Jonnin

You really need to read it. Here is the related passage quoted, but you may want to review it in context. Chief Ranger Shane Petty, who did not believe the AK-47 was a handgun given the description of it. Petty and Ward determined that Ward should undertake a “felony take down†of Embody, disarm him and check the weapon.

Wow, and we thought they were poorly made NOW.

You missed a joke, i think. He said he the LEOs *should* have given him a swift kick in the nads for being a jerk, and I was replying in kind, but the exchange was all in jest. The LEOS absolutely DID NOT harm him in any way. Its not about the police being called. I am 100% OK with that. Its not about detaining him either (though I have conceded the point, I still say 5 min of google would have answered the question for the LEOS). See up a couple of posts to understand my complaint, I reduced it to a very simple question, "why the felony takedown after he had already cooperated?!".

I never said he did. I think he is hurting us same as the rest of you. I have never once said that this was anything other than an attention grab / lawsuit / asshattery stunt. My question from the get go, which has more or less been avoided by everyone, is why it is ok to arrest him at gunpoint due to the way his weapon looks and after he had already cooperated by showing his HCP and allowing an examination of the weapon. That is it. Period. I want to know why the "felony take down" was justified. Am I saying he deserves a bunch of money because his "rights" were violated? No, I agree with the sentiment of the judgement. Pure and simple, I find it "odd" and am left with questions over the full bore swat team approach to stopping him a second time with guns drawn. That is it. Side note, but I will answer: there is NO significant difference between these guns and the respective rifle. They use the same mags, and the same ammo. Their barrels are shorter and the rounds lose energy, but they will still probably take a person down at 200 yards. The reduce velocity may prevent tumble in the .223s at least, so they could be a little less dangerous in that regard, it is not clear and would depend on the ammo used somewhat too. I fully consider mine to be a mini AR, and that is in fact why I bought it: an AR is not legal on my permit, the pistol is, and so I purchased one on the old saying "better to have it and not need it..." To be honest, if I ever really thought I would need that weapon, I would get in my car and leave for safer areas. But I could say the same thing about a .22 2 shot derringer.

I think it is actually an illegal black market there, just not terribly well policed. Probably, if you looked hard enough, you would find a few americans with some questionably gotten diamonds, ivory, animal skins, feathers, and whatnot as well. Ever few years some yahoo thinks he can get away with bagging an eagle for example, usually makes the news.

There have been other cases, but no real decisions yet. Eventually someone is going to end up having to prove their gun is a pistol, at great expense. So you would be ok with a LEO assaulting a suspect who was just sarcastic and annoying? Hmm.

TS:DR

so, so you guys would not change the laws but think that no one should carry a weapon that "looks scary", some sort of system where we all just follow an unspoken agreement?

Ok, so everyone else seems to agree that the type of weapon -- namely its size, shape, and caliber, legal or not, is an issue. These things do come in .22 LR, however, so caliber issue can probably be ignored (?) Do you think the law for what is allowed should be changed? What would you change it to? Do the existing guns, already in hand, get grandfathered in? What about smaller guns that look "extra mean" ? For example, what about this thing: http://www.lowpriceguns.com/product.php_417114 or this one http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/387 ? Just curious where you guys would draw the line in the sand.

depends on how much you shoot it vs how much reloading time you have etc. The cheapest 9mm is still $10 a box, once in a while a fire sale for 9 can be found. You can sometimes save in bulk online but shipping + price puts it right back to the same. Reloading, even without casting, I can pretty easily manage under $5 a box, probably closer to 4 per box, using fairly inexpensive components. So at the very least, you can manage 50% savings. Its not as cheap as casting, but still a decent chunk of change for an active shooter, I could buy 1 average gun a year off what I can save on 9mm.

Does such a thing exist? Wife was into the world wildlife fund for a while until they sent us an anti-gun POS letter, something about "why they let people have guns to murder these poor animals" or some such idiocy.

you might force it to work but they have slightly different bullet diameters and the seating die may not want to come down far enough (???). So, a qualified "probably" ? You really need to get a 32 shell holder, the long has a rim, the 32 acp will just get stuck in your die without the right holder!!

Agreed, it was a specific person and a background for age vs choice, not meant as anything additional for other people. Could be meaningless as you said, but ... at that age ... he was, whatever one says, wired differently from day 1.

I am not trying to bad mouth anyone. But I still fail to see how a drawn gun was required to deal with someone who had already been checked out once and who had cooperated fully the first time around and was not doing anything actively threatening (or the report had no reason given for this). If that is the accepted and professional way to handle a HCP check, I have to be concerned. I do expect LEOs to know OF the class of weapon and be able to ID it and classify it via the internet in just a few moments, yes. However, the convoluted SBR rules do make this an issue.... the laws need to be simplified badly. edit: from the pdf the stuff that concerns me: 1) Embody’s appearance at the park prompted two encounters with park rangers. In the first, Ranger Joshua Walsh approached Embody, asked for his permit and questioned him about the gun. Embody produced a valid permit, but Walsh could not tell whether the firearm qualified as a legal one under state law. “Technically it’s a handgun,†he told Embody, “but I don’t know why you need it out here, ^^^^^^^^^^ Why would you NEED any handgun at any time? Its the old gun control logic. He was exercising his right to be stupid, and that is perfectly legal. and this gem Chief Ranger Shane Petty, who did not believe the AK-47 was a handgun given the description of it. Petty and Ward determined that Ward should undertake a “felony take down†of Embody, disarm him and check the weapon. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WHAT? Do a felony takedown of the guy for what reason? This is seriously an issue, as the decision was made at random and AFTER the first guy decided it was a handgun, then waffled on it. Those both cause me some concern. I can see I am in the minority here, though, so I will stop here.

technically, the second ammendment is a change to the constitution.

I realize its not the same as exact popular vote but it really makes it close. I don't have a solution -- you either set up a system to screw the masses, or you set up a system to screw the rual areas. But something is wrong when less than 1/10 the states can win the election outright. edit: well 5 states is only about 200/270 and includes texas... but still, the big 4 contribute way too much. With the system I thought about earlier ... 2 + sqrt(pop) ... Ca would get 9 EC for example.... Ga would have 6 Fl 8 and so on. Which may be way too much but I kinda like it...

Very sad. I hope they find them, sell the ivory to some artist/carver (rather than some idiot that will grind it into "medicine") and use the profits to hire someone to protect the herds. And sell tickets to the show where they let the poachers play, unarmed, with a nice PO'ed bull rogue elephant in an arena type setting.

You are trying to convince me that my cousin who most of the family suspected was and would be gay made a lifestyle choice about his gender identity before he knew his unit was for any purpose other than taking a whizz? I don't buy it, the boy was girly from the age of 3 or 4 on. It may not be genetics (that makes no sense, the gene would self destruct via lack of reproduction) but something was wired for gay in him from the time he was born. His homeschooling and upbringing, he probably did not even know what gay was until he was 10 or more, and probably never thought about it as his own identity until older still. There was no choice made. I have seen this happen a couple of times. I have seen the other way too, where someone did make a decision or was convinced or seduced. One girl I knew in HS was seduced by a lesbian, and ended up deciding that was what she wanted to do or be, but I am pretty sure she at least thought she was straight before that, pretty sure she dated a couple of guys before. Again, its not something one can find a "root cause" for as each person gets there (their own gender ID) in their own time, in their own way, with many factors from environment to genetics to psychobabble. But I am 100% convinced that at least some % of the homosexual community had no choice, they were indeed born that way (whatever the cause, again, genetics dont make sense).

Not long ago (actually, still quasi in practice when I was of age) teachers would (beat, belittle, harrass, etc) left handed kids until they finally learned to write with their wrong hand. Did those kids stop being left handed? No, but you can force yourself or be forced by others into doing something that is not in your makeup. I cannot say what happens in whatever case. Some men give up women (or men?) altogether (monks, etc) --- by putting their faith over their desires. Some teenagers that are faithful also abstain until married, not many, but some do manage it. I would say the answer is all three: some folks wake up one day and decide they are gay (changed?) and realize they maybe always have been. Some wake up and decide they are really straight. Some live the lie (in the closet) to fit in because of all the pressure and stigma that comes with being gay. Some live the lie because they lie to themself, convinced that being gay is bad (faith, upbringing, social stigma, etc) and then finally give up on trying to please others instead of living their own life. Some people just like sex and do not care who or what they put it in, to be blunt. We used to call them trysexuals, they will try anything.... the answer to this one is going to be on a case by case basis.

DO NOT TAKE MY COMMENT AS A DEFENSE OF LE! I agree with the general opinion here, that he is after money with the lawsuits, is a harm to gun owners, and his attitude brings much of his troubles upon himself. I still do not agree that he needed to be arrested at gunpoint for OC of a pistol. Last time I checked, while it is REQUIRED in some states (like GA) to have a holster, TN is not one of those states. So the "where is the holster" question is a side note. People can and have made some really stupid looking holsters for these things, also a side note. I do not know if LE has such a contraption. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE in the glock or the AK pistol. A pistol is a pistol is a pistol. In the eyes of the law they are the SAME. Painting it orange is another issue. I personally feel that should be illegal, but at the time he did this, it was not against the law. Anyway, I would appreciate it if you could seperate my comments from LE: I do not approve of his methods or attitude, I think he is looking for trouble and lump him in with the anti-abortion dead baby posters crowd. I still say the situation could have been better handled by the LEOS, specifically no reason to point a gun at LE (he has yet to draw or even touch his weapon in any of his many incidents, to my knowledge, unless I missed one?) and no reason to not be able to rapidly classify the weapon. That is not a defense of LE's actions at all.

splitting the EC vote in every state... is just a layer of confusion to a direct popular vote approach. There would be no point in the EC if they did this. you may be OK with that, but I personally do not care for a pure popular vote or similar system. I do not want to be governed by CA+NY, places that have zero understanding of rual america.

It is obvious to anyone who knows the law. It is not obvious to sheep who know nothing about guns, but here again a LEO is not a sheep. A LEO sees a short shotgun, he gets out a stick and does a pass/fail on its legality. A LEO sees a pistol that is a little big, and it takes a full squad to figure it out. This is not good. Give the man a dowel rod cut to 12 inches, if it sticks out the barrel, and the gun does not have a stock but a pistol grip, odds are you have a pistol --- then check for a permit, if the guy has one, move on. If it bothers sheep, so be it: those are the same idiots who would call the cops on an openly carried glock too, you can't cater to those sorts of people or no one would ever have a gun.

She is kinder than me, but still, good job. I hope they do not kill or jail her, but in that country, her odds are slim.

yea that sounds correct. So the TC/14 is not illegal, you just cannot carry it on a handgun permit in TN, then? Amusing that bigger, easier to see guns get so much attention. I still say people need to spend a LOT more time worrying about the ones you can't see...

I am not sure what he was getting at, but as presented, it sounds like because gay marriage cannot produce kids, it is invalid? Which would make mine equally invalid? If reproduction is the purpose of marriage, mine failed. If it is not the purpose, I do not, for real, understand his point with that comment.