Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/13/2013 in all areas
-
9 points
-
It'll be a cold day in hell before I act or portray myself as a victim. Im simply tired of it being rubbed in my face. You have the NAACP, BET, United Negro College fund, scholarships for any and all miniorites, relegions and sexual orientations. You have assocations for every race, color, creed and relegion. Except for white Christian. I don't really care if your black, white, hispanic, asain, straight, gay, muslim, atheist, catholic, whatever. I didn't own slaves, and I don't burn crosses. I owe no one an apology. You leave me alone, I'lll leave you alone. This race shit has to stop, and this is exactly what they have turned this in to. This trial will receive national attention simply because a white male shot a black male. And thats bullshit Sent from the backwoods of Nowhere4 points
-
4 points
-
This is what most people are over looking. How far do you have to run from a stranger following you? What if Martin were a women who knew that she would eventually be caught and over powered? At some point, if you feel that you can't get away you must confront the threat. I've been in a similar situation where my fight or flight response took over. I fought and disengaged until I could get assistance. One more thing. A lot of people are attempting to apply adult logic to Martins actions. I have a very bright young man who may be attending an Ivy League university in the near future, but sometimes he leaves me perplexed by his thought process. No matter how big, strong, smart or fast they are young people are not always equipped to make the right decisions. Yes, there are exceptions as evidenced the the thousands of us who have been in combat during our teenaged years. Some are fast to point out Martins eminent future as a thug, yet fail to mention Zimmermans actions as a flawed adult with several run ins with the law. As I have mentioned before, this case is not about what Zimmerman and Martin were or aspired to be. This case is solely about the actions of two individuals who crossed paths on a tragic Florida evening.3 points
-
Can't have America being the hero these days. :rolleyes: Hollywood can suck my ass.3 points
-
How is that even possible? What makes calling someone something vulgar any different that using a racial slur? At any rate, y'all are nitpicking my post in order to ignore the point I made. Folks are prosecuted all the time for shooting a person in a place they have a legal right to be and aren't breaking any laws. The point I'm making here is INTENT. If your intent is to provoke an attack or violent behavior in order to use your weapon in self defense it doesn't matter how many times they bounce your head off the pavement. Nitpicking? Not only are you using poor analogies, you're also implying that you somehow had the power to read Zimmerman's mind during the time ofbthe incident. There is zero proof, anywhere, that Zimmerman had the intent to engage in a physical altercation with Martin. If I hear a noise in my backyard and go outside to investigate, this doesn't mean I am doing so with the intent to do anything other than find out what's going on. Once there, if I am put in the position to defend my life, property or family, I will take the necessary measures. There are ZERO facts to back up any claims that Zimmerman intended on physically harming Martin in any way, shape or form. None. You can presume and assume all you want, but the facts [as we know them to be] speak for themselves. If you consider him guilty, it's souly based on emotion and the fact that you may have handled the situation differently. If you are comfortable with the justice system operating in such a fashion, let's hope you are never in the position to be judged by a group of your peers who would have chosen to handle any given situation differently than yourself. Or you could convince yourself that you'd never find yourself in such position. I have no problem with someone having an opinion opposite of my own, but please back it up with some facts. Afterall, this is a situation where a man's freedom is at stake. I, for one, do not take such a situation lightly, even if I have no dog in the hunt. We also must not forget, law enforcement initially concluded that not only did Zimmerman not commit a crime when shooting Martin, he also did not commit a crime leading up to the shooting. As far as I know, they still are not claiming he was guilty of a crime leading up to the shooting. To me, it seems this case wouldn't even be going to trial, had it not been for the emotional outcry from the community. Had Martin been gunned down on his way home from the store by some gangbanger on the street corner, we wouldn't even know his name.2 points
-
2 points
-
There is no "annual renewal", I believe type 01 FFL is the ginormous sum of $200 for 3 years and cheaper renewal after that, so I highly doubt this "explanation". I'd posit it's more a simple overall assessment of total net profit vs salaried hours based on projected gross sales. Selling guns is rather labor intensive compared to customer throwing something in the cart -- from stocking them, keeping bound book on both inventory and sales, showing them, checking 4473, doing TICS/NICS, having manager double check everything, and even walk the customer out with it. - OS2 points
-
2 points
-
I guess I should head over to the projects and start yelling ni**er to every black person I see. Since that isn't illegal to do (protected under the first amendment) I should be good. Then I get to shoot the first person who tries to kick my ass (since assault is illegal)'and I'm protected under the right to self defense. Apparently if the only thing that matters is whether or not I'm breaking the law when the confrontation happens I should be good to go, right? Really awesome too since there are all kinds of "thugs" on that side of town. Y'all wish me luck, I'm gonna go hunt some darkies.2 points
-
So...it's bad for Zimmerman to "put himself in danger" by trying to protect his neighborhood? I guess we should just hide in our homes and hope the thugs break into someone else's house. You are right, Trayvon wan't a real criminal...he was just an up and coming one...that's why he attacked Zimmerman instead of just putting a cap in his ass.2 points
-
No, you should not put yourself into a situation of danger. Be a witness from a safe place. What if Travon was a real criminal? He would have shot George for just looking at him. As a police officer I have seen too many people try to do too much and get hurt or go to jail themselves.2 points
-
Other than Big Ed's and taking Spots up on his offer, go into Knoxville. It's not even 15 miles from OR to West Knox.2 points
-
The play stupid games and win stupid prizes theory has been in my mind this whole time, FOR BOTH PARTIES. I could go out at night and dress like a thug, walk the streets with a large hoodie, walk in the shadows, but I don't because I may not be able to handle the repocussions. I could go out and play neighborhood watch commander but I don't because it's stupid. If I see something suspicious I call the police or take good notes so in case a crime occurs I can turn over information. If I am getting paid to wear my badge I will do my job.2 points
-
I think you nailed it...I think sweet little Trayvon is dead primarily because he had a thug-want-a-be attitude and wanted to prove he really was a thug. Now I freely admit that's pure conjecture on my part but it's conjecture based on information that, unfortunately, likely won't be admitted at trial. Well TM proved he was a thug. And now hes dead because of it. Ive stayed out of this thread, mainly because I don't want to create bad blood with friends on here over something like this, and because I don't haveenough information. Based on what Ive seen, heard and read here is my 2 cents which is pretty worthless with this inflation. Zman saw a young thug walking through his neighborhood and called the law while keeping an eye on him. At some point between hanging up with law enforcment and getting back into his truck, Zman was jumped by TM in an effort to make sure Zman knew better than to "disrespect him" by following him. After having his head bounced off the curb Zman did the exact same thing most hcp holders would have done in fear of their life. He drew his legally carried firearm and shot and killed the man attacking him. Zman made a bad decision by following TM on foot, but he was doing what he thought he should by trying to keep thugs out of his neighborhood who may be looking for their next score on a house. Police say it was a good shoot, the race baiters get involved, police fear the mob and bring Zman up on charges at a later date. I didn't contribute to either one because I have trouble paying my bills month to month, much less helping someone else. But I'm sure as hell not going to make some hood rats parents ghetto rich because their son spun the wheel and hit the jackpot. TM was a thug who got what he deserved. The only thing I hate is that it came from a ccw holders gun who is now being brought up on murder charges for defending himself rather than in a driveby by one of his fellow bangers. This is getting MSM attention because a 30 yr old white male shot a 17 yr old black male. Had this been the other way around, the trial wouldnt have garnered any attention. If you dont believe me look up the story on the black men who shot the kid in the stroller. Or the illegal immigrant who raped and killed a 9 month old then tried to flee back across the border. The msm has an agenda to help this administration, which means protecting the minorities and persecuting the evil, white, patriot, Christian males at every opportunity. They have hung Zman out to dry, and I will not be one who celebrates him having hits on his head and being in fincial ruin as justice for a dead thug Sent from the backwoods of Nowhere2 points
-
I have said that from the beginning, Martin utilized stand your ground and Z resorted to self defense. I am not saying either was wrong or right.2 points
-
I would. But when they start running from me; I’m not getting out and chasing them or engaging an innocent citizen walking down the street while I am armed. You mean why didn’t Martin have a duty to retreat? He should have run away, he could easily outrun Zimmerman. He had no right to defend himself against a fat guy chasing him with a gun? When this started it was all about “Stand Your Ground†. Now that that doesn’t fit Zimmerman, but does fit Martin; it’s not about that anymore. The only mistake Martin made was that he wasn’t equipped to defend himself against an attacker carrying a gun.2 points
-
Following someone is not illegal. Truthfully Z could have legally followed Martin all the way to his front door. Martin had the legal right to confront and use force instead of retreat under stand your ground. I can't say that I may not do the same if I was being followed.2 points
-
What I pity are those folks who are so damn sure about "facts" they have absolutely no way of knowing and who rejoice that a man (Martin) is dead OR who wishes that another man's (Zimmerman) life is ruined regardless of the outcome of the trial (even to the point of saying they hoped Zimmerman would be forever broke and in fear for his life from "hits" placed on his head). I find the above ^^^ pretty disgusting; most especially for someone who passes himself of as some highly experienced LEO.2 points
-
I’ve had four college classes (many, many years ago) that had I continued, would have eventually earned me a bachelor degree in criminal justice. So needless to say, my “book knowledge†of law enforcement/criminal justice is outdated and limited and my real-world street experience is non-existent. So; I acknowledge that I may be missing something here that those of you with real law-enforcement or legal experience may not be missing. That said, if we can, let’s forget for the moment that this is the Zimmerman/Martin case, and also forget the “Neighborhood Watch†issue and what race anyone was and let’s just deal with person “A†and person “B†for now. I don’t see/don't understand how person “A†is doing anything illegal by following person “Bâ€â€¦if it is illegal could someone enlighten me on why/how it is??? Maybe there is something critical that I’m “missingâ€, however, I just don’t see how person “A†following person “B†(because “A†thinks person “B†is “suspiciousâ€) in any way gives person “B†the legal right to physically attack person “Aâ€. Am I wrong about that and if so, could someone explain how I’m wrong/what I’m missing??? I also don’t see how person “A†following person “B†constitutes any sort of a threat to person “Bâ€; at least not if “following†is all person “A†is doing…am I wrong about that and if so, enlighten me, please because it seems to me that person “A†would have to do something overtly hostile (threatening language, demeanor, perhaps showing a weapon, disparity of force, etc) before person “B†has any legitimate reason for attacking person “A†and frankly, I’m not even sure person “Bâ€, even then, has the legal "right" to start a physical confrontation with person “Aâ€??? Now, bringing this back to the Zimmerman/Martin case, I freely admit that Zimmerman may have acted stupidly. However, “stupid†or not, all I can see that Zimmerman did (at least as much as we know he did) is that he was following and/or somehow trying to keep an eye on Martin because the thought Martin was “suspiciousâ€. I don’t for a moment think his intent was to “just go shoot Martin†as was suggested above. At the very least, there is no way in hell anyone here could know that! So, if what Zimmerman did was not illegal and if what Zimmerman did, did not constitute an “imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury†then wasn’t Martin’s attack illegal (assault)? Further, if Zimmerman was did not present an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to Martin then wasn’t Martin’s physical attack not only an illegal assault but, if it put Zimmerman in legitimate fear for his life, didn’t Martin’s attack give Zimmerman the legal right to defend his life and use deadly force to do so? I suppose what I’m trying to say is that if I’m not doing anything illegal nor anything that would present an imminent threat of death/serious bodily injury to a person but that person violently attacks me I AM going to defend myself and if the attack is violent enough to put me in legitimate fear for my life I’m going to use deadly force to defend myself. Isn’t that what anyone here would do? Isn’t that precisely WHY we carry a firearm???2 points
-
Wasn't an official intro.....Ricky just walked up and asked Whose Spiffy? to the group of us there. I only panicked for a second before everyone started pointing at me! A pin would work good too. Kinda like a Masonic Ring.......your eye catches it when you see it on someone else. And it would be usable for SASS or any sport with a hat or vest.2 points
-
Nope, I've never hit a rear sight on an XD45 so hard that I knocked one of the tritium vials out. Never! And I don't appreciate anyone insinuating I'd be so stupid as to mess up a set of sights I paid so much for. LOL2 points
-
Dave, I'm sorry but that is just plain wrong, Justice being served because the man is suffering financially. Really? What if he had a wife and kid, would you be happy that his family is having to go without? He hasn't been convicted of anything, and initially was considered a good shoot by the Police dept until the Peanut Gallery decided to pursue this. Sorry but this went from being just your opinion to being that you are happy he's financially broke and will not be able to see the light of day; that's just plain wrong in my eyes and in a civilized world. What about the TM family and there million dollar lawsuit, so you are happy that they are going to be hood rich now, because they son dropped the ball? I can debate with you all day long and find it entertaining, but that statement just rubbed me the wrong way and lost total respect for you..2 points
-
I think many here are afraid this verdict will somehow compromise their ability to defend themselves; I don’t. Tell me how you think this verdict, either way, would impact you. Do you plan on starting in motion events that lead to a confrontation with an innocent citizen walking down the street? If someone thinks they are going to patrol their neighborhood and engage people walking down the street, or chase them if they run in fear; then yes, you should pay attention to what is happening here regardless of the verdict. That message has already been sent to those that think they can do that; but it doesn’t impact me and never will.2 points
-
This bullshit again?????? Here you go: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/62043-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks/ and to save you some time (even though he went through and edited his article, the numbers haven't changed): http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/03/robert-farago/the-truth-about-the-dhs-mraps/ Its not 2700 vics. And it's not 1.6 Billion rounds of ammunition. That was cleared up. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/26/reps-challenge-dhs-ammo-buys-say-agency-using-1000-more-rounds-per-person-than/ 1.3k-ish per person? I laugh at that. Sounds like a good weekend or a pistol course or two. 350 for the Army? Sounds about right.....and thats fucking embarrassing. The only reason I'm able to shoot as much as I can is that I'm in Afghanistan.....and I'm still having trouble sourcing 9mm. 9mm in Garrison is even worse. Who falls under DHS for this training/duty ammo? CBP, ICE, Air Marshals, USSS, FLETC, Coast Guard, INS, etc. There are a lot of agencies who need to train. Don't cry foul when they ask for ammo . Its also an IDIQ contract, not a purchase order. Also, this "retired" Captain....what's his deal? I would love, love, love to read his OER's. Just reading the last entry on his bio makes me wonder: http://combatsoldier.wordpress.com/about/ He was NOT in the 82nd.2 points
-
Before permits, I carried when I thought I needed to. So did a lot of other folks I knew.2 points
-
I'm really glad you posted here...I'll definitely be following your blog (and appreciate the info you've already provided). Many of us have been "debating" this case sine the beginning and I think all of us who have, whatever our opinions happen to be, are eager for the trial to finally get underway and hopefully get some actual facts on the table!2 points
-
I'll admit to it. Before Tennessee had a permit system, I carried regularly. I hurt no one and broke no other laws and no one was the wiser. After TN instituted a permit system, circa 1993-'94, it was (iirc) a PITA to conform (honestly, I don't remember the specifics, but maybe someone can remind me) that I still didn't get a permit. Around '97-'98, TN changed the law again and made it much easier to get a permit. So, in 1998, my (future) wife and I took a class (Buford Tune in Nashville. What a character!) and got our permits. I still don't believe that I need permission from the state to exercise my right to self-defense, and if the permit law were repealed tomorrow, I would still carry. And (apart from this post) neither you nor the popo would have any idea. I would be much more concerned with concealment than I am right now. Just as I was before 1998. I got my permit despite any worries about being on a "list". Like someone said in a different thread, if I'm not on a list already, somebody's not doing their job.2 points
-
You pay 115 once and I think 50 to renew three years later. Yeah but its still $115 plus a $50 class from someone who may or may not be as qualified as the people they are teaching, all to exercise a Constitutional right. Then if you want to keep exercising your right its $50 every 4 years. How would people feel if you had to take a class and pay a tax to exercise your right to free speech? Or any other rights?. Like I said Im not condoning it, but I understand it. Sent from the backwoods of Nowhere2 points
-
I have experienced the progressive underminings of citizens' rights by a tyranical government in my country of birth Venezuela. That is how they started, undermining the value of the military and having them participate in civil tasks, making them loosen their deffese of the border with Colombia and ignore FARC which is the narcogerrilla terrirosts, doing these things more and more of the true patriot military leaders either oppossed and quit or were kicked out or imprisoned. At the same time these communists led by Chavez, taught and mentored by the Castros, began arming parallell groups of militias called "Circulos Bolivarianos" who were used to terrorize the citizenry. At the same time the national guard was being purged of any opposition and given more and more power to control internal ('domestic") uprisings... through all this they made it harder and harder for the common citizen to own guns finally banning gun ownership but for a select few with influence, a lot of money or connections with the goverment and always blaming the raising crime rate for said gun control. Right now people are finally waking up and realizing the terrible damage Chaves's reign did and what his sucessors are doing, they're waking up because they are no longer blinded by the prescence of their hero. It is a critical time in the country after the current administration that took over with Chaves's death stole the elections and have been forcing all powers to legitimize it. The problem is that the opposition and the citizens who now know they are the majority have no choice but to hold peaceful protests and ask for international intervention. At all these peaceful protests a few people die, more are wounded and many imprisoned, less and less people go now in fear of what happens. The "Circulos" "Tupamaros" and other armed groups terrorize and hurt people while the national guard who act like they are not there but they ride motorcicles carrying long guns in plain flags like they were flags. less and less people will protest in the street. It is very unlikely the corrupt government will fall. 14 years going on 15... His first canpaign run was on CHANGE and the end of traditional corrupt government. I could'nt yet vote and was telling my friends not to vote for him, his associations warned us he was a communist. They all laughed at me with similar insults as your tin hat joke. This is serious. I couldn't yet vote here when I was telling all my friends about BHObama's associations, I became a citizen and voted agaist him in the second election, it's all I have done until now I am writing this... I am convinced he read Chavez's history and is following his and Castro's manual... This is serious. Before dismissing it like it were a joke let's all just look at the facts and read the history. The communists are reading the history, they know how to make us not do anything until it is too late.2 points
-
The thing is, it is illegal to start a fight. It is not illegal to "patrol" your neighborhood for possible illegal activity. If you see someone or something that appears suspicious in your neighborhood, it is not illegal to further investigate. Even if Zimmerman happened upon Martin and asked him what he was doing, that is not illegal. If Zimmerman physically assaulted martin first, that would have been illegal. But there is zero proof that happened. As far as I can tell, at least up to this point, there is zero evidence Zimmerman broke any laws. We have the testimony and bloody pictures of Zimmerman with two cuts to the back of his head and a bloody nose that appears to be swollen to twice it's size. If anyone is insinuating these are self-inflicted injuries, you are seriously grasping at straws. Martin is no longer around to contradict Zimmerman's testimony, and anything anyone thinks he would have said holds zero water. As far as I am concerned, unless the prosecution has some damaging bombshells up their sleeves, I can't fathom Zimmerman being convicted of murder. If the jury can take all emotion out of the equation and only consider the facts, a murder conviction is not justified, in my humble opinion. Even if Zimmerman is proven to be a full-fledged member of the KKK and/or a convicted murderer in a previous life, that does not mean he murdered Martin.2 points
-
An estimated 85 to 100 million people were rounded up by their own governments & "disposed of" in the 20th Century, the vast majority of those killed by their own governments were living under communist regimes. Genocide isn't tin-foil hat stuff, it actually happens more than most folks realize, make no mistake about it ... it most certainly can happen here, just as it has happened time after time, in country after country, in fact if history is any sort of indicator, genocide is almost guaranteed to happen when communists seize power. I'm not "fear-mongering" I'm just stating the facts, communists don't play well with others, once they seize enough power absolutely no dissenting opinions are allowed, let alone any sort of actual opposition, if you dissent a little in opinion you are re-educated, if you dare to physically resist you are executed. This is their modus operandi & we should keep a watchful eye on those who keep such a watchful eye on us.2 points
-
I'm not condoning it or saying I do it or would do it. But I can understand people who do it because they are sick and tired of paying to exercise a Constitutional right. This state has no clue what true firearms freedom is. I'm sick and tired of paying $115 to the state and $60 to someone who may or may not know as much or more than me about firearms, firearms safety and carry laws. Sent from the backwoods of Nowhere2 points
-
you are spot on Mark. Congress only cares about what they have to say in order to get re-elected.2 points
-
Why is that so unbelievable? A bunch of Chicago politicians believe they have authority over the rest of the nation.2 points
-
I look at it this way, Zimmerman didn't receive the wounds to his face & the back of his head AFTER shooting Martin. Therefore his claim that he fired in self-defense is undeniable, there is zero doubt in my mind that Zimmerman was being brutally assaulted when he fired his weapon. So I believe anyone & everyone who is pushing for Zimmerman to be charged/prosecuted/imprisoned is doing so for idiological/political/racial reasons. Both Zimmerman & Martin had a right to be where they were, but Martin did not have the right to brutally assault Zimmerman, Zimmerman did however have the right to end/stop that ONGOING (at the time) brutal assault with deadly force, due to the seriousness/immediateness of the situation. Simply put ... you cannot repeatedly/violently smash another person's head into concrete without putting that person in fear of their life &/or serious bodily injury. Had the assault ended & Martin had gotten up to walk away when the shot was fired then & only then should Zimmerman been charged, but from all accounts, the assault was still ongoing when Zimmerman shot Martin. The only crime I can see is charging Zimmerman because Martin "was black" & a bunch of other "black folks" demanded Zimmerman be charged. Sickens me to no end to see such blatent racial politics poison our justice system to the extent where victims of violent crimes also become victims of a corrupt system.2 points
-
Gee...that one may have been my best post ever! ROTFLMAO It made the most sense. :p1 point
-
It’s all arm chair quarterbacking, assumptions and wild azz guesses. Are you implying your opinions are something other than that?1 point
-
Given some of the more "heated' discussions on here, I'm not sure I want some TGO members to identify me on a range. ;)1 point
-
Nope, look mistakes were done on both sides, we don't know what happened that night other than the 911 call and the end result. Did they confront each other, was it a polite conversation or was it an asshat type conversation that led them to blows. We don't know and we'll never know.. But we can't just crucify someone based on mob rule. I'm going to throw this out there: Let's say Zimmerman was a Off duty police officer that was patrolling his neighborhood and the same thing happened, would those that are calling for Zimmerman's head, would you have done the same thing if it was and office duty officer? Another What if: What if Zimmerman was unarmed and still patrolling his neighborhood and he's the one that gets killed, would you say he shouldn't have followed the man? Would those that jumped to hoops for TM, be there now? I'm sorry but play stupid games and in stupid prizes. His parents should have reign him in and none of this would have ever happened. It's easy to pawn it off on some other situation, but as a parent you need to make sure your kid walks a fine line and it reflects on you as a parent. Kid was a problem child and continued to be one, they failed him and he paid the prize for their failure, now they are trying to get rich off his death, shame on them, the lawyers, and the Peanut Gallery.1 point
-
Meh, I think Obama-butt-kisser rags have to, occasionally, run a 'story' or 'editorial' that is (usually mildly) critical of Barry. The reason this is necessary is so that next week when they tell you he walked across the Potomac to heal handicapped children in a Maryland hospital they can claim to be unbiased because they 'criticized' him in the past.1 point
-
You didn't but you consider "Justice" being served due to his suffering, based on your statement. Community didn't want justice, mob rule wanted Justice. If the Community wants Justice, then they would do the right thing and turn in all the Dope Dealers, Thieves, Shooters, Gang Bangers, and every one that is committing crime in the Community and/or against the Community. Ooops wait, you can't do that because you'll be labeled a snitch, but let's use this shooting and a catalyst to deflect the true issue. The Peanut Gallery, should probably spent time in Chicago where Black on Black crime happens on the Daily, Or in St. Louis where a Police Chief trying to police up his city almost died this week by an assailant while driving in a unmarked Police Impala wearing Police Uniform. Like I said, I can debate all day and find it entertaining, just found your statement disrespectful and unbecoming of a civilized person.1 point
-
Zimmerman, the neighborhood watchman, observed suspicious behavior and changed his position to continue to observe suspicious behavior. He called the police early in the observation and gave an accurate report. We forget that Zimmerman had a weapon, had a weapon for the entire time of the incident, and did not use the gun until it was an Absolute Last Resort. By all reports, the gun did not come out of Zimmerman's waistband holster even while Martin was on top of him beating his brains out on the sidewalk and raining Mixed Martial Arts blows to his face. Only when Martin felt the weapon in Zimmerman's waistband, pulled up Zimmerman's shirt and attempted to control the weapon did the gun come into play. Zimmerman was able to retain control of the weapon and fired one contact shot into Martin's abdomen as an Absolute Last Resort. This is self defense, self defense in the light of considerable restraint, self defense as an Absolute Last Resort.1 point
-
Now because E7 tried to destroy the integrity of the jury is there not anything the courts could do? It would seem as though he perjured himself or should be held accountable. The problem with our justice system is it no longer is about justice and that people have no problem lying anymore. If people were actually held accountable for the lies they tell the world would be a better place.1 point
-
If you're worried about bears, then get bear spray. Far more effective than a handgun and the odds of survival are way better for both you an the bear.1 point
-
"Multi-caliber" marking has no actual practical meaning on an AR-15 lower. "Multi" (as some say, without mention of "caliber") seems to have become sort of a convention back when AR pistols first came in vogue, mainly signifying that it wasn't a "rifle", and might have been a nod to certain state laws where registration is necessary along with type of firearm. There are even lowers made in the past that say "pistol" on them, but I believe most of them were assembled as pistols from the manufacturer. My PSA lowers just say "multi" for instance, no "cal" or "caliber". Also, for years, the 4473 classification was "long gun", "handgun", and "both", so some lower makers followed that convention if they weren't making them for a manufacturer to assemble and market a rifle or a pistol. (now 4473 is "long gun", handgun", and "other firearm", changed in 08) "Multi-caliber" seems to perhaps be just more of a marketing convention to make it clear that they have versatility beyond just 5.56/.223, I dunno. Might also be a nod to SBR process, where you have to initially specify caliber, even though you can change it if you like without further paperwork, and regardless of what lower says. But the upshot is that the marking has no legal significance, and never did, at least federally. And no structural significance either, since obviously, you can make an AR-15 from a mil-spec lower that will run some 15 different calibers regardless of what is inscribed on it, and you can make any virgin lower into a pistol or a rifle (and if first built as a pistol, it can go back and forth between pistol and rifle). - OS1 point
-
Are they lubed? It doesn't look like it. If they are not lubed they will lead the bore. I have shot these as well and like them. I have started powder caoting bullets. You can use acetone and powder coating powder. You mix the two and tumble lube the bullets like you would using Lee Alox. Then you bake but I am not 100% convinced they even need to be baked. I have pushed them to over 2K fps and I have read reports of pwople getting to 2,800 fps with the powder coating. Next time I do a batch I will be taking pictures and posting a how to.1 point
-
1 point
-
It’s confusing. The bill is veto proof, but the Governor doesn’t have to sign it. If he refuses to sign it, they have to wait 60 days for it to become law. I don’t know if this extension means that 60 day clock won’t start until July 9 or not. I don’t think there is any way Madigan or Quinn can stop this bill from becoming law. They don’t like that Chicago is not allowed to keep their anti-gun laws in place and are trying to find a way around it. As I said Quinn and Madigan are both going to be running for Governor next year. They couldn’t get done what Chicago wanted, so it could hurt them in the election. That’s a good thing. It shows how arrogant the Chicago machine is. The SCOTUS has ruled their gun ban illegal, the legislature has passed a carry law, and still they are looking for a way to ban both guns and carry. The sad part of this is that the good people of the state of Illinois see what’s going on and don’t like it, but the people living off the government in Chicagoland have the votes. (Same thing is going to happen everywhere else)1 point
-
Not me. Wouldn't matter much one way or the other. From what I've observed there has been race related bias on both sides of this issue from the start. My feeling is the incident was instigated by Z, as it has always been. However, I agree that if the only evidence the prosecution has is the physical evidence from the scene then Z will walk as a free man using the self defense argument. I still am trying to figure how SYG ever made it into the argument at the start of all this. I don't recall Z's lawyers ever suggesting they would use it and it wouldn't apply if Z's story was that Martin had him pinned. You can't make the choice to "stand your ground" if escape isn't an option. We'll see; I'm expecting some revealing evidence to come out when this goes to trial.1 point
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00