tntnixon

I believe she is in a gerrymandered district. The GOP controls the legislature, but as you probably know, it's common practice in state houses to make a distict that is made up of one demographical group in order to get two districts that are made of the demographics that favor the majority.

Not really. It's an op-ed piece by Phil Valentine. The actual people who work for the Tennessean (AKA Pravda on the Cumberland) would never give gun owners a fair shake.

Will do. Interestingly, my grandfather is who talked me out of joining the Army when I was 18. He said "There are too many p***ys running things now. They'll get you killed." Of course he also told me "Quit chasing women. That cooter will kill you." And, while it hasn't killed me, it has gotten me in trouble from time to time. Hey, that's my granddaddy and he's one of my heroes.

Corker is the only one, so far.

You are both technically right. the neutron bomb was "postponed" in 1978 under Carter. It was susequently restarted in 1981 by Reagan. As far as combat time for soldiers during WWII, it was a mixed bag. My grandfather for instance saw action in North Africa, Italy, France, Belgium(landed on a grenade in Belgium and was sent to England to be "patched up") after 2 months of rehab in England he was reassigned to the South Pacific were he also saw combat before coming home (2 bronze stars, a silver star and a purple heart). He was subsequently given a dishonorable discharge for being AWOL (he stayed 2 days late after the birth of my mother) but that was overturned. Guess what, he's still kicking. My father-in-law's experience was different. He was in the Navy and had a hell of a good time (lot's of partying in England, Morocco, and Durban, South Africa) even though he was sank 3 times by German subs(never captured. The Germans just wanted the boats off the seas).

You understood what I was referring too. Except I would take the "Tactical" away.

I appologize, if you think I was referring to our troop's willingness. By no means did I mean that. I'm referring to the public at-large, and the political figures that control what our military is able to do. I will correct you on one point, though. Contrary to popular opinion, most of the 16 million Americans that served in the military during WWII were volunteers(expressed a desire to enlist, you actually couldn't volunteer after the middle of 1942 because there were too many willing and there was fear of not being able to keep factories and farms running at home. But those who had expressed desire to enlist were drafted and there was no shortage). They waited in line to join the fight. Many, like my grandfather, lied about their age just to get in. Luckily, we weren't checking ID's.

We haven't truely gone to war since WWII or been willing to do so. Back then, we believed that ruthlessness was necessary. We also weren't affraid to let our sons, husbands and friends die for the nation. We actually considered it our duty to do so. Oh, a lot has changed in the last 65 years. We have no heart for real war. My grandfather, for instance, got on a boat in 1942 and came home in 1946. Now think 12 months is too long to be deployed. Back then, when you took territory, it was yours. You didn't appologize for being there or try to bend your will to the local culture. You weren't there to make friends. People forget that the Japanese were just as "hard-core" as the jihadists, now. What we said to them (with our actions) was:We know you're willing to die for your Emporer. But are you willing to have everyone who looks like you, speaks like you and thinks like you die in the process? The answer was a resounding no!!! And my theory is, unless we make the jihadists answer the same question, we will always have these problems.

Love my M&P 40. just can't carry it much during the summer. It has a tendency to imprint a little.

Damn, I'm glad our founding fathers wern't part of the "smarter crowd". They must have been some of the dumbest SOB's ever.

Yes, I'm sure it wasn't $1.70. I wouldn't have been pissed over $1.70. My wife is in the postal business and she told me what they had done. But I can't remember exactly what it was. I just remember her saying that they could have mailed it a lot cheaper and whoever mailed it didn't know what they were doing.

I actually agree with most of what you are saying. I believe in the market and for people making money in America. Actually I believe in making a lot of it. It's the percentage of money that I have a problem with. Mr. LaPierre makes 0.45% of all the money coming to the NRA. By comparison the highest paid CEO in America (Oracle) only makes 0.08%. If Exxon's CEO made the same percentage he would make $1.7Billion (he does not). It's purely a matter of accounting. It takes 35,000 annual memberships to cover his salary. Private business would never tolerate this. If you told me that we had quadupled our endowment and membership during his tenure, I would say great. But we are actually having fewer members by population percentage, not more. That is why an NRA endorsment is meaning less and less. And , yes you can get good help for $500,000 a year. It doesn't require $900,000. All I'm asking for is fiscal responsibilty. We demand it from our government and we should demand it from the organizations we belong to.

I didn't qualify my statement. According to The NRA's required federal disclosure for non-profits, Wayne LaPierre's salary is approximately $900,000 plus benefits. So at a tax rate of 36% plus 11% SSI=$432,000. I'm sorry but two things make me angry that is highly paid clergy and highly paid leaders of non-profits. I certainly believe they should be able to live comfortably, the question is how comfortably? And what does that say about one's commitment to the cause? I'm certainly not questioning Mr. Lapierre's commitment, but I am questioning the leadership for approving such a salary when they know a form 900 will be required and it gives ammunition to the "Brady Bunch".

The NRA is a non-profit (501©(4)) and is therefore not subject to taxes other than the witholding taxes of its employees (which by my calculations would be about $432,000 for Wayne LaPierre, alone).

My only criticism of the NRA is that they are not good stewards of our money. They typically run annual deficits which is a travesty. You send them $ and they spend more than that in postage to petition you for more money. What's the point? I bought a membership for my nephew. It was $25.00. They sent him a multitool and spent $17.00 just on postage(It was on the envelope). Keep the multitool, save the postage and operate in the black for crying out loud.

I love the idea, but all the posts on what you want in a gun show, or don't want, seem to be a bit ambitious. Unfortunately, what makes gun shows what they are is money. Shows cost a lot to produce and recuperating those costs requires things like Sham-wow. Unless you're the Las Vegas ShotShow, which is basically what everyone is describing. There is only one place in TN that could accomodate such an event and that is the Opryland Hotel which would cost insane amounts of money to book. It would also take a lot of work and a long-term plan. I'm not saying having such an event in TN is a bad idea (I would love it). I'm just saying that there are reasons why our local shows are like they are.

my glock 27's shooting low center-mass (about 3" to be exact). never had problem before (i did drop it about a month ago. glocks are slick as owl ). the gun smith i used to use died. tried to talk to the guy at the gun shop I've been patronizing for some time and same old story "must be you. next". I've shot enough over the years to know when it's me, and I know my bad habits. this is not one of them. Are the gun folks doing sooo well right now that they don't care about their customer service anymore? I just want someone who'll sit down and talk to you maybe even go down to the range and see what's the matter. this used to be the norm. anybody out there like that anymore?

i tried the oil. no good. i wonder if i should just soak the barrel over night?

In the original version the amount of force necessary to stop the perpetrator was authorized even though it stated not the use of deadly force. However, it did leave the door open to the use of appropriate force even if the ultimate outcome was death. The amended version clearly states that only if deadly force were otherwise appropriate is it Ok to use the amount of force necessary to stop the perp. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but that's the way I see it. And probably the way the jury would see it. That being said, I don't know that is the original legislative intent. But, as we all know, the courts over-rule legislative intent constantly in todays society.

My father in law passed away a couple of weeks ago and he had several weapons that my mother-in-law wanted me to make sure were in good working condition. No problem except for this little Italian job .25 that he bought at Western Auto in 1968. Slide works appropriately, chambers a round well, manually cycles well, but I cant get a .25 brush or a small patch to pass through to barrel. I see no obvious obstructions (the barrel's only 2"). I can't take the barrel off. It's evidently made into the frame. Strange design. It's a Galesi.

You stole my thunder. FMJ .45 is a relatively ineffective load as are most FMJ loads regardless of size. Thats why the JHP was invented.

I find it interesting that the amended law seems to give one less rights to pretection of property than the previous version. I thought we had a conservative legislature, yet they passed this bill during the current session. What gives?

the last time I saw statistics (it's been a while), Corbon 115gr 9mm had the best one shot stop percentage in a non-LEO only round. I believe it was something around 94%. Federal 235gr Hydroshocks had about a 96% OSS percentage but only in full sized .45's. In more compact .45's, the Golden Saber 185gr was best at about a 94% OSS percentage. These statistics are about 10yrs old and quite possibly have changed but I have lived by it ever since it was published in Guns and Ammo. Just a word to the wise, those Corbon 9mm's are a little "snappy" if you're not used to them.

First let me preface this thread with a little nostalgia. When I was a child I remember looking into my dad's gun case (back before safes, when wood and glass was sufficient) and looking at all of his guns. One always caught my eye. The dark checkered walnut, the vent rib, the scrollwork and the high gloss blued finish. It was his Remington 1100. And regardless of the value of each firearm (many were worth far more), I was in love with that gun. That was a love affair that I have secretly carried on with until this very day. While my friends were buying Brownings, Benellis and Berettas, I cleaved unto my 1100 (I bought my own as my very first gun purchase). After God, my country, and my wife comes my Remington. Like the others, not once has it let me down. So here's my question. Should I buy a brand new self defense shotgun(i.e. Mossberg 500) or just put a 18 1/2" barrel, magazine extension and a pistol grip on my trusty 1100? I can buy a new gun for about $350 or modify mine fro about $250. Of course, I'll never throw away my old barrels or stocks and will still use my 1100 for all other uses.

I don't know if this overides the previous State law regarding possesion of a suppressor. I think previous law still requires clearance by the feds. Kind of ambiguous. To me it sounds as if it is not illegal to make them or buy them but in order to possess them it has to be cleared by the feds. It's difficult to make or buy something without possessing it. At least that's my experience. But as the 9th Cicuit of Appeals ruled several years ago, keeping and bearing arms is not the same as owning and possessing.