Jump to content
Sniper

Military VET’s Dog Named “Donald Trump” Shot Dead

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Old School said:

I love animals.  I love my wife.

My wife was mauled by a neighbor's dog.

Which side do you think I line up on?

If a stray dog is on my property and I've been loosing livestock, there's only one solution if the owner is irresponsible.

Five shots?  Ever shoot at a dog or coyote on the run?

Yeah figure your lead    Then aim at the torso/neck.   Not the feet.  thats just playing cruel.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You shoot until the critter is down or you're out of ammo. I've hit critters on the run they show no reaction to being hit and they keep going. Once you walk up on it you realize you hit it multiple times. It happens. And yes if I had livestock I'd have zero tolerance policy for dogs and dog owners trespassing on my property. All neighboring properties would be aware of this. I've had run ins with dogs off leash while hunting. Could have, should have shot 2 of them but I didn't. It was close. Now that I have 2 minors hunting with me.....not letting an aggressive dog within 60' of my boys. Not a chance. 20 yards. Dog can cover that in 2-3 seconds. Nope. Sorry. I'll take my chances with law enforcement. 

The new thing(probably not new) down here in wharton is lazy POS riding down the road in their car while dog(s) run around. Just saw it last Saturday after I pulled a couple treestands. You say something to them and they flip you off. 

I'll be in there next month scouting for turkey....

Maybe I'll pickup the predator permit for $2 and take the AR for a walk. Lol. It freaks them out.  Lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Golf battery said:

Yeah figure your lead    Then aim at the torso/neck.   Not the feet.  thats just playing cruel.  

First of all, we are assuming that the dog was killed with a 22lr.  I have not found any info that verifies what kind of firearm or caliber was used, so everything here is just pure speculation, as far as I know.

Second, there are also assumptions being made that cattle farmers and their workers are all highly skilled marksmen.  That's a mistake.

If I'm going to join the guessing game.  I'd go with a farmer having a lever gun over any other, probably chambered in 30-30 or a semi auto in .223.  I'm basing this guess on my many many discussions with actual farmers that deal with predators on another forum.

If, in fact, the dog was shot with a 22lr at night, it was probably a deer poacher.  22lr is a popular caliber for poachers.  No farmer would go after any predator with a 22lr.  The dog was put down as a target of opportunity.  Considering the circumstances, the poor pooch was a legitimate target.

In the end, the bottom line, the final analysis...  It really REALLY sucks that a beautiful dog was killed for no good reason other than it's owner did not have it under control.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Scorpio64 said:

First of all, we are assuming that the dog was killed with a 22lr.  I have not found any info that verifies what kind of firearm or caliber was used, so everything here is just pure speculation, as far as I know.

How good are you at determining caliber based on wounds? There are a couple of pictures at the Gofundme link in the OP. Can you tell by those wounds what caliber it was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sniper said:

How good are you at determining caliber based on wounds?

I'm no good at that sort of thing at all.  That is why I pointed out that all this talk about 22lr is speculation.  Farmers using 22lr on predators makes no sense at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok.  Im the one that first mentioned 22 lr.  Its my assumption due to the wounds on the pic.  Ive hit plenty of of small vermin with 22 lr.  Those pics are a resemblance of that cal.  A centerfire wound on that type of animal will not have that look.  From my experience.   The wound would be more devestating.      If you are to assume.  Dont.  Unless you’ve hit small game with a 22 lr. Hey if im wrong.  Im wrong.  But from my personal knowledge.  Thats why i said 22lr  and.   Donald probably couldnt walk anymore being shot in atleast his two legs   Laid down and bled out or the gut shot did him in

Thats that.  You’re thoughts?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Golf battery said:

Thats that.  You’re thoughts?  

It's a real crappy way to get your neighbor's dog off your property. Why didn't he have his livestock fenced in? Wouldn't that stop outside predators from wandering in and chasing his livestock?

1 hour ago, Scorpio64 said:

Farmers using 22lr on predators makes no sense at all. 

Unless his whole point was to injure and make the dog suffer. Remember, he left the dog out to die, doesn't sound like he moved in to take it out of it's misery after he stopped it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sniper said:

It's a real crappy way to get your neighbor's dog off your property. Why didn't he have his livestock fenced in? Wouldn't that stop outside predators from wandering in and chasing his livestock?

 

No, it's too expensive to put small-mesh fence around cattle.    Cattle-size animals get cattle size fences, which won't keep out coyote-sized predators.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this:

Randall Thom

Having to say my final goodbye to my best best friend Mr Donald Trump. He was shot by a neighbor 4 times and then he never checked if he was as actually dead. When I found him about midnite in a cornfield he was actually still warm. The bastard let Donald suffer for over 14 hrs.

Thom said when he found his dog its body was still warm, leading him to believe it experienced suffering before succumbing to gunshot wounds.

“That’s what hurts the most out of all of this,” Thom said.

The release added that the sheriff’s office conducted and completed an investigation related to the circumstances of the dog’s Feb. 10 death. The investigation, the release said, found that the owner was “legally protecting their livestock on their private property at the time.” According to Minnesota State Statute, a livestock owner or caretaker may kill any dog found “chasing, injuring or worrying” livestock on land owned or controlled by the owner.

https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/crime-and-courts/4571234-shooting-death-minnesota-dog-named-donald-trump-wasnt-over-politics

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Scorpio64 said:

First of all, we are assuming that the dog was killed with a 22lr.  I have not found any info that verifies what kind of firearm or caliber was used, so everything here is just pure speculation, as far as I know.

Second, there are also assumptions being made that cattle farmers and their workers are all highly skilled marksmen.  That's a mistake.

If I'm going to join the guessing game.  I'd go with a farmer having a lever gun over any other, probably chambered in 30-30 or a semi auto in .223.  I'm basing this guess on my many many discussions with actual farmers that deal with predators on another forum.

If, in fact, the dog was shot with a 22lr at night, it was probably a deer poacher.  22lr is a popular caliber for poachers.  No farmer would go after any predator with a 22lr.  The dog was put down as a target of opportunity.  Considering the circumstances, the poor pooch was a legitimate target.

In the end, the bottom line, the final analysis...  It really REALLY sucks that a beautiful dog was killed for no good reason other than it's owner did not have it under control.

 

 

with all due respect, how many ranchers do you know? Each one I knew was skilled with a rifle

22lr is unethical for a dog sized animal, period.  Can't believe this is even a discussion.  Dogs legs were shot, both front and back and then torso.  That's not shitty shooting and if it is, person doesn't belong behind the trigger

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sniper said:

Found this:

Randall Thom

Having to say my final goodbye to my best best friend Mr Donald Trump. He was shot by a neighbor 4 times and then he never checked if he was as actually dead. When I found him about midnite in a cornfield he was actually still warm. The bastard let Donald suffer for over 14 hrs.

Thom said when he found his dog its body was still warm, leading him to believe it experienced suffering before succumbing to gunshot wounds.

“That’s what hurts the most out of all of this,” Thom said.

The release added that the sheriff’s office conducted and completed an investigation related to the circumstances of the dog’s Feb. 10 death. The investigation, the release said, found that the owner was “legally protecting their livestock on their private property at the time.” According to Minnesota State Statute, a livestock owner or caretaker may kill any dog found “chasing, injuring or worrying” livestock on land owned or controlled by the owner.

https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/crime-and-courts/4571234-shooting-death-minnesota-dog-named-donald-trump-wasnt-over-politics

 

I don't see caliber used and he broke a cardinal rule in shooting animals

poor dog, regardless of how you feel about the owner, rancher, etc....poor animal doesn't deserve to suffer a long death in the cold like that. 

Remember people, dogs have the mental and emotional cognitive development of a 3-6yr old child.  think about that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple farms I used to hunt the farmer always carried a shotgun with buckshot in the tractor. Maybe this guy sent a few loads of buckshot at the dog. Dog has lots of holes in him. 

I feel bad for the dog. I don't feel bad for the dog owner. Not at all. I've seen too many incidents that could have been avoided 100% if the dog owner followed simple leash laws. 

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, myhatinthering said:

I don't see caliber used and he broke a cardinal rule in shooting animals

poor dog, regardless of how you feel about the owner, rancher, etc....poor animal doesn't deserve to suffer a long death in the cold like that. 

Remember people, dogs have the mental and emotional cognitive development of a 3-6yr old child.  think about that

I agree and I see that the farmers have legal right to kill a dog attacking their livestock. But, the way this dog was targeted is where I have an issue. First, if chasing off dogs is required, how about a few shotgun shells with rubber bullets, or even rock salt. That would get the point across and not torture the dog.

Like you said, most dogs are smart enough to figure out not to go back if they were shot at. But to wing this dog in the legs, then just leave it to die, there has to be some moral values exhibited. If he didn't want the dog to come back, kill it in it's tracks and end it's life. Don't leave it to suffer for many hours until it bleeds out or dies from exposure.

That's considered cruelty to animals.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sniper said:

I agree and I see that the farmers have legal right to kill a dog attacking their livestock. But, the way this dog was targeted is where I have an issue. First, if chasing off dogs is required, how about a few shotgun shells with rubber bullets, or even rock salt. That would get the point across and not torture the dog.

Like you said, most dogs are smart enough to figure out not to go back if they were shot at. But to wing this dog in the legs, then just leave it to die, there has to be some moral values exhibited. If he didn't want the dog to come back, kill it in it's tracks and end it's life. Don't leave it to suffer for many hours until it bleeds out or dies from exposure.

That's considered cruelty to animals.

This is like the bullshit argument of why didn't the cops jsut shoot him in the leg. 

You talked to the owner. The dog keeps coming back. Killing the dog means that at the very least the idiot owner has to buy a new one. 

You keep focusing on the legs. It was also shot through the right shoulder according to the article. From the picture it appears to have come out the left shoulder. That implies an attempt to finish the animal via  a heart or lung shot. 

You keep projecting onto a situation what you want to because you like dogs. 

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, DaddyNick said:

Couple farms I used to hunt the farmer always carried a shotgun with buckshot in the tractor. Maybe this guy sent a few loads of buckshot at the dog. Dog has lots of holes in him. 

I feel bad for the dog. I don't feel bad for the dog owner. Not at all. I've seen too many incidents that could have been avoided 100% if the dog owner followed simple leash laws. 

I think you nailed it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, raz-0 said:

You keep focusing on the legs. It was also shot through the right shoulder according to the article. From the picture it appears to have come out the left shoulder. That implies an attempt to finish the animal via  a heart or lung shot. 

You keep projecting onto a situation what you want to because you like dogs. 

Wow, the reports were 3 or 4 shots to the legs and ONE to the body. Then leaving the dog to die a slow death in field.

He DIDN'T finish it off, did he? How many other body shots did he hit?

I said the guy had the legal right to kill the dog for attacking his livestock. He didn't kill it instantly, like he could have.

Which part of cruel and inhumane treatment to an animal don't you understand? He knew this was someone's pet, not a stray or wild pack dog from the woods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sniper said:

He knew this was someone's pet, not a stray or wild pack dog from the woods.

You cannot apply suburban NJ sensibilities to the way things are done in the rural Midwest.  On a farm, dogs, wolves, yotes and anything else on four legs that kills livestock are ALL the same.

Oh, if only this, or only that.....

If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the owner for not keeping his dogs from killing other peoples livestock.  Being angry with the farmer for protecting his property and livelihood borders on leftard thinking.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scorpio64 said:

If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the owner for not keeping his dogs from killing other peoples livestock.  Being angry with the farmer for protecting his property and livelihood borders on leftard thinking.

I've searched and searched, and read numerous articles about this situation. In not a SINGLE article did it say this black and white Husky was responsible for killing any livestock. It said that in past years it has happened with his dog(s), he had 10 at one time, and back in 2015 he paid off a neighbor because he had two dogs that were causing problems.

This dog that was shot was 3 years old. There's been ZERO proof or evidence in dozens of articles that THIS dog was responsible for ANY livestock issues. Does innocent until proven guilty hold up for dogs? We have just the word of the farmer, who has been having political differences with Thom.

Plus, in numerous articles it said that Thom put up fencing around his yard to contain his dogs the past year, because of past issues with them in the neighborhood.

So, it's possible that this dog might just have gotten out by accident and was seen loose in this farmer's land, and the farmer shot him. After all the press that has come out the last few days, I would have expected more media investigation and details released and more information to be released by the Sheriff, but there has been nothing.

How come? The lack of any additional information or details or interviews with other neighbors is a bit strange..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Sniper said:

I've searched and searched, and read numerous articles about this situation. In not a SINGLE article did it say this black and white Husky was responsible for killing any livestock.

Look brohime, I sympathize with the way you feel about this, and the dog, and the owner, and the farmer too.  However, in the final analysis, the farmer was just dealing with a predator running loose that came from a breeder with a track record of dogs running loose and killing livestock,  Nobody wins in this situation.  It just is what it is.

I hate the fact that the dog was named trump and owned by a fanatic trump supporter because it adds an unnecessary complication to what went down.  Even the owner said he did not believe it was politically motivated.

If the dog was kidnapped, tortured and left to die a long and painful death out of spite, my sentiments on the matter would be very different.  But, sometimes things are just as simple as they seem to be.  Farm, predator, bullets, death.  That's it.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2019 at 10:23 PM, Sniper said:

Wow, the reports were 3 or 4 shots to the legs and ONE to the body. Then leaving the dog to die a slow death in field.

He DIDN'T finish it off, did he? How many other body shots did he hit?

I said the guy had the legal right to kill the dog for attacking his livestock. He didn't kill it instantly, like he could have.

Which part of cruel and inhumane treatment to an animal don't you understand? He knew this was someone's pet, not a stray or wild pack dog from the woods.

Dude, you have an irrational love of doggies. I get it, they are pretty awesome when things go right, but they are still animals, and however you feel about them, there isn't as big a barrier as you might think between a house dog and a feral dog. 

But you have a severely distorted notion of "finished off". 

There is a doggo who the report said was shot in the right side. With a fucking bleeding hole in the left side. RIGHT where a doggo's lungs are. Which is a double lung shot. Which at least according to most hunting tests I have run into is the gold standard of good finishing shots on a deer. I don't see why it wouldn't be a on a dog. 

You keep assuming the dog was left to bleed out slowly in a field. I'm  not sure where you dig this up from. The pictures would seem to indicate that wasn't possible. 

To me it looks like the chest wound is bigger. That might just be bleeding. It might also be that the truck gun is a shotgun, and he shot it, hitting it multiple places, it went down, and he put one through both lungs from up close to finish it ASAP. 

On 2/16/2019 at 12:05 AM, Sniper said:

This dog that was shot was 3 years old. There's been ZERO proof or evidence in dozens of articles that THIS dog was responsible for ANY livestock issues. Does innocent until proven guilty hold up for dogs? We have just the word of the farmer, who has been having political differences with Thom.

 

 

Look dude. All it takes is it being on the guys land anywhere near the livestock to be an ACTUAL issue. 

For it to be a legally sufficient issue it just has to be on his land in most cases. 

Doggos not roaming unattended are safer happier doggos. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, raz-0 said:

 

Look dude. All it takes is it being on the guys land anywhere near the livestock to be an ACTUAL issue. 

For it to be a legally sufficient issue it just has to be on his land in most cases. 

Doggos not roaming unattended are safer happier doggos. 

 

Very true, the dog harassing the livestock can easily cause a miscarriage. Enough livestock have a miscarriage and the farmer and his family starve. Thats why the laws say harassing livestock not attacking or killing livestock. There is zero good reason for any dog to be running at large 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, raz-0 said:

Look dude. All it takes is it being on the guys land anywhere near the livestock to be an ACTUAL issue. 

For it to be a legally sufficient issue it just has to be on his land in most cases. 

Try reading comprehension, you might like it:

On 2/15/2019 at 10:23 PM, Sniper said:

I said the guy had the legal right to kill the dog for attacking his livestock. He didn't kill it instantly, like he could have.

I didn't disagree that he had the right to shoot the dog. It was the WAY he did it.

There's a difference.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2019 at 2:27 PM, raz-0 said:

This is like the bullshit argument of why didn't the cops jsut shoot him in the leg. 

You talked to the owner. The dog keeps coming back. Killing the dog means that at the very least the idiot owner has to buy a new one. 

You keep focusing on the legs. It was also shot through the right shoulder according to the article. From the picture it appears to have come out the left shoulder. That implies an attempt to finish the animal via  a heart or lung shot. 

You keep projecting onto a situation what you want to because you like dogs. 

 

I totally disagree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2019 at 2:27 PM, raz-0 said:

You talked to the owner. The dog keeps coming back. Killing the dog means that at the very least the idiot owner has to buy a new one. 

 

19 hours ago, raz-0 said:

You keep assuming the dog was left to bleed out slowly in a field. I'm  not sure where you dig this up from. The pictures would seem to indicate that wasn't possible. 

It's really nice how you make crap up and fabricate a story to fit your own, incorrect narrative.

More information since the original story. Seems like the dog escaped from the chain link enclosure he built to keep the dogs contained, then was shot by the neighbor when loose.

..."Thom said he built a chain link fence on his property last spring, but it's possible that a snow drift helped the dog escape sometime that day while he was in Minneapolis.

Thom said he learned of his dog’s death by calling dispatch based on a “bad feeling.”

When he found his dog in a field around midnight its body was still warm, he said. He claims there were no footprints in the snow that showed anyone checked to see that the dog was actually dead, leading him to believe the dog suffered before eventually succumbing to the gunshot wounds.

021619.N.DG_.%20Randall%20web.jpg?itok=W

https://www.dglobe.com/news/4572000-new-version-death-lakefield-mans-dog-makes-international-headlines

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sniper said:

 

It's really nice how you make crap up and fabricate a story to fit your own, incorrect narrative.

 

What crap did I make up? I took it form your own initial post. IT said shot in the right shoulder with a picture of the dog with a wound on their left side. Which implies that they were shot through one or both lungs in a quartering shot, or it was more square on and is through the liver. A lung shot is generally considered a rapid and humane kill shot. 

We are ALL speculating on how that wound got there, but it is not a wound that would generally permit an extended period of suffering. 

Go look at your own pics and quoted article. 

Also my interpretation is simply requiring someone to have not made a mistake in mirroring the picture or stating the wounds. Your's is based on one aggrieved party making qualitative statements about bad feelings and what must have happened. Even if he isn't full of shit, your new quoted article contains no information on how much time passed between the dog being shot and the owner finding it. Which is where you are being speculative (i.e. making up crap as you put it) about whether the dog was killed humanely. 

I'm disinclined to give the benefit of the doubt to some dipshit who has an extensive record of creating a menace to the public via his treatment of his dogs. 

I am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to someone who has put up with said dipshit and his dangerous dogs for some time and by the appearance of the public record and the dipshit's own statements has attempted to do so reasonably. 

Yes the dog is a victim of the dipshit too. That sucks. But dogs left to their own devices aren't inherently virtuous. Some will want to be your friend. Some will cause you real problems with livestock while wanting to be someones buddy. Some will not be your friend and will try to eat your face. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading that new article the dog owner sounds like the definition of s shitty dog owner. Real breeders dogs dont attack people or other animals or run at large. The guy has had 2 potentially dangerous dog charges with one still pending. Those cases dont take long because the dog is in impound until the judge's decision. So one of his dogs attacked a person and caused bodily injury or killed another animal recently.

Sounds like a puppy mill scumbag to me. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sometimes this place feels like farcebook.

 

 the fact is that most of us here love dogs. there's no argument there. we all know now that this guy wasn't the innocent he painted himself to be originally. it appears as if his dogs have in the past had issues with attacking people and animals. there is a pattern there. the neighbor shot this dog apparently to protect his livestock. shot it what? 4 or 5 times? few shots in the legs? some of you seem to feel that he did the leg shots deliberate.  yet...... we all keep talking how ridiculous it is to expect a cop to shoot a perp in the leg 'cause small fast moving target.  and some of you think that he aimed for the dogs legs. i'd venture that the guy just wasn't a good shot.

 

 no one wants to see a dog shot. the neighbor did what he felt was necessary. if the shitty owner hadn't been shitty, this poor dog would still be alive. that's pretty much what it comes down to.

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



  • 52 How important is it for you to have your next pistol be "Optics Ready?"

    1. 1. How important is it for you to have your next pistol be "Optics Ready?"


      • Very, (Do not want to pay for slide cutting, Looks cool, etc.)
      • Neutral (don't have a preference either way)
      • Not at all (not a feature I am looking for).
    2. 2. How much are you willing to pay for "Optics ready"? (i.e. gun is cut for an optic)


      • Up to $50
      • $50 to $100
      • $100 to $200
      • $250 or more
      • None. If it is not standard part of the gun, not willing to pay more for a model with it.
    3. 3. Why are you looking for Optics Ready?


      • Planning on adding optic.
      • Want to have the option just in case
      • n/a
    4. 4. Why do you want to add an optic?


      • Looks cool/tactical or someone told me I should
      • Need it for deteriorating eyesight.
      • To compete in certain gun games (USPSA Carry Optics)
      • Other Reasons

  •  

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • #59  CNJFO HONORS FIVE NJ 2A "HEAVY LIFTERS" DURING BRIEF CEREMONY HELD AT A DIVERSITY SHOOT AT GFH! CNJFO BESTOWS "PATRIOT PIN" TO (5) 2A NJ HEAVY LIFTERS! COLANDRO, SIMON, FISHER, INGRAM & WONG ALL AWARDED! by Black Wire Media Tuesday June 18, 2019 www.cnjfo.com/join-us CNJFO's President, Matt Andras, spoke from the heart last Friday evening at Tony Simon's "The 2nd is for Everyone: Diversity Shoot, detailing the how & why of the beginning of the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners (CNJFO). He then called Anthony Colandro, Tony Simon, Sean Fisher, Dan Ingram and Nick Wong to the front of the classroom at Gun For Hire's Woodland Park Range where this Diversity Shoot was being held. Thanking each of the honorees for their steadfast support of the 2nd Amendment in New Jersey and the Coalition in particular, Andras, on behalf of CNJFO's Board of Trustees, did then officially award the five a "Patriot Kit" consisting of a custom pewter pin, embossed certificate and thank-you note. The applause were so loud it froze the video camera (noted in video). These five have been supporting us since our inception, so they were the first selected for this honor. We at the Coalition are proud to partner with and are humbled by the volunteerism, expertise, monetary support, and hours spent promoting awareness, education and good will in the NJ 2nd Amendment community at-large. These five deserve your congratulations, respect, and your promise to do your best on the 2A scene as we celebrate their unwavering efforts on our behalf. Andras then concluded his brief presentation with the following remark, "When friends get together conversations get started. When conversations get started, ideas begin to flourish. When ideas flourish, great things will be accomplished". He also added, "Don't just be a member, become a part of it, own it, and say this is MY organization and I'm proud to work with it"! NOTE: We'd like for you to JOIN us, buy some exclusive swag or make a tax-deductible donation at www.cnjfo.com . All help is sincerely appreciated & thanks for reading / watching and SHARING!   Thanks for watching & sharing!  To JOIN us please visit:  https://www.cnjfo.com    
    • Please note that the overall length is 26.5" with a 12.5" barrel.  This means the firearm was measured collapsed.  If you choose to build your own and risk the legality of it, DO NOT use a barrel less than 12.5" long. I embrace gray areas of the law, but that letter from the NJSP sets a precedent for how OAL (overall length) will be determined in NJ. 
    • https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-passes-bill-allowing-concealed-carry-state-lines/story?id=51628124&fbclid=IwAR1liA-GZVmDVAFWEMEMDYHPDwMPX4GywyWKJyJnel8taAmy0sPMd5_Gvhs
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information