Rights have responsibilities. We continue to prove the left's contention that not everyone should have access to firearms.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. No logical reason at all for luging around an AR in public, the pistol in his pocket was enough for self defense. Publicity of the wrong kind.
That used to be the case, back when thinking was something a man did. Nowadays he just parades around "exercising his rights" without even knowing what the word "responsibility" means.
I don’t get people who drink cream in their coffee, but I don’t get hot and bothered about it. They’re not hurting anyone.
Looks like a wrist brace. Carpal tunnel syndrome, perhaps, which could be a fair reason for carrying an AR pistol for self-defense.
Last edited:
I guess my post went over your head so fast it gave you a center part. That's ok, keep cheering these jokers on while the far left work to get sport rifles banned (again, but much stricter). And then we will sit back and tell you we told you so as you scream about the 2A.
I’m cheering no one. I’m just not caterwauling about it. Reducing the fight against those who would completely and permanently circumscribe natural rights to a “PR campaign” is pathetic.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Gimme a break. That is nothing but a gimmick like the bumpfire to get around federal regulations to carry a SBR. There is no physical method in that stock that can brace on the wrist. SMH.
Huh? I’m talking about treatment for a painful medical condition that can affect someone’s ability to use a firearm.
Similar threads
