Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

1,350 profile views

DD123's Achievements


Member (24/24)

  1. Maybe she discovered that she can make more on Only Fans
  2. https://pagetwo.completecolorado.com/2023/01/09/colorado-democrats-aim-to-ban-entire-class-of-semiautomatic-weapons/
  3. Has anyone gotten wind of some new bills that supposedly landed either this morning or last night? I've seen a few rumblings on the web but without them being able to provide a bill number, I'll assume it was just folks who had no idea what they were talking about. I personally haven't been able to find anything, but I also don't have loads of time to read through every bill.
  4. Agreed, coordinated effort and coming together as one team is needed, but our side needs to grow up and not act like petulant children. When the gun dealer bill was gaining traction, we had two camps for the pro gun side....one who correctly wasn't going to negotiate, and the other who sat at the table and helped negotiate and caused a setback by allowing them a "win" with the gun dealer licensing act. It was only until the last couple weeks that I've seen progress and unity in the gun groups. The biggest challenge is getting people to prioritize what is important. A great example would be, and I'm just making up a scenario here, but one group is totally focused on doing away with our suppressor ban. While you'd be challenged to find a single gun owner who would oppose it, there are many other things that take precedence. So the gun groups say "hey, we want that too, but we have to focus on this first so that we open the door to making that challenge significantly easier". What normally follows is the other group stamps their feet and throws the baby out with the bathwater. They go on social media and start calling everyone Fudds, and basically doing nothing helpful. If they stopped acting like children for a moment and took the time to understand the strategy of why their pet project isn't first on the list, we'd get a lot further. In the grand scheme of things, usually the people that I'm pointing out here are the ones who literally do nothing....they don't donate, they don't make calls.....they do absolutely nothing but complain. I'm sorry, but if you're not doing anything to help, you need to sit this one out because hearing a childlike tantrum being thrown just makes us look more like the meme the other side has turned us into. Just wanted to add: one of the biggest challenges is getting all the powers that be with our various pro gun orgs onto the same page and putting their own egos aside. While I believe our odds of winning these challenges is upwards of ninety something percent, how we chip away at other things requires unity in our pro gun orgs otherwise these scumbag politicians will find another way to weasel in some language that has us right back in court. Court costs mean nothing to them because their legal fees come from our taxes. Their goal would be to make it too costly to continue court challenges. But like that check that city of Chicago had to cut to the NRA after winning that court challenge over a decade ago, I'm looking forward to seeing the same from the state of Illinois to every gun group after the courts rule in our favor.
  5. Honestly, it wouldn't have made a difference, at all. Literally every FOID card holder in Illinois could have sent emails, wrote letters, and blew the phones up and it wouldn't have made a single bit of difference. Just look at the last 2-3 elections. Barely 40% of voting aged people bothered to get out and vote, that vast majority of whom were outside of the northeastern part of the state. When people can't even be bothered to get out and vote, and basically hands the election to the democrats, this is what we get in return. There's no legitimate reason for JB having won the election. Look at the total votes between him and Bailey. We have approximately 10M people over the age of 18 in this state. If you round up vote totals, JB and Bailey had 4 million between them. Where are these other 6 million voters? I personally know several people who are all about political debate and criticizing democrats, and they don't even vote. The problem isn't the new people who suddenly discovered that they live in a horrible state, the problem is that 6 million Illinoisans are complacent, lazy, sacks of manure who'd rather stuff Doritos down their gullets than make an effort to actual effect the changes that would actually help them. I also know people who claim that they're pro gun, but vote democrat. When I've asked why they vote democrat when democrats are trying to ban their guns they've said "they'll never ban guns....guns are the boogeyman that helps them get reelected." Well, these last two days have been interesting watching them deal with the cognitive dissonance of their political stances. The point of all of this is they were set on passing this regardless. We could have shown up to the capital in force, 2+ million strong and they would have still passed it. The blame goes solely to those who either voted democrat, or couldn't be bothered to waddle into a voting booth in this last election.
  6. Name one time during our first 100 years as a country that guns were registered. This is the question the Illinois AG will need to answer because this is what Bruen opened the door for. Interest balancing is gone. If the courts thumb their noses at SCOTUS, this case will end up in front of SCOTUS and with the current makeup, now only would our bans go down in flames, but so would CT, NY, CA, and the rest of the commie bans.
  7. I can't wait until this gets overturned and see the faces of everyone that supported or had a hand in passing it. When that moment of cognitive dissonance hits them knowing that they could have let the Cook, Chicago, etc. bans stay in place at least for a while had they not attempted this, and then lose literally everything in one fell swoop will be just as glorious as the faces of Hillary voters when Trump won I'm literally going to go out of my way to constantly rub it in their faces. With that being said, it's important to understand why they're throwing this last Hail Mary. The Bruen case changed the landscape as much as McDonald and Heller did, but also finally put the foot down that anything other than strict scrutiny won't be accepted. Knowing that this ultimately dies in court, and many of the existing laws also disappear, there aren't many logical reasons to even attempt this. The only ones I can see are: 1. The pill popping moms pushed to get some sort of ROI and threatened that the piggy bank goes away. 2. They threw the spaghetti at the wall to see what will stick, and then focus on that across the nation. 3. They're legitimately morons and have absolutely no understanding what the ramifications of Bruen actually are. What I think will happen is if the first ruling comes back overturning this law, they may take their ball and go home knowing that if they appeal and this works its way all the way to SCOTUS, this will have nationwide ramifications and even the most solid blue states in the country will hate every Illinois democrat politician. Stopping at that first court loss gives them the cover to throw their hands up and say "hey we tried, now about those campaign donations..." That wouldn't bode well for any aspirations the governor has for high political office.
  8. If this thing gets signed into law, and somehow ends up in front of SCOTUS and they slap Illinois in the face striking the law down, basically making all such laws across the country null and void, I will personally call up a bakery and put in a standing order for a cake with the text of the 2A on it, including a card with a pic of everyone laughing in the Goodfellas scene with the text "Sen. Harmon, thank you for personally safeguarding the 2A for all Illinoisans for generations to come"......and I'll literally send it every week lol.
  9. Again, it's not a comparable case. McDonald, Heller, Bruen, and others were correctly interpreting the founder's intentions when including 2A in the bill of rights. Abortion was only legal because SCOTUS created law through their decision. This always should have been left to the states, or the fed to write a bill and pass it into law. And I'm probably one of the few on this forum that really doesn't care one way or the other on the topic of abortion. Not a fan personally, but at the same time I don't care what you do, just don't include me in it. One has been a constitutional right since the beginning, while the other has never been a constitutional right, and likely never will be since it's technically homicide, or infanticide to be more specific. Generally when SCOTUS makes a decision, they rarely, if ever go back decades later and revisit it. The reason being that they typically don't create law out of thin air, and in the case of RvW, that's exactly what they did. The only other case where they created law involved Robert's created law with the liberal side of the court in the ACA case. That case will likely be revisited. But in RvW, they had a chance to correct a mistake made where the court put on their legislators hats. To be clear, none of these gun laws should be passed, at all. The founders were very clear why 2A was included, but it takes time to read through all of the various historical writings of the time period. The two that give insight are the federalist and anti federalist papers. The biggest mistake our side made was going down the path of "well regulated means in good working order" rather than what the actual intent was. The federalists couldn't get the anti federalists on board without the inclusion of the bill of rights. One of the fears, which is becoming clearer and clearer as time goes on and how intelligent the founders were is that because we needed a standing army to protect the country, and that standing armies in the past have been used against the citizenry when a despot took control, so naturally the people should always have the means to defend themselves, and the power to overthrow the despots. Whenever the anti side talks about how it says "militia", we should have never gone down the rabbit hole of debates where we define who the militia was. While there is some merit to the discussion, it's goes off into the weeds rather than looking at the bigger picture, and that is that regardless of who makes up the militia, it could be used against us and we should have the ability to fight back. Had the founders just included "A well regulated militia, being necessary to a free state, because of the likelihood that they can be used against the people, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", we probably wouldn't be where we're at today. Somehow we've gotten to a point in time where they're trying to figure out exactly what they can infringe on rather than acknowledging that the only way they can enact any sort of change to our right to keep and bear arms is through constitutional convention.
  10. RvW was correcting a mistake where a previous court "created law". It's not the job of SCOTUS to create laws through their rulings. I wish our side would stop using RvW in this manner because 2A is specifically enumerated in the constitution, so these are two completely different subject matters. The only way abortion can be made legal uniformly across the county is with congress passing a law. Congress can pass gun laws, and even then they're not really safe from court rulings. Just look at the ACA as an example. The only way to legitimately infringe on 2A is through a constitutional amendment, and they know that. My suspicion around the tactics the left are using, and have been using for the better part of the last 20 years is making life miserable enough in solid blue states that causes enough republicans to flee, and with them solid democrats eventually have enough. The end result are red states that turn purple with time. Once they change the voting demographics of enough states, constitutional convention becomes achievable. High taxes, high levels of crime, more laws infringing on freedoms....the writing is on the wall. Everyone calls democrats dumb....I think it's everyone else that's dumb because they're playing a long game while our side continually calls them morons. It's the same tactic they use for redistricting. Find a republican stronghold district, split it off into democrat stronghold districts, and roll parts of solid democrat areas in and you lose the district altogether. The only difference is they're doing it statewide by making life miserable knowing that while they're getting rid of their opposition (GOP voters), they'll also lose enough democrats to turn other states purple. While we're focused on their next move, they've started at checkmate and are moving backwards from there to eventually reach it.
  11. Based on my understand of what's going on, TRO's are part of the response.
  12. Honestly, let them pass it. This goes to court and I know that multiple pro gun orgs are salivating to get their names on those potential cases. Upon getting overturned, Illinois will have effectively nuked Chicago, Cook County, Oak Park, Highland Park, etc. bans too, and if the decision comes from our circuit, any other states that may have similar restrictions also get overturned. All this just because the Mom's are angry that the democrats haven't really provided them a return on investment for their campaign dollars and likely threatened to turn off the campaign money spigot.
  13. How long would they be in effect for when upon signing legislation like this, injunctions will be filed, likely by more than one pro gun organization. These morons are literally walking themselves right into a trap of their own making.
  14. If you think the legislators don’t know this is a waste of time, you’re wrong. They’re only pushing this to show the anti gun orgs that they’re doing something in return for their bribes…umm….. I mean campaign donations.
  15. I've been shooting competitively going on my 6th year and have tried basically every type of lube. The only things grease belongs on are Garands, over/under shotguns, and the pin that holds the bolt into the carrier on a semi auto (Benneli) style shotgun. I actually had grease on the rails of a Ruger P90 45 and shot it outdoors when it was like in the 20's out and the slide cycled so slowly that you could actually watch it slowly slide into battery lol. Froglube is the same concept. My buddy swore up and down that Froglube was the best of the best, and I took him to shoot outdoors in the winter and it was malfunction after malfunction. We stripped the froglube off and went back and the gun ran fine. If you've detail stripped a gun, just use a good lube, really any good lube on all parts and surfaces that are metal. I have a collection of expensive lubricants and since I clean my guns religiously, I go through a lot of lube. From a cost and performance perspective, the best I've found is Radcolube which is a regular old CLP. The company is based here in Illinois and they're one of the military's suppliers. Every gun I own is run "wet". I used to be a minimalist when it came to lubing my guns, but after seeing how many malfunctions I was getting once a gun was run hard enough and got dirty enough, I started lubing more liberally and my well tuned guns run malfunction free. You'll read a lot from people talking about how you should lube your carry gun minimally to avoid lint, but you're gonna get lint in the gun regardless. Just use enough lube that you can see the gun is actually lubed, but not so much that your clothes are also getting lubed lol. Range guns and competition guns are extremely lubed. The only other lube I've used that performs extremely well is Lucas Oil Xtreme Duty gun oil. The viscosity of the oil is a bit thicker than CLP, or other oils, so it "sticks" a bit better to where you apply it. I actually like it better on an AR bolt than CLP for this reason. It seems like it doesn't burn off quite as much as thinner oils, and isn't thick enough to affect cycling.
  • Create New...