An interesting discussion you may want to get in on...

[Drjones]

I recently joined the "Desert Eagle" discussion forum in order to learn more about my new toy.

There is a discussion going on that I thought you may be interested in.

Link: http://pub64.ezboard.com/fthedeserteaglefrm1.showMessageRange?topicID=2727.topic&start=1&stop=20

A gentleman by the name of "Chezz2" has made some interesting comments, a few of which I have listed below.

Now, he is a vet and obviously not anti-gun, but just a bit wrong on some issues.

I thought a few of you may like to join in and help him see the light, as it were.

His comments:

PS I will also subject myself to a backround check with no worries to get a CCW. I am not worried, nor should anyone else be worried, unless they have done something that is illegal, or otherwise would prevent them to get a CCW, in such instance, I wouldn't want that person to get a CCW either.

PSS If anybody watched the famous LA City bank robbery in which the burglars were wearing full body armor and had a vehicle full of assault weapons, they might see why its a good idea not to allow those weapons on the street.

 

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

His thinking skills are a bit below par.

PS I will also subject myself to a backround check with no worries to get a CCW. I am not worried, nor should anyone else be worried, unless they have done something that is illegal, or otherwise would prevent them to get a CCW, in such instance, I wouldn't want that person to get a CCW either.

I am glad he is making our decisions for us. In a perfect world, no one should be required to get "permission" to carry a firearm.

PSS If anybody watched the famous LA City bank robbery in which the burglars were wearing full body armor and had a vehicle full of assault weapons, they might see why its a good idea not to allow those weapons on the street.

So we are being equated to criminals and terrorists? If you buy into this argument, then no one can own a gun because it might be put to an "evil" use.

Does this person (being nice) understand that AK-47s have not been legal since 1986?

Does he understand that if the police were not so PC they could have countered the threat with equal firepower? Or, heaven forbid, a CCW in the bank might have ended it all real quickly.

 

[Drjones]

Does this person (being nice) understand that AK-47s have not been legal since 1986?

Does he understand that if the police were not so PC they could have countered the threat with equal firepower? Or, heaven forbid, a CCW in the bank might have ended it all real quickly.

I dunno.

Ask him yourself. I gave you the link!