Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
bofh
Banned
Correct, it was a S&W M&P Shield. It is unclear if it was the version with the safety or without. If it was the version with the safety, then it was likely off. The safety on the shield has received a lot of critique of being difficult to operate.
BC1
,
This is unfair to business owners who make a money drop.
BC1
,
In NY banks all post signs that say no hats, hoodies, sunglasses or covered faces. When I go to my bank I usually keep my hat and sunglasses on... just out of habit. The sign has no weight of law anyway. They could ask me to remove it but they can't boot me out if trying to access my money for wearing a hat. They don't ask anyone to remove it. Then again they know me for many years.
.
The bank may not obstruct access to your money based on your clothing. You cannot be kept from accessing your money because they don't like hats. NY has no laws prohibiting the carrying of a concealed weapon at sporting events, banks, churches, bars, restaurants, hospitals, elections, funerals, parades or any of the other crazy stuff we see around the US. I asked my branch manager what he does when someone wears a hoodie or hat. He said "nothing unless they're wearing a mask. Then he calls police."
I'm confused, NRA. Could you explain what you meant here. It's probably obvious and sailed right over my head, but I don't get it.
You have to realize that when people like N R A can't come up with any factual basis to rebut a post that expresses an opinion they don't agree with, they must fall back on posting nonsense, insults, childish rants, and/or name calling. N R A's response falls somewhere between nonsense and childish rant.
I think what N R A was trying to get at was that those people who carry condition 1 aren't competent enough to rack the slide in an under pressure situation. And my response to that is....there simply is no real need for me to put myself intentionally in the situation of having to rack the slide in an under pressure situation.
The problem is you are trying to read N R A's posts using your intelligence.....you need to use your imagination when reading his posts.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Human imagination is not that vast. I have, however, found an N R A-to-Human-Logic translation manual:
With Forward by N R A:
:biggrin:
N R A
New member
People seem to act like racking a slide, is such a hard job, they want to do it in the privacy of their own home, and put the gun, holstered, chambered, on their hip, because having to do it later, in case it was needed, would be impossible, dangerous, time consuming, and void any chance of Jesus ever coming back. Myself, I do not rack a slide, unless I am going to shoot a gun, real darn soon. Immanent. No imminent threat, why risk a round in a chamber? I do not have to scratch my balls, to know I have some. I think many people rack their slide, like they do, play loud music, or get tattoos, just to piss off their grandparents.
.
My post was poking fun, at people that think Condition 3 carry is stupid. What is stupid, is thinking all the training in the world, will ever influence the actions of a 2 year old, or the physics of a T-Bone accident at 55 mph, or a tire iron to the back of your head, as a teen gang member, trades up from car tools, to a Glock 23C with nasty ammo, 3.5 pounds away from killing you.
.
I think proper training is needed in all conditions of carry, I just think Condition 3 is more family, society friendly for good people. I meed thousands of good people, for every one bad guy. Why train 99% for the bad guy? Why not train equally for all conditions?
N R A
New member
One more insulting DA added to the ignore list. Got to love technology. Please reciprocate.
Nah, I won't put you on ignore, your posts are way to entertaining to ignore. So, I guess you won't be posting your exaggerated nonsense in response to common sense posts now......
CharlesMorrison
Banned
Link Removed
CharlesMorrison
Banned
You are just jealous because N R A is "ignoring" me, but not you....yet.
Unless I reply with your quote!
BC1
,
Very sad. The little nieces will remember this forever. One can't "unsee" such a thing.
BC1
,
I don't put anyone on ignore. Even those who sh!t-hammered me. Sometimes I deserved it.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
I used to use the ignore feature. Got maybe 10 or so names on it still, but they're all long gone, most of them being so insulting and provocateur-ish that they got banned within hours or days after I started ignoring them.
Now I just ignore certain posters *for the most part* without using the ignore feature. I am not one who finds idiocy, vapidity, or unmitigated hubris as "entertaining," so I just scroll on by those folks' posts whom I don't wish to interact with. The main reason for that is that the ignore feature doesn't work very well to begin with. Anyone who is on the list that gets quoted by someone who isn't puts their idiocy, vapidity or unmitigated hubris right back in your face anyway, so it's not like you can avoid seeing their crap in any case.
This is probably the most difficult forum to get banned from of any I've ever been a member of. I like it that way. It's not that I "like" to argue, but I do like to be able to argue without being baby-sat. Ignoring someone you consistently argue with is the coward's way out. Ignoring an argument prevents one from winning the argument. The case in point in this thread seems to believe that he's somehow "won" something by putting a bunch of people on ignore. All he's "won" with me is confirmation that all the negative impressions I had of him before, are now redoubled and added to.
Blues
Now I just ignore certain posters *for the most part* without using the ignore feature. I am not one who finds idiocy, vapidity, or unmitigated hubris as "entertaining," so I just scroll on by those folks' posts whom I don't wish to interact with. The main reason for that is that the ignore feature doesn't work very well to begin with. Anyone who is on the list that gets quoted by someone who isn't puts their idiocy, vapidity or unmitigated hubris right back in your face anyway, so it's not like you can avoid seeing their crap in any case.
This is probably the most difficult forum to get banned from of any I've ever been a member of. I like it that way. It's not that I "like" to argue, but I do like to be able to argue without being baby-sat. Ignoring someone you consistently argue with is the coward's way out. Ignoring an argument prevents one from winning the argument. The case in point in this thread seems to believe that he's somehow "won" something by putting a bunch of people on ignore. All he's "won" with me is confirmation that all the negative impressions I had of him before, are now redoubled and added to.
Blues
