another dishonest response. I was mocking your claim with my second line. You dishonestly neglected to include that
Because of course, if it were "right wing" gang violence, cities would be set ablaze by BLM, the ACLU would demand justice, and the MSM would report every single shooting.
I saw something great on face book. If gun owners were as violent as gun banners claim we are, there would be no living gun banners at all
Yeah, saw a similar meme somewhere ... 350 million registered guns vs 330 million population ... not difficult to grasp.
I believe there are many more. that counts the ones that were made or logged in as imported. It doesn't count the thousands upon thousands of weapons that came across our borders "without inspection" or the weapons brought back by GIs in WWI, WWII, Korea and Nam. or the ones people are now making with 3D printers and "80% finished receivers that do not require serialization if you are the maker and user. those things are being churned out by the thousands each week and anyone with a drill press and 6 months of high school shop training, can turn into completely satisfactory AR 15 lowers
Let me repeat this; re-read your post and what I posted and then, without all your emotional words, re-post a modified response.
How fortunate for yourself. However not everyone is so fortunate. Nationally the average response time for a law enforcement response is growing increasingly longer. In the city of Flint, in the state of Michigan, for example, the response time for emergency calls is approaching one hour. Which only provides certain information to law enforcement. However it does nothing to provide other necessary information, such as the nature of the problem, what the level of threat is, or what degree of response is needed. Your supposed friend is selling you a false notion. http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jun/28/nation/na-police28 The Supreme Court ruled Monday that police departments can't be sued for failing to enforce restraining orders, a decision hailed by local governments but decried by organizations trying to protect victims of domestic violence. In the 7-2 decision, justices spurned the contention of a Colorado woman, whose three children were murdered by her ex-husband, that she had a constitutional right to police enforcement of a restraining order that had been issued by a state court judge. The decision stemmed from a case that Justice Antonin Scalia, who ruled against the woman, characterized as "undeniably tragic." In May 1999, when Jessica Gonzales got her divorce, she obtained a restraining order that barred ex-husband Simon Gonzales from molesting or disturbing her or their children. He also was ordered to stay at least 100 yards away from the family home, except when she agreed that he could pick the children up for "parenting time" that was permitted under the divorce. In capital letters, the order stated emphatically that police "shall" use all reasonable means to protect her and her children and that Simon Gonzales could "be arrested without notice" if a law enforcement officer had probable cause to believe that he had violated the order. Early one evening, a few weeks after the order had become final, Jessica found that her children were missing. She called the Castle Rock, Colo., police at 7:30 p.m. Two officers came to her home. She showed them the restraining order and requested that they enforce it immediately. The officers said they could do nothing and suggested that she call back if the children were not home by 10 p.m., according to the decision. At 8:30 p.m., Jessica reached Simon on his cellphone. He told her that he had the children at an amusement park in Denver. She called police and asked them to have someone "check for" him or his vehicle at the park. The officer she spoke to refused and told her to call back at 10 p.m. Jessica called the police at 10:10 p.m. and told them that her children were still missing. This time, she was told to wait until midnight. She called the police at midnight and reported that the children were still missing. Then, she went to her husband's apartment, found no one and called police. She was told to wait until an officer arrived. When none came, she went to the police station at 12:50 a.m. and filed an incident report. About 3:20 a.m., Simon Gonzales showed up at the police station, where he opened fire on officers and was shot and killed. Officers discovered the bodies of the children, ages 7, 9 and 10, in the back of his pickup. Jessica Gonzales sued in federal court, asserting that the Police Department's "official policy or custom of failing to respond properly to complaints of restraining order violations" had violated her rights under the Constitution's due process clause. A federal judge in Denver dismissed the suit. But the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated it, holding that Gonzales had a "protected property interest in the enforcement of the terms of her restraining order." The appeals court said the town had deprived her of due process because the police never "seriously entertained her request to enforce and protect her interests in the restraining order." The appeals court said to rule against Gonzales "would render domestic abuse restraining orders utterly valueless." That statement was branded "sheer hyperbole" by Scalia in his majority opinion Monday. "We do not believe that these provisions of Colorado law truly made enforcement of restraining orders mandatory." Scalia said police had to be given discretion on when to act for a number of reasons, including "insufficient resources and sheer physical impossibility." Scalia also rejected Gonzales' claim that she had a "property right" in having her restraining order enforced. "The creation of a personal entitlement to something as vague and novel as enforcement of restraining orders cannot 'simply go without saying,' " Scalia wrote.
Like I said perhaps other area's of the country do things different then in my area. There are a lot of things police aren't required to do but yet they do them nonetheless. But I'll pass this along to my "supposed" friend and see what his response is.
The Blackhawk is a nice gun; but my favorite .41 is a DA; actually a custom gun; a M57 "Effector" .41 with a 3-inch barrel. Built on the same frame as the 27 and 28 .357s you mention. Really the best all around "packing" revolver I have. You are absolutely correct regarding the strength of the Rugers.
"custom gun; a M57 "Effector". Hmmm, custom? Who made that for you? I know the M57. Maybe one of those with a solid, unfluted, cylinder? That would be a good idea.
It was actually part of a limited number of guns tuned by Jovino and called the "Effector". They were available in .45 Colt, .45 ACP, .44 Magnum, and .41 Magnum. Pretty rare, apparently; but I was lucky enough to get one a friend of mine had passed down to him by a relative, and traded to me because I had a gun he wanted and he knew I was a fan of the .41 Magnum.