Mousegun

Unless your name is Naifeh. Then it takes about 2 days.

I called the Ten Dept of Safety and a nice lady openly admitted that the web site information makes it difficult for one to re-up by mail, especially the part that states you can't send in a photocopy of your birth certificate. I did mine in person.

True that restaurant carry is a large topic on our CCW agenda and I would love to see the law change on this issue but it is only one of three big ones IMHO. The other two are as follows and the chances of one of these ever getting changed are slim. The first is State and County park carry. That is another annoying fly that just keeps buzzing around our heads. That can easily be changed. The other, that is more controversial, but I feel should be addressed is that annoying fly's cousin, the "no firearms" sign on PUBLIC businesses. In many other states it carries no legal weight unless when asked to leave, you refuse and only at that point can charges be levied against you. Here in Tn. you become criminalized if caught carrying past the sign. The Feds, State, and local government have granted the right to carry and you have proven your ability to do so by not only your day at the class but the life you have led since receiving your carry permit. Why should a sign at the door of a PUBLIC building overshadow your right to self protection? It doesn't in many other states. I know all the arguments about owners having the right to stop you and you should take your business elsewhere but there are times that is not practically possible especially if you are with others and they may be depending on you for a ride etc.

Isn't it hell that we don't have state laws that allow us to carry in posted areas without some severe reprisal under penalty of law. I can easily see if a person is asked to leave and refuses that he or she should be faced with trespassing but that is where it should end. I can't see these laws ever changing either. I also feel that PUBLIC private property is not an excuse to upstage our constitutional rights so lets not start that argument all over again. There are just some times and some places that it is too difficult not to patronize under certain conditions especially if you are with family (and that is when you may need it the most) or with friends.

Unfortunately, if things keep going the way they are, the author will have to get used to the fact that more than half of the people in this great nation, did actually elect the above to the oval office.

King Jimmy Naifeh hasn't helped the situation much. He has to go before we get any changes and even so, they will come slow.

Our parents ( in some cases) lived through WW11 and Korea. Some of us saw action in Viet Nam. At that time, very little was given to us as compared to what is passed along today. Many of today's kids never ran a paper route or bagged at a grocery store to get a few bucks for stuff because stuff was given to them by mom and pop. Many people that are close to being seniors or are already there, started out by learning prejudice and gradually as we evolved and developed new ideas, that which used to be accepted in days gone by, became very politically incorrect. Some people may feel that they are making amends for past practices by giving Obama their vote. I have heard this more than once. Add these things together along with the status of the country and you get what you got. A man that leads us to believe that he will continue to give us stuff without having to dig in deep and work for it. Socialism, I certainly think so.

Kel Tec just released a new hammer block that stops a condition called "short stroking" which occurs when you don't let the trigger go all the way forward after a shot and then pull it back to shoot again. In the older guns, the hammer would fall off the block and cause a light hit on the primer but not enough to fire the round. You would have to work the slide to get the gun going again. The new hammer block dis-allows this from happening. The trigger just goes back to stop and does not release the hammer. You then let it go fully forward (like should have been done in the first place) and you are back in business. When I installed my trigger shoe, I took a small drill bit and with an Exacto hand dill holder, drilled two shallow holes in the side of the trigger where the screws made contact. This secured the shoe many times better than just tightening the screws down.

PF-9's do not usually injest 124 grain ammo that well. There have been problems feeding and ejecting the heavier rounds. 115 grain or 102 grain often fit the bill better. The gun may need some break in as in 200 rounds or so. Fluff and buff is a common expression used with Kel Tecs due to the fact that YOU play a big part in recoil of the gun. You must not limp wrist and you must hold on tight.

As a person that was VERY close to the events at the World Trade Center and with a sorrowful anniversary coming up in two days, I decided to add to this post. I am torn between many of the things that were said so far but if the following is at all true, then it should be cause for alarm worldwide. The dark side of Islam made itself visible 6 years ago on our shores. The thought of singling out a group of people as being dangerous or subversive can be dangerous in itself to our fundamental American way but the thought that a group of people may possibly want to alter our fundamental American way is even worse. Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In it's fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components. Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well. Here ' s how it works. As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in: United States -- Muslim 0.6% Australia -- Muslim 1.5% Canada -- Muslim 1.9% China -- Muslim 1.8% Italy -- Muslim 1.5% Norway -- Muslim 1.8% At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in: Denmark -- Muslim 2% Germany -- Muslim 3.7% United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% Spain -- Muslim 4% Thailand -- Muslim 4.6% From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in: France -- Muslim 8% Philippines -- Muslim 5% Sweden -- Muslim 5% Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3% The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5% Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8% At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world. When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in: Guyana -- Muslim 10% India -- Muslim 13.4% Israel -- Muslim 16% Kenya -- Muslim 10% Russia -- Muslim 15% After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in: Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8% At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in: Bosnia -- Muslim 40% Chad -- Muslim 53.1% Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7% From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in: Albania -- Muslim 70% Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4% Qatar -- Muslim 77.5% Sudan -- Muslim 70% After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in: Bangladesh -- Muslim 83% Egypt -- Muslim 90% Gaza -- Muslim 98.7% Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1% Iran -- Muslim 98% Iraq -- Muslim 97% Jordan -- Muslim 92% Morocco -- Muslim 98.7% Pakistan -- Muslim 97% Palestine -- Muslim 99% Syria -- Muslim 90% Tajikistan -- Muslim 90% Turkey -- Muslim 99.8% United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96% 100% will usher in the peace of ' Dar-es-Salaam ' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there ' s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in: Afghanistan -- Muslim 100% Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100% Somalia -- Muslim 100% Yemen -- Muslim 100% Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons. 'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, ' The Haj ' It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts nor schools nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate. Today ' s 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world ' s population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddists, and Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world ' s population by the end of this century. Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond ' s book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

I yearn for the day that we can legally go into a restaurant that serves without having to disarm. That will be a wonderful progressive change to our "antiquated " gun laws in this state. We all know that uncle king Jimmy will have to go first and that too will be progressive. The next one would be that stupid law that allows a business to make us a criminal by posting a no gun sign. It should carry no legal weight (as in many other states) until we are made and refuse to leave at which time a trespassing charge could be levied. That gives the business an opportunity to maintain control as well as the gun owner a chance to avoid prosecution

Wouldn't it be nice if all this crap could be eliminated and Tennessee law read that the owner could only ask a patron to leave if that patron was observed with a firearm ( concealed is concealed ) and the legal ramifications could only be trespassing. Fat chance that will ever happen but I can dream can't I. Lucky are those in states that have gone this route. It is a form of saying that individual rights are recognized in those states just slightly above a proprietor or corporation's desire to legally stop you from being the master of your own protection. Before all the " business' have the right to determine their own rules" come at me, I am not saying that they shouldn't be able to do so if they knew you were armed. If concealed, you get the best of both worlds in that it is your decision to leave if made, and if you don't do it, the business can then claim trespassing.

I love your comments on my first post guys but what disturbs me is being put into the category of a common criminal due to a stupid law and a stupid sign that sets that law into motion and the potential problems that could arise if you get made. OTOH if you were in violation of the sign, something went down, and you came out victorious, the events that took place after that (jail, judges, lawyers, and law suits etc.) could almost be considered anti-climactic, cause you would still be around. It should still be a fight to consider after getting restaurant carry.

We all know that we are taking a good beating from "King Jimmy" when it comes to restaurant, school, and park carry but I would like a few opinions about off limit carry in posted areas. Now I know all the arguments about doing business elsewhere and a business' right to post etc. but what about the many states where the sign carries no legal value unless you are asked to leave and you refuse (then a trespassing or disturbing the peace could be issued). In my opinion a posted sign upstages your right to self defense as well as the State's granted "legal" ability for you to carry after going through the process even though the State made this the law, it could have gone the other way. I would love to see Tennessee become one of those states where the poster does not have the effective right to write the law and make a person a criminal if they get made carrying. Some may say you get what you pay for if you violate the sign but there may be situations where the practicality of storing a firearm vs. the need to patronize an establishment becomes extremely difficult. EG: while out and about, I encountered a business with such sign and was nearly a mile from my vehicle. I had to do some fast double talking to the people I was with, much to the chagrin of my wife, why I wouldn't go along with the group. I got out of that one relatively unscathed but it did get me thinking about this condition. I know that issues like restaurant carry is more in the forefront of our arguments but this is one that may make for a good change also ---- after getting rid of the "Jimmy".

Not even close --------- In Tennessee, a store owner can effectively "write the law" by putting up a sign that dis-allows firearms. This sign carries the legal force to get anyone that doesn't comply in legal hot water and even loose your license. In many other states, the sign has no authority to do this but if a person is caught and refuses to leave, then and only then can a disturbance of the peace, trespassing or some similar charge can be levied. This seems to be a much lesser issue than others like restaurant carry or park carry but to me it is one of the most annoying. I can't count the times I have been out and about and had to go back to the vehicle to stash my firearm because of the sign and I don't buy the argument, "just take your business elsewhere". Sometimes that is extremely impractical. Restaurant and park carry is a fight that keeps getting lost due to just one man in the House of Reps. It is a shame that just one person can be granted the power to do something like that when the majority of the state legislators have given it the green light. Jimmy has to go. I would love for our laws to be the same as Ky.

At the price of ammo today $80 isn't a lot but it can buy you some. Kingston police give it for free and only ask for a donation. I gave $20 and that seemed like a lot more than what others gave. It isn't easy to get in to so make plans in advance.

We still have a bit to go. Parks, restaurants (don't say bars) and IMHO a posted sign should not be a criminal act. Remember the State gave us the "legal" right to carry not the guy in the corner store. The argument could be that anyone has the right to determine what goes on his or her property but the counter to that is, are they then responsible for actions against our right to self protection. Also, there are a number of other states where the "sign" holds no legal ground and the worst that can happen if you get made is a disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct charge or some other lesser crime. These would put Tennessee high on the list of friendly carry states. Lets never give up trying.

New Jersey falls into the almost impossible category also. $$$$ and connections change all that though.

The operative phrase in this sinerio

The morning that the Tennessean rag published the names of permit holders, I called the rag directly. They put a low level public relations young lady at the desk to answer the flood of incoming calls. I started the conversation with something to this effect,"I guess you've been getting beat up pretty bad this morning huh? Well I'm not going to do that to you". From that point, I proceeded to explain in rational terms and calm voice the many reasons why it wasn't a good move to make. I could hear a sigh of relief at the other end from the brow beaten young thing. She actually had the editor herself call me back but unfortunately I missed the call. You can read about the original event here. http://www.tfaonline.org/memberforum/viewtopic.php?t=1150&highlight= I feel the key to getting something done in a case like this is a rational approach that gives them a chance to think about the situation in lieu of responding to an angry bunch of people (even though they are right).

I am making an attempt to do my personal share to get some of these lousy laws, if not changed, at least looked at and then hopefully changed. I dislike the idea that Tennessee has allowed us to be the controllers of our own self protection by allowing us to get a licence to carry and stupid signs can block that abiliy. I know there are many that think it is fine for a public business to post a "no guns" sign and all we have to do is go elsewhere but that is not always a practicle solution and in a number of other states, the sign has no legal strength. It would be a lot easier if Tennessee was in that category. The carry permit is just that. It is not a concealed carry permit but a right to carry permit and you can open carry if so desired. Not a good idea here in east Tennessee because of the inevitable "man with a gun" calls from a lot of northern transplants (like myself ) and a good number of LEOs that are not sharp on that law. I recently sent my representitives the following e-mail. >>>> Sir: Our State of Tennessee has “made legal†the right that we have as human beings and verbalized in our Constitution allowing us to be the master of our own self defense by passing statewide handgun carry laws in 1996. While this progressive act did in fact fall in line with the national trend that continues today, was a positive step forward, it did and still does fall short in many areas of which two specific points come to mind. In many other states, pistol permit holders are legally allowed to enter an establishment that makes less than 50-51% of their revenue by the sale of alcohol. This, although still a restriction on the legal right that the states provided lawful gun owners, is a somewhat reasonable compromise. It allows a person to take their family to most restaurants and not jeopardize their self protection capabilities. The law also place a heavy restriction on the consumption of alcohol while in the possession of a firearm, as it should. The other point that can be learned from quite a number of other state laws centers on how they handle restricted areas. Here in Tennessee we face misdemeanor charges by entering a public establishment that has simply put up a “no firearms†sign. A number of other states recognize that THEY, the state, gave their people the legal ability to carry a firearm and don’t recognize the sign as a legal entity. If a person enters the signed establishment, is asked to leave and doesn’t, then and only then can legalities be imposed like trespass or disturbance of the peace. This is the best of both worlds. If the firearm remains concealed it is a non event. If open carried the proprietor has the means at his disposal to deal with it as he sees fit. In the wake of recent events it is clear to see that people intent on harm do not read signs, do not respect life and realize that the best places to do their evil is places that are not only crowded but provide them a safer environment by dis-allowing licensed firearm holders. The police, although doing a wonderful job if they are present, are just not always present and for the most part become armed historians as they take the report. The old saying is, “when seconds count, the police are just minutes awayâ€. We know they can’t be at all places at all times and for those of us who have chosen to be the directors of our own destiny, these two laws are a major blocking point in the ability to do so in an otherwise wonderful State whose people have proven themselves worthy of the awesome responsibility the State legally granted. Please remember, it is not the laws that give us the right to carry a firearm, but the Constitution of the United States and our God given right to self protection. Laws just make it “legalâ€. So I respectfully request you consider changes in the legislation addressing the above and consider sponsoring laws that make it easier and less restrictive for us all and follow some of the guidelines as previously described. Thank you for any consideration and my unwavering support if followed up on XXXX XXXXXXXX

Not only National Parks need to be changed but State, County and Town parks should also be on the list. Lets not forget them.

I have recently gone pretty active at posted locations by attempting, with polite and sensible conversation, to get proprietors to remove their signs. So far the success rate is dismal but the desire hasn't diminished. I know that a private business has the right to post a no firearms policy. I know I have the right to take my business elsewhere. I also have the right to discuss the matter with the owner. He has the right to do nothing about the discussion and / or even ask me to leave and not return if he thinks I will break the law and enter with my firearm (which I will not). Here is the question. In a number of states, the law does not recognize a "no guns" sign as a law breaking event if violated unless when asked to leave, the carrier refuses at which time trespass or disturbance of the peace laws kick in. Here in Tennessee it can carry a $500 fine (see John, I been readin' your book) Wouldn't this be the best of both worlds? You could still conceal and remain protected and yet the owner can, if he or she discovers you are carrying, can legally ask you to leave. It is up to you as to what to do from there. Why do you patronize these establishment in the first place you may ask. Well what if you are with the family and a situation comes up, like a movie the kids want to see, or a store your wife just has to go in. Are you going to march the group back to the car to stash the gun to the tune of a lot of complaints, are you going to refuse to go in, or are you going to have to wait outside while the crew goes in? There must be thousands of better scenarios that can take place than I just described but I hope you get the picture. At any time a condition may develop that causes you to make a nuisance decision. Along with the "no firearms in restaurants that serve" law, this is the one that bugs me the most. When Tennessee went to a shall issue state they made a few reasonable rules such as the permit is a carry permit and not just a concealed carry permit. This was to supposed to stop a problem if a person accidentally exposed his or her firearm (even though here in East Tennessee a man was put against a wall for an accidental exposure in a Wally World). Has the TGO or any other known firearm supporting group made any attempt to have the law about posted business property altered. Does anyone think this law should be or has a chance of being changed. Is anyone else in favor of pursuing the efforts to get it changed. Please give me some thoughts on the matter.

Do you guys know that even police are legally prohibited from carrying at a restaurant that serves while ON DUTY if they are not performing that duty (like having lunch). The state Attorney General made two rulings on that issue alone. How many police officers have been arrested for carrying while eating lunch????????? Not too many I bet. I do get a kick out of nicely mentioning this to any officer I see in a restaurant that serves if he has his firearm on, and they all do. For the most part, they don't even know that law because it so stupid. Another one that should go is any establishments ability to post a no guns sign and make you a criminal if you enter. They effectively "write the law" in that situation. In many other states, a sign does not get you convicted unless you are asked to leave and you refuse. Then it becomes a disturbing the peace violation. Both of these will be a long hard battle with Jimmy Neifth as Speaker of the House of Reps.

Please tell us what you feel he was "off" on? I feel he pretty much hit it right on but there may be some things I missed.