E4 No More

Good post. I didn't see that because I got too tired of the 9mm vs 45 debate.

I have seen earlier reports referring to Hawaii's Governor as a Democrat, and quite frankly, the belief that a Democrat Governor was squelching his Birth Certificate prompted my suspicion that something was being hidden. I have gone online and discovered that she is in fact a Republican, and that changes my stance on the subject. In todays political climate, I am convinced that if "The One" was not a natural born citizen, then the Republican Governor would have made sure that information was released and verified. Either that or she simply doesn't follow the Democrats' modus operandi. After all, the Democrats had no problem with going after "Joe the plumber".

Dave, you are just a hoot! I want bigger F'n holes! Back in the day, a JHP .45 didn't expand much if at all. I'd think in 1.5 decades they'd have developed something that does expand. I plan on a Glaser in the tube, with penetrating rounds in the mag in case I miss with the first shot and the person ducks behind cover.

Please supply opinions of what is recognized as the best defensive rounds for the .45 & 9 mm. I'm not looking for exotics such as the Glaser Safety Slug. I know about those. I'm only familiar with TAP, and I know some of the stuff has been taken off of the market in the 16 years I've been out of guns.

Yes, but you'd get awful yucky doing it.

I was being sarcastic...sorry.

I hope that you are saying that the major's position is bull, and are not calling me a liar. I don't care enough about whether he's legally right or wrong. I was pointing out his stated position after many others on here were jumping to conclusions and getting diarrhea of the keyboard. I do know that there are several legal scholars worried about exactly the same thing that this major is worried about, so if pushed into taking a side I'll side with the legal scholars.

Maybe we should campaign for a law making the businesses liable in civil suits if they opt out? That sounds fair.

Very well done!

Although you didn't write it, that is an excellent post my friend. Thank you!

I hear ya, but I'm just a stubborn ex-policeman who can't stand LEOs who get creative with the law, (or testimony for that matter), to exert more authority than is intended by law. I'd fight it in court.

Shall we nuke the reds?

Please let me relate a point on this topic that goes to my earlier post. When I was in the Marine Corps, a fellow Corporal confided in me how his marriage fell apart. You see he was a big, bad Marine who was assigned to the MP's on the Marine Base at 29 Palms, California. His wife relied on him, (just as mosy women do), to protect her. One night while on patrol, he responded to a "Rape" call at his own home in base housing. Another Marine broke into his home and raped his wife. Long story short, his wife blamed him for not protecting her because in her mind it was his responsibility to do so, and he failed. As irrational as it may seem, the fact that she conceded responsibility for her protection to her husband, (who in no way shape or form provide 24 x 7 x 365 protection for her), rather than maintaining it herself caused their marriage to fail. Ladies, (and gentlemen), it is unreasonable to expect someone else to protect you. Rely on yourselves at all times, but be grateful for the times when someone else has your back. Just my two cents.

My response would be to show me the ordinance. If I was written I'd politely tell him/her to be prepared to show in court how many vehicles showing signs from the back, (there are numerous examples such as dump trucks, icecream trucks, work crew trucks), he/she's cited for the same thing. Because we all know police officers never inject their personal feelings into a situation.

Guns and stupid don't mix!

I've had supper there once, and I wasn't impressed. I wouldn't tell them that, however.

Wow! Thanks for that. I suspected as much, but it's nice to see it in print.

Even better: http://www.batteryspace.com/index.asp?Page...amp;ProdID=1147

It would be his fault IF the douche can get the plate number through the sun-spots on his eyes.

I find this suspect: Senate Rejects Controversial Concealed Weapons Measure - Political News - FOXNews.com "Concealed handgun permit holders killed at least seven police officers and 44 private citizens during a two-year period ending in April, according to a study by the Violence Policy Center." If one tracks such things, wouldn't it be a definitive statement rather than to say "...at least...."?

No, no, no! Too small!

Show pictures of the entire thing with his name on it; not bits and pieces of what could be several BC's.

I prefer BBQ sauce!

I don't get it either, so I stay out of those threads. If you want to sell it quit screwing around and post it. But I also see why others value it, which is why I stay out.

And again, you know not of what you speak. Birth Certificates issued by the state are CERTIFIED COPIES; what was provided was not. They also show where the baby was born. If Obama has nothing to hide, why is it that the Dummycrat Governor of Hawaii has issued orders to not release his birth certificate to anyone, and all official statements made to date DO NOT indicate that Obama was born in Hawaii? You know...nevermind. I don't have the patience to argue with a wall soaked in today.