Paladin132

Hrm... Thanks, I was wrong. Either way, criminal record which is not something I want - and as you say looking your right to carry.    And yes, it is posted now on the main entry next to Belk. I did call and tell the store manager that they had denied me service and that I had intended to purchase some clothing. 

Fallguy, as I understand it in Tennessee that the sign carries with it the force of law and that it is not a misdemeanor. If I am in error I apologize, nearly sure it is though. 

I went shopping in Knoxville for new clothes. I have been very fortunate to be hired full time after three years and need a few more nicer shirts and pants. As I approached the door, carefree and looking forward to buying three or four of each and then going home for the WVU kickoff I was stopped dead in my tracks as I was denied service, as well as entry to the East Town Mall. I have not been there I suppose in forever and only once that I can think of. It was nearly abandoned this morning, but there at the door I was barred entry. I felt offended. I should not perhaps but I did. I felt violated. I was not bothering anyone, but going through my life. I was stopped by a small red sticker that told me that entry into the premises was relegated to those that forgo their rights to self defense by carrying a legal weapon. I have heard all the arguments, but let me state if it is a business that is open to the public they should not have the ability without proving intent to harm to charge someone with a felony. Signs should have no force of law. I was scared. I could have walked by it and been a felon in the same stride as Dahlmer or Hassan and just because I was caught up in enjoying my morning. Some day those that say well its business they have rights are going to realize that can no longer carry their weapon in a park for a afternoon stroll, into a restaurant for a great meal, or into a store to purchase clothes. It is coming. Seattle is trying to get all business to do it as the council won't pass a law banning weapons. On that day I will not tell you I mentioned this. Instead I will merely shrug and wish that we had found a better way to convince people that we are not bad people and that we are among then daily - and that criminals do not respect the laws that we do.

Ahhhh... all is right with the world!

I am confused, you said if we don't smell the coffee, but obviously one CAN smell the coffee given the right preparedness :)

Interesting. 

Good posts, but I would like to point out that without a stand your ground doctrine you do not have a legal right to self defense in certain situations. There is not articulable legal right to self defense. There is no law or constitutional clause that states that right. What you have are certain laws that give you a very imperfect version of a right that I think we can agree is a basic human right. 

I agree with you Oh Shoot. Both are bad. I could get a better reasoned law from a kindergartener with crayons. 

I also have a problem with the language specifying where I can keep the weapon. Because if I wear that weapon I may break the law getting out of my car to put it in the trunk - not to mention people may notice what I am doing. I leave my weapon in a safe in the vehicle. No one is the wiser. Why specify that nonsense?

http://www.9news.com/news/article/348974/339/Apartment-tenants-told-they-must-get-rid-of-guns   This is why I am concerned about allowing public businesses to refuse weapons on their property. Some day it seems to me we will all be unable to have a weapon anywhere. They will ban CC by default. Mostly it is due to uneducated folks making decisions not on safety and security but perception. The 2A guarantees a right to bear arms. What part of the constitution spells out the right to ban what is on your property when it is open to the public?    No folks. 2A issues must be brought to the same level of protections and recognized as a civil right. If we do not continue to combat things like this in the court of law and the court of public opinion we will all eventually wind up keeping a baseball bat behind our door to protect us from the armed criminals who would take our things and harm our families. 

Michael Bane said something similar to this a few podcasts back. He said that with all the new gun owners you have that many folks buying what goes with a new firearm - ammunition to shoot with, and probably to put some back as well. Once you think about that with all the new firearms owners I think we have a simple supply and demand issue. 

I read the 2011 Essential Guide to Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack - Reports of the EMP Commission on the Threat and Critical National Infrastructure - The Danger from High-Altitude Nuclear Explosions published by the U.S. Government; Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack; U.S. House of Representatives (2011-01-17). 2011 Essential Guide to Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack - Reports of the EMP Commission on the Threat and Critical National Infrastructure - The Danger from High-Altitude Nuclear Explosions (Kindle Locations 2-4). Progressive Management. Kindle Edition.    It claims 11 million casualties due to starvation within the first winter and if I remember right about 10 years to rebuild the nation to a 1960's level of technology. It seemed pretty well sourced and reasoned. Now I am not a physicist or any such thing, but I do know that mother nature sometimes can kick our behind that numerous threat groups in the world are working to utilize EMP against us. Especially as that would be a heck of a sucker punch against a super power who is not prepared for it. For example, the military has been wavered to not purchase equipment that was EMP hardened for a number of years and would be susceptible to such attack. For the minimal cost that it would take to harden ourselves to such an event it seems silly not to - until you realize that groups rarely prepare for something until it has already bit them in the tail once. 

Ahhhh the good old days on BWMU range. 

Incidentally, didn't he officers in the King trial get charged with something other than assault (again, probably because it is not a federal crime to assault someone unless you do it in specific circumstances)? 

  Exactly, my point which I stated poorly, was that they will a) not try him again n the murder charge (as you point out it can not be applied here federally) and b) will not apply because the federal government is looking into charges of violation of federal civil rights statutes not murder.   Please excuse my poor online communications skills.  

Just a note about double jeopardy: it will not be in this case because he was charged with, what murder originally? The DOJ is investigating it from a civil rights point of view. If the DOJ were charing him with murder, that would be double jeopardy. 

Let me just point out that this coming week in my home state of WV that a 1000 dollar a plate fundraiser is being held for Senator Manchin by none other than Mayor Bloomberg. Tell me that they are not coming to other states. Colorado can happen here, and it could start very simply. Sure you can build a coal plant, but it will bankrupt you. Sure you can have a gun, but we will bankrupt you.       Be cautious and aware of things like this is what I am saying I suppose. 

OS, that made my day!

I used to carry 210 for uncle sam... Dang 6000 rounds? He must be he-man if he's carrying it around with him?

Dang where can I order it from? I am having a darned hard time finding ammunition to support some fun up at Oak Ridge for competition. 

I am also not sure about cost, but most states you have to go through special training in order to be assigned to a roadblock. More money.    Now I have seen a study that says that 20% reduction in DUI is what we see. Although that study is suspect to me because it was done by a governor's task force on DUI, I have admittedly not spent more than about thirty minutes looking up information on it. Either way, it seems like they may work, but I come down on the side that they seem awful odd for our nation to tolerate for the small gain we might have out of them. 

Once a person puts on the uniform of a public servant, be it police, soldier, or what have you, that person must represent society. I was often reminded of that overseas when I wanted to act a certain way but instead held back to represent the flag on my shoulder with honor.    It is even more important with folks that can easily violate your person and ruin your life through what to them is a simple arrest. Not only that but the officer in the video jumped immediately to being hurt because a citizen (not a prisoner, not a suspect other than going through a DUI checkpoint) questioned his non-life threatening directions. Now that is not honorable behavior, nor is it acceptable from a public servant. Furthermore in the longer dashcam you can hear more of the conversation that seems to me at least to prove the point that he was trying to intimidate a citizen.    I am sorry, I want to go back to the days of my early adult life when I was not concerned about approaching an officer and asking for directions. Now officers to often are being reported in the news as using things like that to get a arrest, or for having a bad attitude that results in the same - looking for an arrest.    Folks who think the kid got what he deserved should think well what if you were in that situation. The kid did not raise his voice, curse the officer, or anything of the kind. He simply questioned what he had to do. Officers do not know the law, they know how to get through the law to articulate things like reasonable suspicion and probable cause so that they can do their jobs. Lawyers do not know all of the law - they know a small piece of what they work in criminal law. Otherwise we would not need lawyers that specialize in self defense or in tax code cases.    This is why we are supposed to screen and monitor police to make sure we hire ethical folks who want to serve the public and not bullies. Law enforcement officers really do not have the luxury of having a bad day and taking that to work with them. Caesar's wife must be above reproach. Dignity and respect. 

Ouch. I was hoping you were going to give tips on a no hassle change to the licensing and such. 

I don't know if I could be considered a "aficionado" but I do like the Makers Mark blended cigar. Its not as thick as I like but its close, tastes nice and is firm and holds up to me chewing on it over and over before smoking it. I don't smoke them but once in a blue moon but I have a small humidor with a few cigars in it that I chew on occasionally. After that I like Cardoba I think they are, I may have spelled it wrong. I am usually more drawn to Dominican cigars than any other.    Take all that with a grain of salt though, I don't usually like black cigars and I have not smoked one in over a year. Just chewed a little haha. 

Timing and packaging I think is the answer.