E4 No More

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/93716-benjamin-pioneer-airbow/

I wasn't aware that I was playing a game. In fact, I'm pretty sure I'm serious.   There is no black and white and that is the problem - particularly when the problem is allowed to fester from inaction. Absolute statements in the constitution have been perverted for the convenience of the government in the past and particularly in the courts. Example: Go yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater and see how that works out for you. Or tell a judge that you refuse to remain silent when he/she orders you to shut your mouth.   Basically, I see an erosion of our rights that is only going to get worse with time unless it's stopped. With the current political climate what it is today I see at least another 4 years of democrap rule. That will result in a flip in the SC to a decidedly liberal court that would not soon change. Delay will screw us for good.

Of course the anti's argue this, (they're retarded and incapable of understanding what a comma means), but individual gun ownership existing for >100 years AND other rulings ignoring the militias would lead me to believe that the conservative court would rule on our side of the issue. Would you prefer that it be taken up when there is a decidedly liberal slant on the court? Do you think the anti's would just let it go then?

I dunno. I don't think that the Founding Fathers all sat around agreeing that it's a good idea to set-up a "check and balance" that's to be a political animal. :shrug:

I see your point: however, SCOTUS does take culture into account. How long has it been since a well-regulated militia existed?

Yes, but is what's going on now better, (depending on where you live)? I think not, I think the biggest problem with SC is that we, the people, have allowed to become political more than constitutional. It's probably a Genie that we now can't get back in the bottle.

You're gonna give me flashbacks to my CIA days!!! :)

I got the spinning wheel of death when I tried to go to that link. :shrug:   It works in Chrome but not IE: however, what makes this petition any different from the others that I've signed. No one in the government cares, and I don't want to join their SPAM list.

He's a man of few words. :)

In cases that they have heard they've focused their rulings to fine points of law and ignored the larger points of the law. How many people do you hear ask what part of "shall not be infringed" is unclear? How many times has the 2A come under attack, but the gays got pretty much so fast-tracked into law. The same thing pretty much happened with abortion, IIRC.

See my point above.   It seems that if the SC would rule on the meaning of the 2A then much of this crap would be settled. But I guess conflict means big money to both sides, huh? Some of the stupid things I hear said just boggle the mind, like the 1A applies to electronic media but the 2A only applies to flint-locks, muskets, or hunting rifles.

Name a gun-control law.   EDIT: I just Googled and got this article from a communist rag: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/23/the-case-that-could-refine-the-2nd-amendment.html   "The Supreme Court has only twice in its history overturned a law under the Second Amendment and both cases (District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago) involved complete bans on the possession of handguns. Since 2010, the court has not taken a Second Amendment case though it has had plenty of opportunities to do so. For example, on the same day in 2014, the court refused to review three gun cases involving laws pertaining to the selling of guns to consumers across state lines and a Texas law prohibiting 18- to 20-year-olds from carrying guns in public. The justices have also declined cases upholding strict permitting procedures making it difficult for many people to carry guns in public in Maryland, New York, and New Jersey.   The National Rifle Association and other organizations hostile to gun control have been trying to get issues like these before the court for five years to no avail.

For the life of me I don't understand why the Supreme Court is allowed to kick the 2nd Amendment can on down the road? For decades I've seen the conservative-weighted SC sit on the sidelines while all of the 2nd Amendment issues are bantered around the country. They act like a soccer goalie kicking the issue back into play rather than settling it themselves.  I'm not a lawyer by any means, but isn't it the SC's job to uphold the constitution? Aren't they supposed to throw-out laws that violate the constitution, and make rulings/interpret the constitution? Why are they allowed to reject hearing cases that directly address the 2nd Amendment? I mean, regularly I hear about decisions from the SC that appear to have far less impact on the constitutional issues but get heard really quickly - such as gay marriage. WTF are these people paid for?   Someone well versed in such things needs to explain it to me, please?

I caught that. That technology is a long way off from being viable. Heck, they can't get biometrics working reliably on larger items as it is now. Invest all you want, but he can't mandate it to my knowledge, and it'd sure take congress to authorize the spending.

That would make more sense than being allergic to a baby. Most allergies are protein based, but I've never heard of a dog allergic to a human.

Companies have come to employing review writers to "review" their products for a fee. I no longer give a crap about reviews. Now site members would be a plus, but I'd sure look at their post count before I gave any credence to their review.

I've owned G22, M&Pc, Shield, and P320c. I've gotten rid of all of them in favor of the 9mm & .357 Sig. I thought that it was the platform but it's just the round doesn't do anything for me.

I don't like his crap anyway, but I had to like this. :)

Does converting my P320c .40 to .357 Sig count? I'm also getting the carry and full size parts for it as well so that I can have 3 sizes of .357 Sig. I also may break down and get a Glock 20 for the S & G's of it.

Why set myself up for failure? Ask me no questions and I'll tell you no lies. :)

Jeff Walle at Guns & Leather in Greenbrier: http://gunsandleather.com/gunsmith/   PS: I was just up there a couple of weeks ago. He has a lot of work, but due to the season people aren't in a hurry to pick their stuff up. Probably a good time to have him do this if you want it quickly.

My bad. He said 9mm. :shrug:

How does one double dose a .357 Sig? Aren't they stuffed with a normal load? Wrong powder, perhaps?

You know, the majority of those marks look like he got an airburst from the front. The deep ones look like they may have been while it was laying on the ground. Still, the force that it took to make those is incredible considering the size of the anti-personnel rounds. When I was in the Marine Corps before we re-tubed to 8" Howitzer, the 175mm rounds would fragment into shrapnel the size of my thumb. The 8" would break-up into plates. I remember visiting the FO position and watching the plates from the 8" skip across the ground powdering the granite as they went.

Consider the fact that you aren't a typical woman. I imagine that most guys are posting comments out of their experience with women concerning guns. I know that my wife's attitude and desires aren't anywhere close to yours when it comes to guns and self-defense. My wife has a .38 spl S&W 642 to have around here in case I'm not around to protect her. She does not practice with it nor harbors any will to do so. She only shoots it when I drag her with me when I go shooting. She is intolerant of semi-automatics at all, (hot brass went into her cleavage), and has very small hands that match her stature so she can't comfortable shoot the typical larger calibers even if she had a mind to do so.