Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states - Page 9

Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states

This is a discussion on Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Ogre Your rights end when they usurp mine. No, you sound like a liberal... You should of said, your rights end, when ...

Page 9 of 36 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 532
Like Tree139Likes

Thread: Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states

  1. #121
    Member Array ole slabside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogre View Post

    Your rights end when they usurp mine.
    No, you sound like a liberal...

    You should of said, your rights end, when they are ones I don't agree with...

    Aint the first amendment a beautiful thing... you can say stupid stuff in public too...


  2. #122
    Member Array ole slabside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogre View Post

    Your rights end when they usurp mine.
    No, you sound like a liberal...

    You should of said, your rights end, when they are ones I don't agree with...

    Aint the first amendment a beautiful thing... you can say stupid stuff in public too...

  3. #123
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,665
    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post
    SCOTUS just overruled the long standing precedence on state regulation of guns from cases like Cruickshank and Slaughterhouse. They have incorporated the 2nd Amendment into the 14th to do it. You and all the other anti crowd have been in full evasion mode ever since that happened. It happened. Stop trying to pretend it didn't. It is a complete upheaval of the legal landscape. You've been in complete denial and evasion of this now through dozens of pages in two different threads.

    What you guys have to offer doesn't even amount to a judicial rational basis argument. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals just laughed this stuff out of court. The Heller court ruled. It's settled law. You can't deny our whole society their right to keep and to bear arms with "feel good" arguments, no statistics, and or statistics that support the plaintiffs. More guns equal less crime. Get out of the way, we're heading to the gun store, and you're holding us up.
    Please stop pointing to me as anti. I'm only the messenger. Heller gave no right to bear arms. It gave a right
    to possess them in your home, subject to regulation, and then only in DC.

    Incorporation is beneficial because it places some presently unknown limit on what the states can do. It does not
    turn every regulation into an infringement on the right enumerated in 2A. For all the rulings, nothing much has changed,
    has it? I mean in a practical way, it is still tough in DC. Basically, Heller was a dud for us.

    So please don't take my repetition of what the situation is as an anti-position. I'm just saying
    The Supremes haven't and are not going to ride to our rescue and give us nationwide
    constitutional carry. Quite the opposite, they will at most affirm a right to carry, subject to reasonable regulations,
    to wit, licensing.

    Now let's turn to NY. I don't think those are reasonable regulations, you don't think those are reasonable
    regulations, but the 2nd Circuit in NYC IS going to think they are reasonable regulations, and if the Supremes don't
    take an appeal from the 2nd Circuit (should it get there) then they don't think those are unreasonable
    regulations either.

    I really think those who think that somehow the Supremes are going to come out with an unqualified
    2A -anything goes ruling are badly mistaken. They have been quite cautious and nuanced, even when
    the ruling was written by the most conservative member of the conservative majority on the court.

    Oh, and it ain't over in IL-- That wasn't a ruling by the full panel.

    http://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/p.../20130108.html


    "January 8, 2013

    MADIGAN REQUESTS FULL 7TH CIRCUIT REHEARING IN PUBLIC CARRY CASE

    Chicago — The Attorney General Madigan today has filed a petition for rehearing before the full “en banc” U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Madigan issued the following statement :

    “In ruling that Illinois must allow individuals to carry ready-to-use firearms in public, the 7th Circuit Court’s decision goes beyond what the U.S. Supreme Court has held and conflicts with decisions by two other federal appellate courts. Based on those decisions, it is appropriate to ask the full 7th Circuit to review this case and consider adopting an approach that is consistent with the other appellate courts that have addressed these issues after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Heller and McDonald decisions.”

    Again, please note I'm not saying which way it should go. I'm just saying it ain't over till
    its over and there is a long way to go; and I personally don't expect the kind of sweeping
    victory many here think has already been won.
    Last edited by Hopyard; February 2nd, 2013 at 08:58 PM. Reason: Chopped and re-wrote part of article due to possible copyright issues- I think we have a forum rule that is relevant.
    Luis50 and glockman10mm like this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  4. #124
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by mg27 View Post
    Personal responsibility should be mandate..
    Personal responsibility is already mandated. There are all kinds of laws that mandate what your personal responsibility is. The law that mandates your personal responsibility not to murder someone applies to everyone. They don't mandate training on that law, except for legal firearm owners. What training do you think we should mandate for all the criminals that are actually the ones out murdering people with guns?

  5. #125
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by ole slabside View Post
    The other day I renewed my state issued Handgun Carry permit (HCP), the renewal cost me $50.00. But that made me stop and think about what it cost today to get a permit for the new applicant, because a friend of mine is in the middle of that process now…

    People often say that TN is a gun friendly state.

    That normally causes me to snort loudly, while spewing my coffee… or in a rare moment when I don’t have a coffee cup in my hands, just to bust out laughing at whomever said it. TN is far from anything, even remotely close to resembling, “a gun friendly state.”

    But lets focus on the topic of my little rant. The state issued hand gun carry permit scheme and how this wonderful state has priced it (intentionally, I believe) out of reach of the poor, the working poor and the vast numbers of people who simply live paycheck to paycheck. And cannot afford to spend several hundred dollar on a piece of government issued plastic. Showing where you bowed down before the alter and laid offering at the feet of the almighty .gov, who graciously gave you state sanctioned permission to exercise one of your rights.

    The state will tell you the permit costs $115.00, which that is mostly true, mostly… That’s how much you’ll have to fork over to the department of safety when you give them your application, BUT…

    Before you get to this point, one must take a state required safety course, which on average costs about $75.00 and is 8 hours long… usually given on the weekends, occasionally on a Thursday or Friday at a few locations. Now if you’re like me you actually work for a living. And your job might require you to work those days… so now, you’ll have to take off a day from work without pay or burn a vacation day you otherwise wouldn’t have… so lets say you earn $10.00 per hour and you work 10 hours a day. That’s $100.00. Add that to the $75.00 for the course, plus the $115.00 to the state and were up to $290.00.

    But wait, that’s not all!

    The state requires a certified, state issued copy of your original birth certificate to accompany your application, which depending on what state you were born in can run you upwards of $50.00. For me it cost $25.00 so I’ll use that figure. Now were at $315.00, you have shelled out so you can exercise your God given, Constitutionally protected right. (void where prohibited, some restrictions may apply, of course…)

    Now recall I used the rate of $10.00 an hour as your pay. Probably a close average pay rate for this state, but how many of you make much more than that?

    Now you might as well also add in the box of ammo for your required shooting test (50 rounds) and any other cost too, like the gas you’ll waste running to and from the course, then to and from the DMV, to one of the approved locations to get your fingerprints taken, (they don’t do them there)… then back to the DMV to finally give them all this paperwork… and you better hope its all in order too!

    We’re talking about the poor and working poor here so think about this from their standpoint. Here I have demonstrated the permit is well over $300.00 for something the Constitution says is your right. Just like free speech, and your rights to trial by jury and to be free from unwarranted searches.

    But in “Gun Friendly” Tennessee that will cost you well over $300.00

    If your poor, that could well be an entire months rent, or many, many days worth of groceries.

    So, it is my opinion that the wonderful gun loving state of TN has intentionally priced its handgun carry permit out of the reach of a great number of its citizens. This is/was intentional, just as in your face as all those unconstitutional Jim Crow laws of yesteryear, this is no different. Its a Poll Tax plain and simple. One designed to keep a right, just out of reach of many in this state.

    Many who, arguably need to carry a firearm for protection due to where they might live than any other group.

    Think about that, when was the last time you heard of a mugging in the upper crust neighborhoods of the rich and shameless?

    What about the lower income neighborhoods of Memphis, Nashville or Chattanooga?

    The cost of the HCP in the state of Tennessee amounts to a De facto ban, effectively prohibiting poor people from obtaining a permit to carry a firearm for lawful self defense.

    The gun owners in this state need to wake up, stop lying to themselves and think for once in their lives.

    This state is NOT gun friendly.

    Tennessee?s Handgun Carry Permit Scheme Is A De facto Ban For Poor People. This Ain't Hell, But You Can See It From Here!
    I absolutely agree. This is just as much intentional as every other anti-gun law has ever been. It's not just the poor. It's keeping my wife from carrying and I can afford all the costs.

  6. #126
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,928
    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post
    What I hear on this forum and in this thread is the same attitudes and arguments we just heard in congress and around the country. The laws you are advocating are an important part of a scheme of regulation that is effective at keeping millions of people from carrying firearms in public. It's anti-gun and the laws you're advocating are unconstitutional. So, if you are going to support anti-gun laws, I and plenty of others are going to call you on being anti-gun.

    No one is supporting unconstitutonal laws here. You are creating that in your own mind, either thru fear or a misunderstanding. There are already requirements in various states one must comply with in order to get a CCW permit. Explain how they do that if its unconstitutional.
    So who are the others here that would join you in calling me anti gun?


    And there you go. You touch on Heller and then go back to rationalizing laws that were passed before Heller and have never been tested against Heller. The anti-gun crowd went around the country bragging about Heller as if it was a ruling that favored their agenda. Here's another area where you seem to align with the anti-gun crowd. It doesn't favor the antis agenda of regulating guns out of existence.

    Once again, read it for yourself. I cannot help you with the comprehending part of the study.



    Who are you kidding? These laws are keeping millions from exercising their rights. Have you read the 2nd Amendment? You know, keep and bear? There's no differentiation giving the government more authority over one as compared to the other. What it says is that the government has no authority over either.

    And once again, we are talking about how the court decided on the states ability to restrict handgun possesion, which it concluded that since the handgun was the common used firearm in America for SD, that the state had no authority to ban their possesion. They did not cover the areas of carrying on ones person, but specifically thru out the brief, referred to the right to possess a handgun in the home.
    And, the way I am understanding it, has left the when and how up to each individual state to regulate, with respect to carrying on onces person.



    Did you read the Heller decision, or did you just read all the Brady camp propaganda bragging about how it favored their agenda? They held the 2nd Amendment was an individual right to self defense using common firearms. That holding is applicable to both keep and bear. They also held that a rational basis argument defending gun regulation could not stand against such a fundamental right.

    Refer to the prior.



    And now we have the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that has held that Illinois' law banning public possession of firearms is unconstitutional. My arguments parallel their interpretation of Heller. Your arguments were laughed out of court. They specifically ridiculed gun statistics that favored the plaintiffs. They specifically ridiculed efforts like yours to re-litigate the rational basis approach to defending these anti-gun laws. They specifically ridiculed the concept that the government had more authority over bear than keep. Heller is now binding law. It's striking down laws like these all over the country. You can keep on pretending it didn't happen, just like the anti gun crowd crowing in Washington right now, but it happened. Get used to it.

    Once again, this arguement is not relevant to the subject matter of the thread. You are still trying to talk around the topic like a treed squirrel.



    I'm not convinced it has no bearing on concealed carry. That we have an individual right to self defense, and that may very well have bearing on concealed carry. I agree it doesn't have a lot of bearing for the foreseeable future. However, this discussion was prefaced by a long debate about Texas where open carry of handguns is completely banned. The mandated training as part of a scheme of laws that prohibits millions from exercising their right is unconstitutional. Heller has direct bearing, and we may see how it plays out in 180 days in Illinois if they pass only CHL laws. And read the Heller opinion, the minority opinion talked all about balancing the right vs the public. It was overruled.

    You are shooting yourself in the foot. So even Texas can regulate that the open carry of firearms is illegal? Sounds like regulation to me. So how could this be allowed to stand then according to your arguement?



    It's settled law that all laws that infringe on the 2nd Amendment have to at least meet intermediate if not strict scrutiny. As we saw in the Illinois case, the whim of the majority as to reasonable and common sense isn't going to cut it anymore. Start getting used to the idea of strong and compelling interested tailored to meet those interests in the least restrictive way possible.
    So, if its settled law, then in Texas you should be able to open carry. Go ahead and walk downtown Houston with that Colt strapped on your hip and make that arguement to them.
    But I can do it in Kentucky. Because its legal here. Hmmm, I wonder why that is possible?

    The problem I have with your arguements, is its based purely on emotion and rational that conflicts with the reality of these rulings. And because of that, you try and circumvent the facts by ignoring the law, that the state has reserved the power to regulate, who gets a CCW, and the stipulations therein.

    And, in doing so, you have to create strawman arguements to support your opinion, which, I happen to share your beliefs by my own convictions, but convictions do not always hold up under constitutional scrutiny.
    My personal beliefs are that all Americans should be allowed to carry whatever, and whenever possible. But my beliefs do not override the fact that, while it is clear that the 2A is an individual right, and held up as such, that it does leave some room for regulation, which is where the "not be infringed" part is not fully defined.
    So, if what you say is true, then the state of Texas law against OC should have been struck down with these rulings.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  7. #127
    Member Array Ogre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, AL
    Posts
    292
    Nope, said what I meant, meant what I said. Your right to bear arms ends when it usurps my right to life. My rights end when they usurp yours as well. See I'm not a liberal, they don't reciprocate.

  8. #128
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,670
    This may nor may not be construed to be "off topic" a bit, but one issue I have always considered is IF some of the regulations and attached fees and costs have a negative impact on lower income folks and minorities.

    It seems to me at least that a reasonable person would have to admit that the more it costs to buy a firearm and ammunition, then additional fees to "obtain a permit to purchase" (NJ for one example) then IF carry is allowed, fees and costs of said permit(s) . I believe a case can easily be made that such a system is imposing an unreasonable burden on folks "just barely getting by " now in this economy? Clearly this infringes on the Rights of lower income folks (many of which are minorities) IF you just can't afford to buy the handgun AND pay the costs and fees, you cannot exercise your RIGHTS? An easy way to discriminate against these folks is to simply make the fees higher and renew mandatory with high fees on an annual basis.

    I believe that this IS where the "forced training" etc. will hit the proverbial legal road block, especially IF the states cannot prove that training IS something that is "needed for the safety of it's citizens"...... thoughts?

  9. #129
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Please stop pointing to me as anti. I'm only the messenger. Heller gave no right to bear arms. It gave a right
    to possess them in your home, subject to regulation, and then only in DC.
    Heller gave no rights because rights don't come from the government. And again, you evade all the points I've made about the other holdings of the case that go way beyond what supports your position.

    Incorporation is beneficial because it places some presently unknown limit on what the states can do. It does not
    turn every regulation into an infringement on the right enumerated in 2A. For all the rulings, nothing much has changed,
    has it? I mean in a practical way, it is still tough in DC. Basically, Heller was a dud for us.
    I never said it overturned every regulation. It held that we have an individual right to self defense with common handguns and that applies just as much for keep as it does for bear. It ruled out the rational basis arguments that you're using to support the training mandate. Why can't you acknowledge that part of the ruling and how it will apply to your arguments you're making here?

    So please don't take my repetition of what the situation is as an anti-position. I'm just saying
    The Supremes haven't and are not going to ride to our rescue and give us nationwide
    constitutional carry. Quite the opposite, they will at most affirm a right to carry, subject to reasonable regulations,
    to wit, licensing.
    They don't have to. The appellate courts are already doing it, based upon Heller. You and the antis both love to use Heller to defend these anti-gun laws, but nothing in Heller says anything to suggest that any of these laws will survive a constitutional test. The only thing the ruling says about it is dicta. In the dicta, all it says is that the ruling doesn't automatically rule out long standing laws. That doesn't mean any long standing laws will survive. It just says the Heller ruling is limited.

    Now let's turn to NY. I don't think those are reasonable regulations, you don't think those are reasonable
    regulations, but the 2nd Circuit in NYC IS going to think they are reasonable regulations, and if the Supremes don't
    take an appeal from the 2nd Circuit (should it get there) then they don't think those are unreasonable
    regulations either.
    We don't know what the courts are going to say, but we know what the Heller court did say.

    I really think those who think that somehow the Supremes are going to come out with an unqualified
    2A -anything goes ruling are badly mistaken. They have been quite cautious and nuanced, even when
    the ruling was written by the most conservative member of the conservative majority on the court.
    I never said that.

    Oh, and it ain't over in IL-- That wasn't a ruling by the full panel.
    Did you read the ruling? It's a well reasoned ruling that makes the arguments I've made with strong backing from the Heller ruling. No we don't know what the outcome of the case may be in the end, and it may take quite some time before all the appeals run their course. We do know what the Heller court said, and we do know that you can't just dismiss the arguments I'm making when they are being upheld at the circuit court level.

  10. #130
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,447
    Pennsylvania.
    No Written test.
    No Oral test.
    No Classes.
    No Range Qualification.
    No "NO FIREARMS!" signs everywhere.
    No Blood Running In The Streets.
    No Accidental or Negligent Discharges happening everywhere & everyday.

    The County Sheriff suggests that citizens seek qualified, professional, training. Many DO. Others ask a friend, relative, or family member to give them basic firearm and safety instruction.

    Personal Adult Responsibility
    - It seems to work just fine for Pennsylvania.
    Aceoky and 9MMare like this.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  11. #131
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,670
    So, if what you say is true, then the state of Texas law against OC should have been struck down with these rulings.

    That cannot happen (either way ) unless and until it is challenged in Fed court based on those SCOTUS rulings. Laws don't generally just "Vanish" due to rulings they must be challenged.

    Would it hold up if so challenged? Honestly I would have to figure , that is doubtful as since one clearly has the right to "keep and Bear arms" and for individual self defense per the 2nd, regulation of "arms" outside the house to much of an extent would be a clear violation (IMO at least) . A RIGHT to bear arms is not limited to one's home or vehicle in other words, Texas by seeming to limit that for most (who don't have a CCW) could be argued to violate both rulings IMO ; depending on how it is argued.

  12. #132
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    This may nor may not be construed to be "off topic" a bit, but one issue I have always considered is IF some of the regulations and attached fees and costs have a negative impact on lower income folks and minorities.

    It seems to me at least that a reasonable person would have to admit that the more it costs to buy a firearm and ammunition, then additional fees to "obtain a permit to purchase" (NJ for one example) then IF carry is allowed, fees and costs of said permit(s) . I believe a case can easily be made that such a system is imposing an unreasonable burden on folks "just barely getting by " now in this economy? Clearly this infringes on the Rights of lower income folks (many of which are minorities) IF you just can't afford to buy the handgun AND pay the costs and fees, you cannot exercise your RIGHTS? An easy way to discriminate against these folks is to simply make the fees higher and renew mandatory with high fees on an annual basis.

    I believe that this IS where the "forced training" etc. will hit the proverbial legal road block, especially IF the states cannot prove that training IS something that is "needed for the safety of it's citizens"...... thoughts?
    That's exactly the point, and that last part is the most important part. No one here can offer anything other than fluffy feel good statements to support that it's needed at all.

  13. #133
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    So, if its settled law, then in Texas you should be able to open carry. Go ahead and walk downtown Houston with that Colt strapped on your hip and make that arguement to them.
    But I can do it in Kentucky. Because its legal here. Hmmm, I wonder why that is possible?
    It's just like I said. It's settled law that the irrational "rational basis" arguments we see here won't be sufficient to uphold my conviction. The Heller case settled that.

    The problem I have with your arguements, is its based purely on emotion and rational that conflicts with the reality of these rulings. And because of that, you try and circumvent the facts by ignoring the law, that the state has reserved the power to regulate, who gets a CCW, and the stipulations therein.
    I'm not ignoring the law. I'm just not ignoring the change in the legal landscape that you are. The state of Texas doesn't have the constitutional authority to deny every citizen the right to carry a handgun in public and that's exactly what our 46.02 law says.

    And, in doing so, you have to create strawman arguements to support your opinion, which, I happen to share your beliefs by my own convictions, but convictions do not always hold up under constitutional scrutiny.
    If you're going to accuse me of making strawman arguments then you're going to have to point out what the strawman is.

    My personal beliefs are that all Americans should be allowed to carry whatever, and whenever possible. But my beliefs do not override the fact that, while it is clear that the 2A is an individual right, and held up as such, that it does leave some room for regulation, which is where the "not be infringed" part is not fully defined.
    So, if what you say is true, then the state of Texas law against OC should have been struck down with these rulings.
    You're supporting the training mandate. If that's not your personal belief, just say so. Oh, and what part of shall not be infringed do you not understand?

    I never said any law should have been struck down with the Heller and McDonald rulings. They have laid the foundation of precedence that clearly indicate these laws are unconstitutional.

  14. #134
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,670
    Amazing isn't it?

    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter View Post
    Pennsylvania.
    No Written test.
    No Oral test.
    No Classes.
    No Range Qualification.
    No "NO FIREARMS!" signs everywhere.
    No Blood Running In The Streets.
    No Accidental or Negligent Discharges happening everywhere & everyday.

    The County Sheriff suggests that citizens seek qualified, professional, training. Many DO. Others ask a friend, relative, or family member to give them basic firearm and safety instruction.

    Personal Adult Responsibility
    - It seems to work just fine for Pennsylvania.

  15. #135
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,928
    A snippet from the PFOA, a Pennsylvania Forum

    SO! not five min. ago, I inserted a live mag into my Wilson Combat CQB with the slide locked while inside my apartment. I then continued to rack the slide back to load the firearm, as I do once or twice DAILY before I re-holster. My finger was NOT NEAR THE TRIGGER! As I released the slide, I was greeted with thunderous boom as my 1911 fired a round through my bed and several other objects, into the floor.

    Of course its not a indicative of what happens on a regular basis, and this could happen anywhere in the CONUS, however, it could be a training issue.

    Or perhaps this could be cut back on
    Texas man injured two people and himself after he accidentally fired his handgun Monday night while standing on line at a Walmart store, police said.
    MyFoxDFW.com reported that the suspect, who was not identified, accidentally fired his gun while he reached into his wallet at the Dallas-area store. The bullet hit the man in the buttock and shattered on the ground. Fragments hit a child in the leg and a woman in the foot, the report said.

    Dallas News | myFOXdfw.com
    The suspect, who has a concealed handgun license, apparently panicked and took off running, but was soon caught by police.
    He faces evasion charges and injury to a child.
    Click for more from MyFoxDFW.com
    RELATED STORIES
    Texas man, 70, accused of biting boy's face
    Woman killed in Arkansas workplace shooting, police say
    Gunman on UCONN campus kills self
    At least 3 men arrested in separate 'Dark Knight' incidents at movie theaters
    RECOMMENDED STORIES
    Justin Bieber denies groping young fan's breast, despite photographic evidence
    Gomer Pyle actor Jim Nabors on marrying partner: 'Just wanted it legal'
    Taylor Swift breast implant rumors swirl after Spanish awards show
    Dan Marino fathered child with CBS employee, paid to keep it secret, report says
    Autopsies: Evidence of cocaine in 2 killed in Cleveland chase as 13 officers fired 137 rounds
    Police in Iowa city to buy their own semi-automatic AR-15s
    ALSO ON THE WEB
    Lightbulb alert! Another one bites the dust. (AARP.org)
    Killer Waves in California Claim 5 Lives Without Warning (Bloomberg)
    Gunsmiths 3D-Print High Capacity Ammo Clips To Thwart Proposed Gun Laws (Forbes.com)
    10 Things You Should Never Say to Grandkids (Grandparents.com)
    Want a Large Dog That Is Gentle? Than This Breed Is For You (Vetstreet)
    Allmendinger Finally Responds To NASCAR Drug Suspension - Updated (MotorAuthority)


    Read more: Texas man accidentally fires gun in Walmart, police say | Fox News
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

Page 9 of 36 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

powered by mybb advanced weapons

,
powered by mybb all movies
,

powered by mybb best exercise

,
powered by mybb code search
,

powered by mybb criminal law

,

powered by mybb free full movies online

,

powered by mybb free online training course

,

powered by mybb law and order

,

powered by mybb legal

,

powered by mybb paintball stuff

,
powered by mybb reference
,
powered by mybb video of potty training
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors