GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-01-2013, 13:17   #126
.264 magnum
CLM Number 121
Charter Lifetime Member
 
.264 magnum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 16,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by railfancwb View Post
Some say that each sheriff is the SUPREME law enforcement official within his/her jurisdiction, because it is an elected position which predates the formation of the United States. In other words the sheriff trumps city police, state police, and all federal law enforcement. .


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
Hear, hear.
__________________
The Gonzales Flag - "Come and Take It!"
.264 magnum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 13:30   #127
Spiffums
I.C.P.
 
Spiffums's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Beararms View Post
You do know there are Heroes among the ranks of our Men and Women in Blue who are making a stand and making it public they will not enforce laws that strip away our gun rights. With all that is going on, it's important to know this and thank them if you have the chance to. They are putting their jobs on the line even more than they already do now. Thanks for taking time to consider this.
We know they are all in GnG.
__________________
Internet Celebrity Personality
Spiffums is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 13:32   #128
beatcop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 1,884
Quote:
Quote:



originally Posted by railfancwb

Some say that each sheriff is the SUPREME law enforcement official within his/her jurisdiction, because it is an elected position which predates the formation of the United States. In other words the sheriff trumps city police, state police, and all federal law enforcement. .


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

Quote:
Originally Posted by .264 magnum View Post
Hear, hear.
Sovereign Citizens hold that concept in high regard. It is one of their planks.

Last edited by beatcop; 03-01-2013 at 13:32..
beatcop is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 13:49   #129
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,170
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenEyes View Post
Supreme Court is not the final authority in this country and was never intended to be.

"We the People..." mean anything to you?



Mr. HE
No, your oppinion does not outweigh thier rulings.

We the people have quite a bit of power, but in terms of weighing in on what is or isn't constitutional, they are the deciding body.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 14:09   #130
HiddenEyes
It can be done
 
HiddenEyes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 40,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
No, your oppinion does not outweigh thier rulings.

We the people have quite a bit of power, but in terms of weighing in on what is or isn't constitutional, they are the deciding body.

Our founding fathers never intended for it to be that way and in fact clearly warned that it should not be that way. The Supreme Court is but one branch of government in our system of checks and balances. They are not the final word on the meaning of the constitution and should not be given that much power.




Mr. HE
__________________
Dear Mr. President, If I had a son he would look like one of the heroes you let be murdered in Benghazi.

Moi Нет sprechen español
HiddenEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 14:19   #131
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,170
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenEyes View Post
Our founding fathers never intended for it to be that way and in fact clearly warned that it should not be that way. The Supreme Court is but one branch of government in our system of checks and balances. They are not the final word on the meaning of the constitution and should not be given that much power.




Mr. HE

I don't disagree, but it is how it is (today)
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 14:29   #132
HiddenEyes
It can be done
 
HiddenEyes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 40,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I don't disagree, but it is how it is (today)

I agree that is how it is today.

It is an interesting history of how it became that way, and it tracks closely with the rise of judicial activism and the problems that has created, all of it springing from the false notion of living law. At the heart it is nothing more than people assuming for themselves more power than they have been granted, and there is nothing new about that.




Mr. HE
__________________
Dear Mr. President, If I had a son he would look like one of the heroes you let be murdered in Benghazi.

Moi Нет sprechen español
HiddenEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 14:50   #133
GunHo198
Senior Member
 
GunHo198's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tampa
Posts: 1,116
Take a look at the Abu Ghraib Prison scandal. Do you think the higher ups had no idea what was going on there? Most of those guys were just following orders, as it "Was the Law." Many were hung out to dry as scape goats in the political aftermath, and are still in prison today. Everyone has a right to refuse to obey orders that they find unjust. So before anyone thinks that there Job is worth more than the American Peoples 2nd amendment right, they should know that eventually they will have to pay the consequences down the road for treason against the American People.

Fact is, some may turn in there firearms, but most won't. There are Millions of Americans that are going to prefer that if you want there guns, your going to have to take them. Many of them have sworn the same oath to Preserve, Protect, and Defend the Constitution of the United States.
__________________
This Message Sponsored in Part by "One Angry White Guy"!
GunHo198 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 15:05   #134
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,170
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Your making the same invalid argument as the other 5 posters tried to with the Nazi attempt.


An AWB is legal , and lawful, and constitutional though you may not agree with it.


You can't draw a comparison between just following orders to an unlawful order, and following orders to a legal/lawful one.


I do not want to see a AWB pass, but if it gets the votes, it would be legal.

Personal feelings, or misinterpretations of the constitution do not hold sway to legal rulings.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 15:17   #135
railfancwb
Senior Member
 
railfancwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Shelbyville, Tennessee TN
Posts: 3,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock20 10mm View Post
Fulfilling an oath does not mean blind obedience. Sorry but a line must be drawn somewhere and those that have stepped up and said they will not enforce confiscation orders have drawn the line. They understand that the Constitution outweighs any laws that VIOLATE IT. They understand their oath much better than those that won't disobey.
Think Nuremberg... "Just following orders " did not keep a bunch of folks from hanging.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
"Never give to your friend any power that your enemy may some day inherit." -- Paul Weyrich
railfancwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 15:21   #136
Glock20 10mm
Use Linux!
 
Glock20 10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Land of Idiots and Libtards
Posts: 14,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
SC trumps your opinion.
And they can't be wrong? I beg to differ.
__________________
Using Microsoft is like playing Russian roulette with an automatic pistol... the results are always messy
"The Constitution is my Law. The Declaration of Independence my bible. And Freedom my religion." - Me
Thick skin... a must in a free society.
Glock20 10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 15:23   #137
Glock20 10mm
Use Linux!
 
Glock20 10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Land of Idiots and Libtards
Posts: 14,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
No, your oppinion does not outweigh thier rulings.

We the people have quite a bit of power, but in terms of weighing in on what is or isn't constitutional, they are the deciding body.
The real irony here is there are these documents called the Federalist papers that actually go to great lengths to explain what the founders were up to. If you read them... then look at the "findings of SC" you will find some serious discrepancies. Infringements happen because the people are ignorant in mass and lack will to say no to the government.

But there are a small group that understand history, intent and documentation and take their loyalty to freedom very seriously. This small group will be what either makes or breaks the tyrannical governance we are seeing imposed. History repeats.
__________________
Using Microsoft is like playing Russian roulette with an automatic pistol... the results are always messy
"The Constitution is my Law. The Declaration of Independence my bible. And Freedom my religion." - Me
Thick skin... a must in a free society.

Last edited by Glock20 10mm; 03-01-2013 at 15:25..
Glock20 10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 15:26   #138
Glock20 10mm
Use Linux!
 
Glock20 10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Land of Idiots and Libtards
Posts: 14,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
Your making the same invalid argument as the other 5 posters tried to with the Nazi attempt.


An AWB is legal , and lawful, and constitutional though you may not agree with it.


You can't draw a comparison between just following orders to an unlawful order, and following orders to a legal/lawful one.


I do not want to see a AWB pass, but if it gets the votes, it would be legal.

Personal feelings, or misinterpretations of the constitution do not hold sway to legal rulings.
Negative red rider, it's a direct infringement on our 2nd Amendment rights. The problem is not enough people have stepped up to tell the scotus and potus they are breaking the law.
__________________
Using Microsoft is like playing Russian roulette with an automatic pistol... the results are always messy
"The Constitution is my Law. The Declaration of Independence my bible. And Freedom my religion." - Me
Thick skin... a must in a free society.
Glock20 10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 15:49   #139
AZson
Senior Member
 
AZson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tucson
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.
Every police officer who does this I applaud everybody who thinks they should be fired forgets they work for us not the government and they are no better then the obamanation people.
__________________
G17 G27 G29 G35 G38 NRA GSSF
NEED A GOOD GUN? See your local ATF (AKA F-troop) agent. He will get you one fast and furiously.
AZson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 16:05   #140
G19G20
Status Quo 2014
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinny99 View Post
It doesn't matter what any LEO says today. When the time comes, an overwhelming majority of LEO's will take guns away from "law abiding" citizens. They will feel they are doing the right thing, they will have federal and state laws on their side and the mainstream public and media support for their actions. They will be hero's. They will be enforcing accepted laws against criminals.
I honestly don't think a majority, much less an overwhelming majority, will line up to take guns from otherwise law abiding citizens (this is considering that anyone owning a gun would by definition no longer be "law abiding" if a ban were enacted).

Cops want to go home at the end of their shift. As much as they like to dress-up and run around with their DoJ paid-for toys their desire to live trumps that when they're starting to be sent into blatantly dangerous situations against people that they know to be armed. If a confiscation order were issued, it would then not be just armed but armed and dangerous because some gun owners will shoot back. Just look how many guns are being sold in this country right now, never mind all the ammo and accessories.

It's something I learned from watching the Dorner incident unfold, particularly the last showdown. Even the most decorated and skilled of SWAT officers didn't want to set foot in that cabin while Dorner was alive. Why? Because each one of them knew the possibility of being killed was far, far greater than a raid on some stoner's house or someone selling knock-off purses or a group of illegals huddled up in a stash house. Those situations, while dangerous due to unknown variables, are infinitely safer for police than busting into people's houses and taking their guns. "Officer safety", indeed. Sometimes the best way to preserve officer safety is to not put that officer in danger in the first place and cops generally possess the same desire to survive as anyone else does. Many will refuse to participate, citing constitutional conflicts, but the real reason will be that they don't want to die trying to enforce a law they don't even agree with.

Quote:
The few that do refuse will be replaced. There are plenty of people ready to take their place. Are they well qualified,ideal canidates? No! But quantity will be more important than quality.
There may be some gung ho storm trooper types that will line up to replace but if (when?) a gun grab goes hot and the storm troopers start dying and shootouts are occurring in residential neighborhoods those lines will shrink quickly.

Just my .02.

Last edited by G19G20; 03-01-2013 at 16:16..
G19G20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 16:07   #141
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,170
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock20 10mm View Post
Negative red rider, it's a direct infringement on our 2nd Amendment rights. The problem is not enough people have stepped up to tell the scotus and potus they are breaking the law.
Reasonable regulation has long been accepted.


That your oppinion is that it's unconstitutional, does not have the slightest bit of effect on its status.

You don't have to like it, or follow it, but it's still the law.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 16:15   #142
rppnj
Senior Member
 
rppnj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.
hussein also took an oath...to uphold the Constitution...he should be the one to be fired.
__________________
'Life is tough...it's even tougher if you're stupid!'
-John Wayne

'Integrity is who you are and what you do when no one is watching.'
-rppnj
rppnj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 16:40   #143
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
...with their DoJ paid-for toys their desire to live trumps that when they're starting to be sent into blatantly dangerous situations against people that they know to be armed. ...

It's something I learned from watching the Dorner incident unfold, particularly the last showdown. Even the most decorated and skilled of SWAT officers didn't want to set foot in that cabin while Dorner was alive. Why? Because each one of them knew the possibility of being killed was far, far greater than a raid on some stoner's house ... real reason will be that they don't want to die trying to enforce a law they don't even agree with.

There may be some gung ho storm trooper types that will line up to replace but if (when?) a gun grab goes hot and the storm troopers start dying and shootouts are occurring in residential neighborhoods those lines will shrink quickly.

Just my .02.
There might be a bit of disconnect here. Believe it or not every day officers attempt to confront violent armed felons. Most every hour somewhere in the nation, officers go after and into some building with the intent to confront and arrest or stop if necessary someone who is "blatantly dangerous."


And if you think the "most decorated and skilled"
SWAT officers have never dealt with others like Dorner
you may well be mistaken. Sometimes they elect to wait and sometimes they elect to go in

But you don't have to believe me. But before you start thinking you know what level of danger officers are willing and perhaps more importantly are not willing to face, you probably should pose some questions to them instead of making some (very poor) assumptions about what they think is unacceptable from a danger standpoint. If you wish some potential answers instead of your own assumptions, consider asking some questions here in the Cop Talk section.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
Reasonable regulation has long been accepted.


That your oppinion is that it's unconstitutional, does not have the slightest bit of effect on its status.

You don't have to like it, or follow it, but it's still the law.
Whether we like it or not just because we don't like something does not mean it is Unconstitutional. I concur that a ruling from a high court is necessary unless there is by chance widespread agreement from large segments of society on both sides of a specific issue. There may be some activities that one could safely say are not Constitutional absent an actual court ruling. But I would suggest that this is not one of those.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 16:57   #144
Paul53
Geezer Boomer
 
Paul53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Rosa's Cantina
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.
My soldier daughter says in the Army there's overwhelming feeling that the Constitution doesn't allow them to disarm civilians without very strong reasons to do so. Note that in New Orleans only LEO's were disarming civilians. The military wasn't asked to do so, but had already come out against.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights are the law of the land and all laws must be measured against them.
__________________
Just had lunch at The Rod and Gun Club. Finally realized that in "philly cheese steak," philly isn't referring to Philadelphia.

Paul53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 17:00   #145
BobbyS
You Talkin ToMe
 
BobbyS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: In The Noise
Posts: 2,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
There might be a bit of disconnect here. Believe it or not every day officers attempt to confront violent armed felons. Most every hour somewhere in the nation, officers go after and into some building with the intent to confront and arrest or stop if necessary someone who is "blatantly dangerous."


And if you think the "most decorated and skilled"
SWAT officers have never dealt with others like Dorner
you may well be mistaken. Sometimes they elect to wait and sometimes they elect to go in

But you don't have to believe me. But before you start thinking you know what level of danger officers are willing and perhaps more importantly are not willing to face, you probably should pose some questions to them instead of making some (very poor) assumptions about what they think is unacceptable from a danger standpoint. If you wish some potential answers instead of your own assumptions, consider asking some questions here in the Cop Talk section.




Whether we like it or not just because we don't like something does not mean it is Unconstitutional. I concur that a ruling from a high court is necessary unless there is by chance widespread agreement from large segments of society on both sides of a specific issue. There may be some activities that one could safely say are not Constitutional absent an actual court ruling. But I would suggest that this is not one of those.
So what you are saying is; A tyranical gov. and it's SC make BS laws that go againt our constitution should be followed right on down the line.

Even though they bastardize the constitution with bad law after bad law. They will stay in business as long as the brainwashed sheeple keep voting them in. Though it's wrong acording to our constitution, we should bend over, grin and take it.
__________________
I don't mind shooting, as long as the right person gets shot! - D. Harry
BobbyS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 17:46   #146
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,140
There is a huge difference between tyranny and a law passed in one state that limits magazine capacity. People who have actually lived under tyranny probably could explain that better than I. It may pay to remember that more people can carry in more places than twenty or thirty years ago. If we look at the trend over the last couple decades we may not actually be falling into tyranny.


But no, that is not at all what was my point. The first point was that if police elect to not do an entry it probably is not from fear. And my second point is that one of the ideas that continues to keep our nation strong is that what is not Constitutional cannot be decided by a relatively small special interest group that equates seven round magazines with the collapse of western civilization.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 17:48   #147
G19G20
Status Quo 2014
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
There might be a bit of disconnect here. Believe it or not every day officers attempt to confront violent armed felons. Most every hour somewhere in the nation, officers go after and into some building with the intent to confront and arrest or stop if necessary someone who is "blatantly dangerous."
I do believe they (as a whole, not to a man) confront violent felons and get into blatantly dangerous situations on a daily basis. The instances where they devolve into shootouts and life or death situations is very rare however. Come on, you know this is true. Raiding people's houses with the sole intent to disarm is an entirely different ball game, especially once people start shooting. How many houses a day is the average cop willing to bust into knowing the person inside may start shooting? Im not talking about the occasional swat raid to serve a warrant here. Im talking about day in and day out running up in people's houses for no other reason than they own guns. The odds are against the cop in the long run. Apples and oranges.

Quote:
And if you think the "most decorated and skilled"
SWAT officers have never dealt with others like Dorner
you may well be mistaken. Sometimes they elect to wait and sometimes they elect to go in.
Or sometimes they just set the house on fire so they don't have to make that decision and risk their lives by confronting someone they know will shoot back. I don't agree with how Dorner was handled but I completely understand why it went down that way. That solidified to me that once the people start shooting back (and they will), most cop's own survival instincts kick in and suddenly "the job" is just...well, a job.

Quote:
But you don't have to believe me. But before you start thinking you know what level of danger officers are willing and perhaps more importantly are not willing to face, you probably should pose some questions to them instead of making some (very poor) assumptions about what they think is unacceptable from a danger standpoint. If you wish some potential answers instead of your own assumptions, consider asking some questions here in the Cop Talk section.
Maybe the difference is that I don't put police on a pedestal as if they're fearless and superhuman. They're no different than me, just people with an occasionally dangerous job, and possess the same basic instincts that I do, such as the will to survive. I don't have to ask anyone questions about that to know the answers. No one needs to explain human nature to me. Once the storm troopers start falling and collateral damage rises from a gun grab, a cop doing his job turns into a cop with a death wish. Btw, do notice I was countering the assertion by another poster that an "overwhelming majority" would participate in a gun grab. I didn't say none would.

Last edited by G19G20; 03-01-2013 at 17:54..
G19G20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 17:56   #148
GunHo198
Senior Member
 
GunHo198's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tampa
Posts: 1,116
Ever wonder why you can't Finance a gun? It's because they are extremely hard to Repo! I'd like to see Lizard Lick Towing try that!
__________________
This Message Sponsored in Part by "One Angry White Guy"!
GunHo198 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 17:56   #149
Big Bird
NRA Life Member
 
Big Bird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
So if you walked up to your boss and said, I object to doing what you pay me to do, what exactly do you think would be his recourse?


Thats exactly what those cops are saying. We're not going to do our jobs, and you can't make us do it.

Complete and utter horse crap.
If you substitute Nazi Death Camp guards for Cops you have your answer.

Its one thing to follow orders. Its another to take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and then clearly violate that oath.

At some point you have to make a judgement call...

Is it a lawful order? Does it violate my oath?
__________________
Big Bird,

“Est Nulla Via Invia Virute”
Big Bird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 18:00   #150
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,140
Perhaps you have never seen a gas grenade work. I am quite confident that the police did not intentionally start a fire. And the difference between the twenty officers entering the home and the occupant inside is that the one inside who resists will nearly always loose. I am not putting the police on a pedestal. But I am suggesting that in most any confrontation of people who are about equally armed and about equally skilled the clear advantage probably regularly goes to the side that has the twenty to one advantage and even more so when that side has some training and experience that the side with one does not.

And also that we are still a few weeks away from that scenario.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 16:41.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,267
408 Members
859 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42