Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Posted: 3/9/2006 4:15:30 AM EDT
Lets just pretend that our worst fear becomes reality in 2008 and Hitlery or some other just-as-bad liberal becomes president. Could they really pass a law for the confiscation without reimbersment of our firearms?

It has always seemed, I don't know... ILLEGAL when places like SanFran decide they will just take our guns and not give any reimbersment. How could this happen on a federal level without severe consequences for the government? Klintoon put a ban on sale of "assault weapons." OK, yeah it sucked, but at least everybody got to keep what they already had. It was much better than the alternative.

So, could the feds really steal our legally purchased and owned firearms without (at best) getting hit with a class-action lawsuit the likes of which have never been seen, or (at worst) starting a civil war?
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:16:42 AM EDT
wouldn't happen to my guns. ever.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:17:02 AM EDT
only if we let them
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:18:08 AM EDT
Molon Labe
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:19:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
only if we let them



And people will.

Daily life is to comfortable to stir the pot over some icky guns.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:20:31 AM EDT
<----- not this guy's
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:23:29 AM EDT
if that happens i swear i'll move to canada. oh wait....shit!

what are the firearm laws like down unda?
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:24:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RockoZ:
if that happens i swear i'll move to canada. oh wait....shit!

what are the firearm laws like down unda?



Aussies can't own guns
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:24:51 AM EDT
I dont have any guns..all of mine were abducted by aliens.

Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:26:18 AM EDT
Anybody remember John Candy, in "Stripes", when the Czech army caught them in the 2 1/2 ton?

"Here ya go, fellas."
"Pass 'em forward boys."

I think far too many would be just like that.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:28:02 AM EDT
Join the NRA.

Vote.

These things will be way more effective, that thinking you can shoot it out with the .gov.

I wonder how many people here, really take the time to vote.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:29:21 AM EDT
They can do whatever they want.

They are making all the rules.



I pray that they won't be handed over peacably. I have a feeling that a large percentage of guns would just "disappear".
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:29:58 AM EDT
I'm already a member of the NRA and vote every election.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:33:15 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:36:12 AM EDT
It won't happen that way, the gun grabbers know the score. They will chip away a tiny bit at a time until there is nothing left. "Death by a thousand cuts".

In twenty or thirty years they will have won and not a single shot will have been fired and we will be wondering what the fuck just happened.

We must fight now and fight every little thing they throw at us, We can't let a single piece of gun control legislation get passed without a huge fight. No free rides for these assholes.

Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:41:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/9/2006 4:44:09 AM EDT by julenissen]

Originally Posted By clasky:

Originally Posted By RockoZ:
if that happens i swear i'll move to canada. oh wait....shit!

what are the firearm laws like down unda?



Aussies can't own guns



They can, but there are severe restrictions.


I doubt that your .gov can actually steal your weapons, they would probably have to pay for them like the .aus "gun buyback program".

The more guns you own, the harder it would be to start confiscating your guns. The gun-haters would probably love to start confiscating them, but not necessarly when they see the price.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:42:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By clasky:
I'm already a member of the NRA and vote every election.



A lot here aren't and don't.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:45:39 AM EDT
What do you think happened in California? Don't be fooled - CA's law is a total ban on "assault weapons" - it's just taking a few years to take effect.
Can anyone born after 1993 own an AR-15 in CA? No. Once the current generation of registered AR-15 owners die, no one will ever lawfully own an AR-15 in CA.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:53:43 AM EDT
I was in California for their bans/registrations. Trust me, very few people percentage-wise took them up on their offer. As I mentioned years ago, if you ignore the tyrant, he loses much of his power.

There is a reason that they haven't gone door-to-door looking for all of the unregistered "assault weapons". It would be bad for their health.

The most that they did to me was to send me a pre-paid FedEx envelope, along with a letter from the CA DOJ, telling me that I had 90 days to send in my "assault pistol", or "else".

I ignored the tyrant. I'm still amongst the living.

...And I am free.

Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:56:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/9/2006 4:58:22 AM EDT by jimtash9]
The've already been prohibited since 1968, 1986, and 1989. Now what's to stop them from totally banning them? The 2nd? Nope.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 4:58:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Molon Labe



<--------- +1
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:02:36 AM EDT



the .gov can if they want. there will be no war, don't fool yourself.

i was chastised on here just yesterday for (half-jokingly) suggesting we bust some windows in the homes of these "representatives" that keep introducing and voting for gun control.

breaking windows! if we wouldn't even be willing to do $50 worth of damage to someones property in order to send a message, do you really think we'd be willing to fight a "war"?

not a chance. when the government wants them, they'll take them.



Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:03:04 AM EDT
not only can it be restricted like in California and NYC, but it has happened in Australia and Britain. It's not a question of "can" but "if".
Can you say "flint lock" or "match lock"? Hey, it beats rocks!
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:09:29 AM EDT
Use them or lose them, you gotta figure out whats more important. Ive got my war paint picked out and ready.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:28:03 AM EDT

Could the Government really take our "assault rifles?"


Theoretically, no due to the Fourth Amendment:


FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'


As a practical matter, the answer is "YES," due to the Golden Rule:

He who has the gold makes the rules.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:35:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hardcase:

Could the Government really take our "assault rifles?"


Theoretically, no due to the Fourth Amendment:


FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'


As a practical matter, the answer is "YES," due to the Golden Rule:

He who has the gold makes the rules.



But if the feds pass law saying our guns are illegal, would that not give them "probable cause?"
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:38:49 AM EDT
cable tv, lazy boy chairs, fast food and starbucks will not allow people to fight back...
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:40:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/9/2006 5:40:44 AM EDT by markmars]
I don’t think they will ban so called assault weapons all at once. The gun control lobby is going to go after ammunition first. They will make ammunition so expense that the average person can’t afford it. The will introduce bills for serial number bullets, blocking the sale of all surplus ammunition, need an ID card to purchase ammo, and listing your name in a national data base that you purchase 100 rounds of 9 mm. To stop crime, for the children, or some other BS.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:46:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/9/2006 5:47:18 AM EDT by Leisure_Shoot]
1. shoot
2. shovel
3. shutup


2 & 3 should take care of things for a few years.
Receivers are pretty small.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:48:22 AM EDT
in case you guys hadn't noticed gun control is a big LOSER come election time and some dems are begining to realize this. the big problem is that the republican leadership is doing it's best to drive the base away.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:49:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By danno-in-michigan:
What do you think happened in California? Don't be fooled - CA's law is a total ban on "assault weapons" - it's just taking a few years to take effect.
Can anyone born after 1993 own an AR-15 in CA? No. Once the current generation of registered AR-15 owners die, no one will ever lawfully own an AR-15 in CA.



There is the problem. Everyone is so worried about obeying "laws", when in fact you arent the criminal.

"Oh, yeah. I did have an AR a few years back, but I sold it at a gun show. I had a few pistols, too, but they were stolen out of my truck when I stopped at the store on my way home from the range. I have a copy of the police report somewhere; you guys are welcome to come in and look around while I try to find it."
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:53:51 AM EDT
Time to do like what gruops like Christian Exodus is doing, only for guns. Every damn gun owner moves off to some state and vote ourselves in and tell the feds to fuck off.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:54:03 AM EDT
There wouldn't be enough jails, or body bags for such an undertaking in my opinion.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:04:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Tromatic:
Time to do like what gruops like Christian Exodus is doing, only for guns. Every damn gun owner moves off to some state and vote ourselves in and tell the feds to fuck off.



From what I hear, a lot of s have the same plan....................
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:10:18 AM EDT
Tag
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:12:17 AM EDT

It is doubtful they will outlaw them and demand they be turned in although no doubt a lot of politicos would like to. The gun grabbers learned a lot from the 1994 ban failure. The next ban will require class 3 regisration of existing guns. This was the original language of the 1994 ban, but it was taken out. That way it will be the same as all the unregistered war souvenir machine guns. All the guys who didn't register their stuff in 1968 on the last chance registration were just stuck with it. Can't sell it, can't take it anywhere, etc.
That is the situation we are likely to face. Once you have an unregistered weapon you can't really use it and it's a hot potato. Plus there is now the paper trail of 4473's that didn't used to exist, and all the "destroyed" instant checks. In 1994 we were all wondering about guns we had bought and later sold. If you got a letter from the ATF that said "Records reveal you purchased Colt rifle serial number 12345 on a certain date. Our records do not show it having been registered per the current ban" what does that mean?
How can you prove you don't have a gun you bought 10 years ago and sold 5 years ago when you lost interest in it or needed money? That's the bad part.
Most people will not register their guns as was shown in California. If the govt makes felons out of a lot of gun owners it will not bode well. Most black rifles are owned by middle class male whites. That is the largest, wealthiest, best armed group in the country. For a govt to alienate that group in their society is beyond stupid. It's dangerous as hell.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:19:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Rustygun:
It is doubtful they will outlaw them and demand they be turned in although no doubt a lot of politicos would like to. The gun grabbers learned a lot from the 1994 ban failure. The next ban will require class 3 regisration of existing guns. This was the original language of the 1994 ban, but it was taken out. That way it will be the same as all the unregistered war souvenir machine guns. All the guys who didn't register their stuff in 1968 on the last chance registration were just stuck with it. Can't sell it, can't take it anywhere, etc.
That is the situation we are likely to face. Once you have an unregistered weapon you can't really use it and it's a hot potato. Plus there is now the paper trail of 4473's that didn't used to exist, and all the "destroyed" instant checks. In 1994 we were all wondering about guns we had bought and later sold. If you got a letter from the ATF that said "Records reveal you purchased Colt rifle serial number 12345 on a certain date. Our records do not show it having been registered per the current ban" what does that mean?
How can you prove you don't have a gun you bought 10 years ago and sold 5 years ago when you lost interest in it or needed money? That's the bad part.
Most people will not register their guns as was shown in California. If the govt makes felons out of a lot of gun owners it will not bode well. Most black rifles are owned by middle class male whites. That is the largest, wealthiest, best armed group in the country. For a govt to alienate that group in their society is beyond stupid. It's dangerous as hell.




Alientation of white middle class americans(wasps) happens all the time in both politics and the media.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:30:29 AM EDT
Molon Labe, I live in IL so this could be happening alot sooner than latter. Just think what 200 trained shooter could do, think beltway sniper times a thousand of course the targets would be completely different, not random innocent people. For something like this to happen it would take active confiscations, not just laws with no teeth or rare enforcement.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:39:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By kc8ard:

Originally Posted By Rustygun:
It is doubtful they will outlaw them and demand they be turned in although no doubt a lot of politicos would like to. The gun grabbers learned a lot from the 1994 ban failure. The next ban will require class 3 regisration of existing guns. This was the original language of the 1994 ban, but it was taken out. That way it will be the same as all the unregistered war souvenir machine guns. All the guys who didn't register their stuff in 1968 on the last chance registration were just stuck with it. Can't sell it, can't take it anywhere, etc.
That is the situation we are likely to face. Once you have an unregistered weapon you can't really use it and it's a hot potato. Plus there is now the paper trail of 4473's that didn't used to exist, and all the "destroyed" instant checks. In 1994 we were all wondering about guns we had bought and later sold. If you got a letter from the ATF that said "Records reveal you purchased Colt rifle serial number 12345 on a certain date. Our records do not show it having been registered per the current ban" what does that mean?
How can you prove you don't have a gun you bought 10 years ago and sold 5 years ago when you lost interest in it or needed money? That's the bad part.
Most people will not register their guns as was shown in California. If the govt makes felons out of a lot of gun owners it will not bode well. Most black rifles are owned by middle class male whites. That is the largest, wealthiest, best armed group in the country. For a govt to alienate that group in their society is beyond stupid. It's dangerous as hell.




Alientation of white middle class americans(wasps) happens all the time in both politics and the media.



All in the name of "Diversity" and "Equal Rights".
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:48:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/9/2006 6:56:38 AM EDT by TRW]
Sure they could.

All they are really waiting for is our wool coats to grow and thicken a little more and our bleats to become a little more uniform before they step in and confiscate.

Politicians have short fucking memories and their political beliefs are driven by what they think will help them stay in office...not is what is best for the country.

Flashback to the mid 80's when they said that this would be the LAST AMNESTY for illegal aliens and that they would aggresively fix the problems that called for the amnesty.

THEY DIDN'T DO SHIT AND HERE WE ARE, 20 YEARS LATER, LOOKING AT ANOTHER LOOMING AMNESTY.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:50:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By clasky:
I'm already a member of the NRA and vote every election.



+1

How about you?
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:52:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TravisM1:

Originally Posted By kc8ard:

Originally Posted By Rustygun:
It is doubtful they will outlaw them and demand they be turned in although no doubt a lot of politicos would like to. The gun grabbers learned a lot from the 1994 ban failure. The next ban will require class 3 regisration of existing guns. This was the original language of the 1994 ban, but it was taken out. That way it will be the same as all the unregistered war souvenir machine guns. All the guys who didn't register their stuff in 1968 on the last chance registration were just stuck with it. Can't sell it, can't take it anywhere, etc.
That is the situation we are likely to face. Once you have an unregistered weapon you can't really use it and it's a hot potato. Plus there is now the paper trail of 4473's that didn't used to exist, and all the "destroyed" instant checks. In 1994 we were all wondering about guns we had bought and later sold. If you got a letter from the ATF that said "Records reveal you purchased Colt rifle serial number 12345 on a certain date. Our records do not show it having been registered per the current ban" what does that mean?
How can you prove you don't have a gun you bought 10 years ago and sold 5 years ago when you lost interest in it or needed money? That's the bad part.
Most people will not register their guns as was shown in California. If the govt makes felons out of a lot of gun owners it will not bode well. Most black rifles are owned by middle class male whites. That is the largest, wealthiest, best armed group in the country. For a govt to alienate that group in their society is beyond stupid. It's dangerous as hell.




Alientation of white middle class americans(wasps) happens all the time in both politics and the media.



All in the name of "Diversity" and "Equal Rights".



All in the name of such fuzzy things as tolerance and political correctness. Just and end around on the 1st Amendment. Against conservatives, of course. That is what we need to fight.


Originally Posted By krpind:
Join the NRA.

Vote.

These things will be way more effective, that thinking you can shoot it out with the .gov.

I wonder how many people here, really take the time to vote.



LMAO. I vote everytime but if you think you will hold onto your rights or your country via the ballot box you are a fool.

And I belong to NRA but their primary strategy is buying off corrupt politicians to abide by the Constitution of the United States. Something wrong when that is our only option. Well, almost our only option.



Originally Posted By fireguy:
It won't happen that way, the gun grabbers know the score. They will chip away a tiny bit at a time until there is nothing left. "Death by a thousand cuts".

In twenty or thirty years they will have won and not a single shot will have been fired and we will be wondering what the fuck just happened.

We must fight now and fight every little thing they throw at us, We can't let a single piece of gun control legislation get passed without a huge fight. No free rides for these assholes.




I thoroughly disagree. That has been their preivous gameplan, no doubt, but they are almost beside themsleves with the Republican Gov't now, even though it is damn near as socialist as they are. No, next time around they will move more quickly and turn up the heat in the pot quite a bit. Already getting pretty warm in their, ain't it froggies?

I'm ready.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:54:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hardcase:

Could the Government really take our "assault rifles?"


Theoretically, no due to the Fourth Amendment:


FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'


As a practical matter, the answer is "YES," due to the Golden Rule:

He who has the gold makes the rules.



I disagree.

Gold is for the mistress - silver for the maid
Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade
"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,
"But Iron - Cold Iron - is master of them all."
Rudyard Kipling

They're welcome to my crabgrass. I'm keeping my iron.

Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:56:34 AM EDT
they are too late for mine-- lost them in a boating accident
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:58:06 AM EDT
The gungrabbers have been seething since 1994.
They have failed to pass any nationwide gun control acts.
If the Dems gain power in 2008, the gun grabbers will be there.
Have heart, because that is good for us.
It means they will be greedy, and they will bite off more than they can chew.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 6:59:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GoBlue:
they are too late for mine-- lost them in a boating accident



Why do people say this?
Do you really think they would believe you anyway?
And if they did believe you...what is the purpose of holding onto firearms you can't use?
If the time comes where you have to bury your guns, the time has come to use them.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:02:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Originally Posted By GoBlue:
they are too late for mine-- lost them in a boating accident



Why do people say this?
Do you really think they would believe you anyway?
And if they did believe you...what is the purpose of holding onto firearms you can't use?
If the time comes where you have to bury your guns, the time has come to use them.



Oh yeah.
Of course caching some supplies for future ops is always a good idea.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:03:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By clasky:
Lets just pretend that our worst fear becomes reality in 2008 and Hitlery or some other just-as-bad liberal becomes president. Could they really pass a law for the confiscation without reimbersment of our firearms?

It has always seemed, I don't know... ILLEGAL when places like SanFran decide they will just take our guns and not give any reimbersment. How could this happen on a federal level without severe consequences for the government? Klintoon put a ban on sale of "assault weapons." OK, yeah it sucked, but at least everybody got to keep what they already had. It was much better than the alternative.

So, could the feds really steal our legally purchased and owned firearms without (at best) getting hit with a class-action lawsuit the likes of which have never been seen, or (at worst) starting a civil war?



Like it would matter if the Gooberment gave you $50 bucks to take someting that you own and do not want to sell.

The 1st ammendment is dead. The 4th ammendment is dead. Most of the others are on deaths door. The 2nd has had some revival in the last few years. But hardly matters. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

Take a look a recent history. Waco happens then Militias start springing up. Sure OCB squashed that to a certain extent. But is shows some people will acually start doing something.

But they don't have to outlaw guns. They know who you are and where you live. How hard do you think it would be to plant some child porn on your computer, or drugs in your car, or arrest you for a terrorist offence.... Think about it. How hard would it be for the feds to get rid of the bigger trouble makers one by one. You get labled a drug user or child molester by the media and your done. Even close friends will doubt you. There are many other ways to get rid of problem people.

Even if they were 99% effective it still leaves a very large number of very pissed off ARMED citizens. In the long run freedom should win out but it will HAVE to get worse before anything would ever happen. We will not fight until there is only a slim chance of victory or we will fight when there is no chance of vicotry because it will be better to die than live as slaves. There will be no revolution untill things get really really bad. And they will not have to enact much if any more gun control to do it. When we could have won a bloodless easy vitory there wasn't even a fight. When we could have won easilly again no fight. When we could have won a difficult victory we were too comfortable to fight. These events happened in generations past and the toughest fight will probably be on our kids or grandkids.

Expect another big terrorist type event and the inevitable call to surrender anything that is left of the Bill of Rights afterwards. They will get who they think are the big trouble makers with other means. They are not stupid. People are now used to the Patriot Act restrctions and will accept more and more as time goes on. The country still thinks we are free. Ammo may start to get to expensive to purchase or to practice much. Simply having a gun collection even if it was WWI bolt actions would be enough to have a nervous neighbor turn snitch, then you have a terrorist arsenol....Just be creative. Our best hope is that they get impaitent and move too soon too fast, and enough people get righteously pissed.

Freedom is being killed by a thousand cuts. We lost the day we one the Revolutionary war. The Federalists (Big Government Guys) pushed the Constitution though. They were organized and the Anti-Federalists (Freedom Guys) were disorganized and couldn't agree. Guess who one. We are VERY lucky the Anti-Federalists were are succesful as they were in getting a Bill of Rights. They should have had Hamilton Killed. We have the same problem now. The Fascist/Socialists have a comon goal, and freedom lovers can't get along or agree on anything.

Hunters hate "assult weapons" what ever those are, They are starting to turn on the NRA. Others hate the NRA because they don't fight hrad enough for 2A. (Hint Join and change org from inside. The ACLU hates the 2nd ammendment and the RKBA people hate the ACLU. Free speach people hate the 2nd ammendment but love the first. Christian/Conservatives won't back the Libertarian Party because of abortion. People who support freedom also support the "war on SOME drugs". Religous leaders want to force everyone to live by THEIR morals, not freedom in general. Athiests want to abolish organized religion to be free of it..... The list goes on and on and on.

So many people are fighting for crumbs of liberty and they squabble over their chosen scrap. And they don't want others to get other crumbs.... They will not agree. Too many people want to tell other people what to do and how to live their life. I guess I'm just ticked and I'm rambling now.

It would be nice if EVERYONE saw the big picture and started working together. All in all I doubt that an Assult Weapon ban/confiscation will happen untill people are even more contidtioned to give up more of their freedom and at that point it won't matter much either way. Eventually that oppresive regime will die like they all do but will any of use even be around then????
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:04:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By callgood:

I disagree.

Gold is for the mistress - silver for the maid
Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade
"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,
"But Iron - Cold Iron - is master of them all."
Rudyard Kipling

They're welcome to my crabgrass. I'm keeping my iron.




first we need to ban Kipling...
sorry he's not being taught in public schools so i guess they did.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:05:42 AM EDT
It always amazes me how quickly something such as registration and confiscation take place in any given country...People think, Oh, it can't happen to me...and then, surprise!

With a do nothing Rep. majority and an administration out on cloud 9 somewhere, all it would take is an amendment attached to some remote crime bill, thrown in just 15 minutes before a holiday recess and the idiots in congress wouldn't read the bill because they want to go home...that type of politics happens all the time....I never feel overly confident with government.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:06:15 AM EDT
If I had any guns to take, they could have them.

Guns are icky.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Top Top