All progun bills only towards Concealed?

Because concessions has worked so well in the past, and in the states that lost OC...

Bull Hockey, the problem is lobbyists, and those fooled by them, or hire them to create a elite they can milk for money.

papa bear said:

sorry another thought

by making CC not a permission any more, only makes it harder to OC. if you don't have to have a card anymore then you will be expected to CC.

like i have said before, i grew up with hiding your gun is a bad thing. it plays to the ignorance of the people that CC is better. they think if they don't see the gun everything is unicorns and rainbows. :banghead:

i carry to protect myself and i carry open so no one will be tempted

Click to expand...

Expected to cc by who?

All it really does is take away the illegality of carrying concealed in the state, and leaves the permit in place for people who want to get one for whatever reason. I see is as the beginning of the end of the need for a CHP, although any law or program is always subject to abuse. When you look at the big picture, it's being done the way it was designed: Get the ability to cc in the state, build up a history to stand on in terms of erasing the false fear created around all gun owners, and then begin to slowly eliminate the need for the permit while slipping in laws which erase prior restrictions where possible for all gun owners.

I understand the pure frustration of how slow the process is, but you have to remember, the climate in Raleigh for any kind of change has only been viable for a few years now. Prior to that, it was virtually impossible to get anything passed. When the full-on assault failed and left a bunch of supporting Republican politicians looking elsewhere for work due to being skinned by the voters and the political leaders, a slower method was adopted until such time when the climate had changed in Raleigh.

Now, for the first time in 100 years, it's changed and the hopes are that progress can be made for all gun owners. Now it's time to chip away at some of this stuff. I'm all for crashing the gates in Raleigh and demanding they pass what we want them too, but the sad fact is that you won't get very far like that.

If anyone has a better plan that can be proven effective, I'm all ears. I'll follow, simply lead on and I'm behind you or beside you.

rotorhead said:

Expected to cc by who?

All it really does is take away the illegality of carrying concealed in the state, and leaves the permit in place for people who want to get one for whatever reason. I see is as the beginning of the end of the need for a CHP, although any law or program is always subject to abuse. When you look at the big picture, it's being done the way it was designed: Get the ability to cc in the state, build up a history to stand on in terms of erasing the false fear created around all gun owners, and then begin to slowly eliminate the need for the permit while slipping in laws which erase prior restrictions where possible for all gun owners.

I understand the pure frustration of how slow the process is, but you have to remember, the climate in Raleigh for any kind of change has only been viable for a few years now. Prior to that, it was virtually impossible to get anything passed. When the full-on assault failed and left a bunch of supporting Republican politicians looking elsewhere for work due to being skinned by the voters and the political leaders, a slower method was adopted until such time when the climate had changed in Raleigh.

Now, for the first time in 100 years, it's changed and the hopes are that progress can be made for all gun owners. Now it's time to chip away at some of this stuff. I'm all for crashing the gates in Raleigh and demanding they pass what we want them too, but the sad fact is that you won't get very far like that.

If anyone has a better plan that can be proven effective, I'm all ears. I'll follow, simply lead on and I'm behind you or beside you.

Click to expand...

Like getting dinner at a restaurant, buying gas at a gas station that sells alcohol, or at the grocery store. Or entering a state park(this is a good one for showing the lobbyists for the tyrants they are).

It is not much of a right if GRNC gets it's way and puts more restrictions on where a NON permit holder can carry. Nothing like fancy foot work by political hacks.

NO THANKS! I would much prefer that constitutional open carry remain as it is without GRNC pushing for laws that only permit permission card holders to carry.

COMMENT REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: Bashing other gun rights group.

WalkingWolf said:

Like getting dinner at a restaurant, buying gas at a gas station that sells alcohol, or at the grocery store. Or entering a state park(this is a good one for showing the lobbyists for the tyrants they are).

It is not much of a right if GRNC gets it's way and puts more restrictions on where a NON permit holder can carry. Nothing like fancy foot work by political hacks.

NO THANKS! I would much prefer that constitutional open carry remain as it is without GRNC pushing for laws that only permit permission card holders to carry.

Until GRNC changes it's agenda to eliminate OC I will fight every single bill they put up.

Click to expand...

Noooo problem.

But your false assessment of GRNC seeking to "eliminate OC" is obviously built upon a flat out lie. Your lie, that is.

I understand your sentiment and agree with many of your views concerning OC. I don't have a permit either for many of the same reasons you do, although you stated you once did have one in the past.

I never have had one.

But what you won't get away with is spreading flat out lies unchecked. You spreading around the lie that GRNC is anti OC is one of the more ridiculous things I've seen out there on forums.

That said, let's talk about another distortion of the truth. This one may be a simple mistake on your part and not a flat out lie. We'll see here in a minute.:

It is not much of a right if GRNC gets it's way and puts more restrictions on where a NON permit holder can carry

Click to expand...

Exactly what additional restrictions are they (GRNC) putting on where a NON permit holder can carry? Be specific and give a reference, please.

Because I've seen where both CC and OC were already restricted and then they helped change laws which affected where OC and CC can carry in just the past few years. What I haven't seen is where GRNC has been responsible for adding additional restrictions to places were we can OC. I'd like to see your references for those claims.

The examples you provided here...:

Like getting dinner at a restaurant, buying gas at a gas station that sells alcohol, or at the grocery store.

Click to expand...

...are not restricted in any way by state law. They are restricted only by virtue of the business owner's discretion. I OC'd today at a gas station that sells alcohol, in fact. I went to the grocery store last night, too (Food Lion on Reaford Rd), and have spent many a times in restaurants eating while OCing. According to state law, you may not carry no matter the method in places that both sell and serve alcohol, so as of right now, that's a non-issue. To say that they will all suddenly decide that we can no longer carry there openly would be their decision, not the law or GRNC's.

If that turns out to be the case, I'll continue to do what I do already: refuse to give those businesses any of my money.

But again, exactly what additional restrictions has GRNC added that have resulted in more places where we cannot OC.

Thanks!

WalkingWolf said:

It is not much of a right if GRNC gets it's way and puts more restrictions on where a NON permit holder can carry.

Click to expand...

Wabbit hit me up on facebook and wants to know if you can cite this statement? A statement that is an obvious violation of forum rule #12. How about one example of where an additional restriction has been added to non permit holders since 1994 when GRNC was formed that concealed carriers can go? Opening an additional place for permit holders to carry that no one was allowed to carry in the first place is not adding restrictions to non permit holders. You can't call something an additional restriction if it was never allowed in the first place.

To be fair and honest, I'd have to say that there have been places where restrictions were lifted for CC only, which is something I don't like very much. But then again, I don't have a permit so I gain or lose nothing in the process in those instances. I truly wish that every restriction lifted would be for both OC and CC, but I'm also a realist and understand the mindset in Raleigh. It's not going to happen overnight.

Onward we fight, though.

Wabbit did not, he has both my email address and my phone number. Please don't pull that poopoo. He can speak for himself. As far as the legislation proposed by GRNC it only addresses CC, IF it addresses OC at all it is with a permit. This is the way it is in several states, and as a lobby organization it gets it's money from contributions. PV's own words are he GRNC represents concealed carry. I can't cite my opinion as to where he will take us if he gets his way. I have no intention of letting him get his way.

As far as the rules you know exactly where that little report triangle is, don't you?

rotorhead said:

To be fair and honest, I'd have to say that there have been places where restrictions were lifted for CC only, which is something I don't like very much. But then again, I don't have a permit so I gain or lose nothing in the process in those instances. I truly wish that every restriction lifted would be for both OC and CC, but I'm also a realist and understand the mindset in Raleigh. It's not going to happen overnight.

Onward we fight, though.

Click to expand...

Actually it is not the mindset in Raleigh, if that was the case they would have outlawed carry completely. The mindset is of the man who admits to writing the laws, he writes them that way for a reason. It has nothing to do with the antis, they want none of it. Not OC, not CC, not either with a permit. Anybody that actually is pro rights would fight for rights without permits, and those are the only ones that would vote for his bills, he sets the tone, he has admitted it.

I am not in the position to write legislation, I make suggestions, and voice opinions to the representatives as a individual. Those wishing compromise will get compromise, just like CA, Texas, Florida, New Mexico. Or like the compromise the NRA has given us that led to GFSZA, background checks, or any of the other rights infringing laws they have backed.

Some of us made suggestions to CA, and were not well received, now the same groups are asking us for money because they screwed it up. I lived in Florida when they had OC without a permit, the CC crowd, yes that's right the CC crowd bellowed that they could carry with no training or whatever. They got their way and OC was eliminated almost completely. CC crowd were the ones that pointed it out to the media, that Ohhh My God, ordinary folks could just strap on a gun.

Compromise got us the mixed bag of rights infringing laws we have over the years, and you guys still want to compromise. The fact is without the people willing not to compromise we would not have the NC supreme court rulings that insure that we have constitutional open carry. Not sucking up to the politicians and lobbyists in Raleigh.

WalkingWolf said:

Actually it is not the mindset in Raleigh, if that was the case they would have outlawed carry completely. The mindset is of the man who admits to writing the laws, he writes them that way for a reason. It has nothing to do with the antis, they want none of it. Not OC, not CC, not either with a permit. Anybody that actually is pro rights would fight for rights without permits, and those are the only ones that would vote for his bills, he sets the tone, he has admitted it.

I am not in the position to write legislation, I make suggestions, and voice opinions to the representatives as a individual. Those wishing compromise will get compromise, just like CA, Texas, Florida, New Mexico. Or like the compromise the NRA has given us that led to GFSZA, background checks, or any of the other rights infringing laws they have backed.

Some of us made suggestions to CA, and were not well received, now the same groups are asking us for money because they screwed it up. I lived in Florida when they had OC without a permit, the CC crowd, yes that's right the CC crowd bellowed that they could carry with no training or whatever. They got their way and OC was eliminated almost completely. CC crowd were the ones that pointed it out to the media, that Ohhh My God, ordinary folks could just strap on a gun.

Compromise got us the mixed bag of rights infringing laws we have over the years, and you guys still want to compromise. The fact is without the people willing not to compromise we would not have the NC supreme court rulings that insure that we have constitutional open carry. Not sucking up to the politicians and lobbyists in Raleigh.

Click to expand...

I agree with some of that, and compromise leaves a bad taste, for sure. But sadly, had some of these groups not worked out a compromise, the end result would have been much, much worse in the end. Sometimes it sucks, sometimes it puts a finger in the hole of a possible sweep. Sometimes it's what we are left with. I'd love it if we never had to compromise with any form of carry. I don't like my rights trampled any more than you do.

I can't cite my opinion as to where he will take us if he gets his way.

Click to expand...

I didn't ask you for a cite of your opinion was as to where you think he will take us if he gets his way.

I asked you specifically for a cite as to your claim here:

it is not much of a right if GRNC gets it's way and puts more restrictions on where a NON permit holder can carry

Click to expand...

I would like you to cite one single additional restriction that GRNC has placed on where we can OC in North Carolina, as per your claim.

Thanks!

I would also like clarification (please) for this claim you just made, specifically the part in bold:

As far as the legislation proposed by GRNC it only addresses CC, IF it addresses OC at all it is with a permit.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm not reading it correctly or confused what you wrote, so I'll hold any comment. I just want to make sure I know what you're saying, that's all.

Thanks!

rotorhead said:

I would also like clarification (please) for this claim you just made, specifically the part in bold:


Maybe I'm not reading it correctly or confused what you wrote, so I'll hold any comment. I just want to make sure I know what you're saying, that's all.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

The restaurant carry bill is for carry WITH a permit! State park carry is for CC only with a permit! PV himself stated that GRNC represented concealed carry permit holders. The constitutional concealed carry bill does not address carrying without a permit in those restricted areas that GRNC supports restriction UNLESS the person holds a permit, such as state parks and restaurants that serve alcohol.

The fact is Open Carry was not legislated, it was fought for in the courts, by people who would not compromise. In Colorado the recent concealed carry loss was due to the fact that it was over a permit, when the challenge should have been the right to open carry. Same thing happened in Maine with the 4th circuit, the only way to win is by fighting for rights, not compromising for privileges. It is odd that a felon who would not submit brought us a big win in the 4th, not GRNC compromise.

Literally the 4th stated without RAS a person cannot be searched, and that translates into constitutional concealed carry as long as one does not break the law. But now after that ruling is in place GRNC suddenly comes up with a concealed carry constitutional bill that says basically the same thing the 4th circuit court said. If there is no RAS there is no legal search, no crime no search, constitutional concealed carry.

WalkingWolf said:

The restaurant carry bill is for carry WITH a permit! State park carry is for CC only with a permit! PV himself stated that GRNC represented concealed carry permit holders. The constitutional concealed carry bill does not address carrying without a permit in those restricted areas that GRNC supports restriction UNLESS the person holds a permit, such as state parks and restaurants that serve alcohol.

The fact is Open Carry was not legislated, it was fought for in the courts, by people who would not compromise. In Colorado the recent concealed carry loss was due to the fact that it was over a permit, when the challenge should have been the right to open carry. Same thing happened in Maine with the 4th circuit, the only way to win is by fighting for rights, not compromising for privileges. It is odd that a felon who would not submit brought us a big win in the 4th, not GRNC compromise.

Literally the 4th stated without RAS a person cannot be searched, and that translates into constitutional concealed carry as long as one does not break the law. But now after that ruling is in place GRNC suddenly comes up with a concealed carry constitutional bill that says basically the same thing the 4th circuit court said. If there is no RAS there is no legal search, no crime no search, constitutional concealed carry.

Click to expand...

Ahh ok, thanks for the clarification. I was a little confused by the statement in question.

Hey, I'm not one to say that permits are a good thing. I've never had one for various reasons. You have in the past, so you can probably give more insight from that angle. It's one point of contention that I still hold with GRNC, actually. But I also understand things a little differently than you do in terms of their intentions. GRNC fights for all legal carriers, despite your claims to the contrary. Paul V did say he tries to represent permit holders, but he's also on record with saying he is fighting for all carriers. You just choose to cherry pick the parts you don't like, have misunderstood, or purposefully twist to fit your own agenda. It's the only sad part of many of your arguments, really. A bit more honesty in that regard would be appreciated.

Literally the 4th stated without RAS a person cannot be searched, and that translates into constitutional concealed carry as long as one does not break the law. But now after that ruling is in place GRNC suddenly comes up with a concealed carry constitutional bill that says basically the same thing the 4th circuit court said. If there is no RAS there is no legal search, no crime no search, constitutional concealed carry.

Click to expand...

The above quote is an interesting take. I actually agree with some of it. But sadly, and honestly, the laws against concealed carry of a handgun were on the books in North Carolina long before Paul V ever came on the scene, or was even old enough to know what concealed carry was, for that matter. You, me, Paul V, GRNC,....none of us had anything to do with CC becoming illegal. Trying to say that GRNC came around with a constitutional carry bill which basically said the same thing that the 4th Amendment did, thereby making CC legal by virtue of the fact that there is no reason to search is disingenuous, at best.

The simple fact that the 4th Amendment is there to prevent illegal searches is not a legal justification for carrying a concealed handgun- not by a long shot. That's the equivalent of saying "It's only illegal if yer caught!". Simply being protected from illegal searches is not a defense for carrying a concealed handgun. The fact is, the laws are on the books. They have been on the books long before GRNC was around, too.

From what I've read, GRNC tried to attack those laws in teh form of a full frontal attack early on in it's existence. It didn't work so well and the politicians who supported it got creamed by teh Democrats in charge of the NCGA at the time. Since then, he switched tactics and tried to chip away at the stone ever since. Sometimes it's maddeningly unsuccessful, and sometimes little victories are won. It's the nature of the beast. Each little bit chips away at that stone just a little bit.

If you would like to try a full frontal assault again and tear down these oppressive laws in one fell swoop, I'm all for it. Let's do it. Simply find a politician there that will sponsor the bill and I'll go all the way with you. Start calling their offices on Monday morning and let me know which one takes on the fight. I'll call and email him/ her, too, and we'll get this ball rolling. I'll be waiting for your updates here, or feel free to send them through PM. I'm with ya.

But, dont forget about this, please:

it is not much of a right if GRNC gets it's way and puts more restrictions on where a NON permit holder can carry

Click to expand...

I would like you to cite one single additional restriction that GRNC has placed on where we can OC in North Carolina, as per your claim. I'd really like to settle this one once and for all.

Thanks!

rotorhead said:

I would like you to cite one single additional restriction that GRNC has placed on where we can OC in North Carolina, as per your claim. I'd really like to settle this one once and for all.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

I already did, GRNC was responsible for the bill that kept OC out of state parks. And GRNC was responsible for the bill that is attempting to ONLY allow carry in a restaurant with a permit. As far as I am concerned that is settled. I don't really care who cares, my support is not based on your or Paul's commands or whatever it is you think you are entitled to. You ain't entitled to JACK, so you can either accept that or not, if you do we will get along a lot better. If you can't then you can bugger off! GRNC does not represent me, or IMO open carry, and I find the bills damaging to RIGHTS, though they sound good for privileges. The problem here as it has been from the beginning I do not give my support, nothing more, nothing less. I have the right to petition my representatives to not pass a bill I find offensive, you have the right to do the same or opposite. Get the blank over it. The biggest problem with GRNC is this BULLY attitude, and I just don't like bullies, they can kiss my arse.

You can keep this up until the cows come home, I will not be put upon by you or anybody else. Especially for compromising a privilege at the expense of good citizens rights.

Hey ROTOR, WALKINGWOLF and i have had our disagreements too. but i do see his point that any success that the GRNC can claim is for CC. there does seem to be more biased geared to CC

if you will notice in the alert, PV talked about still having the card for "purposes" where we would need a card

not needing the card will make it harder to OC. we really need to be on guard, so that we won't lose the right

WalkingWolf said:

I already did, GRNC was responsible for the bill that kept OC out of state parks. And GRNC was responsible for the bill that is attempting to ONLY allow carry in a restaurant with a permit. As far as I am concerned that is settled. I don't really care who cares, my support is not based on your or Paul's commands or whatever it is you think you are entitled to. You ain't entitled to JACK, so you can either accept that or not, if you do we will get along a lot better. If you can't then you can bugger off! GRNC does not represent me, or IMO open carry, and I find the bills damaging to RIGHTS, though they sound good for privileges. The problem here as it has been from the beginning I do not give my support, nothing more, nothing less. I have the right to petition my representatives to not pass a bill I find offensive, you have the right to do the same or opposite. Get the blank over it. The biggest problem with GRNC is this BULLY attitude, and I just don't like bullies, they can kiss my arse.

You can keep this up until the cows come home, I will not be put upon by you or anybody else. Especially for compromising a privilege at the expense of good citizens rights.

Click to expand...

Wow, pretty violent response.

No one has commanded you to do anything. I haven't even commanded you to provide a cite for your lie, I asked nicely.

If all you can do is be a dick, I reckon I'll end it now with saying that your supposed cite fails miserably, just like every other lie you present as fact. Your opinions are one thing but when you state them as facts and use them to deceive others, you become nothing more that a fart in the wind.

But for the record, there was no bill anywhere to keep OC out of parks. It was a bill to allow people with a CHP to carry concealed in parks. The restrictions for OC (and CC for that matter) was already there. You are dishonestly trying to link an organization to a false account. This is but one example of your dishonesty, although there are plenty of others. And when questioned about it and asked to provide a specific example to back up your stupid little claim, you twist words and attempt to shove them into the mouths of all of us here.

Take it or leave it, here's my advice: Stop lying, stop acting like a spoiled child, and put your big boy pants on. The gun rights movement needs people who can speak the truth as well as say things with a loud voice. So far, you've only proven yourself reliable with the loud mouth part.

rotorhead said:

Wow, pretty violent response.

No one has commanded you to do anything. I haven't even commanded you to provide a cite for your lie, I asked nicely.

If all you can do is be a dick, I reckon I'll end it now with saying that your supposed cite fails miserably, just like every other lie you present as fact. Your opinions are one thing but when you state them as facts and use them to deceive others, you become nothing more that a fart in the wind.

But for the record, there was no bill anywhere to keep OC out of parks. It was a bill to allow people with a CHP to carry concealed in parks. The restrictions for OC (and CC for that matter) was already there. You are dishonestly trying to link an organization to a false account. This is but one example of your dishonesty, although there are plenty of others. And when questioned about it and asked to provide a specific example to back up your stupid little claim, you twist words and attempt to shove them into the mouths of all of us here.

Take it or leave it, here's my advice: Stop lying, stop acting like a spoiled child, and put your big boy pants on. The gun rights movement needs people who can speak the truth as well as say things with a loud voice. So far, you've only proven yourself reliable with the loud mouth part.

Click to expand...

Where do you see violence, I am blunt, and bluntly honest, if you don't like it, don't read it. I am not here to kiss your arse, like you seem to think. You can try all the magical double talk you like, the end result was that OC was kept out of state parks. OK that is fine, but it is not what I support, and I do not have to support a organization that does not represent me, and lies claiming it does. On top of that members who become abusive because I only withhold my support. Take you lying advice and shove it, it is the biggest problem with you and the others who believe they can insult their way into people's heart for support. That is so blanking stupid, but does not surprise me, bullies usually are not that intelligent.

If you think exercising a right to petition a representative is being a spoiled child you are very very ignorant. In fact throwing your tantrums because I do not support your BS organization is about the most childish stupid asinine thing I have ever heard.

papa bear said:

Hey ROTOR, WALKINGWOLF and i have had our disagreements too. but i do see his point that any success that the GRNC can claim is for CC. there does seem to be more biased geared to CC

if you will notice in the alert, PV talked about still having the card for "purposes" where we would need a card

not needing the card will make it harder to OC. we really need to be on guard, so that we won't lose the right

Click to expand...

Oh, I understand completely, trust me. My disagreements with Wolf are not so much ideological, but mostly due to his dishonesty when it comes to his assertions of quotes and things like that. If he could get over that much, we'd probably be very close in terms of objectives.

And while it's victories are certainly more on the side of CC currently, there have been others that have not been honestly included in the debate by him as well. But that's Wolf's M.O.: Tell the half truth and lie about the rest. There's only so much you can do with that kind of debate.

But you are correct. We gotta stay vigilant out there. I don't want things turning out like Texas or Florida any more than anyone else does. I'm just as passionate about that fear.

WalkingWolf said:

Where do you see violence, I am blunt, and bluntly honest, if you don't like it, don't read it. I am not here to kiss your arse, like you seem to think. You can try all the magical double talk you like, the end result was that OC was kept out of state parks. OK that is fine, but it is not what I support, and I do not have to support a organization that does not represent me, and lies claiming it does. On top of that members who become abusive because I only withhold my support. Take you lying advice and shove it, it is the biggest problem with you and the others who believe they can insult their way into people's heart for support. That is so blanking stupid, but does not surprise me, bullies usually are not that intelligent.

If you think exercising a right to petition a representative is being a spoiled child you are very very ignorant. In fact throwing your tantrums because I do not support your BS organization is about the most childish stupid asinine thing I have ever heard.

Click to expand...

Blah blah blah.

Honestly, you just got a dose of what you give other people. You're lucky I didn't pull out the same crap that you have in the past, things like questioning someone's fitness to carry based on how you perceived them to be unstable. Look who's looking pretty unstable now...

And again, no one is asking you to support them. You keep bringing that up like someone is actually asking you to. It's not the case. By all means, please don't- who cares. All I care about is that you stop lying about them, that's all.

One more time: I'm not asking you to support them, I'm just asking that you stop lying about them. I mean, it really is that simple.

rotorhead said:

Oh, I understand completely, trust me. My disagreements with Wolf are not so much ideological, but mostly due to his dishonesty when it comes to his assertions of quotes and things like that. If he could get over that much, we'd probably be very close in terms of objectives.

And while it's victories are certainly more on the side of CC currently, there have been others that have not been honestly included in the debate by him as well. But that's Wolf's M.O.: Tell the half truth and lie about the rest. There's only so much you can do with that kind of debate.

But you are correct. We gotta stay vigilant out there. I don't want things turning out like Texas or Florida any more than anyone else does. I'm just as passionate about that fear.

Click to expand...

You are a bully, and I won't submit, that is sum total of your problem. It has nothing to do with OC or CC, because if you were that passionate about supporting OC through GRNC you would not try to be so offensive. I have done nothing but express my lack of support, and for that you and a few other bullies have attacked me. I am sorry it does not work, I never did like bullies, I always like to watch them blow a gasket when like a spoiled child they could not get their way. I have not done anything dishonest, PV's and your own words are what the problems are, not mine.

You gotta do what you gotta do, if that is what you feel is important to support, then support. But please stop with the whining and moaning about MY BUSINESS. I have never told you or anyone else what to do or believe, but you keep at it with the attacks. I am sorry if it makes you look overbearing, and angry. Actually I am not sorry, I think it is pretty funny.

rotorhead said:

Blah blah blah.

Honestly, you just got a dose of what you give other people. You're lucky I didn't pull out the same crap that you have in the past, things like questioning someone's fitnes to carry based on how you perceived them to be unstable. Look who's looking pretty unstable now...

And again, no one is asking you to support them. You keep bringing that up like someone is actually asking you to. It's not the case. By all means, please don't- who cares. All I care about is that you stop lying about them, that's all.

One more time: I'm not asking you to support them, I'm just asking that you stop lying about them. I mean, it really is that simple.

Click to expand...

Right now? I would say you have flipped out. You just keep at it, over and over again, even when everybody knows I am not going to bow to you. Yet you continue with the tantrums. The best thing you could do would be chill out, but instead you keep trying to attack me, seems you have contracted a dose of something.