Futility, or do they have an inside track on this?
Same argument, same results
Creating entire new doctrines of law
You’re trying to break the law
“You don’t need an AK-47 or an AR-15 to hunt deer.”
Making an example.
It’s like a “bazooka” or a “cannon”
Why quibble over facts?
“evolving technology does call for evolving regulation.”
Neither locked nor loaded
Permanent minority status approaching.
“Gun control now.”
Should’ve stuck with the pirate gig. It was working for him
Won’t be much left.
Your list of demands it a publicity stunt