Fuzz

Rolled past the wreckage today on a stop there, not much left but the tail area, they impacted about 50 yards off the end of the runway. Definetely a somber scene to see. RIP gentlemen.

Yeah I was there too, forgot to ask them about their website.

I'm heading through there too in a couple days but thanks anyways

Well I love shooting it at the moment, the next morning though is a different story.

Thanks was looking to see if anyone had been there recently I.e. this month.

I love shooting my mosin-nagant, I was lucky to find a pre-WWII one in excellent condition a couple years ago.

https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/publication/afi34-246/afi34-246.pdf Page 10

Yeah I ordered a jacket from them in December and I can't imagine them going out of business. Just thought it was odd that their website has been down for several days, have looking to get a shoulder holster from them instead of this POS I was issued.

Anybody know if pops leather is still in business? I can't get their website to work over the past couple days, and am trying to scout out prices for an upcoming trip.

"The United States has evidence that the chemical weapon sarin has been used in Syria on a small scale, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday." https://www.cnn.com/2013/04/25/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html

Last year at KEND there were a bunch of studs that went to CR boards. Had one guy in my class go and another one scrape his way out of going. The one that went did get retained, and had went as a result of hooking his Nav check ride and only had 12 more rides to finish the program.

I can attest to the ineffectiveness of that system, had a debt from ROTC, after even telling my finance dept. and DFAS about it multiple times it took them over a year to send me my first letter, and then sent it to collections when they claimed they "couldn't find me".

holy shit dude, "I was just following orders" doesn't fly for a cop who knows better just like it doesn't fly for you and I as military officers.

You can't claim exigent circumstances (I.e. immediate danger) and then proceed to systematically search 20 city blocks and then it turns out the dude was hiding outside their "perimeter". If people wanted to let them in, then by all means but if I opened my door and said "he's not here", the police unless they believe otherwise should move on since a) they have no proof he's even there (or they would have a warrant) and b) they can't prove that I'm in immediate danger (then there's no need for one) Their sworn duty is to uphold the law and conduct their business within those standards. The burden of proof is on the officers to prove now that their 20 block door to door search fell into the immediate danger to each and every occupant in each and every house. They were shooting in the dark and hoping to hit something, which while it may be the best option they had doesn't mean they are above the laws. As for punishment, I respect what they were trying to achieve, maybe some law refreshers for them. Mainly I want someone to hold their feet to the fire and show them that laws apply to them still. ETA: there's no perfect solution in a free society, because the government is the one restricted, which may seem inconvenient but I would rather have more freedom and the danger associated with it, than more government control and the same danger. Notice what is constant in this equation? The danger,it will always exist, and therefore I will take the freedom.

I hope they get their asses sued off.

Will never change the fact that gingers don't have souls.

M2 I'm with you I hate the double standard, but any reason they can use to strip him of his rights can further be used against any other citizen. The 2nd Ammendment is fairly safe, but the fourth and seventh amendments could fairly quickly disappear and most people wouldn't say a thing because it was in the "interest of safety", and it doesn't effect them... YET. Yes fuck him and I hope he rots in hell, but lets not allow him to be used to strip us of any further rights or set any precedences.

I've heard of both, but that was all second hand, the only person I actually know that I had to pay back was an SIE.

Anti-material rifle = big ass guns (wiki source, so take it FWIW)

We all know where Gravedigger spent (and probably still spends) his summer:

UTFSF! Here's what the AFI says, this is posted also here & here...: AFROTCI 36-2011: 4.7.4. Drug Use Waivers 4.7.4.1. Waivers are permitted only in very exceptional cases for otherwise very highly qualified applicants whose pre-service drug use was limited in frequency and scope, experimental in nature, and unlikely to recur. A drug experimenter is defined as one who has illegally/improperly used a drug for reasons of curiosity, peer pressure or other similar reasons. Multiple instances of drug use may be considered recreational drug use and NOT experimental. Someone who says their drug use was social, to relieve stress, with the same group of friends over several periods, or to cope with their situation will be considered a recreational drug user no matter how many times used. The AF doesn't want someone that "needs" drugs to get through rough times, especially if your definition of rough is a high school academic program. If you think your program if rough and need drugs to get through it, you'd be hard pressed to make it through UPT and no one here wants to be in the same plane with you or flying as your wingman.

I don't blame the FBI, I'm sure they had probably way bigger fish to fry, we'll probably never know how many other similar attacks they stopped. Plus there are 300 million people in this country and this isn't minority report, this stuff is going to happen no matter how much we try to prevent it.

Considering Barrett stopped selling to California PDs or servicing their rifles after they banned them, I doubt the NJ LEOs will be able to get their hands on any if this law passes.

they should ban big macs before they focus on anything else, would doing something good for the state and that overweight penguin. what a retard.

you still have to prove in a court of law that said person is associated with groups and therefore should have their citizenship revoked. Also Im not sure how legally kosher it is to revoke someones citizenship and rights after they committed a crime and then you prive they belonged to a group. Its called due process and no matter how despicable his crime he was apprehended here in America not on a foreign battle field (if that were the case you have a shot at the enemy combatant angle). I hate this bastard as much as the next person, but the legal system is in place to protect you and I from hasty public opinion courts. This man will face justice but let's do it the right way and not make exceptions because if not, one day you might wrongly find yourself facing an "exception".