Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-10-2013, 20:47   #61
thetoastmaster
NOT a sheepdog!
 
thetoastmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: One Nation, Under Surveillance
Posts: 5,274
Send a message via ICQ to thetoastmaster Send a message via AIM to thetoastmaster
My question for the hypothetical business owner: Does he or she agree to be responsible for my safety, civilly, criminally, morally, and spiritually, while I am disarmed at his or her place of business?
__________________
This is the law:
There is no possible victory in defense,
The sword is more important than the shield,
And skill is more important than either,
The final weapon is the brain.
All else is supplemental.

- John Steinbeck

2+2≠4!
thetoastmaster is offline  
Old 05-10-2013, 20:49   #62
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
As I read this I think people are confused as to who has what right.

I have the right to keep and bear arms (2nd amendment) obvious right. This is TRUE.

Business owner has to right to keep me off of their property because I have a gun. This is FALSE. Their right, they have the right to ask me to leave their business at any time for any reason whether I have a gun or not, whether a sign is posted or not. If I refuse, then I am guilty of trespass.

Me simply entering their store regardless of the presence of a sign is NOT infringing anyhow on their actual right, they can still ask me to leave, which is what they have the right to do.

If that store has a sign that says "no shoes no shirt no service" and I walk in there without a short and without shoes, am I violating the property owner's rights? No. That sign set's the expectation that I will most likely be denied service by them, which IS their right.

In the same way a no guns sign sets the expectation that if they see it or somehow ascertain that I have a firearm the will likely ask me to leave, as is their right.

Me simple walking into the store with my concealed firearm is NOT violating anyone's rights. I fully accept the fact that I may be asked to leave and I will if I am asked.

Will I go to the store in the future, probably not if I can help it. But, I am not going to not go in and drive across town to get what I want/need whatever the case is somewhere else. I will go in and get what I need. As long as they don't see my gun there would be no reason for them to ask me to leave.

And I won't just disarm myself because in my opinion they are more likely a target than a store that does not have such a sign therefore I believe it to be more likely I may need my firearm to defend myself or others. After all what that sign really says, is "Rob this store, our customer's have been disarmed for your convenience." My safety is too important for me to just disarm myself.

And ultimately this is all legal...in my state at least. Truth be told I live in the gun friendly part of Washington, I have yet to run across a no guns sign, besides where its actually unlawful (ie schools). On the same note if I was visiting a school for some reason and I properly secured my gun in my car in the parking lot (as state law permits me to do, I just can't carry into the building) and someone starts shooting up the place I would not hesitate to run out to my car, retrieve my Glock and run into the school with my gun (thus violating state and federal law) to defend those inside. You have to make choices. I have made mine.

But please don't treat me like I am a horrible person for ignoring the sign or accuse me of violating anyone's rights because as I have mentioned I am not!)

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-10-2013 at 21:10..
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-10-2013, 20:53   #63
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by thetoastmaster View Post
My question for the hypothetical business owner: Does he or she agree to be responsible for my safety, civilly, criminally, morally, and spiritually, while I am disarmed at his or her place of business?
Just because you are armed is still no guarantee of your safety. would a gun have helped you if you had been standing next to one of the bombs in Boston?
and you have to decide if the risk is acceptable
Nobody and nothing "guarantees" anyone's safety. It is a free choice you make if you decided to abide by the business owner's rules. You are free to do business else where if not.

This idea that there is such a thing as "safety", and that someone else can be responsible for it, has led us to this era of stupid lawsuits.
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-10-2013, 21:51   #64
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
As I read this I think people are confused as to who has what right.

I have the right to keep and bear arms (2nd amendment) obvious right. This is TRUE.

Business owner has to right to keep me off of their property because I have a gun. This is FALSE. Their right, they have the right to ask me to leave their business at any time for any reason whether I have a gun or not, whether a sign is posted or not. If I refuse, then I am guilty of trespass.

Me simply entering their store regardless of the presence of a sign is NOT infringing anyhow on their actual right, they can still ask me to leave, which is what they have the right to do.

If that store has a sign that says "no shoes no shirt no service" and I walk in there without a short and without shoes, am I violating the property owner's rights? No. That sign set's the expectation that I will most likely be denied service by them, which IS their right.

In the same way a no guns sign sets the expectation that if they see it or somehow ascertain that I have a firearm the will likely ask me to leave, as is their right.

Me simple walking into the store with my concealed firearm is NOT violating anyone's rights. I fully accept the fact that I may be asked to leave and I will if I am asked.

Will I go to the store in the future, probably not if I can help it. But, I am not going to not go in and drive across town to get what I want/need whatever the case is somewhere else. I will go in and get what I need. As long as they don't see my gun there would be no reason for them to ask me to leave.

And I won't just disarm myself because in my opinion they are more likely a target than a store that does not have such a sign therefore I believe it to be more likely I may need my firearm to defend myself or others. After all what that sign really says, is "Rob this store, our customer's have been disarmed for your convenience." My safety is too important for me to just disarm myself.

And ultimately this is all legal...in my state at least. Truth be told I live in the gun friendly part of Washington, I have yet to run across a no guns sign, besides where its actually unlawful (ie schools). On the same note if I was visiting a school for some reason and I properly secured my gun in my car in the parking lot (as state law permits me to do, I just can't carry into the building) and someone starts shooting up the place I would not hesitate to run out to my car, retrieve my Glock and run into the school with my gun (thus violating state and federal law) to defend those inside. You have to make choices. I have made mine.

But please don't treat me like I am a horrible person for ignoring the sign or accuse me of violating anyone's rights because as I have mentioned I am not!)

Texas Penal Code

Sec. 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.(b) For purposes of this section:(1) "Entry" means the intrusion of the entire body.(2) "Notice" means:(A) oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders or to contain livestock;(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;

This basic logic is found in many other states as well.

I don't think you're a horrible person but you are violating their rights by entering their business after being notified that they didn't want you there.
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence Ö from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable Ö the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference ó they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline  
Old 05-10-2013, 22:02   #65
thetoastmaster
NOT a sheepdog!
 
thetoastmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: One Nation, Under Surveillance
Posts: 5,274
Send a message via ICQ to thetoastmaster Send a message via AIM to thetoastmaster
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Just because you are armed is still no guarantee of your safety. would a gun have helped you if you had been standing next to one of the bombs in Boston?
and you have to decide if the risk is acceptable
Nobody and nothing "guarantees" anyone's safety. It is a free choice you make if you decided to abide by the business owner's rules. You are free to do business else where if not.

This idea that there is such a thing as "safety", and that someone else can be responsible for it, has led us to this era of stupid lawsuits.
I bear responsibility for my own safety, and take reasonable steps to secure the same. When another denies me same protections he or she assumes responsibility for the protections I abdicated unwillingly.

Frivolous or not, it does open doors for litigation if one could show a jury that removing said protections exacerbated an already bad situation.

Regarding my first point, this is what I think when I see a "no guns" sign: Is this party going to keep me safe?

No? Guess I am keeping my pistol exactly where it is, then.
__________________
This is the law:
There is no possible victory in defense,
The sword is more important than the shield,
And skill is more important than either,
The final weapon is the brain.
All else is supplemental.

- John Steinbeck

2+2≠4!
thetoastmaster is offline  
Old 05-10-2013, 22:20   #66
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by thetoastmaster View Post
I bear responsibility for my own safety, and take reasonable steps to secure the same. When another denies me same protections he or she assumes responsibility for the protections I abdicated unwillingly.

Frivolous or not, it does open doors for litigation if one could show a jury that removing said protections exacerbated an already bad situation.

Regarding my first point, this is what I think when I see a "no guns" sign: Is this party going to keep me safe?

No? Guess I am keeping my pistol exactly where it is, then.
If it was an already bad situation why did you enter?

You cannot prove that your firearm would have changed any outcome. Now if you were wearing body armor and there was a "no body armor" sign, you removed your armor, and were subsequently hit in a place the armor might have covered, then you might, maybe have some legs there.

You were incomplete control over your choice to enter or not. You decided that the risk was acceptable.

There is no assumption that going into a business is inherently dangerous. There are far too many examples of people doing so without being harmed, everyday, to prove that there is an abnormal risk.

Show some case law that proves a successful claim to support this position. I think you will find it very difficult to hold a business owner responsible, for the sudden,random act of an unstable person. You will also find that the Courts tend to side with business owners in such cases and do not consider the "no firearms" rule to be unreasonable.
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-10-2013, 22:53   #67
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by actionshooter10 View Post
Texas Penal Code

Sec. 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.(b) For purposes of this section:(1) "Entry" means the intrusion of the entire body.(2) "Notice" means:(A) oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders or to contain livestock;(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;

This basic logic is found in many other states as well.

I don't think you're a horrible person but you are violating their rights by entering their business after being notified that they didn't want you there.
Under Texas law, the problem is I'm not in Texas. And even if your state law does give force to those signs, entering is NOT violating the property owners right. Laws don't give rights., you personally would just simply be breaking the law, that simple.
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 00:28   #68
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Under Texas law, the problem is I'm not in Texas. And even if your state law does give force to those signs, entering is NOT violating the property owners right. Laws don't give rights., you personally would just simply be breaking the law, that simple.
Do you own property?

Do you have the right to keep people off of your property that you don't want there?

So do they.

Your rights end where theirs begin...and their rights end where yours begin.

You have the right to carry your firearm for your protection.

You have the right not to disarm and not to enter their property.

You do not have the right to carry that firearm on private property where the owner lets you know that you're not welcome.

You may not be violating the law in your state but you are violating the property owners right to control who is allowed on the property.

I understand you don't like this but your previous posts show you understand it.
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence Ö from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable Ö the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference ó they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 00:47   #69
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by actionshooter10 View Post
Do you own property?

Do you have the right to keep people off of your property that you don't want there?

So do they.

Your rights end where theirs begin...and their rights end where yours begin.

You have the right to carry your firearm for your protection.

You have the right not to disarm and not to enter their property.

You do not have the right to carry that firearm on private property where the owner lets you know that you're not welcome.

You may not be violating the law in your state but you are violating the property owners right to control who is allowed on the property.

I understand you don't like this but your previous posts show you understand it.
Its not about liking or disliking anything. Please read my previous posts. Its about the fact they are a business and have opened up their property to the public, at that point I have the right to enter with or without a gun. If they don't like it then THEN have the right to ask me to leave.

The no gun sign, that sets the expectation that I may be asked to leave. Now in your state it doesn't just set the expectation it is actually prohibitive under the law, that's different than the property owner's rights.

If I have not been asked to leave then I am welcomed in regardless of any sign posted. That's what having a business is, your property is open to the public unless you ask them to leave and/or not come back.

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-11-2013 at 01:06..
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 05:13   #70
user
VaLegalDefense
 
user's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Va. and West Va.
Posts: 1,247
In Virginia, that would be an act of criminal trespass (not a violation of any firearms regulation) that could get you twelve months in jail and a $2500 fine. I just keep out - I don't need to be with people like that, and when stores are posted, I vote with my dollars.
__________________
Nothing I say as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice. Legal questions should be presented to a competent attorney licensed to practice in the relevant state.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
user is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 06:11   #71
SouthernBoyVA
Senior Member
 
SouthernBoyVA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Western Prince William County, VA
Posts: 3,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by user View Post
In Virginia, that would be an act of criminal trespass (not a violation of any firearms regulation) that could get you twelve months in jail and a $2500 fine. I just keep out - I don't need to be with people like that, and when stores are posted, I vote with my dollars.
Yes.

Question user. Suppose you have a neighbor who owns a jewelry store and his store has a prominently displayed No Guns sign. You enter armed, he sees you, you point to the sign, and he says, "That's okay, don't worry about it. I know you". Doesn't he have the right to waive the sign and allow you to stay in his place of business while perhaps demanding others to leave?
__________________
In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?
SouthernBoyVA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 06:21   #72
dugo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Wrong.

If a sign is legally posted there is no burden of proof on the poster with regards to your reading it. Just as it does not have to be proven that you read a "No Parking" sign in order for you to be ticketed.

Different State laws apply as to penalty or none at all, but "I didn't see the sign" is not an excuse. In fact, in my State, it is part and parcel of the permit rues that you read and obey such postings to retain your permit.

The onus is on the bearer.
The status of such signs seems to vary a good deal from state to state. In the states where I have looked, as long as the sign was posted properly (prescribed in the statute), then it doesn't matter whether the carrier saw it or not. It still counts.

Other places, maybe they must actually see it, and still others maybe the signs are only advisory and someone has to ask you to leave before you are trespassing. (BUT: I would think that if you see the sign, and transgress, that you could be guilty of trespassing almost anywhere, since "trespassing after notice"-type theories would apply.)

Last edited by dugo; 05-11-2013 at 06:22..
dugo is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 06:26   #73
dugo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernBoyVA View Post
Yes.

Question user. Suppose you have a neighbor who owns a jewelry store and his store has a prominently displayed No Guns sign. You enter armed, he sees you, you point to the sign, and he says, "That's okay, don't worry about it. I know you". Doesn't he have the right to waive the sign and allow you to stay in his place of business while perhaps demanding others to leave?

I would think the answer is "yes", since the sign is a function of the owner's intention, and not required by law. The only problem would be if the owner doesn't own up to it later.
dugo is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 06:50   #74
b_oglethorpe
Senior Member
 
b_oglethorpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 346
If it is my house, and I see a weapon on you. I'm not asking you to leave, you are going to leave but you are going to have earned some extra holes in you. Maybe those will help you listen.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
b_oglethorpe is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 06:51   #75
AXaxiom
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 35
All I see here is what is Legal, legal this and legal that. Where is the personally held morality and integrity anymore, does it exist in this world anymore?

Do we not hold ourselves to the same accountability as we hold others?

We are to judge others by their actions but judge ourselves by our intentions? This breeds only disrespect for others and their property. It’sOK if not caught attitude is why we require lawyers. Can we not internally police ourselves and do what is right only because it is the right thing to do?

You people keep doing what you can get away with and argue how to perceive the law in your best interest and I’ll choose to do the right thing just because I try to hold my personal integrity above the law.

Last edited by AXaxiom; 05-11-2013 at 07:59..
AXaxiom is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 06:57   #76
Ryobi
SummertimeRules
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,416
You can't expect maturity from everyone. Permit holder carry where posted is like drunk driving: if it wasn't clear to them it was a bad idea in the first place, no amount of explaining is likely to turn their light bulb on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AXaxiom View Post
All I see here is what is Legal, legal this and legal that. Where is the personally held morality and integrity anymore, does it exist in this world anymore?

Do we not hold ourselves to the same accountability as we hold others?

We are to judge others by their actions but judge ourselves by our intentions? This breads only disrespect for others and their property. ItísOK if not caught attitude is why we require lawyers. Can we not internally police ourselves and do what is right only because it is the right thing to do?

You people keep doing what you can get away with and argue how to perceive the law in your best interest and Iíll choose to do the right thing just because I try to hold my personal integrity above the law.
Ryobi is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 08:43   #77
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernBoyVA View Post
Yes.

Question user. Suppose you have a neighbor who owns a jewelry store and his store has a prominently displayed No Guns sign. You enter armed, he sees you, you point to the sign, and he says, "That's okay, don't worry about it. I know you". Doesn't he have the right to waive the sign and allow you to stay in his place of business while perhaps demanding others to leave?
That's a great point. Another reason why I say the sign sets an expectation that you may be asked to leave for carrying a firearm but ultimately the owner or store management may decide not to enforce it. Maybe because they know you. Maybe because its a large corporation that has a national policy of no firearms in its stores and posts on each store, but the local management is more gun friendly and don't care and thus don't enforce it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AXaxiom View Post
All I see here is what is Legal, legal this and legal that. Where is the personally held morality and integrity anymore, does it exist in this world anymore?

Do we not hold ourselves to the same accountability as we hold others?

We are to judge others by their actions but judge ourselves by our intentions? This breeds only disrespect for others and their property. ItísOK if not caught attitude is why we require lawyers. Can we not internally police ourselves and do what is right only because it is the right thing to do?

You people keep doing what you can get away with and argue how to perceive the law in your best interest and Iíll choose to do the right thing just because I try to hold my personal integrity above the law.
That is a very good point, the different between what it ethical/moral/right and what is legal. Reminds me of my college ethics class, we were asked to describe something that is not ethical but legal, and something that was ethical but not legal.

Ultimately it comes down to the sign. Is carrying where the sign says not to ethical/moral? We each have our own moral beliefs. Overall what is ultimately moral i believe is something that come from the creator, God. Now for those who don't believe in a God you can just substitute your own personal morality.

I think a lot of people operate on their own personal morality, and when the morality is shall we say questionable that's why the government steps in with laws, to define boundaries that are not to be crossed, and if they are they set penalties.

A sign is a sign, it inherently is not prohibitive. Why well I think there are several reasons but one, I don't really know the posters intention in posting it. Now some states like Texas law makers have written laws to give the sign a prohibitive nature, the reason for the law, the sign in some moral views is not prohibitive. Am I any more right or wrong to say it is not prohibitive compared to someone who says it is?

Morality can be viewed two ways..absolute or relative. I think its both, I believe there is a absolute morality guided by the creator of the universe (not to try to make this a religious argument feel free to disagree). Then we each have our choice of our own morality, for me I try to keep it inline with what I see as the absolute morality, what is really the right thing to do.

So it is right or moral to ignore the sign? Is it right or moral to follow the sign? I say both, as I mentioned you don't know who posted the sign or what their intentions were in posting it. Maybe its left over from a previous business and the new business hasn't remove it because they didn't notice it, or just haven't often around to it. Maybe its posted by the building owner but the business inside welcomes legally carried firearms and is trying to get permission to remove the sign. Whole other discussion on property owner vs business owner rights there.

Most people will say the second amendment gives us the right to carry firearms. I actually have to disagree personally I believe it confirms our God given right to defend ourselves from criminals and tyranny. As such I believe it to be right and moral to carry whenever possible.

I also support the owner's right to restrict who is in his business, and what he allows there, the business owner exercises this by asking people to leave and or not return.

But signs by nature are not restrictive. Think of a city that posts no parking signs throughout, but has no law about parking on the books.

What is the intention of the sign, no parking during certain hours, no parking unless you have written permission of the police? they mayor? A law must be on the books to give the sign its prohibitive nature because naturally it has none on its own, because the law will make assumptions of what this signs intentions are to make it clear to all.
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 08:49   #78
Fear Night
NRA Life Member
 
Fear Night's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Posts: 3,853
I find it hard to respect anybody that thinks a "gun free zone" makes them any safer.

Concealed is concealed. If you happen to get caught, explain that you missed the sign and leave immediately. Then take your business elsewhere.

The signs carry no force of law in AL, but if you refuse to leave at the request of the owner, you can get hit with trespassing.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Fear Night; 05-11-2013 at 09:02..
Fear Night is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 09:43   #79
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Its not about liking or disliking anything. Please read my previous posts. Its about the fact they are a business and have opened up their property to the public, at that point I have the right to enter with or without a gun. If they don't like it then THEN have the right to ask me to leave.

The no gun sign, that sets the expectation that I may be asked to leave. Now in your state it doesn't just set the expectation it is actually prohibitive under the law, that's different than the property owner's rights.

If I have not been asked to leave then I am welcomed in regardless of any sign posted. That's what having a business is, your property is open to the public unless you ask them to leave and/or not come back.
You've referenced "rights" several times.

I believe you and I have a different definition of "rights".

In your opinion:

Where do rights come from?

What protects these rights?

Are these rights defined somewhere?
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence Ö from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable Ö the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference ó they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 10:40   #80
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Why do I get the feeling this thread is no longer a civil discussion?

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-11-2013 at 10:45..
Ryan WA is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

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 11:56.




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


Users Currently Online: 1,210
316 Members
894 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31