Marswolf

Never bring a baton to a gun fight.

De moi?

I kinda liked Fred before I knew his position on the issues. Now if Rudy really is a gun lover....

It would have been better if I hadn't had just take a mouthful of Guinness Extra Stout before reading this.

Yeah, 9mm handguns and rounds suck. That's why I still carry one when I go out of country.

I'm glad the photos were posted. But I can tell you that Israeli carry is a lot different from Colombian carry. And I really don't see any situation where I would carry that way. I could relate one situation many years ago in Panama in which Israeli carry would have resulted in my immediate demise. But as an academic matter, I think the technique is interesting. Yes, I would say foolish - but interesting.

It seems to me that this technique was a solution to a problem that largely doesn't exist these days. I really see some severe disadvantages in not keeping a round in the chamber. But it was interesting to see how Israelis do this. The one person I know who carry this way (G21 SF) does not turn the gun on its side when preparing to rack but brings it upright to his side. I can see positioning and mechanical advantages both ways.

An XD-9 is a good gun, but it certainly can not really replace an 92. Just tell your wife that you are trading her new 92.

I'll bet he doesn't have another Italian made Beretta 92. Now if the trade was for a Gl........

I'm all for this guy. He just needed to plan a better getaway.

Yeah, but Streisand just endorsed Hillary. Which actor should I trust the judgment of? Personally, I wouldn't vote for anyone who isn't endorsed by an out-of-work actor.

My Beretta 92SB goes back to the mid 80s and I still carry it for some uses. I wouldn't think of trading it for anything. If I could keep only one pistol, it would be my old Beretta.

What Phantom said.

Yeah, but it won't go in your back pocket concealed in shorts and a T-shirt like the P3AT. Actually, I like the idea of a revolver with a thumb spur hammer for a lot of people. I tend to think of them more as a purse gun than a pocket gun, but if used in Thunderwear they might impress the ladies.

The Nashville rag did put the HCP list online for a little while in a database. Took it down after they got a lot of hate email.

Keep me up on this. I hate those Big Brother traffic cameras and would love to see them go down in flames. No I have not gotten a ticket from one.

I wonder that too. I just looked for it for another topic but couldn't find it. But let me tell you my opinion of Glocks.

It was a good topic. No problem with that. We think we need to review all the trainers. Some are very good and some are dip-heads. Information is what the board is about. But after a while the info/opinions/conclusions get posted and don't need to be restated endlessly. If there is new info, then fine.

Where on earth did he come up with that??? :confused: The "Castle Doctrine" provision of TCA 39-11-611 says you do not have to retreat if you are not engaged in unlawful activity. So, it simply does not apply if you are doing something illegal. But.... The provision preventing you from being charged has absolutely nothing to do with 39-11-611. It is covered under: 39-17-1322. Defenses. — A person shall not be charged with or convicted of a violation under this part if the person possessed, displayed or employed a handgun in justifiable self-defense or in justifiable defense of another during the commission of a crime in which that person or the other person defended was a victim. That provision of TCA has not changed one letter. It is absolute as long as the defense is justified. So, if you are illegally packing in Applebee's and someone comes in to shoot up the place, you may blast him and not be charged if the defense of yourself and others was justified. You just can't claim that Castle Doctrine made it unnecessary for you to retreat (which was never part of TCA anyway). However...having the illegal weapon might eliminate your civil protection against a suit normally prevented under TCA 39-11-622. 39-11-622. Justification for use of force — Exceptions — Immunity from civil liability. — (a) (1) A person who uses force as permitted in §§ 39-11-611 — 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201, is justified in using such force and is immune from civil liability for the use of such force, unless: (A) The person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in § 39-11-106 who: (i) Was acting in the performance of the officer's official duties; and (ii) Identified the officer in accordance with any applicable law; or (iii) The person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer; or ( The force used by the person resulted in property damage to or the death or injury of an innocent bystander or other person against whom the force used was not justified. ( The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by a person in defense of any civil action brought against the person based upon the person's use of force, if the court finds that the defendant was justified in using such force pursuant to §§ 39-11-611 — 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201. So, you still can't get away with collateral damage.

Careful Mark...I know where you live and I may sic one of my pet dinosaurs on you! About the 50 yard shooting thingy, Mark@Sea and I were talking about that yesterday over coffee. Except that we were talking about shooting various handguns at 100 yards, including 1911s....

I must add Vanderbilt to my list of places to safely rob people at.

Folks, do you think we've about done this topic to death?

This is what you want: http://www.foxlabs.net/pepperspray.shtml

Unless things have changed, you have to fill out the form completely and pay them the $5 to get a duplicate at a later date. Lady here at DOT told me getting the duplicate would invalidate the original. She was/is wrong about that.

Poor Bristol's Krispy Kreme closed down some time ago. Now they have to be imported from Kingsport.