Mossyoak
Never enough
Not to mention that in a lot of cases the mentally ill attacker turns the gun on himself when a good guy with a gun shows up.
Fixed for more clarity.
Calguns had another good one, I'm paraphrasing. If one in every 20 ducks could shoot back, nobody would go hunting.
Fixed for more clarity.
Calguns had another good one, I'm paraphrasing. If one in every 20 ducks could shoot back, nobody would go hunting.
Posted on a lib 'acquiantance's' Facebook page. Sad.
But I need the one line comeback. Maybe that one kid would think twice if everyone had rocks.
View attachment 160853
We should collect these stories. Having them scattered about is great, but it would be good to set up a site similar to the anti's, ie Shooting Tracker.
http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Main_Page
that's so insane as they would say make common sense changes and this is not even on the table or talked aboutGun Free Zones are here to stay. Regrettably. Because people with guns, in their minds, are lower than whale crap. We're not welcome in their world.
And each side is so entrenched right now that no middle ground will ever be reached and BHO knows it.
We are right. They are right. Stalemate!
There is only one way to break a stalemate.
So we should insist that owners of "gun free zones" carry massacre insurance.
If I'm not mistaken, that came from one of the Plaintiffs during oral arguments in Peruta when it was at the District level. I believe the original quote was:
“If 5% OF THE DUCKS SHOOT BACK, “NO ONE” WOULD GO DUCK HUNTING”
Private establishments can still make their own rules.
Exactly, WTF, the .gov can force a Christian to bake a cake to recognize a right that is not enumerated in COTUS but they can't give me a pass for carrying gun (an enumerated right) into a business that serves the general public?I will never understand this line of thinking. If self defense is a fundamental right then it is equal to other fundamental rights. So since a private establishment cannot refuse service because of gender, for example, that same establishment should not be able to refuse service because of a person's right to self defense.
That gem came from Chuck Michel to Federal District Court Judge Irma Gonzales. He is and was the NRA attorney for Peruta Vs SD Sheriff against 5 individual plantiffs and one institutional (CRPA) plaintiff.
He brought the house down and the judge appeared impressed, at least at that moment.
Proud Peruta co plaintiff,
Mark Cleary