Jump to content


Inactive Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


beebee233 last won the day on January 5 2019

beebee233 had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Gender
    Not Telling


  • Military

Recent Profile Visitors

1,141 profile views

beebee233's Achievements

Established Contributor

Established Contributor (3/5)



  1. "Live" doesn't necessarily mean "real"...
  2. That I'm not buyin'?????????????????
  3. So you would seize whatever the threatened person wants you to and only that/those items?
  4. Yes, really. The whole topic here as I see it is about a person being deemed a threat to someone else and that being cause to seize guns. Not knives, not chainsaws, not baseball bats, just guns. And then allow this person back into society. That's right up there with a no firearms sticker on a door.
  5. I think that's where legislators go off the rail and wreck. Support of language in legislation is support of the legislation.
  6. I'm at the beach having a beer and a drunk puts his hands on my wife and I tell him if he touches her again I will kick his ass and because I threatened the guy the cops go to my house and seize my guns. Is that what you're saying is Constitutional?
  7. Thanks for clarifying. When bersa said he didn't have a problem with red flag laws and you responded in agreement, I came to the wrong conclusion. For the record, I don't want to keep things the way they are now. I want to follow the Constitution as it was written and intended.
  8. First link goes to cdc study. Didn't see proof that the adult perps were normal, stable people. Second link broke. Again, show proof that people who leave precious cargo in hot cars to die are normal.
  9. If taking guns is not important, what do you want red flag laws for?
  10. You said: When LE has identified someone as a credible threat for violence to themselves or others, do you think the cops should have to wait until they start shooting to take their guns? What I mean by my statement is that, under your stated scenario above, LE has identified a credible threat for violence to themselves or another, at that point, LE has the authority and responsibility to eliminate the threat. I'm assuming your scenario involves the person brandishing a gun. Otherwise, why would LE take it/them? My solution for neutralizing the threat would be to take the person into custody, not take his guns and let him go free. What if he kills his wife with a knife 5 minutes after LE leaves? What you are saying is illogical to me. Why is LE taking the person's guns so important?
  11. You're gonna' need another one of these...
  12. Doesn't current law cover this already?
  13. If you need a reminder that your child is in the back seat of your car your child should be taken from you for their safety's sake.


Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.

Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions. TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.