"We have no reason to believe they had any intent to sell these weapons," a police source said. "They just shouldn't have had them in the first place." [More]Well of course not. They're not Furious Mike "Only Ones," are they now?
And a family had dozens of pills!!!
When I take a look at that Fudd gun collection spread out over the table, for some reason I channel Crocodile Dundee:
'at's not a stockpile.
'at's a stockpile.
5 comments:
30 is a stockpile? I'm good then because my collection is smaller than that.
Anyone want to buy a pile of old VW Bug parts so I can have money to turn my collection into a stockpile?
I would argue that the following comment from the Daily News story is an abuse of the 1st Amendment and that the commenter should be forbidden from having access to a vocabulary of over 29 words.
“What in the world does someone need 30 guns for? Sure, the laws "supposedly" say that having a gun is a right but to own 30 of them is just wrong. I think this is just a case of abusing the privileges of freedom.”
[W-III]
From the picture in the Daily rag, the pistols appear to be complete junk.
Of course that doesn't suit the agenda of the libtards writing for that rag.
Considering that article is found in the Daily News, the comments there are refreshingly Pro 2nd A and are quite critical of the paper's reporting of the incident.
Post a Comment