Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

What may have cost GOP control of TWH, House and Senate.

2

Replies

  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #32
    The National Firearms Act of 1934 itself is a violation of the 2nd A itself. I believe the 2nd A protects my right an American citizen to own even a true machine gun. I think pink guns and Muddy Girl camo on guns looks stupid too but I also believe they are protected under the 2nd A.

    Is a scope for hunting an integral part of a hunting rifle? How about a rifle sling or a bipod? Still, Gun Owners of America defends ownership of bump stocks with impunity. They are not personally my cup of tea but I don't like the government's interfering with them still.
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #33
    I don't believe it's the gubmint's position to dictate what is "a part of the proper function of a firearm" in regards to gun control measures. Our elected officials are not gunsmiths by trade or firearms developers. Some of these idiots can't even tell a barrel from a butt-stock.

    This woman doesn't even know what a barrel shroud is but introduced legislation to ban them. She dodges the question twice and talks about high-capacity "clips". She wants to ban M1 Garands that use clips? Does your AR-15 accept "clips"? Granted many people refer to magazines as "clips". It's a Hollywood thing.



    Does anybody here believe gun owners with bump stocks would be a menace to society for that bump stock reason only? Does a bump stock really make a gun "more deadly"? Do you personally support outlawing them?


  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    edited May 2021 #34
    I'm a Life Member of Gun Owners of America and they would disagree with you, Gun Nut. GOA has been No Compromise Since 1975.  I love GOA because they are No Compromise. They never cave as the NRA has done in the past. Bump stocks are still PARTS of ARMS. So are triggers, barrels, locks and stocks. They way I see it, if the gubmint bans any one part of a gun they have effectively banned the whole gun and therefore have infringed upon "the right to keep and bear arms".  It's not up to the gubmint to decide as to whether a citizen needs a bump stock, a flash hider or a high-cap mag.

    WE THE PEOPLE do rule the country. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Each and every good President defends and upholds the Constitution as sworn to do when taking office. Please read the preamble. Banning one thing like a bump stock is just another step toward banning other things related to guns. When  it comes to gun control, if you give the gubmint an inch, they take a country mile.

    Furthermore, according to GOA, there is no evidence that possession and use of bump stocks by citizens make us more unsafe.

    If I were to be lawfully sworn into  TWH, I would summarily seek to disband the ATF and shred the following:

    -The Brady Bill
    -The FBI NICS
    -The Gun Control Act of 1968
    -The National Firearms Act of 1934

    I would also seek federal legislation to overturn most if not all gun control in the several states and their respective local jurisdictions. All soldiers would be allowed to carry concealed on military installations at all times under my watch even it took an executive order to make that happen.




    How many members in GOA?  That’s EXACTLY how many people agree with you 100%. MAYBE...  The rest of the country, all 330,000,000+, have a voice too.  Did you see any type of an insurrection when they banned bump stocks?  Not even a ripple, except by the fringe trying to agitate the masses and the organizations using it as a simpleton bullet point to raise money, the rest of the country, me included, gave it one big yawn and changed the channel.  BUT, fascinatingly enough it’s still the battle cry of those insistent on trying to pinpoint Trump failure to win a second term.  That’s just silly and simpleminded.

    The biggest problem the fringe of BOTH parties have going in, and what ultimately WILL destroy this amazing country of ours is the we have totally lost our ability to compromise.  And when a politician is smart enough to do it, his own party will eat him alive because it’s not politically desirable to the fringe.

    Thats why the Republican Party has lost so many members in the last few decades.  Unmitigated catering to the fringes.  If we could only get out of a woman’s uterus (and by the way I’m a Christian and I think abortion IS a sin) we would have never alienated 10s of MILLIONS of otherwise conservative women that have been swayed by that single issue.  But as a party we had to include a female body part as part of our platform.  DUMB!!!!! 

    Abortion needs to be debated in court as a SCIENTIFIC issue.  NOT though political platforms and stupid rhetoric.  Roe vs. Wade (which I have read in its entirety) is an abomination of a decision, based on ancient science, and horrible and some outright unconstitutional legal principles, and it should be thrown just on how it was written and the poor and vague principles used to justify it.  NOT by party platform.

    The Republican party’s platform should be a one pager including less government, lower taxes, more jobs, secure borders/National security, 2A and more personal freedom from government.  If we did that we’d own 90% of the people of this country.

    Everything else belongs to the states and let THEM deal with the pile of dung issues, IF they really want to step in them. 
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #35
    I'm afraid now that they banned bump stocks they will go after something else. The gun-grabbers always like to do these things in little steps hoping nobody will notice. The thing is GOA alerts me by email so none of these underhanded sneaky tricks ever get past me or other 5 million+ GOA members. GOA is my political watch dog. It's not how many dogs you have in the fight or the size of any dog in the fight: it's the size of the fight in the dog.

    Again the bump stock thing wasn't the deal-breaker that stopped me from tossing Trump my vote last November like tossing a stray dog a worn-out old bone. 
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    I get the fear of the “slippery slope” because it’s real.  We just should not use it as a blanket excuse preventing us from having reasonable discussions.
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    Even worse than the bump stock ban was the notion of "take the guns now, due process later".
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 9,595 Senior Member
    What seems to be causing victory or loss these days is simply lack of focus on the part of the voters.

    In the minds of many, it has largely become about the candidate, not the candidate's platform.  How they look and how they speak are more important than which of your freedoms they want to take or give back to you.

    Trump has the misfortune of having a decent platform while being an absolute boor.

    As to the bump stock ban, the "compromise" that many on both sides of the aisle seem willing to make is that heavily regulating full autos (which since almost anyone old enough to have had unrestricted access to them is now dead, so it's "always" been that way) is OK.  Bump stocks are just a cheesy simulation of full auto, so as long as full auto bans are OK in their mind, so is one on bump stocks.  That's a foolish battle to fight - FAR more sensible to work to change the minds of the public on the utter WRONGNESS of the NFA.

    National concealed carry is probably going to take some significant wringing out of a few things in the Supreme Court - - primarily the Constitutionality of just about ANY state-level gun or magazine ban. . .Really just about any state regulation that contradicts the B.O.R. has got to be hashed out.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 25,179 Senior Member
    GunNut said:

    That's why the Republican Party has lost so many members in the last few decades.  Unmitigated catering to the fringes.  If we could only get out of a woman’s uterus (and by the way I’m a Christian and I think abortion IS a sin) we would have never alienated 10s of MILLIONS of otherwise conservative women that have been swayed by that single issue.  But as a party we had to include a female body part as part of our platform.  DUMB!!!!! 
    THANK YOU!!!!
    This is exactly right, and so is your point about pandering to the leftist loons as well.

    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
    )O(
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 25,179 Senior Member
    GunNut said:
    I get the fear of the “slippery slope” because it’s real.
    Yes - its "incrementalism" and is used by both sides - although the Left has had better success with it.

    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
    )O(
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 25,179 Senior Member
    Bigslug said:
    In the minds of many, it has largely become about the candidate, not the candidate's platform.  How they look and how they speak are more important than which of your freedoms they want to take or give back to you.

    Trump has the misfortune of having a decent platform while being an absolute boor.

    Absolutely correct. Everyone seems to be in love with candidates who have charisma - which I don't give a tinker's damn about. Obama had charisma, Trump did not. He called them like he saw them - right or wrong - and that is something I can get behind because I do too. So much hand wringing about protocol and semantics - some of it on this very forum. I respect plain language, and I detest hand wringing.

    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
    )O(
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    zorba said:
    GunNut said:
    I get the fear of the “slippery slope” because it’s real.
    Yes - its "incrementalism" and is used by both sides - although the Left has had better success with it.

    We have gotten pretty good at it too, we just don't really appreciate it.  I can conceal carry in over 39 states with my NC license, that is second only to a national reciprocity bill which is actually looking better nowadays than it has in a long time!  10 years ago this was only a dream.  Just about every state has a CC process in place too.  Some are ridiculous but they ARE being taken to court as we speak.

    We also have states lining up for Constitutional Carry.  My state is looking into getting out of the single Pistol Purchase Permit system in place for non-CCL holders, that's huge, AND many states/cities/counties are passing or looking to pass 2A Sanctuary laws and ordinances basically pissing in the face of the into-gun movement. I have liberal friends and family that are in an actual PANIC mode, outright shaking! as they read the news.  Make me smile...

    While we don't live in 1920s when you could order firearms from the Sears Catalog, we are actually living in a good time for armed Americans.  And as much as it pains me to say this the ridiculous frequency of the left screaming for more control after every "gun violence" incident is actually starting to desensitize the average American, even their base!, and irritate most moderates as a bonus.

    In my mind they saw the swamp draining and they are doing EVERYTHING within their power, especially cheating any which way they can, to get their agenda in before we send another Trump to the White House, AND it's backfiring on them all over the place...

    Joe and Chuckles can NOT be in front of the press right now because them, Nancy and Chucky have NO clue what to do next.  They NEVER saw this coming, kind'a like the dog that caught the car, now what!?!?!?!?!??
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #43
    I prefer to say "permit-less" states rather than "Constitution Carry" states. Virtually every so-called permit-less state still has a certain degree of 'no-gun zones' and/or special zones requiring CCWs and sometimes enhanced CCW's (eg. schools, colleges, universities, polling places on election days, bars, gaming establishments). Even the term "permit-less" might be questionable. There are strings attached. There are catches. Idaho is branded "constitution carry" but it requires an enhanced permit to carry concealed on a public college campus in that state. Oklahoma is branded "constitution carry" also but it stoops so low as to make it a  felony to carry on public school/college campuses, polling paces on election days, bars, courthouses, govt, buildings and gaming establishments. One could say they are "limited constitution carry" more accurately.

    As far as I'm concerned the Second Amendment itself is a  permit to pack anywhere and everywhere on American soil a law-abiding citizen pleases. If a jurisdiction were truly "constitution carry", there would be absolutely no "gun-free zones" and no law-enforcement-issued permit requirements whatsoever. No law-abiding American should ever have to pay fees to local gubmints to carry concealed nowhere.
  • mitdr774mitdr774 Member Posts: 1,773 Senior Member
    You can do as you please, as long as you are willing to deal with the potential consequences. 

    Based on the BS that has been happening lately we can only expect more proposed and possibly passed legislation to limit things more.  A large part of that push can be placed on the actions of those that decide to make a point and go against some common decency that is expected in a civilized society.  We dont need people in a state capitol building standing on a balcony above legislators while being dressed in "tactical gear" and holding rifles in their hands.  As far as I am concerned it is attempted intimidation at that point.  When you do that you only hurt the chances of things being eased.  Its like a child throwing a tantrum because they didnt get their way.  Its a small minority ruining things for a majority.
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    edited May 2021 #45
    I prefer to say "permit-less" states rather than "Constitution Carry" states. Virtually every so-called permit-less state still has a certain degree of 'no-gun zones' and/or special zones requiring CCWs and sometimes enhanced CCW's (eg. schools, colleges, universities, polling places on election days, bars, gaming establishments). Even the term "permit-less" might be questionable. There are strings attached. There are catches. Idaho is branded "constitution carry" but it requires an enhanced permit to carry concealed on a public college campus in that state. Oklahoma is branded "constitution carry" also but it stoops so low as to make it a  felony to carry on public school/college campuses, polling paces on election days, bars, courthouses, govt, buildings and gaming establishments. One could say they are "limited constitution carry" more accurately.

    As far as I'm concerned the Second Amendment itself is a  permit to pack anywhere and everywhere on American soil a law-abiding citizen pleases. If a jurisdiction were truly "constitution carry", there would be absolutely no "gun-free zones" and no law-enforcement-issued permit requirements whatsoever. No law-abiding American should ever have to pay fees to local gubmints to carry concealed nowhere.
    And you would be completely wrong since you'd be infringing on the RIGHTS of the property owner (whether it'd be Government or Private) to decide what happens on THEIR property.  Do you allow anyone to just walk into our house without asking?  Or do you put conditions on folks that want to come into your house such as, there has to be a reason for you to be here AND you need my permission to enter/stay?

    Folks that post their property with no gun signs have the same rights you do and they can ABSOLUTELY put as a condition of entry that you do not carry a weapon into their property, Exactly the same as signs that specify you need shoes and a shirt to get service.  It is your right NOT to patronize business or other properties that will not allow you to exercise your 2A but if you do violate their right to post their property you are TRESPASSING since you did not meet the conditions they stated for you to be welcome, and in many states it is a felony or a high level misdemeanor if you are directly asked to leave and you refuse.

    Constitutional Carry applies to all public spaces, period.  Gun free zones are clearly stupid because there is no logic to them, BUT you have no right to think that you have some sort of God given right to violate another person's liberties and THEIR right to do as THEY wishes with THEIR own property or a property THEY have a right/job to manage as THEY sees fit.

    There is not one state that I can think of that allows you any kind of special carry privileges because you have a concealed carry permit or are open carrying.  If you are forbidden by law or by the property owner/manager to carry on a property, no common CC License will get you legally in if you're "packing".
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #46
    The thing is Boise State University is a PUBLIC school in the state of Idaho paid for by taxpayers. That property belongs to the people and there is no reason to restrict firearms (eg, enhanced CCW requirements) there. There is also no logic in making it a felony to bring a gun to a polling place on election days also, TX and OK.

    These "no gun zones" are not about public safety at all. I don't believe it. It's horse feces. CCW requirements are all about squeezing fee money out of people. It's a reason for firearms instructors and ammo companies to get people's bread too. It's anti-gun extortion.
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    The thing is Boise State University is a PUBLIC school in the state of Idaho paid for by taxpayers. That property belongs to the people and there is no reason to restrict firearms (eg, enhanced CCW requirements) there. There is also no logic in making it a felony to bring a gun to a polling place on election days also, TX and OK.
    Boise State University is managed by the State.  As the lawful entity managing the place it is well within their rights to enact any rules they want.  No one is forced to attend or even visit the school.

    The PEOPLE elect the state officials.  You want policy changes?  Change the current management by vote, the way the system is designed to work.

    The laws outlawing firearms at polling places were put in place because at one time in our country (not too distant past), folks were intimidated from voting or forced to vote a certain way at gun point.  The law worked and the practice stopped.  Is is still necessary?  no, but no one has complained enough about it for anyone to take it up as a priority.
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #48
    It's unlawful to unjustifiably point a gun at people anyway whether at a polling place, a horse track, a gas station or otherwise. Certainly political persuasion is no lawful excuse to point a gun at somebody. That's just plain stupid. Why not just outlaw pointing guns at people going to vote rather than hitting somebody with a felony for merely having concealed guns at voting places? Outlawing guns at polling places does leave innocent folks there vulnerable to mass shootings with no way to shoot back.

    Mass shooters will never obey no-gun zone laws. Get it through your thick skulls. It's not a school policy or rule about requiring an enhanced CCW on ANY public college or university campus in Idaho. It's a state law. If one is not even a student on the public campus, one can get arrested still and charged with a misdemeanor for not having an enhanced CCW along with the handgun they are packing if they are somehow caught.

  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    It's unlawful to unjustifiably point a gun at people anyway whether at a polling place, a horse track, a gas station or otherwise. Certainly political persuasion is no lawful excuse to point a gun at somebody. That's just plain stupid. Why not just outlaw pointing guns at people going to vote rather than hitting somebody with a felony for merely having concealed guns at voting places? Outlawing guns at polling places does leave innocent folks there vulnerable to mass shootings with no way to shoot back.

    Mass shooters will never obey no-gun zone laws. Get it through your thick skulls. It's not a school policy or rule about requiring an enhanced CCW on ANY public college or university campus in Idaho. It's a state law. If one is not even a student on the public campus, one can get arrested still and charged with a misdemeanor for not having an enhanced CCW along with the handgun they are packing if they are somehow caught.

    Yep…

    And yet, these things are law.  So your only realistic options are:

    1- Violate them after assessing risk/reward, and take your chances.
    2- Try hard to elect pro-gun politicians that will do away with them, and them pester them until they do.

    If you have an novel and expedient way other than those two, I’m all ears.  I have not found one.

    Otherwise, expending precious energy proselytizing your disdain for these laws in a online forum of relatively same minded folks is about as useless as nipples on a bull, and makes you sound like you just enjoy listening to yourself.  Not sure what you are trying to accomplish with this except wear out your keyboard sooner.

    So who are you addressing when you say things like “get it through your thick skulls”?  I hope no one here.  If it’s the population at large, may I suggest Twitter and Facebook for these rants?  You might even get a much more reactive, if not receptive, audience.
  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 7,928 Senior Member
    The laws governing polling places are serious business, made in answer to events of more recent history and consequence than may be evident at first glance. WW1 veterans helped secure against armed assault in Kansas and Missouri. 

    Right or wrong. Changes and policy regarding such places will get subjected to intense scrutiny and political theater. Well I may disagree with outcomes. I don't necessarily disagree with the process.

    Times change, but human nature as well as modus operandi remain remarkably consistent.
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #51
    I'm actually trying to get folks to see things Gun Owners of America way. I get the impression that some folks here are not as pro-gun as GOA is. I'm not suggesting doing things that will get you in trouble. It does help to belong to GOA though. And yes, pester the devil out of your elected officials. Tell them you always remember on November. Vote for as many pro-gun candidates as you can and pass it on.

    Human nature, as well as Mother Nature, is to use armed deadly force when life and limb are seriously threatened. You corner a cougar and he will use his teeth and claws.
  • JustsomedudeJustsomedude Posts: 1,359 Senior Member
    My biggest issue with everything is that people that lived well before me decided to set up this "game" called society with rules, laws and regulations and for some reason unbeknownst to me, im told that I have to take part in their game and follow all of these rules, laws and regulations that were established well before I was even conceived. I honestly came to the conclusion a long time ago that I'm not playing anymore. If I can go about my day not bothering, harming, hurting, inconveniencing or costing anyone money, then leave me alone. If theres any overlap in my life, I didnt ask to be put here anymore than the next or last guy. I'm me first and foremost.
    We've been conditioned to believe that obedience is virtuous and voting is freedom- 
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    Maybe it's just me.
  • mitdr774mitdr774 Member Posts: 1,773 Senior Member
    Ranting at this group about something that nobody in this group has the ability to change as part of their normal job or daily activities is a waste of energy and key strokes.  Your behavior and excessive pushing of GOA is enough to push me away from being associated with them in any way.  Might be a great organization, but if they have tools like you pushing them so hard I dont need to give them any of my money.

    Do as you please, but be prepared to deal with the potential consequences.  Its people like you that push anyone on the fence about policies to shift toward a more restrictive set of rules and laws.
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 25,179 Senior Member
    edited May 2021 #55
    My biggest issue with everything is that people that lived well before me decided to set up this "game" called society with rules, laws and regulations and for some reason unbeknownst to me, i'm told that I have to take part in their game and follow all of these rules, laws and regulations that were established well before I was even conceived. I honestly came to the conclusion a long time ago that I'm not playing anymore. If I can go about my day not bothering, harming, hurting, inconveniencing or costing anyone money, then leave me alone. If there's any overlap in my life, I didn't ask to be put here anymore than the next or last guy. I'm me first and foremost.
    Yep. 99.99% of it is completely arbitrary and made up and has little to no meaning in an absolute sense.
    EDIT: And I don't like games.
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
    )O(
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    I'm actually trying to get folks to see things Gun Owners of America way. I get the impression that some folks here are not as pro-gun as GOA is. I'm not suggesting doing things that will get you in trouble. It does help to belong to GOA though. And yes, pester the devil out of your elected officials. Tell them you always remember on November. Vote for as many pro-gun candidates as you can and pass it on.

    Human nature, as well as Mother Nature, is to use armed deadly force when life and limb are seriously threatened. You corner a cougar and he will use his teeth and claws.
    And what in God’s Earth drove you to that conclusion?  Actually most folks here, would make GOA  look like Boy Scouts trying out for a badge.  

    You’ve been around here mostly taking to yourself and not listening and yet you feel compelled and qualified to judge and preach to us?  That seems highly presumptuous.
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #57
    GunNut said:
    I'm actually trying to get folks to see things Gun Owners of America way. I get the impression that some folks here are not as pro-gun as GOA is. I'm not suggesting doing things that will get you in trouble. It does help to belong to GOA though. And yes, pester the devil out of your elected officials. Tell them you always remember on November. Vote for as many pro-gun candidates as you can and pass it on.

    Human nature, as well as Mother Nature, is to use armed deadly force when life and limb are seriously threatened. You corner a cougar and he will use his teeth and claws.
    And what in God’s Earth drove you to that conclusion?  Actually most folks here, would make GOA  look like Boy Scouts trying out for a badge.  

    You’ve been around here mostly taking to yourself and not listening and yet you feel compelled and qualified to judge and preach to us?  That seems highly presumptuous.

    Not listening? I have read every word in response from others to what I have posted on threads. That doesn't mean I will believe in or agree with what others say. We can all politely disagree. I'm not talking to myself. I'm typing into my Internet-connected PC. I know full well that at least one other person will read whatever I'm typing here whether they reply or not.

    I've now come to the realization that Guns & Ammo is not a place to debate gun rights. As a matter of fact, most so-called "gun" forums across the Web don't lend themselves well to the gun rights debate. It's a hot zone for a lot of flaming. There's a certain degree of anti-gunners on each and every one of them.

    From now on, I will make no more new threads on gun rights or gun control at this site. If somebody else has such thread, I may or may not decide to chime in on it.

    Since I'm not a paying member here I'm probably not held in high regard anyway.

    I probably should just limit new thread creation on the technical aspects of handguns, rifles, shotguns, shooting and hunting. If I want knowledge on using a gun lawfully and effectively for self-defense, I could just take up lessons on that matter or perhaps look at threads on that matter others have posted.

    Otherwise,  it's just me then. I rest my case.

  • PFDPFD Senior Member Posts: 1,801 Senior Member


    "I've now come to the realization that Guns & Ammo is not a place to debate gun rights. As a matter of fact, most so-called "gun" forums across the Web don't lend themselves well to the gun rights debate. It's a hot zone for a lot of flaming. There's a certain degree of anti-gunners on each and every one of them. "




    Debating gun rights on a gun forum is like promoting  vegetarianism on a PITA forum. Think of what your message is and who your audience is.
    Why spend the effort trying to convert someone who probably already agrees with you fundamentally.
    Get out there with the twitterers and Space Face crowd and mix it up!
    There's a world wide internet full of people on the fence about gun rights that are just waiting for someone to explain it to them. 😂

    That's all I got.

    Paul
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member

    Good idea, PDF. Some people here seemed to have indicated that they are personally not bothered by certain degrees or types of gun regulation. I now understand that all people on any gun forum might not see eye-to-eye on gun control or gun rights. I personally have no interest in ever owning a gun equipped with a bump stock but still the mere principle of banning those things troubles me. I figure banning bump stocks might lead to banning "assault weapons" and then semi-automatic handguns and then semi-automatic shotguns and rifles for hunting and then…. and then…. and then….. The antis like to take things away gradually, in baby steps, hoping nobody will notice until it's too late…they've reached the ultimate goal to disarm all honest Americans, period. I'm just glad I have an organization as GOA to alert me as to what's going on so those "baby steps" at least never get past my eyes unnoticed.





  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 7,642 Senior Member
    And for probably the 5th time you’ve been told, There are NO paying members here.  G&A graciously lets use use this space on their website for free.  Even the Moderators are volunteers...
  • GermanShepherdGermanShepherd Posts: 160 Member
    edited May 2021 #61
    My memory has no recollection of having been told that ever. But I will now remember that. Still, some noobs seem to get a ribbing from others by ganging up on them. Maybe longtime membership here elevates folks to a more favorable status. Yes, I have to earn respect here. It's like the soldier newly-arrived at boot camp: bottom of the barrel.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement