Top Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

You guys are sleeping

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FirstBubba
    replied
    IIRC, SAF is based in Seattle.
    SAF also won a gun rights suit for a U.S. territory somewhere in the Pacific.

    Leave a comment:


  • Danbo
    replied
    Originally posted by FirstBubba View Post

    The NRA has proven to be relatively effective.
    The SAF has proven it's mettle quite often too.
    I like the JPFO, but jiminy cat whiskers, how many organizations can one man contribute to! LOL!

    I belonged to NRA for awhile. I just got tired of all the duns! If they had spent as much money on lobbying and lawsuits as they did on printed literature they sent millions of members and ex-members, they wouldn't have to beg for more money! 🤷‍♂️

    I tried SAF and JPFO! My mailbox STILL filled up with donation solicitations!
    I haven't belonged to SAF in ten years and I still get the occasional literature.
    The second amendment foundation and NRA bring the best arguments and lawyers to court.
    The GOA is more bluster than anything, they have almost no victories in court . Heller and McDonald were originally 2nd amendment foundation and Bruen was NRA through NY state affiliate.
    One would think the NRA would have jumped all over NY law.
    2nd amendment foundation is heavily focused on neutering California gun laws .

    Leave a comment:


  • FirstBubba
    replied
    Originally posted by fitch270 View Post

    I hadn’t, thank you for the heads up. I’ve actually been thinking of joining GOA based on internet chatter. Under present circumstances with the NRA here it might be better if someone else steps up in State Court right now.


    Edit; If GOA pulls this off to any substantial degree it will certainly help their credibility. Gotta start somewhere I guess.
    The NRA has proven to be relatively effective.
    The SAF has proven it's mettle quite often too.
    I like the JPFO, but jiminy cat whiskers, how many organizations can one man contribute to! LOL!

    I belonged to NRA for awhile. I just got tired of all the duns! If they had spent as much money on lobbying and lawsuits as they did on printed literature they sent millions of members and ex-members, they wouldn't have to beg for more money! 🤷‍♂️

    I tried SAF and JPFO! My mailbox STILL filled up with donation solicitations!
    I haven't belonged to SAF in ten years and I still get the occasional literature.

    Leave a comment:


  • fitch270
    replied
    Originally posted by Danbo View Post


    https://www.ammoland.com/2022/07/jud...#axzz7Zyde2lCS


    I don't know if you saw this but it sounds like this judge is going to put a stay on this law.

    The only problem I see with this case is who brought it.
    They bring a lot of lawsuits that go nowhere.
    I would feel better if it was NRA or the Second amendment foundation .
    I hadn’t, thank you for the heads up. I’ve actually been thinking of joining GOA based on internet chatter. Under present circumstances with the NRA here it might be better if someone else steps up in State Court right now.


    Edit; If GOA pulls this off to any substantial degree it will certainly help their credibility. Gotta start somewhere I guess.
    Last edited by fitch270; 07-24-2022, 03:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Danbo
    replied
    Originally posted by fitch270 View Post

    Yep, and agreed but no plans to go anywhere. Still glad to see some sanity prevail regardless.

    https://www.ammoland.com/2022/07/jud...#axzz7Zyde2lCS


    I don't know if you saw this but it sounds like this judge is going to put a stay on this law.

    The only problem I see with this case is who brought it.
    They bring a lot of lawsuits that go nowhere.
    I would feel better if it was NRA or the Second amendment foundation .

    Leave a comment:


  • FirstBubba
    replied
    Originally posted by fitch270 View Post

    Yep, and agreed but no plans to go anywhere. Still glad to see some sanity prevail regardless.
    I can definitely understand the "heir" side of things. The deed to the land we occupy was awarded in the last Oklahoma land rush* in 1904.
    It was settled by my wife's great grandfather.

    * - it really wasn't a "rush" like the first one. They just opened up the land for settlement.

    Edit:
    Red clay that won't soak up water, is harder than concrete. Droughty
    No water
    Hot in summer
    Cold in winter
    non existant water table (i.e. no well)
    There is a well. It produces a whopping 80* gallons a day! 😜
    Using that on the garden saves on the water bill ... and it's stinky water! LOL!
    Tree species - elm, hackberry, locust and some black jack oak.
    This area is known as "The Cross Plains".
    When settlers came into the "Cross Plains", the black jack oaks and the understory created such an impenetrable thicket, even the Indians wouldn't even venture into it.

    No wonder they gave it away!

    * - the recommendation is 100 gallons per person per day.
    Last edited by FirstBubba; 06-27-2022, 07:51 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • 99explorer
    replied
    Many years ago in N.Y. state, if a concealed weapon license holder wished to add another gun to his list, he had to surrender his original license for the additional gun, and hope that it didn't result in its revocation by someone who might think the original license should not have been issued in the first place.

    Leave a comment:


  • fitch270
    replied
    Originally posted by Milldawg View Post
    Did I read some of these answers correctly. Your guns are listed on your permit. That is a huge invasion of privacy what do with my money is no one else’s business. So thankful I I moved south.
    Yep, and agreed but no plans to go anywhere. Still glad to see some sanity prevail regardless.

    Leave a comment:


  • fitch270
    replied
    Originally posted by Danbo View Post


    They give you another card with your guns listed on it.


    This decision goes well beyond concealed carry and opens a lot of doors for gun laws to be ruled unconstitutional.

    Safe Act.? The courts used intermediate scrutiny.
    The Thomas court has ruled that unconstitutional.

    Thanks Dan, after reading this it reminded me of a conversation at our club a few years ago between a couple guys talking about the number of cards they each had.


    Hoping dominos start falling but the process could take awhile.

    Leave a comment:


  • labrador12
    replied
    Originally posted by 99explorer View Post
    I think what our friend Danbo is saying is that because criminals can get whatever weapons they want without any paperwork, law abiding citizens should enjoy the same privilege.
    A non sequitur.
    Law abiding citizens should enjoy vastly more privileges than criminals. In spite of the Democrat urge for equity, citizenship should be rewarded, not penalized. The NY Supreme Court just ruled that Non-citizens can't vote in NY. Only a NY Democrat or other mental defective could believe otherwise.

    Let's GO Brandon!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • FirstBubba
    replied
    Originally posted by Danbo View Post


    What? How?
    Are they not true?

    Did I hit a nerve ?

    Every thing I said is true. Our criminals have many handguns without permits.

    Everything you said was/is true. The problem IS NOT the honest, day by day gun owner.
    Honest gun owners are the ones that all the asinine gun laws affect, yet libtards are blinded by their own fear, rage and stupidity.
    They couldn't care less about honest gunowners because they stand in the way of the "socialism" they're trying to bring to America.

    Leave a comment:


  • 99explorer
    replied
    I think what our friend Danbo is saying is that because criminals can get whatever weapons they want without any paperwork, law abiding citizens should enjoy the same privilege.
    A non sequitur.

    Leave a comment:


  • Danbo
    replied
    Originally posted by jhjimbo View Post
    I said a permit could stop someone who should not get one, period. All the other qualifiers you added and really, they sound stupid.

    What? How?
    Are they not true?

    Did I hit a nerve ?

    Every thing I said is true. Our criminals have many handguns without permits.


    Leave a comment:


  • jhjimbo
    replied
    I said a permit could stop someone who should not get one, period. All the other qualifiers you added and really, they sound stupid.

    Leave a comment:


  • Danbo
    replied
    Originally posted by jhjimbo View Post

    Permits are processed by the Sheriff and much more detailed than a background check.
    The sheriff does it here in NY also but yet the criminals still have any firearms that they wan in NY. Ohio must have no gun violence if you think the permit stops criminals from getting handguns.

    Criminals will always have whatever they want. They don't care about permits.

    Vermont has had constitutional carry forever and yet their per capita crime is low.

    Leave a comment:

Welcome!

Collapse

Welcome to Field and Streams's Answers section. Here you will find hunting, fishing, and survival tips from the editors of Field and Stream, as well as recommendations from readers like yourself.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ for information on posting and navigating the forums.

And don't forget to check out the latest reviews on guns and outdoor gear on fieldandstream.com.

Right Rail 1

Collapse

Top Active Users

Collapse

There are no top active users.

Right Rail 2

Collapse

Latest Topics

Collapse

Right Rail 3

Collapse

Footer Ad

Collapse
Working...
X