Leaderboard

When making decisions about safety and "threat vs non threat " we need to look at the whole picture in making decisions... not just clothes or skin color or tattoos....The overwhelming majority of people are good people. And no race has the monopoly on kindness... or cruelty for that matter. A black guy in a suit on the streets of Chattanooga at lunchtime is going to appear as far less of a threat than a black guy dressed in "urban street attire" in Alton Park at 11PM. And there are plenty of candy ass white kids who like to dress like gangbangers...... and not every black guy with a red shirt on is a "Blood".....But to dismiss the combination of tattoos (especially gang affiliation tats ) , race and clothing is just naive. The pasty white dude with the "88" tattoo on his shoulder and "spider web" tat on his elbow is advertising to you what his background is if you know how to read the signs. Add to that a pair of black BDU pants and combat boots and a shaved head and you have someone I will consider a threat until proven otherwise....even though I am a white guy too and have a good friend who is a pasty white guy with a shaved head....But the guy with the tattoos and the "uniform" is a potential threat simply due to how he is advertising himself. Just like I'd see the totality of circumstances and big picture with a black guy with pants hanging down , tattoos of a 6 pointed star and a pitchfork (Crip Gang symbols) and a North Carolina "NC" hat (Northside Crips) turned to one side. Or a brown guy with tattoos of the Virgin Mary and " MS13" tattoo....they all are telling a story if you just read the page.... And looking at the whole picture is how we make better decisions on whether something is dangerous or not. It is not just race...or just clothing ...or just tattoos....or just body language... it is the totality of circumstances. And if that makes you feel bad then I suggest you spend less time watching Oprah and listening to NPR.

This also goes to prove the opposite thing though. Don't have your home defense shotgun loaded with birdshot or you might end up being the guy who gets shot. This could have been very different if the thugs had had 00 buck. I know a bunch of people that claim birdshot will be just fine.

It's a start. http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/article158965184.html

So am I covered if I stencil this in purple?

I think I just saw a flicker of light at the end of the tunnel Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas had stern words for his colleagues when the Court declined to hear a case challenging California’s handgun laws, saying that the jurists do not understand the importance of self-defense. The case, supported by the National Rifle Association, involves San Diego resident Edward Peruta, who challenged his county’s refusal to grant him permission to carry a concealed firearm outside of his home. “For those of us who work in marbled halls, guarded constantly by a vigilant and dedicated police force, the guarantees of the Second Amendment might seem antiquated and superfluous,” Thomas wrote after most members of the court declined to hear the California case. “But the Framers made a clear choice: They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. I do not think we should stand by idly while a State denies its citizens that right, particularly when their very lives may depend on it,” Thomas said. Justice Neil Gorsuch, the Court’s newest member, joined Thomas’ statement on the court’s refusal to hear the case, calling the decision by the 9th circuit on Peruta v. San Diego “indefensible.” A case needs to be approved by at least four justices in order to get on the Supreme Court’s docket. “The Second Amendment’s core purpose further supports the conclusion that the right to bear arms extends to public carry,” Thomas wrote. “Even if other Members of the Court do not agree that the Second Amendment likely protects a right to public carry, the time has come for the Court to answer this important question definitively.” The San Diego County Sheriff’s department has very narrow restrictions for concealed carry permits. Only those who can prove they have a regular need for self-defense against a specific threat are granted concealed permits. “The whole point of the Sheriff’s policy is to confine concealed-carry licenses to a very narrow subset of law-abiding residents,” Peruta’s attorneys wrote. “And because California law prohibits openly carrying a handgun outside the home, the result is that the typical law-abiding resident cannot bear a handgun for self-defense outside the home at all.” http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/26/justice-thomas-calls-out-the-supreme-court-for-not-believing-in-the-second-amendment/

Didn't work out too well for the old dude on Tremors!

I will try to remember to bring a set.

I know most don't agree but I'm glad to hear that. Why ruin the lives of 2 kids who were only guilty of being young and stupid?

I can promise you my father would have got shot or arrested for trespassing because he was completely color blind. If he was sitting at a stop light that was laying sideways instead of up right my monther would have to tell him when to stop and go and he made sure he never traveled any roads that had those type of stop lights by himself. One thing I do wish I had that he had. Being color blind gave him great night vision without needing to use a flash light very often.

Just picked mine up at my FFL.I ordered a .45 SHIELD with out the thumb safety for $338 shipped from GRAB-A-GUN and with the $75 rebate from S & W tat puts me at $263 and my FFL only charged me $25 for the transfer and back ground so add that in and I'm at $288, that leaves some money for another Mag. or two. I'm going to take it out this weekend and run some rnds. down it and break it in.

And this is what really rubs me when justices are there to interpret the Constitution, not make law. As Justice Thomas points out the 1st and 4th Amendments have been reviewed numerous times while the 2nd has been virtually ignored with the exception of Heller.

I won't argue that fact with anyone about the Twitter issue but I don't know how much golf he is playing so can't argue that either. I just hope he does not try to beat Obama on how many rounds of golf he plays cause he would have to camp out on the golf course to beat Obama..............jmho

If Trump would stay of Twitter and Golf Course he would plenty of time to do his job.

I found myself wondering why he wasn't armed when he answered the door. Anyway,

Imgur. Some of my pictures from PB still posted, some not. What I now do is go to PB, save to computer, load to Imgur. Post here

The 9th Federal District will find a way to justify the ban.

They don’t care what we think or do. What their advertisers do will be the question. With technology the way it is today I can’t see anyone paying $400 a year.

Thanks, guess I just did not read far enough down..............

The 99.99 plan does not allow 3rd party linking. You have to get the 399.99 a year plan, if you want to link. I'll be moving to Flickr...

This Sunday is the birthday of the Delightful and Wonderful Mrs. Kari (She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed), U.S. Army Wife (Retired). Its the only day of the year that I have something better to do than go shooting. Christmas, Thanksgiving, 4th July...., I'm happy to be out there somewhere busting caps. July 2nd - - - I'm staying with the one who has always been there for me. Have a great match, see ya'll in August.

She probably will not notice it until the rebate check arrives as she has seen me carrying a 9mm Shield.

Not much difference in price on the used market, and yes the px 4 is a hoss. The smith and wesson m&P 45 feels a lot better in my hand

The Kimber Custom II is $799 at Academy, and I think the PX4 45 is $569 or thereabouts. Just depends on if you are that determined to dump the 1911. Just beware that the PX4 45 is one of the chunkiest handguns you'll ever hold! :-)

Payment sent. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Pregnant lady might have some legal troubles over this but I am sure it was satisfying to run the sob over.

Disagree, the suicide verdict was ridiculous. They are going to start charging "bullies" with manslaughter next. Except in the case of "inciting a riot" or "inciting violence", those are the only legal forms I know of that can apply "legally". He killed himself, she did not have any part of the action. She could have been charged with "inciting violence", but I doubt her actions fall under that scrutiny. He should be held liable for his decision. There is no "legal" application for that girl with manslaughter except what the judge made up. In this case she made a decision and HER direct actions led to death. Manslaughter is absolutely the right charge and almost the definition in this case.

This is what happens when appointees are political instead of justices following the Constitution and rule of law. It doesn't take a college degree to know Thomas is exactly right.

Supreme Court justice Kennedy is considering retiring soon so once Trump puts a replacement for Kennedy on the bench I would guess the case will be appealed back to the SC again and get a hearing next time..........JMHO

Natural. Just saying. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The truth of the matter is this.... Some decisions are life-altering (...and in some cases life-taking...) actions... I've got zero sympathy for the "...they are just kids thing...." and the "...no amount of punishment is appropriate thing..."... The fact is that these two people have caused the loss of life, stupendous property damage, and misery on a gargantuan scale to folks they don't know and who have done nothing to them... Not many people can say they have accomplished such idiotic, and monstrous mayhem; no matter the age or occupation (...or lack of one...) in a whole lifetime of screwing things up and doin evil... That puts them in a very elite and despisable class... A class that i simply do not think you can tolerate out in the general population... These two are miscreants at best and monsters at worst... Those who believe that this is "...kids being kids..." are either intellectually challenged or intellectually dishonest as far as i'm concerned... Actions do have consequences, and this is about the worst action i've seen in a good while... I (...and i suspect others...) have friends and kinfolk, rich and poor, that have lost everything as a result of this monstrous action... This conflagration has touched thousands, if not tens of thousands of people... It is on the same scale as an act of war; no matter the original intention.... America seems to be the only place in the world where we have a pretty large subclass of otherwise intelligent people who dote on our young folks and do them the genuine disservice of lying to them by failing to tell our children that "actions have consequences"... I say that if you believe in "teenage irresponsibility"; you are part of the problem... It also baffles me that there seems to be a "cottage industry" of "experts" who would tell us that "kids will be kids", and seek to explain away and/or minimize this sort of monstrous behavior.... Kids should continually be told that all actions have consequences; from childhood thru adulthood... I don't wanna hear about "kids being kids" and "they didn't mean to do it"... This is not some idiotic video game that you can re-set; nor some goofy "alternate reality" where it don't matter... People have actually died as the result of these actions and property has been destroyed on a god like scale... This one aint gonna go away... If you want kids to be responsible, you have to continually teach them to act responsible; while being responsible yourself... Sometimes the punishment is not sufficient for the crime; and i suspect that is the case here... None the less, serious punishment needs to be passed out for this; right up to and including trial for capital murder... I say, let justice take it's course and keep the "they were just kids" things out of it... Thus endeth the rant... leroy....