TMF

Okay, so then what are you saying? You suggested that I didn't read the same article as you did. I did. What are your questions? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, I read it. What I read was one side of the story from the perspective of the deceased dog's owner. The only facts in that article are that a man shot a dog, and that dog was not in control by the owner at the time of the shooting. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The best way to measure how bad your day is going is to consider how bad others have it. Then you'll feel lucky to be able to have the problems that you do. When trivial crap like this happens to me, I'm immediately thankful that I can have problems so trivial when I put it into perspective. I'd give some examples of actual bad days I've had, or bad days of those close to me, but I don't want to bring everyone down. Just be thankful that you can have these things happen to you and that you consider them a big deal. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You ever pinned a dog in attack mode before? Good luck moving from that position without killing it. Ask a dog handler what it's like trying to subdue a dog which is intent on eating you. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you don't have your dog on a leash, and you're in a public area with other people, dogs and kids, then your are not just an idiot, you're an a**hole. I've had my small pug, who was on a leash, attacked by a large pit/boxer mix while walking him. I would have shot him if he wasn't on top of my dog, but I'm pretty sure I broke a few of his ribs. I do feel bad for the dog, because he's doing what dogs do. It's the owner who is at fault. Unfortunately, there are irresponsible dog owners out there who believe that their dog is fine being off lead, and others should just deal with it. Well guess what morons, your dog will end up getting shot and it will be your fault. I just don't understand these people. How f'ing hard is it to keep your dog on a leash and respect the law? And then you have people who are outraged that a dog was shot, and not acknowledging that the owner of the animal is ABSOLUTELY the problem here. F'ing morons. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're still talking about what "could" happen. I don't understand this. You're saying that one shouldn't employ pepper spray against an unarmed assailant because he might just be determined enough to ignore the excruciating pain? Is that it? Also, the pepper blaster I posted looks and functions similar to a firearm. While it's clear that people like to focus on anecdotal evidence, the fact is that most attacks in which a weapon is produced by the victim, the attacker does not proceed. But your argument that, "well, it might not always work", is the same argument that people use to say you shouldn't carry anything smaller than a .45 and you need to have several back up mags. No, you just don't, based on statistics. Same goes for the option I posted. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ha, I'm sure she doesn't care what your preferences are. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's good to see that Selena Gomez has finally gotten around to becoming a sex object. I was concerned she might try to continue her success on talent alone, but it looks like she figured out how to diversify and transition to a sweet little commodity. Thank goodness too. I hate it when women achieve fame on merit alone. It suggests that they exist for a reason other than my sexual gratification. Keep up the good work, Selena. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can get on board with that. Of course, my personal safety comes first, so I'm applying battlefield ROE. Unless their hands are up and they're actively surrendering, they are getting shot until such time as they cease to be a threat. I didn't make the choice for them to present themselves as a threat in my home, but I can choose to reduce their ability to be a threat. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Having been shot at by people running away, I don't buy for a second that an intruder with his back to me isn't a viable threat, just less accurate. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's false. Because physics. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Firstly, it's not a different scenario for people who have the job of collecting information and developing intelligence. What is true in Iraq is true in the states. Secondly, as I stated before, so long as no one's rights are being violated there is no problem. It sounds like you're saying the problem is what "could" happen if police engaged them and they refused to answer questions. That isn't how this works. We don't keep suspicious information to ourselves because we're worried about what the government "could" do. The government "could" just ignore the whole thing. The government "could" violate their rights. The government "could" determine that the context of these purchases is on the level and requires no further investigation. None of the potential actions of law enforcement should or will have any bearing on whether or not I report something that seems suspicious. Somebody could have reported me for my purchases in Lowes earlier this year as being suspicious of meth lab materials. If law enforcement would have engaged me in regard to my purchases it would have been up to me how the questioning went. I could choose not to speak to them or to explain why I'm making these purchases. Either way, whether or not they choose to violate my rights is an individual choice of those agents to commit a crime or not, right? That has nothing to do with whether or not the person who reported me should have made the report. There certainly are indicators which point to certain illegal activities. Purchasing a large number of throw away phones is one. Drug dealers do this, and so do folks who are involved in other illicit activities. I'm sure there are countless legal reasons why someone would need to purchase a large number of throw away cells, and those people should have nothing to worry about if they're investigated. However, if Muhammed is linked to the purchase of 150 throw away phones and he's also on a terror watch list, pieces of the puzzle start to come together. I've yet to hear a good reason for why people shouldn't report suspicious activity. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's wrong with reporting something suspicious? If it is nothing, as you say, then the authorities will figure that out in short order. Not as if someone's Constitutional rights are being violated because law enforcement look into a report of suspicious behavior. Perhaps if folks had done this with the savages in California, people would be alive right now. I called the cops on a suspicious guy walking in my neighborhood this summer. He wasn't breaking any laws, but I didn't recognize him and he's wearing a thick, black sweater hoodie with the hood pulled over his head. It was 90 degrees out and sunny. He was breaking no law. Perhaps he was making a fashion statement. Maybe he was dropped on his head as a baby and had no sense. Maybe he was a one man protest for Trayvon Martin. I dunno, but the shit looked suspicious to me. When the cops show up to ask him questions, are his rights being violated? No. So what's the problem here? If it were different, and the reaction of law enforcement was to toss him in jail simply for wearing a hoodie when it made no sense to do so, then we have a problem. Investigating suspicious activity isn't a problem, so long as nobody's rights are violated. Seriously, if you were sitting down with a source in Iraq, and he listed out all kinds of suspicious activity going on which could otherwise have completely legal contexts to them, would you simply ignore that stuff and leave it out of your report? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There were threads about this years ago when a Bloomberg pulled this. One long one if I recall. The outrage was strong. However, this isn't about Bloomberg. It's about Nashville doing what it's going to do, and using this nonsense as a small part of their scheme. The same scheme which plagues every large city in the US. Demonize gun owners; ignore violent crime; white people are racist; free lunch; vote for me; etc. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Granted, it's been a couple years since I've been in there, but I've always had a good experience at TN Gun Country. Someone gave me a gift certificate from there shortly after they opened shop in that tiny strip mall years back, and I had a pleasant experience, so I kept going back there. Their prices weren't all that great on gun inventory, but close enough when factoring in shipping costs on Internet sales, and I prefer to patronize locally if I can. I've purchased two firearms from them. Yeah, chances are you're going to know more than the guy at the counter if you're a gun guy. I am, and I'm sure I know more than most the staff. With that, keep in mind that they can't pay employees a whole lot of money to work there, so you aren't going to have a sooper dooper gun genius behind the counter every time. If someone wanted to pay me lots of money to work behind a counter at a gun store, I'd do it and strive to be more knowledgable than anyone I encountered. Good luck finding a generous supply of people like that at $7.00 an hour. Like another poster mentioned, let the owner know if he has employees screwing up. TGC didn't seem like the kind of place where the owner/management treat their customers poorly. I'm sure your input would be appreciated. Like I said, it's been a few years since I've been in there, but I can't believe it's gotten so bad that it ranks up with other idiot gun stores in the area. At least I hope not. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think they can do that at the school house while under the command of their superiors. Defecting may raise them to that category where asylum may be considered. I've seen it happen with partner nation servicemembers when I was at Ft Bragg. I don't know whatever happened with their cases, but I do know that the US Gov ain't going to send them back knowing full well they will be imprisoned for life or executed. Not that the Afghan gov will do that to these guys, but them being awol from the base may give them the opportunity for asylum that they couldn't exploit while in training. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no other logical conclusion than this. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A true professional. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately, it was destroyed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Counterpoint: I'm not taking his word on it, because the type of person who would illegally enter a person's home with the intent of doing crime is not a a person I would consider reliable or a man of his word. I'm gonna give him some extra breathing holes. ETA: On a side note, like dogs, alligators are known to be excellent judges of character. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Deserved? No. But you know what they say, "Play stupid games, you might get eaten." Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't play Navy rules. Army rules only; it isn't gay if it's cold out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In Florida, that's what we call a citizen's arrest. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a legitimate concern, but whether it be good guy or bad guy bullets, they're just as deadly. If I'm willing to risk being shot by an attacker, I suppose I'm willing to risk getting shot by the good guys. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk