The Rabbi

Right, you have no idea what you're talking about. The wealth of a nation is not measured in gold. If that were the case Russia and South Africa would be economic powerhouses. They arent. You persist in saying that the US has to back its dollar with gold. Get over it. It isnt true. It has not been true since 1974. U.S. stocks of gold are trivial compared with the value of the rest of the economy.. Illegal immigrants (and legal ones too btw) send money out of the country. Multinational corporations also send money out of the country. And in far greater amounts than illlegals could imagine. Are you proposing that multinationals are responsible for weakening the economy? The data on whether illegals help or hurt the economy are unclear. There was an announcement not too long ago from a group of Nobel Prize winners to the effect that the overall impact was positive. Arthur Laffer has said that immigants (including illegals) are the lifeblood of the economy. I tend to think this is true. People say we cant absorb all the illegals. We already have. Unemployment here is well under 5%. If we deported all the illegals many industries would face unprecedented labor shortages. We are not talking about an extra dollar a head for lettuce. We are talking about prices being 20-30% higher across the board. If you object to illegals taking advantage of social welfare programs, then lobby to reform those programs. And I am still waiting to hear the name of this index you referenced.

It's certainly easy to distort someone's argument into nonsense and then disagree with it. I guess your approch would be: let's pick a problem and throw as much money as we possibly we can until the problem is solved. Iraqi insurgence? Let's draft every male between 18 and 35 and send them over there. That would solve that problem. Border control? Let's draft every male between 18 and 50 and send them down there. That would solve that problem. Oh, those things would wreck our economy and cause massive disruption to our social and political life? So what? It's the RIGHT THING TO DO.

Really? Please supply the name of this index that measures how much gold we hold and tell me its relevance to currency valuation. Then tell me, in support of your original thesis, how this gold is being depleted by illegal aliens. Maybe they're the ones driving up and demanding gold at Ft Knox. Please cite any evidence, any at all, that illegal immigration is responsible in any part whatsoever for the dollar's fall. And while you're there, please explain why the dollar is almost exactly at the same value against the Euro as it was in Jan 2005, as you see here: http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?D5=0&D4=1&ViewType=0&C6=2007&3=0&ShowChtBt=Refresh+Chart&Symbol=%2fEURUS&C8=2007&DateRangeForm=1&CE=0&C5=5&C7=5&ComparisonsForm=1&C9=0&DisplayForm=1&CP=0&PT=10 Or please explain why the dollar is currently at about the same level against the Yen as it was Jan 2003 http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?from=USD&to=JPY&amt=1&t=5y Finally, I cannot account for all the hispanic food stores on Nolensville Rd here if all the illegals are simply growing their vegetables in spare bedrooms. I guess those are just front organizations.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I strongly suspect your knowledge of economics is lacking. The dollar is not falling because of illegal immigration. It is falling for complex reasons, among them the increase in inflation in the US. The US stopped backing its dollar with gold in 1972, and stopped backing it for private individuals in 1934. Illegals do not send every penny they earn to Mexico. They have to live here too. Further money sent back home means those receiving it are not moving here since they have no need to. All immigrants send money home. My great-grandfather regularly sent money to his father back in Lithuania. Illegals enter in every which way possible. That includes Canada. That includes the airports here as well. Try mining the airports. I would state as a rule that any solution that involves ending human life is not a viable solution in any way at all.

I suppose theoretically we could build fences and have constant monitoring (weren't there just tunnels discovered underneath the border crossings, used by drug smugglers?). It is a 2000 mile border across very uninhabited and inhospitable land. We would need to mine parts of it. We would need to draft or otherwise encourage people to join the guard or the army, since much of the guard is currently being sent to the middle east. The cost of such an enterprise would make the current Iraq War look like small change. We would share the dubious distinction of fortifying our borders with the likes of the Soviet Union. So it would be grossly costly in and of itself, it would create labor shortages here, drive up the cost of things, increase inflation, and expose us to the odium of the rest of the world. If you want to call that fortitude, go right ahead. I'd call it plain dumb.

Eggsactly. There was a news item about a bunch of Nigerians who were here illegally, and had already been deported 3 times already. It is too easy to get here somehow. China can't control its border with N.Korea, despite it being much smaller and teh Chinese less sensitive to human rights than we are.

It's an economic problem: limited supply of labor here at cost-effective rates. So it has an economic solution. One solution is to depress the economy here and create massive unemployment. That will stop people trying to come here since there is nothing to come for. There is already less illegal immigration since construction jobs have been declining. The other solution is to create a means where people can come here and work, at least temporarily. If work dries up, they go back home. Or to Canada. Or whereever they can find work. I know which solution I'd go for.

What a concept! Please stop by sometime, btw, even just to chat. Phil at Bellshire is a stand-up guy and has been a real help to me in the business. I wouldnt blame anyone for patronizing him.

Yes, people are free to spend their money where they want. Business owners are also free to set whatever prices they need. Some business owners simply dont want to do transfer business, and price accordingly. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with people thinking they ought to be able to transfer a gun for the cost of the TICS check. Or people who think that because they can "get it online" for X amount, that is what they should pay. I made the mistake of falling for that one once with a customer who wanted a Ruger Alaska. I made all of $20 on it. That's when I decided I wasn't doing that anymore and I would provide the gun at a fair (actually excellent) price compared to what they were selling for here, not somewhere in Montana. The thing that really makes selling vs transferring a problem is the sales tax. Really dealers should probably be collecting the sales tax that is owed to the state on the out of state transfer. Eventually I am sure some hotshot in Dept of Revenue will realize this and push it. But in the meantime I remind people they are responsible for the tax. btw, the guy with the Ruger Alaska never came back.

No because: a) I wont transfer a gun that I can order in and sell myself; It isnt anybody's business what someone pays for a gun. I provide a service and charge a flat fee for that. I dont need to see someone's invoice. On the first part, the transfer exists (in my mind) to get guns that customers could not get through me. I'll never have a Colt Python probably through the shop. So if someone wants one, he needs to find it on line. Similar with new Kimbers, SIGs, Beretta doubles, and anything else that is dealer direct. But I am not going to allow someone to transfer a new Taurus just so he can save 30 bucks on my back. In fact, about 50% or more of customers who transfer through me end up either buying another gun or buying ammo or whatnot. So I guess I'm easy enough to deal with. In person, anyway.

Repeat customers for what? Free business. I can get all the business I want giving things away. Do you think it costs nothing to operate a gun shop? I charge what I think is very reasonable amount to do this, but it is not without work or risk. I don't blame dealers who charge more. It's a free country.

NAte and Steelharp, thanks. The check is going out this morning.

Mazal tov, Mikey. Time to treat yourself to a Beretta 92....

Speer Gold Dot 135gr SB (for short barrel). I tried the Buffalo Bore .38LHP+P in the gun and it was way too much for my Bodyguard. The Speer had just the right amount of oomph. Remington or Winchester 158gr LHP+P also a good choice.

I've had both through the shop. The Kel Tec is much slimmer than the Kahr.

Cheap mil-surp .308 is a thing of the past. There is some cheap nasty stuff from India floating around. Good luck putting that in a $1k+ gun. Cheap mil-surp 5.56mm is also a thing of the past, largely. There might be a little around still.

Nice gun! You get a good deal on it??

Honestly with so much info out there, it doesnt bother me terribly. Yeah, someone could get a hold of such info and use it in nefarious ways. But in fact that seldom, if ever, happens. And criminals just aren't that smart or industrious. I dont know what the rate of gun ownership is in this state. But I'll bet it's high. So out of any 10 houses someone breaks into, I'd guess that he would find guns in 7 or 8 of them. WHat bothers me about the Tennessean is the fact that they think it's newsworthy, and that they think they are sticking it to permit holders by publishing this info. What did they hope to accomplish by putting this database on line? What message were they sending? I dont know, but think its a worthwhile question.

It's not that people are going to see you. It is that people will see 250,000 permit holders openly carrying. It does 2 things: 1) It affirms that open carry is legal here. That's a bigger deal than it sounds because a lot of people (including LEOs) think it isn't or will hassle people carrying openly. 2) It demonstrates how widespread carry is. It also demonstrates the broad range of people carrying. Most discussions from the anti side (just check the comments on the Tennessean website) focus on gun owners and permit holders being yay-hoos with no teeth. In fact ministers, doctors, lawyers, etc etc are also permit holders. If the general populace sees how many people carry it will remove some of the stigma attached to carry. That is the point.

Whats your issue with it? I would really like to avoid thread drift into a discussion of open vs concealed carry. That isnt the point. The point is to adopt one day in the year when we all open carry as a political protest of sorts by law abiding gun owners. I'd propose the 4th Saturday in March, which is the day the TN State constitution was adopted.

Sorry for posting this as a newcomer to the forum. I did a search and didnt see anything on it right off. We know that TN allows open carry. For lots of reasons I dont particularly recommend it and myself dont open carry. But for a while I had the thought that an Open Carry Day would be a good thing. There are, AFAIK, about 250,000 permit holders in this state of 7M people. My idea is that one day it would do everyone good to see how many of us carry, and also what kinds of people do it. What an eye opener for someone to see his doctor or his accountant carrying a weapon. It would bring weapons carry into the mainstream and maybe make people a little more comfortable with the concept. Heck, might even encourage a few to apply for their permits. What do you say?

In fairness what he is saying is that research on private ownership is split down the middle (actually it is split between showing it has a major impact in reducing crime and showing it has a huge impact in reducing crime). The vast majority is the reaction of police brass in the orgs he mentions. I guess the disconnect between what the cop on the beat sees and the brass in their offices see can be explained that the brass are basically politicians and most politicians have a basic distrust of the average citizen. It isnt based on anything concrete. It certainly isnt based on fact. But somehow the thought of millions of people doing ANYTHING without it being heavily restricted, regulated and (best of all) taxed gives these guys the willies. But as for his written response, I could summarize it as "don't confuse me with the facts, my opinion is obviously superior."

Thanks. Boy are you going to be sorry....

I guess I'm one of those old guys. Smith Model 19 with either 4" or 2 1/2" barrel. Also what I carry.

He was the instructor. And a darned good one, too!