Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Senate Committee Advances Bill Clarifying Open Carry Rifle Handling
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lhecker51" data-source="post: 3737991" data-attributes="member: 48719"><p>I get your point and agree if this becomes the law of the land. </p><p></p><p>My problem is this should not be a law of the land. It makes no sense. If a situation would motivate one to patrol an area during high threat rioting, it makes no sense whatsoever to have a law specifically for this as public endangerment is already on the books. A person not observing good muzzle discipline and having a finger on the trigger comes to mind unless they actually have a threat in their sights. I personally don't even move the selector from safe to fire until I am moving muzzle to align with the threat, but that is just me and what I feel confident and comfortable with. </p><p></p><p>Why should we give the threat the advantage by a law that can only add reaction time to a threat? This proposed law could be read into any situation regardless of the existence of a real threat. Even if it becomes the law I have confidence the police and justice system will exercise common sense. Again, this law is unnecessary and only serves to infringe.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lhecker51, post: 3737991, member: 48719"] I get your point and agree if this becomes the law of the land. My problem is this should not be a law of the land. It makes no sense. If a situation would motivate one to patrol an area during high threat rioting, it makes no sense whatsoever to have a law specifically for this as public endangerment is already on the books. A person not observing good muzzle discipline and having a finger on the trigger comes to mind unless they actually have a threat in their sights. I personally don't even move the selector from safe to fire until I am moving muzzle to align with the threat, but that is just me and what I feel confident and comfortable with. Why should we give the threat the advantage by a law that can only add reaction time to a threat? This proposed law could be read into any situation regardless of the existence of a real threat. Even if it becomes the law I have confidence the police and justice system will exercise common sense. Again, this law is unnecessary and only serves to infringe. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Senate Committee Advances Bill Clarifying Open Carry Rifle Handling
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom