Welcome to TNGunOwners.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

DaveTN

TGO Benefactor
  • Content count

    12,259
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21
  • Feedback

    100%

DaveTN last won the day on September 22 2016

DaveTN had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,980 Excellent

1 Follower

About DaveTN

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Murfreesboro, TN

Recent Profile Visitors

3,443 profile views
  1. Rumor is Caroline Wiles has convictions for DUI and bad checks. Isn’t that something that should have been available to them prior to her being hired?
  2. And IMHO you are wrong. A Castle Doctrine doesn’t create a free fire zone. A presumption could be there, but a Prosecutor is free to attack that presumption. From the story I am assuming they were in the trailer and not in the cab. From the pictures in the story there is no access from the trailer to the cab and the trailer is not permanently attached. Pretty tough to make an argument he was in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm. However, if that wasn’t the case and they were entering the cab; you are right. And where are you getting this part you are adding about not having to be in the house or car, only have a reasonable belief entry was made? I don’t believe that. He couldn’t legally shoot them for stealing stuff from his trailer anymore than you could for someone stealing stuff from your yard or detached garage. However, it’s all moot(other than the discharging charge if it goes to court). Because he was absolutely justified in shooting the guy when he came back with a gun; especially when he started firing. Either he didn’t want to shoot him or he didn’t have the ability to shoot him. However, I’ll give the guy the benefit of the doubt on that because we don’t know any of the facts about that other than he was in the truck and the other guy didn’t just walk up shooting because there was a discussion about car keys. It would be interesting to know why he didn’t shoot the guy or even return fire while being shot at, and why no one was shot in an exchange that had to be just a few feet apart. As I have said before, I remember when you could shoot fleeing forcible felons. We need that back. Our legal system shouldn’t be judging people that are defending themselves against criminals committing a felony. We also had far less felons run when caught in the act as compared to today when everyone runs; they have no reason not to.
  3. As soon as you tie your right to carry to the United States Constitution; you lose. To believe that you need to believe three things: 1. That the Federal government controls the safety of citizens even though they are not responsible for local law enforcement. 2. That the SCOTUS will someday proclaim that everyone in the country can strap on a gun and walk down the street. 3. That States Rights do not exist. They don’t, doubtful, they do. The state needs to step up first.
  4. TBI would probably like nothing better than to be able to keep records. My understanding is (although I haven’t checked) it’s illegal. They should HAVE to explain to him why he is being denied. But they don’t.
  5. Someone hires you, and you return the favor by walking off the job? I guess that made sense to them. Think people…think.
  6. So one guy is cranking rounds into the air, the other guy came back and starts cranking rounds into the truck. They are afraid to shoot each other, but are okay with making it pretty dangerous for anyone else in the area. Jeeze Of course the real problem here is that the driver couldn’t shoot someone burglarizing his truck. But he could have when he came back with the gun.
  7. 1963-65 C622700-C810532 1976-77 D870001-D999999
  8. Doesn’t provide criminal immunity. But I don’t guess you have to worry about your wife being sued while you are in prison. I don’t condone what the protesters are doing. But I don’t condone running someone over that isn’t a threat to you either. If they start attacking you; that’s a whole different story.
  9. I’ve never had a camera red-light ticket. Does it just show the car in the intersection with a red light? I don’t guess it shows where the car was when the light tuned red? Does it have a clear picture of the driver? You know, questions that Judges ask in traffic court.
  10. As OS said; you can’t. Unless there is a leak, and it would take one heck of a leak and a criminal act for someone here to make it public, or the Russians decided to release a transcript, we won’t know.
  11. Any gun by any manufacturer can have problems. In the over a hundred S&W I have owned I have sent back 2. I go direct with S&W. In both cases they emailed me a shipping label, fixed the problem and returned the gun to me. I don’t really have time to wait on the phone during the hours they are open, and in both cases I never talked with anyone; it was handled through email. I have an issue with them right now and was not happy with CS. I wrote a letter and the day they received it I got a phone call. I think the issue will be taken care of; we will see. Nothing against your dealer, but if you are not happy with them; contact them directly. They do try to fix the problems. Just as any manufacturer can have a gun with problems, any of them can have a CS person that isn’t doing a good job. That just happened to me. Good luck, and let us know how it works out for you.
  12. Then I would use the 30-06. Then distance and whether or not the round can kill is not even an issue. 50 or 300 yards; you do your part and it doesn’t matter. I can’t imagine being able to get within 50 yards of a Coyote that knows you are there; but if you can pull that off most anything would work. Good luck.
  13. I don’t think anyone was thinking the conversation wasn’t being recorded by both sides. I would be certain it was. I think Flynn went father in the conversation than he should have. I think he thought it wouldn’t be an issue. When it became an issue; he blinked. He made bad choices and he paid for them.
  14. Murfreesboro doesn’t use speed cameras, but they do use traffic light cameras. I have never thought it was right that a person doesn’t have the same recourse as they would if an Officer wrote the ticket. If they allow these tickets to be taken to court; it won’t be such a lucrative situation anymore. Also, the companies that make the cameras get too much of the money. Get rid of the cameras and use the money they cost to add more Traffic Officers if they are needed. As far as the courts stopping them…. I remember many years ago when California courts ruled radar was a 4th amendment violation because they were looking at people they had no reason to believe were committing a violation. That didn’t last long; they still use radar. According to legislators and attorneys, in Murfreesboro people can refuse to pay the tickets and the city doesn’t have a way to collect through the courts. I guess they can however turn you into the credit report agencies.
  15. Flynn was talking with the Russian Ambassador prior to the inauguration. He told the VP sanctions weren’t discussed and the VP repeated that in a TV interview based on what Flynn told him. Apparently that wasn’t truthful based on the information Trump has now. (I would guess a transcript of the conversation, but I don't know that.) There is noise about whether or not he violated the law or if there is enough to charge anyone. (It is a crime for unauthorized citizens to negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States). But it made Pence look bad. Flynn has now admitted it may have happened. Had Flynn told the VP exactly what the conversation was; he would probably be okay. But he either lied or omitted what was said. That cost him his position.

Connect With Us

The Fine Print

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.