Leaderboard

  Ask Maggart how that worked for her.  There are absolutely enough of us to put up the money to beat Manchin, we may not get them all, but we can get any one of them, if we get riled up and put our money and our time into the game.   Talking with Sheriff Guy Buck last night, he said if the Feds or the State require registration or confiscation, he will simply deputize the entire adult population of his county. There are not enough of "them" to beat all of us into submission if we stand together.

Usually, congresscritters ignore folks that are not in their district.  I like to spice things up by showing them the error of their ways.   "Senator Manchin, I am in Tennessee, but what you are proposing affects everyone in the country.  So, here's the deal:  If you accept ANY infringement in the Right of the People to keep and Bear arms (including magazine limits, ammo limits, background checks, etc), then I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary.  I know that you believe that you are 'safe' since that won't be until 2018.  But firearms owners have long memories.  And I promise that I will do all I can to ensure that this will not be forgotten.   If you are looking for a way to 'compromise' on the gun issue, consider re-reading the Oath you swore last month to "...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same..".  The operative part of the Second Amendment is very simple.  "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".  How can you say that restrictions on private citizens are not an infringement?  I submit that ALL Federal Gun Control are infringements.  So, a good compromise would be to repeal the 1994 Brady Act as well as the 1986 Hughes Amendment to the FOPA, instead of the 1968 GCA and 1934 NFA as well.   Sincerely, me"   They really hate that part of "I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary".  But be prepared to follow-up on it.  Otherwise it's meaningless.  As someone from out-of-state, that's about all you can do.

Unfortunately, he hasn't attempted to stab the right person, yet.

http://soldiersystems.net/2013/02/08/larue-tactical-issues-new-sales-policy-for-state-and-local-agencies/       I wish others in the firearms industry would follow suit.  While their statement is couched in not wanting to run afoul of the law, it seems like they're taking a stand.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

No more compromises! Firearms enthusaists know what compromise means when it comes to the 2A.  It means we get SCREWED!!! I'm tired of being screwed over by my representatives in Washington.  If ANY of my representatives in either house votes for this, I will do everything in my power to make sure they get sent home the next election!  I don't care who their opponent is!!!

Hard Questions for Anti-Gun Freak Family and Friends Read more: http://clashdaily.com/2013/02/hard-questions-for-anti-gun-freak-family-and-friends/#ixzz2KPvoWrTf 

By the way, have you ever noticed where these polls are conducted? Never do you hear of them happening in the south or real rural areas. And only using a 1000 or 2000 people. As a teacher this is what we call a biased sample and misleading graphs. Go to people who have the most guns and use them, then see what the polls say!

We all need to contact them and thank them for doing this!!!! This is awesome!!!

As of 2008, there were 765,000 sworn Law Enforcement officers (Federal, State, Local) in the US.  Figure that departments buy more guns than one per officer, so 900,000 is probably not too far off the mark.  And figure an average replacement cycle of every three years (very liberal, but why not?).  That's only 300,000 handguns per year as a market for LE. ATF says that there were almost 2.6 million handguns made by licensed manufacturers in the US, with 120,000 of those being exported.  Military contracts for Beretta, Sig, and Colt pistols only amount to about 40,000 pistols per year.   So, over 2.1 MILLION handguns are sold to civilians every year, versus less than 400,000 for Military/LE.   Smith&Wesson went bankrupt after getting civilian gun owners pi$$ed-off in 2000 by making a stupid deal with Clinton.  If you don't think that other manufacturers noticed, you would be wrong.  And Smith&Wesson in particular, has been VERY vocal about not supporting gun control!

  History has shown time and time again that a lightly armed (rifles count) and determined population that refuses to submit is all but impossible to defeat. 

If more did you'd see a whole lotta SWAT guys with boo boo lip. The whole state of California would have to use neutered guns for their LEOs.

  What you must understand is gun owners have nothing to gain in the never ending game of "compromise". We will lose every time.   Giving up one thing for the sake of another is not good.  Eventually you will have nothing.   The way this country works now is just about anyone can make some kind of complaint and somebody else has to give something up to shut them up.  That is not right.

From your post we have no idea why the Officers stopped your friend, but yes, they can disarm him and there isn’t anything that stops them from running the numbers. They don’t need probable cause to stop him, only reasonable suspicion. You are asking “Can they do that?” To have any kind of intelligent discussion about that we would have to know the exact circumstances of the stop. If they told him that he couldn’t have a round in the chamber; they were wrong. I don’t want stopped by the cops for anything. Since carrying a gun in Tennessee is a crime unless you are part of our special group; I don’t open carry to gain their attention.

I saw this in an ad on some site I was browsing, and it is very intriguing...   http://www.zipfactory.com/   It's a modular .22lr that can be setup as a handgun, rifle, etc. Takes 10-22 magazines.

I'm gonna say that a cop killer is a greater danger to the public than someone who murders someone during a robbery or some such. He has shown that he will kill at the drop of a hat and that he is desperate to make a splash in the media. I don't think this is a matter of a cops life being more valuable than a citizen's, I think this is about the unique threat this guy is to the public and the story behind all of this lunacy. That is why the press is eating this up and so much law enforcement is involved in this manhunt.

Go out in the woods and take a nap with your back against a tree. Wake up and shoot squirrels. I use a 22.

Sorry you feel that way, but your comments made in response to me showed that you either didn't adequately read my original statement or you have reading comprehension problems. To suggest that I said I would use force to prevent arrest or attempt to escape in unfounded. You can't find that in my post. You were debating something that I wasn't even debating. I took that to mean you're making assumptions on my character with no basis for such assumptions. So instead of acting like a victim, how about acknowledging that and sack up a bit?

Came across this clip and thought I'd share. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ncdXfUAkMUI

Hunt on overcast days.  Squirrels (and other animals) see shadows, fear they might be owls, hawks, etc and their survival instinct causes them to hide.

There is NO COMPROMISE on the Constitution nor any of the amendments. If you accept a compromise on the 2nd, then be prepared to compromise the 1st, 4th, 22nd, etc. We are not debating some lame law here, and it really doesn't matter what the polls or the majority of the population thinks. It's not up for negotiation... well, it shouldn't be. I write/call my reps all the time, and my vote for them rests on this issue.

well, technically a 'kettle of vultures' as they were in flight, a 'wake of vultures' is when they're actually aground & eating

Haven't you heard Baltimore is going bankrupt, and the ravens are fleeing!  They are being quiet trying to find a new home.

I took their statement differently...smartass, giving the finger while maintaining the angelic halo around his head. I loved it.

The ammo in this was 168 grain hornady.  I'll have to get the box out of the truck to tell you exactly what it was.  Not sure.   The scope is an Occulus brand.  It was free and just to get me running.  I already have a few issues with it that I would like to address but it will work till Im ready to spend serious money on a scope.  

Had a pretty good turn out, thanks to all that made it out.

There is no duty to notify. If he has “a few” years on the job, he shouldn’t really need to go check that.   Having been a Police Officer I will notify. I will do it because I respect them, I want a safe stop for everyone involved, I want them on our side, and the pavement around here gets scalding hot during the summer months.    

I have worked in law enforcement and I can assure you that law enforcement officers should know most laws, especially those commonly used such as those relating to firearms and weapons, and be trained well enough to know when it's time to consult their statute book before making any statements or decisions about the law.  Officers are also expected, and trained, on changes of the law.  Clearly, whether the individual officer takes the training seriously or whether the department provides the adequate training is a different matter entirely, but the case law is clear that officers are expected to meet a reasonable level of knowledge and expertise in their skills and knowledge of law.  They cannot simply use the "good faith" exception to justify their mistakes if their level of training and knowledge fails to meet minimal professional expectations and mandated standards.  That generally does not give the individual citizen the lawful authority to resist the officer, but it does provide a mechanism for civil and possibly criminal litigation.  In short, the police have a professional, legal, and ethical responsibility to be knowledgeable of the laws they enforce.

There are many laws I don't expect LE to know. Laws concerning the carrying of firearms is definitely one they should know. That is skill level one type stuff. Any law enforcement officer that does not know the handgun carry laws is derelict in his duties. It isn't as if there is a secret crypt where this information is hidden. When I applied for my permit I found the rules in the TCA and educated myself. A law enforcement officer should be doing the same if he intends to enforce laws pertaining to that. Simply making an "on the spot" law that doesn't exist is a Barney Fief moment, and shows what an unprofessional mouth breather that cop is. If an officer is confused about a law he is free to educate himself at any time (and should since he is supposed to be enforcing the damn law) or he can get on the radio and call an adult to ask what the laws are. There is no room for debate here. You can't enforce laws that don't exist. Saying that there are too many laws for police to know them all I can agree with, but that means they shouldn't be ENFORCING laws that don't exist in the first place. That is the dumbest set of reasoning I've heard in a while. Who the f@$k is talking about conspiracy theories? Are we on the same topic here? And when did I say I would use force? Are you just making assumptions or something? I was talking about two dimwit cops that needed to be corrected on what the laws are. And I'm not kidding when I say this, if a cop said that it is against the law to chamber a round I will absolutely tell him that it is not and that I intend to chamber a round as soon as we are done talking. He will have only two options and that is to either educate himself and eat crow, or arrest me and eat some very serious crow. Either way, you are wrong. Police don't make the laws, so they can not dictate to me new laws or make-believe laws. That is why we have people we elect.... you know, at polls and stuff. What makes them special??? Are you friggin for real man? Their job is to enforce the law! I expect them to have a better understanding of it than "regular folks". For crying out loud you must live in bizarro world. I don't expect to walk into a Subway and explain to the guy behind the counter how to make a turkey club. I don't expect to explain to my doctor how to properly treat or diagnose an illness. I don't expect to have an encounter with a cop and have to explain to him what the laws are.

Don't shoot all your 5.56/223 - save enough for the first battle.  After that we'll have captured ammo to shoot.

But you CAN buy suppressors designed for air rifles without a tax stamp.  If you put them on a firearm, it's illegal.  But to further complicate the issue, BATF says that if you CAN put them on a firearm, they require the $200 tax stamp.  People have gone to jail for buying an airgun suppressor without paying that $200 tax.  Even though there is no law saying that it required for an airgun.   No, it's not right or fair.  If you expect the law and/or government to be fair, prepare yourself for a lot of disappointment in life.   http://www.pyramydair.com/article/Airgun_silencers_What_s_the_big_deal_August_2006/32

Stop Dave. You're depressing me.

I'm honestly very torn on the merits of Tapatalk.  From the perspective of an end-user, I do like what it brings to the user interface.  But from the perspective of a forum admin, I also see where it omits a lot of the extra features that we can add to IPB to improve the experience and add value to the site for the members.   For example, when we used the excellent Classifieds add-on for the forum, Tapatalk didn't support it and wouldn't render the pages properly.  We ditched the Classifieds in favor of Tapatalk.   In hindsight, I should have done it the other way around.

I've never been asked but I'd likely just tell them to mind their own damn business.  My touchy feely side comes out in instances like this.

Along the lines of the medical or insulin pump response, it could be worded something like "my personal emergency lead pump". It would take the sheeple at least 10-15 min to get it if they would even get it at all.

Either way, the responsible parties need to be accountable. This is absolutely unacceptable.

Apparently there's a bunch of people who need to work on situational awareness.

  So what are ya gonna do?    Your 2nd Amendment rights have been regulated since 1791.

  Yep, "compromise" on gun issues means that we lose something else. When's the last time we "gained" anything? The only thing I can think of are a few things in the Firearm Owners Protection Act. Which of course also Protected us by making machine guns illegal.   - OS

Sheep asks Caster: Is that a gun?!? Caster: uhh, yeah... Sheep: Why are you carrying a gun?!? Caster: It's against my religion to fight. Besides, Recoil is much easier to manage than blunt force trauma to my fists and or face. Sheep: ......blank stare Caster: ......sly grin...walks away casually, possibly whistling a Black Sabbath tune.

Let this be a lesson to any moron who goes to one of these events packing an AR.  You are not going to win any hearts or minds packing an "assault rifle"   This guy is a fucking idiot of the highest order.

Either way, LAPD needs to be bankrupted by the two shooting victims. I can't believe this is even possible for them to open fire on two separate vehicles on the same day with the occupants of both not being wanted for a crime or being armed at all. These are a bunch of trigger happy kids without adult supervision.

Just for the record, I have liability insurance. That is for me, not for someone else. Now, if someone does something grossly negligent that results in the severe injury or death of myself or a loved one, I do believe I am entitled to compensation from that person. If they happen not to have liability insurance then I will take it out of their bottom line. If they don't have a pot to piss in and I'm squeezing a rock, then oh well. That's life and sometimes things happen that you can't do anything about. If I found myself in that situation I would be pissed at the individual responsible, but the last thing I would think of would be having the government require all of its citizens to carry insurance (in the form of a tax, that's what it would be) in order to exercise a right. Besides, where is the assumption coming from that owning a gun means I intend to use it on another human being? I have lots of guns that will probably never be fired again as long as I own them, on the range or otherwise. My FIL owns one rifle which is locked in basement storage, which he doesn't even have ammo for. Once again, you're projecting your own beliefs and values on to others.

  For the same reason I don't consent to a cop searching through my sock drawer. Because I don't have to and he/she has no good reason to.

Over 5 million have died since Roe v Wade. 211 were killed in 2011 by drunk drivers, 160 with the driver.

I don't consent to anything more than I am legally and morally obligated to. I have great respect for local law enforcement and will assist them if I have knowledge that will help them solve a real crime. I will not assist an officer in a fishing expedition. The officer can either have PC that he can defend in front of a judge (because he will have to) or he can fuck off and go do his job and let me get on with my day.

I use full synthetic blinker fluid.  Between that and the ceramic muffler bearings, I get at least 25 more hp.  The tech at the dealership showed be a dyno run...   

  He won't neuter mine. I have a BIG pile o' mags :)

  Impeachment maybe?

I understand that a lot of democrats are more concerned about losing their seats than pushing for a ban. So, there will be no ban. I'm against any type of ban, but their actions hold true to form. They are just being politicians. It's all about staying in power.