Has anyone else seen this website yet?

[Guest blindarrow]

http://www.gunsandalcoholdontmix.org/

The amount of disinformation this spreads really gets under my skin completely. I carry, and it really bothers me to no end when people will purposely try to spread disinformation and such in an attempt to continue to limit our 2A Rights.

Reading the "Make Your Point" section of their website will probably make your head want to explode; I know it did mine. They provide a "Contact Us" form on their site though, so I fired them off an email basically informing them that it was a shame that they allowed the supposed preconceived notions about the bill and guns in general to not only prevent them from becoming adequately educated on their rights, but to continue to spread disinformation in an attempt to corrode them further.

[Guest bkelm18]

And yet these are the same people who will piss their little diapers if someone even mentions curtailing the 1st amendment. America, the land of diversity. And morons.

[Garufa]

Website belongs to that ass-hat Nashville lawyer Adam Dread.

[Guest blindarrow]

More info on the idiocy of Adam Dread?

[Guest bkelm18]

More info on the idiocy of Adam Dread?

There's another thread about him. Basically he is suing the state to get an injunction on the new restaurant carry law.

[Guest blindarrow]

I'm pretty sure the specific point that they lose all credibility is when they try to use movies as an example of "what will happen," too.

Though actually I think it was at the point where they didn't fully read, comprehend, and understand that it doesn't allow guns in establishments that primarily serve alcohol, anyways..

[Guest blindarrow]

There's another thread about him. Basically he is suing the state to get an injunction on the new restaurant carry law.

I'll have to check that out.

[Chucktshoes]

Though actually I think it was at the point where they didn't fully read, comprehend, and understand that it doesn't allow guns in establishments that primarily serve alcohol, anyways..

Not true, TN does not differentiate between bars and restaurants.

[eapking]

The only mistake our founding fathers made was in the numbering. You won't have the first amendment without the second.

[Guest GT_Rat]

The numbering is correct. The second cannot be allowed to usurp the first.

[Guest blindarrow]

Not true, TN does not differentiate between bars and restaurants.

Yea.. I stand corrected some. I totally missed that change.

[Guest m&pc9]

I wish I knew someone who could hack into that website.

[Oh Shoot]

Not true, TN does not differentiate between bars and restaurants.

Yea.. I stand corrected some. I totally missed that change.

Although the new booze/carry law DOES define "restaurant".

- OS

[Guest blindarrow]

Although the new booze/carry law DOES define "restaurant".

- OS

Good freaking lord I need to brush up on my lawyer-speak apparently. I've been going back and forth with this all day trying to figure out if it does/doesn't differentiate.

[Oh Shoot]

Good freaking lord I need to brush up on my lawyer-speak apparently. I've been going back and forth with this all day trying to figure out if it does/doesn't differentiate.

Well, the carry part defines "restaurant" as opposed to "not restaurant", but "bar" is not defined. However, all "bars" have a "restaurant" liquor permit. But beer-only places don't.

Oh "concealed well is well concealed" Shoot

[Falcon1]

The only mistake our founding fathers made was in the numbering. You won't have the first amendment without the second.

The numbering is correct. The second cannot be allowed to usurp the first.

Actually, in the initial offering of what became the Bill of Rights, our First and Second Amendments today were the third and fourth on the list.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/images/uc004829.jpg

The second on the list has now been finally approved as the Twenty-Seventh Amendment.

As for Adam Dread's website...well, Forrest Gump said it best.

[Guest SUNTZU]

[TGO David]

Website belongs to that ass-hat Nashville lawyer Adam Dread.

Wait... wasn't there a thread on here just yesterday or the day before where someone was complaining that a journalist at the Nashville Scene had referred to gun owners as "assclowns" ? I suppose it's ok for us to refer to people that we don't agree with as asshats, however.

I'd suggest taking the high road.

I wish I knew someone who could hack into that website.

I wish I knew someone who had actually read TGO's Code of Conduct and knew that promoting illegal activities isn't tolerated here.

Further, what you are in essence advocating, beyond the criminal act of hacking a server and defacing a web site, is in essence the practice of stifling the web master's right to Free Speech. How can we expect anyone to realistically appreciate our Right To Bear Arms if our members think it is OK to squash other people's rights?

And need I remind anyone here how much it F-ING SUCKED when TGO's own web server was under attack just a few months ago? That cost me a lot of time and money to resolve, and we were forced offline quite a bit because of it.

THINK BEFORE YOU POST.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

yea guys you do know they are using quotes from several websites in their lawsuit to claim the misinformation that was used in getting he law passed... so they read everything any of us type.

[Guest blindarrow]

Whoa.. didn't mean to start anything with posting this.

I don't advocate anything being done, except voicing your opinion (and maybe even attempting to actually EDUCATE these people).

[Guest mustangdave]

Whoa.. didn't mean to start anything with posting this.

I don't advocate anything being done, except voicing your opinion (and maybe even attempting to actually EDUCATE these people).

Unfortunately those "people" think they're already "educated" on the matter, and WE the unwashed heathen gun nuts are in the wrong.

[Guest blindarrow]

Unfortunately those "people" think they're already "educated" on the matter, and WE the unwashed heathen gun nuts are in the wrong.

Very true. And unfortunate.