Gavin Newsom
(AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)
Previous Post
Next Post

Without the [concealed carry restriction] bill’s new rules, the pressure is now on county sheriffs to start handing out concealed carry licenses under the Supreme Court’s new standard, if they aren’t in compliance yet. 

Many already are — and were even before the ruling. Because California’s prior licensing system granted local discretion over who has “good cause” to have a concealed carry license, counties with gun-rights sheriffs, including Sacramento, Orange County and Fresno, assumed any applicant who met the bare minimum standard as having good cause enough.

But for liberal-leaning urban areas on the coast, changes may be coming.

Some “will be dragging their feet,” said Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association. “But the sheriffs are going to start issuing, and they’re going to be sued very quickly by us if they don’t.”

San Francisco, for example, issued just 11 concealed carry permits over the last decade, rejecting all other applications as unnecessary. Since the Supreme Court’s ruling, the department has received 40 applications, said spokesperson Kelvin Wu. 

“We have issued no concealed carry permits as of yet. We are finalizing changes to our policies and practices based on the change in the law,” he added. 

Now that no change in law is forthcoming from the Legislature — at least not in the short term —  the effects of the Supreme Court ruling that Newsom, Bonta and Portantino wanted to shield California from are likely to arrive before long. 

— Ben Christopher in Misfire: Behind the California concealed carry bill’s big fail

 

Previous Post
Next Post

101 COMMENTS

  1. The gun banners are seeing their power erode nation wide, and they are desperately trying to hold on to what remains of it. Half the country is now Permitless carry, and more will be within the next 12 months. From the Democrats and Progressives point of view that is an intolerable outcome, and an existential threat to them. They will do literally anything to hold on to their power, including starting a civil war.

    • Rest assured sneaky democRats are searching through their Jim Crow Gun Control playback looking for ways around any court ruling. After all Gun Owners are to democRats what Jews and Blacks were to nazis and the kkk.

        • I’m being given 100-120$ greenbacks per-hr. to finish a few copy past task on my laptop. I even have definitely now no longer imagined like it might even feasible however my (any-s15) confidant buddy turned into receiving $42 k simply in 4 weeks operating this clean opportunity & she has encouraged me to try. Following Link

          For More Details:>>> https://smartpay21.pages.dev

    • if these corrupted clowns start a civil war, they will not finish it. IT will finish THEM. I have little doubt that patriots from compliant counties will hesitate very little to go and help their fellow Californians attain unfettered access to their God given and lawfully emplaced liberties. That scowl of fear on the Gabbling Nuisance’s mugly ugg above speaks volumes…. the contents of which he can scarce imagine at this time.

    • Their power may be eroding, but the damage is still done.
      Many years spent in court after passing all of these ridiculous laws has wasted a lot of money of these gun rights groups, not to mention the loss of more and more mom-and-pop gun stores as those laws got more ridiculous over the years.

  2. The fight has just begun. The Leftist Scum (wrongly, like always) consider it their ‘sacred duty’ to ‘protect’ the public from freedom-loving patriots.

    Lawsuits are expensive. Californians, please donate to the gun rights organizations that will be doing the dirty work of suing those slime into compliance…

    • How’s about recalling any sheriffs who refuse to commply? Flim Flam Friskum just recalled their Cheesey Pudding, against all odds. Surprised the heck out of that creepy sleazey being. If THEY can do it, soros money and all against them, any other county can. Let the feast begin.

      • You try to be so cute with your wordsmithing that it makes it impossible to figure what you’re trying to say. Try writing clearly.

  3. Gavin Newsom. That must guy must be a piece of work. I recently learned his parents moved there residence to Florida. Bought a place in Naples. His dad registered as a Republican and his mom as no party affiliation. Kinda like an Independent. That’s gotta sting sonny boy.

    • Gavin was born rich and the Getty’s have “sponsored” his entire career. He’s only a “D” for political expedience, if California was overwhelmingly red he’d be a Republican.

    • Trust me on this hunch. Any two parents whose DNA produced a weasel like Gavin Newsom, are at BEST – a pair of lily livered, Mitt Romeny – Lindsay Graham – Juan McInsane – Bush flavored RINOs.

    • It was his wife’s parents that moved to Naples. In 2020 they donated $5,000 to a DeSantis PAC. Should make for interesting conversation at Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners.

  4. “We are finalizing changes to our policies and practices based on the change in the law,” he added. ”

    Uhhhh, excuse me, but there have been no changes in the law. The fact is, the law required “shall issue” for as long as concealed carry permits have been a thing. Gun control jurisdictions have simply ignored the constitution, as well as real, actual laws on the subject.

    If a person’s 2nd amendment rights have not been revoked for good cause (violent felony conviction(s) or mental incompetence) then YOU SHALL ISSUE his permit!! It is really that simple.

      • yes, by the US Constitution. Second Article of Ammendment. Anyone, upon commission of sich violant crimes, forfeits certain of their rights at least untio their crimes are dealt with. Same with right to vote. And in some cases hold public office.

  5. “applicants would need to receive a psychological assessment, take at least 16 hours of safety training and provide three reference letters attesting to their moral fitness. ”

    Can we get that for voting? While we’re at it add ID, a 4473, and a background check.

    • We’d have to build another prison if we did that… like the super-secret one that only dacian knows the location of, where they put over three million felons caught lying on 4473s.
      Maybe we can reopen Alcatraz.

      • along with a bsic fourth grade level civics and government test based on the Constitution. Make that a precondition of tossing your hat in the ring to stand for office. I cannot believe much of the drivel these politicians are blathering,m pontificating, bleating, etc. Clearly many of them know NOTHING about the structure of our government. And they want to participate in it? I’d laugh but its too tragic to laugh about. Unka Dopey Joey saying and doing some of his “things”…..

  6. The statement “will be dragging their feet” is an understatement. The wheels of government turn very slowly for good stuff, and very quickly for stupid stuff. The sad truth is that they plan to pick up this dastardly CCW legislation as soon as they get back in session in December. The battle wages on against these tyrants…

    • that simply means a bunch of sheriffs need to get their game on and begin issuing tose Mother May I Cards. WOuldn’t it be comforting to learn that two million of them have been issued by the time the new session has enacted a bill?

  7. Dems are generally unconcerned. Waiting 6mos until the legislature reconvenes is no hardship to the march to confiscation. Few jurisdictions are going to spend much money, or effort, to establish an approval system that will be overturned in January 2023.

    A pent up flood of applicants means lengthening delays to processing govt permission slips. All pretty much remains BAU (business as usual).

    • “…means lengthening delays to processing govt permission slips.”

      And *that’s* an opportunity for an intrepid judge to lay down the law.

      As in, process those applications in 90 days or the applicant can carry without the permit. The same tactics were used to force Chicago into compliance.

      This is a fucking civil right, literally number 2 on a top 10 list of civil rights, not an application for a dog license…

      • “And *that’s* an opportunity for an intrepid judge to lay down the law.”

        Which state or federal judge in Californication is going to do that? The decision would be immediately appealed, and the case tied up in the courts for years. Federal judge Benitez will soon rule, again, that Californy is in violation of the Second Amendment, and that will, again, be appealed; status quo remains in tact.

        Chicago is in the 7th Circuit, where outcomes can be unpredictable. Cali is in the predictably leftist 9th. Any attempt via court cases in Cali to defend 2A will go through the entire appeals process, with the 9th, and take as long as did “Miller v. Bonta”, first time around.

        Being “right”/correct/righteous in a court case is irrelevant. All that matters is what judges and juries decide.

        Never forget: the Supreme Court cannot force a ruling on anyone. US Marshals will not be sent to arrest all the judges (state and federal) in Cali for the crime of ignoring an SC decision.

        • “Chicago is in the 7th Circuit, where outcomes can be unpredictable. Cali is in the predictably leftist 9th.”

          We hold a trump card, literally Trump-selected SCotUS Justices.

          Dare them to drop something in Justice Thomas’s in-basket. The repercussions are now national in consequence… 🙂

        • Sam is completely correct. What “repercussions” and “consequences” are you talking about? If you or I violate someone’s Constitutional rights, it’s a crime with consequences. If someone sworn to uphold Constitutional rights violates Constitutional rights, the law (including Bruen) provides zero criminal, civil, or professional repercussions. As Sam noted, the Feds sure-as-fuck aren’t enforcing the Federal Constitution against state tyrants on Biden’s watch.

          And don’t say “That’s why it’s important to vote!”, because there’s zero possibility that leftist-scum politicians are thrown out for doing exactly what California’s overwhelming majority of leftist-scum voters hired them to do in the first place. A gun guy’s vote means as much in Newsom’s California as a Christian’s in Nero’s Rome.

    • The legislature can never retract the Mother May I Cards issued under current law/policy. That would be “ex post facto” and wrong. The trick is to get the pump primed quickly and get as many Cards issued and/or in the pipeline before the new Leg convenes. It will still take them a while to hammer some bogus plan together. A court filing on the day it is enacted can also kick it up the road a year or three.

      What we hear now is very much like the wails of a wild hare once the hounds have him.

  8. With the increasing numbers of “wins” for 2A defenders, one is reminded of “Cinco de Mayo” celebrations. The holiday recognizes a specific battle victory in a war that was lost.

  9. California is well aware of the success of the new New York anti-carry law that in many ways is way worse than the original law. California may have failed the first time by making the changes too severe but do not think they have thrown in the towel. No not at all as the next round of anti-carry laws will soon be up for a vote. I am sure California will emulate New York’s plethora of “sensitive places” that will make a concealed carry permit absolutely worthless to have.

    • And Saint Clarence of Thomas is going to slam-dunk that s*** into the weeds, and all you Leftist/fascists know it. You’re buying the amount of time it will take to get the case through the SCOTUS docket. Thomas didn’t say ANY designation of “sensitive places” was acceptable, and a frivolous invocation of that will completely p*** off the six justices who DID join the majority opinion. But you Leftist/fascists will keep running your stupid little scams, until everyone in the country who ISN’T an ardent Leftist/fascist will see clearly that your emperor has no clothes. When y’all get the s*** kicked out of you, come November, your idiot “assault weapon ban” will die a well-deserved death. I wouldn’t even be surprised to see some young firebrand re-introduce national reciprocity. Play stupid games; win stupid prizes. But I guess “stupid” is all you’ve got, so, sure . . . go with that.

      I’m going to LOVE hearing you squeal like a pig come November 9, you sorry sack of excrement.

      • To the Lamp that went out in his head.

        In reality it looks like America’s women are going to take no shit from the Trump appointed radical far right jackbooted Supreme Court and their wish to outlaw birth control next so the outcome of the mid-terms is very uncertain and this is agreed by most political commentators.

        You keep quoting Thomas but he is only one judge and the worst nut case on the court. He even stated he wanted to ban birth control, how much more demented can you get??. Kavanaugh and other judges have stated they support laws outlawing concealed carry in sensitive places so the likelihood that ban will be ruled illegal is very slim indeed. Most likely the court will let the lower court rulings stand and they will of course sanction the bans on sensitive places. There has been so much public outrage against the radical Trump appointed court that the far right nut cases on the court realize the last thing they want to see is more outrage from the public over gun control being overturned.

        • What you and those paid for shills are ignoring is that folks cannot afford gas for their cars. They cannot pay their bills and they are rapidly losing their ability to feed themselves. Thanks entirely to the current administration.

          A few entitled white women pissed about an abortion ruling that does not ban abortions or birth control is nothing but a smoke screen to attempt to divert attention from the real problems.

          But thanks for playing.

          And after joe burdens ‘hate Americans’ speech why do you think he’s going to allow elections to occur.

          jerry p. of canton ohio we are on the edge. You’ve made your choice. You’ll be in the dock at Nuremberg 2.0.

        • Dackie Boy you miss completely the basis of the Bruen decision. It had NAUGHT to do with specific laws/rules/requirements, but ONLY with the fact that STATES cannot enact laws that enfringe upon the basic and simple right to arms. In short, it ain’t STATE issue, its a FEDERAL issue. Same with the abortion overturn. Roe had NO BUSINESS even coming up before SCOTUS as that was all about STATE politics, not federal.

          READ your Constitution, including ALL the various articles of amendment. You fail to comprehend HOW the law works, including its making, enforcement, and justification.
          WHERE were you and your twisted pals in Civics Class back in third nd fourth grade? I knew more about this stuff then than you do now, or your twisted compadres know.

        • Jethro you live in your own little demented micro world of Foxy News.

          Kansas a very conservative state overwhelmingly just defeated an attempt by the Jackbooted Republican’s to outlaw abortion in their Constitution. The Conservative and Liberal Women told them to suck a fat one.

        • And so the issue in Kansas is resolved. And you’re still ignoring the shipwreck that you so called social-lists have created in the economy. Those same women are facing or have already experience financial disaster because of you and joe burden.

          If you think the abortion issue is enough to save the midterms you are even more mental than I thought.

        • And they specifically and carefully DID NOT specify what “sensitive places” consisted of, you absolute @$$clown. I see no likelihood that a law banning carry in courthouses and government buildings and schools would be upheld (stupidly, but that will be the result).

          Declaring movie theaters, shopping malls, churches, etc. to be “sensitive places”. Try it, or as they say, “F*** around and find out”.

          You are so stupid retarded planaria laugh at how stupid you are.

        • Re: my prior post – the part reading ” . . . a law banning carry in courthouses and government buildings and schools would be upheld . . . . ” . Last word should have been “overturned”. My bad.

  10. I’m all for making an ultimatum to all states: Adhere to the Constitution in its entirety or you will be denied federal funding in all facets for an entire year. Fail to heed the rights of the People 3 times and you’re out, banished forthwith from ̶R̶o̶h̶a̶n̶ the Union.

  11. Alabama will be permitless carry come January 1st. You will still need a permit to travel to another state. At $20 for a hard permit and the money going to the sheriff’s department I’ll still be buying one.

  12. Some legislators in Louisiana have been chipping away at carry permits by way of granting exceptions over the last 3 years. Now as of August 1 Louisiana citizens who are honorably discharged veterans can carry concealed in state without a permit. This was made possible by SB 143. Point is, if you can’t get the whole pie then take a piece at a time…………ain’t that what the left is doing!
    This is something that should be done on the federal level. If Louisiana’s honorably discharged veterans can carry without a permit, then shouldn’t ALL veterans nation wide be given the same permission?

    • Why just veterans? Why just LEOs? All Americans, of whatever political bent should be able to carry, unless they have been found incompetent by a judge and doctor, convicted of a firearm misuse or are in the middle of a trial involving misused of a firearm.
      They also should have a way to get their rights back after serving their sentence.

      • rt66paul,

        Absolutely agree – if it is a Constitutional right, it should be available to all citizens. LEO and veterans should have no greater rights than any other citizen.

        I can go along with depriving convicted felons of their rights (voting, RKBA) while they are serving their sentence (including parole/probation). Beyond that, deprivation of rights is deprivation of rights. Either revoke their citizenship and banish them (which the Constitution does not provide for, and the government has no right to do), or they are citizens once again after completing their sentence. I notice that our Dimocrat “friends” are all about letting felons vote . . . not so much about RKBA. Hypocritical @$$holes, the lot of them.

    • What is going to be interesting is when someone gets arrested for carrying where they were formerly able to do so and refuses to take a plea deal. Would not be surprised to see their case tossed just to avoid it going up the chain and heard on constitutional merits.

  13. @Geoff “I’m getting too old for this shit” PR
    We hold a trump card, literally Trump-selected SCotUS Justices…
    Dare them to drop something in Justice Thomas’s in-basket. The repercussions are now national in consequence…”

    Time, time and time, again.

    Any challenge to a law takes time to resolve. Time is on the side of the gun-grabbers; delay until the SC is packed with Leftist justices.

    As always, it is “we the people” who are responsible for what legislation gets signed into law; not the courts.

  14. @Geoff “I’m getting too old for this shit” PR
    “We hold a trump card, literally Trump-selected SCotUS Justices.”

    Until Congress creates new seats on the Court.

    • @Sam I Am
      Quite right. If Dems pick up two more Senate seats to replace the moderates from WV and AZ, all bets are off. Filibuster? Gone. SCOTUS? Packed with progressive crazies. Voting? Restructured to ensure no red state can use logical common sense tools to verify the citizenship and identity of voters. Congress? DC added as a state further cementing Leftist Marxist rule for decades.

      • “DC added as a state further cementing Leftist Marxist rule for decades.”

        Possibly, but giving all US possessions a rep and one senator (or two), will seal the deal, permanently.

  15. They’ll set up a process that delays issuance until after they come back into session (december?) and pass all the same laws using a simple majority.

    • but that is the choice and policy of each county sheriff’s department. State cannot interfere with county policy. Once that Mother May I Card is issued, the State gummit cannot withdrw it or make it illegal. Ex post facto is illegal. At any government level.

  16. WTF are you to tell me what i have to do to exercise a constitutional right, or my God given right. Who TF do you think you are anyway.

    • “(Who) are you to tell me what i have to do to exercise a constitutional right, or my God given right.

      “Who” is “the law”. Exercise your rights anyway you like; the law will dictate the result. Sloganeering is not effective in court. Fact is neither good, nor evil; fact just “is”.

  17. Who TF are you to tell me what i have to do to exercise a constitutional right, or my God given right. Who TF do you think you are anyway?

  18. Tyrannical Governments strive for a Society that is unable to protect or defend itself from violent criminals. By denying them the ability to do so. Then allow those same violent criminals to continue to prey on innocent defenseless citizens under the guise of Criminal Justice Reform. In order to create as much crime and chaos as necessary to implement laws that only effect, Law Abiding Citizens. Until all vestiges of Freedom and Liberty are gone. Not until then will they concern themselves with removing the criminal element that has been their willing instrument of their Dystopian Society.

    • possum,

      Nope, it’s not a “win” . . . but it IS a baby step in the right direction. We (the libertarians and ACTUAL Constitutionalists) have been giving ground steadily for over 80 years, and we are SLOWLY starting to claw back some of the ground we’ve lost. Sure, we never should have given the ground in the first place, but . . . we did. At least that proves that WE are NOT the ones being “unreasonable” and “refusing to compromise”. That is ENTIRELY the Left. I doubt that very many gun owners/libertarians/Constitutionalists will fall for that crap again. NEVER forget the cake: https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2013/11/08/cake-and-compromise-illustrated-guide-to-gun-control/

      • But the pieces of cake that were taken, then eaten, and then shit out.
        So what your going to get back is a pile of shit.
        Let’s Go Brandon

        • Well, I would be willing to consider an Amendment that provided for possums to exercise concealed carry of nukes. Does that work for you?

  19. @jwm
    “What you and those paid for shills are ignoring…”

    Now, hold on there, just a minute.

    I am shrill, and I don’t get paid anything. Just doing a job most Americans don’t want to do.

    • Can’t think of too many honest objective devil’s advocates that fall under the shill category let alone amusing ones. With that said the dark mirror is appreciated if disturbing.

      • “With that said the dark mirror is appreciated if disturbing.”

        Happy to be here, grateful for the opportunity, proud to serve.

        (Did you read “shrill” as “shill” ?)

      • Hah!! You fel for it!!!! Go back and RE-read Sam’s post. Pay attention to every letter… one by one.
        He gotchya, good!!!!

        He’s NOT like the pawl a TISH uns who sling their blather hoping no one is really listening. He IS listening…. and you were not.

        • Differentiation seeking distinction and try to find the humor in the absurdity we find ourselves in.

  20. California is NOT “shall issue” under the current statute (although the majority of sheriffs issue on a shall issue basis). As Attorney General “Bonta Fail” made quite clear in his (ill-advised letter) issued to all sheriffs after Bruen, the applicable statute has a “good moral character” provision, and that provision can be used to end run the end of “good cause.”

    In a letter sent to all Californian district attorneys, police chiefs, sheriffs, county counsels, and city attorneys, Bonta recognizes that Bruen eliminated their “good cause” requirements for public carry permits and encourages them to institute “good moral character” requirements instead.

    “Accordingly, in assessing whether an applicant has established “good moral character,” issuing authorities should recognize that Bruen does not eliminate the duty or authority of local officials to protect the communities that they know best by ensuring that licenses are only issued to individuals who—by virtue of their character and temperament—can be trusted to abide by the law and otherwise ensure the safety of themselves and others. The investigation into whether an applicant satisfies the “good moral character” requirement should go beyond the determination of whether any “firearms prohibiting categories” apply, such as a mental health prohibition or prior felony conviction. Those categories, which may be found to apply during the DOJ-conducted background check (including the many categories pertaining to an applicant’s criminal history), simply determine whether the applicant is even eligible to own or possess firearms under state and federal law. When it comes to evaluating an applicant’s moral character, however, the issue is not whether the applicant meets the minimum qualifications to own or possess firearms under other statutory criteria. “Good moral character” is a distinct question that requires an independent determination.

    Existing public-carry policies of local law enforcement agencies across the state provide helpful examples of how to apply the “good moral character” requirement. The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office, for example, currently identifies several potential reasons why a public-carry license may be denied (or revoked), which include “[a]ny arrest in the last 5 years, regardless of the disposition” or “[a]ny conviction in the last 7 years.”2 It is reasonable to consider such factors in evaluating an applicant’s proof of the requisite moral character to safely carry firearms in public. See, e.g., Bruen, slip op. p. 63 (referencing “law-abiding citizens”). Other jurisdictions list the personal characteristics one reasonably expects of candidates for a public-carry license who do not pose a danger to themselves or others. The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department’s policy, for example, currently provides as follows: “Legal judgments of good moral character can include consideration of honesty, trustworthiness, diligence, reliability, respect for the law, integrity, candor, discretion, observance of fiduciary duty, respect for the rights of others, absence of hatred and racism, fiscal stability, profession-specific criteria such as pledging to honor the constitution and uphold the law, and the absence of criminal conviction.”3

    As a starting point for purposes of investigating an applicant’s moral character, many issuing authorities require personal references and/or reference letters. Investigators may personally interview applicants and use the opportunity to gain further insight into the applicant’s character. And they may search publicly-available information, including social media accounts, in assessing the applicant’s character. Finally, we note that it remains reasonable—and constitutional—to ask applicants why they are interested in carrying their firearms in public. Although applicants do not need to demonstrate good cause for the issuance of a license, an applicant’s reasons for seeking a license may alert authorities to a need for psychological testing, be considered as part of the “good moral character” requirement, or provide information relevant to other statutory requirements.”

    Interestingly, the recently amended CCW law, aside from its other defects, had a much narrower scope of “good moral character”, even to the point of eliminating the phrase all together. It focuses on objective criteria, not including social media accounts, but does retain the authority of the issuing agency to require three letters of reference (with in-person interviews to follow) and a psychological evaluation. (Letters of recommendation were optional and only required by a few jurisdictions is my understanding.)

    • ‘Good moral character.’ is Fascist speak for white males of certain political connections and financial status. No minorities need apply.

      • Oh, no, jwm, they’re equal opportunity fascists – they will issue CCW to any woman, person of color, gay, or otherwise “minority” politician or person of “influence”!!! Diversity is our strenght, donchaknow.

    • @Mark,

      Very well written comment on the matter. Kudos. To this portion of your text:

      “…[a]ny arrest in the last 5 years, regardless of the disposition…”

      This is the bit that concerns me the most. If CA is going to consider any arrest (not conviction, but mere arrest) grounds for disapproving a permit, then CADOJ and various LE can declare open season and push for arrests across the spectrum. One of my former coworkers was arrested by LAPD due to claims of an ex-girlfriend that he [email protected] her. He sat in jail for several days until the woman recanted after being pressed by detectives to explain herself. She admitted to making a false claim because she was upset at my coworker for the breakup. The charges were dropped, and he was released. If a renewed version of AB918 makes its way through Sacramento with this same verbage, innocent people like him would be denied the right to carry.

      • and the wench in question MUST be charged with making a false claim to police, bear the penalty of his false imprisonment, and if she has any money sued for defamation of character. And then SHE will be on the “not good o=moral character} list and denied HER right to arms, if she is not already otherwise so denied.
        If the cops took NO action against HER< then they are derelict HE was imprisoned for some time based upon HER false testimony. Lying t police in this way is a felony perjury offense.

  21. @SAFEupstateFML
    “Wait they are not the same thing just with different spelling from English to Subject speak?”

    Not exactly.

    A shrill doesn’t need to be a shill, but a shill can be quite shrill.
    (Wonder how many readers understand what we are doing with this?)

      • “But does the shrill shill float??”

        The shrill shill floats still.

        “Who are you (two), who are so wise in the ways of science??”

        First, there is no “science”. Last year, or the year before, the protectors of all things backwards declared that historical math is white privilege (though ‘math’ was invented by non-whites), and imposing “white math” on societies with different cultures is racist.

        Second, once math is racist, all “science” that depends on math is also racist, thus prohibited from use.

        Third, “Science? We don’t need no stinkin’ science.”

  22. @SAFEupstateFML
    “And on waking up I realized I need to get some whiskey.”

    C’mon, mon. Try ChamPipple.

    What have you got to lose?

  23. “Implying I can afford any champagne for mixing.”

    If you don’t tell anyone, you can substitute sparkling wine for cheap Champagne (Yellow Tail Pink Bubbles, $5 at Drizzly.).

    Also, for cheap Champgne, you can alter the mix to be heavy on Ripple, stretching out the amount of ChamPipple you can produce.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here