G
Guest
Guest
imported post
CV67PAT wrote:
CV67PAT wrote:
LOLBig Gay Al wrote:CV67PAT wrote:Well, in replying to the first PM you sent me today, Takes one to know one.Big Gay Al wrote:So now to cover up for your shortcomings, you're going to blame the new guy for being lazy.CV67PAT wrote:How about, because if he'd searched for it in the forum, he could have found his answer without even asking? Oh, sorry, that's too simple an answer, isn't it. Gee, my bad.autosurgeon wrote:If the person asking the question knew the answer, why would he ask a very specific question for information about the law?However Pat something that is generally known to be true does not need to be Cited.
Isn't incumbent upon a person replying to provide an answer that specifically addresses the question being asked?
The poster did not ask a "general" question. He was explicit about the information he was seeking.
To give a new poster any less of a courtesy than to assist him with the cites, as necessitated by the forum rules, and to answer he very specific question does a great disservice to them. It leaves a lot to be determined by their own assumptions.
insignia240 wrote:Not too ambiguous in his question.Check, I have a CPL.
What exactly are the laws for CC/OC in a liquor store if I am stopping in to buy chew? They don't generate sales from open bottle sales, correct...?? So OC/CC with my CPL would be perfectly legal?
So why should he expect any less in the response he receives?
Way to go BGA.
That's the one thing about you...
You'll never get caught without an excuse.