Hgunner

Then do it, don't talk about it, I personally don't mind joining him.

So, from your response I take it that his sin is being prejudice, not that his post was inflammatory, just simply that he is prejudice. I did not realize that this has become a crime worthy of being banned from a discussion board, and I did not realize that having opinions different from others was also not acceptable. I think gts made a very eloquent and informative response stating his view of things. Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with his views I think he has the right to them right or wrong. This is were the PC attitude is killing free thought, when one is punished for speaking his mind, if you don’t agree tell the individual so, but to ban him to shut him up is cowardly, and may just be a good example of the cowardice of which he spoke. Your statement of “Thanks, I have been waiting for this” tells me you did this more out of spite and vindictiveness than because of the content of his post. As for the threat of me joining him, well I never cottoned to threats much myself so do what you want to. I was thinking of benefactor status but that won’t happen ever after your threat, I simply asked for an explanation of your action. In the event that Daniel drops the ban hammer on me. To all the good folks out on TGO I’ve enjoyed my short stay here, I liked the debates and the discourse. I hope that you are better able to deal with the lack of tolerance for free expression than I am.

The poster was asked to explain himself, agree with him or not he did so quite well. What in this post caused him to be sent on vacation?

You are absolutely right about that...unless we do something about it... like vote every last one of them out....Republicrats or Democains...don't matter to me.

7-5-95 Issued by Sumner County Sheriffs Department. States on permit weapon my be carried Concealed only.

Ok, they called it Federalizing, Ike actually called the AR Guard to active duty to remove it from the Govenors control. He did not Federalize the Guards of the 50 states. That wasn't technically completed until 2007.

You can go here and look at legislation pertaining to the NG. National Guard of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia It was made a component of the Army in 1933, there were no acts or legislation during ther 50"s, in 2007 the govenor was removed from sole command of the Guard. So please show where Ike Federalized the Guard. If that was the case why was a court injunction needed to get the Govenor to stand down. Anyway multiple wrongs do not make a right, I guess if Big Zero gets his Civilian Police Force that's going to be ok with you too. Doesn't really matter who's jack boots are on your neck as long as they are government authorized jack boots right?

And I remember states using the NG to put down riots in th 60's. but that was the states not the FED's. In your example the 101st was used to enforce a Federal Court order, can't deny that, however they were not engaged in putting down citizen by force. They were a show of force, makes one wonder, what if the Govenor had ordered the Ark NG to open fire on the 101st.

That was aid in a natural disaster, not injecting specially trained combat troops into a already hot civil unrest situation. Of course that may be exactly what they want, a big bad messy situation with a lot of dead so that they can say. Well we can't have this happen again so we've go to outlaw guns. The use of US Troops to aid in a disaster ok, I can get that, helicopters to move supplies, medical treatment etc, ok. Not using Troops as a policing force to quell a riot or put down civil unrest, that's when riots turn into revolts.

I like the ad, I just hope he means it, I'm so tired of lying politicians, hell for that matter i"m tired of them all.

Well personally, I would like to think I had the balls to shoot the ...hole that issued it. If this story was about the Fed's sending 80K troops to our southern border to stop the influx of illegals and stop the (not being racist here) Mexican/Drug cartel wars from spilling over into the US of A. I'd be all for it. We have American citizens being killed on their own land by invading illegals while our government sets idle and plots the use of force against its own citizens. ........

gts gets it, there may be technical details that may not be accurate, the picture, even troop strenght. But they are training troops to deploy against who? Us, you and me. Doesn't that bother you is the least and doesn't it make you wonder what they may be up too.

Special army unit ready to be deployed on American soil just before Nov. elections (Update) Special army unit ready to be deployed on American soil just before Nov. elections (Update) April 13, 5:16 PM · Anthony G. Martin - Conservative Examiner Note: An update has been posted at the end of the article. In October of this year, one month prior to the November midterm elections, a special army unit known as 'Consequence Management Response Force' will be ready for deployment on American soil if so ordered by the President. (AP Photo/David Longstreath). <IMG border=0 name=s_i_examinercom alt="" width=1 height=1> The special force, which is the new name being given to the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, has been training at Fort Stewart, Georgia and is composed of 80,000 troops. According to the Army Times, They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack. The key phrase is 'may be called upon to help with civil unrest.' This afternoon a local radio talk show host reported that he had been in contact with a member of the military. This military source stated that the armed forces have been alerted to the strong possibility that civil unrest may occur in the United States this summer, prior to the midterm elections of 2010. The source described this as 'our long, hot summer of discontent' that could be eerily reminiscent of the summer of 1968 when riots broke out in many of our largest cities. However, the summer of 2010 could well be much worse due to the players involved. In 1968 the major players were war protesters. This time, the outrage simmering beneath the surface of American society involves a broad cross-section of the heartland, and most of them are heavily armed. It is highly unlikely that these citizens would ever initiate armed conflict of any kind. In their view, gun rights are for self-defense--and for defense against tyrannical government, which our Founders regarded as the most dangerous force on earth. However, it has become clear that other groups may well initiate violence in order to start an 'incident' that would give Obama and a rogue Congress a reason to implement martial law, confiscate the citizens' guns, enforce curfews, and suspend all future elections until such time as it is deemed 'safe' to proceed with human liberty as encapsulated in the right to vote. Tea Party members, for example, have been warned in recent days that members of Andy Stern's SEIU union and members of the organization formerly known as ACORN plan to infiltrate Tea Party gatherings in order to incite some sort of incident that could result in armed conflict. In addition, all indications point to a humiliating defeat for the Democrats and Obama in November. Not only will the House in all likelihood transfer to Republican control, but it is increasingly possible for the Democrats to lose the Senate as well. And there are Leftwing groups in this country that would use whatever means necessary to prevent that from happening. ACORN has already gone underground, changing its name so as to fly beneath the radar screen. How many people will the group register to vote illegally? And with Obama's plan to naturalize between 10 and 20 million illegal aliens, a brand new voter base for the Democrats will be in place prior to November. Add to this the growing unrest over continued high unemployment, the coming spike in interest rates and inflation, and the still-boiling outrage over the manner in which Obama and the Democrats shoved ObamaCare down the throats of the citizens, and all of the ingredients are present for a major F-5 tornado to sweep across the heartland. To what extent would soldiers use deadly force during such 'civil unrest' should the Consequence Management Response Team be utilized? During the anti-war riots of the 1960s they killed student protesters. What about now? The military source cited by the radio host today was asked this very question. He would merely say that the culture of the U.S. military is changing--half support Obama and the other half are dead-set against him. His conclusion? There is no way to know for sure if they would obey an order to open fire on ordinary citizens. Update: The Cato Institute published this warning when the program was launched in its first phase in 2008 (the program has been updated and expanded since 2008). The Founders insisted that standing armies were never to be used against American citizens on our own soil, no matter what violations of this principle have occurred in the years following. In the spirit of the Patriots and of real journalists government must be questioned constantly and held to intense scrutiny in order to preserve liberty.

Both of our current Senators need to go, but all we can do in the mean time is call or email and give them an ear full.

My thought exactly, what precluded you and the client staying with the disabled auto ( with gun), while the wife and kids took your vehicle to get gas?

The 1911 is a modern firearm, HK even used design features of in your HK. Double your efforts thats what you said, and I think you meant crutch, not crux. Crux would be like the root of a problem. I think again thats pretty ridiculous as there isn't a much simpler platform than the 1911. Glad you've had the opportunity to shoot all of those 1911's and that your HK is a good one. So the next time I get a call, and need to teach someone new to shoot. I will give them the basics and show them different platforms to chose from etc. Then I should advise them to go out and buy the worst cheapest POS they can find and master that first, so when they buy a good gun they will appreciate what they have. Something that is going to require at least twice the effort to become proficient with. Not to giude them to something that they would feel comfortabe with and that they could become proficiet with quickly, and might help save their life if it came to that.

No argument there.

Bart, wasn't meant as a personal attck, just my way of disagreeing with you. Lets take a look at your original post. 1. The 1911 is one of the easiest weapons to maintain. It can be completely disassembled, cleaned and repaired with a minimum of tools, with just a little mechnical ability. 2. Your own words "they are just so easy to shoot so well". "but i would have to nearly double my efforts than if I were shooting the 1911". What better endorsment could you give the 1911 as opposed to the HK. Why would you advise someone to go with a more difficult platform to master shooting well? 3 Accuracy...Have you ever shot a Wilson? a Baer? a Brown?" a Nighthawk? Do you own any of the above. Can you make that direct comparision from experience?

Exactly if the Legislature, allowed it, it really depends on their few to preventing crime. In TN ownership is a right, carry is a priviledge. Want it changed, change the constitution or get the Legislature to legislate it.

And just how many Wilsons, Baers,Browns,Nighthawks do you own or have you shot. Hk makes a decent "Chrunchinthunker" and I'm really impressed by "Larry Vickers" but it's nothing more than a upgraded USP/2000. You can try and make a silk purse out of a sow's ear but in the end it's still a sow's ear. Like I said you keep beleiving that if you want too and you've made some pretty stupid comments yourself.

Things really depend on how one views thems, after secession the Confideracy was a Soverign Nation. Therefore it wasn't a Civil War, but the victors write the histories. I was always partial to The War of Northern Aggression.

Thats right you just keep telling yourself that Kid.

I hope you are right, but I doubt it.

See Militia Act 1792, its what gives Congress the right ot raise and fund a standing Army. It could be ammended to mandate manditory militay service. Its what authorized a draft also, but I sure am not going to get into this. That wasn't my point. My point was that every citizen is not trained by any uniform life experience to handle a firearm in this country. Some learn for our dad's others from a uncle's, friend etc. I was just saying that as far as Tennessee goes the legislature has the right to regulate carry and I don't have a problem with them mandating training to do so, especialy after reading some of the stuff on this and other boards. I would rather pay for it myself and go where I want as to paying an addition tax to the state and having to take a state taught course.

Gosh and I blew a gasket when my daughter came home from college in NYF'IN City and told me she was marrying a uppity liberal Philadelphia Yankee.....