Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
ND has placed enough restrictions and closed down enough facilities that abortion is unavailable to the vast majority of residents.
Please do tell how North Dakota has closed down facilities...
There has only ever been one abortion clinic in the entire state of North Dakota and its located in Fargo. I live in Fargo and I drove by the abortion clinic today, its still there and its still open. Please stop spreading lies.
LOL, It's like trying to have a rational conversation with a teenager.. it just doesn't happen. Lack of common sense, making decisions based on emotion that's all this post does. These new laws makes the poster feel better , like someone is actually doing something.
I'd hate to see what their thoughts are on concealed carry...
And someone can still purchase one of these scary weapons legally even after all that fluffy bunny waste of time.
It doesn't matter if what they do is effective, as long as they "do something."
Typical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint
In reality he got the weapons from his mother's arsenal
Wrong. In reality, the mother broke the law and straw purchased those weapons FOR him. The gun safe was kept in his room. The guns were hung on the walls in his room. They were HIS guns, which were purchased for him ILLEGALLY by his mother. EXISTING laws were already broken in order to facilitate this tragedy. What makes you think that MORE laws will stop it from happening again?
Your efforts should be focused on mental health issues and enforcement of existing laws. Screaming for more laws will change nothing. At all. Ever. Maybe you'll feel better about yourself, but when the next massacre takes place, I'll be pointing at YOU to place blame, because YOU didn't demand that people "do something" that would actually have made a difference.
It's a 29 rd mag, not 30. My bad. Probably could add a +1 ext to it, though. Midway has discontinued them - don't know if Scherer is still around. I've never been able to find a website for them.
LOGIC
Of the two extremes : [] disarmed populace versus [] fully armed populace, which one would experience the least amount of attacks on one's person or property?
If a predator had a choice, which one would he prefer?
If you were about to become a victim, which one would you prefer?
Weapons are not dangerous - people are dangerous, with or without weaponry. A weapon may augment a weaker man's defense against attack by a stronger man. Or a weapon in the hands of the stronger will vanquish the weaker.
The original reason for government was mutual defense of person and property. When government was infiltrated by predators it transformed into a persecutor of people and a taker of their property.
If you feel that disarming the people under those conditions will enhance security, I will respectfully disagree.
You can't come into a thread and spew that kind of logic, reason and common sense? What the hell kind of forum do you think this is?
It's a 29 rd mag, not 30. My bad. Probably could add a +1 ext to it, though. Midway has discontinued them - don't know if Scherer is still around. I've never been able to find a website for them.
Thanks ! I will have to pick up a couple if available.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
