1 - 10 Next
You are correct. I have an agenda. It is my desire to not have gun owners made to look like idiots by the likes of this goofball, Grisham.
Another thing. He was carrying a hand gun, concealed as far as you can tell from the video. More than adequate to repel or kill any fauna that would be in the neighborhood. And look at the video... Fire hydrants, traffic signs, no houses in view, but you can't tell what is behind them either. If you are in wilderness where there is real danger of an encounter with these animals, well, it doesn't look like that in most cases. The AR slung on the chest is an intimidating site. Fairly unusual for hunters, and certainly not normal for a walk down a country road where there are apparently neighbors who can see you from the road... So, yes, I am saying he was carrying the long gun in a deliberately intimidating manner to provoke a fight.
I've know some of those rough men. None of them act like Grisham.
He did not cooperate in the least. He was physically combative and verbally abusive, did not let the cop finish a single sentence, which careful listening reveals the cop was doing his duty to verify he was not a threat. That is within Texas law as far as I can tell from various sites which cite it... As far as how the officer treated the boy after the fact, and the initial actions of the cop, I would have to suspect the truthfulness of Grisham based on his behavior. I like guns. I support gun ownership and bearing of arms. I do not support belligerent fools who resist reasonable requests by police who are responding to calls...
Yeah, a real wilderness, with a fire hydrant within thirty feet of the site, clearly visible if you take the time to look at the video. The cop clearly said, "Once I find out there's no issue then we're gonna give it back to you and you will be on your way." In compliance with Texas law. The gun was carried at the ready. Grisham's hands were close to the gun, although he kept saying his hands were not near the gun, the cop kept telling him to keep his hands away from the gun... sounds like arguments you may have had with unruly kids.
Sure I read the article. I watched the video, too. There were three squads responding to his walk in a rural area. Texas law requires long guns to be carried in a non - threatening manner. Not having seen the beginning of the incident, nor being privy to the call logs that would verify the reason for initial police presence, I have to go with Grisham's demeanor. His stance and response to the cop were probably other than non - threatening, at least to the cop's reasoning. This sort of confrontation happens a lot, and you don't hear about it because the person carying complies with requests from police, diffuses the situation, and they go about their separate ways... Grisham escalated the situation on his own. He is a tool.
More equal? You are clearly unhinged and oblivious to the real differences between men and women. Look into any group and try to pick out the men and women... See a difference? Women smaller, narrow shoulders and wide hips, men generally taller and more muscled? If you were shot on the street in a firefight and had to rely on your partner to drag you to cover would you want a typical male or a woman trying to move you to safety? The Pentagon has already mandated commanders to come up with gender neutral performance standards...
Not true. Not by a long shot. The induction of gays is not impetus to mandate "gender neutral" standards of performance which are now being required by the Pentagon. I don't care if a guy is homosexual and he does his job. In a combat unit his male genetics make him equal to the job. A female frame is unable to do the work of combat, and the gender distinction is a real and present danger working in the minds of the unit members. Women in combat will get US warriors killed. They will degrade the standards and capabilities of the unit, turning winners into losers. If you lose on the battlefield you die and others will die after you.
Sensible words. Thanks. Panetta doesn't agree. He must know better... mustn't he?
In response to:

Women in Combat Spells Trouble

Mr Difar Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 8:06 AM
The Liberal sense of justice is anathema to justice. It is not just to force a man to carry the weight that a woman cannot. It is not just to force a man to rely on a woman to save his life in a fight. It is not just to requre the taxpayer to fund the additional billeting structure needed for women. It is not just to force the citizen to fund and endure the additional deaths of US warriors. It is not just to emasculate the world's most elite fighting units making of them laughing stocks who will be losers in fact and reputation from now on. It is not just to engineer the destruction of US freedom.
1 - 10 Next