The Rabbi

Quality of the guns is fine, very good in fact. Quality of customer service is nonexistent. The IRS has better customer service. So if you get one and it doesnt need anything (and it shouldnt) you will be getting a good deal. If it does need anything you'll wish you spent more money for a Smith (not that Smith makes a .410 revolver).

I sold a Taurus Judge 3 1/2" model about a month ago. Customer was very pleased with it. It will only accomodate 2 1/2" shells as I recall.

I was looking forward to a nice little P220compact with the TN state flag etched on the side. SIG, Heil!

I wouldnt consider confusing 40mm with 40cal a real error in fact. Stupid and ignorant, yes. But what do you expect from people who dont know much about it? If they had reported it as a "40mm automatic assault pistol" that would be really an error. As for Metro council, no. No one reports when they raise taxes. The media are of the opinion that Tennesseans pay way too little in taxes. The proof is that everyone else pays more. Therefore more taxes is good because it "puts us in line with other states."

It was a rhetorical statement. Illinois will never get carry as long as Chicago is part of the state.

I drink bourbon. But when I do drink scotch it's usually an Islay and usually when its about 30-40 degrees and rainy/damp. When I really feel frisky it's whisky and ginger. Right, cheap scotch and gingerale. Learned to drink that in England and like it.

Oooh, 40mm pistol. I want one!! Yeah, people tend to emphasize penetration but de-emphasize the downside, namely collateral damage. Did the story mention if the guy had a permit or not?

Why dont we cut out the petty bs and answer the man's question. Yes, we all know "assault rifle" means a select fire. Yes, we all know a "clip" is not that thing that holds cartridges in a handgun. I own an AR and love it. I put mine together and one of the virtues of it is that an idiot (like me) can do it easily. I can't say the same about an AK. But an AK is somewhere down my wish list too, esp a kewl underfolder with nice wood foregrip. I'm not sure why the M1 carbine was left off. That is the original "assault weapon" in this country, probably the second most popular long gun in history.

IL? Ain't never going to happen. Even though the state is probably 80% rural/suburban and prime territory for shooters, Chicago exerts a disproportionate influence over the state and they are rabidly anti-gun. Actually they are rabidly anything that isnt "progressive." Heck, they banned foie gras. Vote Chicago off the island and it will pass.

I posted before about an attempted home invasion. Turns out the victim did have a gun and was prepared to shoot should they actually enter the home. In fact he came in and bought another gun for downstairs and we had a nice chat. Now his neighbors are getting the idea that 1) bad things happen quickly, 2) cops show up generally after you need them, 3) a gun is a big dissuader to evil doing. But what if you are anti-gun? Thus this email from a woman in the neighborhood. I guess shotguns are kinder and gentler ways to blow people into the next life. But I do think I have an opportunity to show an anti that it really isnt as bad as its cracked up to be.

They could (and probably will) affirm the 2nd is an individual right but will not press that on the states (many of which already have constitutions with RKBA in them). Nor will they declare unconstitutional measures "to control crime" i.e. gun control laws already in place. The decision will be very narrow and allow the most restrictive of laws as long as they do not include a total ban. I honestly would be shocked if it turned out any differently.

Your notion of rights is seriously flawed. You are also confusing "natural rights" with enumerated rights. I defined earlier: A right is something that takes positive action for the gov't to deny it. Felons lose their right to vote etc as part of the judicial process. The gov't has to demonstrate some reason to deny rights. A privilege is something the citizen has to demonstrate a need for or a qualification for. It requires positive action on the part of the citizen to be able to do whatever it is legally. It is clear that in this state anyway, buying and owning guns is a right but carrying them is a privilege.

Matchlocks don't come in semi-auto. Would make reloading a darn sight easier I can tell you. Personally I dont like manual safeties (and of course my Smith Model 19 doesnt have one) as being just one more thing to go wrong. I am personally acquainted with a case where the homeowner attempted to fire his S&W semi and the gun wouldnt fire. He racked the slide and tried again but again failed. Eventually he retreated and discovered the safety was on. In that case it was good because the intruder in fact was a disoriented psychotic woman who would not have posed a threat. Not that he would have known that at the time.

Aren't these statements contradictory? If the people consent not to have RKBA then it isn't a right, despite what a minority want.

Not a damn thing. I don't even know what you mean. What is "incorporation of the Second"?? The first issue the court will face is whether the 2nd confers an individual right at all. The second issue is whether the 2nd also applies to the states. The third is whether states and/or the Federal gov't have the power to regulate private ownership of firearms. My gut on this is that they will decide very narrowly (as has been the habit of the court) and say that the 2nd does apply to individuals and that DC cannot outright ban private ownership. But I predict the court will stop at that point and not address the other issues. D.C. will end up with an ownership regime that will resemble NYC's, a ban in all but name. Don't look for this to be a watershed event or a cure-all for RKBA. It won't. Our best hope for expansion is nationwide reciprocity. There are several bills pending for just that. Let's support those.

I couldnt lay out all the issues I have with the previous post. I will pick out one and say that in one sense it really doesn't matter what the Supreme Court decides in the DC case. The net effect for us here is likely to be zero. People who think a favorable outcome will mean they can open carry in Manhattan are sadly uninformed about the entire debate and the structure of Constitutional Law.

Excellent! Very well said.

Just post on your opinion of Open Carry and away you go.

OK, 10-15 ft on level ground is certainly contact distance and definitely a threat. Thanks for clarifying. I would hope I would do the same in that situation.

I see the reasons to OC amounting to: 1) It is legal, therefore right. 2) It is more comfortable that way. 3) If we don't do it we are on a slippery slope to total confiscation. I don't see those as particularly compelling although I grant the first two a measure of validity.

Could we have a vote and just make this a general rule??

According the post by Mike .357 Knox Co deputies will arrest anyone OCing and confiscate their weapon until they "check out." Maybe I misread it. If that is the case then they are abusing their authority and perpetrating a civil rights abuse. You do not arrest someone for legal activity. If they stop and ask to see the permit, that is legal and proper.

Can you be a little more specific, like linking the actual thread, or summarizing some of the arguments?

I want to OC in Knox County so I can sue the miserable SOBs for false arrest and abuse of authority. They can ask to see the permit but they cannot arrest someone for doing something legal.

Or you could just spend $5 on a shirt that would cover it.