive legal fight for relatively trivial amounts of money such as are involved in a traffic ticket. Evidence of the Ferguson PD's knowledge of their blatantly unconstitutional practices (especially with respect to the habitual issuance of arrest warrants for missing a payment) is shown in the report by the way that the Municipal Court regularly drops these warrants as soon as a defendant appears with counsel. I am singularly unimpressed with the argument that the report should be dismissed because it is the product of the Holder DOJ's dissatisfaction at the resolution of the Michael Brown case. The implicit admission in such an argument is that many police departments are worse; if so, the proper response is not to excuse the Ferguson PD but rather to acknowledge that there are, in fact, systemic problems that exist on a widespread basis that should also be solved." The Red State piece was written by a conservative who in reading the DOJ report, approached it in a hostile manner. His words explain the way he read it best. "I took the time over the weekend to read the entirety of the 102-page Department of Justice report on the Ferguson PD ("FPD"). I cannot recommend highly enough that you do the same. During the course of this reading, I intentionally read it with as jaundiced of an eye towards the Department of Justice as possible. I intentionally disregarded all commentary regarding what the DOJ investigators reported that they saw, and also all of their reported interviews of the citizens of Ferguson and FPD officers. I decided to say to myself, let's assume that everything DOJ says is a lie, and also that everyone who was willing to talk to the DOJ during the course of their investigation either lied or shaded the truth. What remained astounded me." So before you engage in a reflexive defense of the FPD, one should understand what they were really doing according to their own documents. Also before you say that the practices there are no worse than anywhere else, (which I would agree with) maybe you should understand how terrible of a situation that really is and recognize it as a bug and not a feature.

Find a local bank or credit union. Don't punish yourself with the terrible treatment of one of the nationals.

Innocent people were already caught up in it. You had a predatory gang preying on a disenfranchised population as a source of revenue. Holder and Obama aren't the only racists in this picture.

How about we just stop the government stealing money from folks and giving it to other folks for any reason at all. Just a suggestion.