Man's concealed weapons permit revoked over gun found in theater
TILLAMOOK, Ore. (AP) — Police revoked the concealed-weapons permit of a 61-year-old Tillamook man after he wriggled in his theater seat during a showing of "The Hobbit" and shook loose a loaded handgun.
A 7th-grade student found the weapon on Wednesday with a round in the chamber and the safety off.
Gary Quackenbush says he's embarrassed that the gun fell out of his holster.
Quackenbush says he always keeps the gun loaded with a round in the chamber because he never knows when he may have to use it.
"In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."
Quackenbush said he lives in a rural area where bears and cougars abound. He said he's had to fire his weapon to scare off animals, but in more than 40 years of gun ownership, hasn't had to fire it another person.
The student notified adults and local police cleared the theater on Wednesday.
Quackenbush said mass shootings in recent months, including a Colorado movie theater, could have been averted — or the casualties lessened — if someone had had a loaded weapon.
"If somebody had been prepared, they could have stopped those perpetrators long before they were able to commit those horrific acts," Quackenbush said.
Tillamook County Sheriff Andy Long said the case was handled by city police and information was forwarded to the county district attorney, who is considering whether to press charges.
Quackenbush can reapply for a concealed-weapons permit as long as criminal charges aren't pending, Long said.
"He shouldn't apply for it soon," Long said.
Quackenbush said no one answered the phone when he called the theater late Tuesday after he realized the gun had fallen out of his holster.
He said he spent a sleepless night pacing and drove to the theater early Wednesday, but police were already on scene.
"I'm totally appalled at the incident and embarrassed and regret that I gave people distress," Quackenbush said.
Of the movie "The Hobbit," his review in a letter to news media organizations explaining the incident was brief: "Overly long," he said, "and fairly boring."
You can reach reporter Nigel Duara on Facebook at http://on.fb.me/UKvVDo
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.
While the question of what defines a âsafeâ gun can be debated by some, there seems a common-sense level of security to have the safety on when not shooting the weapon. In this case, that does not appear to be how Mr. Quackenbush felt safe. Â I do feel that using the police as an example to promote the idea that anyone can walk around with a loaded weapon, round in the chamber and safety off is a red-herring. Police, in spite of their faults â and we all have faults â are willing to put on a uniform and go out on the streets to help maintain law and order. As part of being an officer, they are trained more than the average citizen to use weapons in cases where life and death decisions need to be made. Along with that idea, every time they put on their uniform, they become a target. They are constantly in the line of fire. While this is a career choice, as a society, we need to allow them latitude not afforded to the average person.
Â
Whacko gun nuts like Mr. Quackenbush would seem to be part of the problem with the violence-oriented gun culture in our society. The article states Mr. Quackenbush is 61 years old and has never had to shoot his gun at a person but âhe never knows when he may have to use itâ. Mr. gun-nut Quackenbush is quoted as saying âIt is my mindset everywhere I goâ. Was this not the very fantasy that Wayne LaPierre warned us about during his presentation of the NRAâs (No Regulation Allowed) response to Newtown when he said âIsn't fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?â When you think about it, that is what these people are doing with this mindset â fantasizing about killing people. Wayne LaPierre, in his overly simplistic response to the tragedy, was warning us about his members.
Â
Mr. Quack seems to think that had he been in the theater in Colorado, things would have been different â meaning better. I am not so sure we can know that. I would think it very likely that with more people shooting there would be more innocent people wounded and more innocent people dead. Add to that the fact that with bullets flying in in all directions, we would have a real-life wild-west shootout, where the police would not know who to neutralize. The idea that more guns in any circumstance means better outcomes has not been proven. Thatâs the other part of the same fantasy âif only I had had my gunâ. These gun freaks think they can be real-life heroes. We have seldom seen it work that way.
Â
Every time we have seen one of these events, the answer from the gun lobby (the NRA) is ALWAYS the same. More guns. Every single time, it has been the same answer. More guns. Look it up. Thatâs been the consistent message all the while these events have become more common, more frequent and more dead. Are we really to accept the NRAâs reasoning that more guns is the answer? Looking at recent history, that is clearly not the case. We have more guns than ever and more killings than ever. Could there be a connection? Clearly, we need a new direction.
Â
We need to divorce ourselves from theâmore gunsâ idea promoted by the NRA and get to the point we can have an open, honest discussion on this issue. I am not one who believes that banning certain types of rifles is the answer. What does seem clear is that somehow limiting the capacity of these weapons would be a good start. Â Very often, when these people have to stop shooting to reload, there is an opportunity to intervene and stop the shooter. Letâs not forget when the Second Amendment was drafted, no such weapons existed. Anyone with a gun would have had to stop and reload. Do you really think the founding fathers would have envisioned the Second Amendment would have been taken to the extreme and used to further the agenda of the gun lobby? Mr. Wayne Lapierre stated it pretty clearly, âThere exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells, and sows, violence against its own people.â That would be the NRA and the gun lobby looking to protect gun profits at the expense of the average citizen.
Â
I know I have used harsh language to talk about people in this article. I donât know Mr. Quackenbush. On a personal level, I may very well owe him an apology (or he may choose to shoot me). My point in all of this is that we can no longer afford to take the NRAâs word that more guns is the answer. We need to get peopleâs attention that these folks are on the relative fringes and start an open, honest and level-headed discussion on these issues. We need input from sportsmen and gun enthusiasts as well as people on the other side. We need to find some balance and real solutions. That wonât happen without someone having the courage of their convictions to start talking about what we can do - outside of simply selling more guns. When you are something like 5% of the world's population and have the majority of the world's guns and the worlds most murders by guns, you have to admit there is a problem and the answer may not be more of what is part of the problem.
Â
Speaking for myself, I would feel safer knowing there were fewer armed people around me rather than more armed and clearly dangerous people around me.
Â
I came close to being murdered when a mentally ill person tried to shot me with a shot gun. Luckily the safety was one so I am here to tell the tail
SKV you are wrong!!! I am an expert gun instructor, marksman, and accomplished safety advocate and there are truly situatotions that one can enter where it is best to have the firearm ready. One click and you can shoot. It's also quieter to release the safety than to cock the gun with the movement involved thus not alerting the opposition to your whereabouts.
@None As a expert instructor,what is your opinion of someone who leaves a firearm on the floor of a movie theater?.I know that is a huge mistake according to my instructors.
There's not a single gun expert around that would say it's ok to have a bullet in the chamber with the safety off...not one...and this guy thinks it's ok...no way if I'm the sherrif he get's the permit back with this mindset....even the NRA would call this stupid.
@SKVmutant
While the question of what defines a âsafeâ gun can be debated by some, there seems a common-sense level of security to have the safety on when not shooting the weapon. In this case, that does not appear to be how Mr. Quackenbush felt safe. Â I do feel that using the police as an example to promote the idea that anyone can walk around with a loaded weapon, round in the chamber and safety off is a red-herring. Police, in spite of their faults â and we all have faults â are willing to put on a uniform and go out on the streets to help maintain law and order. As part of being an officer, they are trained more than the average citizen to use weapons in cases where life and death decisions need to be made. Along with that idea, every time they put on their uniform, they become a target. They are constantly in the line of fire. While this is a career choice, as a society, we need to allow them latitude not afforded to the average person.
Â
Whacko gun nuts like Mr. Quackenbush would seem to be part of the problem with the violence-oriented gun culture in our society. The article states Mr. Quackenbush is 61 years old and has never had to shoot his gun at a person but âhe never knows when he may have to use itâ. Mr. gun-nut Quackenbush is quoted as saying âIt is my mindset everywhere I goâ. Was this not the very fantasy that Wayne LaPierre warned us about during his presentation of the NRAâs (No Regulation Allowed) response to Newtown when he said âIsn't fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?â When you think about it, that is what these people are doing with this mindset â fantasizing about killing people. Wayne LaPierre, in his overly simplistic response to the tragedy, was warning us about his members.
Â
Mr. Quack seems to think that had he been in the theater in Colorado, things would have been different â meaning better. I am not so sure we can know that. I would think it very likely that with more people shooting there would be more innocent people wounded and more innocent people dead. Add to that the fact that with bullets flying in in all directions, we would have a real-life wild-west shootout, where the police would not know who to neutralize. The idea that more guns in any circumstance means better outcomes has not been proven. Thatâs the other part of the same fantasy âif only I had had my gunâ. These gun freaks think they can be real-life heroes. We have seldom seen it work that way.
Â
Every time weâve seen one of these events, the answer from the gun lobby (the NRA) is ALWAYS the same. More guns. Every single time, it has been the same answer. More guns. Look it up. Thatâs been the consistent message all the while these events have become more common, more frequent and more dead. Are we really to accept the NRAâs reasoning that more guns is the answer? Looking at recent history, that is clearly not the case. We have more guns than ever and more killings than ever. Could there be a connection? Clearly, we need a new direction.
Â
We need to divorce ourselves from theâmore gunsâ idea promoted by the NRA and get to the point we can have an open, honest discussion on this issue. I am not sure that banning certain types of rifles is the answer but it does seem clear that somehow limiting the capacity of these weapons would be a good start. Â Very often, when these people have to stop shooting to reload, there is an opportunity to intervene and stop the shooter. Letâs not forget when the Second Amendment was drafted, no such weapons existed. Anyone with a gun would have had to stop and reload. Do you really think the founding fathers would have envisioned the Second Amendment would have been taken to the extreme and used to further the agenda of the gun lobby? Mr. Wayne Lapierre stated it pretty clearly, âThere exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells, and sows, violence against its own people.â That would be the NRA and the gun lobby looking to protect gun profits at the expense of the average citizen.
Â
I know I have used harsh language to talk about people in this article. I donât know Mr. Quackenbush. On a personal level, I may very well owe him an apology (or he may choose to shoot me). My point in all of this is that we can no longer afford to take the NRAâs word that more guns is the answer. We need to start an open, honest and level-headed discussion on these issues. We need input from sportsmen and gun enthusiasts as well as people on the other side. We need to find some balance and real solutions. That wonât happen without someone having the courage of their convictions to start talking about what we can do. We can do better than continuing to allow events like Newtown and doing nothing.
Â
Speaking for myself, I would feel safer knowing there were fewer armed people around me who might lose their weapons in movie theaters, doctor's offices, toy stores, playgounds, public parks, schools, etc - where ever they happen to go. Fewer armed people just waiting for the chance to use their gun would make me feel safer.
Â
Â
Â
@SKVmutant
While I would generally agree, the guns should be as safe as possible while being carried in public by citizens, the questions about what is âsafeâ may be argued by some. I would think the safety should ALWAYS be on when out in public. Also, I would tend to think police officers are not the best example to cite when trying to justify carrying a loaded weapon around town. Police, while they have their faults â like we all do â are trained and wear a uniform and are always in the line of fire because of that uniform. That allows them some privilege the normal citizen may not be afforded.Â
Â
The fact is that gun nuts seem to see the only solution to gun violence is more guns is clearly the wrong course of action. History tells us this is not working. Take the NRA's (No Regulation Allowed) response to Newtown and every other shooting incident. The response is always the same - more guns. Could there be a connection between the number of guns in our society and the number of shootings?
Â
The NRAâs responsibility and allegiance is to the gun manufacturers and their profits. With that in mind, it stands to reason they would lobby hard and publicly for no rules around guns. They serve their masters well in this regard.
Â
I can't help but wonder what would have happened had there been a nut like Quackenbush in the theater in Colorado. It would have made for a real wild-west shootout with even more victims and leaving the police not knowing who to neutralize when they arrived. I find this Quackenbush guy the perfect example of a paranoid gun nut who seems to fantasize about killing someone. The article states he is 61 years old and has never had to shoot anyone in his entire life yet he feels the need to carry a loaded weapon everywhere because "you never know when he will have to shoot someone." He takes his gun to movies and everywhere else with him. What about the doctorâs office? âMr Quack, you can leave your holster on but we need you to put on this gown.â I find the mentality of these people to be at the core of the problem these gun freaks claim they are trying to solve. The irony is that these people who carry guns in order to shoot someone seem to be part of the group of people the NRA is warning us about. That section of our society who is focused on violence and carry fantasies in their head about shooting and killing someone. Are they not part of the problem here? What was it that Wayne LaPierre said in the NRA's response? "Isn't fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?" Are these gun-toting people possessed of the idea that "You never know when you might have to use your gun" not th same thing?
Â
We need voices other than the people in our society who seem to fantasize about shooting someone - very quickly and from a hidden position - to solve this problem.
Â
Personally, I would feel safer if we did not have all these gun-crazy whackos running around own armed and dangerous. But that's me.
Â
I know I used harsh terms to describe the people in this circumstance. I don't know Mr. Quackenbush. I may be wrong in applying these terms to him and his circumstance. On a personal level I may offer an apology to him (otherwise I may be shot). The point is that as a society and culture we have to start with this issue somewhere. Some discussion by reasonable people and some reasonable controls don't seem like a bad starting point. The direction we're moving is clearly not working and we have to re-think this. Either way, based on our history on this issue, we are going in the wrong direction and it is very clear that simply having more guns is not the answer. That 'solution' is not working.
  @SKVmutant really? And just what do you think of the fact that every single police person wearing his issue glock 17 is walking or riding his beat each day with a round chambered and the (no) safety off? You see, the Glock design does not incorportate a safety per se, it has a mechanism which requires a finger to pull on it before it will fire but no safety in the traditional form of a lever with a red dot under indicating it is ready to fire.
The safety on your friendly neighborhood protector is his or her finger - if it doesn't pull the trigger the gun is safe. If he or she does pull the trigger the gun is not safe.
Â
Pretty difficult concept for you and your world of gun experts, isn't it? Yet that pistol Glock is the most widely accepted/adopted firearm in police arsenals all over the world.
 @SKVmutant Cite your sources.
It is an accident that is bound to happen why revolk his permit he didn't committ any crime as it was an accident. What about the portland cop who left his gun,Flak jacket and a Flash bang at the shooting range and when he realized what he did and went back all items were gone. Yet that idiot is still a cop and no punishment was given out,cops need to be held accountable too. We need to fire the prosecuter as he stated he will never file against any police officer,this is wrong!
@Merlin Granberg Losing a loaded gun where anyone can find it is an accident we can't afford. He should lose his permit and that gun. Losing a loaded weapon is not like spilling milk.
He can always open carry. No permit required for that in Oregon.
 @MikeÂ
Cities can restrict open carry and in Portland, Beaverton, Oregon City, and a few other cities it is a crime. Unless one has a CWP in which case they can open carry.
Â
Do not take my post as legal advice. The point of my post is that there are laws that need to be addressed and before attempting to open carry in Oregon check all the laws, both state and local.
Â
Now a criminal on the other hand means one can carry a gun anywhere they want to because criminals have no respect for laws.
We need more gun control, Like Mexico! Look how well it works for them.. No one has died in at least 3 seconds over there.
Guess that is what I get for sleeping last night. I read a lot of the comments from the folks that want to ban guns below; they make it sound like they figured out a way of getting the guns off the streets, including out of the hands of the criminals. Can someone explain it to me, because when I went to bed last night there was no solution, but now it sounds like there is?
Â
"HarryJuku854 pts
Very good. The correct outcome was reached.
See, America? It's not so difficult...
Let's do this thing!"
"Solipsist01801 pts
Guns are goin' away, HOORAY, the guns are goin' away....sing it with me! This year has been an EPIC one-two punch for the inbred gun barrel stroking wingnuts in this country....FINALLY, sanity will prevail. Get ready to have your precious love guns pried lose from your hands.....cold or warm...it don't matter none....YeeeeeHaaaawwww."
"Solipsist01801 pts
Gun nuts....guess what....you're going to lose your rights...period, end of story, you're done...."
Â
These are just a few of the rantings about the "guns going away". So, again I ask, how are you going to get the criminals guns? Could not do it with booze durring prohibition, can't do it with drugs, can't do it with child porn, how you gonna do it with guns?
@iamtroglodite
Unfortunately, any gun control laws that get enacted will only effect the law abiding. Â
@oodathunked @iamtroglodite So that means we should not try to change the status quo. Perfect.
 @iamtroglodite Don't even pay attention to Harry Juku. I think he has some major problems with himself.
Nice looking old Beretta.
The guy blew it in so many ways but it should be noted that many pistol models, including (I think) that old Beretta 1934, make use of a feature known as a "decocker" which enables the pistol to have a round chambered and the safety off but not being cocked to fire. Pistols with decockers are most always single/double action meaning they can be fired with the hammer manally pulled back to cocked or by squeezing the trigger through a double action hammer movement that takes it from uncocked to pulled back and then to fire in one long squeeze. Both methods of fire are common to double action revolvers and the pistol is no more dangerous with the safety off than a revolver with no safety lever available.Â
Â
 Saying "OMG! the safety was off!" is undue alarmism and media terrorism.
Â
I carry either a Sig-Sauer .45 P220 or the 9mm sister model P226 generally because I believe that with their decocker mechanisms they enable what is, IMO, the safest way to carry a pistol that is ready for use if needed but unlikely to fire accidentally than most any other pistol design. Both are semi-auto which means only that they will fire with each seperate trigger pull until emptied
No fool like an old fool.Â
atleAast he can reaply. that is a warning served to remind him to take better care. sounds like the 7yeear old aawlso had a good head on his shulders. Good parental up bringing.
Should've used a retention holster, Gary.
For all you gun control freaks, here's a list of all the murders in the United States for the year 2011, state by state, take directly from the FBI's website. Notice which type of gun was used to commit the fewest murders. Yes, that's right: RIFLES!!
Â
Handguns were used the most and yet no one is screaming for a ban on handguns, it's all about the assault rifles.Â
Â
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20
Â
Quackenbush, that's appropriate. Â Because everyone should carry a loaded weapon with the safety off. Â THAT will keep people save and reduce needless deaths for SURE. Â
Sorry, all excuses and justifications flew out the window at the part where he dropped a loaded gun in a movie theater and JUST LEFT IT THERE. Â Went home, didn't grab the manager with a couple flashlights right after the movie. Â The man is a mutton-head.
"Quackenbush said mass shootings in recent months, including a Colorado movie theater, could have been averted â or the casualties lessened â if someone had had a loaded weapon."
So he brings a loaded weapon into a theater full of kids WITH THE SAFETY OFF. I got $20 says he was planning to start shooting.
So he notices his gun is gone, calls the theater and they don't answer the phone.. This is where I have a problem, why not call the police then ? Instead he waited to go to the theater himself.. He should have called the police and reported this, then a young child would not find that gun..
""If somebody had been prepared, they could have stopped those perpetrators long before they were able to commit those horrific acts," Quackenbush said.So now this idiot is a expert on conceal carrying? it's inconvievable in the first place to drop my weapon out of its holster and to top it all off to not notice your gun is missing immediately.There is no way that he should get his liscence reinstated.Unfortunately the actions of a moron just increases the anxiety ofthe general public about people carrying guns.
"to not notice your gun is missing immediately" this is the part that gets me. Unless you are brain dead from drugs or booze, how do you NOT notice when a 2 pound weapon (actualy more if fully loaded) is suddenly missing? it isn't like a 4 oz cellphone, 2 pounds is a lot. This moron should not be driving, carrying, or even walking alone. He is a danger to himself and others around him if he is too stupid to be aware of his surroundings!
 @iamtroglodite actually that quite true. that weights a bunch you should notice it missing.
 @iamtroglodite Agreed. Just goes to show that there's a lot of morons out there who carry guns...who shouldn't be.  And there's nothing anyone can do about it until it's too late.
Speaking of irresponsible idiots with guns I remember when Dick Cheney got drunk and accidentally shot his friend in the face with a shotgun, then to top that stunt he didn't report it until the next day after he sobered up.
That was perfectly acceptable, he wasn't even cited. That was a class C Felony 2 counts.
Â
 @special effects Not to mention the treason he committed.
in his defense, it probably wasn't an accident.
What an idiot. Stupid fool thinks he's hero material, instead he could have caused an innocent child their life. I know I would feel safer in a movie theater without stupid gun toting fools like this one. I hope he does not get his permit back, he doesn't deserve it.
""""""Man's concealed weapons permit revoked over gun found in theater"""""
seems reasonable.......
What an irresponsible idiot. Â What a mockery of a "... well regulated militia..." Â Who in the heck gave this dubma*s a CCW in the first place? Â
The real story here is that he didn't enjoy The Hobbit. I thought it was great! Of course, if you didn't like Lord of the Rings, don't waste your time! But for anyone who found Lord of the Rings to be interesting, or anyone who has read The Hobbit, it's basically a must watch.
 @Morticae ...interesting, earlier I wondered what a 61-year-old man would be doing watching a movie and not give it a good review or at least a bit in-depth. It's as if he wasn't really watching the movie and was interested in something/someone else...apologies to all if my cynical side offends anyone.
@str1ngb3nd3r @Morticae It makes one consider that he randomly picked a movie so he could somehow in his head be a "hero" simply for the fact that he was carrying,possibly considering that another shooter just might decide to strike the very theater tha he was in.I know that sounds crazy but you have to wonder hat goes through the mind of a total moron who happens to have a CWP.
 @noneofyourbizzness  @str1ngb3nd3r  @Morticae With the media whores we're seeing, it wouldn't surprise me.
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku Well Harry, you and all the anit-gun idiots can rest assured that when (not if) someone breaks into your home with a gun, pro-gun people like myself won't be there to protect you. Instead, you'll be lying on the floor in a pool of blood because you didn't have a weapon to defend yourself. Good luck.....with the way the world is going right now, you're going to need it.
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku Where are getting that I am threatening you? I never threatened you or anyone else.
@scoreboard @HarryJuku Why would you be inside a complete stranger's home "protecting" it in the first place? Before you start calling me a "anti gun idiot".Take a close look at my avatar.Yes by this moron leaving his gun on the floor of a theater is a recipe for disaster.
scoreboard; so, let me ask you this....why (in your mind) are all people who are against guns, idiots (your words, not mine)?
Just curious.
 @catherine.henry I'm not saying their idiots. I'm just saying that increasing the gun restrictions won't make a difference because criminal don't obey the rules. For example, if you ban assault rifles, it only prevent the law abiding citizens from getting them. Criminal would get them on the black market.Â
Â
Anyone who thinks otherwise is foolish.
 @scoreboard Speaking of idiots......it's not your responsibility to save the world.
This comment has been deleted
 @Hiker123 I'm either dead or in jail for trying to defend myself.
 @scoreboard  @HarryJuku Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you know how to use it. I'm not anti-gun I have had them, and plan to get my CWP in the near future. I believe it's false sense of security to believe that if someone breaks into your house you'll have the upper hand just because you have a gun in the house. The struggle I have with that argument is that when I had a handgun in the house it was locked away in a safe place from my son.Â
Â
If someone were to confront me in my home there's no way I'd be able to get the gun fast enough. But, apparently I'm the minority, and there are a fair amount of gun owners who don't believe in locking up their weapons for the off chance they'll have someone break into their house. I'd much rather have a home alarm system, a gun locked in a safe, and not worry about my 3-year-old grabbing my gun from the night stand, or under my bed.
Â
@r @scoreboard @HarryJuku My problem is that I sleep like a rock and with the grogginess factor,I don't think my gun will help me much...although adrenaline might set in if someone is inside my home.
@r @scoreboard @HarryJuku I grew up in the Corbett area. When somebody was spooking around the house, the police weren't going to just show up in five minutes. There's only one deputy patrolling the entire Columbia River highway at night until you get to the next county. Suburbanites just don't get it.
 @scoreboard  @r  @HarryJuku But if you have a dog or two you will know farther in advance of any intruders than just relying on your human senses to hear or see an intruder.Â
Would that be the study which also noted that most of the gun deaths in Philly were between rival gang members?
 @r  @HarryJuku Yea well I do know how to use one and I like the fact that the odds are greater that I will have the upper hand if I do have gun than if I don't.
Â
Plus an alarm system will only alert the police who are more than likely at least 10 minutes away when you need them right away. 10 minutes - more than enough time for the intruder to escape or worse - hurt or kill someone.
 @scoreboard  @HarryJuku ya good... so let's overpower firepower with firepower..  I'm about to go buy me some nukes..
@Fed up Fed let us know when you find one. In the meantime, while you're there pick me up a couple of lightsabers and a phased-plasma rifle. 40watt range.
This comment has been deleted
What's that sound? Why it's scoreboard being Clowned!
 @Fed up Fed  @scoreboard  @HarryJuku Same wishes to you Fed. Good luck.