Semi-automatic rifle ban passes Washington state Legislature

Finally - At least one state is taking reasonable action on assault rifles.

Now they need to do the same on handguns.

https://apnews.com/article/semiautomatic-rifle-ban-washington-adbbc5bc0d3b92da0122a91d42bcd4f6?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_08

edit --

Nine states including California, New York and Massachusetts, along with the District of Columbia, have already passed similar bans, and the laws have been upheld as constitutional by the courts, according to Washington’s Attorney General Bob Ferguson.

In Colorado, lawmakers debated on Wednesday about similar gun measures, but a sweeping ban on semi-automatic firearms faces stiffer odds.

Lawmakers in the Texas Capitol set aside a slate of proposed new gun restrictions without a vote after hours of emotional appeals from Uvalde families whose children were killed last year. The hearing didn’t end until the early morning hours Wednesday.

Democrats in Colorado decided against such actions.

https://coloradosun.com/2023/04/20/assault-weapons-bill-colorado-rejected/

I will again take this opportunity to bitch about state and municipal level gun laws. If someone wants to be a legal gun owner, it's difficult enough to follow the byzantine laws currently on the books. If you want to travel, you need to become a damn legal researcher to make sure you're on the right side of a random traffic stop. Now we're looking at local, county and city level laws being enacted. Let's come up with a common set of laws that make sense for everyone and apply it across the board. Stop making life more difficult for those that want to do the right thing.

TravelinMan wrote:Democrats in Colorado decided against such actions.

https://coloradosun.com/2023/04/20/assault-weapons-bill-colorado-rejected/

I will again take this opportunity to bitch about state and municipal level gun laws. If someone wants to be a legal gun owner, it's difficult enough to follow the byzantine laws currently on the books. If you want to travel, you need to become a damn legal researcher to make sure you're on the right side of a random traffic stop. Now we're looking at local, county and city level laws being enacted. Let's come up with a common set of laws that make sense for everyone and apply it across the board. Stop making life more difficult for those that want to do the right thing.

Simple solution, and the one that I follow.

Don't travel with guns.

I guess I can see a legitimate reason if you are going hunting, but other than that you don't need to travel with tools meant for critter control.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:Democrats in Colorado decided against such actions.

https://coloradosun.com/2023/04/20/assault-weapons-bill-colorado-rejected/

I will again take this opportunity to bitch about state and municipal level gun laws. If someone wants to be a legal gun owner, it's difficult enough to follow the byzantine laws currently on the books. If you want to travel, you need to become a damn legal researcher to make sure you're on the right side of a random traffic stop. Now we're looking at local, county and city level laws being enacted. Let's come up with a common set of laws that make sense for everyone and apply it across the board. Stop making life more difficult for those that want to do the right thing.

Simple solution, and the one that I follow.

Don't travel with guns.

I guess I can see a legitimate reason if you are going hunting, but other than that you don't need to travel with tools meant for critter control.

So you're recommending I just buy a matching armory for my vacation homes? What are you an NRA shill now?

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Simple solution, and the one that I follow.

Don't travel with guns.

I guess I can see a legitimate reason if you are going hunting, but other than that you don't need to travel with tools meant for critter control.

So you're recommending I just buy a matching armory for my vacation homes? What are you an NRA shill now?

You need a shot gun & a 22 rifle at each place. I sure you can afford that.

TravelinMan wrote:Democrats in Colorado decided against such actions.

https://coloradosun.com/2023/04/20/assault-weapons-bill-colorado-rejected/

I will again take this opportunity to bitch about state and municipal level gun laws. If someone wants to be a legal gun owner, it's difficult enough to follow the byzantine laws currently on the books. If you want to travel, you need to become a damn legal researcher to make sure you're on the right side of a random traffic stop. Now we're looking at local, county and city level laws being enacted. Let's come up with a common set of laws that make sense for everyone and apply it across the board. Stop making life more difficult for those that want to do the right thing.

Hmmm. Could have sworn there was a poster with a different user name who discussed different gun laws in different states/cities.

NigelUno wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:Democrats in Colorado decided against such actions.

https://coloradosun.com/2023/04/20/assault-weapons-bill-colorado-rejected/

I will again take this opportunity to bitch about state and municipal level gun laws. If someone wants to be a legal gun owner, it's difficult enough to follow the byzantine laws currently on the books. If you want to travel, you need to become a damn legal researcher to make sure you're on the right side of a random traffic stop. Now we're looking at local, county and city level laws being enacted. Let's come up with a common set of laws that make sense for everyone and apply it across the board. Stop making life more difficult for those that want to do the right thing.

Hmmm. Could have sworn there was a poster with a different user name who discussed different gun laws in different states/cities.

Who's that and how fast did they get run off? It'd be nice to have a friend here.

TravelinMan wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Hmmm. Could have sworn there was a poster with a different user name who discussed different gun laws in different states/cities.

Who's that and how fast did they get run off? It'd be nice to have a friend here.

Weird. Why would you think they got run off?

NigelUno wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Who's that and how fast did they get run off? It'd be nice to have a friend here.

Weird. Why would you think they got run off?

Because you guys run anyone off who disagrees with you. Duh!

TM wrote: If someone wants to be a legal gun owner, it's difficult enough to follow the byzantine laws currently on the books.

I am wondering about this.  What sort of laws are you talking about?

I mean, to me it seems to be common sense that guns should never be loaded until the point of use, that guns should always have trigger locks on when not being used, that guns and bullets should be in separate locked places when not in use, and the guns should not be in the passenger area of a vehicle.  For guns, such as shot guns, but for any other gun where this is possible, guns should be disassembled into separate parts until point of use.

These are all just basic gun safety stuff, and if followed a gun owner should not have any legal issues.

TravelinMan wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Weird. Why would you think they got run off?

Because you guys run anyone off who disagrees with you. Duh!

Weird. You assume that "guys" disagreed with this different user name poster (and that different user name poster was run off).

NigelUno wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Because you guys run anyone off who disagrees with you. Duh!

Weird. You assume that "guys" disagreed with this different user name poster (and that different user name poster was run off).

Well, if they weren't run off, then please tell me who that current active poster is so I can have a new best friend.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TM wrote: If someone wants to be a legal gun owner, it's difficult enough to follow the byzantine laws currently on the books.

I am wondering about this.  What sort of laws are you talking about?

I mean, to me it seems to be common sense that guns should never ne loaded until the point if use, that guns should always have trigger locks on when not being used, that guns and bullets should be in separate locked places when not in use, and the guns should not be in the passenger area of a vehicle.  For guns, such as shot guns, but for any other gun where this is possible, guns should be disassembled into separate parts until point of use.

These are all just basic gun safety stuff, and if followed a gun owner should have any legal issues.

I'm looking at it mostly from a CPL point of view. Which states have reciprocity? Which don't? For those that don't, what are the specific laws regarding transporting a firearm? Is that gun even legal in that state? What about magazine restrictions? Accessories?

That's just the top of the head basic questions to ask when travelling by vehicle across multiple states. There are probably even more you could come up with if you sat down and went through it all.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I am wondering about this.  What sort of laws are you talking about?

I mean, to me it seems to be common sense that guns should never ne loaded until the point if use, that guns should always have trigger locks on when not being used, that guns and bullets should be in separate locked places when not in use, and the guns should not be in the passenger area of a vehicle.  For guns, such as shot guns, but for any other gun where this is possible, guns should be disassembled into separate parts until point of use.

These are all just basic gun safety stuff, and if followed a gun owner should have any legal issues.

I'm looking at it mostly from a CPL point of view.  Which states have reciprocity?  Which don't?  For those that don't, what are the specific laws regarding transporting a firearm?  Is that gun even legal in that state?  What about magazine restrictions?  Accessories?

That's just the top of the head basic questions to ask when travelling by vehicle across multiple states. There are probably even more you could come up with if you sat down and went through it all.

I see.  (Ignoring that I don't believe anyone should carry a loaded gun)

There must be some WEB site that provides that information, it would seem like a natural bit of information the NRA would keep on a site and up to date.

edit -

https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/state-laws-and-published-ordinances-firearms-34th-edition

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I'm looking at it mostly from a CPL point of view. Which states have reciprocity? Which don't? For those that don't, what are the specific laws regarding transporting a firearm? Is that gun even legal in that state? What about magazine restrictions? Accessories?

That's just the top of the head basic questions to ask when travelling by vehicle across multiple states. There are probably even more you could come up with if you sat down and went through it all.

I see. (Ignoring that I don't believe anyone should carry a loaded gun)

There must be some WEB site that provides that information, it would seem like a natural bit of information the NRA would keep on a site and up to date.

Well, it is currently a legal activity, so.... I respect your opinion, but yeah, I have a differing view. I don't carry everywhere, or every day. But when I do, it's because I'm in a sketchy area and feel just a little bit better about having it. Everyone can save the statistics about how I'm less safe carrying, blah blah blah. I get it. We're different. Accept it.

I'm not a huge fan of the NRA, but yes, there are websites that can help you gather info. But how often are those updated? Are they reliable? And again, why do I have to embark on a multi-hour research project just to do something that the Constitution implies is legal? Let's just get one set of laws, apply them across the board, and enforce the shit out of them. Seems common sense to me.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I see.  (Ignoring that I don't believe anyone should carry a loaded gun)

There must be some WEB site that provides that information, it would seem like a natural bit of information the NRA would keep on a site and up to date.

Well, it is currently a legal activity, so.... I respect your opinion, but yeah, I have a differing view.  I don't carry everywhere, or every day.  But when I do, it's because I'm in a sketchy area and feel just a little bit better about having it.  Everyone can save the statistics about how I'm less safe carrying, blah blah blah.  I get it.  We're different.  Accept it.

I'm not a huge fan of the NRA, but yes, there are websites that can help you gather info.  But how often are those updated?  Are they reliable?  And again, why do I have to embark on a multi-hour research project just to do something that the Constitution implies is legal?   Let's just get one set of laws, apply them across the board, and enforce the shit out of them.  Seems common sense to me.

I added a second link for you which breaks things down within states.

The answer to your question as to why there can't be one set of laws is simple.  

We have a federalized system where unless the federal government has passed a law the state laws determine what is legal.  If we make the states part of the federal government, a vast change to the constitution, we could change that.  

I'm all for the federal government passing laws greatly restricting, or in most cases outlawing, guns, but is seems unlikely, as there is very little consensus, and a law that doesn't have a pretty high support level will not be followed all that much. The likelyhood and enforcement issues will not deter me from my "anti-gun" position, however, as I see it as the only rational solution the death by firearm issue we have.

edit -

Here is something you can buy and carry in your car.

https://www.gunlawguide.com/?v=2320522a6676

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Well, it is currently a legal activity, so.... I respect your opinion, but yeah, I have a differing view. I don't carry everywhere, or every day. But when I do, it's because I'm in a sketchy area and feel just a little bit better about having it. Everyone can save the statistics about how I'm less safe carrying, blah blah blah. I get it. We're different. Accept it.

I'm not a huge fan of the NRA, but yes, there are websites that can help you gather info. But how often are those updated? Are they reliable? And again, why do I have to embark on a multi-hour research project just to do something that the Constitution implies is legal? Let's just get one set of laws, apply them across the board, and enforce the shit out of them. Seems common sense to me.

I added a second link for you which breaks things down within states.

The answer to your question as to why there can't be one set of laws is simple.

We have a federalized system where unless the federal government has passed a law the state laws determine what is legal. If we make the states part of the federal government, a vast change to the constitution, we could change that.

I'm all for the federal government passing laws greatly restricting, or in most cases outlawing, guns, but is seems unlikely, as there is very little consensus, and a law that doesn't have a pretty high support level will not be followed all that much.

And as someone who leans Libertarian a lot of the time, I am completely torn.

Yes, states rights seems like a good idea, but then you get crap like our myriad of gun laws, or perhaps an even stronger argument, the current situation with abortion and reproductive rights. Or the legalization of recreational drugs. And I think, "Yeah... maybe the Feds need to set some direction here." But then I fear the direction the Feds might set, and wonder if that wouldn't be even worse?

Eh, it's all just stupid bullshit to navigate.

TravelinMan wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Weird. You assume that "guys" disagreed with this different user name poster (and that different user name poster was run off).

Well, if they weren't run off, then please tell me who that current active poster is so I can have a new best friend.

Weird. Why are you assuming this other user name poster agreed with you?

NigelUno wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Well, if they weren't run off, then please tell me who that current active poster is so I can have a new best friend.

Weird. Why are you assuming this other user name poster agreed with you?

You're trolling so hard I've lost the plot. I have no idea what you're on about.

Congratulations.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I added a second link for you which breaks things down within states.

The answer to your question as to why there can't be one set of laws is simple.

We have a federalized system where unless the federal government has passed a law the state laws determine what is legal. If we make the states part of the federal government, a vast change to the constitution, we could change that.

I'm all for the federal government passing laws greatly restricting, or in most cases outlawing, guns, but is seems unlikely, as there is very little consensus, and a law that doesn't have a pretty high support level will not be followed all that much.

And as someone who leans Libertarian a lot of the time, I am completely torn.

Yes, states rights seems like a good idea, but then you get crap like our myriad of gun laws, or perhaps an even stronger argument, the current situation with abortion and reproductive rights. Or the legalization of recreational drugs. And I think, "Yeah... maybe the Feds need to set some direction here." But then I fear the direction the Feds might set, and wonder if that wouldn't be even worse?

Eh, it's all just stupid bullshit to navigate.

At least you see the conflicting results. Some Libertarians are dogmatic.

The issue I see with all levels of government is political and outright corruption.

Political corruption being the government favoring one group over another, instead of treating all equally, which is sort of a fact of politics and mostly unavoidable.

Outright corruption, where politicians are bought by various forms of power & money also is muchly unavoidable, but at least in some sense it once could be outlawed, until the Supreme Court itself was corrupted.

History shows me that the federal government is more likely to be less corrupt than state or local governments simply because it can be more idealistic without pushback by the powerful, because the powerful have to have more power to push back with at that level.

State and local governments is some parts of the country to a great extent, and in all of the country to a lesser extent, as just cheaper for the powerful to corrupt.

However, since we have allowed the wealthy to become powerful enough to be able to too easily corrupt the federal government and the courts have declared "open season" on buying off politicians we are basically fucked.

This influence of money is why I support really high taxes on higher incomes & wealth, simply to reduce the amount of power a small group of people can use to influence governments. It is also why I rail against corporations, which are just entities that wealthy people hide behind and use to exert political influence.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

And as someone who leans Libertarian a lot of the time, I am completely torn.

Yes, states rights seems like a good idea, but then you get crap like our myriad of gun laws, or perhaps an even stronger argument, the current situation with abortion and reproductive rights. Or the legalization of recreational drugs. And I think, "Yeah... maybe the Feds need to set some direction here." But then I fear the direction the Feds might set, and wonder if that wouldn't be even worse?

Eh, it's all just stupid bullshit to navigate.

At least you see the conflicting results. Some Libertarians are dogmatic.

The issue I see with all levels of government is political and outright corruption.

Political corruption being the government favoring one group over another, instead of treating all equally, which is sort of a fact of politics and mostly unavoidable.

Outright corruption, where politicians are bought by various forms of power & money also is muchly unavoidable, but at least in some sense it once could be outlawed, until the Supreme Court itself was corrupted.

History shows me that the federal government is more likely to be less corrupt than state or local governments simply because it can be more idealistic without pushback by the powerful, because the powerful have to have more power to push back with at that level.

State and local governments is some parts of the country to a great extent, and in all of the country to a lesser extent, as just cheaper for the powerful to corrupt.

However, since we have allowed the wealthy to become powerful enough to be able to too easily corrupt the federal government and the courts have declared "open season" on buying off politicians we are basically fucked.

This influence of money is why I support really high taxes on higher incomes & wealth, simply to reduce the amount of power a small group of people can use to influence governments. It is also why I rail against corporations, which are just entities that wealthy people hide behind and use to exert political influence.

That’s a decent point.

But is the problem that we let people get rich, or is the problem that we elect corruptible dirtbags for politiicians?

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I am wondering about this.  What sort of laws are you talking about?

I mean, to me it seems to be common sense that guns should never ne loaded until the point if use, that guns should always have trigger locks on when not being used, that guns and bullets should be in separate locked places when not in use, and the guns should not be in the passenger area of a vehicle.  For guns, such as shot guns, but for any other gun where this is possible, guns should be disassembled into separate parts until point of use.

These are all just basic gun safety stuff, and if followed a gun owner should have any legal issues.

I'm looking at it mostly from a CPL point of view. Which states have reciprocity? Which don't? For those that don't, what are the specific laws regarding transporting a firearm? Is that gun even legal in that state? What about magazine restrictions? Accessories?

That's just the top of the head basic questions to ask when travelling by vehicle across multiple states. There are probably even more you could come up with if you sat down and went through it all.

Why do you need a gun wherever you go?

duffy munn wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I'm looking at it mostly from a CPL point of view. Which states have reciprocity? Which don't? For those that don't, what are the specific laws regarding transporting a firearm? Is that gun even legal in that state? What about magazine restrictions? Accessories?

That's just the top of the head basic questions to ask when travelling by vehicle across multiple states. There are probably even more you could come up with if you sat down and went through it all.

Why do you need a gun wherever you go?

As I previously stated a mere 7 posts above your reply, "I don't carry everywhere, or every day."

But thanks for your interest in entering into some kind of weird trolly banter with me.

TravelinMan wrote:

duffy munn wrote:

Why do you need a gun wherever you go?

As I previously stated a mere 7 posts above your reply, "I don't carry everywhere, or every day."

But thanks for your interest in entering into some kind of weird trolly banter with me.

I don’t know how old you are, but I’m 46 and not once in my 46 years, not once, never actually, never ever ever ever in my 46 years on this planet, have I been in a situation where a gun would have improved anything. Did I mention that it has never ever happened??

Motown Spartan wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

As I previously stated a mere 7 posts above your reply, "I don't carry everywhere, or every day."

But thanks for your interest in entering into some kind of weird trolly banter with me.

I don’t know how old you are, but I’m 46 and not once in my 46 years, not once, never actually, never ever ever ever in my 46 years on this planet, have I been in a situation where a gun would have improved anything. Did I mention that it has never ever happened??

Good for you. You have my deepest wishes that continues to remain the case throughout your time here in this planet.

TravelinMan wrote:

Motown Spartan wrote:

I don’t know how old you are, but I’m 46 and not once in my 46 years, not once, never actually, never ever ever ever in my 46 years on this planet, have I been in a situation where a gun would have improved anything. Did I mention that it has never ever happened??

Good for you. You have my deepest wishes that continues to remain the case throughout your time here in this planet.

Has it ever happened to you?

Motown Spartan wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Good for you. You have my deepest wishes that continues to remain the case throughout your time here in this planet.

Has it ever happened to you?

Has what ever happened to me?

Motown Spartan wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

As I previously stated a mere 7 posts above your reply, "I don't carry everywhere, or every day."

But thanks for your interest in entering into some kind of weird trolly banter with me.

I don’t know how old you are, but I’m 46 and not once in my 46 years, not once, never actually, never ever ever ever in my 46 years on this planet, have I been in a situation where a gun would have improved anything. Did I mention that it has never ever happened??

At 69 neither have I.  I'm guessing it is because I am a white small town kid that has never engaged in anything where I would remotely be a target for someone.  I am so sheltered I am unable to imagine what the situation would be where running away from it, or if at gum point cooperating wouldn't be the best option.

Maybe there are situations I can't imagine where a gun makes sense?

TravelinMan wrote:

Motown Spartan wrote:

Has it ever happened to you?

Has what ever happened to me?

Farted in your cupped hand and held it up to your nose…

EVER BEEN IN A SITUATION WHERE A GUN WOULD HAVE IMPROVED THE SITUATION???

Trapper Gus wrote:

Motown Spartan wrote:

I don’t know how old you are, but I’m 46 and not once in my 46 years, not once, never actually, never ever ever ever in my 46 years on this planet, have I been in a situation where a gun would have improved anything. Did I mention that it has never ever happened??

At 69 neither have I.  I'm guessing it is because I am a white small town kid that has never engaged in anything where I would remotely be a target for someone.  I am so sheltered I am unable to imagine what the situation would be where running away from it, or if at gum point cooperating wouldn't be the best option.

Maybe there are situations I can't imagine where a gun makes sense?

Nobody has ever deescalated a situation with a gun, that is for sure.

1) I've lived in saginaw, flint and detroit... never felt the need to have a gun. (Probably only times anywhere close was high school)
2) I agree with tm... driving through Chicago to deer hunt in Wisconsin would be concerning.

Motown Spartan wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Has what ever happened to me?

Farted in your cupped hand and held it up to your nose…

EVER BEEN IN A SITUATION WHERE A GUN WOULD HAVE IMPROVED THE SITUATION???

That's a largely hypothetical question that has no objective answer.

I have a friend who was a conshee during Nam and as part of his service worked for social services in Baltimore and lived in a broken house in the slums. I'll ask him next time I see him if he thought a gun would be a good idea.

Trapper Gus wrote:I have a friend who was a conshee during Nam and as part of his service worked for social services in Baltimore and lived in a broken house in the slums. I'll ask him next time I see him if he thought a gun would be a good idea.

I'm sure his answer will help sway everyone and solve this national crisis.

TravelinMan wrote:
That's a largely hypothetical question that has no objective answer.

Na, it has an answer, but it's different for every person. I would probably like to be armed in Ukraine now a days... probably wandering around the Kalahari... my "fear" threshold doesn't pertain to humans of different shades.

It's a huge deal for some (white republican) people to go to a tigers or lions game because they went to Detroit... where it's scary and dangerous.

So I remember probably back in the 90s at some fireworks show in Detroit an old white lady got jumped and beaten by a group of black teens and there was some video, of course the lady talked shit and found out... but that's neither here nor there... the video played round the clock on the local news for weeks... that alone instilled racism for a generation. There are other "local news" type things I can bring up, but that's all it takes.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:
That's a largely hypothetical question that has no objective answer.

Na, it has an answer, but it's different for every person. I would probably like to be armed in Ukraine now a days... probably wandering around the Kalahari... my "fear" threshold doesn't pertain to humans of different shades.

It's a huge deal for some (white republican) people to go to a tigers or lions game because they went to Detroit... where it's scary and dangerous.

So I remember probably back in the 90s at some fireworks show in Detroit an old white lady got jumped and beaten by a group of black teens and there was some video, of course the lady talked shit and found out... but that's neither here nor there... the video played round the clock on the local news for weeks... that alone instilled racism for a generation. There are other "local news" type things I can bring up, but that's all it takes.

I don't think I've ever bothered with a gun in downtown Detroit. Certainly not to go to a sporting event. That's just silly.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:I have a friend who was a conshee during Nam and as part of his service worked for social services in Baltimore and lived in a broken house in the slums.  I'll ask him next time I see him if he thought a gun would be a good idea.

I'm sure his answer will help sway everyone and solve this national crisis.

Just trying to find something to relate to your situation, dude.

So exactly when and why do you feel you need a cpa gun?

And yes, this is an honest question, as I said I cannot see a situation like that in my life.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I'm sure his answer will help sway everyone and solve this national crisis.

Just trying to find something to relate to your situation, dude.

So exactly when and why do you feel you need a cpa gun?

And yes, this is an honest question, as I said I cannot see a situation like that in my life.

Nearest police are 35 minutes away at best. Lots of bears, moose, and mountain lions.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Just trying to find something to relate to your situation, dude.

So exactly when and why do you feel you need a cpa gun?

And yes, this is an honest question, as I said I cannot see a situation like that in my life.

Nearest police are 35 minutes away at best. Lots of bears, moose, and mountain lions.

Where do you live?

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Just trying to find something to relate to your situation, dude.

So exactly when and why do you feel you need a cpa gun?

And yes, this is an honest question, as I said I cannot see a situation like that in my life.

Nearest police are 35 minutes away at best. Lots of bears, moose, and mountain lions.

A handgun isn't going to stop any of those.

I get the lack of protection, I live that every day, but a shot gun is the better protection.