Jump to content

DaveTN

Active Member
  • Posts

    17,782
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    165
  • Feedback

    100%

Posts posted by DaveTN

  1. The more I read about Vista, the more leery I become.

    I always run the latest OS as soon as it is out. I ran Vista for about two months and just last week switched back to XP Media Center.

    Vista didn’t have any major problems for me, but it was just always something. SP1 may fix everything, if not it could possibly be the next Windows ME. :confused:

    This has nothing to do with laptops, but I just bought a new desktop. It came down to Dell and gateway. Gateway has a new “configure-to-order†operation at laVergne. (These are not the “Best Buy†Gateways). I bought the Dell XPS-410 and have since wished I had given the gateway a shot. But I couldn’t find anyone that had one.

  2. smilielol5.gifsmilielol5.gifsmilielol5.gif

    I’m sorry but I couldn’t help that.

    Man… I don’t know what is going on with this forum today… must be something in the water.

    You are on an internet forum. You will quickly see that there are people posting their interpretation of laws here that will make you shake your head and wonder how they find their way to work in the morning. From what I have read RBC isn’t one of them, I just think he was being funny. However I’m not trying to make excuses for him, I’m sure he can deal with that himself.

    I’m a former Police Officer and have been told in short order that I don’t understand chit about Tennessee law or the Constitution of the United States. So with that in mind …. My interpretation of the law is that the legislators do not want you carrying in an establishment that is licensed to serve liquor on the premises. My interpretation of their intent is that they are not interested in getting into whether or not you were drinking or whether or not any liquor was being served. But as Dennis Miller would say… I could be wrong. biggrin.gif

    Yes drinking will help. thumbsup.gif I’m always much smarter when I’m drinking. :devil:

  3. They are going to talk to me until they decide that I'm not going to kiss their shoes, and then they tackle me. I think you're getting the point now, that, I will not be the one who initiates and escalates forceful contact.

    It's pretty clear that I won't have committed a crime by not willingly handing over my gun... nothing which warrants said potential application of force.

    If the police tackled and disarmed an HCP holder who had done nothing illegal, who do you think would end up being vindicated? Can the police pull over and rough-up anyone they see driving, just to go on a fishing expedition for anything which might be illegal, without some articulable reason? Driving is a 'privilege' too :).

    Not one time have I suggest that they can do that for no reason. But I have pointed out several times that you may not know what that reason is. You seem to believe that if you have done nothing wrong Tennessee law allows you to refuse their demands; I can’t ague that except to say I find that very hard to believe.

  4. I can’t support the death penalty because of religious convictions. I could not be on a jury where the death penalty is an option for that reason.

    But also…

    It costs more to kill a prisoner than keep him. Look at all the money we (the tax payers) paid for Coe’s defense.

    I think death is too easy. If I knew I would never get out I would take death over life in prison. If they had put Coe in GenPop he would have suffered for what he did.

    How many innocent people being executed is acceptable?

  5. So... even if a police officer commands me to give him a BJ, I am not justified in resisting that demand, even though it is un-lawful? I suppose I just have to sort it out afterwards, after the damage is done?

    That is not a civil rights violation. That is criminal sexual assault by an authority figure while he is armed with a deadly weapon. That is no where close to you getting your feelings hurt because a cop is disarming you.

  6. Simply standing still with my arms crossed demanding them to articulate why they are detaining me, or not allowing me be on my way...

    Justifies whatever amount of force is required to subdue and disarm you in most states.

    Apparently that isn’t the case in Tennessee. According to you Tennessee cops are going to enter into negotiations with you and see if they can talk you out of your gun. biggrin.gif

  7. Wouldn't it be a better idea to ask the individual that you suspect is the person who committed a crime for their drivers license?

    Absolutely, but if you read the thread that Monolabetn linked the “suspect†said he knew his rights, didn’t have time for this BS and walked away.

    I have said all I can from a former LEO point of view, common sense and the fact that you will be held responsible for whatever path you decide to take will have to form your decisions. I certainly hope that no one on this forum is ever in a position that they think pulling a gun on a cop seems like a good idea.

  8. Sorry Dave, with your "the younger members of the forum" statement, I move from observer to involved. I side with Molon. He brought out full proof of every one of his statements.

    Good. :)

    If you ever find yourself with a Police Officer ordering you to surrender your weapon; tell them you know your rights and walk away. If you are still alive maybe he’ll come bond you out.

  9. I think your analysis is flawed.

    No doubt. biggrin.gif

    For starters, D.C. needs to file a writ of certiorari before the case can even get on the docket for the Supreme Court. As far as I know they have not yet filed the writ. So the Supreme Court isnt dragging its feet.

    Many cases are waiting in the wings for the “individual right†answer. The D.C. decision is nothing that will force a ruling.

    I posted this in another thread but I will post it again here…

    This is only the second time a federal appellate court has decided that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms. The Fifth Circuit also has reached this result. In contrast, the First, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits all have concluded that the Second Amendment only protects a collective right. (See Decision at 16.) The Second Circuit (which covers <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City>New York</st1:City>, <st1:State>Connecticut</st1:State>, and <st1:State>Vermont</st1:State>) still has not addressed the issue. As a resident of <st1:City>New York City</st1:City>, I would love to see the Second Circuit follow the D.C Circuit's lead and declare the NYC gun laws unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the Second Circuit is very liberal, so this is extremely unlikely to happen.

    Undoubtedly, the D.C. Government will seek reconsideration of this decision by the full D.C. Circuit ("en banc") and/or will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Unless the D.C. Circuit en banc reverses this decision, I think it is very likely that the case eventually will be heard by the Supreme Court. Although the Supreme Court has discretion over which cases it agrees to hear, the existence of a disagreement among the various federal appellate courts on a major issue of constitutional law (known as a "circuit split") makes it more likely that the Supreme Court will take action to resolve the disagreement. Although the D.C. Circuit has the smallest geographical jurisdiction of the federal courts of appeal (it covers only the <st1:State>District of Columbia</st1:State>), it generally is considered the most important of the circuit courts (for several reasons). Consequently, its decision in this case will be accorded considerable weight when the Supreme Court decides whether or not to hear the case on appeal.

    Second, no one outside of the ill-informed on gun boards thinks that the 2nd Amendment (or any of them for that matter) confers an unrestricted right. So your #1 outcome just isnt in the cards.

    Oh I agree that it just won’t happen. But you can’t deny that the majority of 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment proponents think this is how it should be, and believe that there is a chance of that being the ruling.

    Third, there remains the question whether the 2A is binding on states. They could always decide it is binding only on the Federal govt.

    That is #2 and that is what I fear the ruling will be. That would clear the way for states to ban firearms totally.

    Even if they side with the circuit court, it will mean only that the DC gov't will have to draft some kind of law that allows for private ownership of guns. My guess is they will look to NYC for their guidelines on that one.

    What D.C. does after the fact is moot to the rest of the country. The question is can that case cause the court to rule on the “individual rightâ€. That will (in my opinion) end the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment battle.

    <O:pDon't you agree?

    If the SC decides that there is no individual right, we are right we are now.

    We are here in <st1:State>Tennessee</st1:State>. But for states like <st1:State>Illinois</st1:State> and <st1:State>California</st1:State> that would be devastating. <st1:State>Illinois</st1:State> could expand the <st1:City><ST1:pChicago</st1:City> handgun ban to the rest of the state without having to worry about having the Courts tell them they can’t.

    Meanwhile I'd like more attention on the legislative front, especially getting national reciprocity passed.

    I thought that passing the legislation that allowed retired Leo’s to carry in any state might be the beginning of a national carry permit. But with a few states in the way I can’t see that happening.

    <O:p</O:p

  10. but if NRA is sticking up for gun owners so well, why wouldn't they want to allow scotus to make a decision on the 2nd amendment ruling in the DC gun ban case?

    It is the SCOTUS that is dragging their feet on hearing a case; the NRA has no input on that. But many pro-gun people and groups (myself included) feel that the ruling could be disastrous.

    There are only three ways they can rule…

    1. The 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment is an individual right. Everyone straps on guns and goes walking around.

    2. The 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment is not an individual right; it is a protection for the state.

    3. The 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment is an individual right. But the state can regulate when, where and how firearms can be carried.

    I don’t think the SCOTUS wants to make the ruling because if they make ruling #1 state and local government will immediately say that they can longer protect their citizens. It’s also a states rights issue.

    I don’t think they want to make ruling #2 because it opens the door for states like <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:State>California</st1:State>, <st1:State>Illinois</st1:State> and <st1:State>New York</st1:State> to outlaw firearms period. They just created a whole new class of criminals.

    Or they could make some kind of ruling like #3. A “feel good†ruling that really isn’t anything more than we have right now by leaving it up to the Federal Districts.

    It seems to me that it would be better to get it out in the open where it can be fought, rather than drag it out, or have it happen at a time when carolyn mccarthy holds sway.

    Once it goes to the SCOUTS the fight may be over.

    <O:p</O:p

  11. I don't want loonies to be able to legally obtain a gun. And in the current atmosphere after Virginia Tech, there IS going to be a change in the law.

    And since VT had nothing to do with mental patients and everything to do with law abiding students being disarmed let’s hope the changes in the laws fix that problem before it happens again.

  12. Since there is no “quality†involved; as low as possible.

    After purchasing a couple of firearms from a local dealer I wouldn’t expect to pay anything if I was transferring something he didn’t have or couldn’t get. ;)

    That is the relationship I had in my home state, unfortunately I haven’t been able to find that since I moved here.

    On used stuff I have just posted on several forums what I want or what I am selling and put “FTF in TENNESSEE†in the title. I have had real good luck with that and the transfer hassle is not an issue. ;)

  13. If you look at the more recent court cases, there have been several rulings that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right.

    There have only been two that matter.

    The biggest success being the federal court in Washington DC admitting that. A couple people sued, and now you can own a gun in DC. The Founding Fathers made it very cclear that the 2nd is an individual right, and the only thing keeping it from such is the government's fear of the people.

    Has DC changed their gun laws?

    This is only the second time a federal appellate court has decided that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms. The Fifth Circuit also has reached this result. In contrast, the First, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits all have concluded that the Second Amendment only protects a collective right. (See Decision at 16.) The Second Circuit (which covers New York, Connecticut, and Vermont) still has not addressed the issue. As a resident of New York City, I would love to see the Second Circuit follow the D.C Circuit's lead and declare the NYC gun laws unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the Second Circuit is very liberal, so this is extremely unlikely to happen.

    Undoubtedly, the D.C. Government will seek reconsideration of this decision by the full D.C. Circuit ("en banc") and/or will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Unless the D.C. Circuit en banc reverses this decision, I think it is very likely that the case eventually will be heard by the Supreme Court. Although the Supreme Court has discretion over which cases it agrees to hear, the existence of a disagreement among the various federal appellate courts on a major issue of constitutional law (known as a "circuit split") makes it more likely that the Supreme Court will take action to resolve the disagreement. Although the D.C. Circuit has the smallest geographical jurisdiction of the federal courts of appeal (it covers only the District of Columbia), it generally is considered the most important of the circuit courts (for several reasons). Consequently, its decision in this case will be accorded considerable weight when the Supreme Court decides whether or not to hear the case on appeal.

    I don’t think any of us are going to like the way the SCOTUS rules on this if they choose to hear it.

  14. I find it odd that so many firearm enthusiasts are quick to point out all of the experience they have, and many times imply how much combat action they have seen, etc etc. We often say police do not have "Jedi-like" powers over firearms, well guess what, no one does.

    All of that experience is fine and dandy, and I applaud folks who have served and done what they had to do to survive whatever encounters they have had. I sincerely mean that. However, don't look down your nose at the common Joe who wishes to protect themselves with a firearm. I have never driven in the Indy 500 either, but I consider myself a pretty safe driver.

    I will freely admit I am not, nor have a ever been a cop, in the military, or served in any capacity in any position that required me to take a life. That does not make me unable to form opinions (or conclusions :D ), nor does it revoke my right/privilege to be able to protect myself and my family from those that would do them harm, or the ability to protect them with the best tool I have available, my firearm.

    Firearms are a tool, as we all know. Are some carpenters better with a hammer than others? Sure. I also have little doubt in my mind that there is a long line of people on this board, and in this world who could out-shoot me easily. But, I can also tell you that I feel confident in my ability to stop a threat should it present itself. I hope I never have to prove myself right or wrong in that regard.

    I think we are probably all experts on one thing or another. I have spent a large portion of my life learning about the human body and the eyes, and the medicines and materials that can be used to benefit my fellow man. I don't tell people who come to see me that their opinion is baseless and worthless because they don't know as much about the eye as I do. Neither should it be implied that my opinions don't carry weight because I have not BTDT.

    Humbly submitted for your flaming.

    Who is looking down their nose at you? There are people on this forum that have actually been in shootings. Not in combat, but encountering a criminal face to face on the street in exactly the type of scenario that you may find yourself in some day. If those people try to share their experiences of what you need to know to stay alive or to even avoid a shooting in the first place; that is not looking down their nose at you.

    If you are saying that now that you have been through your 8 hours of smoking and joking at the range and paid your money to the state; that makes you Jack Bauer... most folks are looking down their nose at you.

    You listen to everyone, you take any advice at the range that is offered, you look at who is offering the info, why, and if they have a clue. You keep the good and throw out the bad.

    There are bad guys out there that are experts and have as much experience as probably anyone of this forum. Do not think that because they are criminals they won’t shoot you dead in a confrontation?

    Look at both sides of things. You don’t like me telling you that you don’t have right to own a firearm in Tennessee. Your reaction to that is emotional; not logical. Sure we could all run around yelling that the 2nd amendment gives us the right to bear arms. I mean after all we all are patriots and that’s what patriots do right? Wrong, patriots don’t pick and choose what parts of the Constitution they agree with, they don’t pick and choose what laws they want to abide by. Our Federal Courts have established that the 2nd amendment is protection for the state; not an individual right. You and I may not agree that is what our founding fathers intended; but that is the law. There is nothing right about violating parts of the carry laws in Tennessee that you don’t agree with.

    I may be a little passionate about this, but I have lived in states that allow no one to carry firearms except the Police.

    As far as your driving abilities…. I submit that Danica Patrick would embarrass you and she’s a girl. biggrin.gif

    leaving.gif

  15. On the firearm 'privilege' topic... Can you point me to the document-of-record, perhaps TN code or AG opinion which defines the RKBA as a 'privilege'? I have looked for it, but never found it... perhaps I didn't look in the right places? The only place I have seen the term used (informally, at that) was the TN HCP video given in several HCP classes... and based on the extensive incorrect information elsewhere in that video, I don't give it much credence.

    I’m not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that you think you have a RIGHT to bear arms? I think we have a right to bear arms. Unfortunately what you and I think does not count; we must live by the laws and the decisions of the court.

    If you think that you have a right, where does that right come from?

    I submit that you do not have a right to carry a firearm. Therefore the state granting you the privilege; is just that.

    If you are carrying a firearm without a permit and it is discovered by a Police Officer, you can be arrested for no crime other than possession of a firearm. Therefore your state does not recognize it as a right; rights do not require permits.

  16. Dave Tn,

    Yeah, some of us have training resumes that might surprise you. Some of us know EXACTLY how we would deal with a situation because we ALREADY HAVE. So be careful when you paint with a broad brush.

    Have you done it? Have you stood face to face with and armed assailant and taken his life? Do you know what goes through your mind? Do you know how your mind and body reacts?

    BUt then there are some permit holders who spend big $$$ to take as many classes from different schools (like 15 classes in 19 months) as they can so they are as well trained as they can be. No reason THOSE people should be limited in where they carry as their continuing education is better than that of ANY police officer.

    Any Police Officer? Broad Brush?

  17. As a TN Department of Safety certified Carry Permit Instructor, I am partly offended at your comment that training here is a joke.

    To you (and the others here that are instructors) I apologize if you think my comments were aimed at your teaching abilities; they were not. My comment was directed at the state training requirements for a carry permit. Considering that someone is trained to be carrying a firearm after 8 hours of training is laughable.

  18. Yet, those of us who've jumped through hoops, recieved training, and proven that we are responsible adults......

    I'll tell you why:

    Because GUN CONTROL IS NOT ABOUT GUNS, IT'S ABOUT CONTROL!

    Lets be real man… you didn’t jump through hoops… you paid money. Training is a joke….. Most here can’t even answer the most basic questions about Tennessee gun laws and have no idea how they would act in a deadly force situation. And proven you are responsible how? No… I’m sorry but the fact that you bought a carry permit doesn’t make you all those things.

    Control??? You live in Tennessee and you think your legislators have gun control issues?? smilielol5.gif

    I support my pro-gun legislators and I realize that my gun privileges in Tennessee come from them; not from the Constitution. When I look at the privileges I have as compared to other states I certainly don’t think my legislators have control issues. If they want to ban carry where liquor is consumed; they have my support. If I needed to carry all time I just wouldn’t go in those places.

  19. Sure, it is wrong to be under the influence of alcohol and carrying a gun, just as it is wrong to be under the influence of alcohol and operating a car. There is no doubt that alcohol impairs judgement and slows reflexes. Why is illegal for me to go into a restaurant that sells alcohol, while carrying a gun, even though I am not drinking, but it is fine for me to drive a car to a restaurant and even consume alcohol, as long as I don't exceed a BAC of 0.08%? The gap in logic is lost on me.

    I don’t care one way or the other on the liquor thing. But let me take a WAG as to why.

    Judgment is effected quickly when consuming alcohol; way before .08%. Apparently the legislators didn’t feel they wanted to get into the legal mess of proving BAC.

    but it is fine for me to drive a car to a restaurant and even consume alcohol, as long as I don't exceed a BAC of 0.08%? The gap in logic is lost on me.

    Is it fine? Can you be arrested in Tennessee for DUI with a BAC of less than .08%?

  20. Well, I have done all I can. I have written numerous letters and made many phone calls. Personally talked to 2 reps. Most of them say they are pro 2A but you know how that goes.

    Yes, it means that they are not on the Supreme Court of the United States so they not only don’t have anything to say about it; but no one cares what their opinion on the 2nd is. biggrin.gif

    In trying to get legislators in Illinois to even talk about concealed carry one of the biggest hurdles is to get pro-gun folks to understand that they can’t let the words “2nd amendment†pass their lips while discussing carry permits. Once you start that discussion you are doomed. We need to be asking our legislators to change the laws that we don’t like; not telling them they are violating our rights.

TRADING POST NOTICE

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.

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.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is not a lobbying organization and has no affiliation with any lobbying organizations.  Beware of scammers using the Tennessee Gun Owners name, purporting to be Pro-2A lobbying organizations!

×
×
  • 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.