E4 No More

They probably told him that he should consider himself lucky that he and his family weren't killed, but we'll be nice and drop the charges.

Actually, I am about to make a move too, and by making this difficult move with my current employer it will open many doors for me in as little as a year. I am interviewing for an outside technical sales position next week. My current role is as an inside technical salesperson. I have been frustrated by having Networking Sales Engineers, (the outside position), coming to me with questions that they shouldn't have when they get paid literally twice the income as I do. By making this move for only a short while it will open doors with resellers/competition that would offer me much more money. The irony at my employer is that in order to get paid what they are offering others hired from the outside you must leave them and come back after a year or two.

I'm with TGO David. They should fight for meaningful changes rather than superficial "messages" such as this.

I was told that there was a "study" that showed that if you didn't change employers every two years, (average), then you miss out of 25% of the income potential during your worklife. I'm finding out that that's VERY true - seeing what lesser capable people are being hired in at where I work. You just have to make sure the grass is really greener on the other side. A friend of mine left where I work to go to work for a competitor at higher pay, but now complains that the insurance and 401k sucks. He is now looking to come back after 1.5 years, and if he succeeds he will be hired back at much more than when he left.

Maybe he just needed a hug! :shrug:

I bet that would really screw with the po-po in states where autos are not legal. :)

Daaaaaaammmmmnnnnnnn! :dropjaw:

Thanks, LJ!

I know a graduate of Overton HS who in all honesty has no idea what the Revolutionary War was about, and thought the 4th of July celebration was just about fireworks.

This might be closer to the truth than you think. Consider that the high school is filled with a lot of kids who don't want to be there but drag down the system for those that do. At least at college there are far more kids who actally want to be there than those who don't, but mommy and daddy insist.

I thought that they were doing away with the NFA Trust "loophole" anyways. That's why I didn't pursue it with Chip.

I consider it a nightmare. :shrug:

They weren't cops, Dave. That's a mighty big difference. They also didn't know what was going on but decided to hold a 62 year old man to the ground and take his property. And they weren't under threat because the 62 year old wasn't doing anything to them like aiming his gun at them. Not knowing what's going on doesn't entitle you to act first and ask questions later.

Seriously? They didn't accidentally hold him on the ground and take his gun away by force. That is in and of itself intent.

Florida laws...if they wanted to be anal-retentive:   784.03 Battery; felony battery.— (1)(a) The offense of battery occurs when a person: 1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other;   787.02 False imprisonment; false imprisonment of child under age 13, aggravating circumstances.— (1)(a) The term “false imprisonment” means forcibly, by threat, or secretly confining, abducting, imprisoning, or restraining another person without lawful authority and against her or his will.   812.014 Theft.— (1) A person commits theft if he or she knowingly obtains or uses, or endeavors to obtain or to use, the property of another with intent to, either temporarily or permanently: (a) Deprive the other person of a right to the property or a benefit from the property.   812.131 Robbery by sudden snatching.— (1) “Robbery by sudden snatching” means the taking of money or other property from the victim’s person, with intent to permanently or temporarily deprive the victim or the owner of the money or other property, when, in the course of the taking, the victim was or became aware of the taking. In order to satisfy this definition, it is not necessary to show that: (a) The offender used any amount of force beyond that effort necessary to obtain possession of the money or other property;

I'm not a hunter, nor do I play one on TV, but I have met several "hunters" in my day that hunt wooded areas but dream of elk hunting in ____. They do not have the budget to get multiple weapons so they get one that'll handle anything. Yes, I realize that if you have just enough budget for one gun then you don't have the budget for the great hunting trip, but those fellers can dream, can't they?

"Life is hard; it's harder if you're stupid!"

Well, I carried a P220 DA/SA on the PD in 1989 for a very short while because I hated the transition. Is the SAO very good? I've been entertaining the idea of a 10mm for a while now.

The ammunition for the Marine Snipers are hand-loaded to recipes unique to their particular rifles by Marines in Quantico, so it's not a stretch that the Navy would do the same.

The others that joined in MIGHT be able to be charged, but I doubt they'd be found culpable since they were probably reacting to the situation of a struggle over a gun. Had they jumped in with the dude in the very beginning then they'd be hosed.

I don't have Facebook so I can't see the remarks: however, I see a lot of the stupid crap they post on news sites that feed from Facebook, and they are un-nervingly wacky, keyboard commando type comments. Sometimes I wonder if this country is headed into another civil war. Perhaps not soon, but.... Clearly, the morons don't consider who's better armed.

:blink:

Could you be a little more vague? I feel that half of this is posted and missing the punchline. :)

So a "tip" is all it takes to kick in a door now days, huh?

Auto could be quite high. I doubt homeowners would cover it since it was in the car off of the property. IIRC, I claimed my rifle under homeowners because auto deductible was higher. It was a long time ago.