DaveTN

Seems impractical to me for anything other than maybe a nightstand gun. .410 is useless as a defensive round. .45 Colt is good, but I think there are better options.

I haven’t used shooting gloves since I was a cop. But after seeing the pics of that guys hand blown off it made me think about them again. Yea, I know it wouldn’t have totally protected him, but it may have helped. I would like the best cut resistance while maintaining good dexterity. What do you guys use? Or what are you LEO’s using as duty or frisk gloves? Anyone in the MidState stock Hatch, 5.11,... etc?

Do you think that percentage is not the truth?

I put more people in jail for domestic violence than I can count. Many were guilty of nothing more than having an argument with their spouse and many I would have not arrested under the old laws. If you feel that hitting your spouse is required to protect yourself then I guess you have to do whatever you are ready to take responsibility for. The domestic violence laws are wrong. And on top of that they put you in a category with convicted felons as far as firearms are concerned. Based on my vast experience in responding to these calls and knowing how they go down in court. I would not recommend that anyone lay hands on a family member. Even If you are wrongly accused you could very easily be convicted, and if you happen to be armed when the incident takes place you could be charged with a felony. Are you a Police Officer? If so you should know that better than anyone. Men and women both, I am making no distinction. You read something into my statement that wasn’t there.

Your Mom obviously doesn’t have an HCP and neither will you if you follow her advice.

Bunch of Deer on that ESPN cam #1.

So the state is going in the gun business? I think it is a good idea but I’m surprised they got it past the states lawyers; seems like a lot of potential liability.

Why should I possibly care how this poll ends up when it is a race between pro and anti’s that are both of questionable character?

Not an AR, but a .223 pistol. Already complete and no tax money paid to the Feds. I purchased mine as a rifle for the trunk before they passed the law allowing HCP holders to carry rifles. I didn’t carry it on me, but could legally have it in the trunk loaded.

.223 or .308?

I agree. Cheap fire safes won’t protect your guns in a fire, so why pay the extra money for them if you don't have it to spare? A locked closet door will stop little kids and cheap metal boxes will stop big kids.

There is no black magic involved with Police. First off cops aren’t entering a house if they know for sure someone is inside. They are securing the house from the outside and the perp is coming out to them. If they don’t know and don’t have a dog available they put themselves in the open and in harms way when they clear a house. It’s their job. Rarely do they get shot for a couple of reasons. The person in the house knows that once the cops are there they are caught, also burglars are not generally shooters. (Home invaders are shooters but they aren’t going to be there when the cops get there.) But cops have been killed doing home and building checks. To leave cover to check the house when you aren’t sure someone is there is normal. To leave cover when you know someone is in the house is ridiculous. You can’t help your family if you killed.

It depends on what you are looking for and what kind of background check it is. You know if you have been arrested. A background check for a gun purchase or most jobs is not going to be the same as a background check for a military security clearance or a job as a Police Officer. You can do a criminal background check on yourself at the FBI web site for $18 plus whatever it costs you to get finger printed. Federal Bureau of Investigation - Criminal Justice Information Services Division - FBI Identification Record Request

Not what I’m saying at all. Sorry you wasted all that time typing. I have stated several times what my opinion on the right to bear arms is. However… I also stated it is an all or nothing proposition. You have the right to carry or you don’t. The SCOTUS is going to rule that the states can regulate the bearing of arms and therefore (in my opinion) it is not a right.

I think I am crystal clear. I’m all for what you guys are saying. I just know ain’t happening. The right to keep arms is settled. The right to bear arms is not. And yes, it is all or nothing. The state regulates or they don’t. that is the only question left to answer.

Jamie why do you care what I think? Does it upset you that much that I am wrong? What will I do?..... Jamie, I couldn’t care less what the SCOTUS says; but I am absolutely sure what is going to happen and I doubt there will be any surprises. If the Supreme Court of the United States of America rules that all citizens of this country can strap on their favorite sidearm and go walking down the street…. I will get on this forum and publically apologize to you because if that happens you truly are the best legal scholar I have ever seen post here. However… when they rule that the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment guarantees the right to own arms but not the right to bear arms are you going to do the same? They are going to shoot down the Chicago hand gun ban. Are they going to end the carry ban in the state of Illinois? No, they are not going to address it and they don’t have the horsepower to do it. What I’m really curious to see (because I don’t know) is what Daley does. I know Daley and I know that he is not going to take this well. He has to already know what is going to happen. This whole case is because of him thumbing his nose at the Heller decision. He can admit defeat and do away with the ban, He can acknowledge the ruling and find a way around it, or…. If he has the support of the state he can do the same thing he did the last time and tell the SCOTUS to go pound sand. I don’t know what he will do but I guarantee there will be news crews around him 24/7 when it’s close for a time for the ruling. He will be entertaining. It acknowledged the individual right to own guns, and acknowledged the states right to regulate the bearing of them. same as its always been in most states. Same thing that’s getting ready to happen in Chicago… Heller version 2. What’s changed? And don’t give a smart answer about what you think has changed or what’s going to change in another 50 years. What has changed now? Do the citizens of the state of Tennessee have a right to carry? How about Illinois? Will you be able to carry a handgun in Chicago?

No, the interpretation and the application of it have. Yes, and as you can see the intent is to maintain a well regulated security force. That is now state and local government, and unless the Feds want to take over law enforcement that is a responsibility claimed by the state. I’m not trying to be a wise guy either; just a realist. Do I think everyone should be able to carry a gun? Yes, but I do not tie that right to a dog like the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment. The SCOTUS is trying to keep part of the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> alive because it does serve a purpose. The alternative is to repeal it; they don’t want that to happen. A right to bear arms would not be accepted by many states, Tennessee included. Tennessee specifically claims it as a state right in section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution adopted 1870.

Jamie, Some of us are having a discussion; not an argument. Please don’t turn this into a personal attack on me or all you will do is get the thread locked. I understand that you are all excited about McDonald, you recently learned about incorporation, and you think this is going to be some amazing decision that is going to finally allow the right to bear arms to be enforced. I hope you are right. But I think at 46 years old you are pretty naive for someone that claims to understand how all this works. <O:p</O:p You are not thinking past what you hope will happen with the court rulings. Let’s say the SCOTUS rules that the right to bear arms is and individual right and the state can’t restrict or control it. What do you think will happen next? Do you think Illinois, California, New York or even the great state of Tennessee will comply? No they won’t; they will tell the court to go pound sand. You don’t get to the Supreme Court by being a dumb ass; they won’t do it. <O:p</O:p A line would be drawn in the sand. It would no longer be a gun issue it would be a States’ Rights issue. I know which side of that line I would be on, and I hope it never comes to that; we have been there before. <O:p</O:p Now… if you can continue with a discussion on this; that would be great. But if you want to reduce this to immature little personal attacks, I’ll refrain from responding to your remarks and maybe you can do the same. D.

Because attention whores can cause problems for the rest of us. Just look at what is happening with Kwick.

That is absolutely true. But that has to be the belief of the people that are charged with and have the responsibility of law enforcement at the local level. <O:p</O:p This is not even going to be an issue. We already fought a war over this and the SCOTUS is certainly not going to take us down that road again. This is not 1787 this is 223 years later and the responsibility for law enforcement is nothing like it was back then. I think the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment serves a purpose and the SCOTUS is doing what it can to keep it from being repealed. But there is no way they can tell you to strap on a gun and walk down the street….. it can’t happen. If it does we are right back to 1861.

I hate to break it to you guys, but this is the case in most states and almost all of the Federal District Courts. <O:p</O:p You have a right to own arms, but you do not have a right to bear arms. That is a state right and it will still be a state right after the McDonald ruling. Unless the Federal government is ready to take over law enforcement; the SCOTUS can rule no other way. Unless of course they just want to make a decision that the states will refuse to comply with. <O:p</O:p Some of you think you have problems with cops now; think what it would be like with an Obama Police Force running the show. <O:p</O:p

Looks great. I wish I had bought that. I bought a SuperTuck about a week before I saw these; I hate kydex. Is that opened at the barrel end? I can use my SuperTuck with my Compact or Full size M&P. I wonder if I could do the same with that.

In that price range you have Smith & Wesson and Kimber. Kimber is a given; you just can’t beat them. But I found the Smith & Wesson to be every bit as good. I have not owned the SW1911 Compact (Commander size), but I have the full size SW1911 stainless target and it is sweet. If you are going to pay for the Wesson name; get the real deal. J/K…… kinda.

This is an easy one. Sounds to me like you want an AR platform in the .308 caliber you used before. DPMS Panther .308. AR platform from a quality manufacturer in the caliber the AR should have been in the first place and under $1500. What else do you need?

Man I missed it. You guys need to quote these posts before they get deleted. Now I have no idea what someone is getting all butt hurt about.