Fallguy

Pretty interesting. The LEO gave just as good advice as the Professor.

Glockmeister, John I'm not really disagreeing with what y'all are saying. I do agree there is chance for real liability on your part if you choose to help someone. However there is some truth to that whether you armed or not, that is somewhat my point. I feel it is a choice that each person has to make for themselves based on their conscious and the situation at hand at that time. I really feel there are times you could help and people never know your armed. If the BG is running right by you, doesn't take a lot of effort to stick out your leg and trip him and doesn't require anyone knowing your armed. My main goal would be to retrieve the stolen property not necessarily hold the BG for the police. I admit, my feelings are some what skewed on this because of the amount of things stolen from me over the years.

Although there are minimum standards set by the DOS for the class, each class/instructor is different. Some are better than others. However I don't think it has ever been the intention of the class to make you in expert on handling a handgun or the laws in TN. I'm still of the opinion that one should not need a permit from the state to carry a handgun.

We (or at least I) are not talking about those who choose not to carry. You can't shoot someone for taking a purse. We are talking about getting involved in a non-self-defense situation.....that could become one and the possibly liabilities because of injecting yourself into something that did not directly involve you. But apparently we need people who don't carry so they can chase down the thug and get the purse back for the little old lady (who even if she was packing couldn't legally shoot a purse snacher). Because all of us that are armed have to just stand and watch or turn our heads and walk away.

Y'all watch the little old lady get robbed and beat if you want.... I'll help if I can. True, if he is running away, he is not a threat, so you can't shoot him then. But nothing legally or morally says you can not intervene simply because you armed as opposed to someone who isn't. You shouldn't get into a "shootout" unless the BG is armed as well, and he has become threat. I am by no means saying go out and look for bad situations to interject yourself into. But I think it is just foolish to say that because you armed you have do nothing. Because even though deadly force is an option (if it escalates to that) doesn't mean it is the only option.

Welcome

I agree, in general if called and able to you should serve on a jury. I have been called a few times, but have never served because it seems they always ask if anyone has ever been in Law Enforcement, I say, yes...next thing I know I'm told I can sit down. I agree there are certain situations where it is truly a hardship, that is why the judge can weigh the facts of each person circumstances and decided. But you have to at least show up and tell him of your situation. I believe you are right that they use your DL number, but there is no way of them knowing you also have a HCP unless they were to run a check on your DL. I'm not sure, but I think a computer simply generates a list of people.

Welcome

I have to disagree. If someone takes the purse of the woman with me at Wal-Mart...I'm going to give chase. Not with my weapon drawn or anything like that. But I'm not going to let the simple fact I'm armed stop me from retrieving the purse if I can. I'm not going to draw and say "Stop, or I'll shoot!" or anything like that. Even if the BG corner's himself I still would not draw and/or hold him at "gunpoint". Only if it becomes a self-defense situation, where I felt I was in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death would I draw my weapon. But again....I don't think a citizen should have to stand back and watch a crime because he is armed. He just needs to remember he is not a LEO and his weapon is for self-defense of himself (or others if he chooses) not to enforce laws or make arrest.

Out of curiosity do you know if the tag that said there was a firearm was inside or outside the suitcase? I have heard of this happening when the used to put the firearm tag on the outside. It is my understanding know the put the tag on the inside of the suitcase next to container with the firearm, so baggage handlers, etc... won't know there is a firearm in a particular bag.

Of course something else to make it somewhat confusing is....there are two types of lakes sort of. You have lakes like Kentucky Lake, Pickwick Lake that are actually just parts of the TN river. That section of the river is simply called a lake because of a dam on the river. Then there are lakes that are independent bodies of water with no outlet..or maybe only a small creek as an outlet. (Not sure if there are any TVA lakes like these) I admit, I may have missed something, is the part about carrying on navigable waterway only apply to TVA controlled waters? What about creeks and smaller non-damed rivers?

I have noticed that too.

Welcome

Yes... ...and you may want to see this thread for more information.

Not sure if it would show up or not, but could always run a background check on yourself. http://www.tbi.state.tn.us/tbibackgrounds/background_checks.htm

Not all lakes right? I mean I would think private lakes would be ok. ...and what about non-TVA controlled lakes?

At the very least I always check the off-limits places of any state, plus whatever else I can find. Also another reason I usually just keep it on my person in the vehicle.

That is probably true....

I'd love to have it...but I have to work Monday.....and don't quite have the entire funds and this exact moment.

Not that I doubt he told you that...and not that I doubt he believes it to be true. BUT...I think we all have seen many post on here where a LEO told a citizen something that turned out not be true or lawful.

That would seem to about answer it.

LOL...got it

I don't have any of these, but Harbor Freight has several that might work for what you want.. http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=91006 http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=97059 http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=96846 http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=96381 http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=93575 http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=45891

I don't disagree that in TN if you are stopped in a legal roadblock, you must show your DL if/when asked by a LEO. Although reading some of the cases in my other post, some are not setup legally, but there is no way for the motorist to know that at the time of the stop of course. But the guy in the video was not in TN, was not asked for a DL and the road block was apparently setup by the Border Patrol not an agency normally enforcing traffic laws. He may not be going about it exactly the right way, but he is proving a point. It is not my intent to ever, purposely or just for *****s and Giggles, give a LEO a hard time. But it is my intention not to foster the idea that is ok for the government to force, by intimidation or otherwise, a citizen to give up their rights involuntarily.