Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Yup I knew about it, its being taken seriously.

but it's kind of a funny oxymoron huh?  gonna kill cops (with a gun) because they don't support a new gun law  /boggle
Elk Hunting / Re: The Elk Mountain vs. You!
« Last post by slavenoid on Today at 11:10:45 PM »
Bring on the uphill but the downhill kills my feet and my right knee. Hopefully they get some relief if I shed some pounds. I have always been a little heavy but stay real active. That might be catching up to me and my lower body.

Have you tried using poles?  They make a huge difference downhill for me.
No. I need to try that.
Trapping / Re: new to the trapping world
« Last post by redi on Today at 10:48:26 PM »
Nice one
I haven't seen anything on here about this yet.A young man threatened all the sheriffs that refused to act would be shot by him.

 Once the information from FPC is available the public will have a better grasp of the situation.

The writing is on the wall but without all the facts, perception of proof makes a poor foundation for decisions. 
That said, the evidence so far should give pause for thought and brings some valid concerns into focus.         

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) is requesting that the Oregon City Police turn over “records about the destruction of firearms” from July 1, 2018, to the present. FPC is also requesting the police department turn over “all records that are, relate, or refer to communications with, to, or from Benchmade” for the same period.

"We receive guns that are turned in" (means nothing & isn't admission to a thing) "We also have guns that are evidence and when a case is adjudicated the guns are ordered by the court to be destroyed." Again - no admission if they were part of the inventory in question.  "We also have" points to they are still in possession.

Why didn't they just come out with a statement saying the inventory of guns destroyed was done in line with department policy and cases adjudicated by the court to be destroyed. Hence the renewed vigor of scrutiny.

"the police department follows Oregon statute 98.245 and 98.336 when disposing of property"  -

"These guns were required to be destroyed."
By department policy not Oregon Law - which we may disagree with but technically is fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here is the quote from the police chief, Jim Band, as well as the Mayor Dan Holladay:

We receive guns that are turned in from community members that they no longer want the guns and want them destroyed. We also have guns that are evidence and when a case is adjudicated the guns are ordered by the court to be destroyed.

The court does not order to destroy evidence . The court orders to dispose of evidence just like a seized vehicle

That again is a lie. 27 years dealing with this have never seen this

Anti gun/hunters playbook.

1. Find a company, organization, or individual that firearms owners and sportsmen support.
2. Do research and find some dirt or something, however small, that may fracture the support.
3. Post it on a media site.
4. Grab some popcorn, sit back and enjoy the show as the supporters rip each other to shreds.
5. Grin.
6. Repeat.
if the private party happens to be the owner?

I'm not even sure it was the owner, but a few pages ago a HW'r said it was benchmade's owner giving money to dems, some of them rabid anti-gun.

If it's a private party donation, why is it flagged Benchmade?   Why wouldn't it just be a name?   That it's associated with benchmade means something? or nothing?

I don't know.

But it sounds like the Dem that got the most money is very pro 2A (0% Brady rating).     D or R, if he votes pro 2A, he votes pro 2A.

I also think I don't want to start using owners contribution patterns as a litmus test for doing business with them.
My tax lady is super liberal, but she does my very complex taxes really well
Its not bad.  Simply prepared its Comparable to a good blacktail I’d say.  I’m sure there are ways to make it taste great.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10