Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ask a cop: Why the anonymity?(UT)
ksl.com ^ | 3 February, 2012 | Officer Anonymous

Posted on 02/06/2012 6:01:46 AM PST by marktwain

The last general answer seems to be a popular subject, especially with the new legislative session: laws concerning open carry and carrying concealed weapons. First off, when dealing with police, just notify us of the fact that you have a firearm. I cannot tell you how an individual officer will react, but that's what you do. Let me first say that I believe in gun ownership. I believe in defending yourself if in a life-threatening situation or defending the life of someone else.

I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor. I have met exactly zero criminals who have possessed and have been wearing body armor. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but I have to wonder why someone would purchase ammunition or a weapon for that purpose. Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what? Terrorists? If you live in the country, then you can maybe justify it. But in an urban environment, I say no.

Next is the open carry. I understand the 2nd Amendment and how states and people interpret it differently. I however see no benefit, unless you're camping, of having a firearm exposed in public. There are a lot of officers in plainclothes, whether undercover or detectives, and the whole point is to not draw attention to themselves, thus giving the element of surprise. That's especially true since they do not wear vests or have the other protective advantages of a uniformed officer.

I have been to restaurants and have seen open carry groups hanging out, and I was amazed at men and women openly carrying their guns in thigh rigs, holding their children, with no sense of their surroundings or weapon retention.

(Excerpt) Read more at ksl.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: banglist; opencarry; police; ut
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
The question I would ask the officer is: Why do you want to disarm us? There has been no crime reduction benefit shown from keeping "assault weapons" out of citizens hands.
1 posted on 02/06/2012 6:02:07 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Sadly, a lot of LEOs think this way.


2 posted on 02/06/2012 6:08:00 AM PST by And2TheRepublic (People like freedom of speech, but only when it's sweet to their ears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

This cop needs to be Zumboed.


3 posted on 02/06/2012 6:08:55 AM PST by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

This cop doesn’t know the difference between a clip and a magazine.


4 posted on 02/06/2012 6:11:50 AM PST by Poser (Cogito ergo Spam - I think, therefore I ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor. I have met exactly zero criminals who have possessed and have been wearing body armor. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, but I have to wonder why someone would purchase ammunition or a weapon for that purpose.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The purpose?

Answer: The Second Amendment is in the Bill of Rights to protect us from the government. Government agents have body armor.


5 posted on 02/06/2012 6:12:12 AM PST by wintertime (Reforming our socialist K-12 schools is like reforming abortion centers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
"I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor."

Stopped reading right there. Requiring justification ("need") is not the purview of government, and common hunting calibers will penetrate body armor.
6 posted on 02/06/2012 6:12:43 AM PST by PowderMonkey (WILL WORK FOR AMMO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
..."I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use,..."

He is admitting that he has no understanding of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution and why it was included.

7 posted on 02/06/2012 6:15:46 AM PST by mosaicwolf (Strength and Honor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I question whether or not this is a serving police officer. Exhibit 1:

" Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips..."

What self respecting and knowledgable cop refers to magazines as "clips"? Methinks if this guy is a cop He considers his duty weapon to be a fashion accessory.And one I wouldn't want to be around when the feces impacts the rotary cooling device.

JMHO

CC

8 posted on 02/06/2012 6:18:01 AM PST by Celtic Conservative (Wisdom comes from experience. Experience comes from a lack of wisdom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Some quotes from the snip in the OP:

I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use…
I have to wonder why someone would purchase ammunition or a weapon for that purpose.
I however see no benefit, unless you’re camping…

The person can have those opinions all he wants. He is not God and his “personal sensibilities”, such that they are do not trump the constitution.


9 posted on 02/06/2012 6:19:28 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

being that he is LEO, i bet he would consider himself completely justified in keeping an assault rifle in his home with lots of “clips”. wow......just wow.


10 posted on 02/06/2012 6:19:39 AM PST by cpray (We'll put a boot in your a**, it's the American way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The LEO answered his question on having ‘assault rifles’ with the wording of his own question: because rifle projectiles go through body armor...and other stuff.


11 posted on 02/06/2012 6:28:25 AM PST by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

It’s not the Bill of Needs.


12 posted on 02/06/2012 6:29:23 AM PST by real saxophonist (The fact that you play tuba doesn't make you any less lethal. -USMC bandsman in Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor. I have met exactly zero criminals who have possessed and have been wearing body armor. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but I have to wonder why someone would purchase ammunition or a weapon for that purpose. Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what? Terrorists? If you live in the country, then you can maybe justify it. But in an urban environment, I say no.

This jack-ass is too stupid to be an LEO. If he can't read the US Constitution, I wonder if he could even write a parking ticket.

13 posted on 02/06/2012 6:34:52 AM PST by Cobra64 (Common sense isn't common anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor.

His failure to understand something does not mitigate my need to have something.

14 posted on 02/06/2012 6:35:07 AM PST by TangoLimaSierra (To the left the truth looks Right-Wing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

A common misconception about the Constitution, is that it grants rights. That could not be further from the truth. It merely recognizes some of your God given rights. The main purpose of the Constitution is to limit the federal government. The Constitution draws heavily upon natural law, and even if the Constitution were amended to eradicate the RTKABAs, that would be in violation of your God given rights. Basically, our natural rights cannot be infringed upon by any organization of men. They simply do not have the authority.


15 posted on 02/06/2012 6:36:43 AM PST by W1somoveon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

I have a side, but related issue with LEOs, at any level.

If you are acting as and representing yourself as an agent of the government, with the inherent authority granted therein,

there is no reason for you to be allowed to remain anonymous,
excepting that you are attempting to avoid responsibility
for malfeasance should you commit such.


16 posted on 02/06/2012 6:45:10 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what?

From tyranny, which is the #1 growing threat in America.

Never, NEVER give the government a monopoly on weaponry. The second amendment to the US constitution was included for a reason, and that reason isn't hunting.

17 posted on 02/06/2012 6:45:56 AM PST by meyer (We will not sit down and shut up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: W1somoveon

—A common misconception about the Constitution, is that it grants rights. That could not be further from the truth. It merely recognizes some of your God given rights. —

It is fun to use that argument on liberal sites. It always starts an argument that they never, ever win. ;-)


18 posted on 02/06/2012 6:48:08 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mosaicwolf

Must be overdue for a donut fix….. What part of “infringement” does he not understand? He “doesn’t understand” why a citizen would want to possess an (whatever this term means) an “assault rifle”? Does he not understand that the stereotypical hunting rifle, be it Grandpa’s Winchester 94 30-30 or the beautiful walnut stocked, scoped and pampered Model 70 30-06 on Dad’s wall will ALSO slice through “body armor”? He does not understand why a citizen would want to possess a 30 round magazine? Gee, my electric can opener is potentially lethal, but I still want it. Open carry? Well, Barney here obviously doesn’t want citizens (who, by the way pay HIS SALARY) to be on the same level of playing field with him. An armed society is a polite society. I live in the backcountry. I carry – every day. Preferably a 357 Magnum or a 44 Magnum, although I have recently surccumed to the temptation of carrying a high capacity 9mm loaded with +P+’s. Often, there’s a rifle in the truck cab with me – sometimes, horror of horrors, it is a semi auto AR or AK, maybe an SKS on occasion. If a coyote is attacking my livestock, waiting for officer tootie to drop the jelly-filled and come to my rescue (VERY SLOWLY – gotta write those “rolling stop” citations those NASTY criminals are committing) is not an option. And - if I have to run in town for any reason, I’m NOT leaving the ordinance behind - gang members move about freely, thanks to LEO incompetance. I DO, however, try to carry something concealed when in town, so as not to alarm any liberal weenies - a J frame S&W 38 Special in a baggy jacket pocket loaded with 158 grain SWCHP +P’s and a couple of speed loaders in the weak side pocket works well. This guy needs to be reminded that he is to SERVE the public - not strut about like a peacock and “interpret” the Constitution.


19 posted on 02/06/2012 6:53:15 AM PST by Nathaniel (- A Man Without A Cross -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Poser

Thus I don’t think an officer wrote this.


20 posted on 02/06/2012 6:55:26 AM PST by Molon Labbie (End the War On Drugs, Restore the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mosaicwolf

Must be overdue for a donut fix….. What part of “infringement” does he not understand? He “doesn’t understand” why a citizen would want to possess an (whatever this term means) an “assault rifle”? Does he not understand that the stereotypical hunting rifle, be it Grandpa’s Winchester 94 30-30 or the beautiful walnut stocked, scoped and pampered Model 70 30-06 on Dad’s wall will ALSO slice through “body armor”? He does not understand why a citizen would want to possess a 30 round magazine? Gee, my electric can opener is potentially lethal, but I still want it. Open carry? Well, Barney here obviously doesn’t want citizens (who, by the way pay HIS SALARY) to be on the same level of playing field with him. An armed society is a polite society. I live in the backcountry. I carry – every day. Preferably a 357 Magnum or a 44 Magnum, although I have recently surccumed to the temptation of carrying a high capacity 9mm loaded with +P+’s. Often, there’s a rifle in the truck cab with me – sometimes, horror of horrors, it is a semi auto AR or AK, maybe an SKS on occasion. If a coyote is attacking my livestock, waiting for officer tootie to drop the jelly-filled and come to my rescue (VERY SLOWLY – gotta write those “rolling stop” citations those NASTY criminals are committing) is not an option. And - if I have to run in town for any reason, I’m NOT leaving the ordinance behind - gang members move about freely, thanks to LEO incompetance. I DO, however, try to carry something concealed when in town, so as not to alarm any liberal weenies - a J frame S&W 38 Special in a baggy jacket pocket loaded with 158 grain SWCHP +P’s and a couple of speed loaders in the weak side pocket works well. This guy needs to be reminded that he is to SERVE the public - not strut about like a peacock and “interpret” the Constitution.


21 posted on 02/06/2012 6:58:10 AM PST by Nathaniel (- A Man Without A Cross -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Telling a LOE you’re legally carrying concealed is likely to get your firearm taken away.

repeatedly answering “I have a CCW permit for this State” when asked if you have any weapons, drives them nuts.


22 posted on 02/06/2012 7:00:49 AM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what? Terrorists?

From the state that has M-16s and tanks.

I bet his polic department has fully automatic weapons. Why?

23 posted on 02/06/2012 7:04:40 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poser

He thinks an AR-15 is an assault rifle.


24 posted on 02/06/2012 7:05:08 AM PST by Oztrich Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Almost forgot - if the “law” (such as it is) where you are does not REQUIRE that you notify an LEO that you’re carrying it is NONE OF HIS BUSINESS. “Than’s what you do”? Really? Wrong answer.


25 posted on 02/06/2012 7:05:08 AM PST by Nathaniel (- A Man Without A Cross -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

In repsonse to this ridiculous opijion: Who asked you?

Don’t like ARs? Don’t own one. Think urban areas are safe from terror or other mass crime? Don’t prepare yourself.

Mind your own business; I’ll mind mine.

“Don’t Tread on Me” Comes to mind.


26 posted on 02/06/2012 7:08:13 AM PST by Manly Warrior (US ARMY (Ret), "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War" (my spelling is generally korrect!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

“The purpose?

Answer: The Second Amendment is in the Bill of Rights to protect us from the government. Government agents have body armor.”
______________________________________________________________________

Precisely. Thanks.


27 posted on 02/06/2012 7:10:52 AM PST by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I think that irrational, lame bit was co-authored by Pelosi and Feinstein.


28 posted on 02/06/2012 7:12:22 AM PST by gigster (Cogito, Ergo, Ronaldus Magnus Conservatus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: W1somoveon

“A common misconception about the Constitution, is that it grants rights. That could not be further from the truth. It merely recognizes some of your God given rights. The main purpose of the Constitution is to limit the federal government. The Constitution draws heavily upon natural law, and even if the Constitution were amended to eradicate the RTKABAs, that would be in violation of your God given rights. Basically, our natural rights cannot be infringed upon by any organization of men. They simply do not have the authority.”
__________________________________________________________________________

Very Well put. Thank you.


29 posted on 02/06/2012 7:14:01 AM PST by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: gigster

Those two writing such a bit of legislation is entirely understandable.

They consider themselves and others that work in government to be of the special “ruling class” and the rest of us have no business questioning what they do.


30 posted on 02/06/2012 7:18:16 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: caver
Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what? Terrorists? If you live in the country, then you can maybe justify it. But in an urban environment, I say no.

Wowzers...talk about having it ass-backwards.

31 posted on 02/06/2012 7:21:47 AM PST by ErnBatavia (Carterize Obama in November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Molon Labbie

I think an officer did indeed write this. It is a regular column in the newspaper linked. He not only didn’t know the difference between a clip and a handgun, but he thought an AR15 was an assault rifle. It seems he also thought that .223 ammo is some sort of armor piercing powerhouse. I wonder what he would think of 30-06 rounds.


32 posted on 02/06/2012 7:22:45 AM PST by Poser (Cogito ergo Spam - I think, therefore I ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: caver

“I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use”

You don’t need to. You are a public employee hired to keep the peace, show up after a crime has been committed and make out a report. Its not your job to philosophize about why the constitution says the general population has the right to bear arms. Its not your job to ascertain what kind of weapon is appropriate for citizens to own and its not your job to wonder why they want to open carry. Just be glad you have a job and that these good folks would be the ones backing you up if you got into a situation you could not handle.


33 posted on 02/06/2012 7:22:45 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
One the second amendment says nothing about what type of weapons you own. Secondly, it is none of the cops business if you are carrying or not. Do they actually think criminals are going to say, "Hey, pig, I have a gun"? Even CA doesn't require that you reveal you are armed at the time of a stop. I realize some states do require it, but I think such laws are as unconstitutional as requiring a permit to carry concealed.

This guy apparently thinks he should decide what weapons, ammo and size magazines we are "allowed" to own.

34 posted on 02/06/2012 7:27:50 AM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The way I read the second amendment I should be able to buy/own an Appache assault helicopter or an M1A1 Abrams if I can afford it.


35 posted on 02/06/2012 7:36:41 AM PST by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2; All
You don’t need to. You are a public employee hired to keep the peace, show up after a crime has been committed and make out a report. Its not your job to philosophize about why the constitution says the general population has the right to bear arms. Its not your job to ascertain what kind of weapon is appropriate for citizens to own and its not your job to wonder why they want to open carry. Just be glad you have a job and that these good folks would be the ones backing you up if you got into a situation you could not handle.

I respectfully disagree. This officer took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It appears to me that he should be using his forum to defend the Constitution, rather than denigrate it.

36 posted on 02/06/2012 7:40:51 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Funny, I know of at least two incidents where crooks had body armor.

Once case was in the People’s Democratic Republic of Kalifornia. The cops’ pistols couldn’t do the job, so they looted a nearby gun store or sporting goods store for hunting rifles that WOULD shoot through body armor.

Another case was in Florida. The FBI tried to take them down, and lost several agents before managing to kill them.

So yes, armor piercing capacity is useful for self defense.

And, of course, you might need it to deal with anonymous black-suited armored home invaders.


37 posted on 02/06/2012 7:43:50 AM PST by Little Ray (FOR the best Conservative in the Primary; AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

{Andy Rooney Voice} I believe in the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

Except for really useful rifles with scary features..or around children.. or anywhere outdoors. Besides, who needs the rapid fire capabilities of fixed cartridges? They shoot one right after another..bam-bam-bam. Flintlocks are okay, though. And why carry indoors where your neighbors can see in your windows and be scared? I’m all for the right to carry flintlock rifles in a box inside your home. Well, rifling gives too much accuracy.. maybe a flintlock smoothbore. And don’t forget the box, it has to be inside a box..” {/Andy Rooney Voice}


38 posted on 02/06/2012 7:52:43 AM PST by Rinnwald
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

My point is that the LEO’s are hired to do a specific job. They have no higher level of authority or moral certitude to be speculating on our 2nd ammendment rights just because they carry a weapon in the course of their everyday duties.

Its just a personal peeve of mine because if the SHTF at the Waffle House I would much rather be with my fiancee’ a shooter and weapons expert who turns down offers from Front Sight every other day than the sweet 23 year old cop who wrote up the robbery report for my Mom’s break in. We personally only CC but if people want to open carry thats their business.

And you are right if anybody should be defending our right to carry its the cops. In fairness a lot of them do.


39 posted on 02/06/2012 8:08:40 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Poser

I am thinking police explorer. They do stupid things like this.

Or if he is on the job, he is brand new probe.


40 posted on 02/06/2012 8:12:10 AM PST by Molon Labbie (End the War On Drugs, Restore the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Poser

>but he thought an AR15 was an assault rifle.

Well, doesn’t the AR stand for Assault Rifle? (Regardless of whatever the pop-culture or legal definition may be, the name itself is different; somewhat like the 1911 being named an “automatic pistol” which references the loading-action, not the firing-action.)


41 posted on 02/06/2012 8:23:06 AM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
To repeat the oft quoted saying:

It’s Bill of {God-given} Rights, not Wants or Needs.

Do we really want the government telling a free-citizenry what they Need to defend themselves?

I’m picking up a strong hint of a conflict of interest there, does anyone else get that impression?

42 posted on 02/06/2012 8:33:48 AM PST by BerserkPatriot (I despise Progressive Obama Socialists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use...

Does the 2ND Amendment ring a bell there Junior? It doesn't say a damned thing about Needs but is says a whole lot about Rights.

No one ever said you have to be smart to wear a badge.
43 posted on 02/06/2012 8:55:31 AM PST by Dr.Zoidberg (Warning: Sarcasm/humor is always engaged. Failure to recognize this may lead to misunderstandings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

“Well, doesn’t the AR stand for Assault Rifle?”

Armalite Rifle, I believe. Armalite developed Eugene Stoner’s design.


44 posted on 02/06/2012 10:19:43 AM PST by M1903A1 ("We shed all that is good and virtuous for that which is shoddy and sleazy... and call it progress")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Poser
This cop doesn’t know the difference between a clip and a magazine.

I caught that too. No one in his department should be allowed to touch a firearm.

.

.

.

.

45 posted on 02/06/2012 10:23:33 AM PST by Cobra64 (Common sense isn't common anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Conservative
One of the younger guys in our gun club ran out of ammo and asked if anyone had anymore "bullets."

I gave him a handful of these:


46 posted on 02/06/2012 10:30:06 AM PST by Cobra64 (Common sense isn't common anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
Bet you He hasn't made that mistake again,lol!

CC

47 posted on 02/06/2012 10:41:05 AM PST by Celtic Conservative (Wisdom comes from experience. Experience comes from a lack of wisdom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Conservative

Is the rotary cooling device similar to a rotational oscillating unit? And when the feces makes high velocity contact with it are the results the same?


48 posted on 02/06/2012 12:28:00 PM PST by Nebr FAL owner (.308 reach out & thump someone .50 cal.Browning Machine gun reach out & crush someone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Poser

Or maybe 7mm-08 , 300 win mag ,.308.7mm magnum,350 whelan etc, etc ,etc.


49 posted on 02/06/2012 12:35:42 PM PST by Nebr FAL owner (.308 reach out & thump someone .50 cal.Browning Machine gun reach out & crush someone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

“Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what?”

From you, moron, from you.

I do not believe that the government, in the form of the military and police, should be in sole possession of the means of deadly force.


50 posted on 02/06/2012 1:35:43 PM PST by PLMerite (Shut the Beyotch Down! Burn, baby, burn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson