99 responses to “Sandbox – 1mar15”

1. 

   Mary Ann

   03 March 2015

   It’s amazing that you people don’t actually believe in science…..
   I’m hearing Don who’s claiming that we only have 150 years of records, and Walt having Bigfoot in his backyard (which I’m more likely to believe than any logical discussion that I’ve heard from him going on here) and George is saying that we’d be turning a chimp loose in a 747 at 30,000 feet, but sorry George, as that chimp has already been loose for the past 50 years and you’re trying to equate this whole problem and the possible resolution to the Cambodia conflict?
   Is that what you guys are trying to tell me?
   A friend of mine spoke with me about your group, stating that there were some interesting intelligent people here, but maybe they had today off?
   I’m still trying to figure out where you gentlemen get your info from??? Oh please do tell as someone with a degree in a scientific area I’d sure like to see this……

   LikeLike

2. 

   fish

   03 March 2015

   Posted by: Mary Ann | 03 March 2015 at 04:44 PM
   Well now you’re just “mailing it in”.
   Todays final trolling grade: C-

   LikeLike

3. 

   Walt

   03 March 2015

   Now come on Mary, We DO believe in science. Just not the fully debunked science of AGW.
   AGW crap is in whole, “political” science. It’s all about money and control.
   Google “fake dead poplar bears”.. There is more ice at the poles than ever.(fact)
   You can’t say there is global cooling, and blame it on global warming.
   The “hockey stick” has turned into the “all day sucker” stick.
   But keep giving to the church of Al Gore.. He has been real good at “do as I say, not as I do”, with his gorse polluting private jets and super size mansions, that suck the power of a town the size of Penn Valley.

   LikeLike

4. 

   Todd Juvinall

   03 March 2015

   Mary Ann, err, I mean MichaelA, we are all based in true science. It is the hoaxers and their true believers that rely on computer models not us. We use logic and real world examples. You seem to be brainwashed into your positions as I have seen them espoused a thousand times and almost as verbatim. I would suggest you return to your favorite blog where the sheeple are all ready to believe the hoax. We think for ourselves.

   LikeLike

5. 

   Gregory

   03 March 2015

   I’d bet real money Mary Ann ain’t Michael P. Anderson… considering the moobs and the writing styles, Stephen Frisch or The FUE would be my guess.
   No, “Mary Ann”, 97% ain’t a real number for climate science consensus, that’s a Banana Republic or a North Korean vote margin. The closest thing to an actual number of actual scientists with expertise in the subject is the 52% of the professional membership of the American Meteorological Society (which is to climate science as the AMA is to chiropractics), which is the percentage of meteorologists that believe one half or more of the warming of the past century was caused by man, including things like deforestation. That probably is akin to less than 20% believing a CO2 driven catastrophe is possible but they weren’t asked that… probably because they didn’t want an answer they couldn’t explain away.
   I think all Frisco State requires for science from poli sci majors is one course akin to “Your Friend, the Amoeba”, but than that’s also about all that is required for a Berkeley BA in Rhetoric, so “Mary Ann” could be from either anti-intellectual position.
   Today’s Quiz: what do John Holdren (the current White House science advisor), the late Steven Schneider and Paul (Population Bomb) Erhlich all have in common besides being environmental demigods?

   LikeLike

6. 

   George Rebane

   03 March 2015

   MaryA 444pm – Regarding “believing in science”, I’m afraid you have me at a disadvantage. You know my credentials in science, and I don’t even know whether you have any understanding of what science is. Perhaps you could share some of your background so we can tell at what level you should be addressed. Talking past each other is so frustrating.

   LikeLike

7. 

   Gregory

   03 March 2015

   “I’m hearing Don who’s claiming that we only have 150 years of records”
   I’d not quite make that statement, but it isn’t far off. 165 years is probably more defensible.
   The gold standard for temps are the satellite data sets that cover the entire planet and are not fudged (call it “homogination”) like the terrestrial temperatures, and the satellite records only go back to 1979. The satellite data also does not support the record high temp year being 2014… that’s pretty clearly a political construct by panicking climate activists. Time is running out for political action.

   LikeLike

8. 

   fish

   03 March 2015

   Posted by: Gregory | 03 March 2015 at 06:27 PM
   Frisch doesn’t write that bad (even while trolling I’d guess). jeffy doesn’t write that good (more’s the pity!).
   Thought that made it MA by process of elimination. Global warming always was his “thing”.

   LikeLike

9. 

   Bill Tozer

   03 March 2015

   Speaking of writing style and the changing seasons,:
   https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=99cBlVKRpKg

   LikeLike

10. 

    fish

    03 March 2015

    Today’s Quiz: what do John Holdren (the current White House science advisor), the late Steven Schneider and Paul (Population Bomb) Erhlich all have in common besides being environmental demigods?
    The “Noble Lie”……”the mis-use of science for political goals……”?

    LikeLike

11. 

    Gregory

    03 March 2015

    fish, nice try. No points.
    All three were at Stanford’s Woods Hole, and all three were raising an alarm for global cooling before jumping on the global warming bandwagon. Don’t bet against the two survivors switching back eventually, assuming the survive long enough.

    LikeLike

12. 

    fish

    03 March 2015

    Posted by: Gregory | 03 March 2015 at 07:20 PM
    All three were at Stanford’s Woods Hole, and all three were raising an alarm for global cooling before jumping on the global warming bandwagon.
    Damn….that was my second choice.

    LikeLike

13. 

    Gregory

    03 March 2015

    “Regarding “believing in science”, I’m afraid you have me at a disadvantage.” -GR
    George, I think it’s more of a disadvantage than you may be aware. Neither of us “believe in science” as this sock puppet does. We are knowledgeable, we are facile, we are able to apply it, discuss it rationally.. I suspect we’ve also both read and understood Popper and grok falsification. To “Mary Ann”, be she the FUE, the Frischie, the Mikey or friend, it’s a “belief” and you either follow the teaching of the High Priests du jour or you are cast out as an apostate.

    LikeLike

14. 

    Bill Tozer

    03 March 2015

    Things don’t make sense in the big financial picture, eh? Let’s throw money at it. That will save Miami, right? Didn’t help the Miami Dophins or the LA Dodgers, but I digress. I wouldn’t mind if I had beach front property in Redding. The ocean air just might kill some of that pesky poison oak. And I could plant some coastal wildflowers instead of perennials from harsh climates that are very water wise. Coastal wildflowers are the prettiest things this side of paradise.
    If we knew there will be long term heating or cooling of our orb for the next few centuries, what can man do about it? Mr. Steele once gave me an answer to a question I posed. I asked him should I buy swimming trunks or long johns?? I followed his advice. More people in our Northeast and Midwest are also following his advice. We can switch to cold tolerate crops for starters, or, if you believe we are going to be treated like a deep fried Twinkie at the Iowa State Fair, we should start tilling the frozen tundra to get ready for Spring planting. There is a lot we can do to prepare, but not much we can do to save Seattle from The Worse Call Ever. Nor the Tampa Bay Buckaneers. Japan already is selling water from ice bergs at high end resturants. We can do much and we can do much ado about nothing.
    “Throw money at the problem” kinda has a futile track record. Seems I have heard that before. We do just that at our educational system and the results are embarrassing. And we can control our public educational system a lot easier than trying to stop our Sol from defrosting of the Saber Tooth Tiger.
    Maybe we can control the climate on Mars. Space is the final frontier. We are mankind and can stop earthquakes and shooting stars and made it rain in Minneapolis in the summer time. But, we still haven’t learned to hold back diarrhea very well.

    LikeLike

15. 

    Bill Tozer

    03 March 2015

    More current events. This is like show and tell:
    https://www.facebook.com/ConservativeNewsToday/photos/pb.169204449790211.-2207520000.1425445724./886465194730796/?type=3&theater
    https://www.facebook.com/ConservativeNewsToday/photos/pb.169204449790211.-2207520000.1425445724./887478881296094/?type=3&theater

    LikeLike

16. 

    George Rebane

    04 March 2015

    Re Netanyahu/Obama and the Mideast. George Friedman of Stratfor has written an excellent short history of the emergence, evolution, and current status of US/Israeli relations. It is important to understand both in the context of the current Iranian negotiations and the fight against ISIS.
    The piece should lay to rest the gross misunderstanding that some readers have evinced on when and how the antagonism between America and Mideast Islam began, grew, and has now evolved. For those interested in our continued Mideast involvement, this is an important read.
    https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/netanyahu-obama-and-geopolitics-speeches

    LikeLike

17. 

    joe smith

    04 March 2015

    GR 15;33.
    Agreed. Excellent synopsis.

    LikeLike

18. 

    Walt

    04 March 2015

    OH BABY… Hillary is in DEEP doo doo.
    But since she is “who” she is,, she is above the law.. Hiding emails is standard operating procedure for LIBS. Seems every branch of “O” and Co.’s administration has been doing it.
    IRS,EPA, etc.

    LikeLike

19. 

    Walt

    04 March 2015

    And a WHOLE lot more on it here.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/04/hillary-clintons-long-history-of-hiding-documents/
    This news has LIBS in their own personal dog fight. They are turning on each other!
    Get out the lawn chairs, beer and popcorn. Even MSNBC has taken a good chunk out of Mediamatters. (MM has been in Hillary’s corner, and flying cover)

    LikeLike

20. 

    Bill Tozer

    04 March 2015

    Walt, after the missing Rose Law Firm docs mysteriously ended up in the basement of the White House found in no other place except on top of the First Lady’s secretary’s desk….after Travel Gate, Pork Belly Futures Gate, and numerous Gates, omissions, and forgetfulness, Hillary finally listened to her lawyers. Her lawyers told her a dozen times Do Not put that stuff on paper, do not ever ever never leave a paper trail be it Goverment e-mails or government phone calls. Ever!
    So, after Hillary goes to the UAE and Saudia Arabia as Sec of State and shakes down the Shieks for 20 million clams American for the Bill and Hill Foundation, do you really think for one second she would use a government e-mail or phone again in this lifetime while doing her fuzzy math????? Nay, she ain’t no dummy no more. Besides, what difference do it make anyhow?

    LikeLike

21. 

    Bill Tozer

    04 March 2015

    For the learning impaired, how about visual aides:
    https://www.facebook.com/PatriotPost/photos/pb.51560645913.-2207520000.1425524452./10152835413855914/?type=3&theater

    LikeLike

22. 

    Bill Tozer

    04 March 2015

    More sand for the litter box.
    https://www.facebook.com/USAPatriots/photos/pb.133154313381817.-2207520000.1425528048./910876442276263/?type=3&theater
    Finally, a leader that loves America.
    https://www.facebook.com/USAPatriots/photos/pb.133154313381817.-2207520000.1425528171./911615952202312/?type=3&theater

    LikeLike

23. 

    Gregory

    04 March 2015

    Looks like “Mary Ann” has skedaddled. “Mary Ann”, if you hadn’t come out the gate swinging, you’d not have gotten the negativity right back atcha.
    Based on her geographic claims I’m wondering if she might be a friend of Tony Waters, a Chico State prof and friend of the FUE, or at least a long time poster. Tony’s a good guy even if he does tend towards the “progressive liberal arts” side of the aisle.

    LikeLike

24. 

    Bill Tozer

    05 March 2015

    Meanwhile another important issue has reared its ugly head. Their dastardly deeds are done in the dead of night as expected. No rest for the wicked.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/05/ecuador-graffiti-accion-ortografica-quito-grammar

    LikeLike

25. 

    Michael R. Kesti

    05 March 2015

    Bill Tozer 05Mar15 05:52 AM
    As Grammarian Laureate of Rebane’s Ruminations I am pleased and encouraged to learn about Acción Ortográfica Quito. Thank you so very much!

    LikeLike

26. 

    Ben Emery

    05 March 2015

    Mary Ann’s treatment from the residents of RR is right on par with anybody who has had the nerve of having a different opinion in the past.
    I want you guys around for many years to come so I throw a bone here every once in a while to get your blood pumping and those synapses firing otherwise its a homoerotic *circle jerk around here on a daily basis. Anti women, pro macho man, infatuation of black man in a position of power, and promotion of ultimate phallic symbol guns/ weaponry.
    Just kidding guys, you are great!
    * “Circle Jerk” is a pejorative slang term referring to a positive feedback loop which occurs when an idea, belief or meme that is already customary within an online community becomes re-iterated and rewarded in a perpetual cycle, giving rise to redundancy, clichés and karma whoring. This phenomenon is typically observed in communities consisting of self-contained forums devoted to specific interests, beliefs or subcultures.

    LikeLike

27. 

    George Rebane

    05 March 2015

    BenE 935am – Always in awe of your astounding analysis of the conservative psyche, but continue having trouble connecting the dots you so liberally scatter here.
    How pray was Ms MaryAnn treated poorly here, and by whom? The lady received a fair hearing from all, especially on matters where she was clearly in over her head. Also, what evidence do you harbor about RR’s readers being “anti women”?
    And am I correct in assuming that circle jerks are by their nature limited to the opining of ideas and perceptions from the Right?

    LikeLike

28. 

    Ben Emery

    05 March 2015

    George,
    Mary Ann’s intelligence was question by the smartest person in the room as usual, Mr Goodnight 03 March 2015 at 07:47 PM
    Calling her a troll or challenging her identity 03 March 2015 at 06:27 PM, 03 March 2015 at 04:56 PM, 03 March 2015 at 06:27 PM, 03 March 2015 at 03:26 PM
    Reducing her opinion to that of believing in Big Foot 03 March 2015 at 04:17 PM
    You would not be correct that circle jerks are limited to the Right. I engage in such behavior when ever I challenge partisans positions or ideology no matter which political party they belong, that includes the Green Party. Our sh!# don’t stink syndrome annoys me beyond no end. There is no perfect system, institution, or governance and there has never been in the history of organized societies. The best thing we can do is create something that benefits the highest % of the population at the smallest interference or obstruction to the remaining population. That is the goal.

    LikeLike

29. 

    Ben Emery

    05 March 2015

    On the anti women claim. I have locked horns here many times about equal pay for equal work, reproductive rights, good old boy political system 20% of our elected representatives are women despite representing 51% of the population and good old boy executive promotions in private sector is even worse, reducing women qualifications and credentials to the physical looks, ect….

    LikeLike

30. 

    George Rebane

    05 March 2015

    BenE 1019am – Does it not puzzle you that your characterization of women holds in a society in which most of the wealth is held by women who also constitute half of the nation’s voting block?

    LikeLike

31. 

    Todd Juvinall

    05 March 2015

    Mary Ann was treated equally here as we treat Ben Emery etal. If she can’t take it, then adios. Looks like she took that path. Ben Emery is a great example of a clueless liberal and I think it is terrific that he posts here. It gives people with a brain a chance to read the absurdity spewed by the left. Of course Ben Emery appears to hate himself and his color of skin since he always brings that stuff up. The left are the true nuts and the right the one’s with common sense. Ben Emery represents the kind of person always working for someone else, always envious, always whiny.
    Regarding women. I can see from Ben Emery’s comments here about women and who must be wearing the pants in his family! LOL!

    LikeLike

32. 

    Walt

    05 March 2015

    Nice try Ben,, “she” started taking shots at me right out of the box with “her” bacon quip, and bitched about the Daily Caller piece. Yup, LIBS HATE the DC.,, just as much as they do FOX. Hell LIBS loath and disparage any news outlet the tells the truth about Lefty highjinks. Standard SOP.
    And as usual, “Mary” ran for the valley when the heat was on.

    LikeLike

33. 

    Walt

    05 March 2015

    Here is a blast from the past for the global warmests.
    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2015/03/05/and-thats-way-it-was-1972-cronkite-warned-new-ice-age
    Yup,, there is where it ALL started. Hummm,, Maybe Walter will be vindicated after all this time.

    LikeLike

34. 

    Gregory

    05 March 2015

    Regarding JoKe’s post before the Mary Ann interlude…
    “This new study combined with the recent revelations of misinformation perpetrated by “for hire” scientists pretty much ends the debate, if there ever was a real debate to begin with.”
    2 March 2015 at 10:23 AM
    The new study is a direct measurement of CO2 warming only; it’s certainly neat they pulled it off (good science there) but there has never been a controversy over CO2’s absorption of a narrow band of the infrared. Skeptics think that results in about a 1C to a 1.5C increase in atmospheric temps for a doubling of CO2, so do Alarmists, but the IPCC multiplies that by a factor of 2 to 5 by a theorized positive feedback loop involving the rest of the planet, mostly more evaporation of water without creating more clouds (a hell of a trick). Anthropogenic CO2 is now up to 400ppm from about 300ppm (that’s an increase of 0.01%).
    What that study did, Joe, was to directly measure what everyone agrees with already; it settles nothing. It’s the theorized response to the CO2 perturbation (look it up) by the climate that is controversial and this measurement does absolutely nothing to shed light on that.

    LikeLike

35. 

    Walt

    05 March 2015

    !!BREAKING NEWS!!
    IMM did’t give money to the proper LIBS!!
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/05/gold-mine-hillary-clintons-brother-granted-super-rare-mining-permit-from-haiti-after-state-dept-sent-country-billions/
    Our mining jobs just went to Haiti. Progressives once again export jobs to parts elsewhere.
    I can’t wait to see the pay scale. 20 bucks a week?

    LikeLike

36. 

    Gregory

    05 March 2015

    Ben, the biggest circle jerks the world has ever seen were the IPCC Assessment Reports 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Especially 3, 4 and 5.
    Another word for that is groupthink, in this case, politically motivated (what part of “Intergovernmental Panel” do you not understand?) groupthink.
    BTW all of the general circulation models (the computerized climate that modelers pretend to be valid when it suits them) require at least a 2 degree CO2 climate sensitivity (meaning we get a 2C increase for a doubling of CO2) in order for anything scary to happen. A number of physicists peg that at 1 to 1.5C, the IPCC desperately wants it to be at least 2C but while AR4 raised the range from 1.5 to 4.5 to 2.0 to 4.5, the weight of real world evidence they couldn’t deny any longer caused it to be lowered back down to 1.5 last year.

    LikeLike

37. 

    fish

    05 March 2015

    Mary Ann’s treatment from the residents of RR is right on par with anybody who has had the nerve of having a different opinion in the past.
    “Mary Ann” received the same level of abuse that pretty much everybody who posts here is subject to at some point. If it isn’t to your liking there is another website that you are familiar with deals with similar issues where the decorum is more warm and nurturing to the progressive SJW soul.
    I want you guys around for many years to come so I throw a bone here every once in a while to get your blood pumping and those synapses firing otherwise its a homoerotic *circle jerk around here on a daily basis. Anti women, pro macho man, infatuation of black man in a position of power, and promotion of ultimate phallic symbol guns/ weaponry.
    Homoerotic…..circle jerk….? Well now I know you want that other blog I mentioned. Ask for jeffy….tell him your interested in the “San Francisco Values” special.
    Mary Ann’s intelligence was question by the smartest person in the room as usual, Mr Goodnight 03 March 2015 at 07:47 PM
    As it should have been!
    Calling her a troll or challenging her identity 03 March 2015 at 06:27 PM, 03 March 2015 at 04:56 PM, 03 March 2015 at 06:27 PM, 03 March 2015 at 03:26 PM
    I seem to recall a certain would be congressman who was incensed that I posted as “fish” as some how that was cowardly. But it’s just peachy that a poster who writes very similarly to a certain local “Climate Warrior” probably dropped in under a pseudonym to mix it up and you leap in to defend “her”. Interesting….
    On the anti women claim. I have locked horns here many times about equal pay for equal work, reproductive rights, good old boy political system 20% of our elected representatives are women despite representing 51% of the population and good old boy executive promotions in private sector is even worse, reducing women qualifications and credentials to the physical looks, ect….
    Yes, yes….we know you are a “goodthinker”! Every single post……..!
    It would seem that the status quo clearly can’t stand, as you have repeatedly assured us that 90% of the electorate “agrees with my positions on the issues”. Why haven’t you and the progressive vanguard implemented these desperately needed reforms. Why are you denying society the beauty of your political vision? When can we expect the implementation of this bold new societal paradigm?

    LikeLike

38. 

    Walt

    05 March 2015

    LOL!! Uh,, what happened to being treated like any man? You know,,, all that “equal treatment” we keep hearing about? OK Mary,, open your own door. Ya’ know what they say,, “if chivalry is dead, women killed it.”

    LikeLike

39. 

    Gregory

    05 March 2015

    Ben, I assure you that if you were to undergo sexual reassignment surgery no one at RR would treat you any differently.
    “Mary Ann” wrote, “Oh please do tell as someone with a degree in a scientific area I’d sure like to see this…” 03 March 2015 at 04:44 PM
    (Ben, please note “Mary Ann”‘s snark)
    If this poster is still reading, please do check back in with a little humility for a change. Please favor us with the actual “scientific area” degrees you have. Some biology/green types think their lifesciencey degrees qualify, but I tend to agree with the likes of UC Berkeley who have a math track for science and engineering, the sciences being chemistry and physics. Same defs as the Chem and Physics department. Once my son finished his sophomore year in Chemistry he was actually was hired to fill the shoes of a grad student to be the lab assistant/recitation section leader for freshman life science chemistry and his department thought it sad that many of them avoided the real class required for the physics, chemistry, math and engineering types.
    As Barbie might have been programmed to say, “Chemistry is hard!”
    If you’ve actually earned a real Bachelor of Science and can read the literature for yourself, here’s one list of peer reviewed science that supports climate skepticism:
    http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
    I personally would recommend all papers written by Shaviv, Veizer, Svensmark, Kirkby and Lindzen. If you run out of material or have a question, just ask.

    LikeLike

40. 

    George Rebane

    05 March 2015

    Speaking of MIT’s Prof Lindzen, he wrote a very revealing piece in today’s (5mar15) WSJ about ‘The Political Assault on Climate Skeptics’ about which we here on RR are well-versed as the targets of the Left’s science-free slings and arrows.
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/richard-s-lindzen-the-political-assault-on-climate-skeptics-1425513033

    LikeLike

41. 

    Gregory

    05 March 2015

    Those for whom googling the title to get a google page reference to get past the WSJ subscription challenge is daunting, here’s a copy you can just click and read:
    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2015/03/dr-richard-lindzen-in-wsj-political.html
    BTW, “Mary Ann”, that’s a good one for you to read, a fine tutorial on how a consensus can be manufactured out of whole cloth: attack unmercifully anyone who dares object. Witch hunts. It worked for a time for Sen. McCarthy and for the witch hunters in Salem, but eventually the lack of facts get in the way.

    LikeLike

42. 

    Brad C.

    05 March 2015

    Tangled webs,
    http://m.thenation.com/article/186689-mitch-mcconnells-freighted-ties-shadowy-shipping-company

    LikeLike

43. 

    Bill Tozer

    05 March 2015

    Them women folk sure are in a cat fight lately. One dame slamming a chick is almost unladylike. Never mind the facts, you can place all the blame at the feet of the Vast Vast Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Fox News this, Fox News that, blah, blah, blah. Boy, when the hens start squawking, I start walking.
    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2015/03/05/just-got-this-document-from-fncs-catherine-herridge-about-secretary-clinton-and-personal-emails/

    LikeLike

44. 

    Bill Tozer

    05 March 2015

    I suppose it’s all in the pronunciation.
    .https://www.facebook.com/PatriotPost/photos/pb.51560645913.-2207520000.1425613436./10152849309435914/?type=3&theater

    LikeLike

45. 

    fish

    05 March 2015

    Posted by: Bill Tozer | 05 March 2015 at 07:30 PM
    Well now I’m pissed….she is clearly throwing the nomination! Ol Thick Ankles was my gal….and she’s deliberately choking!

    LikeLike

46. 

    Bill Tozer

    05 March 2015

    Oh Fish, now comes the parsing of the line between ethical and unethical, between moral and immoral, even between legal and illegal. It all depends of what the definition of is is. Yep, even pant suits can’t hide those ankles. Let the parsing games begin.

    LikeLike

47. 

    fish

    06 March 2015

    Ben Emery says:
    March 6, 2015 at 8:58 am
    This is the epitome of ‘Good Old Boys Club’ hanging on by their fingernails, the local paper supporting the same group of people who want things to remain the same. The same meaning some fictitious revision of what the good old days looked like.
    Now for the State of Jefferson, I can totally relate to their circumstance by being independent of the Democratic and Republican Party’s. The big difference is where my positions on issues are in the high majority in CA where as SoJ is a small minority of people in CA.
    Well thank god we finally know where you stand on the issues!

    LikeLike

48. 

    Don Bessee

    06 March 2015

    Just saw a report that the ATF printed its handbook on ammunition banning the green tip AF15 bullet before the shortened comment period opened on the proposed rule change.

    LikeLike

49. 

    fish

    06 March 2015

    Just saw a report that the ATF printed its handbook on ammunition banning the green tip AF15 bullet before the shortened comment period opened on the proposed rule change.<?i>
    Yeah! No sense letting the proletariat make comments and muck things up Don.

    LikeLike