I have a couple without external safeties. The idea is to carry them in a fitted holster that covers the trigger. Kydex holsters are like $25 or $30 for any given model, it’s a no-brainer.
Also, they have internal safeties to prevent firing when dropped. Also, they have long and hard trigger pulls.
Don’t buy those guns idiots
You need to pass this wisdom on to thousands and thousands of police and military forces across the planet. Because Glock.
LOL, not a Glock fan, but the special forces guys dropped by camp this weekend and I got to shoot one. What can I say? I worked flawlessly, but I had to ask what it was when it was handed to me. Didn’t look like the typical black Glock.
Am I missing something or are there just no gun owners here. This is incredibly disingenuous, and even dangerous, “advice”.
A loaded gun with a round in the chamber should fire when the trigger is pulled, every single time. They should not fire when the trigger is not pulled.
Following any one of the three safety rules prevents 100% of “accidents”. There are no real gun accidents besides catastrophic mechanical failure (which does happen, but usually with shit ammo and shit guns or poorly maintained guns).
Depending on traditional safeties encourages poor gun handling habits and adds precious time to fire when milliseconds count. “Safety-less” pistols will not fire unless the trigger is pulled, period.
Yeah, no shit. And having a safety makes it near impossible to pull the trigger. I don’t think anyone here doesn’t understand the concept of a safety mechanism.
There’s also a safety on some guns, which I personally hate, that allows you to pull the trigger, but the safety disconnects the mechanism from the pin, or blocks the pin from going forward.
Personally I’d rather they just not allow a trigger pull at all. It’s especially freaky when you get one that still moves the hammer.
It’s literally that xkcd geologist cartoon, where they think the average person knows the chemical formula for feltzbar and quartz. Everyone vastly overestimates the average person’s knowledge level for areas they themselves already understand.
For all the gun owners in the thread, GarandThumb recently did a video (youtube gun guy) where he drop tested several handguns and a couple of them actually did go off. As many of you are saying, firearms shouldn’t go off without the trigger being pulled and that’s for sure the case a large majority of the time.
Frustratingly the article doesn’t mention anything about the make, model or condition of the firearm here. It’s totally possible it went off just from being dropped.
He almost certainly tested the very few modern handguns known to have that problem, for which they rightly got a lot of hate. You’d have to link the specific video, I don’t watch GT.
1911 and 2011 are not drop safe as they do not mitigate the firing pin carrying forward and striking the primer when the gun is dropped. Known issue for a long time with the design of the 1911 and was addressed in the manual of arms. The failure is when the crown of the barrel strikes first. It was deemed acceptable for use as the round was most likely to be discharged when the barrel was pointed at the ground.
Most firearms designed after 1940 are drop safe. The exceptions are the ones that follow the flawed design of the 1911
The sidearm that replaced the 1911 in military service the Beretta 92 was, some say, primarily selected as it was hammer fired and drop safe so as to stay as close to the then current manual of arms and sidearm doctrine.
Safty-less pistol owner here. Glock-19 Gen3. Even though the gun is resistant to firing unless the trigger is pulled (ie dropping it) it won’t go off. That being said, I never carry with a round chambered because of this. It takes a half a second extra to chamber the round, I’d rather take that than carry a loaded round pointed at my spine or crotch all day.
Yeah, this idea that you are going to just be on the street and need to quickdraw a weapon like ten paces at dawn style is the biggest fucking delusion on top of a mountain of delusions in the gun community.
Well first of all there is more than one kind of “safety.” There are guns that don’t have a switch on the side that says “go bang” and “don’t go bang.” Glocks, for example.
A Glock pistol doesn’t have a manual safety. It has a drop safety, which is a little tab that prevents the firing pin from going forward that is moved out of the way by the pull of the trigger. That way there’s no way you can drop, hit or shake the gun to make it go off without actually pulling the trigger. If you look at the trigger of a Glock, it looks like there’s two; like there’s a second trigger that sticks out of the first one. You see this on power tools too, it’s a little lever that prevents the trigger from being pulled unless you first push that out of the way. That makes it a lot less likely to fire if you brush the trigger against something; you have to put your finger in the trigger guard, push the trigger safety down out of the way, and then pull the trigger.
Also, the way a Glock works, you can’t load a round into the chamber without cocking the action, and you can’t decock the action without pulling the trigger and firing the gun. (assuming no ammunition malfunctions here) When the gun is cocked, the trigger snaps forward, when the gun isn’t cocked, the trigger stays back. It is common practice when carrying a Glock to carry it with a full magazine, an empty chamber and the action uncocked. With no cartridge in the chamber and the action uncocked, trying to pull the trigger won’t do anything because it’s already “back”. You’d need to pull the slide back to cock the gun and chamber a round, then it’ll go bang. If you’ve fired a couple rounds, and the chamber is loaded and the gun is cocked, the way you return it to the carry state is to remove the magazine, pull back the slide to eject the round in the chamber, point the gun in a safe direction and pull the trigger to dry fire the gun.
On the more primitive side, you have single-action revolvers. A single-action only revolver means the trigger ONLY does the job of releasing the hammer so it can fire the cartridge. If the hammer is forward, it has to be pulled back with the user’s thumb or other hand to cock the action and rotate the cylinder to the next chamber. There’s no need for a lever on the side of the gun because you already need to fiddle with a lever on the back of the gun. If the gun has been recently fired, the hammer will be resting on a spent cartridge. I have heard some say it is good practice to carry such a gun with the hammer resting on an empty chamber, which is basically the same idea as the Glock above; you’re loaded with one fewer round than the absolute maximum but carrying in a way where there’s no bullet aligned with the barrel and ready to go.
I have absolutely no doubt he pulled the trigger when he fell. Only certain types of mechanisms can stop the gun from firing when you pull the trigger, and there’s reasons to not want that mechanism on your gun.
LOL that’s ridiculous. Revolvers are still great firearms, quite useful for target shooting, hunting, and self defense. A good one can last generations, as they are simple and reliable.
Have you been to Texas? There are trash monsters everywhere around here!
I talk shit, but I would absolutely have a firearm some places when taking out the trash. We’ve got a crazy feral hog problem some places. I’ve been trapped in a building by them. A friend got charged heading to his car by a pack of them. Another friend had his driver’s side door fucked up by one while stopped at a stop sign. They will absolutely fuck you up.
Of course none of this was in San Antonio, it was all in rural Texas. I have no idea whether they’re out there causing havoc.
Hey! So, the outskirts of San Antonio where I used to live definitely had a wildlife problem but most of the hogs here are more interested in garbage and farm fowl than attacking humans. We do have issues with foxes, coyotes, and mountain lions though.
This area from the article is an older part of San Antonio with pretty high crime levels. This is the area where you’d be more likely to feel the need to carry a gun to take out the garbage, but only because other people are carrying guns to take out the garbage.
Where I live now, we used to get somewhat frequent gunshots back when there was a party-house nearby, now it’s much more seldom and sounds less… aggressive? When that happens, I just load up the shotgun and wait for about 30 minutes or so (or until the police arrive, if they even bother to come out) to make sure no one is coming into my house to harm me or my family. I’m all for hosting people, as long as they don’t try to hurt me or the people I love. (If they come in to rob or steal, they probably need it more than I do, plus that’s what insurance is for. No need to go blasting people over something as fleeting as stuff)
Funnily enough, my shotgun was my grandfather’s that he used in his oilfields for snakes. I’ve never shot anything living with it and the worst snake I’ve seen at my house is a rat snake. My sister, on the other hand, got bit by a water moccasin when she lived out by you.
Moccasins ain’t nothing to mess around with. I assume she’s alright and living elsewhere now? Over here we have most of the stuff from southern Louisiana that will kill you plus scorpions and a bunch of other crap.
Appreciate the info. I figured you’d know SA better than I do.
LiberalGunNut™ here!. I’m very much like you. For one, never shot an animal that wasn’t dying horribly. LOL, I can’t even bring myself to hunt squirrels. And yes, while we have some serious wildlife around here, I’m far more concerned with the 2-legged sort.
Love what a conservative gun nut, and longtime cop, had to say:
“In the anti-gun Spokane newspaper, internet comments indicated that many people had the clueless idea that Gerlach had shot the man – in the back – to stop the thief from stealing his car. One idiot wrote in defense of doing such, “That ‘inert property’ as you call it represents a significant part of a man’s life. Stealing it is the same as stealing a part of his life. Part of my life is far more important than all of a thief’s life.”
Analyze that statement. The world revolves around this speaker so much that a bit of his life spent earning an expensive object is worth “all of (another man’s) life.” Never forget that, in this country, human life is seen by the courts as having a higher value than what those courts call “mere property,” even if you’re shooting the most incorrigible lifelong thief to keep him from stealing the Hope Diamond. A principle of our law is also that the evil man has the same rights as a good man. Here we have yet another case of a person dangerously confusing “how he thinks things ought to be” with “how things actually are.”
As a rule of thumb, American law does not justify the use of deadly force to protect what the courts have called “mere property.” In the rare jurisdiction that does appear to allow this, ask yourself how the following words would resonate with a jury when uttered by plaintiff’s counsel in closing argument: “Ladies and gentlemen, the defendant has admitted that he killed the deceased over property. How much difference is there in your hearts between the man who kills another to steal that man’s property, and one who kills another to maintain possession of his own? Either way, he ended a human life for mere property!”
― Massad Ayoob, Deadly Force - Understanding Your Right To Self Defense
I can think of a few realistic situations where someone might. Bears, geese, waterbears, meese, gators, hell you might even run into an acorn. Gotta stay safe out there.
Honestly if I lived in the US I probably would. Not because I feel the need to pull it out and show everyone, but because I don’t want to die without a chance to defend myself.
That said - I think the fact that guns are so readily available in the US is bad and should be stopped so that people don’t feel the need to carry themselves.
Edit: woah boy this comment really got some people excited. Look, I’m not pro gun and I’m not American - I’m just saying how I feel…nothing more, or less. Over here in Europe I have the luxury of not needing to even think about it…and without any desire to live in America I also don’t need to think much beyond what i shared. Have a great weekend all!
I worked in the US for a long time and at no point did I ever feel the need to carry a gun around. If anybody ever did mug me they’d just get my wallet It’s not worth fighting over it.
If somebody wants me dead then the gun isn’t going to do me any good, how am I going to get it out of the holster in time?
Defend yourself how? Really imagine the scenario. Someone wants you dead, so they walk up behind you and shoot you. Where is your opportunity for defense?
Fair…I have no reason to dispute you and no reason to believe you…but it sounds sensible and hence if I had to actually make the decision for real I’d look into it!
I know I sound flippant, and that’s because I am. I don’t need to choose - that choice was made for me. And I’m glad it was.
I live in the US, you’re more likely to die in a car accident than get killed by someone with a gun. Plus all us Americans should be pretty desensitized to shootings and what not now, just get over it lol
The kind of country that has the NRA, The Republican Party, Florida, multiple mass shootings a month, a militarised police force, Donald Trump, the KKK…need I go on?
Honestly mate I’m well aware of the fact that most folks can lead entirely ordinary gun-free lives in the US. As a European I train in martial arts to ensure I can defend myself, in the US I’d also train in firearms - because that’s the worst case. Not the likely case. The worst case.
Fair play, I believe you. I also have never felt that way, I am simply applying my views on self defence in Europe to a wildly different set of laws…so I’m guessing what I would do. Not saying that’s how everyone feels - just how I feel.
From my read of the article he wasn’t wearing it, he was holding it in his hands along with the trash…
What’s the line of thinking on that?
Get up. Realize it’s trash day and grab the trash to go outside - but wait! What if some ne’er-do-well has been lying in ambush until 6 in the fucking morning to rob me of my precious trash? Better grab my heat. Shit I’m still in my pajamas and my holster is in the other room. I’ll just walk out like some romcom librarian, except instead of books I have a heap of trash and a loaded gun and the part where I trip is a lot less cute.
Idk I’m a very small woman who lives alone in a bad neighborhood. Had a man try to break in my house. He simply saw me with a gun and ran away. Don’t want to imagine what he could have done if something didn’t scare him away, because it wasn’t my Great Dane and it damn sure wasn’t me that intimidated him.
The fact that the person had criminally trespassed, made no due announcement of their presence and was attempting to enter her property absolutely falls within acceptable brandishment in all states of the Union. There is no question that brandishing a firearm in that situation is with lawful excuse.
Now, if she had pulled the trigger, had an unlicensed or illegal firearm in her state, or sought after the fleeing person, then there’s an argument that she commited a crime.
I am not a lawyer. But every state in the u.s. has different laws, about stand your ground. Even in Canada we are only allowed to use as much force as they use against us.
Brandishing a weapon and firing it are two completely different things. I would advise caution on making suggestions to people that live in a country whose laws you are not directly familiar with.
He was attempting to break down my door. According to the castle doctrine, I could have defended myself in that instance if he would have made it across the threshold. I had my weapon at the ready when he opened my front door without permission. Then he retreated. I called the cops and reported it. Filed a report. The cop said I did everything right.
This logic I’ll agree with you on. It is strange that a grown man felt the need to wear his weapon to take the trash out, whereas I never felt like I had to even in my neighborhood. I keep mine in the house purely for defense.
Actually yes it had that effect. Without that immunity, the market would have felt the pressure and invested more into research into better gun locks etc. The immunity laws took away that incentive. Economists have discussed this issue at length about how the gun market is different than other markets due to this.
Gun manufacturers have been building ever better internal safeties for decades. If a gun goes off from a slip and fall, somebody is carrying like an absolute idiot, or using an obsolete pistol.
The Sig P320, a $700 pistol from a “quality” brand that was adopted as the new military standard issue pistol, would fire if dropped at the wring angle. They didn’t want to have the trigger-safety mechanism that Glock and others use that includes a spring-loaded trigger lock that prevents the trigger from being pulled without something actually inside the trigger guard to pull it.
So if you dropped it at the wrong angle, it had enough inertia that when the gun hit the ground the trigger would keep moving and pull itself.
This was discovered in military trials, so they fixed the flaw (with a lighter trigger that wouldn’t have as much inertia combined with a heavier trigger pull) for the military, but not for the Civilian model.
A viral YouTube video came out showing how it could be reliably fired by dropping it (the video used blanks so they weren’t actually shooting wildly), and they still denied it was a problem until all the gun dealers refused to sell the gun.
They did a recall, but there’s still probably a million affected guns out there.
Other guns will do that as well. It isn’t necessarily resolved by a trigger safety. Some guns, as shown on a popular guntube channel, will fire if dropped from chest height because the drop and angle causes the firing pin to move with sufficient force to fire the round.
The $4,300 Stacatto XC 2011 for instance, dropped from chest height, fired a round immediately without the hammer dropping. So did several others, and that was just one round of testing.
Most didn’t, but for the most part they were only dropped once or twice and it was a fairly informal test. Literally just someone dropping the pistols from the height of being told “drop your weapon.”
The P320, however, despite being dropped about a dozen times (and from much higher heights and different angles since the test was inspired by the discussions about that model going off) never discharged from being dropped.
A 2011, despite the name, isn’t really a modern firearm. It’s essentially a 9mm version of a 115 year-old design and too many boutique race gun companies cut corners for guns that aren’t designed to anything but range queens.
As popular and fun as the 1911 is at the range, it has no place as a modern defensive firearm, and people who carry It are idiots. They’re super heavy, low capacity, jam, rust, have a trigger pull so short and light they can’t be safely handled while cocked without engaging a safety that’s just a hammer block (leaving the pin floating), are a pain to clean, and more.
It was one example. My point is, it happens. This is literally a response to you initially pointing it out that it happens in the “modern” P320, and I’m sure you’ve got an unnecessarily long and complicated opinion about each make and model. 👍
The P320 still requires the trigger to be pulled to remove the stop that prevents the firing pin from touching the primer.
The problem with the 320, the Taurus G1, most 911s, and others is the trigger being pulled. It’s why most of the industry has adopted trigger safeties like the one pictured that don’t allow the trigger to move without something inside the trigger guard releasing the trigger.
SIG for sure has a problem with one or two of their handguns but I’m curious to know what gun this guy had.
This highlights the danger of carrying, the importance of having a quality holster with good retention, and the necessity of being properly trained in the carry and use of firearms.
Edit: I was going to try to add to the comedy but I feel like it’s not actually funny. I get the irony, but I started thinking how I’d feel if I had a family member or friend that died in such a dumb way.
Well he’s in the arms of Jesus now. If there’s any lesson here it’s use a damn holster, people, and take your safety training seriously.
Doubt it. While there are wild areas with actual dangerous animals and it’s prudent to have a way to protect yourself, I find it hard to believe I’d ever be in such fear of the place I live to carry a weapon at all times.
Ah, ok, that explains it …. The guy was taking his trash to the curb in San Antonio, in an active war zone. He needed a hand gun to protect himself from incoming artillery shells and anti-personel drones. That sounds much more sane
It’s like saying he should be wearing cold weather gear because in some parts of the world it’s freezing. Yeah but if you’re not in those parts of the world it’s a pointless comment isn’t it.
When’s the time to talk about the grammatical butchery that is the interpretation of the second amendment to the Bill of Rights?
Even if the government argues the unorganized militia is all male citizens aged 18-45, and females in the National Guard, that’s still not everyone. Also, if the 2nd amendment isn’t actually what grants states their own Defence Forces, but instead the Compact clause of the Constitution, than why the fuck can they exist in times of peace? Americans refuse to read and interpret their own laws, at the detriment to their children, to their families, their existence, and to their future.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Can you explain?
The Second Amendment was written with the expectation that the United States would not have a standing army. That’s why why the first clause is there. The well-regulated Militia in this context means (potentially) every citizen with a gun willing to fight in the defense of the state. Essentially, the amendment guarantees every capable and trustworthy person access to weapons of war for the explicit reason that if a large portion of the populace is armed, then it becomes impossible to forcefully occupy the country.
Thats grammatical trash that makes no sense. 2 commas? The Militia is what is necessary to the freedom of the state, and its ability to bear arms shall not be infringed. You’re saying “everyone is a militia”, but even the government defines the “nonmilitary militia” only as males of 18-45.
Your interpretation of the 2nd amendment is based on decades of propaganda.
Your interpretation of the 2nd amendment is based on decades of propaganda.
No, the decades of propaganda weren’t so sophisticated. My opinion comes from a reading by an anarchist who closely studied the writings of the founding fathers, and based his interpretation on that and the context of who now qualities as a “person” (women and people of colour). It’s very obviously influenced by what he wants it to mean, but it’s not an unreasonable interpretation.
Edit: I mean this guy called me an anarchist for some reason and I guess I’m just sooo dumb because I’m arguing less people should have guns. Choke on it
Why can’t you just read it? It has nothing to do with enabling weaponry in the populace. the fact you say you can’t even interpret it, but go by an anarchists interpretation (which would similarly be biased?), is no better. Why need an interpreter at all. What a joke. “what he means it to mean”, literally admitting to swallowing propaganda whole
Like it really does. The Republicans are always so adamant in the “living” portion of only certain pieces of the constitution. Otherwise, staunchly “originalist”, right? Even you go out on this limb to say people can be black, too, so why not have Militias be people? So why doesn’t privacy extend to women’s health? Why not… so many other shit fucking arguments relating to originalism? Is it maybe… theyre fucking liars that use post-justification to find the outcome they want? That the gun lobby infected America and wants you to believe that you have the god-given right to shoot black people?
You’re cheekily saying you shouldn’t listen to me, cause everyone around you says something different. Thats makes me an anarchist. Incredibly cute. Incredibly disturbing, as you’re implying you don’t need to understand or even believe in the law at all, just so long as your peers aren’t pressuring you. At least I gave you the benefit of the doubt, that you were simply illiterate, instead of a complete shill.
Also wrong, cause I’m not exactly arguing in favor of anarchy… I’m saying less people should have a gun. Which is why it wasn’t obvious, which is why it’s not really a lesson in anything but setting up your jokes better? I’m starting to realize this platform sucks because we were all banned from better places.
Again, point in the “creepy American Nazi” column. Like most of them. It’s just reaffirming really, that most Americans can lose all of their rights entirely. It simply depends on the SCOTUS.
You realize that in order to maintain a militia, the average citizen needs to have access to firearms without relying on issuance of them by the state? A militia “in good working order” requires people to occasionally take their personally owned firearm and train with it. How the fuck do you do this without allowing people to freely purchase them?
How the fuck do you maintain a militia “in good working order” while also banning their existence in peace time?
Lmfao oh so now the militia is just all people again. The fucking state owns the arms, dumbass
I just love this deep assumption that the founders wanted every person to have a gun to ensure every citizen could “kill invaders”. Lmfao maybe if all you Americans didnt need propaganda to go and melt a bunch of vietcong to palm trees, you wouldnt need such shot fucking justification to wrap yourselves around a massive lie. Literally americans get murdered by tree kids, and go back to use that as their justification to own weapons. The founders literally knew the word “PEOPLE” and instead chose “Militia”. Leave it pick-and-choose republican-americans to determine what words mean when they want it to. There are no good Americans.
The state doesn’t own arms for a militia. Look up the fucking definition of a militia. They are ran by civilians and are not an official military organization (they are paramilitary), but can still be leveraged by state governors.
The state already funds for arms separately for their state National Guard using public tax money funded by the local tax payer, and mandate training on them. They don’t care if a militia doesn’t hold regular training, as long as they are capable of taking orders from the governor and can maneuver in an organized manner.
Militias are necessary for when the feds leverage their militarized entities to supplant democratic process.
You are a dipshit that needs to work on reading comprehension instead of non-sequiturs to grasp a “win” in this argument.
Also, you didn’t answer my question, so I assume you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about and everyone here should simply ignore you.
Black people and women aren’t mentioned in the Constitution either you fucking moron. We had to fight fuckheads like you to finally give them the rights they deserve. You want to follow it literally? Go back to your shithole trailer you MAGA inbred fuck.
Lmfao I’m the maga fuck? Who’s the one out here stretching words when it’s convenient? They absolutely are mentioned, specifically. Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote. I don’t understand why originalists get all defensive about the 2nd amendment when its clearly grammatical horseshit, but they’ll skip over all these rules about black people and women.
Is it a living document or is it not? Is abortion a right or not? Anything can be completely destroyed by SCOTUS, any time.
Oh welcome to my point. Maybe read the 2nd amendment again and get back to me and why I’m right, and why all the hand-wringing and propaganda for the last 5 decades has literally been in propagandizing enough people into believing that’s what it says
What question? Americans are literally misinformed, using propaganda to peop up their worldviews. See how it hurts you so bad to confront it?
Your shit question, was “how can the militia have guns” is pretty simple: the state owns the guns.
You didn’t even see my original point, which is that the government also defines the non-military members in the population, which is all males 18-45 and females in the national guard. If you actually believe in the 2nd amendment and the words actually written, those are the only people that should have the right to bear arms. No one else.
See again, edits comment to add more ignorance. States dont have National Guard, they have State Defense Forces, which the compact clause gives them the right to have “in times of peace”.
Like literally these rights were enumerated in 2008. Thats a long time after the founders had an opinion…
Man this site is just choke full of sarcastic cucks, no one really has anything to say but “here’s some propaganda, you better believe it!” Lmfao. At least on reddit people will actually like read and talk. People here are just sarcastic, cryptic assholes
Okay so I read some of your edits and I see many holes in your arguments about not allowing everyone to own guns.
That being said, I cannot deny that societies that have restricted firearms ownership across the board have less homicides.
The factor that no one considers is that those societies are mostly homogenous, whereas the USA is not only more diverse than all countries combined, it’s also difficult to secure due to the size. Pandora’s box was opened long ago and it’s too fucking late to disarm the entire population.
You’re cheekily saying you shouldn’t listen to me, cause everyone around you says something different.
No, not at all; I asked you to clarify what you meant, and explained my perspective to you twice.
Thats makes me an anarchist.
Huh? What? How the fuck did you come to that conclusion?! I implied that I associate with Anarchists and consume anarchist media. I don’t think I’ve said a single thing about you except that you lack reading comprehension.
I’m going to assume you’re a troll, and maintain that assumption unless your next comment is even halfway decent.
Is this the definition of cryptofascist? Where you just cryptically make your points and use your peer position to hold authority? Garbage americans are garbage, im not exactly surprised
Your points are literally nonsense. If you believe “an anarchist interpretation” you 1) literally can’t read and 2) anarchy is definitely not what the founders intended. So amazing, you’ve destroyed your point while just being a confusing shit-brainwd american. Sorry I repeat myself
Oh so Im right? Americans are bullies, and they use peer acceptance as their understanding of their rights. This is why abortion isn’t legal in all 50 states any longer, and why literally any right, whether you believe to be enumerated by the Constitution or not, is hogwash
Literally the ONLY way to have Prevented this was if he Shot his GUN first before his Gun could shoot HIM! LITERALLY nothing else could have Prevented this! Nothing like background checks or safe storage laws or other things to ensure only safe gun owners have Guns!
ksat.com
Active