Chucktshoes

It’s easier to back into a spot than to back out of one. Also, it’s habit as most of my parking is in truck much, much larger and you always back those in.

Happy to be of service.

Actual CATs from North American Rescue.

So important. If one is training/working with other folks then IFAKs should be standardized in contents and placement.

I put them to use and have them staged everywhere. To the OP, the CAT is the best to use. Nothing is as effective, but other styles can be effective as long as you aware of their limitations. Biggest thing is to make sure you train and practice with them. You don’t want to be trying to read an instruction manual when you or someone else is bleeding out.

I believe Garufa is correct.

This one is all you.

As far as he’s concerned, that is the law.

What folks may or may not do on a hypothetical day in the future is one thing but it is explicitly against the TOS to solicit or promote engaging in illegal activity. Outside of being against the rules, openly talking about breaking the law (even if the law in question is a bunch of BS) is stupid and asking for needless trouble. In the interest of the wellbeing of any dogs that may live or even just be in the general vicinity of your house, I’m locking this thread. We’re done here.

The Lulz is no longer going to be joining this conversation, ever. His thoughts on FP aren’t in play anymore. We can leave talk of Russia and Bolsonaro to the side. ——————— If it is prohibited to use a firearm for self defense even when the criminals have them, then yes, one’s right to self defense has been effectively removed. Maybe not in name, but definitely in practice. It’s a semantic dodge to pretend otherwise. This is the norm around the world. The US is one of the few countries that explicitly recognizes the right, but there is no way you don’t already know that. If one is limited to fists or melee tools to defend one’s person than the winner of any confrontation will almost always be the person who is bigger, stronger, and more skilled. Unless one party has a firearm in which case they will win nearly always. In an example of the practical outcome of this, to remove the ability of someone to use a firearm for self defense is to condemn almost all women to be the victims of almost any man that wishes to do them any sort of harm. Or different, non-firearm example. In the Jim Crow era poll taxes, literacy tests and other obstacles were in place to prevent black folks from voting. Sure, they had the right, in theory, but did they in practice? Not in the least. Nobody pretends otherwise. So to answer the question I posed rhetorically earlier, yes. If you remove someone’s ability to effectively exercise a right, then you have removed that right.

Before The Lulz went off the deep end, he made a valid point about denying the ability to use effective tools for self defense is to essentially remove the right of self defense. A great and recent example of this comes from our neighbors up north https://www.dailywire.com/news/guns-must-not-be-used-for-self-defense-canadas-trudeau-insists

Actually, you haven’t schooled anyone. You basically strolled in and did the pigeon on the chessboard strut. You’re new here so this is your one free warning. We expect better of folks than this. You wanna debate your point, do it with reason and facts. Strawmanning, ad hominem and name calling aren’t helpful on any level.

I can’t say for certain that what you’re asking for is illegal, but it’s definitely very close to that line. You need to acquire a jig and perform the work yourself.

I’ll take the blame on this one. My bad. That said we’ve been due for a hard pivot thread derailment. It’s been a while since the last one.

I don’t know what, if any, biases statista hold. Everytown on the other hand is a Bloomberg funded organization created for the sole purpose of enacting gun control so its biases are a known quantity. One is a data set of unknown quality. The other is a data set that is extremely suspect in its veracity due to the strong bias of its source.

You do have an ignore button. I’m a proponent of making use of it if one finds another person’s posts a problem. Sadly, I gave that up when I became a mod.

No, no public voting of that. Not how we do things around here. We have been an echo chamber for long stretches of time. It’s why I am so happy when diverse worldviews arrive and help us not to be that.

I asked a direct question in hopes of getting a clear and direct answer for once. Thank you for providing that. While I absolutely don’t agree with your views (at least as I understand them) I can see the merit in your aims. I will suggest altering your technique. If it seems as if I have changed from being initially supportive of your presence upon your return to expressing disdain there is a reason for that. Your posting style as of late has been more indicative of someone interested in trolling as opposed to legitimate discussion and exchange of ideas. If you’re actually looking to engage with folks here in an honest manner, then do so in a direct and honest manner instead of throwing shade and #### posting. Diversity in thought and even contrarian viewpoints are valuable to any community. The problem is when those views are expressed in a manner designed to elicit anger and sow discord. It is the reason that we eliminated the general politics sub forum. It did not bring anything positive or contribute to the overall health of the community. Even in a place that is mostly leaning in a similar direction, it just ended in needless fights. So stow the general/world politics posts. They’re not welcome. Getting back to the main point, how about more posts like your last? That’s what I was hoping to see from you when you returned with an obviously contrarian worldview. If you want to be an actual part of of this community, I know I personally want you to be, heterodox views and all. If you’re just going to go back to stirring up mess with no purpose, you won’t have to leave voluntarily.

Who seems to use your ownership of guns in the same way that folks like Tim Kennedy use their “I am a veteran“ card to advocate for gun control or the way that some people will use the “I have a black friend” card as a shield. While you may own guns, you seem to come here solely to advocate against them and shove general politics into anything you can. Considering this is a forum dedicated to talking about firearms and expanding firearms rights, I will ask again. Why are you here?

So if you don’t have any actual interest in firearms, why are you slumming it around here amongst us?

Good breakdown and commentary from Breaking Points about the event.

Everyone is always quick to find some way to ties these wack jobs to their ideological opponents, but the truth is that they’re normally just wack jobs. As always, the best idea is to simply wait for the information to come out. Making an informed judgement is so much better for every reason.