BravoLima

It's beyond me how they can say that the votes today were only to move the issue forward for debate yada yada and that they fully support 2A yada yada......well, if you're such a staunch supporter, then why not make every effort to keep it from going any further period! This issue has been debated for months, you know where you stand. You either support our constitutional rights 100% or you don't.

Wow, thanks for the post. This could be very powerful if it made it to the right media outlet!

I hope these companies stand by their word. Unfortunately, hitting the wallet is the strongest message we have these days

It amazes me how our society has become so insensitive or perhaps desensitized to traumatic violence. I mean this is mental and physical trauma at it's peak. Unless a person has been in a war zone, it seems impossible for me to fathom how horrific it must be to be pinned a vehicle with massive gunfire focused on you. Can you imagine the shear terror, fear, how loud it was, and just plain frightening this had to be. I don't care how tough and brawny you are. All of this at the hands of our own public agencies, not a rioting bunch of gang bangers! How could anyone responsible for the government of that city feel like a replacement vehicle, which comes with "strings" attached, is even remotely a fitting restitution. That city owes these citizens a public apology, they need to publicly admit that this was a terrible mistake, and take care of these ladies as if they were soldiers returning from battle. They will be dealing with PTSD for the rest of their lives. They will need and deserve long term "after care". The people of LA should be ashamed.

Maybe I am over simplifying, but it seems to me that the "nays" are failing to digest the fact that while our federal government is supposed to represent the greater will of our country, the concentration of our will as Tennesseans on a national level pales in comparison to the concentration of our will within our own state. Our representation at the federal level has many strings pulling them in many directions, of course our local representation does as well.....but it just seems to me that our state government should realize that if they were to truly take stock in the will of the people who elected them and be real honest, it's pretty clear that the majority of TN constituents support 2A and would support taking our own measures in protecting those rights whether the federal government is willing to or not. Not only are we saying that our state demands our liberties, but we are also telling the country that our state is the place to be if you believe in securing your liberties. Our state should be very attractive to industry that depends on the health of the 2A. We should be putting major efforts into recruiting 2A dependent industry to our state. We secure our rights and we build our economy. I realize this is a bit of a ramble, but hopefully it makes some since.

Thou shall not covet, thou shall not covet, thou shall not covet........lol. Very nice.

Oh, I see....thanks.

Sorry folks, I am a noob to the "innards" of how forums work. I noticed on my profile page there is a green box that says "1 neutral". I cruised through this Feedback and Support trying to figure out what that represented, but didn't come up with anything. I'm sure it's not a big deal, but I am curious. I apologize if I am overlooking something obvious. Thanks, BravoLima

Oh wow, this is disappointing.....I believe this falls into the "two steps back" category.

Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill Posted on December 27, 2012 Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, â€œI have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012. According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows: Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms.  The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.   Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.    Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list. Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including: Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.   Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.   Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.   Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.   Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.   Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.   Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.   Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.” The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban.  Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.” “Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein's “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, availablehere. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.   Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade.    Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.  Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must hear from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx 

What they need to regulate is these violent "life like" video games that kids spend hours playing killing people. The imagery is toxic and desensitizes (sp?) especially those who are in a "dark" place in their life. I think they should be what's banned!

That sounds great, I'll check out their schedule online. Have you noticed what the young kids are shooting? I know IDPA requires at least 9mm. Are the kids shooting 9mm or 22's "just for fun"? Have you noticed what pistol any of the younger ones are using? Thanks for the info!

Really appreciate the reply, thank you. I just checked their website; it looks a little "dated" but apparently their juniors program is 12+. Maybe I'll send them an email and make sure that's current info. Thanks again

Are there any shooting clubs for youth in the Knoxville area? I have an 8 y/o that loves to plink with her Cricket and Walther P22. Would love to find a group out there that can help me foster her interest and knowlege.

What is the best way to dispose of the crow remains?

This story breaks my heart. I pray for this poor family. http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/sep/21/trooper-wife-2-daughters-charged-in-child-death/

As I began reading this article, I thought, cool the city is allowing citizens to take conceal carry classes from the same officers who will be out enforcing those very laws. Citizens will get the expectations straight from the ole horses mouth. They lost my applause as I read on. Apparently, the four hour conceal carry classes will be held without any real guns or ammo. They will use "dummy" guns. Now, it seems to me that's borderline negligent. It's absolutely imperitive people understand the requirements, and I'm sure they can simulate gun safety with dummy guns, but seriously, aren't they concerned they are certifying people who only theoretically know how to handle a lethal weapon. Isn't the part where the instructor observes you handling the live weapon, and shooting the live weapon safely and appropriately kind of important? I presume the lack of live weapons use probably comes down to insurance and liability for the city, but it just seems to me the training will be incomplete. Hopefully, there is more to this story than is being reported. http://gazettextra.com/weblogs/latest-news/2012/sep/18/milton-cops-offer-concealed-carry-training-courses/

@Dolomite, I understand better now. It's funny, I've read all of that before, but just haven't let it sink in that it's illegal for me to carry, BUT I have a valid defense as long as I have my HCP. I looked at it as if it WOULD be illegal, but it's not for me as a HCP holder. what you're saying makes more sense to me now. I think it's bizarre that it's worded that way, I'm sure there are academic reasons. I also was getting hung up on the "search" part in FL. They can search you just for having a weapon. I didn't think in TN they could search you just for having one. Of course I understand them having the authority to approach you and inquire about your carry status, maybe check your permit, but I just a figured that beyond that, they would need further cause to search me. But since I'm technically breaking the law, I guess they automatically have cause. Never thought of like that. So this new perspective makes me beg the question, is there such a thing as "legal carry" in TN or is it technically more correct to say you have a legal defense to carry illegally. LOL By the way, I appreciate the the effort you made by pasting in all the related TCA. Thanks for the lesson. My HGC permit instructor surely could have gone more in depth on this particular subject. Cheers, BravoLima

I see what you are saying. But it sounds like in FL an officer can stop you, search you, etc automatically assuming you are engaging in criminal activity simply because you are carrying. In TN doesn't an officer have to have some reasonable suspicion before stopping you and searching you just because you are carrying?

"Now the courts are saying that anytime you carry a firearm you are committing a crime.  If you have a concealed carry license, that just gives you an “affirmative defense†to the charges." "Now, under the Mackey decision, any time you exercise your Second Amendment right you are engaged in presumably criminal activity. Therefore, you can be stopped, searched, and even arrested for carrying a firearm and then be made to present the “affirmative defense†to a judge that you have a valid concealed carry license." "THIS CANNOT STAND! This Mackey case has been appealed to the Florida Supreme Court (SC12-573).  Florida Carry is filing an Amicus Brief on behalf of the law-abiding gun owners of Florida to reverse this dangerous precedent." Wow, I sure hope our law-abiding gun owner friends in FL can get this reversed. In a nut shell, FL is saying you have the right to 2nd ammemdment, and the right to conceal carry if properly licensed, but if you do you are presumably involved in criminal activity and can be stopped, searched, arrested and then prove to the judge you have a CCL. What? Really? It's late and I'm spent for the day, but unless I'm misunderstanding this article, I see this causing some significant problems. http://www.ammoland.com/2012/09/18/fl-supreme-court-to-decide-is-carrying-a-gun-a-crime-even-with-a-carry-license/#

Your theoretical scenario crossed my mind as well.

As my grandmother says frequently, "people are just crazy these days...." http://www.thestarpress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012120918005&gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

I'm with you. I too am borderline obsessive about clearing a weapon before cleaning or handling it for any other reason. Drop the mag, lock slide, pinky check the barrel from the exhaust port...all while ensuring the weapon is in a safe direction. I can be easily distracted at times, so I know I need double-triple check for clear. I am teaching my girls to shoot; and they know that even if they watch me pull the gun out of the case and show clear that I expect them to follow safe steps and show clear also as soon as it's in their hands.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/sep/12/roane-county-man-killed-while-cleaning-shotgun/ Friends, let's all remember we can never be too careful. My condolences to the family and friends.

Welcome to Knoxville! Denied a purchase? We're you given a reason?