Leaderboard

soooo glad I really don't have asshat neighbors, LOL they probably think I am that guy

[quote name='QuietDan' timestamp='1353288392' post='847886'] I've been away from this soap opera for a week or so. Did I miss anything? No? Didn't think so. Anyone convince anyone about anything? No? Didn't think so. [/quote] Actually the OP was just two days ago, and it referenced the fact that we MIGHT have convinced Lt. Gov. Ramsey to back the ability of a permit holder to have his weapon stored in their vehicle while at work on the majority of parking lots, like 19 other States have done... DaveTN convinced me we have no firearms Rights in Tennessee, Life and Law Enforcement of Weakly County, TN (Sheriff's Department and DA) convinced me we have no Private Property Rights.

[quote name='DaveTN' timestamp='1353284209' post='847852'] I worked off duty security for a company that had very large tanks of flammable liquids the grounds. They had several plants, but the one that had those tanks did not allow firearms on the property or in vehicles in the parking lots of that one plant. For you guys that think you have a right to have a gun in a parking lot, how are you going to respond to the companies that claim a very real safety risk of having guns in the vicinity of hazardous/flammable/explosive materials? Are you and your state legislators in better position to determine those risks than the experts that use the products or processes? [/quote] So that weapon in the car out in the parking lot is going set the flammables off without any person pulling the trigger? Denying the legitimate, licensed permit holder the ability to keep a weapon locked up in the parking lot is going to make it more dangerous than the thug that does not abide by the law and has one in their vehicle now?

Does he have a second sign for the other gun grabbing presidential candidate?

If the nutcase purchased the knife at the store how did he get it out of the fiendish packaging to commence his rampage?

[quote name='JayC' timestamp='1353251602' post='847603']I'm sorry but it is a progressive argument that somehow societies 'feelings/whims' trump a persons property rights. I'm not suggesting that progressives haven't been very successful in getting courts to violate those rights for the last few decades, but it doesn't change the fact that property rights are a natural right, the same as the right to own and carry a gun is a natural right, and the government has no legitimate reason to violate either of them. I'm never going to post a business I own, when certain laws were changed a few years back, I got into a number of arguments with progressive leaning members of the family on why we should not post our family owned business... I even had to fire an employee who answered the phone and told a customer we would be posting. (BTW that is the only time I've lost an unemployment claim but that is an entirely different story) But, I should have full control over my business, I should be able to ban carry over the entire property if I so (IMHO incorrectly) choose. Like with any other policy I make, employees who don't like it can find another job... Customers can do business elsewhere if they don't like the policies. Somebody else will come along and cater to those folks, and get their business and labor if they so choose. I use to work for a corporation that prohibited carry for employees, and it was one of the reasons I choose to leave and start my own business. I make less money, but I don't have to disarm everyday to go to work... Nobody is forced to work somewhere they must disarm, they choose to... That is their choice. Again, we should be focused on removing stupid laws, and laws that prohibit carry n government control lands and buildings... because none of us have a choice when it comes to those locations... Not try and tell some business person he must do something he fundamentally disagrees with.[/quote] [size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]This is not about feelings or whims; it’s about laws and the good of society at large. Is it “[i]progressive[/i]” of me to want zoning laws in my city so that my next door neighbor can’t suddenly decide to convert his “private property” into a petting zoo or a garbage dump or a half-way house for child molesters? Is it “[i]progressive[/i]” for me to believe that I should be able to control the contents of my vehicle provided the contents are legal to own/have in my vehicle? Is it “[i]progressive[/i]” of me to believe that a restaurant shouldn’t be allowed to refuse to serve a black man or a Chinese woman because of their respective races or to think that a business shouldn't be able to require employees to work 16 or 20 hour days or even force eight year old children to do the same? If the above examples are examples of “[i]progressiveism[/i]” then color me progressive but I suggest that there is nothing libertarian or conservative or patriotic OR Constitutional in allowing anyone/any business/any property owner to do whatever the hell he wants to do on or with his "property" with no regards to anyone else or regards to society at large. Most of the laws we have regulating what property owners and businesses can and can’t do on their “property” or in running their business exist in response to the sometimes idiotic and sometimes even dangerous things that property owners/businesses have done that harmed others/society and while we probably have far too many laws and regulations, on the whole, I say such laws and regulations are a good thing, even “Constitutional”...even conservative. The government certainly can have legitimate reasons for infringing on or even completely taking our rights away, including, among others, the right to keep and bear arms and the right to own property - our founders understood that which is why we have the 5[sup]th[/sup] Amendment. If you believe the courts have blundered in upholding these laws then please explain how they have done so…show specifically how a legal, inert thing, whether it’s a firearm or a set of golf clubs locked inside of a vehicle while parked on a piece of ground provided for the purpose of parking vehicles is a violation of the takings clause.[/font][/size] Until you or someone can do that, I'll remain, "[i]progressive[/i]" and armed. -------------------- I believe we are left with two issues...[list=1] [*]Can the government install such a law without violating the Constitution's takings clause. [*]Should the government install such a law. [/list] I believe the first issue has been addressed sufficiently well by the courts - I think the courts were right. Others can disagree but disagreement doesn't change anything unless others can show how the courts got it wrong. The second issue is, I believe, the only issue that truly matters at this point. The "it's my property and I should be able to do what I want" statement certainly sounds reasonable...it even sounds patriotic but when examined in detail it is, I believe, unconvincing. It's unconvincing because it really just states an opinion....it's unconvincing because it can (and in many cases was) used to justify any manner of abhorrent, disgusting and even dangerous practices and shows absolutely zero concern for anyone or anyone else s rights; including [u][i]their[/i][/u] property rights.

My experience tells me you will draw and fire without thinking about your equipment and you will fire where and how you have trained; chances are you will not have time to do anything else. My training was firing into center body mass without using sights. If you think you will have time to get a sight picture or make a head shot; train that way. If I were a “Shot placement guy” I would be dead.

I'm still waiting for a satellite to fall out of orbit and land on my neighbor's house. They moved in 5 years ago and it has been nothing but trouble since. Police have been involved twice.

[size=4][color=#001320][font=Arial]As a business owner I often choose not to offer our services to some people. That is what is great about living in a free country. We can still choose not to do business with someone. We usually are refusing to buy from someone but it is also refusing to sell to someone. Over the years I have learned a lesson. Bad business is worse than no business. We do not have to subject ourselves to people we do not want to associate with. At the same time no Obama voter has to shop with these guys. It’s still a free country go somewhere else. [/font][/color][/size]

[img]http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/61983_420982761300680_254569568_n.png[/img]

I've never understood buying a car. I don't understand why I have to sign 50 documents for a damn car. I've paid cash for a few and just don't get it. If I pay you, why can't you give me the title, a bill of sale and handshake on the way out the door. Should take no more than 15 minutes TOPS.

[quote name='S&WForty' timestamp='1353092365' post='846718']That sure is a good perspective. It's almost like such a law being enacted sets a precedent. What else can the government tell a private person/company what they can/cannot do/allow on their property?[/quote] There is a clear distinction, both in law and in practice, between private property used for private purposes and property used for business purposes and that distinction has been recognized for many, many decades. I agree that the rights of the property owner should be protected but no one right exists in a vacuum; they interact with other...sometimes they conflict with one another and when that happens, a fair balance needs to be sought; a balance that does the most good and least harm. I would suggest that the larger issue that should impact whether "parking lot" legislation is or isn't passed into law is what constitutes the best outcome for society at large. We have a large amount of history/data to show that an armed citizenry is a benefit to society; as such, if we (the government) can promote citizens being armed with little or no infringement on the rights of property owners then it's appropriate to make that possible. Other than the cry of "private property rights" (a cry I believe is misguided), I've not read or heard even one argument that has shown me any measurable, negative impact on a business owner simply because an employee or a customer chooses to have a legally owned and transported firearm in their vehicle while it's parked in a parking lot that is open to the public, and not just "open to" but where the public is invited to be.

I got the Mosin Sniper(depending on who you ask) I ordered from Classic Arms. It is a 42 Izhevsk. The scope is a Progress, which was a Carl Zeiss company. It appears clear, although it was dark outside and I only looked through it in the house. The rifle has a heavy coat of shellac, and the fore end seems to have been rubbed with some kind of dark finish which I assume was to cut down glare. Here are the required pictures. [img]http://i687.photobucket.com/albums/vv238/BigGuy300/IMG_6031.jpg[/img] [img]http://i687.photobucket.com/albums/vv238/BigGuy300/IMG_6032.jpg[/img] [img]http://i687.photobucket.com/albums/vv238/BigGuy300/IMG_6034.jpg[/img] [img]http://i687.photobucket.com/albums/vv238/BigGuy300/IMG_6033.jpg[/img] [img]http://i687.photobucket.com/albums/vv238/BigGuy300/IMG_6037.jpg[/img] [img]http://i687.photobucket.com/albums/vv238/BigGuy300/IMG_6038.jpg[/img] [img]http://i687.photobucket.com/albums/vv238/BigGuy300/IMG_6039.jpg[/img] I'm not sure when I will get to try it out. Soon I hope

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1353299917' post='848025'] Your veiled assertion that there is a difference between a regulation that is based on "taxes" or "wages" as opposed to any other regulation is both flawed and immaterial because it entirely misses the point....[/quote] Yep. And even Strick's vehement refusal to equate ADA with handgun carry is specious. In the the same vein as your comment, it is simply one more set of regulations, showing just one more precedent for adherence to one more set of regulations. I've certainly never claimed that disability and handgun possession are on any kind of equal status, that is not a valid argument, or does it need to be. And much of this is red herring territory anyway. The parking lot bill is not so much about anything the business owner must [i]do[/i], but simply about something he must [i]not[/i] do. Just like the hundreds of other things he must not do, whether it's to quarter top staff in your home, or commandeer your car. Or in this case, effectively prevent you from self defense while in your own property, something that TN law specifically allows, HCP or not, actually. - OS

[quote name='Worriedman' timestamp='1353284834' post='847857'] So that weapon in the car out in the parking lot is going set the flammables off without any person pulling the trigger?[/quote] I'm sure that an unmolested firearm is also far more dangerous than the 15 or 20 gallons of flammable liquid know as "gasoline" most vehicles carry. I also wonder, how much more dangerous is an unmolested firearm sitting in a parked, unoccupied vehicle sitting in a parking lot than is a firearm inside an occupied vehicle being driven down the highway just a few feet outside the fence of that parking lot??? While I'm not suggesting that the decision about the appropriateness of a "parking lot" law should be based on risks; if we were going to do so I would think the far greater risk is the gasoline most vehicles carry or the firearm in the occupied vehicle driving down the road who could pull the trigger.

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1353272288' post='847758'] Do you want the government to make you do something with your property simply to satisfy a stranger's convenience and sense of entitlement? [/quote] Here is what our Constitution has to say about the matter. Article 1 § 8. Deprivation of life, liberty or property under law; due process "That no man shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseized of his freehold, liberties or privileges, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any manner destroyed or deprived of his life, liberty or property, but by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land." Due process allows your peers to decide what is going to be allowed with respect to the subject at hand. I do not see anything that say whatever any single property owner may decide is to rule. That pesky "judgment of his peers" interferes with the absolute enjoyment of whatever one may decide to do on, or with their property, but nevertheless, there it is. That can be the County Commission, a City Government, (or agencies of either) that stand for our peers in legislating or mandating rules and regulations, some good, some not so, but effective none the less. I do not read anything in there that precludes "private property" business or personal from inclusion. Then one has to consider the last part of the Article, where deprivation of ones property may be achieved through the "law of the land." Stepping back to Article 1 § 26. Weapons; right to bear arms "That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime." Therein lies the rub with respect to the issue at hand, the Tennessee Constitution [b]specifically[/b] references how issues related to arms are to be considered. To DaveTN's point, I agree with him that the current TCA code is in fact against the intent and letter of the Constitution, as our ability to bear arms should not be "sold" and it is in fact guaranteed though currently denied except at cost of a permit. (Though I much prefer the system we have to say that of Illinois, where there is no chance to carry) I am all for working to achieve "Constitutional Carry", and believe it is the right (correct) thing to do. Having spent the majority of this summer embroiled with a private property issue involving my 85 year old Father, I have come to the firm conclusion that there are no "private property" Rights in Tennessee. The convicted, and still on probation meth dealer that lives next door to my aged parents strung a barbed wire fence across a major portion of their front yard, taking in the drive way that goes along their dividing line that feed the barn that has been part of my Father's property for over 100 years since the original deed was drawn up. The Sheriff came out and said that even though he knew where the property line lay, he could not make this piece of filth remove the fence until such time as my parents hired a surveyor and filed suit to have the fence removed, as it fell under "adverse possession" standards. We filed the suit, hired a registered surveyor to run the meets and bounds of the deeds, all in all out over $3,000.00 so far in cost. The original incident took place in June of this year and we still have not come to closure. The Sheriff did finally make the interlopers take the first fence down after the points were established, but he next day the guy puts a new one up over 4 feet across the property line, and it took another month to get that one moved. There was a restraining order issued by the Chancery Court Judge against the people next door, saying they were to not harass my parents or to interfere with their enjoyment of their property. The clown would park his truck pointed at my parents bedroom and keep the bright lights turned on, and hit his alarm on the vehicle. We gave video of the acts to the Sheriff, but he said that he or one of his officers would have to witness it. TDEC is doing a Project to remedy a gas tank lead from the neighbors property which used to be a store of sorts (these people purchased from the original owner). It infiltrated my parent's well requiring a tank yank and drilling numerous wells that pump through a huge set of filters. The neighbors threatened the TDEC employees to the point they will not service the filters without a Sheriff's Deputy on site while they are there. (TDEC can make the Department protect them, my parents do not share that weight) A person's property is not his castle it seems.

[quote name='barewoolf' timestamp='1353250199' post='847588'] Are civil rights allowed to be violated on private property, as in the parking lots of the workplace? How about in restaurants? Is it permissible to discriminate against blacks in these places? Then why is it ok when its the 2nd Amendment that's being violated? [/quote] I am really, really getting tired of seeing these comments. A person's skin color, sex or disability is in no way similar to an inanimate object and comparing them as such is offensive. Gun - inanimate object\ Shoes - inanimate object Hat - inanimate object Ice cream - fun inanimate object Skin color - not an inanimate object Sex - not an inanimate object Disability - not an inanimate object Age - not an inanimate object See the difference?

[quote name='gregintenn' timestamp='1353266467' post='847716'] What is that one thing that, no matter what, UT always does Derrick Dooley? [/quote] They pay off fired coaches

[quote name='barewoolf' timestamp='1353241513' post='847519'] .... If one could only have one AR, I'm kinda thinking that a pistol with the tube might be the way to go. [/quote] Well, first, I simply don't see not having an AR rifle at all, just to have an AR pistol. However, if you start with an AR pistol you can keep a rifle upper and go back and forth, maximizing use of the lower, so in the sense of a convertible "kit" firearm it has been a pretty attractive idea to me, so been thinking about doing exactly that for a while. But really, have just about come to conclusion that with a 6 or 7" (barrel which I would prefer to keep it closer to real pistol) the anemic performance of the round with that length, the noise, and extra length needed for the conventional length buffer tube just aren't worth it to have something kewl. Makes a bit more sense if I wanted to maybe go 10" barrel and later make it SBR too, but that's another genre that just doesn't much appeal to me for whatever reason. Or do it with another caliber, which I don't really wanna jump into either at this point. So all in all, I'm currently thinking this is one of those things I could do but likely won't. As far as having a "battle caliber" pistol only, I've come to understand the ergonomic attraction of the PLR-16 or the Drago, with the latter easily becoming SBR too for those wanting to go that route. - OS

I would love to live in the country, but I can't afford the amount of land needed to keep my neighbors far enough away. I don't see the point of country living if your neighbors are still on top of you. Until I can afford such a piece of land, I'm thankful for a homeowners association that keeps my neighbors in line.

This (below) is a good investment. There are tons of videos out there on reloading, but I read the book because doing it wrong can be dangerous. There's also lots of help on forums like this. [url="http://www.amazon.com/The-ABCs-Of-Reloading-Definitive/dp/1440213968"]http://www.amazon.com/The-ABCs-Of-Reloading-Definitive/dp/1440213968[/url]

Heres a heart warming neighbor story from yesterday. Lawn company cuts her grass, blows a four foot pile of leaves from her yard into mine. (I have no trees.) Yes, I blow them back. She comes out and yells at me, " I paid to have those blow there!) Me> " What?!" I feel your pain.

Can't beat Daniel Defense. Top notch company. Yes, the only difference between the two uppers is the barrel. The 300 uses a 5.56 bolt I doubt that the ammo will come down much because of the 30 cal bullets. They're just gonna be more expensive. Good caliber to reload. The mags are compatable (short answer). The BLK is a shortened 5.56 case. Some bigger bullets can bump into the internal rib in the mag (a Dolomite discovery), but that may be limited to cast bullets. I don't think you'll have any problem with factory ammo. No reason to steer clear unless you are bothered by the higher ammo cost. I reload it, so it's not that bad. It's a great caliber. Lots of info from the horse's mouth... [url="http://300aacblackout.com/"]http://300aacblackout.com/[/url]

Seems to me SHTF means being able to eat, and a bow would be a fine tool for that in many cases.

That sucks. My goal is to move to the country, but I need many acres between me and a neighbor for just the problems you've been having. Plus I like my privacy.

[quote name='TMF' timestamp='1353248138' post='847561'] No one is disputing that. The point is, to shut off all business to anyone who voted for a different candidate is a stupid business move and is pretty childish to boot. [/quote] My guess is his business has done very well since putting up the sign.

[quote name='45guy' timestamp='1353247716' post='847555'] It's the fact that as a free person I can make the call not to offer my services to someone regardless of the reason.[/quote] No one is disputing that. The point is, to shut off all business to anyone who voted for a different candidate is a stupid business move and is pretty childish to boot.

This is a guy that truly put his money where his mouth is. Would I alienate 50% of the people at my gun store? Probably not, but I sure wouldn’t turn around and leave because of this guy’s sign. Many people felt like they had been kicked in the guts when Obama was reelected. I agree fully with his statement and would fully support him.

Good except for the fact of the warning, now he will get the chance to do it again.

I like shorty's (pistols & SBR's), the only problem I have encountered with the ones I have owned is how loud they can, and when I say loud I mean really, really loud, the muzzle blast out of the 5.56 versions can be felt from several shooting stations away & multiple layers of hearing protection is recommended/required to avoid any potential hearing loss. Keep in mind that trying to suppress any 5.56 barrel shorter than 12" will quickly ruin an expensive can, there is simply still too much pressure out of the short barrels. As far as accuracy & power, I have found that if I keep it within 100 yards or so they are just as accurate as their larger brethern, power is still good enough for social work, albiet velocity/energy is diminished the farther out you go. There are also two basic ways to properly hold the buffer tube versions, the first is the same way you would hold a non tubed version, that is by pushing the weapon out creating tension with a sling in order to stabilize the weapon enough to sight down the sights. The second is for a tubed version only, which is to "shoulder" the buffer tube and tuck yourself down behind the weapon in order to sight down the sights, a good foam buffer tube cover is required or this will be rather uncomfortable for any period of time. Because of their size they are very handy, and are great bases for making an SBR, but as mentioned above there are some trade offs, I do not have any experience with any other chamberings other than 5.56 so I am afraid I cannot really give much input on those.

I've had two PLR's. It's surprising, the amount of recoil compared to a conventional AR. However, after gathering info here about the suffering of the ballistics to the .223 round by that short of a barrel... I opted to sell them. You might want to consider that.

[quote name='gregintenn' timestamp='1353204422' post='847392'] How'd you do that?[/quote] Above the picture on the main page is a button labels "share" I clicked it and check the box that said "grab the BBcode". It gave me a long link and I deleted everything before [IMG] and after [IMG/]

sad that they went under,unions suck but the company was also a mismanaged mess - Really I am not a fan of the product,wonder bread,twinkies and dingdongs really sucked and were bottom of the barrel for health and quality .. They will more than likely reopen under another name with a different backer or corp umbrella and it will be non union. Who lost? The strikers lost,the unions lost but im certain twinkies will be back , hopefully they will bring back the original recipe

At the recent show here in Knoxville there was a guy selling some stuff called New View or Vue. Or something close to that. It was a pink liquid that you smear all over your glasses and then wipe away. This stuff is pretty amazing. No fogging at all and the best part is it also fills in small scratches. My glasses are clearer than that have been in a long time. I was getting ready to go get new glasses because fot eh small chips and scratches (I am hard on my glasses) but with this stuff I think I can get a lot more use out of them. Dolomite

[quote name='gregintenn' timestamp='1353212573' post='847449'] Can I get a big ANCHOR DOWN!!! for those Dores??!!!?? [/quote] Did I call it or what? Hell, they failed 3 or 4 times in the red zone and had two touchdowns called back. Could have scored like 80 or something if they had clicked just a hair better. - OS

[quote name='JC57' timestamp='1353210918' post='847438']How does he know who you voted for unless you volunteer the information? We have a secret ballot in this country last time I checked.[/quote] Ha, I think it was supposed to be the honor system. I voted for Romney, but if I saw that sign I woulda turned around and gone somewhere else.

sounds to me like the guy who owns the gun store is a nut bag.

Not me, I love this time of year. Especially Christmas (it has nothing to-do with presents though). I do agree that the Christmas theme shouldn't begin until after thanksgiving, though. posted from my phone

TN has no mag restriction except on migratory birds i.e dove, ducks, geese......

[quote name='S&WForty' timestamp='1353167423' post='847180'] Don't single out liberals. There are liberal gunnies, even on this forum! We mustn't offend! [/quote] Maybe you mustn't offend. Liberals can kiss my a$$.

[quote name='Major Kong' timestamp='1353109673' post='846892'] I've been out of town for the last week. What'd I miss??? [/quote] There ain't no more twinkies, and Obama is still a commie

yyyuuummm [img]http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17xa5ldvlps80jpg/original.jpg[/img]

[quote name='GKar' timestamp='1353094358' post='846734'] He was decidedly PO'd at John et al, and I bet that doesnt subside anytime soon. [/quote] You would be correct there. Several in the legislative business are of the same opinion, but, when the Republicans were in the ascendancy, they used his "scorched earth" policy as a cudgel against the Democrats. I have copies of Joint Resolutions signed by Ramsey that laud John's efforts, which at the time were his like treatment of Democrats that he delivered to the Republicans over the last two years. Being no Stranger to the Rain myself, I have been sacrificed and crucified over the years, I may not constantly remind the players as to how they acted the last round, I just never forget. I am willing to work with anyone who is aiming for the same goal at the moment, but I rarely stand away from the wall far anymore. [quote name='QuietDan' timestamp='1353095418' post='846752'] Take the "permit holders only" position and run with it. Then in a year or two, campaign for Constitutional Carry. Half a loaf is always better than none. It's also incrementalism, win a battle, win another battle, win another battle, all enroute to your objective. Trying to do it all in one jump often gets you nothing. Be Strategic. IMO. [/quote] QuiteDan, I have been for reaching a reasonable accommodation from the start. From back when Rep. Josh Evans put forth the first proposal that I worked with, to the present. The tales that have been told, the "course corrections" by numerous individuals are all fresh in my mind. I simply want to afford my daughters the ability to provide for the defense of my grand babies in a legal manner, as the government and the employers are not of a mind, nor under any obligation to do so. This whole issue should be viewed (in my perspective) as an extension of our "Castle Doctrine" and any legal thing that is permissible for non criminal Citizen to have should be allowed in their vehicle as long as it is not taken out and displayed. A weapon's use is already covered elsewhere in the TCA code and requires no other discussion.

It's the wrong move... We should be pushing for removing government land and buildings from being posted under 1359. Not trying to overrule the rights of private citizens to control their own land.

[quote name='Worriedman' timestamp='1353070581' post='846451'] In a conversation in his office in September, he says the bill will NOT include a "Fed Ex" style fenced lot exclusion. We shall see.[/quote] Yep. Forgive me if I have a lack of faith in this area. I remember Ronnie courting us gun owners quite heavily when he was running for governor he said a lot then and we know how that turned out.

I refuse to support this until the state of Tennessee recognizes the right to bear arms. To say that the state won’t recognize your right but a business must is just a thug government. The government thinks they have the right to outlaw carrying loaded guns in your car for the safety of the public, but a business can’t come to the same conclusion for the safety of their employees? What a load of crap; this bill stinks and doesn’t deserve the support of gun owners, and won’t get the support of citizens.

Imagine that, being responsible for the services you receive as a direct consumer. Imagine that!

Here is a hint....the case holders that fit in your press also fit in the puller...just like the "universal" one that comes with it. Saves time if you have a couple to pull.

I use mine every time I reload. It is something I thought I didn't need in the begning and now realize I can't live without it. Dolomite

Didn't think of that, but it could be the humidifier was well. I'd call the installer and have then come look at it. It shouldn't smell at all, especially if it's got an air scrubber. That's the whole point, to eliminate odors and particulates.