Poor people shouldn't have guns - Page 3

Poor people shouldn't have guns

This is a discussion on Poor people shouldn't have guns within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Thanis At that point, not even a 2A issue. So poor people should only be allowed to eat and sleep, so they ...

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 67

Thread: Poor people shouldn't have guns

  1. #31
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Thanis View Post
    At that point, not even a 2A issue. So poor people should only be allowed to eat and sleep, so they can contemplate their crime of being poor? What is the difference between your idea and a state run prison?
    You are mistaking 'being allowed' with the fact that some cannot AFFORD certain items some take for granted. Of course, banning guns is never effective and that has NOTHING to do with poor people.

    Can they own a camera to take a picture of their child's 1st birthday, are they allowed to have children, do they have to sell their wedding rings to get a block of government cheese, not allowed TV entertainment or news, can they own a radio, maybe they should be required to wear special patches to show where they live (to help reduce crime), etc?
    Yes, they have to sell their personal belongings if they want to purchase something they believe is more valuable. They can own whatever they want. If choosing between a bowl of rice and a gun they choose the gun then they can starve for all I care.

    For example, are they allowed the internet? Without access to the internet / computers how will their children ever get out of the projects. Basket ball and rap?
    How did they (the poor) advance before the internet? I will not comment on your reference to basketball and rap.

    I get what you are saying, but just because people in troubled areas live in government housing does not mean they lose their rights to own what you think is a luxury. Since they can't afford housing does that also mean the state can deside how much they get paid and where they will work.
    Emphatically, YES! If people want to take welfare and other handouts paid by hardworking Americans, then they must be held accountable for their actions. This is analogous to the corporate bailouts. The answer is the government should not give corporations or individuals MY MONEY.

    Other people desiding what you can own is not that much different then being a slave.
    The problem is that people willingly take other's money and then expect to be free of responsibility.

    To qualify for housing you need to meet certain requirements. There is a thought process out there that everything government is welfare, that the poor are lazy, but many of those people work more hours and jobs then you can imagine. They even get into situations where they are willing to take that 3rd or 4th job, but if they do, they would be kicked out of housing.
    Exactly! KICK THEM OUT. The freeloaders on society have a disincentive to imrove themselves. THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

    It is a matter of good judgement. Sit around at home and make a few hundred dollars a week or get a job, work 50 hours and make and extra hundred. Sound economic theory would advise not getting the job.

    Most poor people are poor because the CHOOSE TO BE POOR.


  2. #32
    Senior Member Array Shadowsbane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,051
    Public housing is state property. So, unless I can carry and possess weaponry legally on state property, I don't think anyone else should either.

    That in and of itself was why my wife and I spent a great deal more money by living off campus instead of in married housing.

    I am 100% opposed to taking the rights away from law abiding citizenry, however, I am also 100% opposed to giving one class of people more rights than any other as well.
    Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.

    www.Lonelymountainleather.com

  3. #33
    Member Array langenc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Montmorency Co, MI
    Posts
    82
    The anti CCW laws in MI, handgun REGISTRATION and NO HUNTING on Sundays in the Southern counties all came so as to restrict certain peoples rights.

  4. #34
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,093

    Again

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    Where else but in this forum can we have two separate references to Chief Justice Taney in a single month!

    The quote is particularly pertinent since it addresses the true meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment:
    .
    Another thread hijacked for a personal agenda.

  5. #35
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,886
    Quote Originally Posted by rodc13 View Post
    So, there is the argument: Gun ownership is merely a "luxury", and defense of self and family is not a basic necessity.
    Isn't gun ownership a luxury? If my child is hungry and the only thing that I have worth anything to get food for him, the gun will be gone in a heartbeat. Food, shelter and clothing are necessities, everything beyond that is a luxury. Defense of self is not left alone to someone with a gun. It has been said many times on this very forum that the mind is the weapon and the gun is merely a tool, one of many in anyone's arsenal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thanis View Post
    At that point, not even a 2A issue. So poor people should only be allowed to eat and sleep, so they can contemplate their crime of being poor? What is the difference between your idea and a state run prison?

    For example, are they allowed the internet? Without access to the internet / computers how will their children ever get out of the projects. Basket ball and rap?
    No, poor people can work. Even today there are jobs available with an unemployement rate of 10% for those who are willing to work. It may not be the same job as you had before making the same kind of money you once did, but it is a job which pays money that can be turned into a necessity.

    I don't know what the internet has to do with anything. Most every community has a public library, one can read books, and learn the Dewy Decimal System instead of the world wide web. That is what I did when I was younger. Besides most libraries and schools have the internet in them anyway.

    Janq, went through a whole list of things regarding public housing/assitance and such. I understand that it comes in many forms, and do not mean to undermine anyone who is honestly making an attempt at getting themselves and their families on the road to a better life. Many of these programs are honestly a good thing. When families are able to get low interest loans or defered payments in order to get themselves established, they actually end up costing the taxpayers very little money, and much less than if the family was left without that opportunity. Those are not the folks that I was really referring to, because they are taking care of their needs or making their best attempt to do so with a little assistance.

    As far as those folks in the heartland that the whole community may be recieving some assistance, you are definately right. However if the government would get out of the subsidy business, this would cease to exist. Not a single farmer client of mine feels that they are better off with the subsidies than they would be if the market determined the price of their corn, wheat, soybeans, rice or whatever they grow. It probably would cost the taxpayer less money on April 15th, but more money at the local grocery store. We could have a whole discussion about the policies of subsidies, but that will have to wait.

    Like I stated earlier, I don't want to take anyone's guns away. I do however feel that if your asking for help from the taxpayer, or a friend, or family, whomever, you need to set priorities. That doesn't mean that you have to give up any rights. The right to keep and bear arms does not come with it the right for the government to help you purchase that gun. Just like the right to free speech doesn't come with a publishing contract. If you want either of the two, or anything else for that matter you need to work for it.

    I don't know of any cases where a gun legally kept or removed anyone from poverty, ignorance or any other depressed condition. The gun after all is just the tool, nothing more nothing less.

    This is pretty tough to try to argue this side of this issue, but if you subsitute plasma tv, or Hummer, or some other thing for gun, how would either side of the argument hold up?
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  6. #36
    VIP Member Array Thanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    2,362
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    ...Emphatically, YES! If people want to take welfare and other handouts paid by hardworking Americans, then they must be held accountable for their actions. This is analogous to the corporate bailouts. The answer is the government should not give corporations or individuals MY MONEY....
    Or, maybe we see what happens when a service industry and consumer based society disregards the basics. BTW, it is not YOUR MONEY. The feds can do what ever they want to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    ...The problem is that people willingly take other's money and then expect to be free of responsibility....
    Or, maybe people are only paying just enough in social programs to bribe / prevent unrest of the masses (you know, the majority / the people).

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    ...Exactly! KICK THEM OUT. The freeloaders on society have a disincentive to imrove themselves. THAT IS THE PROBLEM...
    Your mistaken on the incentive / disincentive. Consider public housing to be one of the opium of the masses. Without it, they would see the only way to improve their situation would be to revolt.

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    ...Most poor people are poor because the CHOOSE TO BE POOR.
    Most old people are old because the choose to have several birthdays. Most poor people are poor because there are more people then opportunity.
    NRA Member
    S&W 642 (no-lock) with .38 Spl +P 135 GR Gold GDHP
    Glock G31 & G33 with .357 Sig 125 GR. SXT Winchester Ranger

  7. #37
    VIP Member Array PatrioticRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rigby, Idaho
    Posts
    5,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Romans623 View Post
    Missouri Democrat: Poor Too Irresponsible to Exercise Second Amendment

    "There was a time during the ’70s and ’80s when public housing developments were considered killing grounds,” said Emanuel Cleaver II , D-Mo., who grew up in public housing. “It is just foolhardy to place guns in developments of poor people, many of whom are unemployed, and place these guns around children. . . . Why would we try to put guns in the most densely populated areas in the urban core? It’s just unbelievable
    If I had to live there, I'd want to commit suicide too!
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    USN 78-82/USAF 82-93 Medically Retired
    Desert Shield/Desert Storm
    DAV Life Member
    NRA Life Member

  8. #38
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,503
    RKBA means exactly what it says...not the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, not the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Except if You Are Poor!

    Have they changed the 'rules'?
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  9. #39
    VIP Member Array Thanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    2,362
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    ...No, poor people can work. Even today there are jobs available with an unemployement rate of 10% for those who are willing to work. It may not be the same job as you had before making the same kind of money you once did, but it is a job which pays money that can be turned into a necessity...
    I'm in MI. Unemployement, officially, is 15%. In reality, more like 25%. The jobs are not there. There are more people then there are jobs, at a wage, that alows you to afford housing. Layoffs are weekly, houses are empty, businesses are closing.

    Now there was a time, when people like me, could at least sit on their property, and grow enough to live. However we now have property tax. So in order to own the land, I have to at least pay the tax. I'm told it is for things like the roads, but if you have been to MI, you know better. They say it is for public schools, but they keep closing. They say it is for social services, but they keep getting reduced, closed, or run out.

    It is going to be fun someday when everyone's fiat currency turns to paper and see what people have to say about the poor.
    NRA Member
    S&W 642 (no-lock) with .38 Spl +P 135 GR Gold GDHP
    Glock G31 & G33 with .357 Sig 125 GR. SXT Winchester Ranger

  10. #40
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,886
    Thanis,

    Houston went through something similar to that back in the 70's or 80's I believe. It finally got to the point where people who were working at McDonalds were able to live in houses that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. They were rented out just to keep some amount of money coming in to the banks.

    I feel for you and your state. It has been coming for a long time from what I undertand. I picked up a client this past year that had to leave MI and relocate down this way. They used to have a construction company and a catering business. They packed up with all their kids and moved onto a piece of land owned by a brother. They were/are living in a travel trailer and the parents have taken jobs at Micheals, and a local restaurant. I think that all the children of working age also have some sort of employment as well. Much different standard of living than what they were used to. Yes they lost all equity in the house they had due to foreclosure, but they did what they had to do to survive.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  11. #41
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Thanis View Post
    Or, maybe we see what happens when a service industry and consumer based society disregards the basics. BTW, it is not YOUR MONEY. The feds can do what ever they want to it.
    It's NOT my money? Exactly who earned it? Perhaps you think the government should take all the money and distribute it as they see fit. Does that sum up your view?

    Or, maybe people are only paying just enough in social programs to bribe / prevent unrest of the masses (you know, the majority / the people).
    Most people want to provide for themselves and their families. Are you asserting the majority is the government dole? Hardly. Are you also suggesting that people need to be bribed or else they will becessarily become criminals? And I thought I was cynical.

    Your mistaken on the incentive / disincentive. Consider public housing to be one of the opium of the masses. Without it, they would see the only way to improve their situation would be to revolt.
    Nonsense. Most people own their own homes or rent apartments. No, if they weren't given handouts they would not revolt (and be jailed) instead they would seek to better themselves and find jobs in the greatest economy on Earth.

    Most old people are old because the choose to have several birthdays. Most poor people are poor because there are more people then opportunity.
    You are confusing the natural process of aging with the choice of being poor. Most poor people are poor because they have no initiative to succeed in this country of unlimited opportunity.

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,366
    Hmm...I tried to stay out of this thread, but alas...I cannot hold out any longer. I'm not quite sure I agree with Mr Cleaver's logic/reasoning. Should the government be allowed to violate a basic right due to one's financial status...hell no.

    As to the question of whether or not folks in public housing should be allowed to purchase a firearm..that is their right if they do so with the results of their own labor. It has nothing to do with the fact that they're poor, or over crowded or black or white or purple.

    HOWEVER, I would expect their obligations to you and I be fulfilled first. Still living in "public" housing and think you have money to burn ...? That's fine...I'll take my stolen funds back then. As long as you're living in public housing YOU HAVE NO MONEY. You don't just not have money to spend. YOU HAVE NO MONEY. If you're in public housing that means you are living on the fruits of MY LABOR because it was stolen from me. It's a far cry different from someone that is GIVEN that same money by me. If I band up with neighbors and friends and help out a friend or neighbor in need(say...pay their rent or help with getting the kids dinner or something for a few months while they try to get back on their feet) then as far as I'm concerned they can do whatever they want with the money because WE CHOSE to help. We GAVE them the money as a gift as it was OURS to give. It was not stolen. Public housing is an affront to freedom. It's outright robbery.

    Now, onward and upward to the rest of the rabbit trailing
    Quote Originally Posted by Thanis View Post
    Or, maybe we see what happens when a service industry and consumer based society disregards the basics. BTW, it is not YOUR MONEY. The feds can do what ever they want to it.
    It IS MY MONEY. Just because the Feds have a bigger gun and threaten to use it when they ROB ME doesn't mean it's not mine to begin with or that I didn't work my ass off to earn it as value for value trade with someone else.

    If it's not my money, then your money isn't really yours either and I request that you immediately cease and desist from depositing your paychecks and instead have the pay to field changed to Packinnova and forward them to me. I'll gladly put them to use where there is a "need". I feel a new back porch project coming on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thanis View Post
    Or, maybe people are only paying just enough in social programs to bribe / prevent unrest of the masses (you know, the majority / the people).
    Again...I'm not paying anything. I was robbed under the threat of tanks, b-52's and nukes to back it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thanis View Post
    Your mistaken on the incentive / disincentive. Consider public housing to be one of the opium of the masses. Without it, they would see the only way to improve their situation would be to revolt.
    So...if we drug poor people instead they'll stop stealing from me? Hmm hadn't thought of that one yet. Nice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thanis View Post
    Most old people are old because the choose to have several birthdays. Most poor people are poor because there are more people then opportunity.
    I'll always disagree with that, because I've seen people time and again rise above. I used to work with a guy that was formerly a coal miner. This gentleman was in his upper 60's and until about 5 years prior to our meeting had worked coal mines in Appalachia his entire life and never making it out of the "poor" tax bracket. He dug dirt, and made dirt doing it. At some point in the entire process of losing all his possessions, living on food stamps, public housing etc... he got fed up and did something about it. He moved his family(wife and 2 kids) with all their belongings (which all fit in a single van) to another state(a state with better opportunities at the time). They lived in the van for a few months while he worked 3 menial labor jobs trying to save up for enough rent for an apartment. He had to have 3 because the first 2 jobs already had too many people on shift. In between jobs he would spend his 15 minutes or so he had to himself studying. Fast forward about 7 years and he's making quite a comfortable salary in the tech business while he and his family sleep comfortably in a 4 bdrm house in northern va.

    I'll give you another example of another guy I worked with. He WAS sleeping under an overpass. At 25 years old he had no job, hadn't had one in 4 or 5 years, and at any given time either lived in a car or under a local overpass. Finally ashamed by the looks and comments given to him daily while panhandling, he went to a recruiters office and signed on the dotted line for the US ARMY. Apparently the Army decided he might actually have a brain and they trained him in Communications. Fast forward a few years after he finished his time in the Army, when I met him, he was a network engineer for a telecom making around $130k a year with a house, 2 car garage, a pickup truck and a corvette. This was the guy that had previously been your classic Lazy, deadbeat, good for nothing, trash that decided to turn himself around. We're all destined to step in the pile eventually. What goes around comes around, but people CHOOSE to either get back up or stay in it.

    I have example after example of folks I've run into over the years and some have come from the most HORRIFIC backgrounds yet all of them managed to get themselves out. Some with horrific stories of escaping from war torn countries with nothing but the clothes on their back and not able to speak a word of english, others from drug dealing families, no family at all, etc...

    People remain poor because they choose to do so. I have family in the same boat and I find it hard to stomach being in the same room with them most of the time. Not because they're poor, but because they choose to remain that way and steal from the rest of us.
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)

  13. #43
    VIP Member Array rodc13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    2,753
    The points made against public housing and/or government housing, valid or not, really have nothing to do with the original question.

    Cleaver holds that people should not possess firearms in a specific location. That's where it becomes a 2nd Amendment issue. It's the same anti-gun argument made by those who banned handguns in DC, and simply doesn't hold water. The Brady Bunch just loves that argument.

    If you want to argue against public housing, or public aid programs in general, that's fine, but it's a smoke-screen about restricting the right to keep and bear arms for a certain class of law-abiding individuals. You may not like that tax payer money is going for housing projects, but the people who live there, who aren't breaking the law, have just as much right to self-defense as anyone else.

    Change the laws to abolish government handouts, if you wish, and if you can, but please leave anti-gun legislation to the anti-gun crowd.
    Cheers,
    Rod
    "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

  14. #44
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,093

    Finally a word of clarity

    Quote Originally Posted by rodc13 View Post
    The points made against public housing and/or government housing, valid or not, really have nothing to do with the original question.

    Cleaver holds that people should not possess firearms in a specific location. That's where it becomes a 2nd Amendment issue. It's the same anti-gun argument made by those who banned handguns in DC, and simply doesn't hold water. The Brady Bunch just loves that argument.

    If you want to argue against public housing, or public aid programs in general, that's fine, but it's a smoke-screen about restricting the right to keep and bear arms for a certain class of law-abiding individuals. You may not like that tax payer money is going for housing projects, but the people who live there, who aren't breaking the law, have just as much right to self-defense as anyone else.

    Change the laws to abolish government handouts, if you wish, and if you can, but please leave anti-gun legislation to the anti-gun crowd.
    Above, is finally a word of clarity on this subject.

    As for some of the comments by others here, all I can say is they are utterly unrealistic and reprehensible.

    The participant who posted that people are poor because there are insufficient jobs and employment opportunities is partially correct. He forgot to add that in too many instances they are also poor because
    wages for most folks have never kept up with underlying inflation.

    There was an available compensatory mechanism in the 1970---men finally had to give in and their wives went to work; often with horrific effects on family life. Today, there is nothing left with which to compensate.

    I know people in all walks of life. I know some fairly rich and powerful people. I know some folks who are scrapping by with everyone in the family working. I know people who have lost jobs in this present downturn and are unlikely to ever again earn what they earned before this calamity---possibly never work again.

    What is going on in Michigan (though not in any way isolated) is a national tragedy and disgrace.

    When there is full employment (which personally I think we have really not had in 4 decades) it can be rightfully said that the poor were the lazy. When you have 10% official unemployment rates and
    underemployment of at least double that, when we have the work week (number of hours worked each week per working age individual) at an all time low---below France by the way---we had better have a quick attitude adjustment about the poor. Because, they is us. They are our neighbors, our cousins, our parents, our children. They are people who have worked for one, two, three or more decades, gone to school and then worked, started businesses, bought businesses, and now they are out of luck.

    And to SD, you know full well that in your field you are beholden entirely to Uncle for the major income stream at your company. There isn't much of a private market for "rocket science" or rocket engineering. You are feeding at the trough as much as anyone else. Were it not for the North Koreans and the Iranians, you might well be one of the poor, a displaced engineer trying to find work in a flooded market, with skill that don't transfer well to what little R&D our private companies still do.

  15. #45
    VIP Member Array Thanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    2,362
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    It's NOT my money? Exactly who earned it? Perhaps you think the government should take all the money and distribute it as they see fit. Does that sum up your view?....
    Yes, my view is, so long as the fed exists, and fiat currency is not tied to something beyond expectation, the government can tax your property with no justification, the government can do whatever it wants with what you call your money. You are at the whim of the oligarchies.

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    ...Most people want to provide for themselves and their families...
    Most people want the illusion, nothing more. Millions on welfare / social services, to the farmer, the banker, the unions, the corportaions, we are a country of subsidies, yearning every 2 years to say "What are you going to do about this!"

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    ...Are you also suggesting that people need to be bribed or else they will becessarily become criminals? And I thought I was cynical....
    Yes, and they will continue to be bribed as long as it is financially lucrative. In addition, what is criminal does not always equate to good or bad, rich or poor. Every gun owner could become a criminal overnight, that does not make them evil.

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    ...No, if they weren't given handouts they would not revolt (and be jailed) instead they would seek to better themselves and find jobs in the greatest economy on Earth....Most poor people are poor because they have no initiative to succeed in this country of unlimited opportunity.
    Just words, because one justification you had for taking away government assistance was to motivate. If people were so motivated to better themselves they would naturally wean. On the contrary, when people in desprate situations look for opportunity, in contrast to your imagined unlimited opportunity, overwhelmingly they turn to what is considered criminal. Ironically the only difference is the sucessuful simply did not get caught.

    To sum up the sociological / economic issues of our society with a statement that the "poor choose to poor" requires / demands the same simplicity in thought. It is in direct contrast to a belief that people will choose to better themselves. With your logic you must also state the imprisoned choose to be imprisoned. The rich choose to be rich.

    I can't really argue that. Over time wealth has concentrated in the hands of a small, and smaller, number of families. Looks like you are right, the rich choose to be rich. The difference is I don't believe in your country of unlimited opportunity, because the wealthy are very selective with those opportunites. The only things your thought process can show is that people do not strive to better themselves, they strive to be better then others. The only reason the poor choose to be poor is becase they have been bribed enough to prevent them from force. That belly full of fast food and government cheese is all it tkes, and is cost effective.

    Bribe, enslave, or cull the herd. No code words here, I'm not making racial statements. When the masses demand to much in bribes, stop fighting over their neighbor's scraps, refuse some form of slavery, and are motivated, it will be viewed as a united revolt, and they will be slaughtered or will force change.
    NRA Member
    S&W 642 (no-lock) with .38 Spl +P 135 GR Gold GDHP
    Glock G31 & G33 with .357 Sig 125 GR. SXT Winchester Ranger

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Some folks really shouldn't have guns
    By Treo in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: July 6th, 2010, 04:07 PM
  2. Some people should NEVER have guns
    By CyberGuyPR in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: January 13th, 2009, 01:05 AM
  3. Some people just shouldn't be allowed to work on their own guns.
    By Bruces45 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: February 7th, 2006, 10:05 AM

Search tags for this page

cleaver poor not have guns
,
guns in public housing
,

manna food bank irresponsible bums

,
people shouldnt wield a gun
,
poor have guns
,

poor people shouldn't have guns

,
poor people shouldnt own guns
,
why little people shouldn't have guns
,
why people shouldnt carry firearms
Click on a term to search for related topics.