Important Notice: The site is currently being upgraded to a new software system. This process could take a day or two to complete. During that time, we are going to leave the site up here, on its old software. WHAT GETS POSTED HERE DURING THIS TRANSITION WILL NOT BE COPIED OVER ONTO THE NEW SITE, WHEN THE UPGRADE IS COMPLETE. When we swap over, the content posted while this message is visible will be lost. We wanted to give you folks a place to hang out and talk while we worked though. We will let you know when we are finished. Please pardon the inconvenience, during this transition.

Home Forums Classifieds GT Store Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 10-27-2007, 10:55   #1
The Pontificator
Angry Samoan
 
The Pontificator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Grumpyville
Posts: 24,465


SC: what's wrong with this editorial?

Proving to a licensing authority that you can exercise your rights in a competent manner applies to the Second Amendment, but not to the first.

Take a look at this 'letter to the editor' and guess which 2 finer points of SC gun law the writer missed?

http://www.theitem.com/apps/pbcs.dll...260036/-1/OPED
The Pontificator is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:14.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds
GT Store


Users Currently Online: 605
119 Members
486 Guests

Most users ever online: 4,867
May 19, 2015 at 1:03