Leaderboard

The earthly punishment is small potatoes compared to what is waiting for them on the other side.

http://www.godvine.com/Christian-Comedian-Tim-Hawkins-Found-the-Secret-to-His-Wife-s-Power-Too-Funny--4260.html

I purchased a voucher good for a 6-month Benefactor membership. I don't know your email address, so I chose the Print option. I am assuming you should have received an email or something, informing you how to redeem it. If you have any issues, let me know.

Alexander and Corker have the business money in Tennessee as long as they want it, and that's going to be a big hurdle for any challenger to overcome.  Their constituency at the end of the day is the money that elected them.   I won't pull the lever for either of them again.  Period. 

Welcome to TGO, Mike. If you hang around long enough, you'll likely come to realize the benefit of a Benefactor membership. Unlike other local classified websites, TGO offers a feedback system, much like eBay. This is very helpful in keeping members honest, allowing you to buy, sell and trade with some peace of mind.  Generally speaking, TGO is a pretty close community. For many of us, TGO is a home away from home. Unlike some of the "national" forums, many of us actually know each other, hang out together, help each other, and act much like any other sometimes dysfunctional family.    We've had some of the TGO Authorized Vendors offer perks to Benefactors, often making the membership well worth while. On top of that, and probably most importantly, the minimal (especially if you bite the bullet for the one-time Lifetime Benefactor Membership) fee allows the site owner to keep TGO up and running as well as he does. While some members may not want to admit it, I'm pretty sure the suicide rate in Tennessee would skyrocket if TGO were to ever be shut down for good. As a welcome to TGO, a Thank You for your service, and an early Christmas present, I will pay for your very first Benefactor membership. I'm confident you'll renew.

But does this mean I will have to pay sales tax on stuff that I order from them?

Why do they buy this stuff? The same reason you and I would buy this stuff....If they have the budget and can get a good deal on it, WHY NOT? ;) It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

This is definitely going to be more fun than the hatfield and mc coy dinner show! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2 of course it ate my spelling.

I am happy to announce that, as long as the deal doesn't implode, budsgunshop.com is coming to Sevierville. It will feature several indoor shooting ranges equipped to handle all pistol calibers and most if not all rifle calibers and I believe I understood him to say a tactical rifle/pistol range. It will also feature a large retail area and classrooms to teach anything from HCP classes to defensive tactics . The developers are also working to get a food vendor, such as firehouse subs or similar to set up shop there too. It was presented to me as "manland" a place to come to hang out even if you are not buying or using the range. The conceptional drawings looked awesome! It will be in an existing building close to Smoky Mountain Knife Works.  

This is awesome.  These kids nailed it.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYKLvYGqaC0&feature=share

If you are just wanting to make a bunch of blasting ammo, buy a progressive, but I think Mike gave you good advice. Spend some coin and get a Dillon.

Last day muzzleloader success!

totalitarianism.

  Apparently it is a super secret compartment with an electic opening device that requires a certain sequence of events to happen for it to open.   Regardless, that law is beyond ridiculous.  I don't care if it is a drug smuggling compartment.  There weren't any drugs, so no reasonable law was broken.

I could probably scrape together another $100 to add to it...

The bigger question is, what would happen if someone just refused to stop?  Would the officers start shooting?  Chase you down and pull you over even thought they aren't even sworn officers?   What would be the correct thing to do?   As soon as you open your window your "breath" is being "searched" and you don't even know it. And so what if you have alcohol on your breath...having had a drink at some point in the day or evening is not equal being legally impaired? I don't mind being stopped by an actual LEO if he as legal reason to do so (probable cause) but anything less than that is goes fare beyond the pale no matter how "voluntary" they claim it is...this stinks so much I can smell it in Tennessee all the way from Forth Worth TX.

If you're a parent, I dare you to watch this and not get at least a little teary...   I did.   While they didn't seem that way at the time, it makes the difficulties we encountered with our little ones seem trivial.    http://vimeo.com/78393869       In a season of Thanksgiving, sometimes we have a lot more to be thankful for than we realize. 

There is nothing voluntary about being forced to stop at a road-block, and there is nothing anonymous about a DNA sample.

It's kind of fascinating to watch how both sides have magically flip flopped on this issue.  Back in 2005 it was Republicans screaming about the need to do away with the 60 vote supermajority to end a filibuster and go to a simple majority vote.  Back then it was the Democrats saying how horrible that would be and it would rape the constitution.  Here's articles from that time from both the left and the right:   http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june05/judges_4-18.html   http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/551vzoao.asp

  I'm stuck on imagining the chaos if big dude had whipped Deputy Donut's ass right there in the office. :)

Thanks for posting this, and reminding us -- once again -- of the things that are important in life. Great video.

   I think it’s funny. I don’t think there anything funny about his victims and certainly nothing funny about them being threatened with a gun. But I had to laugh out loud when I saw that this criminal had been arrested again. I guess stupidity makes me laugh. This guy’s life has been threatened yet he continues to try to get to the one place he will be an easy target; jail. The prosecutors made mistakes and the jury got it wrong, it happens in our legal system; I’m okay with that. But in spite of the failures of our legal system this guy seems to be committed to seeing that justice prevails.   I would guess for the same reason you keep posting in this thread; it’s something to discuss? 

Trying to get everyone matched up and sent out by this weekend.  Turns out there's no easy way to automate it. 

Sounds better than a trip to the wax museum for sure!

The militaration of domestic law enforcement agencies has been happening for decades, it's just picking up pace inorder to keep President Obama's campaign promise to (paraphrasing) "create a domestic police force which is just as powerful, just as big & just as well funded as our armed forces". The ultimate purpose/reason of this is of course just speculation & guess work, but history is ripe with examples of what can & does happen when this sort of domestic law enforcement build-up does occur, none of which (at least to my knowledge) had been for benign purposes/reasons.

I am just curious where our older members were 50 years ago. My parents were toddlers, my grandparents were all I believe at work. One of my grandfathers was on a business trip to Texas that week.

  .286 and .287. I had to buy the titanium nitride ones. I got those numbers off a forum for Lapua Brass. I haven't stuffed a bullet and measured yet.

Why dis car be drivin in circles? Oohhh, my tirahs is turned sidewayz.

  I know a lot of people that would help out for free. :bat:

True, true.  Sorry yours is "out of line," so to speak.  Maybe it's 'cause I'm such a good feller :x: .   Or maybe they are planning on giving yours some special treatment, taking a little longer ... at least that would make sense. Hope you get it back soon --- as for mine, my son swooped in, grabbed it and a box of ammo,  and said he'd give 'er a try tomorrow.  So I STILL don't have it ... :shake:

Got my trigger back today from Brimstone and I love it. Came out to a hair over 2.5 lbs and it's smooth as silk. I really appreciate the heads up on Brimstone and I'm getting ready to box up my AR trigger and send it to them. 

Deputy Doughnut would have to pack a lunch for that ass whippin.

  Maybe that's exactly what should happen.

I'm the parent and grandparent of a premie. I didn't watch the video, I experienced it first hand withmy granddaughter, I was away for my sons birth but have seen the problems caused by some of the early "trial and error" testing and treatments. Don't get me wrong, God has truly blessed me and I'm thankful for my family. Just wished they knew then (34 years ago) what they know now.

I would. Well, I would if the lever opened a trap door...

I see your point and didn't want to seem inflammatory....would be nice to see term limits installed for congressional seats....problem is the voter already has the power of term limits but refuse to use it for their own selfish ends...

wow, where to begin?   You're right Hamilton did have that concern in Federalist #84, but to answer that concern, we ratified the 9th and 10th Amendments.  Which basically placed all other natural rights outside the authority of both Federal and State governments.  Keeping in mind that the Constitution is binding to both the States and the Federal government in limiting their scope and authority over 'The People'.   Lets talk about the three big rights identified in the Declaration of Independance...  life, liberty and property.  Most people believe those are the only 3 rights we have, that all other 'rights' stem from those 3..  some will disagree with that assessment.  Nobody is suggesting that you have a right to initiate violence on another...  Nobody...  but we have a right to meet violence with violence to protect ourselves and our natural rights.   If you don't believe in God that's fine, you can believe your rights come from anywhere/anyhow you wish to believe...  as long as your beliefs don't come and try to take away my rights that do come from God.   As for the Constitution, I have a much more radical approach than even you are suggesting...  First, I don't accept the notion that I'm bound by an agreement made among men born 275 years ago.  I don't recognize their authority to condemn me to a life of slavery and servitude to the majority of society.  What gave them to right to inflict the Constitution and this government on me?   Even if I accept that I as a free individual can be bound by a contract they're not a party to...  I for sure don't agree to be bound by rules, regulations, and laws that don't follow the clear and simple reading of that contract.  If a government does something outside the authority granted to it, then by that very act the law is unlawful and can be disregarded.   As for 'The People', the way you say that leads me to think you mean that rights belong to the collective and not the individual...  and that just doesn't jive with either the federalist or anti-federalist papers.  Lets take a look at this quote from John Dewitt #2:     This clearly shows that a common held belief at the time of the Constitutional Convention was that natural rights can only be surrender if the very existence of society would be threatened if they were not....     The Bill of Rights spells out those exact acceptable infringements that are needed to keep the States and the Country together, and permit nothing more to be taken from the individual.  

jacob:  RE: post #21 above ... I dont disagree... I wuz merely stating what i read and opining that the Tea Party folk were changing behaviors; .....nothin more...   No one has been a greater critic of lamar alexander's actions than i have... I would llike to see him go too; but my guess is that he wont go until he decides too... He is a polititian first and foremost....  My guess is that he will pass it on to Bill Haslam ALA the way that the great Howard Baker passed his mantle to lamar...    Politics is, at it's core, a dirty business; and no one on either side of the aisle is dirtier than lamar.... He's vindictive, overbearing, headstrong, well-connected, and smart... That is a formidable combination... My advise is that ya better enjoy whatever lamar is doin and keep the pressure up via the Tea Party...  Ya aint likely to outst him... That is the sad reality of politics...   leroy  

    not to be picking on you, but when is it going to happen?  Give me your best educated guess.

Doesn't that still kind of play into the whole just telling people what you want them to hear until it doesn't matter (ie bait and switch)??? If he thinks the challenges are viable enough to change his tune isn't that enough of a reflection of his character to get him out and give someone else a chance to prove themselves to their constituents?? I agree with Dolomite on a previous assertion. When you consistently vote for an incumbent, they become more difficult with time to dethrone when they no longer represent the people...The founders recognized this and opined as such in their writings...people where not meant to be elected and serve until death...

It's not blame shifting if it is true. Every administration in the modern era has helped build in the surveillance apparatus that is being used against US citizens. That's the danger of building these kinds of tools and granting these kinds of powers to the government in the first place. This guy might not be so bad but you are leaving something that would be very easy to abuse lying around and waiting for the next guy who it turns out is a wannabe tyrant.

  If I was the police, I would want a mini gun mounted on the appropriate vehicle. You never know when some rabid squirrel is gonna require the full force of the law. :)

Vests, yeah; ar's, yeah; RPG's, no; poision gas and bio-weapons, no; tactical nukes, no; artillery, no; tanks; no; flame throwers, no; house crushing vehicles, no.... Ya get the picture....   leroy

Cooler heads on both sides of the aisle have prevailed for a long time on the so called "nuclear rule."  This really is an indication that things are going off the rails.   It was 52-48 with three democrats joining all 45 republicans in dissent.  When they're moaning about it a couple of years from now, someone needs to remind them that they passed it straight along party lines.

  I am curious if this is directed toward me. If it's not, ignore the comments below and accept my apologies for misinterpreting your statements.   If it was, I would encourage you to re-read what I am saying, and pay attention to my signature.  I do not support authoritarianism in any way, but I also do not consider myself naive enough to believe that we can have this "calm comfortable collective" you dream of.  That I believe in the need for some minimal form of legal framework to prevent individuals from doing direct harm to one another is certainly not remotely close to authoritarianism, and if your statement was intended to be understood at face value, it's pretty obvious that you have no willingness and/or ability to engage in any sort of worthwhile political discourse.  In fact, your eagerness to categorically and immediately discount another point of view on how this "calm comfortable collective" would look is actually proof of an authoritarian mindset and unwillingness to  Marx's dream of a "calm comfortable collective" resulted in dictatorships and genocide.  The Native American's "calm comfortable collective" resulted in their virtual extermination at the hands of a more powerful society that believed that the legal safeguards afforded to specific members of white society did not apply to these "redskins" and "savages."  This is why I again state that it is essential that a definite codified legal structure outlining the fundamental ideals of individual rights and liberty coupled with a basic framework for organizing a government that is charged with the duty and responsibility to assure individual rights are protected must be in place.  What that government and legal structure looks like is open for discussion.

definitely, like Spiffy said, don't plan to just stand by and watch.  If you have watched videos online, then you pretty much know what it is about.  Just come and shoot, you won't regret it.  It's a little bit more of a drive, but 1st Saturday of each month up here at ORSA, we shoot IDPA also. 

  I think the charge was Disorderly. Fact is, if that guy would have been truly disorderly, it would have taken a hell of a lot more than Donut Boy to get him in the car.

If you believe in the Enlightenment era philosophy that inspired political theorists like Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire, and also the Founders, then it's understood that we are born with Natural Rights and unlimited liberty while living in a "state of nature" meaning in a complete system of wild anarchy with no organized social structure to protect you or your rights. Based on social contract theory, it is assumed that at some point in human history that humans agreed to come together and organize societies under governmental authority in order to collectively provide a more peaceful and orderly existence while relying on each other to help defend individual rights. Under this agreement, the social contract, we agree to voluntarily give up some portion of our unrestricted liberty and allow some degree of restriction of our natural rights in order to maintain an orderly society and benefit from what civil society offers. Under this concept, government cannot infringe upon those rights any more than what we voluntarily allow as part of our acceptance of the social contract. It was also assumed that the government did not have the authority to claim any more authority than was necessary to preserve our rights and assure the survival of civil society. Philosophically, the idea of freedom and liberty vary, which is visible in the differing ideologies between the American and French Revolutions. Americans emphasized individual rights and liberty (freedom of choice) while the French tended to emphasize collective rights and liberty (freedom from want). The difference is subtle, but highly significant. When you say that government exists to protect our rights, and it is believed that those rights are collective within society, that means the government has the authority to use force against any individual that is deemed a threat to collective liberty and rights. This is one of the reasons that the outcome of the French Revolution was violence and genocide. When the collective body can lay claim to rights, then no individual is safe. In the United States, we emphasize individual rights, meaning that the freedom of the individual ultimately trumps the will of the collective and the majority cannot vote away the rights of the minority. This is why we say that we live in a constitutional republic and not a democracy. Now, to the original question. The philosophical statement of this perspective is found in the Declaration of Independence: "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world." The legal framework constructed to carry out that philosophical statement is the U.S. Constitution. The rights listed in the Bill of Rights are not an exhaustive list of protected Natural Rights, but is a list of rights that were recognized as especially important, indeed essential, for preserving those Natural Rights and restrain the power of government. Contrary to what many people believe, these rights are not absolute as is explained in social contract theory. If they were absolute, then the social contract would be dissolved and we would return to a state of nature. The challenge in all of this is in determining to what extent the people have the ability to yield liberty to the government in order to preserve the social contract and civil society. The reason this has become a bigger issue is due to a qualitative shift in the belief that rights belong to individuals toward one of collective rights, as illustrated by FDR's list of freedoms that included "freedom from want." In fact, that "Four Freedoms" speech is a very interesting statement of collective rights over individual rights. By saying that we have a freedom from want, government now claims the authority to pursue and use force to secure that freedom, which includes restricting your freedom of choice. This works the same way, whether you are talking about economic want or moral want. Basically, what we have today is a government that has adopted this philosophy and policies driven by the desire to control people's freedom of choice in favor of collective rights favored by those in power at that time. Whether it is freedom from wanting healthcare or freedom from wanting a decline in moral values, the end game is the same. It is restricting your individual choice to live your life as you want under the rules of a civil society where we are restricted from doing direct and tangible harm to one another. I think I'm done now.