Chucktshoes

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/02/foghorn/ny-supreme-court-safe-act-injunction-unless-state-can-prove-law-constitutional/ Before the law goes into effect, the state of New York must show it is constitutional.

Is it really a smart thing to threaten one of the guys responsible for bringing about the only presidential resignation in our history? I mean, really?

Seconded. He posts on another forum I am a part of and have seen tons of examples of his work. I'm going to have him do a sheath for my CRKT Dragon. I've paid more for less than his work and been more than satisfied.

I have to fully and completely disagree with you about conscription. To say that because later administrations followed in Lincoln's example and used a draft to enable them to wage wars (regardless of validity of the the casus belli) absolves him of guilt in using such an immoral tool is a poor sort of justification. It is the same as saying it is ok to steal from work because "everybody does it". A government that sacrifices its citizens’ freedom to prop itself up is no longer a guardian of freedom but a tool for tyranny. So ask yourself, do you exist to protect the government, or does the government exist to protect yours? By that I mean does government exist to protect the individual liberties of its citizens. I believe that to be the ONLY valid purpose of any form of government. If government’s purpose is to protect your individual rights, it cannot then claim title to your most basic right—your very life—in exchange. Any Rand tackled (and demolished it, IMO) in a 1967 lecture titled "The Wreckage of Consensus". Here is an excerpt in which she directly addressed the immorality of the draft.

The American Lenin by L. Neil Smith lneil@lneilsmith.org It’s harder and harder these days to tell a liberal from a conservative — given the former category’s increasingly blatant hostility toward the First Amendment, and the latter’s prissy new disdain for the Second Amendment — but it’s still easy to tell a liberal from a libertarian. Just ask about either Amendment. If what you get back is a spirited defense of the ideas of this country’s Founding Fathers, what you’ve got is a libertarian. By shameful default, libertarians have become America’s last and only reliable stewards of the Bill of Rights. But if — and this usually seems a bit more difficult to most people — you’d like to know whether an individual is a libertarian or a conservative, ask about Abraham Lincoln. Suppose a woman — with plenty of personal faults herself, let that be stipulated — desired to leave her husband: partly because he made a regular practice, in order to go out and get drunk, of stealing money she had earned herself by raising chickens or taking in laundry; and partly because he’d already demonstrated a proclivity for domestic violence the first time she’d complained about his stealing. Now, when he stood in the doorway and beat her to a bloody pulp to keep her home, would we memorialize him as a hero? Or would we treat him like a dangerous lunatic who should be locked up, if for no other reason, then for trying to maintain the appearance of a relationship where there wasn’t a relationship any more? What value, we would ask, does he find in continuing to possess her in an involuntary association, when her heart and mind had left him long ago? History tells us that Lincoln was a politically ambitious lawyer who eagerly prostituted himself to northern industrialists who were unwilling to pay world prices for their raw materials and who, rather than practice real capitalism, enlisted brute government force — “sell to us at our price or pay a fine that’ll put you out of business” — for dealing with uncooperative southern suppliers. That’s what a tariff’s all about. In support of this “noble principle”, when southerners demonstrated what amounted to no more than token resistance, Lincoln permitted an internal war to begin that butchered more Americans than all of this country’s foreign wars — before or afterward — rolled into one. Lincoln saw the introduction of total war on the American continent — indiscriminate mass slaughter and destruction without regard to age, gender, or combat status of the victims — and oversaw the systematic shelling and burning of entire cities for strategic and tactical purposes. For the same purposes, Lincoln declared, rather late in the war, that black slaves were now free in the south — where he had no effective jurisdiction — while declaring at the same time, somewhat more quietly but for the record nonetheless, that if maintaining slavery could have won his war for him, he’d have done that, instead. The fact is, Lincoln didn’t abolish slavery at all, he nationalized it, imposing income taxation and military conscription upon what had been a free country before he took over — income taxation and military conscription to which newly “freed” blacks soon found themselves subjected right alongside newly-enslaved whites. If the civil war was truly fought against slavery — a dubious, “politically correct” assertion with no historical evidence to back it up — then clearly, slavery won. Lincoln brought secret police to America, along with the traditional midnight “knock on the door”, illegally suspending the Bill of Rights and, like the Latin America dictators he anticipated, “disappearing” thousands in the north whose only crime was that they disagreed with him. To finance his crimes against humanity, Lincoln allowed the printing of worthless paper money in unprecedented volumes, ultimately plunging America into a long, grim depression — in the south, it lasted half a century — he didn’t have to live through, himself. In the end, Lincoln didn’t unite this country — that can’t be done by force — he divided it along lines of an unspeakably ugly hatred and resentment that continue to exist almost a century and a half after they were drawn. If Lincoln could have been put on trial in Nuremburg for war crimes, he’d have received the same sentence as the highest-ranking Nazis. If libertarians ran things, they’d melt all the Lincoln pennies, shred all the Lincoln fives, take a wrecking ball to the Lincoln Memorial, and consider erecting monuments to John Wilkes Booth. Libertarians know Lincoln as the worst President America has ever had to suffer, with Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon Johnson running a distant second, third, and fourth. Conservatives, on the other hand, adore Lincoln, publicly admire his methods, and revere him as the best President America ever had. One wonders: is this because they’d like to do, all over again, all of the things Lincoln did to the American people? Judging from their taste for executions as a substitute for individual self-defense, their penchant for putting people behind bars — more than any other country in the world, per capita, no matter how poorly it works to reduce crime — and the bitter distaste they display for Constitutional “technicalities” like the exclusionary rule, which are all that keep America from becoming the world’s largest banana republic, one is well-justified in wondering. The troubling truth is that, more than anybody else’s, Abraham Lincoln’s career resembles and foreshadows that of V.I. Lenin, who, with somewhat better technology at his disposal, slaughtered millions of innocents — rather than mere hundreds of thousands — to enforce an impossibly stupid idea which, in the end, like forced association, was proven by history to be a resounding failure. Abraham Lincoln was America’s Lenin, and when America has finally absorbed that painful but illuminating truth, it will finally have begun to recover from the War between the States. http://lneilsmith.org/abelenin.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9mJ82x_l-E

If you are involved in a shoot that gets to that point, you have much bigger problems than whether or not to carry a backup. You also made terrible decisions leading up to that assertion having the opportunity to be made.

Wow, the picture totally changes the color. I used to have a set if FDE furniture and it wasn't the color that yours appeared on screen.

I'd probably order both sizes, but if I have to pick, I want the larger size.

I'm gonna say it is foliage green as I bought the very same kit from PSA.

"EVERY SURPLUS RIFLE WITH BOLT ACTION IS CHEAP SOME TIME IN HISTORY. MOSIN NAGANT RIFLE IS MOST NUMEROUS OF ALL INFANTRY RIFLE. IT IS RIFLE THAT WINS OCTOBER REVOLUTION. IT IS RIFLE THAT CARRIES INFANTRY OF ALLIED FORCES IN EUROPE THROUGH GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR. MOSIN NAGANT RIFLE SERVES FOR MORE THAN CENTURY, OLD STOLEN RUSSIAN RECEIVER IS STILL USE BY SNIPER OF FINNISH ARMY. YOU CAN BE HAPPY WITH 40,000 ROUBLE RIFLE WITH NO HISTORY AND PLASTIC STOCK WHO KILLS PAPER TARGET AND DEER WITH NO WEAPON OR FIGHTING HEART. I CAN BE HAPPY WITH 2,000 ROUBLE RIFLE THAT IS ARTIFACT OF MILITARY HISTORY AND KILLS TSARIST AND NAZI ALIKE. JOY OF HAVING MOSIN NAGANT RIFLE IS JOY THAT MONEY CANNOT AFFORD. " Ivan Chesnokov.

When i saw the title I was wondering when my wife had started posting on TGO.

Mogadishu is in Somalia. ;)

A cut in the growth of spending is not a cut in spending. The way that is spun drives me bonkers. A cut is spending means you spend less this year than you did last year, not that ou increased your spending by less than you thought ou would.

I'm a pretty tin foil-y, but in this case I see the value in those targets in training officers to notice what is in hands and not be lulled into a false sense of security by the person's initial appearance.

That's pretty awesome.

Why WOULDN'T you?:lol:

:lol: Have you ever tried standup?

Welcome to my world as a libertarian. Pull up a chair and we can watch it burn together. There was never any chance of changing the course when both of the major parties are two sides of the same worthless statist coin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jREUrbGGrgM

Folks gave me funny looks and laughed when I said things like "the government has become an enemy of constitution and the American people." I don't think they are laughing anymore.

I wouldn't count on it. CO has been California-ed. It has taken in tons of folks fleeing CA who then vote the way they did before and ruin CO by turning it into what they left behind.

As someone who was a giant dork for the first 20 odd years of my life and still remains a moderate dork, I loved the commercial. Giggity!

The TN Firearms Freedom Act says the same thing a the Montana law but without the teeth. It provides no penalties for fed.gov agents who attempt to enforce fed.gov laws on state exempted items. It also does not compel the state to defend anyone charged, nor even the law itself. While I like it, as it currently stands it is worthless. It needs teeth.

Eff that guy. In the ear. With a 5.56.