DaveTN
-
Posts
17,782 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
165 -
Feedback
100%
Content Type
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Posts posted by DaveTN
-
-
We know quite well how good we have it compared to other states. That does not mean we don't have the right to gripe about not having it as good as the founding fathers intended it.
If you believe the 2nd amendment was intended to give you the right to strap on a firearm and go wherever you like; then you need to push for a SCOTUS ruling.
There are rumblings that a ruling may be coming. I do not believe that most here will like it when it comes.
-
Well, I don't know of any cases, but Tennessee does have the right to bear arms in its Constitution as well as that Federal 2A thingy. A case certainly could be brought based on that. All things considered, I'd think it was a waste of time and money though.
Sec. 26. That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defense; but the legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.
That is hardly a “Right to bear arms”
-
Man you guys don’t know how good you have it. I’m from Illinois where you can’t carry a firearm or have one in your car period. Yet you are prepared to put carry permits in jeopardy by pushing this liquor thing… you will never get the nod to carry in a bar.... in my opinion.
I want to bring this up one more time….
Tennessee does not recognize the 2nd amendment as an individual right; like most states they see it as a protection for the state. You can argue that all you want but that is fact.
You do not have a right to carry a firearm anywhere. You have the privilege of getting a permit that allows you to carry in certain places. Not a single person of this forum has a requirement to carry a firearm into an establishment that serves liquor. If you choose to do so you put the carry permits of everyone in jeopardy.
And… what am I missing here? A carry permit does not require that the firearm be concealed; that has been specifically addressed by the state attorney general. It may be stupid; but it’s not illegal.
-
Ok I went to the range yesterday and tried the M&P 9mm and was not really impressed. It fit pretty well but shot horrible. I wanted to try the Mill Pro ( but they didnt have one for rental. I realize when you loose barrel inches its gonna affect your spread but at 10 yds my group with my 357 glock 31 is about 3-4 inches. the M&P was about 12 inches. Now it could have been the ammo since it was the tennessee reloads or whatever there called in the orange box but shooting 12 at a time for a 100 rounds i would think they would have gotten better. Now at 5 yards it does get better but hell i can throw rocks with the same accuracy at that distance. Maybe im wrong and thats good for a compact.. I have never shot an auto compact before but I have shot plenty Stubby 38's and their pretty accurate. What do yall think?
I think that everything in life is application driven and that quality Tupperware compacts cannot be compared to quality revolvers. You shouldn’t even be using sights with a compact so as long as the rounds are where they should be in a human size target that’s all that counts isn’t it? Isn’t a Glock 31 full size?
I own an M&P and really like it; but keep in mind you are comparing bottom feeders. These Compact plastic guns are sold on price; not on accuracy. I don’t think any of them are anything more than a belly gun. But that's just me.
-
Here, let me screw it up even more for you...
Smith & Wesson M&P Compact .357SIG
That’s exactly what I was thinking as I read this thread.
-
State the obvious. State your point in such a way that reasonable (reasoning, logical, right-thinking) people can't help but be persuaded.
<O></O>
Okay.... The obvious is that if they were "reasoning, logical and right-thinking" you wouldn't need to explain it to them.
The other obvious thing is that you need to be sending emails and letters to legislators and college officials; on-line petitions serve no purpose.
-
Just like with Florida’s legislation you will have people running around yelling that you can’t be sued if you are justified in a shooting. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
All this legislation does is allow you a possible avenue for recovering legal fees if a civil court finds that you were justified in the shooting. There are some problems with this.
1. Most good shootings never go to criminal court. The fact that you were not charged criminally in a shooting does not mean that you were justified; you can certainly be devastated in a civil trial.
2. If a dirt bag or his family sues you, you still have to pay a lawyer to handle your case. You may win your case and the Judge may award you a judgment for your costs. But as anyone that is familiar with civil courts can tell you winning a judgment and you getting paid are two tally different things.
Wanting this to be legislation that blocks unjustified civil action (as we all do) does not make it fact.
I can see where this may be a step in the right direction, but is really nothing to get excited about. Legislation with some teeth would be that you could recover costs from the attorney that filed the case and not just the dirt bags that don’t have anything anyway.
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney nor do I play one on TV. I also did not sleep at a Holiday Inn last night, but this is just how I see it.
-
Here are a few to start with.....
Does anybody know if you can find a single clip IWB holser with adjustible cant?http://rlcompanyusa.stores.yahoo.net/coverupiwb.html
The Tucker Cover Up is adjustable for height and cant. You can tuck your shirt over the gun and holster. For pistols up to the size of a 5" 1911. Also for small revolvers. Sweat shield is standard for pistols.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fist-inc.com/holsters/holster/17A.htm
#17A-LEATHER IWB INTERCHANGABLE AND CANTABLE
The new #17A IWB interchangable and cantable holster is made of 8-9 oz. cowhide and is available in your choice of 8 colors.This holster allows for the interchange of any of the belt loops found below. The loops screw on and off to suit different preferences. This holster can also be canted to your preference. Just loosen the screws, change the cant and tighten them up again.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.andrewsleather.com/macdaniel2.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.tedblockerholsters.com/iwb.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
-
In most cases companies not wanting guns on their property is not a “gun issue†it is a liability issue.
I feel the same way about that as I do about businesses posting that they do not allow firearms on their property…. In a shooting the lawyers will go after the “deep pocketsâ€. It does not matter to them who is at fault; their only concern is who is capable of giving them a payday. If you work for General Motors and accidentally cripple your friend with a ND while showing him your new carry gun in the parking lot; an attorney will know that he can’t get much out of you even if he gets a judgment. But he may be able to get something out of GM. Same thing if you shoot a bad guy and one of your rounds go astray in a business and kills an innocent bystander… sure your done financially but that doesn’t mean much to the attorney; he needs a judgment against the business to get a payday.
This is not a 2nd amendment issue or even a Constitutional one. The state of Tennessee (as most states) recognizes the 2nd amendment as a protection for the state; not as a right of the individual.
Since carrying a firearm onto your company’s parking lot is not a right; it would require legislation to to keep them from banning you from doing so. I think that legislation might not be hard to get through if it included language that insulated the company or business from civil action; without that protection I don’t think it would ever happen.
This issue has absolutely nothing to do with the laws that ban you from carrying where liquor is served. Transporting your firearm in your vehicle onto a company parking lot is required if you want to be protected to and from work. Making an argument for illegally carrying a firearm into a restaurant that serves liquor; makes no sense. By doing that you are putting everyone’s carry permits in danger. There are obvious reasons for not allowing carry in establishments that serve liquor just as there are obvious reason for your carry permit not be valid when you are drunk.
In my opinion trying to add the restaurant/Liquor issue to any “business/private property/employee parking possession†legislation would insure certain defeat of some good legislation.
-
The only opinion you really care about is that of the responding Police Officers. Call or go to the agency that would send Officers to respond if someone called in on you. They can answer your questions whether it is firearms or noise laws.
-
This is a good example of how ignorant Judges and lawyers can be and how out of control the legal system is.
I’m sure the Chung’s don’t have $54M, aren’t insured for that, and a court would never award that much; so that number is meaningless.
This should have gone something like this…
1. Suit filed.
2. Case heard.
3. Judgment made.
4. Done deal.
If there is any good in this… it is that this kind of case should insure that this Judge will never be elected to office. Although I know he won’t be; he should be disbarred.
-
If I’m reading the story correctly surrendering his guns is a condition of bail. If he doesn’t want to do that he doesn’t have to; he can refuse and the Judge can revoke his bail and have him jailed.
-
The only .38/200’s I have seen were LRN; a pretty dismal defensive round by today’s standards. I own and shoot a lot of wheel guns but I use WWB for the range and Federal Hydra-shoks for defensive rounds.
-
Pardon my ignorance, but what would you line the holster with?
Many leather companies offer soft suede linings. If you carry a Tupperware or a stainless gun you wouldn’t need it, but if you carry something with a high quality blue job; it’s something you might want to consider.
-
Here's the thing though, if he has no reason to arrest me before he requests me to disarm, and I non-violently refuse, he still has no lawful reason to arrest me. If he chooses to arrest me, unlawfully, then he will unquestionably be compelled to use greater force than necessary to do so, since I have passively resisted thus far. Either way, the law is in my favor. I would not break the law to remain out of custody, but I wouldn't need to if the arrest was unlawful, to begin with. As I've stated before, most cases will not be worth taking 'all the way' right there on the street, but my case would be solid for legal action afterwards.
I'm not looking for this to happen, but I'm confident that a firm, lawful, response must be upheld once that line is breached by the officer.
Sue the cop, sue the Police department, sue the state and anyone else you want to name; a civil rights violation does not justify the use of deadly force.
But when as a cop, I have a weapon pointed at you and I am ordering you to surrender your weapon; we are not going to have a dialog about why. We are not going to hold a hearing to decide if there is probable cause. You have no idea why I am disarming you. I may be responding to an armed robbery and you match the description of the suspect. You may be totally innocent… but if you do not submit to my demands and it escalates to a deadly force situation; if you die because I think you were going for your weapon, I am okay, if I die because you don’t think I had a right to disarm you and you open fire on me, you will die in prison as a cop killer.
Submit…. Let the cops check you out and everything is fine. The cop goes his way and you can make a bee like to your attorney; no harm no foul.
-
I think you will be happy with the M&P compact. I have the full size .40 and will be adding the .40 Compact. I just can’t decide if I want it or the M&P .45acp first.
I wouldn’t trade a 1911SC for one though.
-
This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right.
You are wrong, sir, and that is why I have responded yet again. Please check your facts before posting false information (which you accuse me of doing, though you have not cited your assertions towards the illegality of resisting un-lawful arrest... no surprise... you can't, because the truth is contrary to your assertion).Can you not understand what you are posting?
Give me an example of where you think the courts will give you a pass on killing a cop doing his job.
We were talking about you refusing to surrender your weapon. You posed a question about someone having a gun pointed at them by a cop until be determines what their intensions are. You then posted the question “Is it legal to resist a civil rights violation?"
I stand by answer…. A cop can disarm you at his discretion, doing so is not a civil rights violation, and even if it was you do not have a right to answer with deadly force.
Sorry man, but I’m a former cop and I find the fact that you think its okay to kill a cop because you are clueless about the law appalling.
-
This guy is in good shape because a "reasonable person" would believe that he was in danger of death or great bodily harm.
Castle Doctrine doesn’t give him a green light for a shoot. Intent comes into play. If a friend of yours is drunk and barges into your home after you open the door his intent is not clear and you don’t get to kill him.
-
Nobody in this thread is advocating resisting a lawful arrest or holding, but it is a hypothetical question of how far would you be willing to go when you are 110% sure you are in the right and 110% sure the LEO is abusing their power. And we should all remember that talking and doing are not related at all.
You have recourse if you feel that a Police Officer is abusing his power. Deadly force is not part of that recourse.
-
So, if the police show up at your door one day to order you to surrender your firearms...? (assuming that you have not broken a law which requires this)
Regardless of what any of us do, the outcome would be undesirable.
I am going to ask them what weapons they want and I will turn them over. What else can I do, get in an armed encounter with the cops? I will only end up dead or in prison. You are asking about something that is not going to happen. Why are you trying to make cops the enemy?
My HCP class didn't cover an in-depth analysis of case-law regarding crimes committed by law-enforcement officers, and the best responses to them...If a cop is committing a criminal act; one that a jury would consider to be a criminal act, not you deciding that you think your rights are being violated; you do what you have to do.
If he had a chance, what should he have done?You are asking me what someone should do if they are having an armed robbery committed against them? The way you are presenting this scenario the guy had no chance. He was dead whether it was a cop or a thug. Life isn’t always fair and the good guys don’t always win.
And no, I didn't sleep through it. That comment adds nothing to this discussion.My point is that if you attended a carry class you should know the answer to very, very basic legal questions about carrying a firearm.
-
That's just it, Judges and Juries HAVE ruled on such cases in favor of a defendant's right to defend themselves from unlawful arrest.
Name one. Name one case where a Judge or jury ruled that a person was okay in resisting arrest by a sworn Police Officer on duty.
You can make all the arguments that you want about what you would do. I’m trying to make it clear to those people (especially the young ones) that you absolutely do not have a right to resist arrest even if you believe the arrest to be improper. Refusing to surrender your weapon to a Police Officer engaged in his duties is a criminal act. You will be arrested, convicted (probably of a felony, depending on what your resisting involves), and spend large amounts on an attorney. It’s not about your rights; it’s about whether or not you are a criminal.
The sticky part would be knowing whether a given situation which one finds themself in, applies...There is no “sticky part†that is why the law is very clear on the point that you do not have a right to resist arrest arrest. I have seen people go to prison for resisting arrest and felony battery on a Police Officer that were not convicted of the crime they were being arrested for. Once you decided that you are not going to comply, or you are going to resist arrest, weather or not you did what you are being accused of does not matter.
which is why I amicably agree with others that such actions are only justifiable in the most extreme cases. I brought this up to promote debate (and awareness) of how to recognize them. Not to build any argument that we should actively (or passively) try to undermine lawful police activity.And I am responding because I hate to see innocent people go to jail because they believed something they read on an internet forum. Tennessee does not recognize the 2nd amendment as an individual right. They recognize your permit as a privilege they have given you and they can revoke it at any time. You do not have a right to argue with or physically resist an arrest.
-
Yes, I agree that legislatures are largely to blame for vague wording and broad interpretations. ........On the other hand, I thought that the open carry issue was clear prior to 2005 when the TFA pushed for open carry so as to prevent a law abiding citizen from losing a permit for their weapon being accidentally exposed (for example: Walking across a parking lot and the wind blows your jacket open to expose your weapon.) I have always been under the impression that due to this fact, open carry is allowed and is there primarily as a safe guard for law abiding citizens.
Not only Police Officers are required to know the law, if you are a carry permit holder you should not “be under the impressionâ€; you should know... correct?
Do not get me wrong,....I place no BLAME on officers, but I do think that they are obligated to at least know the basics of the law which they are sworn to enforce. If a officer of the law cannot answer whether or not open carry is legal or not, something is wrong somewhere.......I support education and practical inservice training as a sollution .
I have not been able to pose these questions to Police Officers to see if they know the answers or not. But I have ask many carry permit holders and some “firearm instructors†the responses have been pretty comical.
1. Is a Tennessee carry permit holder allowed to carry his weapon in the open?
2. Is a carry permit holder required to inform a Police Officer on a vehicle traffic stop if he is armed?
3. Does a carry permit holder have a right to refuse to surrender his weapon when ordered to do so by a Police Officer?
4. Does a business owner have the right to post his property as a gun free zone?
5. Is a carry permit holder required to comply with that posting?
6. Does the state of Tennessee recognize the 2nd amendment to the United States Constitution as an individual right?
I’m not interested in what a tax or divorce attorney thinks the law is; I’m looking for clear answers. These should be very simple questions to answer.
(Well, okay maybe I just threw that last one in there for fun but the rest should be easy.)
-
Sounds like a plan. Go for it, big guy.
I need a million bucks. Are you in?
-
Well from what I can tell you own a gun store and I don’t. So this is all nothing more than a wild azz dream of what I think would be a good business.
I am fully aware that the investment costs would be high and I assume the liability and zoning would require a lot of jumping through hoops. This would be no Mom & Pop operation; Mom & Pop don’t have this kind of investment capitol.
But I think something must be wrong when I can’t get anywhere close to the price of Buds Guns in Kentucky at any of my local dealers even after you figure in transfer costs. If I had the money to buy the kind of inventory that was required, why would my customers want to buy from them? If I had the capitol to get the same discounts they do and passed them along to my customers the firearms would not have to cross state lines and I should be able to get the Lions share of the gun purchases in Middle Tennessee.
75 cents over Wal-Mart?; are you kidding me?? The last .45ACP I bought at Wal-Mart was 100 round box of WWB 230 FMJ for $20.98. Can you come within 75 cents of that? I can’t even order on-line 1 or 2K rounds at a time and beat that price.
I walk into my local gun store and there are more people behind the counter than on my side of the counter and the range.
I can do math, but I don’t know what the numbers are. Tell me how many gun sales take place in Middle Tennessee a year and I will know how much money there is to be made.
My winning personality and fair pricing will get me 60% of that number. 20% will have a local dealer they want to deal with and 20% have become accustom to being treated badly while shopping and don’t care where they buy.
"Concealed means concealed"
in Handgun Carry and Self Defense
Posted
She understands that she is a conservative democrat?