# 10% Discount



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

More companies should follow his lead.

HERE:


----------



## SuperCubber (Feb 23, 2012)

I agree!


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

As everyone at LJs knows, I absolutely do not indorse any rootin' shootin' gun toten' NRA (Non Responsible A**).


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

Jim,
It's wasn't about the NRA you should've seen the News piece. It was intended for the Police in the area and then civilians asked if they could get the same discount. It's about defending yourself in this country and not losing your rights, Has nothing to do with the NRA. I am a supporter of our freedom's and would put my life an the line again and again to keep this country safe from criminals and others trying to destroy the freedoms and safety we have. 
Live free or die trying to defend those that cannot defend themselves.

Bill.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

Bill,
My apologies. I did not see the article when I clicked on the "HERE:", as all I got was a bunch of garbage adds that related to nothing about what it was intended to be. I do agree with defending myself and our country, for our rights as we see. I am a retired vet, on disability after 20+ years in the military, and would do it again to keep us and ours safe . My own sentiments about the NRA is best not expressed here.

jim


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

Jim,
No apologies necessary and thanks for your service. I did 15 in the Army and medically retired a few years ago. I am a supporter of our rights but feel the NRA has become more of a self serving organization as many do. The people of this nation have to stand up for their rights by staying informed and staying active in their communities. 
Time to smoke a brisket, have a beer or two, and enjoy the warm sunny day, have a good one Jim and hope you heal well. 
Weather is outstanding in New Mexico enjoy while it lasts.

Bill


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Bull,
You are absolutely correct about the NRA. I joined the NRA this past year, NOT to support it but to understand it fully. The NRA is a completely self serving organization bent on the politics of fear and of crony-capitalism. As a lifetime gun owner and flaming Liberal, the NRA is CLUELESS in how to cultivate understanding, much less support, of the majority of this country.

FWIW, I to am a disabled vet, currently at 50%.


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

I agree Mike, 
Keep your enemies close, I am 100% VA. Me and my 1911 out in the world can be considered disturbing to some.
I would hope it made others feel a little safer.

Bill


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

If it weren't for the NRA, the pro crime criminal coddlers would have them totally in control. NRA is all we have. If you have a better idea, lets hear it. Don't say call the police. My experience is time the response with a calendar if they show at all.


----------



## TheFridge (May 1, 2014)

It's right down the road from the house. More power to em.


----------



## Blackie_ (Jul 10, 2011)

*Thumbs Up*


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

Topa,
I don't deny they are about the only ones really doing anything, that is exactly why people need to get more involved in their communities and government. Get out there and make sure that your gun rights aren't the only rights being taken away. Carry your gun openly and safely otherwise why have it.

I would also prefer to call the police and have them take care of the situation that's what they get paid to do. Using a weapon needs to be the last thing you do. Using a weapon can be life changing and should never be taken lightly.

Use your rights, speech, bear arms, criminal prosecution but use those rights responsible and not for self-serving reasons. Don't abuse others' rights in the process, it's those who abuse these rights that makes it harder for others to use theirs.

Anyways, probably enough said.

Bill


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

It really starts getting crazy - Two new trends - one called SWAT-ing. in which the anti gun zealots call 911 for any and every open carry person they see -

The other is a bill in New York, that ANYONE who feels uncomfortable, can strip anothers right to own a gun, that they then have to go to court to regain their rights.
http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/10/06/citizen's-confiscation-ny-assemblyman-wants-'anyone-who's-concerned'-prevent-individuals

and http://madworldnews.com/anti-gun-plan-open-carry/

The anti-gun organizations Moms Demand Action, the Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, and GunFreeZone.net are now encouraging people to call police if they see a law-abiding citizen carrying a gun in public in a new tactic known as "SWAT-ing." Some of these anti-gun individuals are even recommending the caller allege a crime is taking place when police are notified, so that when law enforcement arrives, they will open-fire on the unsuspecting gun owner


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

DrDirt - As a hot debated issue previously here on LJ about the serious fanaticism of NRA members, even though I own some weapons, and not a member of the NRA, I do not - and will not - endorse the idiots who call 911 just because some one wants to carry a weapon in public. Those individuals who carry are just as much to blame as the numnuts who are SWAT-ing the situation. In fact, those stupids who call 911 should be held fully responsible for any deaths as a result of their devious calls.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Do note that the above article is from Faux news. IMO, it is a toss-up as to which, Faux or NRA, is the most fear mongering and self-serving organization. Take fear mongering away and neither organization would exist.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

Faux news HM? I had always believed the correct noun was Cluster Fox News.


----------



## BoardCop (Mar 27, 2014)

Heck yeah!! If criminals knew more people were packing they'd think twice!!


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Ahhh the whole Faux news crapola - - -
Here is the congressman's release-
http://www.briankavanagh.org/news/?p=16447

I think a debate on what laws are being introduced, to decide who can deny gun rights to neighbors or other family members, is more useful, than to debate which website posted the story link. HINT (the story is not from fox news - - -they just uploaded the link to their site)

Just like that link posted here is not a "Lumberjocks News Story"

All were quoting the assemblyman - on his "Northeast Public Radio interview on the matter" 
http://wamc.org/post/nyc-assemblyman-proposes-gun-restraining-order-bill

Here is from the transcript:

Democratic Assemblyman Brian Kavanagh of Manhattan this week announced legislation that aims to reduce the risk of gun violence. Here's how.

"So this is a bill that would permit family members or friends or medical professionals or law enforcement or *really anyone who's concerned that somebody having to access to guns poses a serious danger *to go to a court and present evidence of that, and if the court were persuaded, they would be able to issue a temporary order preventing the person from acquiring or possessing guns," Kavanagh explains. "The person who is the subject of the order would then have an opportunity to appeal that decision."

So Cue the SWAT-ers to claim they all feel 'In danger'


----------



## hairy (Sep 23, 2008)

When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

During the Clinton administration, the Justice Department implemented what was known as the Philadelphia Project in the northeast. Existing gun laws were aggressively enforced and it had a dramatic effect on criminal activity. The project was deemed to be too expensive to expand enforcement nationwide. It was abandon in favor of campaigning for new restrictions on those who voluntarily obey the law.

That pretty well exhibits the motivations of the elite officials in government. They have their high security gated communities and their armed escorts. Crime victims are merely political pawns to them. Victims make dramatic TV footage to be used to justify their position of demanding more restrictions. The issue is exploited by both sides to energize their bases and get them to the polls.


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

The real problem we have now a days is there are too many people with way to much time on their hands to do evil and others that all they do is find a way to screw others to improve their lives.

There are sites out there that one person starts just to put their own biases or malicious content on in hopes it incites enough people to deal their own form of justice or evil.

I know people that still believe that video games and movies somehow incite violence in people. If that was true there would be a lot more violence then we have now.

Like I said earlier, you have to use your rights responsibly or they should be taken away from you. I would say legally but truthfully I'm not even sure what that is anymore, I guess how good your lawyer is or what judge you get. People hide behind the same rights they are taking away from others, it makes me sad.

I am knowledgeable enough to know when someone is speaking pure garbage and self promoting their own lies that I can surf the web somewhat safely. But what I truly believe is that in the absence of any true authority or leadership most people will follow the first person that shows any leadership qualities no matter how obscene their path is.

Look at where our country is now and look at where you think it will be in 10 years. Not pretty in my mind and I am no dooms day guy just a little concerned. If you don't think the Terrorists have won then you are missing something. Look who falls under the Department of Homeland Security. They never have to set foot in this country again, they just have to make a threat and the news goes into a frenzy.

Enough babbling, I am not sure where this thread has gone, be responsible and just.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Well said Bill…

it is a challenge to actually manage issues, instead everything has some other agenda.

Now the discussion is guns here, but Ebola is a concern. But naturally anyone talking of limiting travel from Liberia, is just a Racist… and Jesse Jackson is in Dallas, claiming Mr. Duncan died because he got "black treatment" for ebola.

Maybe we need a real PUBLIC HEALTH debate on risk to the US population.

The CDC talking head SHOULD represent the voice of reason, but instead it is a political handwaver, saying nothing to see here, move along.

to me they SHOULD be putting out guidelines for people that think they may have been in contact…. 
Washing 
Laundry
How long is that bodily fluid on the floor 'active' for ebola.

these things should be known at police and fire first responders offices.
But also to Taxi drivers, called to take sick people to and from the hospital. how should they clean their cars.
How do we control the spread given we have a much more mobile population than sub-Saharan Africa.

Instead I forsee a "Oh golly gosh, I guess we under estimated how quickly this virus would spread or mutate" and even that announcement would be AFTER any election cycle.

Much like ISIS not really being so "JV"


----------



## Mahdeew (Jul 24, 2013)

Got money?


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

You are on point Doc. 
You know the government agencies are scrambling behind the scenes just praying they can handle the outbreak/terror threat no matter how small they make it out to be. Containment and Control is their concern and only a real solution for the problem comes after the fact. We should've, could've comes into play after the lack of real action. 
They certainly don't want anyone to know how unprepared they really are. Although, as a nation we are probably more prepared to most countries, we still are more vulnerable then many other.

People become experts in a area that they spent ten minutes watching on the news or reading on someone's blog. They see a newscast about what happened in Ferguson, Missouri and all of a sudden they are experts and know exactly what happened their. 
The instant access to partial or unconfirmed information will cause people to be outraged by whoever they believe is at fault, when in reality they have no idea. After that the information is so convoluted you will never know what really happened.

Get the facts first then react but are we really interested in the truth or what we want the truth to be.

Bill


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Indeed Mr. Jinx - - The comedy side is a new bit, but I heard more when this was applied to a hotel!

The federal government decided to seize the hotel, because people sometimes used a room in drug transactions.

http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/news/ci_23658513/tewksbury-motel-owner-lobbying-congress-reform-federal-civil

Not that the owner was EVER involved…. just that:

Through a process known as "equitable sharing," the federal government would keep 20 percent of what it nets, and the local police department would pocket 80 percent. The Caswell family had no mortgage on their property, which was worth more than $1 million.

Dein wrote in a decision in favor of Caswell that is was "rather remarkable" for the government to argue that Caswell should lose his property, which is assessed at $1.5 million with no mortgage, for failing to take "undefined steps" to boost security when the police didn't communicate with him about the crime problem.


----------



## Mahdeew (Jul 24, 2013)

DrDirt,
The governments are broke because of pensions they promised to everyone and are on a money hunt and will squeeze anyone they can get their hands on now. Last thing they will do is reform but not without a fight. Unfortunately, it has turned to a us and them type of scenario and I am afraid a lot of young folks are going to suffer as the result.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

> it is a challenge to actually manage issues, instead everything has some other agenda.
> 
> - DrDirt


Well said. Exactly the point of post #19. Nearly everyone has their own selfish agenda and motivations.


----------



## Mahdeew (Jul 24, 2013)

Another insane concept.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

> Another insane concept.
> - mrjinx007


That is because the Forest Service and BLM are in bed with the commercial lumbering business and want to stop/prohibit any photos that show any criminal activity by same. An analogy would be the chicken ranchers photo prohibition fiasco. Can't catch us if we don't let you see us." LOL!


----------



## Mahdeew (Jul 24, 2013)

HorizontalMike, this also means while on vacation in a national park, if you take a picture with your cell phone and post it on facebook, you can get a $1000 fine. They will probably show up with SWAT team, kick the door-in and look for cash stash that is presumably "drug money".


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

> HorizontalMike, this also means while on vacation in a national park, if you take a picture with your cell phone and post it on facebook, you can get a $1000 fine. They will probably show up with SWAT team, kick the door-in and look for cash stash that is presumably "drug money".
> - mrjinx007


NOT true. Being an ex-National Park Service(NPS) Ranger, I know better. They are completely different organizations with completely different operating parameters/goals/mission. You are not the first to confuse this matter and I am sure not the last to do so either.

NPS = Preserve and Protect
FS = Best Use (though WHO gets to determine "best use" is political football)


----------



## Mahdeew (Jul 24, 2013)

Understand where you coming from. At the same pace, police job used to be to protect and serve.


----------



## mudflap4869 (May 28, 2014)

> Like I said earlier, you have to use your rights responsibly or they should be taken away from you.
> 
> wseand


 Now that just scares the hell out of me. Why did I spend 23 years protecting those rights, along with millions of others who have bled and died to defend them? No one has the authority to deprive you of your constitutional rights. They do have the authority to punish you if you abuse those rights, but not take them away. By your own words you advocate overthrowing the constitution. That sir, I am sorry to say is treason.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

Somebody should look into the context of the comment, before accusing someone of committing treason!


----------



## Bonka (Apr 13, 2012)

Taken in part from "The Free Dictionary." 
Under Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution, any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort has committed treason within the meaning of the Constitution. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given.

The Treason Clause applies only to disloyal acts committed during times of war. Acts of dis-loyalty during peacetime are not considered treasonous under the Constitution. Nor do acts of Espionage committed on behalf of an ally constitute treason. For example, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted of espionage, in 1951, for helping the Soviet Union steal atomic secrets from the United States during World War II. The Rosenberg's were not tried for treason because the United States and the Soviet Union were allies during World War II.

The first sentence of the second paragraph determines when The Treason Clause applies.


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

Really, MudFlap.
Treason, are you kidding me, you don't even know what that means. I had 15 friends die in Iraq a few while I watched, don't talk to me about loyalty. 
The fact is your own government is taking them away as you speak, go question their loyalty to this country and don't question mine.

Bill


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

> Being an ex-National Park Service(NPS) Ranger, I know better
> 
> - HorizontalMike


Is that where you got your great bed side manor? I tired to get a job working for the F&G in Oregon they wouldn't have me, I knew I should have tried the NFS. Obviously they will take anyone..

Bill


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

> No one has the authority to deprive you of your constitutional rights. They do have the authority to punish you if you abuse those rights, but not take them away.
> 
> - mudflap4869


Really, does a felon have the right to bear arms. You don't think it isn't detrimental to our right that people abuse their. 2nd amendment say's I have the right to bear arms, not to be infringed, do you think that hasn't already been taken away in many states. I applaud Arkansas, Oklahoma, and others for implementing the Constitutional Carry Law.

Bill


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

> Being an ex-National Park Service(NPS) Ranger, I know better
> - HorizontalMike
> 
> Is that where you got your great bed side manor? I tired to get a job working for the F&G in Oregon they wouldn t have me, I knew I should have tried the NFS. Obviously they will take anyone..
> ...


I would NOT know about the NFS hiring qualifications Bill. I worked for the National Park Service (NPS), a completely different organization. And obviously MORE selective… *;-)*


----------



## wseand (Jan 27, 2010)

Mike,
Never said I could type well. I am sure they would've stopped me at the door, I was surprised the Army took me. They have low standards, obviously. 
Have a good one Mike.

Bill


----------

