View Full Version : Obama, Reid slam brakes on gun control
I just came across this article via a friend. It's leaving me asking myself, WTF?!?!
http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-reid-slam-brakes-on-gun-control/article/2516406#.UNN_0ncYMgM
Maybe they have been doing some thinking. And I wonder what the NRA will say tomorrow.
whiterabbit05
12-20-12, 15:37
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Interesting. Maybe Dirty Harry knows its a lost cause to commit political suicide.
From the article...
“I’m going to be one of the more cautious (ones) about doing anything on new gun laws,” Alaska Democratic Sen. Mark Begich told the Anchorage Daily News. “I want to be careful that we just don’t start throwing new laws on the books, driven by emotion, when we need to refocus on this whole issue.” Begich told the paper he preferred to concentrate on the mental illness involved in recent shootings.
Damn straight. He knows for sure that if he votes any new types of gun control in he is finished in Alaska.
Voodoo_Man
12-20-12, 15:49
Interesting. Maybe Dirty Harry knows its a lost cause to commit political suicide.
Obama and Biden do not care about political suicide as they are dead in the water in 4 years.
People know what happened in '94 when the ban took effect, anyone attached to it was a loser.
I'm glad we can leverage their self-serving political career interest and re-election against them.
Still worried about CA though. They want pass some crazy shit through SB-47.
Pelosi and Feinstien will take up the duty. The California morons always reelect them.
Obama and Biden do not care about political suicide as they are dead in the water in 4 years.
People know what happened in '94 when the ban took effect, anyone attached to it was a loser.
True but Senators and Congressmen arent. If he forces them to jump on this wagon they are in for a fight next election. Plus if he pisses them off too much he looses support for whatever BS bills he tries to pass the next 4 years.
Agree, with m249. Someone walked in the middle of the discussions and drew this on the whiteboard: fiscal cliff bs laws > gun control bs laws
Doc Safari
12-20-12, 16:22
Interesting. I stated in another thread that this Biden committee looked suspiciously like a delaying action while emotions die down and I couldn't understand why Barry would want to muddle his own momentum, basically. I also wondered what he could possibly do by executive order without blatantly going around the Constitution.
Still, I don't trust these people.
The only thing I can glean from this is that they are watching people join the NRA in droves and buy up gun stuff by the truckloads. They see voters not on board with new gun control.
Time will tell. Not gonna pop the champagne cork just yet.
Business_Casual
12-20-12, 16:30
They must have gotten poll numbers that scared them. Harry probably told Obama "you're on your own, bro" and there's no way Obama is going to put forward something that is going to make him look stupid.
Or, the MKUltra guys need some extra time to cook up the next mass shooter.
j/k
:cool:
:confused:
;)
bc
ICANHITHIMMAN
12-20-12, 16:45
So I read it and I will admit I'm not sure I fully grasp it. I'm not that politically savvy. Hill you dumb it and sum it for me guys?
So I read it and I will admit I'm not sure I fully grasp it. I'm not that politically savvy. Hill you dumb it and sum it for me guys?
Maybe the see the writing on the wall of what happens to their job when they piss enough people off.
That was yesterday. Today, Eric Holder said he and Obama were discussing moving things along by Executive Order.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/eric-holder-executive-orders-on-gun-control/article/2516519
Voodoo_Man
12-20-12, 18:02
True but Senators and Congressmen arent. If he forces them to jump on this wagon they are in for a fight next election. Plus if he pisses them off too much he looses support for whatever BS bills he tries to pass the next 4 years.
That is fine.
Everyone who supporting Zero this time around is going to see their pockets get empty and crime/violence impact their lives. I hope the next conservative candidate will not be a lame duck so he will get elected; at this point if you are a congressman or senator and you jump on board to any sort of legislation against firearms they will be hurting come election time since Zero won't be around to make pretty speech's for them.
That was yesterday. Today, Eric Holder said he and Obama were discussing moving things along by Executive Order.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/eric-holder-executive-orders-on-gun-control/article/2516519
That is fine, 4 years of a ban? I can deal with that and then its gone.
Quote:Pelosi and Feinstien will take up the duty. The California morons always reelect them.
Hey, don't blame me, I've against them every chance I get. I'd like to get my hands on anyone that votes for them.
Nothing has really changed. The first article says they're going to look at all of the options before rushing into anything. Maybe they'll still want an AW ban, maybe they'll enact tighter controls on distribution to the public, maybe none of the above. Senator Reid said "every idea should be on the table...we have to have full discussion". What else do you want them to say?
And even if there was a conservative Republican in office right now, he would be saying that they need to have discussions. He would be foolish not to say that. You can't dismiss the option of looking at something, if you haven't looked into it. And while the President has expressed his support of tighter firearms restrictions, he doesn't seem to be rushing to judgement; he's seems to be allowing time for the emotions of the situation to settle. Senator Reid, as stated above, isn't trying to legislate anything at this point. House Speaker Boehner is saying exactly what the others are saying which is they need to have discussions. Finally, the AG doesn't speak for the President; he advises the President. Not the same thing.
The drunk uncle at the Christmas party heading up a "commission"= dog and pony show with monkeys dancing on the dogs. And the frantic arming of America continues........
Glad they're at least not straining themselves around the holidays, passing an unconstitutional law through the house and senate is complicated. Better to just use an unconstitutional executive order for the task :mad:
Hilariously left-wing article is hilariously left-wing.
Go read the caption on the first article I :lol: then remembered how the average American will read that and :eek:
CaptainDooley
12-20-12, 20:55
Well, at least that's probably easier to fight in court, since the entire modern concept of executive order is grossly unconstitutional. Maybe we could get a decent ruling limiting the Executive Branch's power in the process.
That was yesterday. Today, Eric Holder said he and Obama were discussing moving things along by Executive Order.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/eric-holder-executive-orders-on-gun-control/article/2516519
Obama and Biden do not care about political suicide as they are dead in the water in 4 years.
People know what happened in '94 when the ban took effect, anyone attached to it was a loser.
Just because they are pretty much out(well you never know Biden could try to come back and do something else) doesn't mean they want to commit political suicide. They don't want to loose support for the mid term election and in a way they don't want to screw over their party because they want their friends to stay in power.
Mind you this is not to say they will not try something sneaky.
Is this the reason why? https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=119241
Alaskapopo
12-20-12, 23:04
Could be they realize it won't be as easy as they think to pass an AWB and this allows them to save face with their Anti gun backers.
Pat
They also have to realize that SCOTUS (where just about any 2A bill/law will end up) doesn't exactly seem to be on their side lately, at least in this arena.
Heck, they actually could be coming to the realization that the existing laws, if enforced, are actually sufficient, and that this is more of a criminality/mental health issue than an evil-black-piece-of-metal issue.
Wouldn't bet on it, though. If they did walk away from the gun issue, it would be a calculated move. They aren't stupid.
NoveskeFan
12-20-12, 23:17
Is this the reason why? https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=119241
The only thing I could find referencing 4 handguns was from Friday. I haven't seen any new links to back this up.
I was young in 1993 and more interested in chasing girls than following politics.
But I do recall that the AWB had a hell of an uphill battle. And if memory serves correctly, the inclusion of the sunset provision was pretty much the only way it eked by. Today, nearly two decades later, most of the country has permitted concealed carry, the AR-15 is in common usage and probably the #1 selling gun, standard capacity magazines are in circulation to the tune of millions or 10s of millions (if not more), and firearms aren't as taboo as they used to be, and the 2nd amendment has been incorporated and individualized. Not to mention the brutal drumming out the Democrats got in 1994, blamed almost exclusively on the AWB. Also today we have the internet and can organize and mobilize like never before.
The point is, whether we see it or not, we are living in a much, much gun friendlier times these days. If an AWB was a struggle to pass 20 years ago, in that climate, imagine the difficulty it will have today. And other than the usual suspects, noboby is really calling for gun control anyway.
Now, I don't think we should let our guard down. We need to join the NRA and make sure our congresspeople know how we feel. But try to keep things in perspective.
Finally, the AG doesn't speak for the President; he advises the President. Not the same thing.
Yes. Sounds like he was advising him on the extent of his executive power and they were discussing how much gun control he could exert by Executive Order. Do you think he told Obama that there was nothing he could do by Executive Order?
sinlessorrow
12-21-12, 06:20
That was yesterday. Today, Eric Holder said he and Obama were discussing moving things along by Executive Order.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/eric-holder-executive-orders-on-gun-control/article/2516519
That's cute....EO's do not work that way.
Bolt_Overide
12-21-12, 06:30
somethings fishy in this.
The greatest irony of any/all legislation proposed will be that it is aimed at gun owners, while the crime was perpetrated by someone who was not a gun owner. Could it be any more apparent that this is all just vindictive legislation under the guise of "safety"?
No matter what these guys say do not believe them. They are snakes in the grass and will sell us out each and every chance they get. They don't believe, respect or intend on defending the Constitution. They want to destroy it.
The greatest irony of any/all legislation proposed will be that it is aimed at gun owners, while the crime was perpetrated by someone who was not a gun owner. Could it be any more apparent that this is all just vindictive legislation under the guise of "safety"?
I just caught a Biden soundbite that included the '...even if it saves only one life...' gambit. Let's play that game with all of our constitutional rights, shall we?
I just caught a Biden soundbite that included the '...even if it saves only one life...' gambit. Let's play that game with all of our constitutional rights, shall we?
Then someone darn well better call him on that if he proposes anything short of a comprehensive and immediate ban/confiscation of every single firearm in the nation. Because allowing a 10-round magazine would be 10 lives lost, by his ridiculous measuring system. Typical inconsistent liberal grandstanding playing on emotions and not logic.
Typical inconsistent liberal grandstanding playing on emotions and not logic.
Definitely. It's a nice catch-all for when they have no reasonable arguments to offer back. (Which is why they would kick off their council on this issue with such a statement, of course.)
That's cute....EO's do not work that way.
I'm sure you're a real smart guy and all. Maybe you should write Holder and Obama and explain to them how they do work.
Business_Casual
12-21-12, 08:43
That's cute....EO's do not work that way.
Obama went to Harvard Law School and Holder went to Columbia. So where did you get your JD?
bc
montanadave
12-21-12, 08:57
Obama and Holder went to Harvard Law School. So where did you get your JD?
bc
Harvard, schmarvard! Ya don't need some high-faluutin' degree to practice law on the intergoogle! Give us a high-speed internet connection and we're all constitutional lawyers. :laugh:
This is all a tad crazy. We're arguing amongst ourselves over the details of a police investigation no one has seen and legislation and/or administrative policies that haven't been written yet.
Our energies are better spent contacting our legislators and convincing folks of the statistical insignificance of mass casualty murders and the futility of an AWB in preventing lunatics from killing people when they decide to twist off.
Obama went to Harvard Law School and Holder went to Columbia. So where did you get your JD?
bc
Apparently they missed the class on the US Constitution.
Doc Safari
12-21-12, 09:10
But I do recall that the AWB had a hell of an uphill battle. And if memory serves correctly, the inclusion of the sunset provision was pretty much the only way it eked by.
You are correct. It was pushed through under suspicious circumstances like Obamacare. IIRC it was voted on while Sarah Brady paraded Jim Brady up the aisles of Congress in a wheelchair lobbying Congressmen or Senators (I forget which) even as the vote was being taken.
Today, nearly two decades later, most of the country has permitted concealed carry, the AR-15 is in common usage and probably the #1 selling gun, standard capacity magazines are in circulation to the tune of millions or 10s of millions (if not more), and firearms aren't as taboo as they used to be, and the 2nd amendment has been incorporated and individualized. Not to mention the brutal drumming out the Democrats got in 1994, blamed almost exclusively on the AWB. Also today we have the internet and can organize and mobilize like never before.
The point is, whether we see it or not, we are living in a much, much gun friendlier times these days. If an AWB was a struggle to pass 20 years ago, in that climate, imagine the difficulty it will have today. And other than the usual suspects, noboby is really calling for gun control anyway.
Now, I don't think we should let our guard down. We need to join the NRA and make sure our congresspeople know how we feel. But try to keep things in perspective.
Absolutely we do not want to let our guard down. As soon as they think they are losing they will start pulling shenanigans.
Obama went to Harvard Law School and Holder went to Columbia. So where did you get your JD?
bc
That means a lot less than people realize. And their actions indicate that while they may have been enrolled in class, they either didn't diligently attend or get the point if they did.
Doc Safari
12-21-12, 09:21
Barry's next gambit:
http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/washington/2012/12/obama-to-address-gun-control-petition-.html
December 21, 2012
Obama calls on public to lobby Congress on gun restrictions
Obama urges viewers to call Congress "as many times as it takes" to push for gun restrictions.
"If we're going to succeed it's going to take a sustained effort," Obama says in the video. "You started something and now I'm asking you to keep at it."
Petitions relating to gun violence have amassed more than 400,000 signatures, making it one of the most popular petition issues since the White House launched We the People. One of the gun petitions was the fastest petition ever to reach the 25,000 signature threshold required for White House review.
NEVER FORGET THAT THE GUN CONTROL FIGHT IS A TWO-WAY RANGE.
And I love one of the comments posted in response to the article:
I remember well when I banned guns from a certain religous group........boy, was that a good move, considering what came later!
Posted by: Adolf
This is all a tad crazy. We're arguing amongst ourselves over the details of a police investigation no one has seen and legislation and/or administrative policies that haven't been written yet.
...and legal, legislative, and political considerations and maneuvering that the smartest guy on this gun forum knows little or nothing about.
They don't need to calculate what's right or legal, they just need to calculate what this lame duck administration can get away with.
Doc Safari
12-21-12, 10:10
Petitions relating to gun violence have amassed more than 400,000 signatures, making it one of the most popular petition issues since the White House launched We the People. One of the gun petitions was the fastest petition ever to reach the 25,000 signature threshold required for White House review.
While we're on this subject...where do we go to start a petition the other way? Is there a pro-gun petition or more than one already? Is it the White House website where they pledge to answer any petition that gets more than 25,000 signatures?
If so, we need to jump on this ASAP!!!!!!
Seems like we need to fight fire with fire here.
While we're on this subject...where do we go to start a petition the other way? Is there a pro-gun petition or more than one already? Is it the White House website where they pledge to answer any petition that gets more than 25,000 signatures?
If so, we need to jump on this ASAP!!!!!!
Seems like we need to fight fire with fire here.
I searched and didn't find one so I started it. Sign it here:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/not-infringe-upon-2nd-amendment-rights-instituting-any-new-form-firearms-ban-legislation-or/v4TVyn8w
I'm thinking that only a blind person cannot see the ever-changing stories of what took place and perhaps Obama & Company are on to the False Flag operation.
Suwannee Tim
12-25-12, 17:18
Harry Reid is bought and paid for by the NRA which doesn't mean he will stay bought. He doesn't run for re-election for another four years and may decide or may have decided to retire. He may decide he no longer needs the NRA. Or he may stay bought. Obama doesn't want to loose the Senate in two years. How this might effect the Senate in two years is beyond my expertise, it would have to be analyzed state by state, all 33 or 34 however many Senators are up for re-election in 2014. Obama would like to take the House in 2014 and won't risk that opportunity for gun control. Obama will screw a constituency or members of his own party without hesitation. He did it to get Obamacare through, a good many House Dems lost their seats for that. He will screw the gun control crowd in a New York minute if he calculates it gains him something. Gun control is a wedge issue against Democrats. There are more than a few Dems who have supported gun rights and who's constituents expect them to continue to support gun rights. A gun control fight will drive a wedge in the Democrat party and unify the Republicans, not something the Prez or Harry Reid will do eagerly.
As far as Executive Orders, the Prez can issue any EO he sees fit. If it is unconstitutional it falls to the opponents to prove it in District court, Appeals court then the SCOTUS, a long process. Then the court will simply tell the POTUS to stop. The Prez could goof us up big time if he wants. Simply declare semi-autos to be class 3 for example. He could freeze the gun market for two years while the case wound it's way through court. By that time he may have replaced a Justice or two or three and it could be upheld by the SCOTUS. And no, I don't have a Harvard law degree.
CarlosDJackal
12-25-12, 19:17
Obama and Biden do not care about political suicide as they are dead in the water in 4 years.
People know what happened in '94 when the ban took effect, anyone attached to it was a loser.
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS. A double-edged sword if there was ever one.
I searched and didn't find one so I started it. Sign it here:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/not-infringe-upon-2nd-amendment-rights-instituting-any-new-form-firearms-ban-legislation-or/v4TVyn8w
I could have sworn I saw a petition similar to yours days ago. Now can find very little pro gun...
After a user creates a petition, he or she will receive a direct link to that petition that may be sent to friends, posted on social networks, or otherwise shared in order to gain signatures for the petition. If the petition meets a pre-set signature threshold within a designated time period, the petition will become visible to individuals browsing or searching the White House website. If enough users sign the petition to reach a second pre-set signature threshold within that time period, the White House commits to respond to the petition in a timely fashion. The White House may also elect to respond to any petition before it reaches the first or second threshold. Once the White House responds to a petition, it is closed to additional signatures.
I'm wondering are they responding to the pro 2A petitions by saying go screw yourselves and then taking them off the site?
There is no way you can be the first to make a pro 2A petition.
Magic_Salad0892
12-25-12, 19:49
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS.
WHAT?
Voodoochild
12-25-12, 19:52
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS. A double-edged sword if there was ever one.
Please cite your sources. Also it will never happen.
Cincinnatus
12-25-12, 20:36
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS. A double-edged sword if there was ever one.
It cannot happen due to the fact that it would take an AMENDMENT to the Constitution to effect. The 22nd Amendment forbids any president from serving more than two terms, it is not just a law of Congress. Then again, the Libs ignore the 2nd and the 1st when it suits them, but I don't see how they could get around this particular one.
Doc Safari
12-25-12, 20:38
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS. A double-edged sword if there was ever one.
This is tinfoil. I guarantee you I heard the same thing about Clinton all those years ago.
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS. A double-edged sword if there was ever one.
Oh come on. That would require a constitutional amendment. It would have to be passed by both houses of Congress then ratified by 3/4 of the states.
In fact, such an amendment has been proposed 21 times over the last 20 years. It's never made it out of committee.
I just came across this article via a friend. It's leaving me asking myself, WTF?!?!
http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-reid-slam-brakes-on-gun-control/article/2516406#.UNN_0ncYMgM
Maybe they have been doing some thinking. And I wonder what the NRA will say tomorrow.
This was embedded within your link....http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-feinstein-suggests-national-buyback-of-guns/article/2516648
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she and other gun control advocates are considering a law that would create a program to purchase weapons from gun owners, a proposal that could be compulsory.
Don't you believe a thing these reprobates have to say, they are coming for the 2nd amendment, Hussein Obama has had this scoped out from his very first day, as have the rest of the socialists...
bondmid003
12-25-12, 22:44
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS. A double-edged sword if there was ever one.
Brother this is the kind of stuff that makes gun owners look like tin foil hat wearers
Oh come on. That would require a constitutional amendment. It would have to be passed by both houses of Congress then ratified by 3/4 of the states.
In fact, such an amendment has been proposed 21 times over the last 20 years. It's never made it out of committee.
I don't think we'll ever see 3/4 of the states agree on anything, ever again.
MountainRaven
12-26-12, 08:26
This is tinfoil. I guarantee you I heard the same thing about Clinton all those years ago.
I heard about it with George W. Bush.
There are rumors of revoking the 2-term limit for POTUS. A double-edged sword if there was ever one.
I wouldn't believe this. It would require an amendment to the Constitution to repeal the 22nd amendment.
I searched and didn't find one so I started it. Sign it here:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/not-infringe-upon-2nd-amendment-rights-instituting-any-new-form-firearms-ban-legislation-or/v4TVyn8w
Finally found ( through a local web site ) one of the other petitions.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stop-any-legislation-will-ban-assualt-weapons-semi-automatic-rifles-or-handguns-and-high-capacity/bjlkvNSf
brushy bill
12-27-12, 00:59
Finally found ( through a local web site ) one of the other petitions.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stop-any-legislation-will-ban-assualt-weapons-semi-automatic-rifles-or-handguns-and-high-capacity/bjlkvNSf
I signed, but would give us some credibility if the originator used spell check..."assualt"...really? And throughout?
ThirdWatcher
12-27-12, 03:17
I really do not have our "leaders" figured out. If they ordered America to arm up, Americans would have refused... but by their actions, America has become better armed (and safer, IMO) than ever. :confused:
Take a look at Dianne Feinsteins press page. They are going all out to get rid of assault weapons. It's very clear from the wording they are going to try and have them registered just like NFA weapons.
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons
You know what, **** it. Ban everything. And when the mass murders don't stop, crime doesn't go down, rape and robbery go up, and not a ****ing thing is fixed AGAIN real leaders can repeal this bullshit and we can be done with it.
You know what, **** it. Ban everything. And when the mass murders don't stop, crime doesn't go down, rape and robbery go up, and not a ****ing thing is fixed AGAIN real leaders can repeal this bullshit and we can be done with it.
What rights that have been given away have ever been recovered?
What makes you think we'll ever get real leaders when half of the population is on the government tit?
You know what, **** it. Ban everything. And when the mass murders don't stop, crime doesn't go down, rape and robbery go up, and not a ****ing thing is fixed AGAIN real leaders can repeal this bullshit and we can be done with it.
Or we could just refer to the crime stats of Great Britain, now the most violent crime country in Europe and they have all the gun laws for which our progressives salivate.
Think about this. How long did it take for Prohibition to be repealed even though there was plenty of violence to go around?
We have had numerous attacks on the 2A and every one has led to more and more shit.
You know what, **** it. Ban everything. And when the mass murders don't stop, crime doesn't go down, rape and robbery go up, and not a ****ing thing is fixed AGAIN real leaders can repeal this bullshit and we can be done with it.
Alaskapopo
12-27-12, 05:43
Or we could just refer to the crime stats of Great Britain, now the most violent crime country in Europe and they have all the gun laws for which our progressives salivate.
On the outside they talk about crime rates but the antis don't really care about crime they are offended by people owning guns period. Its about control not gun control.
Pat
RogerinTPA
12-27-12, 07:56
Take a look at Dianne Feinsteins press page. They are going all out to get rid of assault weapons. It's very clear from the wording they are going to try and have them registered just like NFA weapons.
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons
Agreed. It may only be the first step in there socialist agenda.
Voodoo_Man
12-27-12, 07:59
On the outside they talk about crime rates but the antis don't really care about crime they are offended by people owning guns period. Its about control not gun control.
Pat
I agree. Most anti gun nuts simply do not want guns or see need in their personal lives for them and not only do not want to hear arguement but reject the concept of gun ownership.
That which can be presented with no valid proof can be disregarded as easily. Easier to ignore these people as thinking on their level will require some sort of mental handicap.
Or we could just refer to the crime stats of Great Britain, now the most violent crime country in Europe and they have all the gun laws for which our progressives salivate.
GB official position is that gun ban was not enough to reduce crime and further restrictions are needed. So now they are going into air rifle ban (ASG is already registered). Knives, except those permanently in your kitchen are already banned and you can be arrested for having screwdriver in your car. Surveillance cameras on every corner. And rest of EU really thinks that GB is example to follow :mad:
Or we could just refer to the crime stats of Great Britain, now the most violent crime country in Europe and they have all the gun laws for which our progressives salivate.
Got a link to this crime data? Sure would be handy when discussing the ban with such folks.
Got a link to this crime data? Sure would be handy when discussing the ban with such folks.
Here? http://www.gunfacts.info/
Here? http://www.gunfacts.info/
We need freely available data we can actually use in discussions online with the left.
We need freely available data we can actually use in discussions online with the left.
As far as I noticed it is free and they cite sources for every info in the book.
We need to get some data out there about AR's. I know crime hasn't gone up in proportion to ownership. I can't imagine how many ARs and 30rnd mags have been sold in the past 10 years.
As far as I noticed it is free and they cite sources for every info in the book.
Thanks, I missed the PDF links.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.