JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
The trouble with "Advertising" like in the OP...
Is that you may find customers , so to speak.
As in people who will do things in order for you to follow through with what the sign says.
Andy
That may be true of bumperstickers that say "don't follow too close, I don't want to get hit again" (I know this from personal experience - although I think the guy who hit me was texting, and not reading my bumpersticker), but not sure anyone wants to get shot. In Russia they do jump out in front of cars in order extort money, but they usually only do this with slow moving or stopped cars - they also slam on their brakes or even back into you, which is why a lot of people there have cams recording in their cars - here too.
 
I noted a lot of posts questioning the intelligence of criminals. The really dangerous street thugs, while dangerous, are the norm. The really smart ones wear suits and change their first names to Congressman, Senator, Mayor, Etc.....

They can take your stuff and $$, never have to enter your home at all. Now that's smart.:s0115:
 
Last Edited:
I prefer this:

51n1a7ocb6L._AC_SX355_.jpg
 
I'm sure you're a good guy, and I'm sure you believe that…. but just based on your three posts in this thread that you stated as fact, yet were quickly pointed out (with precedented examples) as incorrect, (respectfully put) gives me some doubts about your confidence…. but hey, you do you!



Better call Saul Goodman! ;):D
Thanks. I am a good guy and confident. I owned my mistake a couple times, said I mispoke and that I was wrong. What else would you like a man to do!?
 
These are actually the kinds of voters we need to ensure 17 and 18 (if they make the ballot) don't pass. We should be embracing these communities and remind them if those initiatives pass, they'll be at more risk for the day to day violence they're already experiencing.
 
These are actually the kinds of voters we need to ensure 17 and 18 (if they make the ballot) don't pass. We should be embracing these communities and remind them if those initiatives pass, they'll be at more risk for the day to day violence they're already experiencing.
problem is most folks have no idea that these laws affect 99% honest people.

i got into a mild debate with a cousin at christmas dinner one year.. she was always posting all this anti-gun bubblegum on FB, and was asking me why i had the position on guns that i do.. she said something like "i get all that, thats fine, whatever, but its the automatics that nobody should have."

"automatics? like FULL automatics?"

"yea! yall redneck motherbubblegumers can have all the guns you want, fine, but the automatics we have to do something about!"

"fully automatic guns have been effectively banned since 1934, and even those few in circulation after that were effectively banned again in '84"

"huh?"

she actually thought "semiautomatic" or "automatic" meant fully automatic

this is the type of retarded bubblegum we are up against. people dont even realize what "the problem" even actually is, and dont even realize that all the proposals for "solving" it absolutely do not. they just assume a gun law is going to specifically target a certain kind or criminal and law abiding gun owners wont be affected.

its kinda hard to wrap your mind around how oblivious most folks really are on this bubblegum
 
problem is most folks have no idea that these laws affect 99% honest people.

i got into a mild debate with a cousin at christmas dinner one year.. she was always posting all this anti-gun bubblegum on FB, and was asking me why i had the position on guns that i do.. she said something like "i get all that, thats fine, whatever, but its the automatics that nobody should have."

"automatics? like FULL automatics?"

"yea! yall redneck motherbubblegumers can have all the guns you want, fine, but the automatics we have to do something about!"

"fully automatic guns have been effectively banned since 1934, and even those few in circulation after that were effectively banned again in '84"

"huh?"

she actually thought "semiautomatic" or "automatic" meant fully automatic

this is the type of retarded bubblegum we are up against. people dont even realize what "the problem" even actually is, and dont even realize that all the proposals for "solving" it absolutely do not. they just assume a gun law is going to specifically target a certain kind or criminal and law abiding gun owners wont be affected.

its kinda hard to wrap your mind around how oblivious most folks really are on this bubblegum
Sadly I know that fun. Sis in law is that way, and her kids. My brother stays out of it, retired Col. and knows all his combat time is preferable to going against his wife….
 
Not knowing that automatics are already banned is ignorance, not stupidity. Especially if your only info is media that often use the word mistakenly.

It seems to me that one unfortunate trend is people increasingly having strong opinions and thinking their opinions are valuable and worthy of being heard even when they have put very little work into learning about the field or issue.

For example, these days, in book reviews on Amazon its surprisingly common for people to read just a few chapters and review the book instead of waiting until they've finished. For books that they like so far, not for books that they failed to finish because it was bad. Some people even review the book after getting it but before reading it, just saying they are looking forward to reading it. Even at the early days of Amazon people normally finished the book before they presumed to write an opinion, at least unless the book was so bad they didn't finish. More and more people seem to think their every passing thought is invaluable to others and worthy of being promulgated, however ignorant or inexperienced they are on the subject.
 
the issue isnt that she didnt know - the issue is that she didnt know and was an outspoken mini social media activist about it.

we've got people pontificating about something they literally dont know anything about.
 
you are correct. I stand corrected. I thought since there is no Stand Your Ground law. That a duty to retreat was implied. a 2007 court case changed that. So it is basically "He Said She Said" with the onus on you to prove the necessity of legal use of force.
I know there is a reason for the law.

However. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to just defend ourselves?
 
It seems to me that one unfortunate trend is people increasingly having strong opinions and thinking their opinions are valuable and worthy of being heard even when they have put very little work into learning about the field or issue.
And yet another instance of NWF gold here. Sage wisdom with this. @The B worded it nicely as well.
For example, these days, in book reviews on Amazon its surprisingly common for people to read just a few chapters and review the book instead of waiting until they've finished.
My favorite is when the book or movie has not been released yet and there are reviews telling us how good or bad it should be?!?!? Some people just like to hear themselves talk....keyboard edition. (Hope that is not me!)
 

Upcoming Events

Rifle Mechanics
Sweet Home, OR
Handgun Self Defense Fundamentals
Sweet Home, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top