QuietDan

What an awesome idea! Just to get started, here's Nashville: Nashville Restaurants, Dentists, Bars, Beauty Salons, Doctors I typed "HCP" in the search box, and an HCP note popped right up. That means that HCP could be used as a keyword: For example: Gerst Haus Restaurant - Nashville, TN

Regarding a statement by OhShoot: really oughtta take this back to the main thread, methinks, it's much livelier: Tennessean: Private sale; also, anyone have contact with Bill Goodman re: gun show? Well, I say leave the man [Mr Brian Haas) alone. Everybody's got to eat, and Mr Haas eats from his writing. I imagine there are days when he kicks the wall, but if he has rent or a mortgage, a car-payment, and perhaps a wife and kids, he cannot say 'the hell with you all' and just quit his job. It's really not Mr Haas' fault that his editor (un-named and unknown to us) is apparently a Marxist ideologue (and it's not an ad hominem attack if it is true, nor is it an ad hominem attack when qualified by 'apparently,' suggesting it is possible and is therefore an opinion). I imagine Mr Haas did not pick the headline. I imagine Mr Haas did not pick the photo of the stereotypical Tennessee backwoods shotgunner character. I imagine Mr Haas did not select the low angled picture of the counter-top transaction, photographed to be sinister looking, with religio/racist overtones too clear to be accidental. Editors do the picking, and the picking of the trappings of the story, in headline and photo selection, is clearly biased. And, more disappointingly, these biases are executed in a subtle manner, allowing all to maintain plausible deniability. "We're not really biased, it's all an accident and a mis-perception." I also note with regret no quotes from the Founding Fathers, nor Supreme Court decisions, either for or against. As far as Mr Haas taking a "fair and balanced" approach, it's not so much for him to judge, protest as much as he likes. He is, rather, a product of his upbringing and training and cannot objectively measure his own balance. He may feel or think he is balanced, but you can't truly measure yourself objectively. Rather, it is more for his audience to judge, and right now I'm thinking this story is a Fail on the "fair and balanced" front. To not talk with Mr Haas on this forum as he prepares a gun story is, in military terms, "to yield the field to the adversary." To not talk to Mr Haas does not mean that his editor will not assign the story or that Mr Haas will not write the story. They'll just be forced to interview only anti-gun people and no pro-gun facts will make it into the story. Just because you don't win all the battles doesn't mean you don't keep fighting the war. I see bits & pieces of our discussions here echoed and reflected in Mr Haas' story. Given the nature of the leftist leadership of the Tennessean (and it's not 'ad hominem' if it's true . . . ), we got just about as much out of the article as we could expect. There are tons and tons of comments on the story on the Tennessean's website, and a lot of them reflect the facts of the issue, and many of the rest, as predicted, are almost completely uninformed comments from the puppy-hugger brigade who put in no thought and no research, but plenty of feeeeeeelings, in their posts. Other informed individuals are correcting the comments-in-error, and I hope some of those corrections are coming from people who post here. God Bless you all. I doubt this will be the last gun story in the Tennessean. (Originally posted on another thread at 1-22-2012 @ 10:37 p.m.)

The list of comments after the article are priceless!

I'm thinking that we're all missing a MAJOR point here, and I would sure like one of the lawyers that post here to chime in: Quote: ". . . the charges/arrests were expunged . . . " Definition of expungement: ex·punge    [ik-spuhnj] Show IPA verb (used with object), -punged, -pung·ing. 1. to strike or blot out; erase; obliterate. 2. to efface; wipe out or destroy. Therefore: The charges, under the law, didn't happen. They don't exist. They were struck out. They were blotted out. They were erased. They were obliterated. They were effaced. They were wiped out. They were destroyed. And futhermore: I'm thinking, in a finer point of law, that to argue otherwise is to disrespect and hold in contempt the ruling of a Judge. I'm thinking that, if the individual who has EARNED an expungement were to speak to the issue, it would exist again, and all the legal protections he has UNDER THE LAW, could be jeopardized. I'm thinking that this is an issue to accept, and to drop. The Lord only knows who among us might need the protection of a Court of Law and a Judge on a similar point at some time in the future.

Well, I say leave the man alone. Everybody's got to eat, and Mr Haas eats from his writing. I imagine there are days when he kicks the wall, but if he has rent or a mortgage, a car-payment, and perhaps a wife and kids, he cannot say 'the hell with you all' and just quit his job. It's really not Mr Haas' fault that his editor (un-named and unknown to us) is apparently a Marxist ideologue (and it's not an ad hominem attack if it is true, nor is it an ad hominem attack when qualified by 'apparently,' suggesting it is possible and is therefore an opinion). I imagine Mr Haas did not pick the headline. I imagine Mr Haas did not pick the photo of the stereotypical Tennessee backwoods shotgunner character. I imagine Mr Haas did not select the low angled picture of the counter-top transaction, photographed to be sinister looking, with religio/racist overtones too clear to be accidental. Editors do the picking, and the picking of the trappings of the story, in headline and photo selection, is clearly biased. And, more disappointingly, these biases are executed in a subtle manner, allowing all to maintain plausible deniability. "We're not really biased, it's all an accident and a mis-perception." I also note with regret no quotes from the Founding Fathers, nor Supreme Court decisions, either for or against. As far as Mr Haas taking a "fair and balanced" approach, it's not so much for him to judge, protest as much as he likes. He is, rather, a product of his upbringing and training and cannot objectively measure his own balance. He may feel or think he is balanced, but you can't truly measure yourself objectively. Rather, it is more for his audience to judge, and right now I'm thinking this story is a Fail on the "fair and balanced" front. To not talk with Mr Haas on this forum as he prepares a gun story is, in military terms, "to yield the field to the adversary." To not talk to Mr Haas does not mean that his editor will not assign the story or that Mr Haas will not write the story. They'll just be forced to interview only anti-gun people and no pro-gun facts will make it into the story. Just because you don't win all the battles doesn't mean you don't keep fighting the war. I see bits & pieces of our discussions here echoed and reflected in Mr Haas' story. Given the nature of the leftist leadership of the Tennessean (and it's not 'ad hominem' if it's true . . . ), we got just about as much out of the article as we could expect. There are tons and tons of comments on the story on the Tennessean's website, and a lot of them reflect the facts of the issue, and many of the rest, as predicted, are almost completely uninformed comments from the puppy-hugger brigade who put in no thought and no research, but plenty of feeeeeeelings, in their posts. Other informed individuals are correcting the comments-in-error, and I hope some of those corrections are coming from people who post here. God Bless you all. I doubt this will be the last gun story in the Tennessean.

I'm thinking there still is a suspect (??) but the feds would like to see or hear additional information to either reinforce their case against the suspect, exonerate the suspect, or identify a different suspect. This is speculation on my part, but I think it fits a law enforcement pattern. Professional LEOs that post here could correct me if I'm wrong.

Take it to the Supremes. In the meantime, New York City resident in Tennessee going 71 in a 70 zone gets a ticket. And their vehicle gets tossed for illegal weapons -- they shouldn't have ANY, seeing as they can't have them at home.

One of several stories with an update on Specialty Arms II fire in LaVergne. Reward Offered For Information On Christmas Day Arson - NewsChannel5.com | Nashville News, Weather & Sports And here's the original press release with contact information for the ATF: http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2012/01/012012-nash-5000-reward-offered-for-information-regarding-christmas-day-arson-at-local-gun-shop.html

You Sir, have married a saint, or a crazy lady, or both! It does let her keep an eye on you . . .

There is a flip side of the coin to 'the evil Walmart.' In a lot of little towns, the leading family owned the main stores and basically held the residents over a barrel because they had no alternative. In those same towns, the leading families often held the Mayor's office or a number of seats on the city council and fought kicking and screaming to keep the Walmarts of the world out of their towns to protect their little fiefdoms. Fine. Then, the Walmart goes into the NEXT town over, or in the county outside the town limits, and the Walmart thrives anyways, and the town with the little fiefdom circle loses business AND doesn't get the tax revenue -- substantial tax revenue -- that the Walmarts of the world generate. We can all sing sob stories over the poor little businesses that lose out to the Walmarts of the world, and some of them have noble stories. But, a LOT of those little stores were actually run by nasty people that lorded it over their neighbors for generations, never developed the customer service, never developed efficiencies, never developed competitive prices, never improved. A Walmart exists because there are efficiencies involved with operating a big store that people drive to. They depend on a larger trade area. If people can burn a little gasoline to save a couple of dollars, they will. It's called rent-seeking behavior and pretty much everyone does it. I don't like it that Walmart minimizes prices by buying from China, I don't like it at all, but people want to save a buck and respond to that. That's just the way it is. A lot of domestic businesses just depended on their political influences to protect their turf and didn't bother to get or stay competitive. If the little store that people can walk to or drive a short distance to doesn't develop a compelling reason for people to continue to shop there, then they won't.

The day after the shooting, this Waffle House is probably the safest place in town to eat. When something like this happens in a chain restaurant, it'd be great if HCP holders went out of their way the next day to eat at one of the restaurants in the chain and to say they were doing it in support of HCP. We have a Waffle House in our town and I know where I'm eating lunch tomorrow. I might bring a print-out of the story and leave it with my tip.

I want one too! How much? How soon?

Nice. Very Nice. Very Nice and Useful.

Politics is often called "the art of the possible" and "vehicle carry" seems a very possible goal at this time in this environment. It seems to me, that if an employer has a parking lot that's open to the public, he's already divested himself of some property rights to it. The property owner may have rights over the ground, but I have a right to have what I wish inside my car. They do this in Texas with Castle Doctrine. You have Castle Doctrine rights over your house and property, over the interior of your vehicle, and over your business, and can use deadly force if you are challenged in any of those places. They could jump start the debate by just stealing the language outright from the Texas statutes. I'm sure Texas wouldn't mind.

Thank you for the words.

God Bless you in your work Mr Haas, but there are HUGE fallacies therein. Ten thousand can understand an issue, and three, either idiots or malign, can create an "issue" with two sides. And then, the "issue" must be discussed ad nauseam with both sides of the "issue" getting equal time? That is an intellectual fallacy that the leftists at the helm of the Tennessean affect, and we are not fooled. That's one of the reasons why the circulation of the Tennessean, and other leftist newspapers, is dropping like a rock. It's because ideologically driven publications tend to sing the tune of the idiot and malign three instead of the ten thousand. Well, the ten thousand get their news elsewhere now. Normal people, well read normal people (perhaps a contradiction in terms), understand clearly the plain language of the Constitution and the Second Amendment. The recent Supreme Court rulings, especially the perspective of brilliant Justice Clarence Thomas, only makes it more clear, and underscores the political history behind the Second Amendment. The right to free will, the right to self-defense, the right to keep and bear arms, are all natural rights that pre-exist the Constitution, and the drafters of the Constitution clearly acknowledged this. The Constitution did not grant "the right of the people to keep and bear arms;" the Constitution's Second Amendment only clearly acknowledged that the people already have that right, and that it shall not be infringed. 'A well-regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.' Many of us cry for our nation to have four judges on the Supreme Court make convoluted arguments to the contrary that frankly embarrass the other five judges, twisting their arguments to support an elitist, leftist ideology on which they maintain a death grip in spite of all logic and legality to the contrary. Justice Clarence Thomas in his argument, takes their arguments to pieces. Regular people retain the free will and the free association necessary to buy and sell firearms, whether they are standing in a gun show marketplace, the parking lot of said marketplace, or in their HOMES, again, under the Second Amendment, which clearly states: ". . . The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." And, the leftist lawyers aren't after the firearms transacted in the marketplace, they are after the firearms transacted in the homes. They cannot go after one without going after the other. Additionally, for a government, already verging on the tyrannical, to attempt to further restrict firearms, can create an environment in which the soft, elitist words of the most elegant lawyer will not stand up to a punch in the face. The right to keep and bear arms pre-exists the Constitution, and it doesn't exist to merely and narrowly allow The People to shoot paper targets, or to shoot sporting clays, or to shoot deer. It exists so The People can shoot Burglars in their Homes -- and, the Second Amendment primarily exists so The People can shoot Tyrants in the Public Square. And, the Tyrants, or the proto-Tyrants know this. That is the primary reason the Tyrants and the proto-Tyrants spend so much time and effort working to neuter the Second Amendment. The Constitution and the Second Amendment have helped hold off the Tyrants for more than two hundred years. And The People, at least normal well read People, know this. And there are more of The People than there are Tyrants.

You mean, like this: Beautiful Israeli Women Soldiers | 206 Pics | Yeeeeee | Painting, Art, Photography, Graphic Design

Do they come like that or has it been augmented? The pistol, that is.

Congratulations on your pending escape. Welcome to (relative) Freedom. Don't forget to beat the dust off of your sandals when you cross the MA border for the last time.

For the Glock lovers among us: [h=3]Glock: The Rise of America's Gun[/h] By Paul M. Barrett Book review: Glock - WSJ.com

Interesting developments in the Marine with a gun in New York City story: Marine Arrested For Carrying Indiana-registered Handgun In New York Made 'honest Mistake,' Attorney Says | Fox News Please note especially, the support through: Boston lawyer and veteran Marine Dave Bruce has organized an online petition through the website leatherneck.com that plans to send its first 14 e-mails to Cyrus, New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg . . . . [ http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108006 ] A Facebook page, called "Free Ryan Jerome," has also been created in the hopes that Jerome -- a TOW gunner before his honorable discharge in 2005 -- will be cleared of the charges. [ http://www.facebook.com/pages/Free-Ryan-Jerome/319936454693543 ] and [ http://www.facebook.com/groups/331878333502842/ ] Also please note, from the story: . . . Jerome had become a licensed precious metal jeweler in Indiana just prior to his trip to New York in September. . . . . Jerome drove to the state with his girlfriend to visit a Long Island-based refinery he was interested in possibly doing business with. He was carrying $15,000 worth of gold. . . .

My wife, who is quite petite, really loves her Ruger 10/22 CRR (but with a Walnut stock). With a 4 power Leupold Scope, it's a tack driver. It's little, it's girlie, but it's not just a child's first rifle. Your daughter can hold on to it for years, or pass it on to her own daughters someday. Circle of life and all that. Here's the Ruger 10/22 CRR (short barrel, short length of pull) in pink laminate: Ruger 10/22 Compact Pink Laminate 22 LR

I'm thinking that a total Tourist, Travel and Business boycott on New York City would be one of the few things that would have an effect on changing the laws there.

Looks like it'd be pretty hard to baseball-bat.

Here's a timely story, what with the Tennessee woman arrested in New York City when she tried to check her gun at the World Trade Center The strange birth of New York’s gun laws—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com All becomes clear . . . .