c.a.willard

Montgomery county shooting complex has a rifle range that goes out to 400 yards.  A little bit of a drive for you but not unreasonable

Sounds like its gonna be a pretty darn good trip.  I think i'm a little bit jealous.

most do not care if you find homosexuality repugnant. People do care when because of your personal feelings you exclude an entire group of people from participating as part of our society.  Why shouldn't homosexuals be outspoken about their rights being violated.  Why shouldn't homosexuals be outspoken about being excluded from a group that should have nothing to do with sex on the sole basis of their sexual orientation.  No one is forcing you to like it but you will have to put up with it because it is happening.      As it pertains to the BSA, the way I see it is that those opposed to this have 3 basic choices.  Fight to change it back which is your right to do, accept that it is happening whether you like it or not and move on, or form your own non secular scouting organization.    Lets not forget that the majority of the BSA voting membership approved this change

My wife chose a P-22 on her own.  She's shot all of my guns and can handle them fine she just likes the way it feels and the lack of recoil.  She started shooting a P-22 because we rented one a couple times while we at G&L and she liked that little rental gun more than any of mine so we ended up buying her one of her own her home defense gun though is my M&P 9 with a tac light on it.      One of my good friends wives just recently switched from a small light 380 to a full size 9mm because she felt the 380 was to snappy.  My buddy wasn't sure what to have her try and when I figured out that it was for a home defense gun I got him to have her try a couple of full size guns.  A heavier slide and springs can do as much to tame recoil as switching to a smaller caliber.  I've known several women that prefer the 45 ACP cartridge because of its particular type of recoil impulse     If I put myself in the shoes of the salesman though I can see why they steer them to guns that more women seem happy with.  

So Dave, just out of curiosity why are you emotionally invested in this case enough to make a trip to Florida for it.  If you do not feel like sharing please feel free to ignore my question.  Im not trying to be rude or anything just curious. 

To me it looks to close to really tell, especially with the shoot and see targets.  I was always taught that when it is to close to call, you score to the shooters benefit.

I'm still just trying to figure out how this is firearms related.

Decided we needed some family time away from the phone and computers, so I took the baby and the wife out to LBL today. Did some fishing at bards lake. Not to much biting on the bank where we were at other than blue gill. Most of them little ones but about a dozen or so keeper size but threw them all back. Today was more about making memories than catching fish but its always nice when you can do both. I know my little girl wont remember it but its a trip my wife and I will never forget. [url=http://s987.photobucket.com/user/cwillard1983/media/Paige_zpscf4f9885.jpg.html][/URL]

a top fed traditional pistol caliber this size would be absolutely amazing.  Since it's a blowback gun you wouldn't think that it would be to very difficult for FN to do. 

Ordering the DOJ to investigate the DOJ is very clever on his part.  Much like holder investigating the IRS debacle.  A pending possibly criminal investigation is enough justification that people involved can not be compelled to testify in front of congress. 

Some of you may remember that I mentioned in other threads that I ordered a PS90 way back in late Nov beginning of Dec (I don't remember the exact date anymore). There were a couple stores that had hem in stock when i ordered but none that did FN mil/le pricing she was only 800 dollars before tax and tics Got a voicemail yesterday and it had finally came in. Now for the real problem, where the heck do i find ammo for this thing right now. way back when i ordered it i realized that ammo would be more difficult to find for this than for my other firearms, but in this current market i don't even know where to start. I was hoping one of you guys or gals might be able to point the way to a local source or a trusted website that you use. I know I can find it on gun broker and armslist but we all know how those prices are. BTW for anyone who has ever wanted to shoot one of these consider this post an open invitation if you can find the rounds I'm free for a meet and shoot just about every weekend [URL=http://s987.photobucket.com/user/cwillard1983/media/PS90_zps66b16d9e.jpg.html][/URL]

This is what you get with a systematic disarming of a civilian population.  An increase in brazen attacks using edge weapons and a 20 minute wait for an armed police officer to show up.

yes,  very different than the US Marshalls service.  Although the US Marshall service does have a portion of it that security focused.  Specifically security for federal court buildings and they also handle the majority of the CSO program through contracting.   Marshalls do the following:  Judiciary security, witness security, prisoner transport, fugitive apprehension   FPS protects around 9,000 different federal buildings and properties.  Most of which are federal office buildings.          The FPS has been around for over 6 decades now, its just that you very rarely hear about them.  Partly because they are small and partly because it is rare for them to do things like in the OP. 

Id say that FPS is  good example of a reasonable size for their scope and authority.  I want to say they have only somewhere near 1,000 sworn officers for all the federal buildings and properties that they cover.  The majority of security is through contract security companies.  I do think that FPS probably needs to move back under GSA instead of being under DHS.  But that's because GSA is better set up to  handle all the contracting issues.  You cant really defund FPS as they do not get their funding through a line item budget.  They get their funding by charging a fee to the agencies whose buildings they protect.  

FPS is the agency that is overall responsible for the security and protection of certain federal properties and buildings.  Their sworn LE portion of FPS is fairly small, however they oversee several thousand security guard contractors.

IT was well outside the scope of that FPS officers authority to even attempt to conduct a traffic stop.  They have relatively limited powers outside of their scope of duties about the only time a FPS officer can do anything not related to the security of federal property is if they personally witness a violation of federal law or a felony offense. 

The three in one should be just as effective. CN Gas is weaker than CS gas it just has a longer effect.  Personally I don't think that for a defensive spray CS/CN even worth bothering with as its effects are greatly reduced with sources of fresh air.  I've been through several CS chambers and have been sprayed by OC multiple times.  For me id rather take the CS chamber any day of the week.  a few minutes of fresh air and your good to go the OC takes significantly longer to wear off also CS And CN both take more time to take effect than OC spray sometimes as much as 30 seconds, that being said both effect different people differently and you are able to fight through any of them.    The next thing to consider is at what range is they are most likely to use it.  The streams have a longer effective range apprx 20 feet depending on manufacturer but require batter aiming.  The cone mist provides for more area of coverage but its effective range is reduced to around 10-15 feet.    For someone who doesn't train on how to use it I would recommend a cone mist unit as they are much easier to get on to target.  As far as a good brand, My go to choice is Fox Labs.  They make some of the best OC products on the market. However their formula is geared to LE.  It has a fairly high SHU with a relatively low oil to dye ratio.  This results in an extremely effective spray that has a slightly shortened recovery time.  So that you don't have to spend an hour waiting for a person to calm down after being sprayed.  Recovery time from most of the fox labs stuff is around 20-30 minutes longer for some shorter for others     I know some of that is unsolicited advice, I just don't want to see people waste money on a defensive product that may not be very effective for their intended use.

They also make a version that does not require a tax stamp     http://store.commandarms.com/products/RONICG2.html

You mean the agency tasked to protect federal buildings (FPS) was outside of a federal building during a protest.  And what makes these guys storm troopers.  I can not see anything in the article you provided to show that they did anything other than stand there

Speaking of TN being on the high side for hunting and fishing, 41/2 more months and I can buy my daughter her lifetime sportsman license.  The way I figure it prices are only going to go up so if I get her the lifetime for her first birthday it will save her lots over her life.  If she ends up being more like her mom and not into that sort of thing i'm only out a couple hundred.  For those out there with young children or grandchildren it is definitely worth looking in to

My concern is more that they spent the time and money involved for a length federal investigation for something where the subject of the investigation obviously had no criminal intent.  Did he make a mistake yes, was it something that a professional hunter should have known, again id say yes.   But was it something so serious that warrants a Felony charge,  Hardly.

If I had the choice of a home made filter for long term water or distilled I would go with filtered.  There are some serious health risk concerns with drinking distilled water over the long term.  However for short term use it does have the added benefit of drawing some toxins out of the body.  rain water is one of the best starting sources for water and a simple charcoal and sand filter should be sufficient.

From reading the article Dave S posted I also see that they conducted a search of his vehicle.  I am curious as to others thoughts on this.  I myself am still trying to make up my mind on legality of the vehicle search.  Arizona v Gant pretty much sets the rules for a vehicle search incident to arrest.     The Supreme Court held that police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle, incident to a recent occupant's arrest (and therefore without a warrant) only if it is reasonable to believe that the arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search, or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest.   He obviously did not have access at the time of the search and since his arrest was for obstruction of justice i'm not sure what evidence of the offense the officers could reasonably expect to be in the vehicle.  According to the police the search was to determine if he was under any disability (basically a prohibited person) so they have already basically said the search of the vehicle was to look for evidence of an offense that the suspect was not arrested for.    My thoughts is that this is a violation of his rights and does not meet the requirements set forth in gant for a search incident to arrest.  There was no danger to the public and no risk of evidence being destroyed so in my opinion no exigent circumstances that would allow a warrantless search of his vehicle.   Separate of this im not sure you can really call it a lie if you ask if he has ID with him and he says no when the ID is in his car 50 feet away.  It becomes subjective on what you view as with you.  For example (this is a bit of a stretch for many)  you go into a properly posted business(Stretch 1) and leave your gun in the car(stretch 2).  you are approximately 50 feet away from your vehicle.  Do you have your gun with you?

I don't want the guy to cost tax payers money, but that may be the only way to get the city to take notice.  I don't even want to see the police officers fired.  I have known many people in the LE community and by far the vast majority are trying to do the best they can in the situations in which they find themselves in. These officers made a mistake, but no lasting damages were done. I see this not only as a violation of his rights but as a LE training issue.  what I would love to see come of this is improved training for that department on how to handle these types of calls.  Unfortunately a large portion of LE at the senior levels is politics and increasing training in this area is more likely to happen under pressure from city officials.  It is sad that it may cost additional taxpayer dollars to force that to happen.  I'm not sure a complaint alone would have been enough to effect change or even a departmental revue to see if there was any wrongdoing by the officers involved.  I am also aware that training is a delicate balancing act between what you want to train on, what you have to train on and what you need to train on. And that there is a very finite amount of time and money that can me devoted to training.  So frequently things like this as long as they happen infrequently enough not to cause major problems are placed on the back burner for training identified as more important.  If one good thing does come of this is that there is now likely be a greater understanding of this issue inside that department.       Dave I agree that I find the wording there interesting.   Here is the text of the ORC.   2921.29 Failure to disclose personal information.     (A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following: (1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense. (2) The person witnessed any of the following: (a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state; (b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property; (c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section; (d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.     (B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one's personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. (C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed. (D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person's age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.

Dave S with all due respect to you and other LE you are still missing the point.  Under Ohio law open carrying of a firearm is not crime.  So the police did not have any reason to suspect that the individual had committed, was committing or about to commit a crime.  They key part of the supreme court ruling on Terry V Ohio is the and.  They require reasonable suspicion not just that he was armed but that he was committing or about to commit a crime. Their was no articulable reason for them to believe that he was unlawfully carrying.  Even had they officer been acting in good faith believing he was within his legal authority the supreme court has ruled good fait is not enough.     " â€œ... in justifying the particular intrusion the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant the intrusion.”  from Terry v Ohio   The only articulable fact that the police had was that he was openly carrying a firearm, which under Ohio law is not a crime.   They had no other reasons for detaining him.    The presence of the gun when open carried is not in and of itself enough reason to detain someone under Ohio law.  They can ask him for his ID all they want all and he can refuse to answer (again affirmed by Ohio law) but the moment he was detained against his will they overstepped their legal authority.     A citizen does not have to prove to the police that they were not doing anything illegal.   In regards to the law suit I think its dumb to sue a city especially for egregious amounts when no significant damage was done.  However these officers were wrong and likely would have gotten away with violating his rights had he not chosen this course of action.  At the very least the law suit will cause the city to have to consider additional and or remedial training for their officers in how to respond to incidents like this.