New public shooting range opening in ...

New public shooting range opening in West Virginia

There are 12 comments on the Charleston Daily Mail story from Sep 13, 2013, titled New public shooting range opening in West Virginia. In it, Charleston Daily Mail reports that:

MANNINGTON, W.Va. -- Gun enthusiasts have a new public shooting range in West Virginia where they can practice their marksmanship.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Charleston Daily Mail.

Weird Harold

Fairmont, WV

#1 Nov 12, 2013
This is a very nice facility, hopefully the red necks will treat it with respect.
PrinceofDarkness

Dallas, TX

#2 Nov 12, 2013
Weird Harold wrote:
This is a very nice facility, hopefully the red necks will treat it with respect.
beats their old facility...

http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/imagecac...

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#3 Nov 12, 2013
PrinceofDarkness wrote:
<quoted text>
beats their old facility...
http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/imagecac...
"Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That every male white inhabitant liable to and appear as aforesaid, shall when summoned and appearing as aforesaid, in his division or district, if required, carry with him one good and sufficient gun or pair of pistols, and at least nine cartridges to fit the same, or twelve loads of powder and ball, or buck shot, under the penalty of one dollar for every day he shall neglect so to do.

"Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That no civil officer or any person whatsoever, shall on any pretence, execute any warrant or process, unless for felony, treason or breach of the peace, on any person or persons, during the time any such person or persons, shall working upon the said roads, or in going to, and returning from working and as aforesaid on the same, or Within twenty four hours after such person or persons be discharged from working upon such roads, under the penalty of ten dollars; and the service of such warrant or summons on any person, is hereby declared to be null and void all intents and purposes; and during the time aforesaid, not any implement, for any cause, matter or things whatever, except it be for any payment or assessment mentioned in, or for any fine or forfeiture incurred by this act; but arms and accoutrements shall not be liable to be seized or taken under any pretence whatsoever; and in case any person shall seize, distrain or levy upon any such implements of labor, arms and accoutrements except as aforesaid, every such person shall forfeit and pay the sum of ten dollars."

[A COMPILATION OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA, PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE SINCE THE POLITICAL YEAR 1800, TO THE YEAR 1810, INCLUSIVE. CONTAINING All the laws, whether in force or not, passed within those periods, arranged in a chronological order, with comprehensive references to those laws or parts of laws, that arc amended, suspended, or repealed. TOGETHER With an appendix, comprising such concurred and approved resolutions, as are of a general operative nature, and as relate to the duty of officers, the relief of individuals, and the settlement of boundary between counties, and this State with North Carolina. Concluding with a copious Index to the whole. BY AUGUSTIN SMITH CLAYTON, ESQ'R. PRINTED BY ADAMS & DUYCKINCK. 1812. Pg. 352]
PrinceofDarkness

Surrey, Canada

#4 Nov 12, 2013
2ndAmRight wrote:
<quoted text>
"Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That every male white inhabitant liable to and appear as aforesaid, shall when summoned and appearing as aforesaid, in his division or district, if required, carry with him one good and sufficient gun or pair of pistols, and at least nine cartridges to fit the same, or twelve loads of powder and ball, or buck shot, under the penalty of one dollar for every day he shall neglect so to do.
"Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That no civil officer or any person whatsoever, shall on any pretence, execute any warrant or process, unless for felony, treason or breach of the peace, on any person or persons, during the time any such person or persons, shall working upon the said roads, or in going to, and returning from working and as aforesaid on the same, or Within twenty four hours after such person or persons be discharged from working upon such roads, under the penalty of ten dollars; and the service of such warrant or summons on any person, is hereby declared to be null and void all intents and purposes; and during the time aforesaid, not any implement, for any cause, matter or things whatever, except it be for any payment or assessment mentioned in, or for any fine or forfeiture incurred by this act; but arms and accoutrements shall not be liable to be seized or taken under any pretence whatsoever; and in case any person shall seize, distrain or levy upon any such implements of labor, arms and accoutrements except as aforesaid, every such person shall forfeit and pay the sum of ten dollars."
[A COMPILATION OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA, PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE SINCE THE POLITICAL YEAR 1800, TO THE YEAR 1810, INCLUSIVE. CONTAINING All the laws, whether in force or not, passed within those periods, arranged in a chronological order, with comprehensive references to those laws or parts of laws, that arc amended, suspended, or repealed. TOGETHER With an appendix, comprising such concurred and approved resolutions, as are of a general operative nature, and as relate to the duty of officers, the relief of individuals, and the settlement of boundary between counties, and this State with North Carolina. Concluding with a copious Index to the whole. BY AUGUSTIN SMITH CLAYTON, ESQ'R. PRINTED BY ADAMS & DUYCKINCK. 1812. Pg. 352]
John Kerry and the Right to be Stupid
By Andrew Zarowny
Our new Secretary of State, John Kerry, thinks that the right to be stupid is part of the Bill of Rights.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#5 Nov 12, 2013
PrinceofDarkness wrote:
<quoted text>
John Kerry and the Right to be Stupid
By Andrew Zarowny
Our new Secretary of State, John Kerry, thinks that the right to be stupid is part of the Bill of Rights.
"The longer we remained in Washington, the more we saw and heard of the recklessness and profligacy which characterize the manners both of its resident and fluctuating population. In addition to the fact of all the parties to the late duel going at large, and being unaccountable to any tribunal of law for their conduct in that transaction--of itself a sufficient proof of the laxity of morals and the weakness of magisterial power--it was matter of notoriety, that a resident of the city who kept a boarding-house, and who entertained a strong feeling of resentment towards Mr. Wise, one of the members for Virginia, went constantly armed with loaded pistols and a long bowie-knife, watching his opportunity to assassinate him. He had been foiled in the attempt on two or three occasions by finding this gentleman armed also, and generally accompanied by friends; but though the magistrates of the city were warned of this intended assassination, they were either afraid to apprehend the individual, or from some other motive declined or neglected to do so; and he accordingly walked abroad armed as usual.

"Mr. Wise himself, as well as many others of the members from the South and West, go habitually armed into the House of Representatives and Senate; concealed pistols and dirks being the usual instruments worn by them beneath their clothes. On his recent examination before a committee of the House, he was asked by the chairman of the committee whether he had arms on his person or not; and answering that he always carried them, he was to give them up while the committee was sitting, which he did; but on their rising he was presented with his arms, and he continued constantly to wear them as before." [Pg. 237]

Hmmmm, the word HYPOCRISY comes to mind....

"A bill to prevent the carrying of concealed weapons was passed by the Legislature of Virginia during our stay here, by a majority of 85 to 17; and the same object was pressed upon the attention of the Maryland Legislature, as concealed weapons arc worn by some of the people of this as well as of the neighbouring state. The bill for the suppression of duelling in the District of Columbia received also, while we were here, the final assent of both houses of Congress and the president, so that it has become a law; and this, coupled with the gradual disuse of secret arms, will no doubt have the effect of lessening the number of sanguinary conflicts." [Pg. 310]

[AMERICA, HISTORICAL, STATISTIC, AND DESCRIPTIVE. BY J.S. BUCKINGHAM, ESQ. IN TWO VOLUMES. VOL. I. NEW-YORK: PUBLISHED BY HARPER & BROTHERS, 82 CLIFF-STREET. 1841.]

Yeah right, THAT worked out real well, now didn't it?(How long was D.C. the murder capital of the U.S.?)
Common sense

Fairmont, WV

#9 Jul 6, 2014
2ndAmRight wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah right, THAT worked out real well, now didn't it?(How long was D.C. the murder capital of the U.S.?)
"Guns do not make a nation safer, say US doctors who have compared the rate of firearms-related deaths in countries where many people own guns with the death rate in countries where gun ownership is rare.

Their findings, published Wednesday in the prestigious American Journal of Medicine, debunk the historic belief among many people in the United States that guns make a country safer, they say. On the contrary, the US, with the most guns per head in the world, has the highest rate of deaths from firearms, while Japan, which has the lowest rate of gun ownership, has the least."
"There was a significant correlation between guns per head per country and the rate of firearm-related deaths with Japan being on one end of the spectrum and the US being on the other. This argues against the notion of more guns translating into less crime. South Africa was the only outlier in that the observed firearms-related death rate was several times higher than expected from gun ownership."

High rates of mental illness in any country, on the other hand, did not predict more gun deaths.

"Although correlation is not the same as causation, it seems conceivable that abundant gun availability facilitates firearm-related deaths. Conversely, high crime rates may instigate widespread anxiety and fear, thereby motivating people to arm themselves and give rise to increased gun ownership, which, in turn, increases availability. The resulting vicious cycle could, bit by bit, lead to the polarized status that is now the case with the US," the doctors write.

"Regardless of exact cause and effect, the current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that countries with higher gun ownership are safer than those with low gun ownership."
Weird Harold

United States

#10 Oct 6, 2015
So, once again, the Dents Run Rifle Range is a perfect example of what happens to programs that are run by Democrats. The grass hasn't been mowed in months, the target stands are totally deteriorated and need to be replaced, the garbage is overflowing, and there are some fairly large pot holes as you enter the parking lot. There is evidence of the requisite number of morons trying to destroy the place, i.e. trash, shooting of target stand frames, etc., however neglect by the Democrats running the DNR is the main culprit. This range started out to be a nice facility for shooters in the northern part of the county, it is a shame that the place has been destroyed.
Liberal SMH

Fairmont, WV

#11 Oct 8, 2015
Weird Harold wrote:
So, once again, the Dents Run Rifle Range is a perfect example of what happens to programs that are run by Democrats. The grass hasn't been mowed in months, the target stands are totally deteriorated and need to be replaced, the garbage is overflowing, and there are some fairly large pot holes as you enter the parking lot. There is evidence of the requisite number of morons trying to destroy the place, i.e. trash, shooting of target stand frames, etc., however neglect by the Democrats running the DNR is the main culprit. This range started out to be a nice facility for shooters in the northern part of the county, it is a shame that the place has been destroyed.
If you want it taken care of properly, you have to have enough funding to pay for the upkeep. Who is responsible for the upkeep? Should it really be the taxpayer? The NRA has their name on it. Maybe they should take a fraction of the money they spend lobbying congress and protecting gun manufacturers and help keep up the range that bears its name. I don't want my tax dollars paying to subsidize your leisure activities. You toothless hillbillies love complaining about government spending but only when it benefits people other than you. Keep your pseudo-intellectual completely nonsensical political rantings on your facebook. That way people can block you, and you can't hide your stupidity behind anonymity.
Weird Harold

United States

#12 Oct 8, 2015
Liberal SMH wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want it taken care of properly, you have to have enough funding to pay for the upkeep. Who is responsible for the upkeep? Should it really be the taxpayer? The NRA has their name on it. Maybe they should take a fraction of the money they spend lobbying congress and protecting gun manufacturers and help keep up the range that bears its name. I don't want my tax dollars paying to subsidize your leisure activities. You toothless hillbillies love complaining about government spending but only when it benefits people other than you. Keep your pseudo-intellectual completely nonsensical political rantings on your facebook. That way people can block you, and you can't hide your stupidity behind anonymity.
Sounds like you must be one of the morons that is contributing to the destruction of the range. Contributing to the destruction? Maybe. A moron? Definitely.
Liberal

Fairmont, WV

#13 Oct 8, 2015
Weird Harold wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds like you must be one of the morons that is contributing to the destruction of the range. Contributing to the destruction? Maybe. A moron? Definitely.
Way to ignore all the points that were made.
Weird Harold

United States

#14 Oct 8, 2015
Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Way to ignore all the points that were made.
What points? All I read was liberal bullshit. If the DNR didn't have sufficient funds to maintain the place then why waste taxpayer money building it in the first place? And since when did you welfare losers on the left begin to care about the taxpayers? Don't worry, your welfare check will not be effected by building a couple of targets and dumping the trash.
Liberal

Fairmont, WV

#15 Oct 8, 2015
Weird Harold wrote:
<quoted text>
What points? All I read was liberal bullshit. If the DNR didn't have sufficient funds to maintain the place then why waste taxpayer money building it in the first place? And since when did you welfare losers on the left begin to care about the taxpayers? Don't worry, your welfare check will not be effected by building a couple of targets and dumping the trash.
Right... People on the left are Americans and we pay taxes, bud. We just want our taxes to be spent on making America better for the everyday citizen instead of spending it on war and tax breaks for the billionaire class. Get real, buddy.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The NRA And The Worst Ad You May Ever See 1 hr payme 76
News Country singer Scotty McCreery cited for 15 hr derp 2
News The Right to NOT be Persecuted for being a Shee... Jul 19 Marauder 2
News Judge blocks California's high-capacity magazin... Jul 19 Red Crosse 73
News How 'The Boyfriend Loophole' Arms Domestic Abusers Jul 17 Jagermann 1
News Democrats should start playing to strengths Jul 8 im not a doctor 1
News The Second Amendment vs. the Fourth Amendment Jul 7 javawhey 4
More from around the web