Recommended Posts
dbattman 0
I remember hearing this on the news. Well, there is no entrance exam for being a crook.
skydyvr 0
QuoteOut of curiosity, I ran a search on "gun or bullet" posted by JohnRich and came up with 202 hits, which is close to one-third (about 32%) of JohnRich's total post number of 636.
The point being? Well...the phrase "broken record" comes to mind.
Broken record or not, chasing the gun threads here lately has been fun.
JohnRich reminds me of Hulk Hogan taking on all comers in a wrastlin' ring, kicking each and everyone's ass without hesitation.
Brings a smile to my face, it does . . .

. . =(_8^(1)
Quote
My point:
(Drumroll please)
JohnRich seems to have taken anti-Gun Control as his pet cause.
Why do you keep saying this?
Why...because JohnRich keeps asking me!

A One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All
bmcd308 0
>>Model rocket motors are already restricted by BATFE. <<
I know. And I think that is silly. We used to fly K motors at a field pretty close by. I don't know anyone who still deals with the hassles associated with the post-OK City LEUP rules.
----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com
I know. And I think that is silly. We used to fly K motors at a field pretty close by. I don't know anyone who still deals with the hassles associated with the post-OK City LEUP rules.
----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com
kallend 2,121
QuoteQuoteI think a great deal more could be done than is done in requiring training, both initial and recurrent, for gun owners.
I would like to see more training, but you run into a problem when you require it in order to exercise a Constitutional right. It would be like mandating a reading test in order to be allowed to vote, or requiring a Journalism degree in order to exercise freedom of speech.
...
The 2nd amemdment specifically mentions "well regulated", so I see no problem with requiring training. If you wish to exercise that right, you comply with the rest of the sentence too.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,121
QuoteQuoteKallend, I posed to two very direct questions to you regarding this issue. I do respect you as an intelligent and generally articulate individual. I'd appreciate it if you took the time to answer them.
From my past experience with Kallend, it is my observation that he generally doesn't like to offer-up his own evidence for something, or to put forth his own theories. I suppose that is because that opens him up to criticism, to which he wouldn't like to respond. He prefers to sit on the sidelines and snipe at others who contribute. What is good for the other's geese, is not good for Kallend's gander.
I already answered him

...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Luv2Fall 0
http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/2747895/detail.html
http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/2747895/detail.html
ChileRelleno-Rodriguez Bro#414
Hellfish#511,MuffBro#3532,AnvilBro#9, D24868
ChileRelleno-Rodriguez Bro#414
Hellfish#511,MuffBro#3532,AnvilBro#9, D24868
Luv2Fall 0
Thanks!
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites