View Full Version : American Bar Association Asks States to Adopt Firearm Confiscation Laws
platoonDaddy
08-22-17, 07:19
Those sons-of-ho's
The American Bar Association is pushing state and local governments to adopt firearm confiscation laws similar to those in California.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/21/american-bar-association-asks-states-to-adopt-firearm-confiscation-laws/
Boy, just what we need to do is adopt something from Kali. I don't think so.
The statement, "I will not comply.", comes to mind.
Averageman
08-22-17, 08:09
It would certainly be an economic boondoggle for Attorneys. Think of all of the new cases to be litigated at 250 to 400 an hour.
Follow the money and to hell with your freedoms.
What, attorneys advocating policy that requires more work from the legal system? #Cashcow.
#go to hell american boar association
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
Law schools churn out thousands of indoctrinated liberal/progressive lawyers every year. There are too many of them, and they need to generate business by thinking up new ways to infringe on our rights. Not all of them, but most of them. They are certainly the enemy of freedom, and are often statists, and globalists.
Ironic that lawyers are recommending policies that don't have due process of law. :mad:
Averageman
08-22-17, 17:26
Law schools churn out thousands of indoctrinated liberal/progressive lawyers every year. There are too many of them, and they need to generate business by thinking up new ways to infringe on our rights. Not all of them, but most of them. They are certainly the enemy of freedom, and are often statists, and globalists.
I've got a great idea, I live in Texas so why don't we let the California Lawyers start at the front end of my block. Bring about two hundred or so though because it's going to get dicey for them when they announce "Hi, we're from California and we are here to take away your guns." they might make it past the third house with two hundred.
I wonder what the taxidermist would charge me???
The statement, "I will not comply.", comes to mind.
That is why it is called "confiscation" and not "please turn them in".
It would certainly be an economic boondoggle for Attorneys. Think of all of the new cases to be litigated at 250 to 400 an hour.
Follow the money and to hell with your freedoms.
Beat me to it. When I saw this on another forum late last night, that was my first thought.
"...The more I think about it ol Billy was right, let's kill all the lawyers, kill em tonight..."
Beat me to it. When I saw this on another forum late last night, that was my first thought.
"....."
I don't care if you're quoting something. GTF outta here with that shit.
Back on topic, not surprising. Another large powerful organization that's left leaning. Time to defund the FJE
Eurodriver
08-22-17, 18:10
I don't care if you're quoting something. GTF outta here with that shit.
GD strikes again with sweeping generalizations and calls for murder.
FWIW - We owe our gun club to lawyers. Who worked pro-bono. And are great shooters. And good human beings.
It was a tongue in cheek reference to an Eagles song which draws on the famous Shakespeare quote. It was not a call to go on a murdering spree of attorneys.
FlyingHunter
08-22-17, 18:55
The statement, "I will not comply.", comes to mind.
or...Shall not be Infringed
titsonritz
08-22-17, 19:33
What do you call ten thousand lawyer at the bottom of the ocean?
A good start.
dwhitehorne
08-22-17, 19:45
I thought lawyers had to take some type of oath stating they would uphold the Constitution of the United States and the state they are licensed in. I guess they don't cover the Bill of Rights part. David
They are certainly the enemy of freedom, and are often statists, and globalists.
... and then they get elected to public office.
This resolution is aimed at preventing gun-related DV homicides, not confiscating the firearms of the general population.
I know that many are concerned about ANY such legislation, but make your decision after some research, beyond a biased Breitbart article.
This is the ABA Resolution and Introduction:
RESOLUTION
RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges state, local, territorial, and tribal governments to enact statutes, rules, or regulations authorizing courts to issue gun violence restraining orders, including ex parte orders, that include at least the following provisions:
1. That a person (a “petitioner”) with documented evidence that another person (a “respondent”) poses a serious threat to himself or herself or others may petition a court for an order temporarily suspending the respondent’s possession of a firearm or ammunition;
2. That there shall be a verifiable procedure to ensure the surrender of firearms and ammunition pursuant to the court order; and
3. That the issuance of the gun violence restraining order shall be reported to appropriate state or federal databases in order to prevent respondent from passing a background check required to purchase a firearm or obtain a firearm license or permit while restraining order is in effect.
I. Introduction
There are few more contentious issues in our public policy debates than the contours of “the right to keep and bear arms.” Increasingly, however, there is consensus that guns should be kept away from those whose behavior suggests that they would be dangerous to themselves or others if they possessed a weapon. This resolution takes a small step toward translating that consensus into common-sense legal terms. A Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO) is a simple legal procedure to enable courts to remove guns from those who are proven likely to use them dangerously, and to do so in compliance with the Second Amendment and Due Process protections of the Constitution. The American Bar Association should continue its long tradition of being at the forefront of policy-making that meets the challenge of the gun violence crisis, which seriously threatens the health and welfare of the people of the United States.
I bolded the text in the introduction. You can read the rest here by clicking on the links on the page: https://www.americanbar.org/news/reporter_resources/annual-meeting-2017/house-of-delegates-resolutions/118b.html
I feel the due process portion of the resolution is where most will have a problem:
B. Due Process
Procedures for obtaining a GVRO can also be instituted so as to satisfy the requirements of the Due Process Clause. These procedures are generally based on existing domestic violence laws that courts have repeatedly upheld against due process challenges. (The legal basis for these challenges lies in the court’s authority to issue an ex parte order before a full hearing occurs, which is neither explicitly required nor precluded by this resolution.)
In Blazel v. Bradley, 698 F. Supp. 756, 768 (W.D. Wis. 1988), a federal district court held that a Wisconsin law allowing victims of domestic abuse to seek ex parte restraining orders against their abusers was constitutional and satisfied due process requirements. The court emphasized that the procedure under Wisconsin law requires:
1. Judicial participation;
2. A verified petition containing detailed allegations before the ex parte order is issued;
3. A prompt hearing; and
4. An allegation of risk of imminent and irreparable harm based on personal knowledge of the respondent.
Courts across the country have come to similar conclusions. They have rejected due process challenges to ex parte domestic violence orders issued after these or similar requirements have been met.
The resolution accompanying this report explicitly requires that a GVRO be consistent with the strictures of the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. In particular, the provisions outlined in subsections 1 through 3 of the resolution set specific standards that comport with due process. It is left to the states to determine whether or not to provide for an ex parte order, and, if so, to ensure that such a provision is consistent with due process.
I may be jaded because of my involvement in teaching classes on DV and helping craft our state's first mandatory arrest law and the initial model policy for LE agencies.
YMMV
SeriousStudent
08-22-17, 22:06
Every night before I go to sleep, I say a prayer for lawyers like Alan Gura. If you do not know who he is, go look him up. Then be thankful.
I'd also like to introduce you folks to Greg Bell and Sean Cody. Both are attorneys, shooters and NFA enthusiasts.
Greg's a mod here, and Sean contributes valuable advice in our NFA subforum.
So, about that broad brush........
A Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO) is a simple legal procedure to enable courts to remove guns from those who are proven likely to use them dangerously
and lets pic out a couple key words
REMOVE
LIKELY
DANGEROUSLY
the idea again is to be able to choose who THEY think is likely to be dangerous ? and what is dangerous ? and what is likely ?
today Paul Ryan wants more gun control against people that might do something and are SUSPECTED of domestic terrorism
so yeah I think this is again a tin foil thing ! but it all fits ;)
so why do I have a issue with this ? its all based on someone turning someone in and then some lefties deciding you MIGHT do something DANGEROUS so they can REMOVE your guns from you !!!!
OK once again the creep and not doing anything with current laws
sadly they do not do anything to actual criminals now !
they harbor known criminals !
they do not even bother with current laws to stop people etc..
and the list goes on
OK, again let me reiterate that the quotated portion of my initial post was, and remains, a purely tongue in cheek comment and nothing more.
I have one relative and many close, personal friends who are attorneys. All of them hold themselves to the highest standards of professionalism. That said, there is no denying that all in the profession do not. This statement extends to judges as well.
My concern with this resolution is mainly with the ambiguous language, as has been referenced by another member. There is quite a leap being made in comparing legislation of this type to temporary restraining orders or emergency protective orders. It has more similarity to an emergency detention order for a person exhibiting signs of mental crisis. That being the case it should have similar restrictions. Restraining orders and protective orders are often issued as a matter of course by the courts in even the most mundane divorce suits absent of even a threat of violence. Ask me how I know.
I have no problem with legislation that is properly drafted with specific language. It is the legislation that is haphazardly drafted and enacted that troubles me. There are enough examples of such legislation that have been enacted in the past that don't even come close to infringing upon God given and Constitutionally protected and guaranteed rights to risk allowing even one that does.
In closing, I will offer my sincere apology to both Greg Bell and Sean Cody, for my aforementioned tongue in cheek comment. It was an attempt at humor and perhaps didn't come across as such. I fully understand the offense that can sometimes be taken when being subjected to criticism that is painted with a broad brush.
Reference "gun violence restraining orders" and the due process involved requiring:
1. Judicial participation;
2. A verified petition containing detailed allegations before the ex parte order is issued;
3. A prompt hearing; and
4. An allegation of risk of imminent and irreparable harm based on personal knowledge of the respondent.
Very persuasive. Forgive me, but the current political climate makes me VERY skeptical of the "process". I think political correctness--not justice--now drives everything. The law has been weaponized; anybody can allege anything and everything and bury the designated offender under the rubble. High fives all around.
Justice, like Elvis, has left the building.
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-23-17, 00:00
If we want to keep our toys and cool stuff we need have a way to keep guns out of and take guns away from crazy people. Some people objectively should not have guns. We need to figure out a way to keep them out of the hands of people that will hurt others or themselves. Considering that suicides are a major cause of gun deaths, there are a lot of gun deaths that could be avoided and potentially a lot of lives saved. How to do that is a really tough question.
I may be jaded because of my involvement in teaching classes on DV and helping craft our state's first mandatory arrest law and the initial model policy for LE agencies.
YMMV
The only problem I have is how often a "charge" of domestic violence carries much the same weight and restriction of rights as a "conviction" of DV. That combined with "false claims" of DV being almost SOP in any divorce case where custody or support is going to be contested.
my brother is a state prosecutor will be curious his take on this :)
but he carries a 45 :) and has guns etc..
Averageman
08-23-17, 04:54
That we find domestic violence so extremely repugnant is a good thing, that we rush to judgement perhaps isn't.
While in the Military it became known rather quickly that the allegation alone, even without merit or evidence could very likely end your career.
It became the standard leverage for spouses to use before the ink on Lautenberg amendment was even dry.
http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/military_justice/lautenberg-amendment.shtml
The Lautenberg Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968, effective 30 September 1996, makes it a felony for those convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence to ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms or ammunition. The Amendment also makes it a felony to transfer a firearm or ammunition to an individual known, or reasonably believed, to have such a conviction. Soldiers are not exempt from the Lautenberg Amendment.
Summary court-martial convictions, nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, and deferred prosecutions (or similar alternative dispositions) in civilian court do not constitute qualifying convictions within the meaning of the Lautenberg Amendment. The prohibitions do not preclude a soldier from operating major weapons systems or crew served weapons such as tanks, missiles, and aircraft. The Lautenberg Amendment applies to soldiers with privately owned firearms and ammunition stored on or off post.
Army policy is that all soldiers known to have, or soldiers whom commanders have reasonable cause to believe have, a conviction of a misdemeanor crime of domestic are non-deployable for missions that require possession of firearms or ammunition. Soldiers affected by the Lautenberg Amendment are not eligible for overseas assignment. However, soldiers who are based outside the continental United States (OCONUS) will continue to comply with their assignment instructions.
Domestic violence is a bad road all the way around, that it doesn't require a conviction, just reasonable cause to believe is criminal in and of itself.
Due process anyone?
Moose-Knuckle
08-23-17, 05:32
It was a tongue in cheek reference to an Eagles song which draws on the famous Shakespeare quote. It was not a call to go on a murdering spree of attorneys.
Some folks are just "skeered".
Song lyrics, rock-n-roll, Shakespeare, the First Amendment, and facetiousness have no place in America comrade.
From time to time I watch George Carlin videos on political correctness to maintain my sanity lol.
Eurodriver
08-23-17, 06:53
It would be your style to defend someone joking about murder.
Hey, as long as they agree with you right?
Fairly confident I could find a post of you decrying the intolerant left when they "joke" about killing gun owners or Cis white males.
Are you over the age of 50?
If we want to keep our toys and cool stuff we need have a way to keep guns out of and take guns away from crazy people. Some people objectively should not have guns. We need to figure out a way to keep them out of the hands of people that will hurt others or themselves. Considering that suicides are a major cause of gun deaths, there are a lot of gun deaths that could be avoided and potentially a lot of lives saved. How to do that is a really tough question.See, when you say gun deaths or gun violence et al, what you really mean interpersonal violence. Atleast that which is not of the self-inflicted variety.
At any rate how do you propose we keep 2 ton missiles on wheels out of the hands of would be harm doers? Freedom is scary I know.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
It would be your style to defend someone joking about murder.
Hey, as long as they agree with you right?
Fairly confident I could find a post of you decrying the intolerant left when they "joke" about killing gun owners or Cis white males.
Are you over the age of 50?
Seriously, I quickly realized that his remark was over the top joking around.
Take a cue from the title of the song and Get Over It
Better yet, take a look at the lyrics and adopt them as your anthem:
I turn on the tube and what do I see
A whole lotta people cryin' "Don't blame me"
They point their crooked little fingers at everybody else
Spend all their time feelin' sorry for themselves
Victim of this, victim of that
Your momma's too thin; your daddy's too fat
Get over it
Get over it
All this whinin' and cryin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it
You say you haven't been the same since you had your little crash
But you might feel better if they gave you some cash
The more I think about it, Old Billy was right (you could delete these offensive lyrics and the song still hangs)
Let's kill all the lawyers, kill 'em tonight
You don't want to work; you want to live like a king
But the big, bad world doesn't owe you a thing
Get over it
Get over it
If you don't want to play, then you might as well split
Get over it, get over it
It's like going to confession every time I hear you speak
You're makin' the most of your losin' streak
Some call it sick, but I call it weak
You drag it around like a ball and chain
You wallow in the guilt; you wallow in the pain
You wave it like a flag, you wear it like a crown
Got your mind in the gutter, bringin' everybody down
Complain about the present and blame it on the past
I'd like to find your inner child and kick its little ass
Get over it
Get over it
All this bitchin' and moanin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it
Get over it
Get over it
It's gotta stop sometime, so why don't you quit
Get over it, get over it
Get over it
The only problem I have is how often a "charge" of domestic violence carries much the same weight and restriction of rights as a "conviction" of DV. That combined with "false claims" of DV being almost SOP in any divorce case where custody or support is going to be contested.
Yep, it sucks to be charged with ANY crime.
Unless a police report was made at the time, is the judge hearing the case going to be able to summarily grant an ex parte order telling the other party to turn in their weapons?
That does sound good as an unsubstantiated internet talking point, though.
As FromMyColdDeadHand posted: If we want to keep our toys and cool stuff we need have a way to keep guns out of and take guns away from crazy people. Some people objectively should not have guns. We need to figure out a way to keep them out of the hands of people that will hurt others or themselves. Considering that suicides are a major cause of gun deaths, there are a lot of gun deaths that could be avoided and potentially a lot of lives saved. How to do that is a really tough question.
I guess my problem is that I have actually arrested guys (and gals) for DV and trust that the system works the vast majority of the time.
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-23-17, 10:02
See, when you say gun deaths or gun violence et al, what you really mean interpersonal violence. Atleast that which is not of the self-inflicted variety.
At any rate how do you propose we keep 2 ton missiles on wheels out of the hands of would be harm doers? Freedom is scary I know.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
No, what I mean that intrapersonal, not interpersonal deaths are the key. 60% of gun deaths per year are suicides. People always talk about the 33,000 people per year killed by guns, never mind that 18,000 or so are suicides. Suicide is a mental health issue that won't be fixed by gun policy, but if the NRA had two brain cells they would be actively trying to reduce the number of overall gun deaths. Let the automotive industry worry about it when people start driving at high speed into bridge pilings to kill themselves.
Gun deaths are driven by gang and suicide related.
I've had 3 coworkers going through divorce get slapped with versions restraining/protective orders. 2 were for DV and 1 for child abuse. All 3 fought them and had to spend $$ proving their innocence. IMO that is BS. Until these new orders are fact/evidence based methods to restrict folks constitutional rights I'll pass. Laws need to be set up to minimize judicial activism as much as possible. Not enable it. Loosely worded laws offer lawyers wiggle room to defend/attack and make $$. I can live with that to a degree. What I can't/won't live with is judicial activism that limits the rights of people until they prove their worthiness if said rights.
Want to help victims of DV? Do something to the folks beating their spouses aside from slaps on the wrist. What % of DV calls are for repeat offenders? Would those calls still com if the offender was removed from the picture? Figuring out a way to put those assholes in jail, in GP to be taught a lesson is a far better path IMO.
Suicides, as much as I may come off as an asshole, are irrelevant to the gun issue. People who want to off themselves will do so whether they have a gun or not. If a lack of gun access would have a severe impact on suicide rates Japan should be almost suicide free. Instead AFAIK they are still very much ahead of the USA in suicides per 100k residents. Pull the guns and they jump, hang, slot, pop pills, inhale gas... Want to help suicide candidates? Get them psychological help aside from pop this pill and call me in the morning.
Want to have an impact on murder? Get murderers off the streets. What % of murders are committed by known criminals with long violent histories? Why are they out among the decent folk??
Our legislators are like little children. I have nothing to play with. I want a new toy. All the while every time you open a closet an avalanche of toys comes out.
Increasingly, however, there is consensus that guns should be kept away from those whose behavior suggests that they would be dangerous to themselves or others if they possessed a weapon.
Everything predicates on that. And because the average person accepts this unlawful pretext, everything else follows. But regardless if this consensus is accurate (and it isn't), it imposes guilt before the fact.
Domestic violence is guilt after the fact. If we don't have laws regarding that, we should.
I see this whole proposal as politics masqueraded as something reasonable.
Eurodriver
08-23-17, 10:45
Seriously, I quickly realized that his remark was over the top joking around.
Take a cue from the title of the song and Get Over It
Better yet, take a look at the lyrics and adopt them as your anthem:
I turn on the tube and what do I see
A whole lotta people cryin' "Don't blame me"
They point their crooked little fingers at everybody else
Spend all their time feelin' sorry for themselves
Victim of this, victim of that
Your momma's too thin; your daddy's too fat
Get over it
Get over it
All this whinin' and cryin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it
You say you haven't been the same since you had your little crash
But you might feel better if they gave you some cash
The more I think about it, Old Billy was right (you could delete these offensive lyrics and the song still hangs)
Let's kill all the lawyers, kill 'em tonight
You don't want to work; you want to live like a king
But the big, bad world doesn't owe you a thing
Get over it
Get over it
If you don't want to play, then you might as well split
Get over it, get over it
It's like going to confession every time I hear you speak
You're makin' the most of your losin' streak
Some call it sick, but I call it weak
You drag it around like a ball and chain
You wallow in the guilt; you wallow in the pain
You wave it like a flag, you wear it like a crown
Got your mind in the gutter, bringin' everybody down
Complain about the present and blame it on the past
I'd like to find your inner child and kick its little ass
Get over it
Get over it
All this bitchin' and moanin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it
Get over it
Get over it
It's gotta stop sometime, so why don't you quit
Get over it, get over it
Get over it
Brb. Grabbing snippets from FTP by NWA to post "over the top joking around" stuff on M4C.
Never conflate fear with disassociation.
The two are mutually exclusive. And not always interdependent.
Some things just aren't worth the time or energy.
I will say this, people love to get on the "but muh First Amendment" and "take a joke y'all" train when its something they agree with but can't seem to do that when the subject is something they don't.
It's this game of "gotcha back" that I outgrew in kindergarten. People can say what they like as long as they own it. I just don't have to participate.
More on point, the ABA can make all the recommendations they want but it still has to be passed into law. I think the way DomVio is trained and handled could use a lot more refinement and investigative work. But those laws were passed and voted on.
For every guy who worries about a shouting match with his old lady, there are a few that don't mind raking her face.
And for those, I have no respect whatsoever.
If we want to keep our toys and cool stuff we need have a way to keep guns out of and take guns away from crazy people. Some people objectively should not have guns. We need to figure out a way to keep them out of the hands of people that will hurt others or themselves. Considering that suicides are a major cause of gun deaths, there are a lot of gun deaths that could be avoided and potentially a lot of lives saved. How to do that is a really tough question.
Once guns are gone, replace "gun" with "knives"
The root cause it's not that guns are available, it's that they are ill. Let's attack the root cause.
I do not think we give ourselves enough credit.
For a nation with only over a quarter billion people yet with more guns in private hands to the point where individual states are more armed than some nations; we do pretty good on gun violence.
I refuse to believe there are so many 'mentally ill' people in this country.
Ignorant? Stupid? Just plain no good?
Sure. But outright mental illness is very specific. And a lot of grey area hits that it becomes subjective and based on consensus.
There are no Pre-Crime divisions. I cite Sandy Hook as the absolute model for why bad things are so unavoidable at times.
The shooter purchased no weapons. All were stolen from his mother. She had taken him to see counselors who saw fit to give him psychotropic medication.
And he still committed heinous gun crime. People will say it wasn't strict enough but the only way to have stopped that was chaining him to a bed in a psych ward. The psych people did not deem it worth doing. If someone is motivated enough....they are going to commit violence. Look at the bi-weekly truckings and stabathons.
So sadly the answer isnt always "get the guns and lock up the crazy people".
It seems so simple but the solution is that liberty is inherently dangerous.....
...but it also gives you the option to shoot back.
Averageman
08-23-17, 12:20
Well said.
titsonritz
08-23-17, 12:50
I've had 3 coworkers going through divorce get slapped with versions restraining/protective orders. 2 were for DV and 1 for child abuse. All 3 fought them and had to spend $$ proving their innocence. IMO that is BS. Until these new orders are fact/evidence based methods to restrict folks constitutional rights I'll pass. Laws need to be set up to minimize judicial activism as much as possible. Not enable it. Loosely worded laws offer lawyers wiggle room to defend/attack and make $$. I can live with that to a degree. What I can't/won't live with is judicial activism that limits the rights of people until they prove their worthiness if said rights.
Speaking from personal experience, it is complete bullshit. When I was dealing with my crap had SB719A (http://www.guns.com/2017/08/17/oregon-governor-signs-gun-confiscation-bill-into-law/) been in place then I'd have been truly f***ed.
titsonritz
08-23-17, 12:55
I do not think we give ourselves enough credit.
For a nation with only over a quarter billion people yet with more guns in private hands to the point where individual states are more armed than some nations; we do pretty good on gun violence.
Now remove half a dozen zip code and recalculate, gun violence in America is astronomically low compared to almost all other nations.
Moose-Knuckle
08-23-17, 13:24
It would be your style to defend someone joking about murder.
Hey, as long as they agree with you right?
Fairly confident I could find a post of you decrying the intolerant left when they "joke" about killing gun owners or Cis white males.
Fake outrage and virtue signaling is all the rage today. Failure to recognize pop culture references dates you.
Are you over the age of 50?
I'm a proud Generation X'er in my mid thirties. Are most millennials ageists?
Moose-Knuckle
08-23-17, 13:34
** word wall snip**
I will say this, people love to get on the "but muh First Amendment" and "take a joke y'all" train when its something they agree with but can't seem to do that when the subject is something they don't.
And some people just want to get on the "OMG muh everything I don't like is literally Stormfront" train tear down statues, censor history, and watch Rome burn.
Moose-Knuckle
08-23-17, 13:36
Now remove half a dozen zip code and recalculate, gun violence in America is astronomically low compared to almost all other nations.
Yeah there was a study published recently depicting the counties in which violent crimes occur the most in, I'll see if I can find the map associated with it as it was very telling.
Whiskey_Bravo
08-23-17, 14:11
Ahh the usual suspects PC outraging over a silly song quote about lawyers. There are thousands of jokes centered around lawyers of which the fast majority are disparaging(see the 1000 lawyers are the bottom of the sea in this thread). There are many good men that are lawyers, everyone knows that. But just like car salesman the stereotype could very well be earned for a reason. I am pretty sure no one here was actually advocating that all the lawyers be rounded up and murdered but I guess I could be wrong, from what I have been told this place is full of nazi's and KKK members.
This silly PC, fake outrage mindset might make me rage quit M4 and then quietly come back a month or two later. Seems to be what the cool kids are doing.
make your decision after some research, beyond a biased Breitbart article.
...gun violence
...gun violence
...consensus
...consensus
...common-sense
...Gun Violence
...gun violence crisis
You can read the rest here by clicking on the links on the page: https://www.americanbar.org/news/reporter_resources/annual-meeting-2017/house-of-delegates-resolutions/118b.html
There are so many trigger words in the short section you posted I won't bother to read the rest.
It's such a simple and obvious play.
Pass stupid law. When it doesn't work,
Claim it didn't go far enough. Next is,
UBC, and when that doesn't work,
Registration.
It's not even about the obvious abuse of the stupid law that will happen to some gun owners.
Ahh the usual suspects PC outraging over a silly song quote about lawyers. There are thousands of jokes centered around lawyers of which the fast majority are disparaging(see the 1000 lawyers are the bottom of the sea in this thread). There are many good men that are lawyers, everyone knows that. But just like car salesman the stereotype could very well be earned for a reason. I am pretty sure no one here was actually advocating that all the lawyers be rounded up and murdered but I guess I could be wrong, from what I have been told this place is full of nazi's and KKK members.
This silly PC, fake outrage mindset might make me rage quit M4 and then quietly come back a month or two later. Seems to be what the cool kids are doing.
Hell yeah it is. I've been having a strange craving for schnitzel and fried okra lately just being here, not too mention my fetish for Zyklon-B, rope, and bullwhips. There isn't a pillowcase in my house that's safe.....:rolleyes:
Brb. Grabbing snippets from FTP by NWA to post "over the top joking around" stuff on M4C.
Say, what?
fried okra
I tracked with everything but that.
There isn't a pillowcase in my house that's safe....
You can go two for one if you cut the pillowcase diagonally lengthwise. Then when your frau sews the seam have her make a very small pocket that you can slide a small wire into, this is useful for slipping and picking handcuffs.
Wash the resulting hat in the washer, pause the machine when it reaches the rinse cycle, add about 8 ounces of starch to the cycle. Remove and promptly iron. When you break starch, your Wizard hat will be the envy of all, who knows it may be the ticket to Wizarddom.
Gangsta rap song, F... tha police.
And some people just want to get on the "OMG muh everything I don't like is literally Stormfront" train tear down statues, censor history, and watch Rome burn.
You did not clearly understand what I wrote nor its context.
And even if we went with your little Antifa sub-narrative; what have you done today about it besides post on M4C?
Antifa/Leftists are not the Rebel Alliance
"Conservatives"/Right Wing are not the Spartans.
I mean....what exactly is your point?
And again what has Moose Knuckle done today in a constructive, legal, and positive manner to prevent "Rome from burning". If you are subtly chiding me, I can associate or disassociate with or from whom I wish. That isn't the same as playing a fiddle as Rome burns and is kind of an exaggeration.
If you look and notice, there has been a backlash lately and not undeservedly so. All I know is these people are not me.
Life is going to go on. And like good ol' Capt. Mal Reynolds said "If you're still standing there when I take off, then you'll never get it"
You can go two for one if you cut the pillowcase diagonally lengthwise. Then when your frau sews the seam have her make a very small pocket that you can slide a small wire into, this is useful for slipping and picking handcuffs.
Wash the resulting hat in the washer, pause the machine when it reaches the rinse cycle, add about 8 ounces of starch to the cycle. Remove and promptly iron. When you break starch, your Wizard hat will be the envy of all, who knows it may be the ticket to Wizarddom.
Fried okra, a Southern thing, trying to combine a Deutch thing (schnitzel) with a Southern thing. The ultimate KlaNazi meal!
(all kidding aside I don't eat any vegetable that has hair)
You did not clearly understand what I wrote nor its context.
And even if we went with your little Antifa sub-narrative; what have you done today about it besides post on M4C?
Antifa/Leftists are not the Rebel Alliance
"Conservatives"/Right Wing are not the Spartans.
I mean....what exactly is your point?
And again what has Moose Knuckle done today in a constructive, legal, and positive manner to prevent "Rome from burning". If you are subtly chiding me, I can associate or disassociate with or from whom I wish. That isn't the same as playing a fiddle as Rome burns and is kind of an exaggeration.
If you look and notice, there has been a backlash lately and not undeservedly so. All I know is these people are not me.
Life is going to go on. And like good ol' Capt. Mal Reynolds said "If you're still standing there when I take off, then you'll never get it"
During your hiatus there was a member (or two perhaps?) who were over-the-top and not in any way sublime about their racist feelings who were banned, and rightfully so. This place is 95+% good guys as far as that goes. Sure, there are personality conflicts and petty arguments, but hey it's life. You shouldn't feel out of place (if indeed that's how you felt) because overall this is a pretty stand-up site.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.