But wait! A LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL!
Let’s see how that goes. Spoiler: It might end in disappointment.
Seems Reid is up to his regular bullshit. Surprise, sur-fucking-prise.
Dear politicians: I know the media doesn’t reflect it, but the vast majority of America doesn’t want more gun control. We want you assholes to get military spending curtailed, legalize marijuana, and work on shit that actually matters.
And this kind of shit is why. We know that in the end, cops are minutes away when seconds count. Politicians and legislation can’t protect us from muggers. Our responsibility to stay alive and unharmed is ultimately upon us. I know, Mr. Reid, that you want to sell us on the idea that the state can protect us.
In order for that to happen, the state would have to be with us every minute. And I, as a citizen, am not okay with that.
“I bet you don’t have one of these.”
I’m going to go ahead and put that down as ‘Worst thing to say ever’.
Talk about bad ways to lose a bet.
Along with “What are you gonna do? Stab me?”
…so, what we have here is another woman coming to destroy Mick’s life. And he’ll help her do it, dumbass that he is.
I see Heidi or alex making a 3 or 4 way out of all of this.
Somebody is going to be jumping those bones, that’s for sure!
I figure it’s a lot more likely to “end in disappointment” if it middles in sex. Mick being, of course, TOTALLY the kind of guy who’d take a situation that’s already way too weird and complicated, and somehow manage to make it even moreso.
Me, of course, I’d just want her to be awesome at selling guns. But that probably wouldn’t make for a very good comic strip.
“SHUT UP AND TAKE OUR MONEY!” might be seen as inappropriate…..
Apropos of nothing …
“I bet you don’t have one of these!”
If the words of Calvin Coolidge, “you lose.”
That bet would’ve had much better odds in NY, CA, MA, or MY, but to roll those dice in MS is pretty stupid.
Mein Gott! She cleans her own guns!?!
Yeah, but it’s a Glock. One step forward, two steps back. 😉
Well, this is good. Mick needs a woman in his life.
LOL! If he hires a man there is always a chance he will lose one of both of his squeezes …
I bet she is hired, but she has WAY bigger expectations of doing more than running the store’s inventory.
That story doesn’t even make sense, the guy asked for a smoke and then walked away, it was the motel guest called him back; he started the confrontation. Also why are the cops spinning the story like that when presumably they haven’t finished their investigation yet? To just assume the guests story as fact when he’s the one who shot someone?
Read more carefully. The suspect asked the guest for a smoke, was told no, turned away, then pulled a gun while turned away and turned back toward the guest and said “I bet you don’t have one of these”. Based on the information in that article, the guest did not call the suspect back.
As for assuming the guest’s story as fact, I’d assume there was either an additional witness or a security camera that wasn’t mentioned in the article.
“The guy started to walk away, when the guest advised that he not.” I don’t see any way of interpreting that other than that the guest stopped the guy and that’s when he turned around.
‘The man began to walk away, when Officer Colendula Green said, “At that time the complainant advised he didn’t.”‘
There’s a big grammatical difference between the actual text and what you wrote. “He” is “the complainant” (the nearest antecedent) and “didn’t” (past tense) is referring to the past question “do you have any cigarettes”; in order to refer to the in-progress action of walking away, it would have to be “advised that he not” or “advised he not do so” or similar.
More importantly, the suspect turned back around with a gun and aimed it in the guest’s direction. Even if it happened the way you read it – even if the guest said “don’t you walk away on me, asshole!” – as soon as the suspect drew a gun and pointed it in the guest’s direction without the guest having previously made a threat of deadly force, the guest’s use of deadly force in response became justified. (Note: that’s how I understand the applicable statutes of Mississippi law, particularly § 97-3-15, but IANAL.)
Disapointment was hinted at from her responses… Worked the Gun counter for 6 years, yet is only 25? Guess Bass Pro don’t require their gun counter workers to be 21 first??
You don’t actually have to be 21 to work in a gun store, just like you don’t need to be 21 to sell alcohol.
True about not needing to be 21 to work in a Gun Store, but many companies make it a requirement that their employee’s are 21 so that:
One, they can legally wear a sidearm (Pistol) during the business day. Since federal law only allows a few exceptions to people under 21 caring or possessing a sidearm, and working at a gunstore isn’t one of those exceptions. Sadly even handling the firearms in the store or being the only one at the counter could legally be “possession” and since BAFTE isn’t known for leniency (or rational and consistent enforcement of the law and regulations they enforce) many places are fairly strict on who can and will work the counters in order to protect their FFL’s.
Two, it is easier to bond someone who is 21 (much like car insurance arbitrary ages are used for insurance and bonding pricing, only reason I can think to explain it is that someone who is 21 has had 3 years to start their “adult” criminal record, where an 17 year old with prior crimes can have them “magically” disappear from many background checks if they weren’t tried as an adult on their 18th B-day)
I’ve never seen anyone under 21 (many are quite salty actually) at my local Bass Pro or Cabela’s but I could garner a guess (and explanation) that she was hired to work the long arms side of the counter only until she was over 21 as a trainee. But just a swag to fill out the story line.
Actually, Federal law says nothing about age to carry, only age to buy from a licenced dealer. Age to own/carry is set by the individual states. The BATFE shouldn’t be entering into that area at all.
New Law Proposal: No person who advocates for stricter controls on the personal ownership of firearms may be protected by any form of restricted entry, with armed security, nor have personal security outside of a phone call to the 911 operator that regular citizens enjoy. They may not live in a gated community in which armed security patrol regularly, nor have any walls greater than three feet high.
Amusing, and I’d sympathize … except for the free speech infringement.
Hey Grant, the website for two lumps is down. Hope everything is ok.