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.
I feel as though comparing background checks on small arms to purchasing a tank for museum display is kind of unreasonable. They aren't really the same thing.
After word got out the owner of the Panzer Tank turned down the $2.5,000,000 offer and now Paul Allen is suing the owner...
No privacy for firearm sellers but he gets a Panzer Tank.....This shows you the mind set of the statist...
From what I read, he paid for the tank and the seller is refusing to either return the tank or the money. What does an antique military vehicle have to do with avoiding selling guns to criminals or terrorists?
From what I read, he paid for the tank and the seller is refusing to either return the tank or the money. What does an antique military vehicle have to do with avoiding selling guns to criminals or terrorists?
To point out his hypocritical nature.
And background checks do not work at all and do not stop criminals or terrorists...
First, why quote the post right before the one to which you're replying. That just is not intelligent. Second, I don't it. It seems like you're whining because you're emotional about the issue. Your post alleges that the owner turned down the $2.5M, but even the article to which you're linking states that this wasn't the case. As such, your statement is as wrong as betting for Denver in the Superbowl last year.
Background checks stop an easy way for people like that to acquire firearms in the state. The law isn't really hypocritical since it would apply to him if he wanted to buy firearms.
First, why quote the post right before the one to which you're replying. That just is not intelligent. Second, I don't it. It seems like you're whining because you're emotional about the issue. Your post alleges that the owner turned down the $2.5M, but even the article to which you're linking states that this wasn't the case. As such, your statement is as wrong as betting for Denver in the Superbowl last year.
Background checks stop an easy way for people like that to acquire firearms in the state. The law isn't really hypocritical since it would apply to him if he wanted to buy firearms.
I am not emotional, how did you come to such a idea?
And what person would bet on Denver?
No, they do not stop them, they just buy them from the black market..
A person throwing their money around to limit the gun rights of the people of Washington who then tries to buy a take..You do not see the hypocrisy.
Not really any hypocrisy here. The tank is a historical artifact. Also Allen isn't trying to ban guns, all he is supporting is better background checks. Not sure what issue you have with this.
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.
