State Rep. Joel Johnson, R-Clare, called the bill a "pro-public safety bill because it allowed gun owners to be an "asset" to public safety in volatile situations.
http://www.gunreports.com/news/handguns ... :&st=email
State Rep. Joel Johnson, R-Clare, called the bill a "pro-public safety bill because it allowed gun owners to be an "asset" to public safety in volatile situations.
beemerboy wrote:The man who has been there three hours in line already, gets pissed and pulls out his hand gun and starts firing at the woman and anyone else he sees. Another armed citizen, thinking he will put an end to this nonsense, pulls out his weapon and starts shooting at the first shooter missing the original shooter with his first four bullets and hits three more people.
Richard S. wrote:Any scenario is possible, what we do know is this. The guy willing to shoot up a DMV because he got pissed is unlikely to give a *censored* about the law preventing him from bringing a gun into the DMV to begin with.

beemerboy wrote:I can see it now.
Someone goes into the motor vehicle office to register their pick-up and the woman tells him that that he needs another form filled out and to go to the back of the line.
The man who has been there three hours in line already, gets pissed and pulls out his hand gun and starts firing at the woman and anyone else he sees. Another armed citizen, thinking he will put an end to this nonsense, pulls out his weapon and starts shooting at the first shooter missing the original shooter with his first four bullets and hits three more people.
Meanwhile, while the second shooter is missing the original person, the first shooter turns around and shoots and kills the second shooter and two more people.
KLook wrote:These are also the scenarios that all the Liberal whack jobs predicted when states went to right to carry and castle doctrine. Ain't happened. And the worst case so far is the Zimmerman case, and that is looking bad for poor T. Martin.
Kevin
Other then the fact he brought a fist to a gun fight.
grumpy wrote:KLook wrote:These are also the scenarios that all the Liberal whack jobs predicted when states went to right to carry and castle doctrine. Ain't happened. And the worst case so far is the Zimmerman case, and that is looking bad for poor T. Martin.
Kevin
Other then the fact he brought a fist to a gun fight.
I'm thinking that Marten did not know Zimmerman had a gun, I'm also thinking if he did know he would still be alive.
I'm also thinking if he did know he would still be alive.
KLook wrote:I'm also thinking if he did know he would still be alive.
It is not part of the obligation to advertise your weapon. Hench, concealed carry. I am good with the last posted logic. Mind your P's and Q's and you won't have to worry about the armed citizen.
Kevin
Richard S. wrote:beemerboy wrote:The man who has been there three hours in line already, gets pissed and pulls out his hand gun and starts firing at the woman and anyone else he sees. Another armed citizen, thinking he will put an end to this nonsense, pulls out his weapon and starts shooting at the first shooter missing the original shooter with his first four bullets and hits three more people.
Any scenario is possible, what we do know is this. The guy willing to shoot up a DMV because he got pissed is unlikely to give a *censored* about the law preventing him from bringing a gun into the DMV to begin with.
NEPA Crossroads is a creation of Nepadigital.Com ©2009 • Contact Admin | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group