E4 No More

The "Ignore" function is your friend, Mark. I've used it on two members in this forum. It makes participation in these threads so much more enjoyable.

Intresting how he believes that the "Responsible Conservatives" should stand up for drawing lines in name calling, but he doesn't mention the same thing for the left.

Lamar probably doesn't have the balls to face his constituents for various reasons.

Tell them, (particularly Grandpa), "Thanks" for me.

Our fathers and grandfathers during WWII did spend all that time in actual combat zones either. They were rotated off the front for rest, recreation, and replenishment.

I was in the Corps after Jimmy "No Balls" Carter, and I was certainly trained in tactical nukes in 1983. I also believe it was after my discharge that Europe went nuts over the idea of having the neutron bomb in their back yards. I didn't understand the logic behind that one either, but I don't understand why you say Carter killed it.

I will never understand how some sheeple think that you can civilize an uncivilized act, so why do they insist on trying? As far as the "Tactical" part, the neutron bomb is a pretty cool thing, and the tactical one is even better. For those who don't know, it was designed for Europe to kill people, but not destroy the historical buildings. Basically, it turns the area into a huge microwave oven. Can you say, "Pop! goes the Taliban."

Three words: Tactical Nuclear Weapons

Dillon Precision Reloading on BrianEnos.com No taxes and free shipping.

16 •HR 3200 IH 1 SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT 2 COVERAGE. 3 (a) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COV4 ERAGE DEFINED.—Subject to the succeeding provisions of 5 this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable cov6 erage under this division, the term ‘‘grandfathered health 7 insurance coverage’’ means individual health insurance 8 coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the 9 first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met: 10 (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.— 11 (A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in 12 this paragraph, the individual health insurance 13 issuer offering such coverage does not enroll 14 any individual in such coverage if the first ef15 fective date of coverage is on or after the first 16 day of Y1. 17 ( DEPENDENT COVERAGE PER18 MITTED.—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect 19 the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an 20 individual who is covered as of such first day. 21 (2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR 22 CONDITIONS.—Subject to paragraph (3) and except 23 as required by law, the issuer does not change any 24 of its terms or conditions, including benefits and 25 cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day be26 fore the first day of Y1.

Glockster157 advised me, so what he said above.

I had a .45 and still have a 9mm compact, and I liked them just fine. Congrats.

Yes, sir, it was. Everything you see there...except the strong mount.

9mm and .45 dies. I took Glockster157's advice to go with them and get the .308 and .223 dies later. I started to set it up on Saturday and realized that, even with my 43" tall bench I still was too tall for the press, so I ran out to Reloader's Bench to get the strong mount.

+1,000,000!

Did you respond with, "Are you brain-damaged?"

I checked last Saturday. Not posted: Legends Restaurant 1918 ALMAVILLE RD, Smyrna, TN (615) 220-2928

I didn't see this post until this morning, but my wife had other plans for me this weekend anyway. Yeah, it's pretty depressing to set-up your press and have no primers with which to play with the press. After setting up the press I now understand and appreciate more the things that you said to me that kept me from ordering more things than I needed. Setting it up was easy with the exception of being stronger than I realized and snapping the 1/4" bolt while securing the strong mount. My bench is 43" high because I'm tall, so I thought that I wouldn't need the strong mount. When I unpacked the press and installed the lever I realized that even the taller bench wasn't enough. I picked up a strong mount at the Reoader's Bench on Saturday when my wife dragged me up there. Hopefully, my primers will be delivered this week so that I can try out the press.

Well, thanks, but there's no need to apologize to me. The laws in Tennessee are quite convoluted in these matter compared to Missouri - which is where I was a policeman. As for the woman, the way I understand the law in Tennessee is that we have no duty to retreat. She was on her own property investigating a noise that lead to the discovery of a crime. She does not know what that noise is: therefore, she has fear and thus justification to arm herself. She has the right to protect herself, and she discovers a criminal in the act. She doesn't know the criminals intent or if he's armed or not. It is reasonable under these circumstances to aim her weapon at the criminal until the threat was removed - which she did once the police arrived. I would not hold the same thought if it occurred somewhere off her property.

I submit that you are challenged if you think your analogy is similar. The fallacy of your point is that the State was in direct control of the LEO's actions during this encounter as if the entity of the State was controlling his/her every action while they are on duty. But I will not argue with the challenged, for as you pointed out in this system of freedom of speech that we are free to do so: however, that same system grants me the freedom to say whatsoever I desire to counter what I feel is ridiculous whether it be in this thread or another. If you feel that simply asking for reasoning from members is ":poop:ing" on them, well, I'd say to grow a thick skin.

No one was questioning the state; they were questioning the LEO. Granted, they were also questioning the mom. Your analogized question is so dissociated from my example as to defy reason on its face: however, I have never complained about how a road crew filled a pot hole. I have complained about their failure to do within a reasonable amount of time.

I was talking about dissecting the LEO; not the mom.

I got that, and I disagree with it too. But, for example, I don't go around criticizing an engineer about how he/she goes about doing their job. I've never been an engineer. I don't know all of the subtleties of being an engineer. I know about science and mathematics, but that doesn't qualify me to dissect what he does. The LEO didn't make an illegal arrest, nor did he cause her undue stress, so what's the big deal? IMHO, some of these comments are un-qualified nit-picking. This is why I asked.

I wouldn't utter the words, "You're under citizen's arrest!" It ain't my fault the guy stood there until the LEOs arrived. I just wasn't giving any ground on which I am lawfully present.