TexasCHLforum.com

First he claims he bought it without a background check because the purchase was at a gunshow. Possible if he bought from a private seller, but unlikely. How much benefit of the doubt you give him may be influenced by point two. That is, he claims that, when a problem arose at the office, he removed his Glock 17 from his desk and flipped off the safety. A Glock. Really.

https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/07/0 ... romoterPro

No DROS? It sounds like they confessed to violating California gun laws. When are the cops arresting them?

I doubt he ever even really bought a gun. The whole thing sounds made up to me. It wouldn't be the first time a liberal lied.

“She.”

This is the same city that made public injecting of heroin socially acceptable and homelessness the latest real estate development. I doubt any of the readers would know the difference.

Normally, I'd go on a narrative about leftist buffoons right about now, but I have to call it as I see it. Here's what the article says:

1: This was back in the 90s. No background checks required before 1993.
2: The author of the chronicle article clearly purchased the gun in Texas, not California.
3: The event where she pulled the gun out of the glove box happened along I-45 in Houston.


Again, this happened back in the 90s. At no point did she mention if she got rid of the gun and when. I wouldn't be surprised if she got rid of it soon after her manager found out at the Oakland Tribune (again, 90s) and never touched a gun again. In 20 plus years, for someone who isn't big on guns, I would not be surprised if she didn't remember that a Glock doesn't have a manual safety. I'm not saying the bearing arms article is wrong, but it is definitely misguiding the readers.

strogg wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:56 pm Normally, I'd go on a narrative about leftist buffoons right about now, but I have to call it as I see it. Here's what the article says:

1: This was back in the 90s. No background checks required before 1993.
2: The author of the chronicle article clearly purchased the gun in Texas, not California.
3: The event where she pulled the gun out of the glove box happened along I-45 in Houston.

There was no MPA in the 90s either so was she one of the first to get a CHL or did she break the law, thereby proving gun control doesn't stop criminals?

BBYC wrote: Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:06 am

strogg wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:56 pm Normally, I'd go on a narrative about leftist buffoons right about now, but I have to call it as I see it. Here's what the article says:

1: This was back in the 90s. No background checks required before 1993.
2: The author of the chronicle article clearly purchased the gun in Texas, not California.
3: The event where she pulled the gun out of the glove box happened along I-45 in Houston.

There was no MPA in the 90s either so was she one of the first to get a CHL or did she break the law, thereby proving gun control doesn't stop criminals?

Wasn't the travelling exception in effect back then? Maybe she was travelling somewhere.

KLB wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:12 pm First he claims he bought it without a background check because the purchase was at a gunshow. Possible if he bought from a private seller, but unlikely. How much benefit of the doubt you give him may be influenced by point two. That is, he claims that, when a problem arose at the office, he removed his Glock 17 from his desk and flipped off the safety. A Glock. Really.

https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/07/0 ... romoterPro

At least she didn't claim she had PTSD after shooting it!