DK Firearms

Texas is going RED with these candidates.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • busykngt

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 14, 2011
    4,730
    96
    McKinney
    Here's the Diane Feinstein orgasm I mentioned in an earlier post. Thought it might be entertaining to watch her giddiness and uncontrollable squirming in her chair. Cut to @ 1:02 and just watch the expression on her face!
    Took me awhile to find it. All the MSM YouTube videos (CBS, NBC, CNN, etc.) managed to cut this part out - no real surprise there. Enjoy!
    Target Sports
     
    Last edited:

    OldFart81

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Sep 18, 2010
    498
    11
    Barn, SE San Antonio
    Below is what the liberal states do and I am totally against that part....got to be a better way to to tag the mentally ill...

    Red Flag bills allow police or family members to petition a state court to remove firearms from a person who presents a danger to themselves or others. At the initial hearing, the petition and evidence are presented supporting the claims the individual in question (the “Respondent”) is a threat. These hearings may be conducted “ex parte,” meaning the respondent is not present to defend himself or herself. If the order is granted, police will execute the order removing firearms with no notice to the Respondent.

    "ex parte" is BS.....
     

    Wolfwood

    Self Appointed Board Chauvinist
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 12, 2009
    7,547
    96
    I appreciate what you are saying but if someone lights a Molotov cocktail and is about to throw it at your house, do you shoot them before they throw it or wait for them to throw it? If it were my house I would shoot first, preferably the bottle so they would glow all night.

    that is a crime before he throws it. clean shoot.

    why not shoot the guy filling up his gas can and buying a 40 at the gas station? constructive intent and all.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    that is a crime before he throws it. clean shoot.

    why not shoot the guy filling up his gas can and buying a 40 at the gas station? constructive intent and all.

    I think anyone with common sense can make the distinction between those two different scenarios.

    A man points a gun at me, should I wait until he fires to determine he might be meaning to do me harm?
     

    Wolfwood

    Self Appointed Board Chauvinist
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 12, 2009
    7,547
    96
    that was the point axe, shooting the guy at the gas station was an illustration of the stupidity of taking someones rights before they commit any crime. (edit for clarification: in your scenario he has commited a crime when he brandished his weapon- thoug both of our scenarios are flawed because we as private citizens are acting out of self preservation not enforcing the orders of a quasi secret court)

    also, disagreeing regularly with laws red flag or not, distrusting the gov't, feeling oppressed buy rules or regulations and routinely being argumentative are symptoms (sound familiar?) of Oppositional Defiant Disorder or ODD. this is a "mental disorder" that can produce violent behavior and could already be used as grounds for disarmament.



    you have heard "show me the man, i will show you the crime"
    now meet, "show me the man, and i will show you the psychosis"
     

    Dougw1515

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 14, 2020
    3,488
    96
    USA
    This thread is crazy. RFL proponents are advocating for some "magical" law that will eliminate the threat of mass shootings, public schools has been listed as an example. You propose that "we the people" trust those in government to figure out how to take guns from the right(or wrong - depending) people and that we further trust Joe citizen to finger these folks the law is supposed to focus on. That's insane!

    Most of the shooters in the incidences have been legal firearms owners. They passed all the test. RFL's will jump up and say "YEAH BUT...BUT...BUTT.... " BUT nothing. Red Flag Law(s) will not have the intended effect. Licensing and background checks were supposed to stop that. How's that working for you. RFL'ers want to create yet another law that "guesses" at who will be the next mass murderer.

    How about this. STOP CREATING GUN FREE ZONES!!! These "zones" create the perfect environment for the mass murderer. Let the faculty arm themselves to enable them to respond to the event. Yeah, not all of faculty will get on board and arm up. But some will. And that may be the deterrent that stops mass murderers from entering the building. If not it will enable faculty that decided to carry to stop a shooting event before it actually starts.

    In a nutshell. RFL's will try to "guess" who the next shooter will be. That's not a good strategy. Armed faculty can address the real shooter in real time. "We shouldn't have to arm teachers to protect our children." Agreed, we "shouldn't". However, we do need to do just that.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    that was the point axe, shooting the guy at the gas station was an illustration of the stupidity of taking someones rights before they commit any crime.

    also, disagreeing regularly with laws red flag or not, distrusting the gov't, feeling oppressed buy rules or regulations and routinely being argumentative are symptoms (sound familiar?) of Oppositional Defiant Disorder or ODD. this is a "mental disorder" that can produce violent behavior and could already be used as grounds for disarmament.



    you have heard "show me the man, i will show you the crime"
    now meet, "show me the man, and i will show you the psychosis"

    I am no fan of the "thought police" nor do I subscribe to the philosophy of The Minority Report, where criminals are caught before the actual crime has been committed. And I also think that trying to jump from one conclusion of "constructive intent" to actual intent are two very different things and anyone with common sense can make that determination.

    And yes, a person at a gas station filling a gas can could be stretched to the point of a wild imagination of having constructive intent. I did it several times this month getting gas for my mowers! Oooh!

    Man standing in front of your home, with a lit bottle of gasoline, clearly has criminal intent on committing a violent and possibly deadly action. Yeah, I'll drop that POS in his tracks if possible.

    You do whatever makes you happy. I hope you never have to find our how flawed your thought process' are.
     

    Wolfwood

    Self Appointed Board Chauvinist
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 12, 2009
    7,547
    96
    ok, let me further clarify, CLEARLY you wouldn't shoot the guy at the gas station. that was a hyperbolic example of what not to do.

    are you messing with me?

    you SHOULD shoot the guy about to throw the molotov. you SHOULD shoot the guy brandishing the weapon.

    you should not shoot/arrest the guy at the gas station buying gas and a 40, you should not take the guys gun before he brandishes.

    you have to be messing with me, right? or maybe just low on sleep? surely my post wasn't phrased that badly...
    also guy with the molotov is brandishing a weapon as well as possession of molotov cocktail or other explosive device for unlawful purposes, a Federal Crime. (https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/22-4515a.html)

    also the constructive intent (i meant constructive possession) was based on the old story of the ATF charging guys with constructive possession of a short barreled shotgun or machine gun because they own a legal shotgun and a hacksaw, or a semi-automatic rifle and a shoelace
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    ok, let me further clarify, CLEARLY you wouldn't shoot the guy at the gas station. that was a hyperbolic example of what not to do.

    are you messing with me?

    you SHOULD shoot the guy about to throw the molotov. you SHOULD shoot the guy brandishing the weapon.

    you should not shoot/arrest the guy at the gas station buying gas and a 40, you should not take the guys gun before he brandishes.

    you have to be messing with me, right? or maybe just low on sleep? surely my post wasn't phrased that badly...
    also guy with the molotov is brandishing a weapon as well as possession of molotov cocktail or other explosive device for unlawful purposes, a Federal Crime. (https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/22-4515a.html)

    also the constructive intent (i meant constructive possession) was based on the old story of the ATF charging guys with constructive possession of a short barreled shotgun or machine gun because they own a legal shotgun and a hacksaw, or a semi-automatic rifle and a shoelace

    Then why even say this in the first place? Your words.

    why not shoot the guy filling up his gas can and buying a 40 at the gas station? constructive intent and all.

    My reading of your post came off as if you felt that "constructive intent" further confused the issue for me. If I misunderstood what you meant, then I apologize for that confusion and misunderstanding.
     
    Top Bottom