I don't think you read the article. Montana is trying to make it easier for people to accept their friends' guns for temporary safe keeping. Right now it's much harder than it needs to be.
I don't think you read the article.
Montana is trying to make it easier for people to accept their friends' guns for temporary safe keeping. Right now it's much harder than it needs to be.
I understand, I'm saying another law shouldn't be required. It's like big pharma, once you take one pill, you often need another to counteract the previous one. Laws work similarly. The minute you enact one law, suddenly, you need more.
I understand, I'm saying another law shouldn't be required. It's like big pharma, once you take one pill, you often need another to counteract the previous one. Laws work similarly. The minute you enact one law, suddenly, you need more.
I'm saying another law shouldn't be required.
And I agree with you. It looks to me as if Montana is trying to work within the system and I can;t really fault them too much for it.
>
I'm saying another law shouldn't be required.
And I agree with you. It looks to me as if Montana is trying to work within the system and I can;t really fault them too much for it.
(post is archived)