Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-16-2012, 10:35 PM  
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $7502
Let's research gun violence.

I've said this in a couple other threads, but I don't believe that gun control is going to get any traction in Congress. Some Democrats will push for it, some other Republicans will table it, some pro-gun control folks like myself will cry foul, and yet another Congress will pass without any gun control measures seeing the light of day.

But here's one thing that maybe we can start doing: better educate ourselves on gun violence, so we can stop stabbing in the dark as to what we can better do to mitigate it.

The problem is that for a couple decades now, the government has not been able to produce any information on gun violence because the NRA has been threatening war if Congress failed to choke off all funding for gun-related research.

The CDC and NIH used to conduct research for decades, but around the time of the late 90s, the NRA became so powerful it was able to prevent these agencies from granting funds to researchers on those topics. McClatchy DC:

Quote:
The CDC and NIH award billions in grants. They fund research into cancer, brain injury, tobacco use, obesity, AIDS, abortion, hearing loss, allergies, infectious diseases, back pain and virtually everything else related to human health. But gun violence is the one area that carries that specific language. The effect has been to limit federal funding into research that could be used to shape policy.
This is irresponsible. We pass hundreds of gun-related laws across the country every few years. Like all laws, we should be able to research the impact of the laws we pass, so we can make decisions based on more than pure ideology.

Anyway, there's a ton of stories on this, but here's a really good one from last year in the Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us...anted=all&_r=0

N.R.A. Stymies Firearms Research, Scientists Say
By MICHAEL LUO
Published: January 25, 2011

In the wake of the shootings in Tucson, the familiar questions inevitably resurfaced: Are communities where more people carry guns safer or less safe? Does the availability of high-capacity magazines increase deaths? Do more rigorous background checks make a difference?

The reality is that even these and other basic questions cannot be fully answered, because not enough research has been done. And there is a reason for that. Scientists in the field and former officials with the government agency that used to finance the great bulk of this research say the influence of the National Rife Association has all but choked off money for such work.

“We’ve been stopped from answering the basic questions,” said Mark Rosenberg, former director of the National Center for Injury Control and Prevention, part of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which was for about a decade the leading source of financing for firearms research.

Chris Cox, the N.R.A.’s chief lobbyist, said his group had not tried to squelch genuine scientific inquiries, just politically slanted ones.

“Our concern is not with legitimate medical science,” Mr. Cox said. “Our concern is they were promoting the idea that gun ownership was a disease that needed to be eradicated.”

The amount of money available today for studying the impact of firearms is a fraction of what it was in the mid-1990s, and the number of scientists toiling in the field has dwindled to just a handful as a result, researchers say.

The dearth of money can be traced in large measure to a clash between public health scientists and the N.R.A. in the mid-1990s. At the time, Dr. Rosenberg and others at the C.D.C. were becoming increasingly assertive about the importance of studying gun-related injuries and deaths as a public health phenomenon, financing studies that found, for example, having a gun in the house, rather than conferring protection, significantly increased the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance.

Alarmed, the N.R.A. and its allies on Capitol Hill fought back. The injury center was guilty of “putting out papers that were really political opinion masquerading as medical science,” said Mr. Cox, who also worked on this issue for the N.R.A. more than a decade ago.

Initially, pro-gun lawmakers sought to eliminate the injury center completely, arguing that its work was “redundant” and reflected a political agenda. When that failed, they turned to the appropriations process. In 1996, Representative Jay Dickey, Republican of Arkansas, succeeded in pushing through an amendment that stripped $2.6 million from the disease control centers’ budget, the very amount it had spent on firearms-related research the year before.

“It’s really simple with me,” Mr. Dickey, 71 and now retired, said in a telephone interview. “We have the right to bear arms because of the threat of government taking over the freedoms that we have.”

The Senate later restored the money but designated it for research on traumatic brain injury. Language was also inserted into the centers’ appropriations bill that remains in place today: “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”

The prohibition is striking, firearms researchers say, because there are already regulations that bar the use of C.D.C. money for lobbying for or against legislation. No other field of inquiry is singled out in this way.

In the end, researchers said, even though it is murky what exactly is allowed under this provision and what is not, the upshot is clear inside the centers: the agency should tread in this area only at its own peril.

“They had a near-death experience,” said Dr. Arthur Kellermann, whose study on the risks versus the benefits of having guns in the home became a focal point of attack by the N.R.A.

In the years since, the C.D.C. has been exceedingly wary of financing research focused on firearms. In its annual requests for proposals, for example, firearms research has been notably absent. Gail Hayes, spokeswoman for the centers, confirmed that since 1996, while the agency has issued requests for proposals that include the study of violence, which may include gun violence, it had not sent out any specifically on firearms.

“For policy to be effective, it needs to be based on evidence,” said Dr. Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis, who had his C.D.C. financing cut in 1996. “The National Rifle Association and its allies in Congress have largely succeeded in choking off the development of evidence upon which that policy could be based.”

Private foundations initially stepped into the breach, but their attention tends to wax and wane, researchers said. They are also much more interested in work that leads to immediate results and less willing to finance basic epidemiological research that scientists say is necessary to establishing a foundation of knowledge about the connection between guns and violence, or the lack thereof.

The National Institute of Justice, part of the Justice Department, also used to finance firearms research, researchers said, but that money has also petered out in recent years. (Institute officials said they hoped to reinvigorate financing in this area.)

Stephen Teret, founding director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, estimated that the amount of money available for firearms research was a quarter of what it used to be. With so much uncertainty about financing, Mr. Teret said, the circle of academics who study the phenomenon has fallen off significantly.

After the centers’ clash with the N.R.A., Mr. Teret said he was asked by C.D.C. officials to “curtail some things I was saying about guns and gun policy.”

Mr. Teret objected, saying his public comments about gun policy did not come while he was on the “C.D.C. meter.” After he threatened to file a lawsuit against the agency, Mr. Teret said, the officials backed down and gave him “a little bit more leeway.”

C.D.C. financing for research on gun violence has not stopped completely, but it is now mostly limited to work in which firearms are only a component.

The centers also ask researchers it finances to give it a heads-up anytime they are publishing studies that have anything to do with firearms. The agency, in turn, relays this information to the N.R.A. as a courtesy, said Thomas Skinner, a spokesman for the centers.

Invariably, researchers said, whenever their work touches upon firearms, the C.D.C. becomes squeamish. In the end, they said, it is often simply easier to avoid the topic if they want to continue to be in the agency’s good graces.

Dr. Stephen Hargarten, professor and chairman of emergency medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin, used to direct a research center, financed by the C.D.C., that focused on gun violence, but he said he had now shifted his attention to other issues.
Posts: 44,261
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 05:28 PM   #76
CrazyPhuD CrazyPhuD is offline
Meow
 
CrazyPhuD's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2005
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by luv View Post
I have a question, and I don't want to create a thread in order to ask it. I don't believe that guns should be banned. I do, however, believe that not just anyone should be allowed to purchase a gun, and that some types of guns are not necessary outside the realm of personal protection or hunting. If I don't agree that owning a gun is a human right, but I also don't want them banned, then where do I fall in the grand scheme of things? I'm pro guns, but also pro gun control.
So here's the rub...how do you define what a valid sporting use is? I have absolutely zero desire to hunt, I don't kill things it's not in me. For the same reason I have almost zero interest in self defense. Outside of a threat to loved ones I don't know if I could shoot someone even if only to defend myself. The personal cost would be massive for me.

That said shooting is fun, I love target shooting and other shooting sports. One fun competition is 3-gun shooting. It's generally timed and involves rapid target shooting on the move with pistol, shotgun, rifle(hence 3-gun). Many of those same 'evil' looking features have valid uses in this sporting shooting competition. Because I don't hunt or I don't believe in self defense, does that make my choice of shooting sports a second class citizen? Why do I not have the freedom to choose my tools of my sport?

It's funny the ATF actually freaked during the recent importation of the VEPR-12 shotgun because it had a folding stock(welded open) which they felt made it a non-sporting firearm. What's funny is that shotgun was designed for 3-gun competitions and that folding stock was there for that sport. By removing the folding stock the ATF actually made the shotgun LESS sporting.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t*rd by the clean end"
Posts: 8,013
CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 05:43 PM   #77
CrazyPhuD CrazyPhuD is offline
Meow
 
CrazyPhuD's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2005
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan View Post
Sounds like you are pretty smart! There are a lot of NRA members who feel as you do.
The problem is that I think there are a lot of gun owners who would have absolutely no issue with safety related regulations. The problem is the gun control leadership is infested not with people that care about making shooting sports safer, but those who want to see all firearms banned. Because they can't legally ban them entirely they seek to regulate them to death so that no one can practically use them or make the regulations so painful that people are afraid to buy them for fear a cop may decide their gun is illegal and arrest them.

Case in put California instituted a 'safe handgun' list and set of requirements that a handgun were to pass before it can be sold. The moral justification was to get the Saturday night specials(i.e super cheap guns) off the street that were blowing up when people shoot them. Sounds like a perfectly reasonable regulation right?

Except that when put through the 'safe' handgun test most of those very cheap guns passed with flying colors. Instead they've tweaked the regulations of the 'safe' handgun list to add features that have little real world impact in making guns safer. But those required features are uncommonly implemented in firearms. Which means to sell in CA they would have to make a special model and get it tested. This puts additional hurdles up to buying handguns without measurably increasing safety.

Additionally provided that a gun passed the safe handgun test it can remain on the roster as long as the maker pays a yearly fee. Even if the regulations have changed where it wouldn't pass on its own. But if there is any change to the firearm then it has to be retested. Even if that change is only a color change(because clearly the color of a firearm impacts its safety!)

In short while it sounded like it would be a 'reasonable' regulation to the masses, what it's actually be used to do is make it harder for anyone to buy a handgun in CA. Ultimately that was the intent of the authors, they couldn't bad the handguns so instead pass regulations under the illusion of 'safety' that are designed to restrict the number of guns sold in CA.(note LEOs are not subject to the regulations for 'safe' handguns, if it was really about safety then shouldn't they have been???)
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t*rd by the clean end"
Posts: 8,013
CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.CrazyPhuD threw an interception on a screen pass.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 05:56 PM   #78
Iowanian Iowanian is offline
Besides, big day tomorrow
 
Iowanian's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Utopia
Casino cash: $7111
Research this:
Colorado, Oregon, Connecticut.
What is the voting block? Are the gun regulations more restrictive or less restrictive than other states?
What are the policies on CWP?

Now: Do the same for Chicago and Washington DC.
Now....look at their violent crime rates.


I know where hundreds of guns are located right now and none of those guns are harming anyone. None of them.

Guns don't murder people. Murderers murder people.

Tim McVeigh managed to murder a lot of people with fertilizer and fuel and a rental truck and those are all available for purchase today. So are box cutters, airline tickets and flying lessons.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC native View Post
I said I'm an expert dickrider.
Posts: 49,895
Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.Iowanian is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 05:58 PM   #79
CoMoChief CoMoChief is offline
The Revolution Has Begun
 
CoMoChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KCMO
Casino cash: $6442
__________________
2014 Adopt-A-Chief: RT Donald Stephenson #79
Posts: 30,783
CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.CoMoChief threw an interception on a screen pass.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:22 PM   #80
LiveSteam LiveSteam is offline
All aboard the crazy train
 
LiveSteam's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: homeof43conferencetitles
Casino cash: $6472
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveSteam View Post
I challenge you to a duel at 20 paces

Where are we on this Dirk?
Posts: 16,911
LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:23 PM   #81
KChiefer KChiefer is offline
Fantastic Planeteer
 
KChiefer's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Champaign, IL
Casino cash: $6174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowanian View Post
Tim McVeigh managed to murder a lot of people with fertilizer and fuel and a rental truck and those are all available for purchase today. So are box cutters, airline tickets and flying lessons.
Why haven't the recent shooters just used bombs and airplane tickets then?
Posts: 4,865
KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:25 PM   #82
Frazod Frazod is offline
Banned
 
Frazod's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: my own personal pig hell
Casino cash: $5050
Quote:
Originally Posted by KChiefer View Post
Why haven't the recent shooters just used bombs and airplane tickets then?
Would it make you feel better if all those little kids had been blown up instead of shot?
Posts: 91,125
Frazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:30 PM   #83
KChiefer KChiefer is offline
Fantastic Planeteer
 
KChiefer's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Champaign, IL
Casino cash: $6174
Quote:
Originally Posted by frazod View Post
Would it make you feel better if all those little kids had been blown up instead of shot?
Answer my question first.
Posts: 4,865
KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:32 PM   #84
HonestChieffan HonestChieffan is offline
Country Santa Year Around
 
HonestChieffan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $7180
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyPhuD View Post
The problem is that I think there are a lot of gun owners who would have absolutely no issue with safety related regulations. The problem is the gun control leadership is infested not with people that care about making shooting sports safer, but those who want to see all firearms banned. Because they can't legally ban them entirely they seek to regulate them to death so that no one can practically use them or make the regulations so painful that people are afraid to buy them for fear a cop may decide their gun is illegal and arrest them.

Case in put California instituted a 'safe handgun' list and set of requirements that a handgun were to pass before it can be sold. The moral justification was to get the Saturday night specials(i.e super cheap guns) off the street that were blowing up when people shoot them. Sounds like a perfectly reasonable regulation right?

Except that when put through the 'safe' handgun test most of those very cheap guns passed with flying colors. Instead they've tweaked the regulations of the 'safe' handgun list to add features that have little real world impact in making guns safer. But those required features are uncommonly implemented in firearms. Which means to sell in CA they would have to make a special model and get it tested. This puts additional hurdles up to buying handguns without measurably increasing safety.

Additionally provided that a gun passed the safe handgun test it can remain on the roster as long as the maker pays a yearly fee. Even if the regulations have changed where it wouldn't pass on its own. But if there is any change to the firearm then it has to be retested. Even if that change is only a color change(because clearly the color of a firearm impacts its safety!)

In short while it sounded like it would be a 'reasonable' regulation to the masses, what it's actually be used to do is make it harder for anyone to buy a handgun in CA. Ultimately that was the intent of the authors, they couldn't bad the handguns so instead pass regulations under the illusion of 'safety' that are designed to restrict the number of guns sold in CA.(note LEOs are not subject to the regulations for 'safe' handguns, if it was really about safety then shouldn't they have been???)
It is hard to meet those who advocate total ban with a middle of the road response. Truth be told, the anti gun effort has always adopted the extreme stand and that can only be met with an equally strong answer.
__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013

Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will."

Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home.
Posts: 28,572
HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:35 PM   #85
Frazod Frazod is offline
Banned
 
Frazod's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: my own personal pig hell
Casino cash: $5050
Quote:
Originally Posted by KChiefer View Post
Answer my question first.
I didn't know any of them. The only crazy people I interact with are the liberal ****s on this BB.

Perhaps we could conduct a seance?
Posts: 91,125
Frazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:35 PM   #86
HonestChieffan HonestChieffan is offline
Country Santa Year Around
 
HonestChieffan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $7180
Quote:
Originally Posted by frazod View Post
I didn't know any of them. The only crazy people I interact with are the liberal ****s on this BB.

Perhaps we could conduct a seance?
Or better, fund a big study!!
__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013

Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will."

Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home.
Posts: 28,572
HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:38 PM   #87
KChiefer KChiefer is offline
Fantastic Planeteer
 
KChiefer's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Champaign, IL
Casino cash: $6174
Quote:
Originally Posted by frazod View Post
I didn't know any of them. The only crazy people I interact with are the liberal ****s on this BB.

Perhaps we could conduct a seance?
So you have no idea why they used assault rifles as opposed to bombs and airplane tickets?
Posts: 4,865
KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:40 PM   #88
Frazod Frazod is offline
Banned
 
Frazod's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: my own personal pig hell
Casino cash: $5050
Quote:
Originally Posted by KChiefer View Post
So you have no idea why they used assault rifles as opposed to bombs and airplane tickets?
Nope.

I guess I don't know why the 9-11 terrorists didn't use AR15s, either.
Posts: 91,125
Frazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:42 PM   #89
KChiefer KChiefer is offline
Fantastic Planeteer
 
KChiefer's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Champaign, IL
Casino cash: $6174
Quote:
Originally Posted by frazod View Post
Nope.

I guess I don't know why the 9-11 terrorists didn't use AR15s, either.
So why are you even replying to me if you have no answers?
Posts: 4,865
KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.KChiefer wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 06:43 PM   #90
Frazod Frazod is offline
Banned
 
Frazod's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: my own personal pig hell
Casino cash: $5050
Quote:
Originally Posted by KChiefer View Post
So why are you even replying to me if you have no answers?
I'll reply to whatever I want, comrade.
Posts: 91,125
Frazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.