Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.
If someone threatens someone else (school) with a gun then if they try to advance they should be shot. Save the state some money housing, feeding, and clothing them in jail.
Do all of you that shop on Amazon use smile.amazon.com to shop? The SAF, GOA and NRA all appear to be available to donate to through it.
I'm interested in seeing some of these (quote-unquote) red flag laws NRA-ILA is supporting.
I give to the SAF with it.I do. I donate to the NRA's Civil Right Defense Fund.
Interesting. So you're completely ok with killing someone as a legitimate government interest if they "advance". What point? He drives by with a long gun? On the sidewalk? One stop onto school property? The school can have a sniper overwatch and kill him once whatever line you set has been crossed but they can't petition a court to have his firearms removed until he receives mental health treatment, gets back on his medications, and is no longer a threat?
We can lock them up, which removes access to guns since they can't have them in their cell or hospital room and that's fine. We can't prohibit their access to guns while in out patient treatment despite it having the exact same level of due process and evidence requirements?
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to BehindBlueI's again.
Better let the oath keepers know.Interesting. So you're completely ok with killing someone as a legitimate government interest if they "advance". What point? He drives by with a long gun? On the sidewalk? One stop onto school property? The school can have a sniper overwatch and kill him once whatever line you set has been crossed but they can't petition a court to have his firearms removed until he receives mental health treatment, gets back on his medications, and is no longer a threat?
Didn't we go through this before? Didn't we conclude that, all things equal, sleeping in your own bed without your guns is better than sleeping on a jailhouse cot without your guns?We can lock them up, which removes access to guns since they can't have them in their cell or hospital room and that's fine. We can't prohibit their access to guns while in out patient treatment despite it having the exact same level of due process and evidence requirements?
Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.
Better let the oath keepers know.
Didn't we go through this before? Didn't we conclude that, all things equal, sleeping in your own bed without your guns is better than sleeping on a jailhouse cot without your guns?
Me too! The Washington Compost says (so it must be true) the NRA supports a bill proposed by Rep. Katko (R-NY) that contains stronger due process protections for gun owners.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...61983b7e0cd_story.html?utm_term=.aac35c5fece4
Katko's bill is summarized here: https://katko.house.gov/media-cente...ko-introduces-bipartisan-red-flag-legislation
The NRA is selling us out on this "RED FLAG" legislation. They and Lindsey Graham are pushing it. If it goes nationwide the gun grabbers will build on it until they have seized all of our guns and making us all criminals. Call your Senators today and stop giving money to an organization that only cares about membership dollars. They have gotten fat off us and do nothing.
Maybe not. My enemy was Hilary Clinton. The enemy of my enemy was Trump. Trump is not, nor ever has been, my friend.
And regarding the NRA, I'm not going to contribute to any organization that supports bumpstock bans or red flag laws.
the enemy of my enemy is my friend
---I never argue with a stupid person---they will drag you down to their level----and beat you with experienceThe NRA is selling us out on this "RED FLAG" legislation. They and Lindsey Graham are pushing it. If it goes nationwide the gun grabbers will build on it until they have seized all of our guns and making us all criminals. Call your Senators today and stop giving money to an organization that only cares about membership dollars. They have gotten fat off us and do nothing.