TGO David

I found this elsewhere and am posting it here because it really resonated with me... An Armed Person is a Citizen; An Unarmed Person is a Subject by Jon Pananas at 6:40 PM Contrary to the belief of many of our fellow citizens, the purpose of the United States Constitution is not to grant us rights. Our rights, given to us by our Creator, are inalienable. The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the powers of the federal government. Look at the language of the Bill of Rights. It is chock full of “shall not” and “shall make no;” all of which refer to the United States government. Our explicit rights, that is, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are contingent wholly upon our implicit right: the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The intent of the Second Amendment is to preserve and guarantee, not grant, a pre-existing right; again, the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Arms, by which we mean guns, allow the free citizen to exercise self-defense; to protect one’s self from predators of various stripes, be they criminal malefactors or rapacious government. St. George Tucker—Revolutionary War officer and later U.S. District Judge—in his Blackstone’s Commentaries of 1803 wrote that “the right of self-defense is the first law of nature.” The Fourth Amendment—“The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure, shall not be violated”—would be hollow prose without the Second Amendment to give it teeth. This concept was recognized very early by the Framers. Noah Webster wrote in 1787, “Before any standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States…[The people] will instantly inspire the inclination to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” This sentiment was expressed best, perhaps, by one of Virginia’s favorite sons. In 1788, Patrick Henry wrote, “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches this jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.” Certainly guns have enormous recreational uses and add hugely to the sporting life of our people. But the intent of the Framers was not to safeguard the rights of target shooters and duck hunters. It was to preserve our freedoms from an aggressive government. Keep in mind that the Framers were insurrectionists. They were well acquainted with the realities of oppressive rule and were determined to give the citizens of this republic the tools necessary to preserve and protect their freedoms. The Constitution is a document of unique concepts and principles. But it will provide the framework for the Rule of Law in this country only so long as we remain an armed citizenry and do not allow ourselves to become unarmed serfs.

Small and lightweight = J-Frame. Maybe even a Kahr PM9.

Basically the old "Black Talon" with a copper jacket and less menacing name without the stigma that the old name had.

Minor tweak to the suggestion... vertical shoulder holster. People with horizontal rigs worry me sometimes because their finger doesn't always stay as far away from the trigger during draw as I'd like. Muzzle pointed straight behind them + finger near trigger = bad bad bad vibe.

I've eaten downtown Nashville in the evenings a few times. It has always meant parking my vehicle in a garage 4-6 blocks away from the restaurant, which means walking a good distance through sketchy territory. Even if it's just pepper spray or a locking knife, I've never ever gone unarmed. This law has GOT to change. I'm not worried as much about getting jacked up while eating dinner inside The Melting Pot. But I don't have that same optimism for the walk to and from my car.

Just let me know and we'll make it happen. I'll bring the AR along too.

If I were going to purchase a sub-compact Glock again, I'd be more inclined to look at the G26. As much as I favor the .40SW, the 26 chambered in 9mm is a more controllable package. I think a lot of shooters tend to have problems with the added recoil the .40SW gives in a sub-compact which makes for difficult follow-up shots and less of a desire to practice, practice, practice at the range.

Yes, it being a transparent GIF caused it to "black out" like that.

I've had both. I sold my 27 for my 23 and sold my 23 to Mike. I really liked the size of the 27 but as has been said, the 23 isn't much bigger really and is a lot more enjoyable to shoot. Plus it carries more rounds.

You need to get on with it, son!!! We need more teachers out there who aren't Birkenstock-wearing, tree-hugging, whale-saving, gun-grabbing Socialists.

I'm going to be writing my representatives today and tomorrow. This absolutely must be fought tooth and nail. ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!!!

I think it's very fortuitous that we can carry into any establishment that sells alcohol for off-premise consumption, but in comparison it is absolutely ludicrous that we can't carry into a restaurant that serves alcohol even if we aren't personally partaking. I realize that the "wisdom" of our legislators was to prevent me from carrying into a place where I might (but wouldn't) have a drink while armed, or be confronted by some drunk good ole' boy who wanted to throw a few punches and summarily ventilate him with my sidearm. But the law is very shortsighted and needs to be amended... badly!!! So many other states allow carry into a restaurant where 51% or more of their revenue comes from non-alcohol sales. Tennessee is seriously behind the curve on this.

I don't think any apology for thread hijacking is necessary. This is a very communicative group of folks and we all enjoy engaging in conversation of the issues near and dear to us. This is a fine example of how a thread can meander it's way into topics that might not have been originally envisioned by the thread's author, but are relevant and welcome none the less. PS: I too believe in "concealed means concealed"

Tell us more about that sidearm in your avatar!

Laugh all you want but wearing my CTAC out to eat has forced me to adopt "healthier" eating habits. I've learned to order smaller portions and to stop when I first start feeling full. I call it the 2nd Amendment Diet.

I have been considering for a while now the thought of sending my XD45C off to Springer Precision to have the trigger worked on. I'd like a shorter reset and less over-travel. I am told that Springer does magic with them.

Paul, I'd love to have you as a guest at On Target sometime. I've got some guest passes that came with my annual membership and I think you might really like the range. It's worth the short drive to Murfreesboro.

I will certainly add gun shops. As for web sites, I'm thinking about incorporating a "links" database that folks can add to at their leisure. Perhaps that would be a better place for it?

This subject came up today on XDTalk and here's my reply to one fellow over there. "Logic" like what this guy is using to abstain from joining the NRA just flies all over me. No offense, but that is easily one of the most absurd reasons that I have ever heard for not joining the NRA. If you have purchased a firearm through an FFL dealer then you filled out a BATF Form #4473 and the government already has your name on "a list". It would be far easier for the government to obtain a record of gun ownership through one of it's own agencies, from data that it already owns, than by subpoenaing or trying to seize the records of a non-profit organization like the NRA. NRA membership costs $35 annually. Most of us blow twice that amount of money on ammo for one session at the range. The NRA may have it's flaws, but I've got news for you: Any organization made up of people will have flaws because people make mistakes. That said, the NRA is the single largest ally of American gun owners and the 2nd Amendment itself. Any gun owner who would stubbornly refuse to join because he or she doesn't like every single minute detail about the NRA is a fool and is contributing to the demise of firearms ownership as we know it today through their own act of dissension. If you want to prove a point by refusing to do something, refuse to vote for these anti-gun asshats that keep getting elected to public office. But don't refuse to help one of the strongest champions of our 2nd Amendment rights.

Very happy to have you here with us. Welcome, and enjoy your stay!

Yes! Like any organization, it has it's faults because it is made up of people and people make mistakes... but it's the strongest ally that gun owners and the 2nd Amendment have.

Interesting.

I was on the fence about going this weekend, but I rather doubt I will at this point. Sorry.

FYI... for some reason the prices at your Wal-Mart are about $1.00 - $2.00 cheaper per 50rds than they are in a lot of other areas of Tennessee. Hornet Handler told me that the ammo was cheaper out there too.

I'd be interested in hearing bulk pricing on 9mm, .40SW and .45acp. Say 1000 rounds of each.