TMF

  As of 10 minutes ago he was on the WKRN comments section defending himself.  Apparently he wrapped the rifle in plastic so it wasn't "clearly visible" giving them no reason to suspect he was carrying a rifle at all, let alone a loaded firearm.  This guys is in desperate need of a very, very late term abortion.

  Ha, sorry.  Forgot about your earlier request.  It's just that there are few names I could think of to describe him... and I have quite a vocabulary too.  Give me a day to think it over and I'll think of a new one to pin to him.

Can't wait for the first FO to write his initials in the side of an Afghan mountain using 105 rounds.

  90% of them violate the terms of use on TGO.

It's probably safe to say he didn't violate any laws, since I'm sure he's been planning this for a while and likely made sure he had all his bases covered, but it still demands the question... WHY????   Imagine you are downtown having lunch with your kids and you see a man walk in with a rifle slung wearing body armor.  I can tell you that your first thought would not be "well it looks like this upstanding gentleman is simply exercising his rights to be a flaming douchetard."  You will likely think that he is on the first leg of a shooting spree.  Not "if" but "when" he gets gunned down for being an idiot I hope he lives long enough to regret being a effing moron.

There are pistols out there that are not drop safe, but the Beretta 92/96 and, I believe, all their modern pistols made after the early 80s are. It's an industry standard, or at least I thought it was. The old GI 1911s were not, but then again, who in their right mind would put one in the pipe and then drop the hammer on it?

I realize the function of it, I've been carrying them for 15 years, however it is unnecessary. Berettas are drop safe, so it won't "go off" if you simply drop it with the hammer down. In fact, my 96G doesn't have a decocker that functions as a safety. It's spring loaded and returns to the fire position as soon as you release the decocker. Safeties on Berettas are unnecessary to use for anyone with more than a couple hours training on pistols. If it was necessary then Sigs would all have safeties.

Thanks. That was a throw back to my Army days. It's the term used when referring to a Soldier's lazy, overweight breeding machine that has chained the poor bastard to a life of torture and agony. Terminal Lance just did a comic on it. The term works for lazy folks on the gov tit. Pretty much the same thing. http://terminallance.com/2010/08/06/terminal-lance-56-myths-and-legends-ii-the-dependapotamus/ http://terminallance.com/2013/07/12/terminal-lance-277-late-nights/ Scroll to the bottom on that one.

He's going to get himself shot. By police or a HCPer.

There is a difference between someone who has earned their gut and someone who hasn't. It's easy to throw out the obesity thing, since most people who are on the gov tit are very overweight. I don't care how much someone weighs so long as I'm not the one funding their EBT cards. When you see a Dependapotomus waddling around the store enjoying all that excess on my dime it is infuriating.

The 92FS has both a safety and decocker function on same lever. With cocked hammer, it first rotates firing pin plunger out of the way (which is the safety) and then decocks hammer. It can then be taken back off safety to fire in double action mode, or manually recocked to fire in single. If safety is engaged, firing pin plunger does not engage and it cannot fire manually or by being dropped. Cannot be carried cocked and locked. If the safety is not engaged, striking the hammer can make it fire, as dropping it on it, whatever. Once the hammer is decocked, the lever functions purely as a safety. It also has a half cock position when safety is off, but this is not secure, and Beretta says not to carry it in that mode. The half cock position is only designed to stop the hammer from falling if you are firing it in double action mode and decide not to complete the trigger pull. - OS The point is that you don't use the safety. This is also a pet peeve of mine. If the weapon in holstered then there is no reason to use the safety as a safety. It is a decocker. In fact, in all my training with a Beretta, every instructor has always referred to it as a decocker. I hate hate hate hate hate hate when some Army douche comes up to me and tells me my "safety" is off, and then I have to explain to him why he is a moron. I can't count on all my fingers and toes how many times I've had this conversation.

Good idea! I bet no one has tried that before.

It matters who is elected in 2014 because the Dems, believe it or not, can still do more damage than collapsing the economy. The world will go on after it happens, but with what means to survive is the question. You can bet your butt that if the Dems sweep 2014 there WILL be vast gun control legislation passed which will probably look like registration, and we know where that road will lead to, especially if there is a collapse.

They didnt enter his house. He met the cops outside.

I didn't like the trigger on Glocks up until I drank the Kool Aid. Now, I dig it.

Yes, all well and good, but how do I make my point unless I open carry into a place with a gunbuster?

The best is manipulating the safety on a Beretta 1959. Can't be done without taking one hand off the pistol.

Well double action pistols with heavy triggers simply don't require the use of a safety. 92Fs are a perfect example of that. I've never used the safety on my M9. Don't need to, ain't supposed to.

That comes down to shooter experience. I can get a first round hit from the holster faster with my 1911 than most people can get with their Glock. My 1911 is an awesome carry pistol.

These are the same people who have sex with sheep. I know that sounds cliche, but most grunts that has spent at least one night on a set of thermals has seen this take place. It is funny the first time, but after that you start to consider how f***ed up their culture must be for this to be such a normal, widespread practice. In regard to dogs, yeah, there's some stuff Momo the King Sheep Raper said about dogs. In reality, it isn't that big a deal in Islam. It just isn't normal in their culture to keep them as house pets, but they do keep them. Especially in rural areas.

We can still woodchip him though. I look at the arguments defending a person's actions by blaming controlled substances and the tools of murder in the same light a wife /girlfriend would look at a cheating partner. I realize some chicks are dumb enough to accept these excuses, but most aren't and the ones that are usually have a stake in the game while knowing in the back of their mind its BS. The argument blaming the controlled substance is like a cheating spouse saying he was drunk, so can't be held accountable for his actions. I don't know too many women who would buy that one. At a minimum, I don't see that holding up in court. The argument blaming guns is like a cheating spouse blaming his penis. Actually, the penis argument would be more sensible since natural chemical reactions occur when an attractive woman makes clear her intent for intercourse, even if you don't want to. Since the gun is not biologically attached to you, it is hard to argue that possession of a gun made you murder.

It has been used, ineffectively, as a defense to murder before. Bottom line, you are responsible for your actions as well as the actions resulting from putting chemicals into your body. I can't go do 3 lines of coke, then go on a shooting spree and blame it on the drugs. I've known dozens of guys who juiced. For some of them it affected their personality, making them act like chicks at one point then have violent outbursts at another. I can't say that their behavior was excusable because it was the roids making them act that way; they're the ones that were injecting themselves. To make the argument emotional for a second, if some roid rager is having an episode and your mother/wife/daughter happens to be in the vicinity, does something to upset him which results in him choking her to death, should we demonize a chemical or the POS that put the chemical in his own body knowing the effects? My answer is that Beniot should be put feet first into a woodchipper and used for chum during Shark Week.

Glock 19. I never, ever carry my Beretta. Maybe I would if I was OCing, but it is impossible to conceal comfortably.

Well, on two occasions, the end of WWI and WWII, Ho Chi Minh petitioned for Vietnamese civil rights and independence. In both those instances he cites the Declaration of Independence. I don't believe it was a matter of belief in the ideals of a capitalist society, or even basic inalienable rights included in the Bill of Rights. I think it was strictly about colonial rule by the French and the desire for independence. Like it or not, our little war with the Brits inspired so many revolutions around the world in the following centuries; even those we may have opposed. Whether or not that is where Ho Chi Minh drew his inspiration doesn't really matter anyway. Serial killers have been known to draw their inspiration from pop culture icons in music and television. I don't think that is an indictment of the person that has nothing to do with the circumstance. If I was to say that Hitler drew his inspiration from the Bible, would we hold Christianity responsible for his actions or blame the Bible in any way? At any rate, I don't believe his use of founding father literature was proof of being inspired by them. I think that was just the medium he used in order to "speak our language" of understanding, especially since the two folks he was petitioning when he quoted Jefferson was Wilson and Truman. They both ignored him. Who knows, maybe if we chose not to back the Frenchies on that one Ho Chi Minh would have never taken aid from the Commies. After all, before the Commies took power in China he even let the French back in to N. Vietnam under a mutual understanding, then the French backdoored him. This is only a couple years after we stormed the beaches of Normandy. If you ask me we should have used our influence to tell the French to take a breather. Colonialism was dead anyway. The world no longer would support it. Vietnam might not have been a bastion of freedom, but it wouldn't have ended up as a proxy war with the Russians. Sorta off topic, but if you really want to get your blood boiling over the whole thing read Dereliction of Duty. It is an eye opener.

If this was a SWAT hit my opinion would be different, but this looks like a case of sh** happens. These officers were doing their jobs. They responded to a burglar alarm and ended up on the wrong side of the street. That was a mistake on their part, but we don't know how they were identifying houses or whether or not they were dispatched to the right address. But let us just say, for argument's sake, that it was the two officers that messed up the address. It is a mistake that can happen, but is that criminal negligence? I don't think so. Now to the question of whether or not they acted reasonably. These cops were dispatched to an active burglar alarm. They went to investigate and were met by a man with a gun. If you were in their shoes how would you react under the circumstances? All you know is that an alarm was going off at this residence and a man with a gun is now threatening you. According to both the police officers' accounts and the woman's account, they were yelling at him before they fired. Likely their story of telling him to put the weapon down and identifying themselves as police officers is accurate. Perhaps the old guy was confused or was dealing with a sudden adrenaline spike and made a decision to raise his gun. It sounds like a tragedy, but not a crime. Those cops undoubtedly feel awful. No one wants to shoot an innocent. This scenario is very different than no-knocks on the wrong house or what just happened down in Sarasota with those dipsh** fed Marshals.