This hits a little too close to home for me. I was born and raised in Collin County Texas not too far from Frisco. I have never heard this story before so I thought I would share it here:
On August 11, 1979, Mrs. Sybil Christian of Frisco, Texas reported the discovery of several purple blobs of goo on her front yard following a Perseid meteor shower. A follow up investigation by reporters and an assistant director of the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History discovered a battery reprocessing plant outside of town where caustic soda was used to clean impurities from the lead in the batteries, resulting in a purplish compound as a byproduct. The report was greeted with some skepticism, however, as the compounds at the reprocessing plant were solid, whereas the blobs on Mrs. Christian's lawn were gelatinous. Others, however, have pointed out that Mrs. Christian had tried to clear them off her lawn with a garden hose.
Wiki article on "Star Jelly":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Jelly
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Ammo hoarders making it difficult for hunters this season
(twincities.com)
Wisconsin hunters looking for rifle ammunition for Saturday's firearms deer opener might be reminded of the 'Old Mother Hubbard' nursery rhyme.
They are going to retail stores and finding the cupboard, er, stock shelves are getting bare.
A yearlong national shortage of sporting rifle ammunition, spurred largely by hoarding, continues to catch some hunters off guard. On Thursday, I was one of them.
I made visits to three sporting goods stores — Fleet Farm stores in Oakdale and Hudson, Wis., and Gander Mountain in Woodbury — before I was able to find the brand of 30.06-caliber ammunition I wanted, a fairly common variety, for my deer rifle. I picked those stores believing the big-box outlets would have the buying power to handle the current demand.
I ended up paying $45 for a box of 20 shells of Federal Premium Vital-Shok at Fleet Farm in Hudson. It was the only 30.06 ammo in stock. Gander Mountain in Woodbury had a better selection but had gaps in ammo availability in some calibers.
Kevin Yoder, of Hudson, stood next to me at Gander Mountain, shaking his head while scanning the shelf for 30.06 ammo. He picked out a box of Hornady shells for $22. There were just four boxes left. "This has been hard to find," Yoder said.
Dave Jensen, of Beldenville, Wis., also drove to Gander Mountain in Woodbury on Thursday to find 7-mm magnum ammunition for his deer rifle. "Everybody's out," he said, "especially of the cheap stuff. My rifle really
likes the cheap Winchester shells."
Retail stores aren't to blame.
Ted Novin, public affairs director of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said ammunition manufacturers are operating "24/7" to keep up with the demand for ammunition, which is outstripping supply. (Officials with Anoka-based Federal Premium Ammunition referred all media calls to the foundation.)
Novin said a recent report examining federal excise taxes on ammunition indicated receipts were up 52 percent in the second quarter of 2009, compared with the same period in 2008. Ammo tax receipts were up 43 percent from 2008 in the first quarter of 2009.
Click here to read the entire article:
http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_13828520?nclick_check=1
Wisconsin hunters looking for rifle ammunition for Saturday's firearms deer opener might be reminded of the 'Old Mother Hubbard' nursery rhyme.
They are going to retail stores and finding the cupboard, er, stock shelves are getting bare.
A yearlong national shortage of sporting rifle ammunition, spurred largely by hoarding, continues to catch some hunters off guard. On Thursday, I was one of them.
I made visits to three sporting goods stores — Fleet Farm stores in Oakdale and Hudson, Wis., and Gander Mountain in Woodbury — before I was able to find the brand of 30.06-caliber ammunition I wanted, a fairly common variety, for my deer rifle. I picked those stores believing the big-box outlets would have the buying power to handle the current demand.
I ended up paying $45 for a box of 20 shells of Federal Premium Vital-Shok at Fleet Farm in Hudson. It was the only 30.06 ammo in stock. Gander Mountain in Woodbury had a better selection but had gaps in ammo availability in some calibers.
Kevin Yoder, of Hudson, stood next to me at Gander Mountain, shaking his head while scanning the shelf for 30.06 ammo. He picked out a box of Hornady shells for $22. There were just four boxes left. "This has been hard to find," Yoder said.
Dave Jensen, of Beldenville, Wis., also drove to Gander Mountain in Woodbury on Thursday to find 7-mm magnum ammunition for his deer rifle. "Everybody's out," he said, "especially of the cheap stuff. My rifle really
likes the cheap Winchester shells."
Retail stores aren't to blame.
Ted Novin, public affairs director of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said ammunition manufacturers are operating "24/7" to keep up with the demand for ammunition, which is outstripping supply. (Officials with Anoka-based Federal Premium Ammunition referred all media calls to the foundation.)
Novin said a recent report examining federal excise taxes on ammunition indicated receipts were up 52 percent in the second quarter of 2009, compared with the same period in 2008. Ammo tax receipts were up 43 percent from 2008 in the first quarter of 2009.
Click here to read the entire article:
http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_13828520?nclick_check=1
Gun opponents up in arms as Jerry Brown aids NRA
(San Francisco Chronicle)
It may come as a surprise to many of his Democratic supporters, but Attorney General and gubernatorial hopeful Jerry Brown has gone to bat for the National Rifle Association.
The NRA's cause: urging the U.S. Supreme Court to guarantee the ability of gun owners across the land to keep and bear arms.
Last year, the high court struck down a ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., ruling for the first time that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms applies to individuals who keep a gun at home for self-defense. But the court made it clear the ruling applied only to the District of Columbia, a federal enclave.
Now, gun advocates are challenging Chicago's handgun ban, asking the Supreme Court to rule that the Second Amendment equally applies to the states. And there was no shortage of states - 34 in all - jumping on the bandwagon in support of the court hearing the case.
In July, before the court agreed to take the case, Brown went so far as to file his own friend-of-the-court brief asking that Chicago's gun ban be overturned - arguing that if the court doesn't act, "California citizens could be deprived of the constitutional right to possess handguns in their homes."
His stance has angered a number of gun control proponents.
Julie Leftwich, legal director of Legal Community Against Violence, said this isn't simply about Brown defending the Second Amendment - it also marks a dramatic turnabout from the administration of his Democratic predecessor, Bill Lockyer, a staunch gun control advocate.
"Jerry Brown hasn't shown leadership in the legislative arena related to the issue of gun violence prevention ... and he hasn't sponsored or weighed in on any significant gun bills," Leftwich told The Chronicle's Carla Marinucci.
Brown's pro-gun stand has also left some San Francisco officials scratching their heads. They're awaiting a ruling in the Chicago case to see how it might affect two local gun-rights lawsuits.
"I'm just gratified that the attorney general in his filing has acknowledged that California has been a national leader in passing commonsense legislation to regulate firearms," City Attorney Dennis Herrera said.
With the high court now agreeing to hear the Chicago case, the only question remaining was whether Brown - amid lobbying from both sides in the fight - would weigh in with another brief on the case's merits by Monday's deadline.
The usually talkative Brown didn't respond to our requests to be interviewed, but on Friday, his spokeswoman, Christine Gasparac, said the attorney general wouldn't be submitting another brief.
"He believes we have nothing more to add," she said.
Hot talk: The sister of slain San Francisco police Officer Isaac Espinoza has some harsh words for Police Chief George Gascón in the wake of his endorsement last week of District Attorney Kamala Harris for attorney general.
"I'm appalled and disgusted he would endorse her," a tearful Regina Espinoza said, still angry about Harris' decision five years ago not to seek the death penalty for her brother's killer, David Hill.
Epinoza called the chief looking for an explanation.
By week's end - two days after she called - she was still waiting.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/23/BAFI1AO83D.DTL#ixzz0Xh8L3ATx
It may come as a surprise to many of his Democratic supporters, but Attorney General and gubernatorial hopeful Jerry Brown has gone to bat for the National Rifle Association.
The NRA's cause: urging the U.S. Supreme Court to guarantee the ability of gun owners across the land to keep and bear arms.
Last year, the high court struck down a ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., ruling for the first time that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms applies to individuals who keep a gun at home for self-defense. But the court made it clear the ruling applied only to the District of Columbia, a federal enclave.
Now, gun advocates are challenging Chicago's handgun ban, asking the Supreme Court to rule that the Second Amendment equally applies to the states. And there was no shortage of states - 34 in all - jumping on the bandwagon in support of the court hearing the case.
In July, before the court agreed to take the case, Brown went so far as to file his own friend-of-the-court brief asking that Chicago's gun ban be overturned - arguing that if the court doesn't act, "California citizens could be deprived of the constitutional right to possess handguns in their homes."
His stance has angered a number of gun control proponents.
Julie Leftwich, legal director of Legal Community Against Violence, said this isn't simply about Brown defending the Second Amendment - it also marks a dramatic turnabout from the administration of his Democratic predecessor, Bill Lockyer, a staunch gun control advocate.
"Jerry Brown hasn't shown leadership in the legislative arena related to the issue of gun violence prevention ... and he hasn't sponsored or weighed in on any significant gun bills," Leftwich told The Chronicle's Carla Marinucci.
Brown's pro-gun stand has also left some San Francisco officials scratching their heads. They're awaiting a ruling in the Chicago case to see how it might affect two local gun-rights lawsuits.
"I'm just gratified that the attorney general in his filing has acknowledged that California has been a national leader in passing commonsense legislation to regulate firearms," City Attorney Dennis Herrera said.
With the high court now agreeing to hear the Chicago case, the only question remaining was whether Brown - amid lobbying from both sides in the fight - would weigh in with another brief on the case's merits by Monday's deadline.
The usually talkative Brown didn't respond to our requests to be interviewed, but on Friday, his spokeswoman, Christine Gasparac, said the attorney general wouldn't be submitting another brief.
"He believes we have nothing more to add," she said.
Hot talk: The sister of slain San Francisco police Officer Isaac Espinoza has some harsh words for Police Chief George Gascón in the wake of his endorsement last week of District Attorney Kamala Harris for attorney general.
"I'm appalled and disgusted he would endorse her," a tearful Regina Espinoza said, still angry about Harris' decision five years ago not to seek the death penalty for her brother's killer, David Hill.
Epinoza called the chief looking for an explanation.
By week's end - two days after she called - she was still waiting.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/23/BAFI1AO83D.DTL#ixzz0Xh8L3ATx
MICROSTAMPING THREAT IN WISCONSIN
An anti-gun bill to mandate the microstamping of firearms has been introduced in the Wisconsin State Senate and is scheduled to be heard tomorrow morning, Dec. 1, at 11 a.m. in the Judiciary Committee. NSSF Director of Government Relations Jake McGuigan is on the ground in Wisconsin and will testify in opposition to the bill. Earlier today, NSSF sent out a legislative alert to Wisconsin sportsmen and firearms enthusiasts.
s
s
Man Faces Years In Canadian Jail For Little Known Gun Law
(KIRO-TV) Canadians will welcome you and your money when the winter Olympics begin in February. But trying to take something else across the border could land you in jail.
Gerald Burke of Tacoma knows that first hand, and is facing an uncertain future because of it.
“The charge that the Crown is after is that I do three years in prison,” he told KIRO 7 Investigative Reporter Amy Clancy recently.
Burke says it was a simple mistake, but the Canadian government calls what Burke allegedly did a serious criminal offense.
Burke remembers the day in February when he was arrested while crossing into British Columbia at the Peace Arch: “Mr. Burke, put your hands behind your back. You are under arrest for smuggling a gun into Canada.”
Burke's loaded semi-automatic 9-millimeter handgun was discovered by Canada Border Services Agency officers in the center console of his SUV. Burke is licensed to carry a concealed weapon in the states, but Canadian laws dictate all firearms must be declared at the border. Handguns are strictly prohibited.
Clancy asked Burke, “did you know that it was in your vehicle at the time?”
Burke: “I did not.” Clancy: “Did you just forget?”
Burke: “I just forgot.”
The CBSA declined Clancy’s request for an interview, but the agency's investigation reveals that Burke seemed nervous at the border crossing and had a hard time answering questions.
Once the weapon was found, Burke was handcuffed and put in a cell. He spent eight days in jail before being allowed bail.
His wife of 26 years, Kelli Burke, says she couldn't even speak with him for five days.
“The last thing we heard when we were up there was the prosecutor saying she wouldn’t be happy without a year in prison for him.”
Burke is now charged with five criminal counts, including gun smuggling, lying to border guards, and possessing 85 rounds of ammunition 'for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or for the purpose of committing an offence."
Peter Ritchie, Burke’s Vancouver-based attorney, tells Clancy “if you have a gun in this country, it is considered to be a very serious matter.”
Ritchie believes that most Americans, including gun owners, have no idea how different U.S. and Canadian gun laws are.
“If you come to Canada,” Ritchie said outside a courthouse in Surrey, B.C., “it’s a whole different ballgame here, and you face one year minimum in jail. Even though you may be the sweetest citizen that walked the earth, that’s what you’re looking at here.”
Burke has no criminal history, is a long-time church missionary, and a married father of three. After he was arrested, dozens of Burke's friends and family members wrote to the BC court, asking for leniency. But Canadian gun laws are very strictly enforced.
In 2008, 191 firearms were seized from people crossing into B.C. and the Yukon. This past July, a Bremerton-based Navy sailor was sentenced to a year in jail after pleading guilty to gun smuggling. His BC lawyer, Kelly Merrigan, tells Clancy that he represents about three Americans per year, arrested for carrying handguns into Canada.
Blaine hardware store owner Jerry Wolten used to rent storage space where traveling American gun owners could lock up their weapons. He claims he’d have up to 30 guns stored at a time. Now, according to Wolten, U.S. regulations make it too difficult and too expensive. But he believes the need is still there, telling Clancy “how do you stress it enough to avoid all this? It has to be, just don’t bring it. But there’s not enough education.”
Burke's attorney, Peter Ritchie, agrees, saying “nobody’s going to warn you in advance. I don’t think there are billboards on the highway saying, hey! Don’t forget you’ve got your gun in your car, or you’re looking at a year in jail in this country.”
While Burke awaits his trial date next fall, he's warning others---especially before the Winter Olympics—“if for no other reason than to prevent one fellow American from going through the same thing that I have gone through. That would be reason enough to contact you” he told Clancy.
When Clancy and her photographer, Brian Doerflinger, crossed the border into Canada to work on this story, they looked for any signs warning Americans not to bring weapons. There are signs that tell you to keep right, watch for pedestrians and bicycles, and to “ThinkMetric.” But the only one warning against handguns is right under the Canadian border guard’s window, much too late to turn around.
Gerald Burke of Tacoma knows that first hand, and is facing an uncertain future because of it.
“The charge that the Crown is after is that I do three years in prison,” he told KIRO 7 Investigative Reporter Amy Clancy recently.
Burke says it was a simple mistake, but the Canadian government calls what Burke allegedly did a serious criminal offense.
Burke remembers the day in February when he was arrested while crossing into British Columbia at the Peace Arch: “Mr. Burke, put your hands behind your back. You are under arrest for smuggling a gun into Canada.”
Burke's loaded semi-automatic 9-millimeter handgun was discovered by Canada Border Services Agency officers in the center console of his SUV. Burke is licensed to carry a concealed weapon in the states, but Canadian laws dictate all firearms must be declared at the border. Handguns are strictly prohibited.
Clancy asked Burke, “did you know that it was in your vehicle at the time?”
Burke: “I did not.” Clancy: “Did you just forget?”
Burke: “I just forgot.”
The CBSA declined Clancy’s request for an interview, but the agency's investigation reveals that Burke seemed nervous at the border crossing and had a hard time answering questions.
Once the weapon was found, Burke was handcuffed and put in a cell. He spent eight days in jail before being allowed bail.
His wife of 26 years, Kelli Burke, says she couldn't even speak with him for five days.
“The last thing we heard when we were up there was the prosecutor saying she wouldn’t be happy without a year in prison for him.”
Burke is now charged with five criminal counts, including gun smuggling, lying to border guards, and possessing 85 rounds of ammunition 'for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or for the purpose of committing an offence."
Peter Ritchie, Burke’s Vancouver-based attorney, tells Clancy “if you have a gun in this country, it is considered to be a very serious matter.”
Ritchie believes that most Americans, including gun owners, have no idea how different U.S. and Canadian gun laws are.
“If you come to Canada,” Ritchie said outside a courthouse in Surrey, B.C., “it’s a whole different ballgame here, and you face one year minimum in jail. Even though you may be the sweetest citizen that walked the earth, that’s what you’re looking at here.”
Burke has no criminal history, is a long-time church missionary, and a married father of three. After he was arrested, dozens of Burke's friends and family members wrote to the BC court, asking for leniency. But Canadian gun laws are very strictly enforced.
In 2008, 191 firearms were seized from people crossing into B.C. and the Yukon. This past July, a Bremerton-based Navy sailor was sentenced to a year in jail after pleading guilty to gun smuggling. His BC lawyer, Kelly Merrigan, tells Clancy that he represents about three Americans per year, arrested for carrying handguns into Canada.
Blaine hardware store owner Jerry Wolten used to rent storage space where traveling American gun owners could lock up their weapons. He claims he’d have up to 30 guns stored at a time. Now, according to Wolten, U.S. regulations make it too difficult and too expensive. But he believes the need is still there, telling Clancy “how do you stress it enough to avoid all this? It has to be, just don’t bring it. But there’s not enough education.”
Burke's attorney, Peter Ritchie, agrees, saying “nobody’s going to warn you in advance. I don’t think there are billboards on the highway saying, hey! Don’t forget you’ve got your gun in your car, or you’re looking at a year in jail in this country.”
While Burke awaits his trial date next fall, he's warning others---especially before the Winter Olympics—“if for no other reason than to prevent one fellow American from going through the same thing that I have gone through. That would be reason enough to contact you” he told Clancy.
When Clancy and her photographer, Brian Doerflinger, crossed the border into Canada to work on this story, they looked for any signs warning Americans not to bring weapons. There are signs that tell you to keep right, watch for pedestrians and bicycles, and to “ThinkMetric.” But the only one warning against handguns is right under the Canadian border guard’s window, much too late to turn around.
Excerpt from Ann Coulter...
I LOVE IT!
"Since Muslims took down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, every attack on a commercial airliner has been committed by foreign-born Muslim men with the same hair color, eye color and skin color. Half of them have been named Mohammed.
An alien from the planet "Not Politically Correct" would have surveyed the situation after 9/11 and said: "You are at war with an enemy without uniforms, without morals, without a country and without a leader -- but the one advantage you have is they all look alike. ... What? ... What did I say?"
The only advantage we have in a war with stateless terrorists was ruled out of order ab initio by political correctness.
And so, despite 5 trillion Americans opening laptops, surrendering lip gloss and drinking breast milk in airports day after day for the past eight years, the government still couldn't stop a Nigerian Muslim from nearly blowing up a plane over Detroit on Christmas Day.
The "warning signs" exhibited by this particular passenger included the following:
His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
He's Nigerian.
He's a Muslim.
His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
He boarded a plane in Lagos, Nigeria.
He paid nearly $3,000 in cash for his ticket.
He had no luggage.
His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
Two months ago, his father warned the U.S. that he was a radical Muslim and possibly dangerous.
If our security procedures can't stop this guy, can't we just dispense with those procedures altogether? What's the point exactly?
(To be fair, the father's warning might have been taken more seriously if he had not simultaneously asked for the U.S. Embassy's Social Security number and bank routing number in order to convey a $28 million inheritance that was trapped in a Nigerian bank account.)
The warning from Abdulmutallab's father put his son on some list, but not the "no fly" list. Apparently, it's tougher to get on the "no fly" list than it was to get into Studio 54 in the '70s. Currently, the only people on the "no fly" list" are the Blind Sheik and Sean Penn.
The government is like the drunk looking for his keys under a lamppost. Someone stops to help, and asks, "Is this where you lost them?" No, the drunk answers, but the light's better here."
Original Article:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35037
"Since Muslims took down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, every attack on a commercial airliner has been committed by foreign-born Muslim men with the same hair color, eye color and skin color. Half of them have been named Mohammed.
An alien from the planet "Not Politically Correct" would have surveyed the situation after 9/11 and said: "You are at war with an enemy without uniforms, without morals, without a country and without a leader -- but the one advantage you have is they all look alike. ... What? ... What did I say?"
The only advantage we have in a war with stateless terrorists was ruled out of order ab initio by political correctness.
And so, despite 5 trillion Americans opening laptops, surrendering lip gloss and drinking breast milk in airports day after day for the past eight years, the government still couldn't stop a Nigerian Muslim from nearly blowing up a plane over Detroit on Christmas Day.
The "warning signs" exhibited by this particular passenger included the following:
His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
He's Nigerian.
He's a Muslim.
His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
He boarded a plane in Lagos, Nigeria.
He paid nearly $3,000 in cash for his ticket.
He had no luggage.
His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
Two months ago, his father warned the U.S. that he was a radical Muslim and possibly dangerous.
If our security procedures can't stop this guy, can't we just dispense with those procedures altogether? What's the point exactly?
(To be fair, the father's warning might have been taken more seriously if he had not simultaneously asked for the U.S. Embassy's Social Security number and bank routing number in order to convey a $28 million inheritance that was trapped in a Nigerian bank account.)
The warning from Abdulmutallab's father put his son on some list, but not the "no fly" list. Apparently, it's tougher to get on the "no fly" list than it was to get into Studio 54 in the '70s. Currently, the only people on the "no fly" list" are the Blind Sheik and Sean Penn.
The government is like the drunk looking for his keys under a lamppost. Someone stops to help, and asks, "Is this where you lost them?" No, the drunk answers, but the light's better here."
Original Article:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35037
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Avatar - Avatater... Subtlety???
Did I miss something plot wise? James Cameron having zero originality? I mean, you basically could have replaced the mining corporation with Haliburton, made it oil instead of “unobtanium” (real original, by the way), and made it Iraq instead of Pandora, and nothing would have changed at all.
On another forum I lurk at, someone posted up this:
2. It’s written and directed by James Cameron. Which means, if Titanic is anything to go by, this movie’ll
a. Be at least an hour too long;
b. Be self-indulgent twaddle;
c. Be over-wrought and sodden with simplistic & simple-minded moralizing;
d. Have a piss-poor plot so full of holes you could sail the Titanic through;
e. Be stuffed full of 2-dimensional characters (more caricature than character) emoting and chewing the scenery;
f. Have dialogue so childish, so shi_tty and so banal you have to wonder if it’s not in fact a parody on bad movie-making;
g. Have 2 hours of mind-numbing dullness building up towards the climax of an hour or so of total action.
The knowledge of impending cool special effects and big explosions is to ensure the male theater goer remains in the theater while the drippy love story being played out in the first 2 hours is there to entertain the female theater goer. I notice the trailers focus almost solely on, what I’m assuming, will be the final battle scenes. Which makes one wonder what happens to get us to that point and why is it not worth promoting.
On another forum I lurk at, someone posted up this:
2. It’s written and directed by James Cameron. Which means, if Titanic is anything to go by, this movie’ll
a. Be at least an hour too long;
b. Be self-indulgent twaddle;
c. Be over-wrought and sodden with simplistic & simple-minded moralizing;
d. Have a piss-poor plot so full of holes you could sail the Titanic through;
e. Be stuffed full of 2-dimensional characters (more caricature than character) emoting and chewing the scenery;
f. Have dialogue so childish, so shi_tty and so banal you have to wonder if it’s not in fact a parody on bad movie-making;
g. Have 2 hours of mind-numbing dullness building up towards the climax of an hour or so of total action.
The knowledge of impending cool special effects and big explosions is to ensure the male theater goer remains in the theater while the drippy love story being played out in the first 2 hours is there to entertain the female theater goer. I notice the trailers focus almost solely on, what I’m assuming, will be the final battle scenes. Which makes one wonder what happens to get us to that point and why is it not worth promoting.
Are the Democrats gonna get our guns?
I've been sitting and patiently watching and observing since the election to see what will happen.
The 2nd Amendment and gun rights are a political mine field for the democrats and those idiots have been regularly blowing their limbs off right and left in that mine field.
Any anonymous person out there on the world wide web care to help me get inside their heads and see what rational they employ in their desire to disarm the law abiding American public?
The 2nd Amendment and gun rights are a political mine field for the democrats and those idiots have been regularly blowing their limbs off right and left in that mine field.
Any anonymous person out there on the world wide web care to help me get inside their heads and see what rational they employ in their desire to disarm the law abiding American public?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
