Gun laws in Australia

Status
Not open for further replies.

billc

Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
9,183
Reaction score
85
Location
somewhere near Lake Michigan
Here is another estimate from the Wikipedia article...

Another survey including DGU questions was the National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms, NSPOF, conducted in 1994 by the Chiltons polling firm for the Police Foundation on a research grant from the National Institute of Justice. NSPOF projected 4.7 million DGU per year by 1.5 million individuals after weighting to eliminate false positives.[8] Discussion over the number and nature of DGU and the implications to gun control policy came to a head in the late 1990s.[10][11]

So a poll by the police foundation....

11,000 vs. 4.7 million....again, no wonder the anti-gun side doesn't mention defensive gun uses...

Now let's give the gun grabbers their absolute minimum number of defensive gun uses...just to be nice...

] Low end estimates cited by Hemenway show approximately 55,000-80,000 such uses each year.[

sooooo...11,000 vs. 55,000...one number is still larger than the other...meaning...if you get rid of guns...and people using them for self-defense, you would still create 55,000 more victims of violent criminals...

But that number is the lowest of the low scale from gun grabbers, so it is already way off...
 

billc

Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
9,183
Reaction score
85
Location
somewhere near Lake Michigan
Why are defensive gun uses sometimes,hard to accurately quantify...

Attempting to quantify this phenomenon, in the first edition of the book, published in May 1998, Lott wrote that "national surveys" suggested that "98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack." The higher the rate of defensive gun uses that do not end in the attacker being killed or wounded, the easier it is to explain why defensive gun uses are not covered by the media without reference to media bias. Lott cited the figure frequently in the media, including publications like the Wall Street Journal[21] and the Los Angeles Times.[22]


In 2002, he repeated the survey, and reported that brandishing a weapon was sufficient to stop an attack 95% of the time. Other researchers criticized his methodology, saying that his sample size of 1,015 respondents was too small for the study to be accurate and that the majority of similar studies suggest a value between 70 and 80 percent brandishment-only.[23] Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz's 1994 estimate rises to 92 percent when brandishing and warning shots are added together.[24] Lott explained the lower brandishment-only rates found by others was at least in part due to the different questions that were asked.[25] Most surveys used a recall period of "Ever" while some (Hart, Mauser, and Tarrance) used the previous five years. The Field Institute survey used periods of previous year, previous two years and ever.[3] The NSPOF survey used a one year recall period.[8] Lott also used a one year recall period and asked respondents about personal experiences only, due to questionable respondent recall of events past one year and respondent knowledge of DGU experiences of other household members.[25]
 

billc

Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
9,183
Reaction score
85
Location
somewhere near Lake Michigan
Oh...and the European numbers for gun deaths...they never average in the real total...when you also add gun deaths committed by government...you know...by the Germans before and during World War Two...well...that is embarrassingly large...isn't it...

That period of 1939-1945...that period where innocent unarmed people were murdered by their military and police...you know, the ones that the gun grabbers,want to be the only ones allowed,to have guns...that throws off the totals for Europe a lot more than we have experienced here in the states...

Yeah, disarming the citizens and just letting the police and military have guns worked out real well in that 7 year period...of course guns only directly caused the death of so many people...but guns only in the hands of the German military allowed the murder of close to 12 million people, 6 million Jews, and another six million non-Jews...

Of course...we can't count those numbers can we...

Did some quick figuring...

The gun grabbers only want police and military to have the guns in a society...

Germany murdered 11,000,000 people according to wiki...so from 1939-2013 that is 74 years....11 million divided by 74 = 148,648 people murderd each year in Europe. Since the Germans murderd people in all the countries under their control from 1939-1945...


(of course this doesn't add the normal murder rate numbers for those countries in Europe to the average during this 74 year time period, and the U.S. Murder rate was probably lower during this time period as we'll, not the 11,000 we have today...just to keep that in mind)

Now, if you take the average murder rate in the U.S. And multiply it by the same 74 year period...74 x 11,000 = 814,000 total

sooo...leaving guns in the hands of only the police and military when they turn bad...

148,648 vs 11,000 a year...for Europe vs. the U.S.

So that pretty much takes Europe out of the running in these comparisons...doesn't it...
 
Last edited:

K-man

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
6,193
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Australia
To be honest Bill I don't see the point of responding to your incomprehensible rant. Comparing what the Nazis did in a war with what is happening in peacetime in the US. Really! You have your guns, you have thousands losing their lives every year but you cannot accept that the guns are responsible. You keep saying that without guns the crime rate would go through the roof. Well that speaks volumes for your fellow countrymen. Without guns everywhere to keep them in check they would be out of control.

Well, I would say three things. Firstly why do you even bother having police if they need all this civilian backup? Secondly, if guns overall were reduced don't you think the guns in criminal hands would also be reduced? And thirdly, no one is taking of taking all guns away anyway. You keep spouting this rubbish knowing that what you are writing is wrong. Why?
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/homicide-by-firearm-v-gun-ownership.jpgView attachment 18847

Yep, you're doing a great job. ;) World leaders in fact from this graph. And, the trend is down, certainly but only really since 1993.


However, I fail to see how you could feel satisfied with those statistics.
When we have 300000000 million people your bound to have a few hundred thousand criminals that can't live by the rules. You tell me what law makes people behave and treat people with respect?
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
Secondly, if guns overall were reduced don't you think the guns in criminal hands would also be reduced?

I would agree if we were an island that didn't share a border with some of the largest most violent criminal organizations in the world. If you magically removed every gun in the US tomorrow. It would create a huge new black market for guns coming up from Mexico. The smuggling routs and distribution networks are already in place. Add a few thousand handguns to the kilos of cocaine your already shipping over the border. It's not a gun problem it's a lack of value for human life problem.
And thirdly, no one is taking of taking all guns away anyway. You keep spouting this rubbish knowing that what you are writing is wrong. Why?
They are taking away our guns as of Oct I lost the ability to buy over 80 different guns. Why? Who have a hurt? Why am I being punished? Other places like Chicago and Washington DC all but banned guns for decades and only after long court battles did the Constitutional rights of citizens get somewhat restored. So it's not rubbish and it's not wrong there are politicians that want to take away all guns. They already started.
 

K-man

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
6,193
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Australia
When we have 300000000 million people your bound to have a few hundred thousand criminals that can't live by the rules. You tell me what law makes people behave and treat people with respect?
Well for a start you have way more than a few hundred thousand criminals.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 2,266,800 adults were incarcerated in U.S. federal and state prisons, and county jails at year-end 2011 – about 0.94% of adults in the U.S. resident population. Additionally, 4,814,200 adults at year-end 2011 were on probation or on parole. In total, 6,977,700 adults were under correctional supervision (probation, parole, jail, or prison) in 2011 – about 2.9% of adults in the U.S. resident population. A 2014 report published by the National Research Council asserts that the prison population of the United States "is by far the largest in the world. Just under one-quarter of the world's prisoners are held in American prisons."


In addition, there were 70,792 juveniles in juvenile detention in 2010.
Maybe it's something lacking in the education system, I don't know. But you have about 7 million criminals under some form of supervision. When you see such figures doesn't it make you wonder if something could be done better? Even with all those guys locked away your crime rate is still very high compared to the rest of the First World. Why do you think that is?
 

K-man

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
6,193
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Australia
I would agree if we were an island that didn't share a border with some of the largest most violent criminal organizations in the world. If you magically removed every gun in the US tomorrow. It would create a huge new black market for guns coming up from Mexico. The smuggling routs and distribution networks are already in place. Add a few thousand handguns to the kilos of cocaine your already shipping over the border. It's not a gun problem it's a lack of value for human life problem.

They are taking away our guns as of Oct I lost the ability to buy over 80 different guns. Why? Who have a hurt? Why am I being punished? Other places like Chicago and Washington DC all but banned guns for decades and only after long court battles did the Constitutional rights of citizens get somewhat restored. So it's not rubbish and it's not wrong there are politicians that want to take away all guns. They already started.
I agree with you about the problem you have with illegal immigrants but if you want to combat criminal organisations in other countries you need to assist the governments of those countries in addressing their issues before they become your issues. We all know guns will not be magically removed overnight so that is not even a point for discussion.

I don't believe many people believe anyone wants to take away all guns. However, if 80 different guns are now off the market, for a good reason I suspect, then that should be a cause for celebration. Maybe it's a small step towards a safer society.
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
I agree with you about the problem you have with illegal immigrants but if you want to combat criminal organisations in other countries you need to assist the governments of those countries in addressing their issues before they become your issues. We all know guns will not be magically removed overnight so that is not even a point for discussion.

I don't believe many people believe anyone wants to take away all guns. However, if 80 different guns are now off the market, for a good reason I suspect, then that should be a cause for celebration. Maybe it's a small step towards a safer society.

See that's where we differ you believe the gun causes the crime I believe the criminal does. I own a few of the now banned guns guess how many crimes they have committed?


Kman If you believe a gun ban is stopping killers and making society safer then in your opinion why does that work but a ban on killing doesnt?
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
Well for a start you have way more than a few hundred thousand criminals.
I'm talking about violent killers not all criminals. The average criminal isn't a killer.
Maybe it's something lacking in the education system, I don't know. But you have about 7 million criminals under some form of supervision. When you see such figures doesn't it make you wonder if something could be done better? Even with all those guys locked away your crime rate is still very high compared to the rest of the First World. Why do you think that is?
We have 7 million criminals because 7 million people broke the law. It's nobody's fault but their own
 

K-man

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
6,193
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Australia
See that's where we differ you believe the gun causes the crime I believe the criminal does. I own a few of the now banned guns guess how many crimes they have committed?

Kman If you believe a gun ban is stopping killers and making society safer then in your opinion why does that work but a ban on killing doesnt?
I think that you could get a PhD for producing the answer to this question. Why do people kill each other? Is it because they simply lose control? Certainly that is true in some cases. Is it because they are insane? Yes, sometimes. Is it because of drugs? Certainly that can be a factor. But the real career criminals who kill probably believe they can get away with it and quite often they do. But even if you removed all guns, it wouldn't stop all murders as we all know and understand. But the evidence from other countries is there for all to see. Countries with less firearms have less violent crime and murder. So by reducing the number of firearms in the community you would expect to see a reduction in violent crime. Of course this would also mean an additional effort by police to reduce the number of weapons in criminal hands also.

I'm talking about violent killers not all criminals. The average criminal isn't a killer.

We have 7 million criminals because 7 million people broke the law. It's nobody's fault but their own
The average criminal is not necessarily a killer but I would suspect that many of the criminals roaming the streets these days would be armed, if not with a gun, at least a knife? Don't you find that a little disturbing?
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
I think that you could get a PhD for producing the answer to this question. Why do people kill each other? Is it because they simply lose control? Certainly that is true in some cases. Is it because they are insane? Yes, sometimes. Is it because of drugs? Certainly that can be a factor. But the real career criminals who kill probably believe they can get away with it and quite often they do. But even if you removed all guns, it wouldn't stop all murders as we all know and understand. But the evidence from other countries is there for all to see. Countries with less firearms have less violent crime and murder. So by reducing the number of firearms in the community you would expect to see a reduction in violent crime. Of course this would also mean an additional effort by police to reduce the number of weapons in criminal hands also.
There is a difference between other countries and the US. We have glorified criminal behavior in this country. We have said it's ok to have 8 kids with 7 different mothers and not be a father to any of them. We have a society that believes talking to the police is just cause to kill you for snitching. I've talked to victims that refuse to tell me what happened because r they don't watch to snitch. We have the largest drug markets in the world. That's not a gun problem that's a screwed up mentality and no laws can fix it. And if banning things worked so well why cam I buy cocaine in every town in this country?
The average criminal is not necessarily a killer but I would suspect that many of the criminals roaming the streets these days would be armed, if not with a gun, at least a knife? Don't you find that a little disturbing?
As a police officer I don't find this true. Most criminals I arrest are not armed at all. Maybe 1 in 10 and of them armed ones 90% have something other then a gun. I do find guns on people but it's not very often in comparison to the number of people I come in contact with.
 

Brian R. VanCise

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
27,758
Reaction score
1,518
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada
There is a difference between other countries and the US. We have glorified criminal behavior in this country. We have said it's ok to have 8 kids with 7 different mothers and not be a father to any of them. We have a society that believes talking to the police is just cause to kill you for snitching. I've talked to victims that refuse to tell me what happened because r they don't watch to snitch. We have the largest drug markets in the world. That's not a gun problem that's a screwed up mentality and no laws can fix it. And if banning things worked so well why cam I buy cocaine in every town in this country?

As a police officer I don't find this true. Most criminals I arrest are not armed at all. Maybe 1 in 10 and of them armed ones 90% have something other then a gun. I do find guns on people but it's not very often in comparison to the number of people I come in contact with.

Ballen there is not that much difference between the US and other countries. Almost all of them have some sort of drug problem, crime problem, etc. People interacting with the police in other countries quite often do not want to snitch either. I will agree though that their is a mentality that quite often is screwed up here but it really is not that much different than other places!
 

billc

Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
9,183
Reaction score
85
Location
somewhere near Lake Michigan
Countries with less firearms have less violent crime and murder

The police can also do things that they can't do here in the U.S. For example...Japaneses can search anyone, at anytime for little to no reason...makes it a lot harder to catch the hard core criminals carrying guns when you have to explain to a judge why you searched a particular criminal for no reason...Japanese routinely hold prisoners for days without legal counsel...non starter here...


also, so, from an article I saw posted on one of these threads...the prison sentences handed out in japan for mere possession of a gun is so draconian the organized crime bosses won't touch guns...in the states...in Chicago...one of the shooters who shot up the park a few months ago had a 3 year sentence for a gun crime and was back on the streets in 18 months...if not less...

Generations of children having babies,and raising them on government welfare, with no adults role modeling mature behavior plus drugs and poverty raises stone cold killers...
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
Ballen there is not that much difference between the US and other countries. Almost all of them have some sort of drug problem, crime problem, etc. People interacting with the police in other countries quite often do not want to snitch either. I will agree though that their is a mentality that quite often is screwed up here but it really is not that much different than other places!

I don't believe it's glorified in other places like it is here in our cities. THUG LIFE. And all that nonsense. Here guys biggest ambition in life is to get on there very own RIP "dink" t shirts.
 

billc

Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
9,183
Reaction score
85
Location
somewhere near Lake Michigan
This is why Chicago has a gun murder problem...the mass shooting in a park in a gang retaliation for a slight wound...

Four now charged in South Side park shooting that hurt 13 - Chicago Sun-Times

Four men were held ordered held without bail Tuesday in the shooting that wounded 13 people in a South Side park, including one police say fired a military-grade weapon into the crowd, allegedly an act of revenge because one of the men had been grazed in a shooting hours earlier.


what did one of the shooters recieve for a previous gun crime...

Champ’s criminal record includes a 2012 conviction for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and a 2011 conviction for receiving stolen property. He was sentenced to Cook County Jail boot camp for the gun-possession conviction and had received probation in the other case, records show.On Monday, McCarthy pointed to the case to highlight the need for stricter gun laws.“He received boot camp for that gun crime and was back out on the streets to be a part of this senseless shooting,”

So...2012 conviction...a conviction, for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon in 2012...and he commits a mass shooting in 2013

That is the problem causing gun crime...no punishment for criminals using guns...
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
Thug culture culture seems to be glorified in a lot of western countries ballen0351!

Sure Now. But it started and is at its peak here. I read a report that Chicago has more verified gang members then the entire country of Australia. I'll have to find it. It also said California prision have more gang members then the 5 largest cities in canada. I read it in some class i had I'll look for the paperwork and find the author
 

Brian R. VanCise

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
27,758
Reaction score
1,518
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada
Still you and I agree that this issue revolves more around culture than anything else. The best way to address it is with knowledge and improvement of our culture. Yet, we are not the only one's with issues in culture. All of Europe has cultural and immigration issues as well. Yet very low gun violence. Reason? Just not as easy access to guns. Sure the criminals can get them but someone who goes off the deep end may not have access to them right away. Europe certainly has violence just like us but mostly without guns. Nor is it fair in any way to look at a few European countries that have a high percentage of gun ownership because they are simply at this point not as culturally diverse as we are. (they have kept their older culture in tact to this point) That kind've would be cherry picking which is what the right wing and or left wing love to do. Culture and education plus mental health is where we need to address our problems. (funny how nothing has been done in these areas) As someone who is a staunch 2nd amendment rights person I also personally see "no issues" with waiting periods and training requirements. This does not bother me at all. While I am highly trained it is in my opinion, unfortunately that the vast majority of American gun owners have little or no training and yet some still parade around carrying a firearm either with open carry or a concealed permit. (I ran into an open carry idiot just yesterday) The firearm education and training in this country when applied to your common everyday person is appalling. Especially considering we have so many firearms! Firearm training for adults and or kids should be some thing we encourage and have happen.

So as a staunch 2nd amendment person I believe in:

Waiting periods
Registration
Mandatory firearm training
People who have committed violent crime and or have mental health issues not being allowed to own them
People with substance abuse history not being allowed to own them
Certainly all far right and far left people should not own them (just kidding ;) )

I am also for a national campaign and or education about firearms for the entire US. Ie How to use firearms properly. What to do if you come across one and what not to do. How and what effects a shooting can have on the individual as well as all those individuals involved and their families. , etc..... Crist we have done this for other things!

Now I know someone is going to say, "who is going to pay for this". Well typically in the firearm training area right now a registered owner pays for their own training. I am okay with that continuing just mandating that if they want to "open carry" or "concealed carry" that they have some training and it be fairly substantial training. I cannot tell you how many civilian ccw courses and non-ccw courses I have taken that were just plain terrible. It is such a pick or choose situation and really depends on the instructor. The NRA has done a terrible job so far in the quality of the instructors that they have endorsed. Some are good, some even great but a lot are just horrible! As for paying for the national campaign on tv, etc. We waste so much money I do not think it would be hard to cut back in some certain area like say "foreign aid" and develop a national program that gets a strong message out there about gun violence. This is some thing we really should have been doing for a long time!

Having said all of the above as someone who sits in the middle I understand that probably nothing will get done. The far right wants no interference in firearms laws and pretty much love the status quo and all that entails. The far left want to take away all of those bad guns thinking that this will some how stop the violence. The vast majority of American's will sit in the middle frustrated with both of these pathetic sides. While the far right puts there head in the sand like and ostrich and says, "nothing to see hear and nothing to do." While the far left ineffectually basically screams at the top of their heads but gets nothing done as well. Bottom line both sides pretty much suck!!!
 
Last edited:

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
1,246
Still you and I agree that this issue revolves more around culture than anything else.
Yes its not a gun law issue its a society issue
The best way to address it is with knowledge and improvement of our culture. Yet, we are not the only one's with issues in culture. All of Europe has cultural and immigration issues as well. Yet very low gun violence. Reason? Just not as easy access to guns. Sure the criminals can get them but someone who goes off the deep end may not have access to them right away. Europe certainly has violence just like us but mostly without guns. Nor is it fair in any way to look at a few European countries that have a high percentage of gun ownership because they are simply at this point not as culturally diverse as we are. (they have kept their older culture in tact to this point) That kind've would be cherry picking which is what the right wing and or left wing love to do. Culture and education plus mental health is where we need to address our problems. (funny how nothing has been done in these areas) As someone who is a staunch 2nd amendment rights person I also personally see "no issues" with waiting periods and training requirements. This does not bother me at all. While I am highly trained it is in my opinion, unfortunately that the vast majority of American gun owners have little or no training and yet some still parade around carrying a firearm either with open carry or a concealed permit. (I ran into an open carry idiot just yesterday) The firearm education and training in this country when applied to your common everyday person is appalling. Especially considering we have so many firearms! Firearm training for adults and or kids should be some thing we encourage and have happen.
You cant really compare cultures anywhere really. The culture in say West Baltimore or North East Washington DC are totally different then where I live and Im only about an hour away. Just like I dont think bad areas of Chicago compare with anyplace in say Spain or Australia. We also spend the most money on illegal narcotics then anywhere else in the world. Where there is money there is violence.
So as a staunch 2nd amendment person I believe in:
fair enough I dont agree with most of these
Waiting periods
In my opinion waiting periods do nothing to prevent crime. Most of these mass spree shootings where planned far in advance so waiting a week wont stop them. I alrady own a ton of guns whats awaiting period accomplish on making me wait a week for another one? Also does nothing to put a dent in the black market sales
Registration
what purpose is a gun registry serve? Criminals dont register guns.
Mandatory firearm training
I dont disagree with that aslong asits not used as a method to prevent people from owning guns. If you make the mandatory training so expensive that people cant afford it. Also who provides the training? Atone time they taught weapons classes in schools Id like to see it go back to that.
People who have committed violent crime and or have mental health issues not being allowed to own them
I agree its the mental health part I wonder how we address
People with substance abuse history not being allowed to own them
For how long? What If they quit can they then get guns back?
Certainly all far right and far left people should not own them (just kidding ;) )

I am also for a national campaign and or education about firearms for the entire US. Ie How to use firearms properly. What to do if you come across one and what not to do. How and what effects a shooting can have on the individual as well as all those individuals involved and their families. , etc..... Crist we have done this for other things!
I agree put it back in schools
Now I know someone is going to say, "who is going to pay for this". Well typically in the firearm training area right now a registered owner pays for their own training. I am okay with that continuing just mandating that if they want to "open carry" or "concealed carry" that they have some training and it be fairly substantial training. I cannot tell you how many civilian ccw courses and non-ccw courses I have taken that were just plain terrible. It is such a pick or choose situation and really depends on the instructor. The NRA has done a terrible job so far in the quality of the instructors that they have endorsed. Some are good, some even great but a lot are just horrible! As for paying for the national campaign on tv, etc. We waste so much money I do not think it would be hard to cut back in some certain area like say "foreign aid" and develop a national program that gets a strong message out there about gun violence. This is some thing we really should have been doing for a long time!
Again it comes down to who sets the classes up? Is it on the Fed level or State Level? Im not sure how effective a "gun Violence" campaign would be if we need movie stars to tell us to stop the violence then we are farther gone then I thought
Having said all of the above as someone who sits in the middle I understand that probably nothing will get done. The far right wants no interference in firearms laws and pretty much love the status quo and all that entails.
Do you really think things are that bad? The trends have been falling for decades. The truly random innocent victim is a rare occurrence. Act right live right and behave and your chances of being a victim are slim
The far left want to take away all of those bad guns thinking that this will some how stop the violence. The vast majority of American's will sit in the middle frustrated with both of these pathetic sides.
The vast majority needs to get off their butts and do something then.
While the far right puts there head in the sand like and ostrich and says, "nothing to see hear and nothing to do." While the far left ineffectually basically screams at the top of their heads but gets nothing done as well. Bottom line both sides pretty much suck!!!
Thats the price you pay when You have a Constitutionally protected right. All our rights have consequences
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top