Home› A Moving Train

good news

8181 Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
edited July 2013 in A Moving Train
Il is about to go ccw

Hopefully by the 19th
:lol:
81 is now off the air

Off_Air.jpg
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    July 9 is the final day for the court ordered carry, if nothing is signed by our Commie governor we fall into that. I just bought a Glock 30SF yesterday for the special occasion. Of course this governor will do everything he can to defy the courts.
  • 8181 Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
    unsung wrote:
    July 9 is the final day for the court ordered carry, if nothing is signed by our Commie governor we fall into that. I just bought a Glock 30SF yesterday for the special occasion. Of course this governor will do everything he can to defy the courts.

    guess i should follow it closer....

    bought fuckin time tho.
    81 is now off the air

    Off_Air.jpg
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Yeah the legislature will be voting Tuesday iirc on overriding his veto. Quinn makes me sick, he surrounds himself with kids and says his #1 directive is public safety, no it is to uphold the Constitution. I'm sick of politicians standing on graves of dead kids.

    In any case it'll be about six months before anyone gets the permit because the legislation gives the ISP six months just to come up with a process. We know nothing gets done quick in this state.
  • ajedigeckoajedigecko \m/deplorable af \m/ Posts: 2,430
    Why do you need a gun?

    ...are the laws not working?
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • 8181 Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
    heard on the radio, they have 180 days to do something or anouther (process?)...and then once you submit an application, the state sheriff has 90 days to review. guess we are looking at next spring
    81 is now off the air

    Off_Air.jpg
  • ajedigeckoajedigecko \m/deplorable af \m/ Posts: 2,430
    Illinois spring.

    Let the revolution begin.
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    unsung wrote:
    I'm sick of politicians standing on graves of dead kids.

    There are many that are likely sick of politicians ignoring the graves of dead kids.

    Good thinking with your new purchase though. You should be really ready when the takeover occurs. Hopefully... PJ will get their tour done first. I'll be pissed if the government takes over before that and wrecks the tour plans. I'm sick of the government wrecking tour plans.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    81 wrote:
    heard on the radio, they have 180 days to do something or anouther (process?)...and then once you submit an application, the state sheriff has 90 days to review. guess we are looking at next spring


    Yep the ISP has 180 just to come up with a permit and approve instructors for the class. So yeah it'll be next spring for sure before we get to exercise our rights. I'm moving in the next few years, I've had it.

    Btw I don't agree with how this whole thing went down. Federal rules on guns is unconstitutional and we allowed a federal court to rule on it.
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    ajedigecko wrote:
    Why do you need a gun?

    ...are the laws not working?


    I have the right to defend myself. Period.
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    unsung wrote:
    ajedigecko wrote:
    Why do you need a gun?

    ...are the laws not working?


    I have the right to defend myself. Period.

    Is it really about defending yourself? Seriously? Are you really that frightened where you think you need an arsenal to defend yourself?

    So I might have a better understanding of where you might be coming from: what exactly are you scared of and what is it that you might need to defend yourself from?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • SnakeduckSnakeduck Posts: 1,056
    I never once let a law or permit dictate my concealed carrying... If I feel the need to conceal a weapon (and I sometimes do), I will.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    unsung wrote:
    ajedigecko wrote:
    Why do you need a gun?

    ...are the laws not working?


    I have the right to defend myself. Period.

    Is it really about defending yourself? Seriously? Are you really that frightened where you think you need an arsenal to defend yourself?

    So I might have a better understanding of where you might be coming from: what exactly are you scared of and what is it that you might need to defend yourself from?

    that does not matter,being prepared and being afraid are not the same thing...during a home invasion you can be armed and prepared or unarmed and afraid and possibly hurt or dead.

    Godfather.
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    Godfather. wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    Is it really about defending yourself? Seriously? Are you really that frightened where you think you need an arsenal to defend yourself?

    So I might have a better understanding of where you might be coming from: what exactly are you scared of and what is it that you might need to defend yourself from?

    that does not matter,being prepared and being afraid are not the same thing...during a home invasion you can be armed and prepared or unarmed and afraid and possibly hurt or dead.

    Godfather.

    But that doesn't really answer the question. You're saying be prepared with guns for something. I'm not sure that's a good enough answer to offset 11,000 gun homicides per annum.

    Is it the home invasion? These are very rare and... in the event of one... a shotgun would suffice. You don't need a glock. Or an AR-15. Why not take these types of guns out of the equation?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • 8181 Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
    this is good news....lets stay on topic....
    81 is now off the air

    Off_Air.jpg
  • SPEEDY MCCREADYSPEEDY MCCREADY Posts: 25,873
    Im in!

    texas_poised_to_pass_bill_allowing_guns_on_campus.jpg
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Florida Posts: 10,219
    unsung wrote:
    ajedigecko wrote:
    Why do you need a gun?

    ...are the laws not working?


    I have the right to defend myself. Period.

    I'd just like to point out that you put a period, then wrote "period."
    If that's like a double negative, I believe your run-on sentence has no punctuation, and you have the freedom to add to it at any time. :P
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    Godfather. wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    Is it really about defending yourself? Seriously? Are you really that frightened where you think you need an arsenal to defend yourself?

    So I might have a better understanding of where you might be coming from: what exactly are you scared of and what is it that you might need to defend yourself from?

    that does not matter,being prepared and being afraid are not the same thing...during a home invasion you can be armed and prepared or unarmed and afraid and possibly hurt or dead.

    Godfather.

    But that doesn't really answer the question. You're saying be prepared with guns for something. I'm not sure that's a good enough answer to offset 11,000 gun homicides per annum.

    Is it the home invasion? These are very rare and... in the event of one... a shotgun would suffice. You don't need a glock. Or an AR-15. Why not take these types of guns out of the equation?



    Why not take these types of guns out of the equation ?.... "My right as a responsible American" to buy and own them.


    Godfather.
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    Godfather. wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    But that doesn't really answer the question. You're saying be prepared with guns for something. I'm not sure that's a good enough answer to offset 11,000 gun homicides per annum.

    Is it the home invasion? These are very rare and... in the event of one... a shotgun would suffice. You don't need a glock. Or an AR-15. Why not take these types of guns out of the equation?



    Why not take these types of guns out of the equation ?.... "My right as a responsible American" to buy and own them.


    Godfather.

    So you are prepared for 11,000 gun homicides each year to preserve your right to own these toys? I say toys because we have concluded that a shotgun would suffice as an effective tool in the event of an extremely rare home invasion; therefore, rendering handguns and assault rifles play things.

    No other scenario- such as an invading army coming up the street- was presented to describe the 'need' for such weaponry.

    Can you realistically call yourself a 'responsible' American when you choose to ignore the gross statistics that point to an epidemic gun problem that has spiralled out of control? From my way of thinking... I call such an attitude irresponsible.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Firearms are not toys.

    But back on topic (there are many anti gun threads here so we can be allowed to have one pro gun) rumor is that there will be a certain someone filing for injunction. Ah, freedom hating people really amaze me.
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    Godfather. wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    But that doesn't really answer the question. You're saying be prepared with guns for something. I'm not sure that's a good enough answer to offset 11,000 gun homicides per annum.

    Is it the home invasion? These are very rare and... in the event of one... a shotgun would suffice. You don't need a glock. Or an AR-15. Why not take these types of guns out of the equation?



    Why not take these types of guns out of the equation ?.... "My right as a responsible American" to buy and own them.


    Godfather.

    So you are prepared for 11,000 gun homicides each year to preserve your right to own these toys? I say toys because we have concluded that a shotgun would suffice as an effective tool in the event of an extremely rare home invasion; therefore, rendering handguns and assault rifles play things.

    No other scenario- such as an invading army coming up the street- was presented to describe the 'need' for such weaponry.

    Can you realistically call yourself a 'responsible' American when you choose to ignore the gross statistics that point to an epidemic gun problem that has spiralled out of control? From my way of thinking... I call such an attitude irresponsible.

    Personally I do not want to ruin my home with the mess a shotgun would make, when one bullet could do the job and make less mess... :)
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    Godfather. wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    But that doesn't really answer the question. You're saying be prepared with guns for something. I'm not sure that's a good enough answer to offset 11,000 gun homicides per annum.

    Is it the home invasion? These are very rare and... in the event of one... a shotgun would suffice. You don't need a glock. Or an AR-15. Why not take these types of guns out of the equation?



    Why not take these types of guns out of the equation ?.... "My right as a responsible American" to buy and own them.


    Godfather.

    So you are prepared for 11,000 gun homicides each year to preserve your right to own these toys? I say toys because we have concluded that a shotgun would suffice as an effective tool in the event of an extremely rare home invasion; therefore, rendering handguns and assault rifles play things.

    No other scenario- such as an invading army coming up the street- was presented to describe the 'need' for such weaponry.

    Can you realistically call yourself a 'responsible' American when you choose to ignore the gross statistics that point to an epidemic gun problem that has spiralled out of control? From my way of thinking... I call such an attitude irresponsible.


    it's a people problem not a gun problem more people die from drugs ans booze but your opinion is yours and we will just have to agree to disagree.

    Godfather.
  • pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,945
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    So I might have a better understanding of where you might be coming from: what exactly are you scared of and what is it that you might need to defend yourself from?

    Better question: What is the motivation to confront a peer who is doing something completely legal and suggest that they have to explain themselves to you?
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    Godfather. wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    So you are prepared for 11,000 gun homicides each year to preserve your right to own these toys? I say toys because we have concluded that a shotgun would suffice as an effective tool in the event of an extremely rare home invasion; therefore, rendering handguns and assault rifles play things.

    No other scenario- such as an invading army coming up the street- was presented to describe the 'need' for such weaponry.

    Can you realistically call yourself a 'responsible' American when you choose to ignore the gross statistics that point to an epidemic gun problem that has spiralled out of control? From my way of thinking... I call such an attitude irresponsible.


    it's a people problem not a gun problem more people die from drugs ans booze but your opinion is yours and we will just have to agree to disagree.

    Godfather.

    I'm not going to disagree that ultimately... it is a people problem. But that problem will never go away: since the beginning of man... there have always been humans incapable of co-existing with others. Given this... I say let's plan for that and limit the types of weapons they can access.

    It is a sacrifice... I know. But the alternative- do nothing- is too costly in my estimation.

    I can agree to disagree... but I wanted to speak to your point and clarify (or expand) my position in light of what you said. We are not completely different.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    pjl44 wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    So I might have a better understanding of where you might be coming from: what exactly are you scared of and what is it that you might need to defend yourself from?

    Better question: What is the motivation to confront a peer who is doing something completely legal and suggest that they have to explain themselves to you?

    The hope for a safer world for the kid in your avatar.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    aerial wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    So you are prepared for 11,000 gun homicides each year to preserve your right to own these toys? I say toys because we have concluded that a shotgun would suffice as an effective tool in the event of an extremely rare home invasion; therefore, rendering handguns and assault rifles play things.

    No other scenario- such as an invading army coming up the street- was presented to describe the 'need' for such weaponry.

    Can you realistically call yourself a 'responsible' American when you choose to ignore the gross statistics that point to an epidemic gun problem that has spiralled out of control? From my way of thinking... I call such an attitude irresponsible.

    Personally I do not want to ruin my home with the mess a shotgun would make, when one bullet could do the job and make less mess... :)

    This is one of the most horrible things I have read on the MT. Brutal, man... just brutal.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,945
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    pjl44 wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    So I might have a better understanding of where you might be coming from: what exactly are you scared of and what is it that you might need to defend yourself from?

    Better question: What is the motivation to confront a peer who is doing something completely legal and suggest that they have to explain themselves to you?

    The hope for a safer world for the kid in your avatar.

    Asking people condescending questions isn't contributing to making the world safer.
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    edited July 2013
    pjl44 wrote:
    Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
    pjl44 wrote:

    Better question: What is the motivation to confront a peer who is doing something completely legal and suggest that they have to explain themselves to you?

    The hope for a safer world for the kid in your avatar.

    Asking people condescending questions isn't contributing to making the world safer.

    Changing prevalent and entrenched attitudes might be though.

    The questions I asked were legitimate- you perceived them as condescending. Note how they were separated from the portion of the post that could be viewed as confrontational, as well as the preface where I asked for clarification to enhance my perspective.

    Speaking of condescending questions though... have a look at your first response to my post though. You come across just a little smug yourself.
    Post edited by Thirty Bills Unpaid on
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • MoonpigMoonpig Posts: 659
    unsung wrote:
    July 9 is the final day for the court ordered carry, if nothing is signed by our Commie governor we fall into that. I just bought a Glock 30SF yesterday for the special occasion. Of course this governor will do everything he can to defy the courts.

    Ha, that old chestnut. Bet you a tenner your governor is not a commie.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    I was in Arizona a few years back and noticed a few people with guns on their side and my first thought was is that legal ? being from California all my life and learning that you can carry in Az. was great.

    Godfather.
  • goingtoveronagoingtoverona Posts: 616
    yeah I remember being outside of phoenix in one of the sun city retirement communities, we were at olive garden waiting outside to be called and this cat with a wife beater, jean shorts and an ugly ass curly mullet strolled up with a glock on his side. everyone was looking at each other with a curious but cautious gaze. guy came back out with a bag of food and left, but I remember thinking that I would never carry my pistol like that around in public. in my opinion, it makes you a huge target for any criminal that might be looking to commit a crime. you could either be perceived as a threat and possibly taken out, or maybe they just want a weapon upgrade. no thanks, carry conceal or don't carry at all is my philosophy.


    Godfather. wrote:
    I was in Arizona a few years back and noticed a few people with guns on their side and my first thought was is that legal ? being from California all my life and learning that you can carry in Az. was great.

    Godfather.
    if you think what I believe is stupid, bizarre, ridiculous or outrageous.....it's ok, I think I had a brain tumor when I wrote that.
Sign In or Register to comment.