Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Multiple shooting Victims at Lake Hefner
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 3118820" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>I'm quoting all three of these together for a reason. I'm not here to pick on anybody, but taken in mutual context, they illustrate a very important point: the law is in a constant state of flux. We've been very successful as a community in pushing for change in the law and getting our freedoms expanded; that's a good thing. With that success, though, comes a need to keep aware of the changes.</p><p></p><p>Y'all know I'm a lawyer by trade, and I'm obviously interested in firearms law, and even I have been caught flat-footed a couple of times right here in this forum. I've always admitted to it and thanked the people who educated me, but the point is that nobody is immune to being misinformed about something that changes regularly and can be fairly technical at times. That's a big part of why I go to the lengths I do to post details and references: we can all use a refresher from time-to-time, and doing the research is <em>my</em> refresher, as well as providing the information to others so we all have good information. Still, I'd second [USER=28113]@Pokinfun[/USER]'s suggestion that you take "another class," not because your first one was bad, but because we can all use some recurrent training.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 3118820, member: 13624"] I'm quoting all three of these together for a reason. I'm not here to pick on anybody, but taken in mutual context, they illustrate a very important point: the law is in a constant state of flux. We've been very successful as a community in pushing for change in the law and getting our freedoms expanded; that's a good thing. With that success, though, comes a need to keep aware of the changes. Y'all know I'm a lawyer by trade, and I'm obviously interested in firearms law, and even I have been caught flat-footed a couple of times right here in this forum. I've always admitted to it and thanked the people who educated me, but the point is that nobody is immune to being misinformed about something that changes regularly and can be fairly technical at times. That's a big part of why I go to the lengths I do to post details and references: we can all use a refresher from time-to-time, and doing the research is [I]my[/I] refresher, as well as providing the information to others so we all have good information. Still, I'd second [USER=28113]@Pokinfun[/USER]'s suggestion that you take "another class," not because your first one was bad, but because we can all use some recurrent training. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Multiple shooting Victims at Lake Hefner
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom