Dodge Raider No Start

From : azwiley1

Q: on feb 15 902 am geekboy n...@nerdy.com wrote on feb 15 604 am stormin mormon cayoung61- &spambloc...@hotmail.com wrote this is why we need concealed carry! if it had not been for this off-duty officers concealed weapon many more people would have been killed and seriously wounded! off-duty officer called hero after utah rampage an off-duty officer celebrating an early valentines day with his wife repeatedly fired at a gunman who killed five people and wounded four at a shopping mall and saved the lives of numerous others the police chief said tuesday.http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17124042/from/et/ -- christopher a. young you cant shout down a troll. you have to starve them. . glad i live in a right-to-carry state. and i do. actually you live ina right to carry country; see us const amend two. thank you. perhaps i should have been clearer. it is my experience that there are some states in which the required permits allowing the legal concealed carrying of firearms are extremely difficult if not impossible for average citizens to obtain. these states are not called right to carry states. i see that someone has already provided a link to the organization through which you can determine which states these are. when i obtained my ccw in california in the 80s it was at the discretion of the county sherrif though the permits were honored state-wide. but there had to be compelling reason for issue. in oregon it is up to the sheriff to disallow those unqualified due to specific reasons from the right to carry concealed. these are usually the same people who dont have the right to gun ownership in the first place due usually to felony convictions or mental capacity issues. otherwise there are no arbitrary grounds for which the sheriff can prohibit the issuing of ccws. thus the right to carry term. like...tell someone in nyc they have the right to carry. ;- wolfie .

Replies:

From : beekeep

nathan in montana wrote thats not true at all miles. one segment broke away from the lds church but the lds church stood as they always had prior to. they didnt form a new church they were the original and still are. the fundamentalists that split formed the new church to suit their polygamist needs. they very much did form an entirely new church. the fundamentalists could be said to not have formed anything new. they kept up with the very same religious views as always. it is what you call the real lds who changed not the fundamentalists. a new religion was formed that is no longer based on the core revelations of smith. .

From : chris thompson

nathan in montana wrote the lds church is not the same as the flds church. the current day lds church is not the same as the lds of over 100 years ago. that church is gone its leaders split and two or more religions were formed to become what we have today. .