User Profile: 2AFirearmsDealerDotCom

2AFirearmsDealerDotCom

Member Since: July 20, 2012

CommentsDisplaying comments newest to oldest.

123
  • April 17, 2014 at 2:03pm

    How about this? Very few children get obese from one meal a day during school.

    Child obesity starts at the home. And I have every darn right to feed my kids what I want (My kids are actually extremely healthy and thin.)

    Child obesity is NOT going to be stopped or controlled by the lunches they serve at school. Just more government control in our lives.

  • April 16, 2014 at 9:25am

    Who said this guy is a kid?

  • April 16, 2014 at 9:24am

    You are all wrong. That is a semi-automatic pistol. The hammer was back, which means it was in single action mode, requiring much less force to pull the trigger. The additional force required is for setting the hammer.

    As far as recoil goes, the action of the slide absorbs most of the recoil and the angle with which he held the gun would allow his arm to absorb most the the remaining recoil.

    Blanks eject just like fully loaded ammunition. Just because there is no projectile in the case does not make the case rim or case extractor work any differently.

    Please everyone, don’t post information sounding like you know everything when you really know nothing about the subject.

    Responses (6) +
  • September 30, 2013 at 9:23am

    It is not Visa. It is Authorize.net, a payment processor.

  • September 30, 2013 at 9:21am

    @Patty Henry

    “PAYPAL may NOT have these prejudices and I feel a lot safer using them for all on-line purchases etc. These NUDGIN’ Cass Sunstein-type liberals are nauseating. I cannot wait until 2014.”

    You are mistaken. Paypal was bought by eBay many years ago. Both eBay AND Paypal have policies against weapons sales. Check them. They will drop your account and keep any money that is in there if they find you are doing business that is weapons related in any way.

  • September 30, 2013 at 9:16am

    Hey Monk, there are a LOT of credit card processors out there, however the vast majority of them have rules against weapons. There are only a scant few processors that are gun friendly. Authorize.Net has had the no weapons policy in place for years. They were one of the first ones we looked at, saw their policy, and rejected even considering them as a processor.

  • August 23, 2013 at 11:55am

    All I can hear is Heath Ledger in Batman playing the joker as he says “know how I got this smile?” …. lol.

    Responses (1) +
  • August 23, 2013 at 11:52am

    Perhaps I’m mistaken, but I thought that whenever somebody died during the commission of a crime / felony, all persons involved in that crime were responsible for and charged with murder?

    What does it matter if only one of the three “pulled the trigger”? They are ALL responsible for the crime.

  • July 30, 2013 at 11:51am

    Note the article… the shots were fired, the taser was used later… lmao.

  • July 30, 2013 at 11:48am

    I’m sorry, but exactly what needs to be investigated or explained? The guy was threatening with a knife, wouldn’t obey law enforcement commands to drop the knife… so yeah. Officers did their duty.

    Maybe if we stopped worrying about the criminals so much, there would be fewer criminals….

  • July 25, 2013 at 11:58am

    “Since the disclosures this year, however, lawmakers have said they were shocked by the scope of the two programs”

    Okay… really? Shocked that laws quickly passed by progressive hacks (both republican AND democrat) had a larger scope than they expected? Since when does the government pass laws that DON”T overreach their authority?

  • July 17, 2013 at 11:41am

    I get a little tired of hearing the word “Unarmed” as applied to Trayvon Martin. Seems to me, he had both his arms and were using them quite skillfully to beat on GZ…

  • July 12, 2013 at 1:58pm

    Sorry. If a bear attacks me I’m not curling up into a ball on the ground or laying on my stomach. I’ll be pulling out my firearm and defending myself with as many well placed shots as it takes…

  • June 26, 2013 at 12:11pm

    @SendTheMeteors

    You are mistaken. The supreme court did not rule that abortions are legal under the constitution. They ruled that the US constitution has no authority to stop abortions. Please find ANYWHERE in the constitution where it states anything about abortions.

    That said, the 10th amendment specifically states that powers not authorized in the constitution are to be given to the states and the people. Thus, it is within every states rights to determine what laws they wish to pass when it does not specifically violate the US constitution.

    Therefore, for good or bad, Texas has every right to pass whatever laws the people of Texas wish with regard to abortions.

    However, on a side note, correct me if I’m wrong, but this law was only banning abortions after the 20th week, yes?

    Isn’t 19 weeks enough for a potential mother to decide is she wants to have an abortion?

    And, for the record, please state the exact time or age of the baby where it turns from abortion to murder?

  • May 8, 2013 at 2:00pm

    Sorry, in my opinion, “heros” do not look for attention, or the need to be recognized, especially as “the first” to help.

  • May 7, 2013 at 9:10am

    I’m so tired of these gun debates. Look… just buy guns. Lots of them.

  • April 10, 2013 at 12:00pm

    You are assuming they either do not know, or do not understand the constitution and peoples rights.

    I suggest that they know EXACTLY what they are doing, and are following the blueprint by the progressives to turn this once free nation to a socialist/communist/dictatorship under the guise of “protecting the people” or “social justice”. It is that simple.

  • April 10, 2013 at 11:54am

    BG Checks are not an additional tax. There is no charge for the check nor does the government receive money for the check (outside of the FFL license fee for license holders).

    When my company sells a firearm, we do not charge a background check fee (though, there are some states that do assess background check fees, this has nothing to do with federal law).

    We do, however, charge a nominal transfer fee, if somebody buys a firearm from another location and uses us as the transfer dealer. But this is not for the background check. This is for our time and effort in providing the transfer service, filling out the paperwork, etc.

  • March 21, 2013 at 1:58pm

    @Welldoneson

    Don’t feed the trolls…

  • March 21, 2013 at 1:56pm

    @Marine25
    “Are you suggesting conservatives make the argument that the judiciary cannot establish the constitutionality of ANY limitations on the 2nd? No restriction on nuclear weapons? Citizens with rocket launchers? Anti-personnel mines? Serin gas? Fully automatic weapons? … Precedent says the arms guaranteed to citizens can be limited in the cause of a civil society and national security. Suggesting the 2nd is unlimited is historically inaccurate and politically unwise.”

    Quit with the BS straw man arguments. First of all, you should learn your history, maybe even read the Constitution and Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers. In addition, the Constitution should be viewed with Constitutional Law, not Case Law with “precedents”. Turning the law system into a Case Law system was the biggest and worse movement in out country by the progressives. Also, no “Precedent” has yet or should ever be set that can or would violate the Constitution. Those that are, I would argue, unconstitutional and our current Supreme Court doesn’t have the guts to knock them down, because of progressives)

    Nobody is suggesting weapons of mass destruction should fall into the hands of the average citizen. That is also, I suggest, outside of the perview of “Arms”, as they are not hand held “firearms”.

    If you knew what you were talking about, fully automatic firearms ARE available to citizens (but it is a LOT more regulated).

    Bottom line, show me ANY evidence that laws stop cr

123