Marswolf

Except for the instructors, yes...you are the only one.

As always, I have a mixed perspective. This video is basically a ACLU video. But that doesn't necessarily make it bad. Cops are trained to intimidate you into giving up your rights. There are things you should not admit and you should not permit your vehicle to be searched without reason. I have a friend who is a retired police chief and who lives in Sevierville. He got stopped for something by county cops around Newport. They asked to search and he said NO! He had nothing to hide, but it's a matter of principle with him. He says to always say "no." The officer became very irate. After a few minutes of intimidation techniques, he backed down. He had no probable cause and knew it. After he calmed down my friend told him who he was. I suspect that officer learned something that day. The video, as I recall (haven't seen it in a few months) basically says to not give up your 5th Amendment rights and don't allow a search.. I agree. That's not to say they won't bring in a drug dog trained to do false positives and do a search anyway. That has been known to happen.... But it will be an inconvenience and becomes part of a pattern of deceit on the part of the department. Remember, I'm not anti-cop. I'm pro-professionally acting-cops. Unfortunately the world is filled with bad cops who think the rules are just an inconvenience. I want all of those folks fired and prosecuted if possible.

Yeah, they are ugly-ugly-ugly. But they are good shooters for a carbine. BTW, so is the Kel-Tec sub-2000 A little weird, but a very good shooter, but it will cost you more than the Hi-Point.

Yeah, but would you vote the party line if you got elected?

I have a topic on another board about that, Dave. There aren't many. Just one or two. I am told this is true in Indiana but I haven't checked it out There are more states that allow carry in bars. and more still that let you pack in restaurants that have bars as long as you don't sit in that section or drink while there. I think Kentucky is like that. You can do that in Virginia as long as you open carry. But as far as I know, you can't drink while carrying. I'm sure Virginia is like Tennessee and you can not be "under the influence" of alcohol. I live five minutes from Virginia. Have to keep up with their laws too. But my point is that even if it is only one state that lets you pack and drink, they really don't have a problem because of it. I wonder how many people illegally carry and drink in bars and restaurants but who don't become deranged killers. My guess is "a bunch." I think we imagine problems where they don't exist. We normally see this with the gun-grabbers who predict all sorts of dire consequences if ordinary citizens have guns in their house, pack, don't have to retreat, etc. The problems are imaginary and people who have permits are good enough citizens, as demonstrated by their lack of criminal history, to not become a problem. A carry permit really is a good citizenship card. My feeling is that if I go into a restaurant and have a glass of wine, when I come out I should still be able to legally protect myself from thugs who attack me. I think .04% BAC is a reasonable allowance for drinking and packing. I'd even go for .08%. I don't think Tennessee will ever go with allowing drinking in establishments while packing, although in my opinion it should as long as there are significant restrictions.

Only if it's a John Deer.

I think sometimes we overreact, particularly in the Bible Belt. You can carry your handgun into a bar and drink there in some states. Last I heard, those places do not have blood running under the door of the bars because the patrons get drunk and shoot up the place. At least one state has set a BAC of .04 as the limit for packing. I think that's reasonable myself.

I wish I was there to SELL a bunch of militaria. I'm cleaning up the place and have bins of the stuff.

JayPee makes a valid point. I don't know how many of you have seen TV shows, or have been in court, where an attorney mentions another case to the judge where a similar matter came up and reminds the judge of what the ruling was in that other case. That's case law. I think it is going too far to say case law is as binding as statutory law, but precedent does carry weight and is basically binding on lower courts. But we are currently seeing a case in Heller vs DC where case law has come down on the side of DC for some years in appellate proceedings. But one appellate court ruled differently than the other equal level courts' precedents going back to the constitutional "statute", so we now see SCOTUS settling the matter. There is a pretty good explanation of this at http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p069.htm. The point is that case law, in legal precedents, can change. Generally these precedents are binding on lower courts, but if you can get an equal or higher court to rule differently then you are in business to get the precedent changed. Statutory law only changes when a legislature votes to change it, although court rulings may nullify elements of or whole statutes. An Attorney General's opinion is just that. It has no legal standing with the courts, but it may be user as a guide by LE and other governing bodies. It may also be wrong. I might also mention the concept of jury nullification where a jury simply ignores the law and instructions of the judge and brings in a verdict based on what they think is right. That's another can of worms.

There is an old saying that all things come to he who waits. Including death.

That sounds great. Please tell your mom that we are thinking of her.

I'll be thinking of her.

I think the reason the restaurants don't want this to pass is because there is no advantage to them supporting it. Right now, you can't carry in these places that serve alcohol. If it passes, then they have to make a choice. They either don't post, but assume greater liability if someone does come in and shoot up the place. Or they do post and piss off those of us with carry permits. There has to be a reason for them to support a change. We could boycott restaurants who do not support us, but permit holders only make up 3% of the Tennessee population and besides, boycotts don't work anyway. The other possibility is that the law remove the liability to restaurants who allow carry for shooting incidents. Do you think ambulance chasing attorneys would go for that? The only way we are going to get this put into law is to exchange enough Democrat members in the House with Republicans to vote Naifeh out of the Speaker's seat.

I think this is a valid point. We seem to be discussing how much training we should have to get a carry permit. Maybe the answer is "none." I don't recall hearing about bloodbaths in Vermont and Alaska from people going crazy while carrying legally but without a license.

All in all, you have to be a moron to support gun control/

But who are the liberals and who are the so-called conservatives? Party labels, although imperfect do have consequences.

OMG, Now I'm going to have to steal some Rodney Carrington MP3s.

I'm with you, friend.

I have to agree, and I'm one of those who view the class as just an inconvenience. But I tend to, admittedly, smugly put myself apart from the standard class participants. I'm old enough to have had a Federal carry permit at one time. Reality is reality. I took the class. Scored 100 on both the written and range qualification, of course. I think most folks want the certificate, so they can be legal rather just carry and be illegal. I absolutely understand that concept. It's like wisely, but illegally, carrying in Applebee's. As I've said before, the carry permit card is basically a reassurance of good citizenship. But in a way, that assurance is not necessarily an indication of being the best citizen. Sometimes the best citizens are also rebels.

Len, the question isn't whether he is a Democrat, but whether he will vote party line when pressured to do so. If not, then why is he (or you ) a Democrat?

And if it had been a 45 Extreme-Shock, it would have killed everyone in the building.

I have a buddy in Baghdad who still carries an Alaska license for financial reasons.... His real home is here in Tennessee, so he would have a problem. Of course if they hadn't kept him in, he would be retired and working in Alaska.

Actually, I think you may have a point. Beer is handled differently than liquor in terms of code. Regardless, we don't have a lot of problem around here with the tittie bars. Seems like the redneck bars in Kingsport have more fights and shootings. Of course the titties are probably male at the gay bars in Johnson City.

Yeah, but as you get older you don't look so pretty. Trust me.

Some stuff is trivial, like showing a Glock and saying it is 357 Magnum. There is also a lack of trigger discipline in at least one place. The worse thing is that this is an old video made before the law change and it says you can not carry where alcohol is sold - not served, just sold. I've forgotten a lot of the problems. I'll have to go back and view it again. Oh yeah, it's excruciatingly boring.