|
OT Gun law US style.
Parents must be half wits.
I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...6pLid%3D107028 |
OT Gun law US style.
harry wrote:
Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. I bet they're hill billies that don't even vote. I'm posting the text of the story for those that haven't read it: ========= May 4 / 2012 A family are dealing with unbearable grief this morning after their 16-month-old daughter was shot dead by her two-year-old brother – just days after a similar tragedy. Police are investigating the circumstances surrounding the death on Tuesday, but it is believed that Calvuna Reese's unnamed brother accidentally pulled the trigger of a loaded gun. The news has sent shock waves around the community in Memphis, Tennessee, U.S., with one neighbour, Randy Lark, telling the local TV station: "Oh it tears me up. It really, really hurts. I'm so shocked and hurt by what happened to this child." Randy added: "Everyone should learn from that lesson, not to leave a loaded gun around a kid." The shooting comes just two days after a similar incident in Kentucky when 15-month-old Bella San Martin was shot dead by her three-year-old brother in their family's Kentucky home on Sunday. Police involved said it was a tragic accident and that the parents were home at the time. ============ In the landscape of consumer products, firearms stand alone as being inately dangerous while serving no useful purpose in the hands of consumers. Firearms makers enjoy conspicuous freedom from law suits and regulators by consumers when their products cause injury or death. The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. The only thing that the right to bear arms has given the citizens of the United States is pain, misery and suffering. |
OT Gun law US style.
On 2012-05-05, Home Guy wrote:
The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. What parallel universe is this guy living in? Mine has too damn many "unconstitutional acts" being performed by a govt run amok and I don't see it improving any time soon. nb -- vi --the heart of evil! Yell out the window "bitch!" --Bill Burr |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote:
Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...6pLid%3D107028 BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim |
OT Gun law US style.
On 05/05/12 09:04 am, gonjah wrote:
Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...6pLid%3D107028 BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Firearms (other than the very few that are bought solely for target practice) have no purpose other than to kill humans or animals. Motor vehicles are not designed to kill. Perce |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 8:16 AM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 05/05/12 09:04 am, gonjah wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...6pLid%3D107028 BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Firearms (other than the very few that are bought solely for target practice) have no purpose other than to kill humans or animals. Motor vehicles are not designed to kill. Perce That matters to the dead guy. |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 9:04 AM, gonjah wrote:
On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...6pLid%3D107028 BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim It doesn't matter. Clearly both harry and home guy live in a dark place and are incapable of seeing anything but the negative side of all situations. If it were "free ice cream day" both would complain that the included free toppings didn't include the color of sprinkles they like so clearly the whole idea of "free ice cream day" is terrible... |
Fwd: OT Gun, law US style.
On 05/05/12 08:42 am, Home Guy wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-Kentucky.html May 4 / 2012 A family are dealing with unbearable grief this morning after their 16-month-old daughter was shot dead by her two-year-old brother – just days after a similar tragedy. Police are investigating the circumstances surrounding the death on Tuesday, but it is believed that Calvuna Reese's unnamed brother accidentally pulled the trigger of a loaded gun. The news has sent shock waves around the community in Memphis, Tennessee, U.S., with one neighbour, Randy Lark, telling the local TV station: "Oh it tears me up. It really, really hurts. I'm so shocked and hurt by what happened to this child." Randy added: "Everyone should learn from that lesson, not to leave a loaded gun around a kid." The shooting comes just two days after a similar incident in Kentucky when 15-month-old Bella San Martin was shot dead by her three-year-old brother in their family's Kentucky home on Sunday. Police involved said it was a tragic accident and that the parents were home at the time. ============ In the landscape of consumer products, firearms stand alone as being inately dangerous while serving no useful purpose in the hands of consumers. Firearms makers enjoy conspicuous freedom from law suits and regulators by consumers when their products cause injury or death. The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. The only thing that the right to bear arms has given the citizens of the United States is pain, misery and suffering. |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 8:19 AM, George wrote:
On 5/5/2012 9:04 AM, gonjah wrote: On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...6pLid%3D107028 BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim It doesn't matter. Clearly both harry and home guy live in a dark place and are incapable of seeing anything but the negative side of all situations. If it were "free ice cream day" both would complain that the included free toppings didn't include the color of sprinkles they like so clearly the whole idea of "free ice cream day" is terrible... LOL. Good one. |
OT Gun law US style.
harry wrote:
Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...6pLid%3D107028 Truly regrettable. Still, an occasional tragedy, even a preventable one, is the price we pay for freedom. |
OT Gun law US style.
On May 5, 1:58*pm, notbob wrote:
On 2012-05-05, Home Guy wrote: The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. What parallel universe is this guy living in? *Mine has too damn many "unconstitutional acts" being performed by a govt run amok and I don't see it improving any time soon. nb -- vi --the heart of evil! Yell out the window "bitch!" *--Bill Burr So how has having a gun helped you? |
OT Gun law US style.
On May 5, 2:04*pm, gonjah gonjah.net wrote:
On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...hot-dead-by-th... BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim Guns are intended to kill. Auto accidents are just that. Not having guns would be lives saved. |
OT Gun law US style.
On May 5, 2:19*pm, George wrote:
On 5/5/2012 9:04 AM, gonjah wrote: On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...hot-dead-by-th.... BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim It doesn't matter. Clearly both harry and home guy live in a dark place and are incapable of seeing anything but the negative side of all situations. If it were "free ice cream day" both would complain that the included free toppings didn't include the color of sprinkles they like so clearly the whole idea of "free ice cream day" is terrible...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - ?????????? I think it's you lives in a dark, paranoid fearful world. |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 10:32 AM, harry wrote:
On May 5, 2:04 pm, gonjahgonjah.net wrote: On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...hot-dead-by-th... BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim Guns are intended to kill. Auto accidents are just that. Not having guns would be lives saved. meh It's the risk you're afraid of. We're less risk adverse. You just have to deal with it. Some people use cars as weapons harry. Happens all the time. |
OT Gun law US style.
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:30:37 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On May 5, 1:58*pm, notbob wrote: On 2012-05-05, Home Guy wrote: The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. What parallel universe is this guy living in? *Mine has too damn many "unconstitutional acts" being performed by a govt run amok and I don't see it improving any time soon. nb -- vi --the heart of evil! Yell out the window "bitch!" *--Bill Burr So how has having a gun helped you? Keeps your and HomoGuy's panties in a bunch. |
OT Gun law US style.
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:32:13 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On May 5, 2:04*pm, gonjah gonjah.net wrote: On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...hot-dead-by-th... BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim Guns are intended to kill. Auto accidents are just that. Not having guns would be lives saved. Of course you never see that guns SAVE lives, too. One George Zimmerman, comes to mind. snicker |
OT Gun law US style.
On May 5, 3:31*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...hot-dead-by-th... Truly regrettable. Still, an occasional tragedy, even a preventable one, is the price we pay for freedom. You are slaves to your banksters. Liviing in a place with concentration camps, arbitary arrest, Most people in jail, one of the highest highest murder rates. Most government snoops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rceration_rate You are 668 times more likely to be killed with a gun in the US than the UK. http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/...d-States/Crime |
OT Gun law US style.
gonjah wrote:
Should we outlaw cars too harry? Can consumers sue gun companies for product liability / defective product reasons like they can for cars or other consumer products? If an old lady can sue McDonalds because she burned herself when she spilled a hot coffee, then why can't a home owner sue Smith & Wesson or Colt because their product did not have enough built-in safety mechanisms to prevent accidental injury or death? If normal consumer product tort and liability laws applied to gun companies as they do to all other consumer product companies, there would be a much different gun situation in the US. Guns would be more expensive and much safer to handle when exposed to children for example. And anyone injured or killed by a stolen or lost gun (a gun that was not reported to the police as being lost or stolen) should be able to sue the last registered owner for negligence and wrongful death. Insurance companies would or could include additional premiums for homeowners that have or maintain dangerous products in their house that can kill or injure others or be stolen and used to injure or kill others - most specifically firearms. If you want to make it so that it's your right to own a gun - fine. If you want to own a company that makes or sells guns - fine. If your gun injures or kills someone (regardless who pulled the trigger) then some degree of responsibility should be aimed at you, and your ass should be able to be sued for (at least) monentary damages. You have to carry liability and property damage insurance to own/operate a car. The same should also apply to firearms. |
OT Gun law US style.
In article ,
gonjah gonjah.net wrote: The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. And deaths by motorvehicle (at least as measured by deaths per million miles traveled) have also been falling since ~1930s. -- People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, until patients started presenting with sexually acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 11:54 AM, Home Guy wrote:
gonjah wrote: Should we outlaw cars too harry? Can consumers sue gun companies for product liability / defective product reasons like they can for cars or other consumer products? If an old lady can sue McDonalds because she burned herself when she spilled a hot coffee, then why can't a home owner sue Smith& Wesson or Colt because their product did not have enough built-in safety mechanisms to prevent accidental injury or death? If normal consumer product tort and liability laws applied to gun companies as they do to all other consumer product companies, there would be a much different gun situation in the US. Guns would be more expensive and much safer to handle when exposed to children for example. And anyone injured or killed by a stolen or lost gun (a gun that was not reported to the police as being lost or stolen) should be able to sue the last registered owner for negligence and wrongful death. Insurance companies would or could include additional premiums for homeowners that have or maintain dangerous products in their house that can kill or injure others or be stolen and used to injure or kill others - most specifically firearms. If you want to make it so that it's your right to own a gun - fine. If you want to own a company that makes or sells guns - fine. If your gun injures or kills someone (regardless who pulled the trigger) then some degree of responsibility should be aimed at you, and your ass should be able to be sued for (at least) monentary damages. You have to carry liability and property damage insurance to own/operate a car. The same should also apply to firearms. This is moving the goal posts IMO. Good arguments, but not the root issue of the right to bear arms. Harry wants to law guns. Not practical here and will never happen anyway. |
OT Gun law US style.
BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. Accidental shootings and firearms mishaps were THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH among the wagon trains in the 1800's. People mishandling guns, shooting their uncle who was taking a dump out in the bushes and they thought they was Injuns, etc. Steve |
OT Gun law US style.
Killing animals or humans, is often necessary.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message news:jo396h$f5k$1@dont- BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Firearms (other than the very few that are bought solely for target practice) have no purpose other than to kill humans or animals. Motor vehicles are not designed to kill. Perce |
OT Gun, law US style.
The unfortunate death is a result of unsafe gun storage.
RKBA is one of the reasons the citizens of USA have any freedoms remaining. Though, rapidly shrinking freedoms. Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. On 05/05/12 08:42 am, Home Guy wrote: The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. The only thing that the right to bear arms has given the citizens of the United States is pain, misery and suffering. |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 12:00 PM, gonjah wrote:
On 5/5/2012 11:54 AM, Home Guy wrote: gonjah wrote: Should we outlaw cars too harry? Can consumers sue gun companies for product liability / defective product reasons like they can for cars or other consumer products? If an old lady can sue McDonalds because she burned herself when she spilled a hot coffee, then why can't a home owner sue Smith& Wesson or Colt because their product did not have enough built-in safety mechanisms to prevent accidental injury or death? If normal consumer product tort and liability laws applied to gun companies as they do to all other consumer product companies, there would be a much different gun situation in the US. Guns would be more expensive and much safer to handle when exposed to children for example. And anyone injured or killed by a stolen or lost gun (a gun that was not reported to the police as being lost or stolen) should be able to sue the last registered owner for negligence and wrongful death. Insurance companies would or could include additional premiums for homeowners that have or maintain dangerous products in their house that can kill or injure others or be stolen and used to injure or kill others - most specifically firearms. If you want to make it so that it's your right to own a gun - fine. If you want to own a company that makes or sells guns - fine. If your gun injures or kills someone (regardless who pulled the trigger) then some degree of responsibility should be aimed at you, and your ass should be able to be sued for (at least) monentary damages. You have to carry liability and property damage insurance to own/operate a car. The same should also apply to firearms. This is moving the goal posts IMO. Good arguments, but not the root issue of the right to bear arms. Harry wants to law guns. Not practical here and will never happen anyway. "outlaw" |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5 May 2012 12:58:32 GMT, notbob wrote:
On 2012-05-05, Home Guy wrote: The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. What parallel universe is this guy living in? Mine has too damn many "unconstitutional acts" being performed by a govt run amok and I don't see it improving any time soon. nb .... and keep your powder dry |
OT Gun law US style.
On Sat, 05 May 2012 09:16:01 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
wrote: Firearms (other than the very few that are bought solely for target practice) have no purpose other than to kill humans or animals. Motor vehicles are not designed to kill. Perce I beg to differ with you. My guns have never killed anything. Bullets do the kilin' when and if essential. Pencils were designed to cause spelling errors. |
OT Gun law US style.
On 5/5/2012 12:06 PM, Steve B wrote:
BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. Accidental shootings and firearms mishaps were THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH among the wagon trains in the 1800's. People mishandling guns, shooting their uncle who was taking a dump out in the bushes and they thought they was Injuns, etc. Steve Well that settles it. Outlaw taking dumps. |
OT Gun law US style.
On Sat, 5 May 2012 10:06:10 -0700, "Steve B" wrote:
Accidental shootings and firearms mishaps were THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH among the wagon trains in the 1800's. People mishandling guns, shooting their uncle who was taking a dump out in the bushes and they thought they was Injuns, etc. Steve "... shaking that bush here Boss, shaking that bush (Cool Hand Luke) |
OT Gun law US style.
On 05/05/12 01:42 pm, Oren wrote:
Firearms (other than the very few that are bought solely for target practice) have no purpose other than to kill humans or animals. Motor vehicles are not designed to kill. Perce I beg to differ with you. My guns have never killed anything. Bullets do the kilin' when and if essential. So impose an enormous tax on ammunition. BTW, the Second Amendment states right up front why people should have the right to bear arms. Have you signed up with your local militia? Does your local militia commander know how to get in touch with you to summon you for duty and what weapons you have and how well skilled you are in their use? Do you report for training as required? Perce |
OT Gun law US style.
|
OT Gun law US style.
Worth noting, "the people" are not a state or national militia. The 2nd
recoginzes the God given rights, and prohibits the government from infringing the God given rights. Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message news:jo3t0p$to$1@dont- BTW, the Second Amendment states right up front why people should have the right to bear arms. Have you signed up with your local militia? Does your local militia commander know how to get in touch with you to summon you for duty and what weapons you have and how well skilled you are in their use? Do you report for training as required? Perce |
OT Gun law US style.
On 2012-05-05, gonjah gonjah.net wrote:
Well that settles it. Outlaw taking dumps. LOL!..... -- vi --the heart of evil! Yell out the window "bitch!" --Bill Burr |
OT Gun law US style.
On 2012-05-05, Oren wrote:
"... shaking that bush here Boss, shaking that bush (Cool Hand Luke) ROFL!....... -- vi --the heart of evil! Yell out the window "bitch!" --Bill Burr |
OT Gun law US style.
On 2012-05-05, Oren wrote:
... and keep your powder dry 10-4 -- vi --the heart of evil! Yell out the window "bitch!" --Bill Burr |
OT Gun law US style.
harry wrote:
On May 5, 1:58 pm, notbob wrote: On 2012-05-05, Home Guy wrote: The idea that the right to bear arms was intended so that citizens can protect themselves from unconstitutional acts performed by their own gov't is hogwash if not impractical. What parallel universe is this guy living in? Mine has too damn many "unconstitutional acts" being performed by a govt run amok and I don't see it improving any time soon. nb -- vi --the heart of evil! Yell out the window "bitch!" --Bill Burr So how has having a gun helped you? Not counting my time in another place, having a gun saved me from death or serious bodily injury at least twice. |
OT Gun law US style.
Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 05/05/12 01:42 pm, Oren wrote: Firearms (other than the very few that are bought solely for target practice) have no purpose other than to kill humans or animals. Motor vehicles are not designed to kill. Perce I beg to differ with you. My guns have never killed anything. Bullets do the kilin' when and if essential. So impose an enormous tax on ammunition. The late Senator Patrick Moynihan proposed just that. Of course there is reloading... BTW, the Second Amendment states right up front why people should have the right to bear arms. Have you signed up with your local militia? Does your local militia commander know how to get in touch with you to summon you for duty and what weapons you have and how well skilled you are in their use? Do you report for training as required? You demonstrate your ignorance. In the 18th century, "militia" was defined as the totality of all free men available for military service. One did not "sign up" to be in the militia, one WAS in the militia simply by existing. If, by training, you refer to the "well regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, you again demonstrate ignorance. Remember, in the 18th century, there were no "regulations" as we know them nor any group, such as taxi cabs, to be "regulated." The word "regulated" at that time (and still does today in some small measure) meant "a functionally acceptable mechanical device, meeting usage requirements" as in a "well-regulated timepiece." You are correct about one of the reasons for firearms being stated up front in the 2nd Amendment. Of course the ability to defend the country is not the only reason as the money part of the amendment makes clear: "... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." |
OT Gun law US style.
harry wrote:
On May 5, 2:04 pm, gonjah gonjah.net wrote: On 5/5/2012 12:28 AM, harry wrote: Parents must be half wits. I bet they are Republicans. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2012/05/...hot-dead-by-th... BTW: Accidental shootings, and all violent crimes, have been on the decline for years now in the US. The odds of being accidentally shot in the US are miniscule compared to death by motor vehicle. Should we outlaw cars too harry? Jim Guns are intended to kill. Auto accidents are just that. Not having guns would be lives saved. That's bizarre. Having guns saves lives. By the hundreds of thousands. The US experiences over two million defensive gun uses per year. Were it not for the gun, a significant number of those instances would result in death. Remember the mantra, "If Vince Foster had had a gun, he'd be alive today." |
OT Gun law US style.
Home Guy wrote:
gonjah wrote: Should we outlaw cars too harry? Can consumers sue gun companies for product liability / defective product reasons like they can for cars or other consumer products? If an old lady can sue McDonalds because she burned herself when she spilled a hot coffee, then why can't a home owner sue Smith & Wesson or Colt because their product did not have enough built-in safety mechanisms to prevent accidental injury or death? If normal consumer product tort and liability laws applied to gun companies as they do to all other consumer product companies, there would be a much different gun situation in the US. Guns would be more expensive and much safer to handle when exposed to children for example. Civil suits arising from damages caused by firearms are specifically prohibited by "The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act," (2005), and became Public Law 109-02 (15 USC 7901 et seq. ). See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-10...-109publ92.pdf |
OT Gun law US style.
On Sat, 05 May 2012 14:54:17 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
wrote: I beg to differ with you. My guns have never killed anything. Bullets do the kilin' when and if essential. So impose an enormous tax on ammunition. Liberal speak for "we need more laws". We already have enough gun laws. Don't you get it? BTW, the Second Amendment states right up front why people should have the right to bear arms. Have you signed up with your local militia? Does your local militia commander know how to get in touch with you to summon you for duty and what weapons you have and how well skilled you are in their use? Do you report for training as required? Perce In summary, I am 911. |
OT Gun law US style.
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:30:37 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote: So how has having a gun helped you? Which time? Fighting a rattlesnake, killing an about to strike cotton mouth moccasin, inhibiting an 8 foot alligator from taking my ship? Don't guns protect your beloved Queen? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter