Anything you say can and will be used against you.
5 Likes
The lawyer I have talked with said he would do everything possible to keep me from having to testify in a SD case.
5 Likes
Yes, I shot him/her/they because they were trying to suck my rights away encroaching on my physical property through perceived violations of their rights, which constitutes a violation of my rights and justifies lethal force.
I am not a lawyer, this was hypothetical, this was not legal advice.
4 Likes
1 shot for..
Him
Her
And They?
Or 3 shots total?
Would neglecting to respect ‘its’ pronouns be transphobic if you only shot once? 
7 Likes
I swear, I shot they 25 times to properly affect every one of their genders and personalities!
I would’ve kept going, but I don’t carry that much ammunition….
I apologize for not shooting any of the decedents other personalities or sexuality that I missed.
5 Likes
Some studies, such as those noted on MedicineNet, reference a list of 72 gender types to represent the spectrum, though this is not an exhaustive or universally fixed number.
6 Likes
Why do people need to keep rewording things until they make no sense?
Treat firearms as if they are always loaded.
Do not put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to fire.
Do not point your firearm at anything except what you are going to shoot.
These basic rules have been in place since matchlocks. No semantics, no weasel words, no B.S.
7 Likes
For “ownership,” maybe.
4 Likes
Ok, I’m opening up this can of worms a little wider, but you guys all sound like a bunch of Lib-tards trying to dissect the 2nd Amendment.
3 Likes
Good, thought provoking, thread.
In part, this is an example of why I joined the USCCA.
Thanks!!
3 Likes
that is right. Both have their own roles. Although Cooper’s rules help to foster safety awareness, the idea of “minimal impact” is more suitable in real-world and legal situations.
2 Likes
@BruceE I didn’t really think of it as dissecting the 2nd Amendment, but you are correct in a way. Trying to appease a few because words might hurt feelings has made us all walk on egg shells. Yes, thought provoking.
5 Likes
I don’t think of this thread as dissecting the 2nd Amendment either. I was comparing the re-wording of the 4 rules as how Lib-Tards dissect the 2nd Amendment.
“It should say this….”
“No, it should be clearer…”
Destroy the threat? He!!, Yes. Shoot it till it stops, beat it with a stick, stomp a mudhole in its round brown big enough to drive my truck through. Anything I can do to stop the threat. If that means destroying it, so be it.
Oh, look, broken eggshells.
4 Likes
@Robert1246 I had to look up the word because I am brain dead right now. This is what I found. 
“At a typical event, he comes crashing onstage, delivers a macho statement of intent, metaphorically flexes his muscles, then roars away.”
Anyway, thank you guys for attempting to get my brain working. 
2 Likes
Stop the threat. At all costs.
3 Likes
Stop the threat, Destroy the threat…
2 Likes
How, the hell 4 universal gun safety rules have anything to do with 2nd Ammendment?
They don’t.
It was a metaphore.
4 Likes
Oh… this thread is more complex than I thought 
2 Likes