Florida good guy put down would be mass casualty shooter

[RX-79G]

Do we not have a de facto litmus test? Why would some random person join here?

Hey, I have a big, black rifle with many 20 round mags!

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Do we not have a de facto litmus test? Why would some random person join here?

Because they want to? The Rules do say "welcomes all gun owners" but it doesn't exclude non gun owners, which very likely could include someone raised anti gun that was trying to find out about firearms right sand ownership

 

[No_Regerts]

Because they want to? The Rules do say "welcomes all gun owners" but it doesn't exclude non gun owners, which very likely could include someone raised anti gun that was trying to find out about firearms right sand ownership

Yankee Stadium sells tickets to Red Sox fans too.

 

[Knobgoblin]

 

[No_Regerts]

Hey, I have a big, black rifle with many 20 round mags!

The biggest black rifles originally had 20 round magazines. I can see a desire to be period correct.

 

[monkeybutler]

View attachment 1259083

Yeah, they wear all kinds of disguises.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Yankee Stadium sells tickets to Red Sox fans too.

But do they have people at the gate demanding everyone that comes in answer some random selection of Yankee Stadium trivia?

 

[RX-79G]

The biggest black rifles originally had 20 round magazines. I can see a desire to be period correct.

30 round G3 mags look stupid.

 

[No_Regerts]

…

 

[Yarome]

We have someone who realistically answers the question as to why the media does not cover defensive shootings as much as many of us would like,

BEING the OP.... I will say again... I did NOT pose any such question or solicit any feedback about media reporting. The "answer" appeared as personal first person input since it was not made clear in that post that he was just posting hypotheticals to that end. Why he would decide to start throwing out blurbs on why the media does what it does.... I can't answer that.

From past experience with the individual, posting controversy just for the sake of controversy is many times SOP. Right or wrong, in that light it was entirely easy to assume he was simply following pevious posting patterns. He even argued some of the points from the first person he made in that post, but later did flip gears and say he was only replying to the OP's question (of which there was none, which I told him, and foolishly thought it would stop there).

The only reference to the media was more just in passing... and simply a statement along the lines of... as usual, not much on this story, but here it is.

i did not start a thread intended to discuss and debate the media's handling of any firearm related story, PRO or CON. That was just the direction he immediately decided to take it. Again, pretty typical from him.

Now we're down to page 9 of all the BS and hardly any of it pertains to the article link I posted. Time to move on!!

@Moderators Please shut this thread, and my apologies. I'll eventually learn my lesson.

 

[No_Regerts]

But do they have people at the gate demanding everyone that comes in answer some random selection of Yankee Stadium trivia?

No, and neither does NWFA. However, once inside, you have to realize the fans may not be totally hospitable.

It's always funny to watch away team fans tell on the home team. Sometimes it works, if there's no choice. BUT, most of the time, the ushers just smile and nod.

 

[No_Regerts]

BEING the OP.... I will say again... I did NOT pose any such question or solicit any feedback about media reporting. The "answer" appeared as personal first person input since it was not made clear in that post that he was just posting hypotheticals to that end. Why he would decide to start throwing out blurbs on why the media does what it does.... I can't answer that.

From past experience with the individual, posting controversy just for the sake of controversy is many times SOP. Right or wrong, in that light it was entirely easy to assume he was simply following pevious posting patterns. He even argued some of the points from the first person he made in that post, but later did flip gears and say he was only replying to the OP's question (of which there was none, which I told him, and foolishly thought it would stop there).

The only reference to the media was more just in passing... and simply a statement along the lines of... as usual, not much on this story, but here it is.

i did not start a thread intended to discuss and debate the media's handling of any firearm related story, PRO or CON. That was just the direction he immediately decided to take it. Again, pretty typical from him.

Now we're down to page 9 of all the BS and hardly any of it pertains to the article link I posted. Time to move on!!

@Moderators Please shut this thread, and my apologies. I'll eventually learn my lesson.