rabid wombat
Member
gun-control side define "beneficial" as anything that limits or restricts access to firearms
And completely ignore the beneficial use of firearms....
gun-control side define "beneficial" as anything that limits or restricts access to firearms
And completely ignore the beneficial use of firearms....
As a result, all gun control laws, including background checks, are not just an infringement, they haven't done anything to stop violent crime.
If a 6" piece of bar stock is $334 and an 80% lower is $40 then why isn't the construction industry making everything out of 80% lowers?
If a 6" piece of bar stock is $334 and an 80% lower is $40 then why isn't the construction industry making everything out of 80% lowers?
Seriously, that price is a bit insane for a lump of unimproved aluminum that hasn't had any value added. Time to start saving up my soda cans I guess.
No, the $334 is the price for the cut piece. Look in the upper RH corner of the ad. The full 144” bar is $737, so you are correct it would certainly be the better deal. They really must not like cutting stock because that’s one heck of a cut charge.Well, it is 144 inches long... Figure you slice that up like a loaf of bread, you'd actually have enough billets for ~72 lowers.
They really must not like cutting stock because that’s one heck of a cut charge.
I think you mean that if the legislative proposals (on guns) succeed, it could cost the Democrats the election. If the proposals are put forward and fail, there would be little political cost to the Democrats. In fact they might pick up a few points from the suburban antigunners. That's exactly the thinking behind this Kabuki theater coming out of the White House. They're proposing this stuff in the sure knowledge that it's not going anywhere.If all this legislative talk ends up failing because of the split in the senate, it could cost Democrats seats next year in the house, and could cost them the election in 2024.