-
Supporting Vendors
-
-
Latest Topics
-
-
Similar Content
-
By njJoniGuy
Longtime resident Lady Liberty, age 236 was struck by a stolen Chevy Volt last night along the interstate. The driver and passengers, illegally in the US from their native countries across the world, then dragged Ms. Liberty into the woods and brutally sodomized her before heading to the local polling place where they registered using the names of Supreme Court justices and voted without being challenged by UN poll watchers.
Authorities found them around the corner, each with a large supply of newly legalized recreational marijuana, getting high. They were taken into custody and released a short time later with a kiss on each cheek and a prepaid gift card for WaWa to handle the munchies.
Ms. Liberty is in extremely critical condition in the Intensive Care Unit, and doctors are very wary of her chances of recovery. A crowd of zombie-like citizens are already gathered at the Liberty residence, preparing to loot it of valuables when she succumbs to her injuries or the Death Panel declares her worthless and pulls the plug.
-
By Maksim
Why not an offshoot...
Been meaning to start thread a few days ago, after dry firing, I was trying to copy a link from youtube to chat....
You know you play too many gun games (uspsa/idpa) when you...
...double tap the Control + C twice before pasting the link.
-
By njJoniGuy
http://www.strategyp...01123142956.asp
with link to their overall humor section
such as:
and
Enjoy!
-
-
Posts
-
Thanks for the info voyager9, but that's what I'm afraid of. Lower courts could give a flip about Bruen if there are no judicial consequences in doing so.
-
He’s certainly trying to. Yes. It means new lawsuits to challenge the new rules. They don’t go directly to scotus though. Start with the lower courts first. In theory those courts should use Bruen as a guide and nuke them there. In theory.
-
By Philasipha · Posted
The bill states that following under the amendments section: " This act shall take effect 1[immediately] on the first day of the seventh month next following the date of enactment, except the Attorney General may take such anticipatory administrative action in advance as shall be necessary for the implementation of this act1." Is this replacing "immediately" with the underlined text or is it the other way around? -
I'm confused (a regular occurrence). Does this mean that Murphy stops ccw in it's tracks by adding all kinds of restrictions, fees, training requirements, sensitive areas, etc. regardless of what Thomas alluded to not doing those things? Does this mean any lawsuits regarding such have to wait to be heard by SCOTUS? Does this mean that at my current age of 65 I may never be able to ccw in NJ?
-
-