1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Sept 11 - Latest NRA - Harry Reid info

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by Brian in Oregon, Sep 12, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,251
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-national/nra-nevada-endorsements-betray-angle-and-gun-owners

    NRA Nevada endorsements betray Angle and gun owners by David Codrea
    September 11th, 2010 11:53 am ET

    The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund has released its grades and endorsements for the 2010 election in Nevada. Absent from their assessment: one of the most important campaigns in the country, the United States Senate race between incumbent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) and challenger Sharron Angle (R). (Click here to review NRA-PVF grades and endorsements.)

    We know NRA announced it will not endorse Reid based on his support confirming anti-gun Supreme Court justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. We also know at the time one of their PR flacks said they would not be endorsing anyone in the race, and I pegged that as "weaselly equivocation."

    Why?

    As a state-level candidate, NRA gave Angle an "A."

    At the same time, NRA gave Reid a "B."

    In every grading system I've ever seen, "A" wins.

    So how does NRA reward that? By giving the Reid campaign thousands of dollars.

    Add to this:

    Angle unequivocally went on the record with specific answers to tough questions related to the right to keep and bear arms. Reid was confident he could ignore them.

    Gun Owners of America endorses Angle and has released a chronological account of Reid's anti-gun votes.

    On top of that, Reid approved a campaign ad disparaging the ultimate purpose of the Second Amendment (using a self-proclaimed "NRA member").

    This is unacceptable--but not unexpected for those of us who have been following NRA's many ratings "miscalculations" over the years.

    So now we have their so-called "Political Victory Fund" afraid to take a stand and produce a political victory. What the hell else do they even exist for? And how does turning their backs on the best gun rights candidate in this race enhance their credibility in any race? The message that sends is, you can do everything in your power to promote that "single issue" they say is all they care about, and they'll still hang you out to dry. That's some loyalty-building.

    I don't expect a campaign calling Fairfax will do much good. My experience with Vulcan Chess Masters tells me they're going to dig in their heels and ignore any protests over this, so ultimately, there's really only one thing that will get their attention.

    If the mighty "800-Lb. gorilla" is too frightened to get involved because of the chicken-hearted "Majority Leader Chuckie Schumer" excuse (which is what it is), then they're simply unfit to lead. If they insist on being Not Relevant Anymore in key political races, give them their wish.

    There are alternatives we could help grow, you know...

    "Vote Freedom First." Unless you're afraid to.

    Or unless you've got a backroom deal to stay out of things?
     
  2. hrosik123

    hrosik123 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Sometimes you have to face the fact that the Republican candidate may not be the best choice. Good luck Chuck Hrosik
     
  3. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,251
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    And a previously F-Rated anti-gun Democrat is?

    Give me a break. This is inexcusable.

    If the NRA is going to upgrade F-Rated anti-gunners to a B-Rating, then endorse them, then give them money, they need to change their name from National Rifle Association to Not Relevant Anymore. At this point I can no longer trust any NRA candidate rating, and will rely on the GOA from here on out.

    Basically the NRA is saying the following Reid votes are not a problem:

    1. June 28, 1991—Voted for a 5 day waiting period for handgun purchases (Vote No. 115).

    2. November 19, 1993—Voted to eliminate the five-year sunset in the Brady Bill's five day waiting period, which would have made the waiting period permanent (Vote No. 386).

    3. November 19, 1993—Voted to end a filibuster led by pro-gun Senators against the Brady Bill (Vote No. 387).

    4. November 20, 1993—Voted for the Brady Bill, which imposed a 5-day waiting period before purchasing a handgun (Vote No. 394).

    5. August 25, 1994—Voted to end a filibuster led by pro-gun Senators against the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on many semi-automatic firearms (the so-called "assualt weapons ban; Vote No. 294).

    6. August 25, 1994—Voted for the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on many semi-automatic firearms (the so-called "assault weapons" ban; Vote No. 295).

    7. April 17, 1996—Voted to expand the statute of limitations for paperwork violations in the National Firearms Act from 3 years to 5 years (Vote No. 64).

    8. June 27, 1996—Voted to destroy 176,000 M-1 Garand rifles from World War II, and 150 million rounds of .30 caliber ammunition, rather than giving them to the Federal Civilian Marksmanship program (Vote No. 178).

    9. September 12, 1996—Voted to spend $21.5 million for a study on putting "taggants" in black and smokeless gunpowder (Vote No. 287).

    10. September 12, 1996—Voted to make it a Federal crime to possess a gun within 1,000 feet of any school, private or public, and impose a 5-year prison sentence for violating the law (Vote No. 290).

    11. July 28, 1998—Voted against killing an amendment offered by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) to prohibit the importation of firearm magazines holding over 10 rounds that were manufactured before the 1994 ban was enacted (Vote No. 240).

    12. May 12, 1999—Voted to ban the private sales of firearms at gun shows unless buyers submitted to background registration checks. Draconian restrictions would have also been imposed on gun show promoters, expanding federal authority in this area (Vote No. 111).

    13. May 13, 1999—Voted to ban the importation of ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds (Vote No. 116).

    14. May 14, 1999—Voted for an amendment introduced by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) that would regulate the transfer of firearms over the Internet (Vote No. 119).

    15. May 18, 1999—Voted for an amendment to force gun sellers to include trigger locks with every handgun sold (Vote No. 122).

    16. May 20, 1999—Voted for legislation to subject repair shop and pawn shop transactions to the same registration and background check requirements as purchases from dealers—even if a person was reclaiming his own firearm (Vote No. 133).

    17. May 20, 1999—Voted for an amendment offered by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) that would ban private sales at gun shows, unless the buyer first submits to a background registration check. Even displaying a firearm at a gun show, and subsequently transferring that gun to a non-licensee, would result in a two-year prison sentence. The amendment would also have granted BATF open-ended inspection authority to harass vendors at gun shows, and explicitly gives BATF the right to keep a gun owner registration list for up to 90 days. This amendment passed 51-50, with Vice President Al Gore breaking the tie (Vote No. 134).

    18. May 20, 1999—Voted for the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a host of gun control provisions (Vote No. 140).

    19. July 28, 1999—Voted to end a filibuster on the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill. The filibuster was led by Sen. Bib Smith (R-NH) because of concerns with the gun control provisions in the bill (Vote No. 224).

    20. February 2, 2000—Voted for an amendment offered by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Charles Schumer (D-NY) to help the cities bring frivolous suits against gun makers (Vote No. 4).

    21. March 2, 2000—Voted for an amendment offered by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Charles Schumer (D-NY) blaming school violence on the fact that Congress "failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures" and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings (Vote No. 28).

    22. March 2, 2000—Voted to use Federal taxpayer funds to hand out anti-gun literature in schools and to run anti-gun public service announcements (Vote No. 32).

    23. April 6, 2000—Voted for and cosponsored a "sense of the Senate" amendment urging the passage of new gun control restrictions (Vote No. 64).

    24. March 2, 2000—Voted for an amendment offered by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) urging the passage of the ant-gun juvenile crime bill being opposed by GOA (Vote No. 28).

    25. April 10, 2000—Voted for a non-binding amendment offered by Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) urging the House-Senate conferees to get the juvenile anti-gun bill to the floor of each chamber by April 20 (Vote No. 64).

    26. May 17, 2000—Voted with 29 other F-rated Senators against an amendment stating "the right of each law-abiding United States citizen to own a firearm for any legitimate purpose, including self-defense or recreation, should not be infringed." (Vote No. 103).

    27. May 17, 2000—Voted for a resolution praising the participants of the so-called Million Mom March, and calling on Congress to pass the anti-gun juvenile crime bill that GOA was fighting (Vote No. 104).

    28. April 2, 2001—Voted for the Incumbent Protection Act, so-called campaign finance reform (Vote No. 64).

    29. March 20, 2002—Voted to end a filibuster of the odious Incumbent Protection bill. The blatantly unconstitutional legislation squelches the voice of groups like Gun Owners of America in the final days before an election. By making it difficult, if not impossible, for groups to criticize the anti-gun actions of legislators prior to an election, incumbents are able to duck accountability for those actions (Vote No. 53).

    30. February 26, 2004—Voted for an amendment to require all handgun purchasers to pay an implicit "gun tax" by requiring them to buy a trigger lock when they purchase their handgun, irrespective of need. In addition, the amendment would create a broad cause of action against gun owners who fail to actually use the storage device to lock up their firearms (Vote No. 17).

    31. March 2, 2004—Voted to outlaw the private sale of firearms at gun shows unless the buyer agrees to submit to an FBI background registration check. This legislative would have effectively eliminated gun shows because of stringent requirements placed on event sponsors (Vote No. 25).

    32. July 28, 2005—Voted for an amendment to require all handgun purchasers to pay an implicit "gun tax" by requiring them to buy a trigger lock when they purchase their handgun, irrespective of need (Vote No. 207).

    33. September 29, 2005—Voted against John Roberts for Supreme Court Justice. Roberts' record and testimony to the Senate show that he is strong advocate for Second Amendment rights. Had Reid's position prevailed on this vote, the 5-4 decisions in Heller and McDonald could have gone the other way (Vote No. 245).

    34. January 18, 2007—Voted against an amendment to strike language in a bill that would infringe upon the free speech rights of groups like GOA by requiring them to monitor and report on communications with members, and could easily have led to government demands for organizational membership list (a.k.a. registration) (Vote No. 17).

    35. January 31, 2006—Voted against Samuel Alito for Supreme Court Justice. Justice Alito's record and testimony to the Senate show that he is strong advocate for Second Amendment rights. Had Reid's position prevailed on this vote, the 5-4 decisions in Heller and McDonald could have gone the other way (Vote No. 2) .

    36. February 2, 2009—Voted to confirm Eric Holder as Attorney General. Holder was an anti-Second Amendment official for the Clinton administration, and has called for a renewal of the Clinton gun ban (Vote No. 32).

    37. March 19, 2009—Voted to massively expand the amount of land covered by the National Parks gun ban. As Majority Leader, Reid frustrated the efforts of pro-gun Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) for more than a year to repeal the gun ban. Sen. Coburn's position ultimately prevailed after overcoming Reid's opposition later in 2009 (Vote No. 106).

    38. June 25, 2009—Voted to confirm Harold Koh as Legal Advisor to the Department of State. GOA warned all Senators that Koh is a radical globalist pushing for worldwide gun control regulation, including the UN Treaty on Small Arms (Vote No. 213).

    39. August 6, 2009—Voted to confirm Sonya Sotomayor as Supreme Court Justice. GOA warned all Senators that Judge Sotomayor's record on gun rights was one of hostility to the Second Amendment, which was born out in her dissent in the McDonald decision (Vote No. 262).

    40. September 9, 2009—Voted to confirm Cass Sunstein as Administrator of Regulatory Affairs (Regulatory Czar). GOA notified all Senators that Cass Sunstein is a radical leftist who would like to ban hunting and give animals some of the same rights as humans in the courtroom (Vote No. 273).

    41. November 19, 2009—Reid voted to confirm the highly controversial Richard Hamilton to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Hamilton has stated that the Founding Fathers intended judges to amend the Constitution through “evolving case law” (Vote No. 350).

    42. December 24, 2009—Reid used his position as Majority Leader to pass the ObamaCare legislation. This bill will allow the BATFE and FBI to troll through the ObamaCare database for gun owners who would be disqualified because of their medical information (Vote No. 396).

    43. March 25, 2010—Reid voted against an amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) to prevent Veterans from losing their Second Amendment rights without due process of law (Vote No. 94).

    44. HARRY REID WILL CONTINUE TO VOTE AGAINST GUNS UNTIL HE IS DEFEATED!
     
  4. WS-1

    WS-1 Banned User Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    3,885
    Daniel 2:31-32

    Nebuchadnezzar had a dream about a glorious idol made of gold and silver and brass and iron. It was Daniel who explained to him the vulnerability of having "feet of clay." Even the mighty will fall.

    Isn't this what we all knew would happen?
     
  5. hrosik123

    hrosik123 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Lets face it Brian. Nobody wants gun control laws that would prohibit gun ownership. Some of the bills he voted on have some common sense behind them. As a lawbiding gun owner I have no problem with a background check. The state and federal government can check my history all they want. I have nothing to hide. For years the NRA has used the 2nd ammendment to block legislation that would help sensible people to own arms and the not-so-desireable to have easy access to them. There has to be a solution that can be come to. I want you as well as me to own guns. I don't want someone who is mentally deficient, or a criminal to own them. You have to see that proper reform and I mean proper needs to happen. Good luck Chuck Hrosik
     
  6. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    Well, it looks like they have spoken and like others,,,,they do not listen to their membership/constituents,,,,guess NRA members like giving money to liberal democrats!!!!

    Chuck,,,,how about the rest of Dingy harry's votes,,,,where is the justification for those???? It would be interesting to see just HOW many times he voted "for" guns, that the legislation was going to pass anyway....
     
  7. hrosik123

    hrosik123 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    bigdog, I'm not looking for any lawbiding citizen to be denied gun privilages. Guns get in to the wrong hands somehow, and I'm pretty sure that they aren't all "stolen". Bad apples do ruin the bunch and its ashame. The NRA could do a lot in order to help prevent this but they use the 2nd ammendmet to help fund arguements that have no basis. In a perfect world it would be different but its not. Good luck Chuck Hrosik
     
  8. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,251
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Chuc, you don't seem to understand that "the wrong hands" to an anti-gun politician means LAW ABIDING GUN OWNERS. I refer you to #5 above...

    5. August 25, 1994—Voted to end a filibuster led by pro-gun Senators against the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on many semi-automatic firearms (the so-called "assualt weapons ban; Vote No. 294).

    THAT is their definition of "the wrong hands". A gun ban that impacted law abiding gun owners.

    You need to think this through with a bit more care.
     
  9. Barry C. Roach

    Barry C. Roach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,209
    Location:
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Harry's got to go. The NRA has to see the larger picture and end this little bastards tyranny in all aspects of his treachery. He's not good for America and they have to bite the bullet and throw him under a bus. He's been like heroin to the NRA and they need to end the addiction.

    The NRA needs to shake the Reid fleas off of it.
     
  10. hrosik123

    hrosik123 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Brian, on the same note I refer you to #31. Remember that Dylan Kliebold and his friend purchased guns at trade shows and we know what happened after that. I want legal owners to purchase, but something needs to halt the flow of guns into the hands of those who do harm with them. All guns in the hands of criminals started out as "legal" guns. Remember that Einstien said for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. For every give theres a take. Good luck Chuck Hrosik
     
  11. Shooting Coach

    Shooting Coach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    8,358
    Location:
    Nashville Tn
    Dear Chuck

    If you are comfortable losing your rights, little by little, that does not make you smart, and don't think the rest of us are that foolish. If you "follow the leader" in Washington, you don't speak for me.

    The NRA doing this spineless flip-flop makes me wish I had the bucks I paid for a Benefactor membership back in my pocket. I wonder if Liberals have sneaked into the leadership of the NRA?

    Rule 1. Follow the wishes of the (paying) membership. The ATA could try this novel idea as well. Not following the wishes of the membership guarantees a downturn in membership, and dues.

    At least the GOA has not betrayed its membership.
     
  12. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    Chuck, what kind of system would you suggest that would have stopped Dylan Kliebold and his friend? Stop talking in generalities and give us some specifics here.

    "something needs to halt the flow of guns into the hands of those who do harm with them" is a meaningless collection of meaningless words if you can't put specifics to your ideas.
     
  13. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,251
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    The problem is, Chuck is overlooking that a straw sale was also part of the way the two Columbine thugs got their guns. Even if a "gunshow loophole" law had been in place, they were willing to resort to straw sales to thwart it.

    Meanwhile, we get idiots in congress (and the White House) who ban our guns. We've had gun bans in 1986, 1989, and 1994, with an attempt at expansion in 2004.

    The GOP initially took back congress because of the gunowner backlash against the Democrats. Now we're supporting some of the very same people who banned guns in the first place. This is insanity.

    I believe this is showing that Wayne LaPierre does not want more pro-gun victories. He wants status quo. Because when there is a fight on, the NRA makes more money. Fighting anti-gunners is big business, and the NRA is addicted to money. Look how the NRA crapped on some of the most hard core pro-gunners in 1986, which resulted in a big backlash against the NRA that continues to this day.

    When the NRA starts supporting its enemies, Wayne LaPierre needs to go.
     
  14. JH

    JH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,359
    Brian,

    Let's see......in grade school, would you rather have an "A" or a "B" in your report card?

    Two candidates: One has an "A" and the other a "B".....which is the more pro-gun person?.....decisions, decisions.....hmmm....I get it: "A!"

    Seriously, your constant raiding of the NRA for GOA membership is not working....why don't you try raiding HCI, ACLU, NEA or UAW?

    Join the NRA....the most EFFECTIVE pro-gun organization in the world!

    P.S. The NRA led the fight against the EPA lead ban!
     
  15. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    If the NRA is only concerned with gun rights issues, the organization misses the point entirely. Private ownership of guns is good for America but there are other things that are good for America as well. Harry Reid is NOT one of them!

    One morning, some years ago, I sat in the back of a limo with Wayne LaPierre en route to a congressional hearing at which I was to testify. Wayne told me that the NRA had contributed $5000 to Jim Florio a couple of times in his career. At that time Florio was Governor of New Jersey and was pushing his "assault weapons ban". Of course I was shocked. Talk about sleeping with the enemy! Wayne went on to say that political contributions are a tool to gain future access to and attention from candidates. They do not indicate an endorsement.

    To me this is truly splitting hairs. If you support a candidate financially, you give that candidate the opportunity to get out "his message" and perhaps to win. In the case of Harry Reid that cannot be good for America!

    I am an annual member of the NRA for the simple reason that I can deny them my money any time I disagree with their policies. My membership is up for renewal and I am holding off until see how this plays out.
     
  16. hrosik123

    hrosik123 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    I knew it was one of them. Thank for clearing that up. Good luck Chuck Hrosik
     
  17. SirMissalott

    SirMissalott Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    2,241
    Vote against him !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! At all cost even if APPEARS to be gun friendly he is not good for our USA......look who he hangs around with.
     
  18. Gary Waalkes

    Gary Waalkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,402
    Brian in Oregon - You always forget to tell folks that you are NOT AN NRA MEMBER. Why do you come on here and bash the NRA? What is your true purpose? I think YOU ARE AN ANTI-GUN TROLL!! A true gunner will disagree with but would never bash a pro-gun group. But not you - we only hear anti-NRA venom from you. Clearly you are trying to divide the ranks and create internal problems. Why would a pro-gunner continue bashing the NRA?

    Oh - by the way - the NRA was INSTRUMENTAL in getting the Lead Ban off the table. This is a target shotgun site - a lead ban would really hurt us. (what contribution to this important effort was made by your GOA org?)

    You can refute the anti-gun charge by posting a picture of yourself standing next to your open gun safe and holding one of your favorite guns (cause I don't think you own any guns). It will take you 5 minutes to take the picture and put it up here. the following is one of my favorite guns - it is an old #1 Ruger in 300 weatherby mag - the stock is kevlar -

    [​IMG]
     
  19. hrosik123

    hrosik123 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    I know you're a shooter Gary. Good luck Chuck Hrosik
     
  20. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,251
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Bangalore, quote: <i>"Brian,

    Let's see......in grade school, would you rather have an "A" or a "B" in your report card?

    Two candidates: One has an "A" and the other a "B".....which is the more pro-gun person?.....decisions, decisions.....hmmm....I get it: "A!"

    Seriously, your constant raiding of the NRA for GOA membership is not working....why don't you try raiding HCI, ACLU, NEA or UAW?

    Join the NRA....the most EFFECTIVE pro-gun organization in the world!

    P.S. The NRA led the fight against the EPA lead ban!"</i>

    Bangalore, you've been flim-flamed. The NRA previously gave an F rating to Reid. Now they've upgraded him to a B rating. The GOA gave him an F rating and continues to do so. His B rating is fraudulent.

    And how soon you forget that I was busy recruiting NRA members. Losts of them, thanks to the NRA's one year free membership sign up drive.

    Am I an NRA member? At the moment my NRA membership is up for renewal. I have not decided yet to continue membership or join the GOA instead. I'm holding off pending the outcome of this Reid debacle.

    Gary Waalkes, quote: <i>"Brian in Oregon - You always forget to tell folks that you are NOT AN NRA MEMBER. Why do you come on here and bash the NRA? What is your true purpose? I think YOU ARE AN ANTI-GUN TROLL!! A true gunner will disagree with but would never bash a pro-gun group. But not you - we only hear anti-NRA venom from you. Clearly you are trying to divide the ranks and create internal problems. Why would a pro-gunner continue bashing the NRA?

    Oh - by the way - the NRA was INSTRUMENTAL in getting the Lead Ban off the table. This is a target shotgun site - a lead ban would really hurt us. (what contribution to this important effort was made by your GOA org?)

    You can refute the anti-gun charge by posting a picture of yourself standing next to your open gun safe and holding one of your favorite guns (cause I don't think you own any guns). It will take you 5 minutes to take the picture and put it up here. the following is one of my favorite guns - it is an old #1 Ruger in 300 weatherby mag - the stock is kevlar -</i>

    See above re: NRA membership.

    As for gun ownership and photos of myself with guns, I should say you're really full of horse manure, and leave your idiotic baseless accusation at that. But I'll play your game, if for no other reason than to see you eat crow. Don't have a photo of me in front of my safe. How about a couple of hunting photos? I would expect they'd suffice, since you didn't post a photo of yourself actually holding a gun.

    View attachment 245931

    My son and I from a few years back. The shotgun I'm holding is my 1187.

    View attachment 245932

    A more recent photo, from this July. Popped this coyote with my Remington R15 in .223.

    I rarely post photos of myself. The two above are the only ones of me actually holding a gun or hunting. There are other threads here, though, showing photos of my guns. Like the recent suppressed 10-22 thread.

    Then there's the thread with my $175 1100 trap gun posted in 2007.

    Unfortunately the thread with my Retro Dissipator appears to have gone into oblivion from a server glitch or something. Some here will remember it. Here are a couple of photos of it:

    View attachment 245933

    View attachment 245934

    Here's a Browning Buckmark I bought a couple of weeks ago. Can't get a photo of me holding it right now. It's out getting threaded for a suppressor. (I doubt very many anti-gunners own suppressors.)

    View attachment 245935

    So if your baseless temper tantrum is done, can we continue with the discussion of this NRA blunder without further hysterics?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.