TMF

Man, he's just handing out sound bytes for the upcoming commercial campaign.

Yuuup!

My family came to America looking for new opportunities and something about potato famine. I dunno, those are pretty good reasons too. I guess they changed the country a little from what it was too. They have much more in common with current immigrants than the very first pilgrims. I don't see what any of that has to do with who has more of a right to practice their religion according to our Constitution. Just because folks believe that Muslims should have a right to practice their religion freely doesn't mean they're bleeding heart tree hugger. I could give a wag bag about Islam and whether it continues to exist or if it hurts their feelings that some folks think they're all freedom hating terrorists. I don't care. I DO care about folks who try to violate their rights to practice their religion. It's their property. The religion here is not the issue; the issue is folks trying to use our courts to prevent them from practicing their religion. The lawyer stirring all this up has made it clear that this isn't about code enforcement or improper notification. He has said repeatedly that Islam is not a religion and doesn't deserve protection. Well you don't get to go around and decide who's religion is valid and who's isn't. That is more anti-American than a bunch of brown people bowing down to a big cube.

Holder isn't going to allow an independent counsel to investigate this. Funny that there was an independent counsel to investigate the Valerie Plame leak, which is small potatoes compared to this. I'm jumping on the "Holder is a crook" bandwagon. I know I'm late to the game on that.

We don't know all the evidence the prosecution has. On the surface it would look like manslaughter, but for all we know Zimmerman could have made a comment days before to an associate the he's gonna shoot the next punk he catches. Something like that would put him in the Murder 2 category. The follow up investigation was surely more in depth than the first; who knows what kind of evidence it turned up. Either that or they did what they often do which is trump up the charge, which I agree isn't right. I'm a reformed Floridian who used to live a quarter mile from where this happened. From conversations with my father who is an LEO working out of Sanford, the opinions of him and his colleagues is that this guy is that Zimmerman committed manslaughter. That is independent of all the media lies and Al and Jesse involvement. They have no love for either amongst that community.

Morbid curiosity. I have a feeling they aren't objective on the matter. What it will accomplish is that it will be used as a tool to strong arm law makers into repealing SYG legislation.

I wonder who makes up this "task force".

Since he killed him while protecting his daughter the father probably won't see charges. Plus it's Texas.

It's also the Army's Bday on the 14th..... for the hooah folks out there.

That awesome man. I had a buddy that met one at an IHOP about a decade ago. He was wearing the ship hat with all the veteran flair so he stopped to thank him for his sacrifice and the sacrifice of his shipmates. It's hard to believe that folks like that still walk amongst us. You were lucky to meet one!

Awesome! Is this something we're going to see make its way into the WWP?

Hey all, I wanted to put feelers out there to see if my fellow Clarksvillians want to change the currents laws on legal carry in Clarksville parks. As some of you may be aware it is legal to carry in Clarksville parks with the exception of about a dozen. Of those dozen are included the major parks such as Heritage, McGregor and the newly reopened Liberty Park. I take my kids to all of them and have to leave my pistol at home when I do. I don't like having to do this, and now that I frequent Liberty Park with my kids I'm wanting to get this law changed to include all parks. So far I haven't heard of any cases where a HCP holder has been charged for carrying in these parks. It has been theorized that since these parks aren't legally posted the carrier won't be prosecuted, however, the Chief of Police has made it clear that he opposes carry in parks so I would say it is safe to assume his officers will make an arrest on a MWG call if someone sees you carrying. I certainly don't want to be arrested, especially with my kids present so I'm not going to test the waters on this and don't expect anyone else to. I just want the law changed so there is no ambiguity. I contacted my City Councilman the other day to ask his opinion on the matter. His opinion is that carry should be legal in all parks, and he would absolutely draft a resolution to change the law at the start of the new year so long as he believes he'll have enough votes to pass it. He asked that folks I know living in other wards contact their Councilman and get their opinions on the issue. The way we can do this is use this thread as a living, breathing document to keep track of the status of this. Below I'll have a list of all the Councilmen, their ward, contact information and where they stand on the issue. I'll need you folks to contact your respective Councilman and make a post on where they stand. I'll update this first post as info comes in. Please do your best to come off as cordial as possible when contacting your Councilman. The last thing we want is them to percieve us as gun nuts wanting to OC our Draco pistols around and scare the children. Let's make this about logic, and how illogical it is to assume criminals will obey a law if they are already intent on breaking a more serious law. If you are in on this then throw up a post and let everyone know so we all know who is going to help on this effort. Thanks guys. Here is the info: WARD 1: Nick Steward, ward1@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 2: Deanna McLaughlin, ward2@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 3: James R. Lewis, ward3@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 4: Wallace Redd, ward4@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 5: Candy Johnson, ward5@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 6: Marc Harris, ward6@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 7: Geno Grubbs, ward7@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 8: David Allen, ward8@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 9: Joel Wallace, ward9@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: PRO-CARRY WARD 10: Bill Summers, ward10@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 11: Kaye Jones, ward11@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: UNK WARD 12: Jeff Burkhart, ward12@cityofclarksville.com OPINION: PRO-CARRY Here is a link to the ward map: http://www.cmcrpc.com/maps/City Council Wards 2011.pdf Here is a link to the City Council Member contact page: http://www.cityofclarksville.com/citycouncil/ Please post if you're in and continue to post to keep us updated on where your Councilman stands. If we get enough votes we will change this next year. Thanks guys.

Well I don't think there is a set formula, but if by initiating a confrontation with a certain intent or if you escalate it to the point of physical confrontation you're stepping into manslaughter/murder territory. For example, someone cuts you off in traffic and you give them the finger, maybe even exchange some words at a traffic light. Now if the guy decides to take it to the next level and get out of his car and you do the same, you're gonna most likely be charged if you end up shooting him, because the likely outcome of having a (legal) roadside argument is a physical confrontation, even if he hits you first. This is all anecdotal, but think about it like this: will a prosecutor be able to convince a jury that you knew the likely outcome when you went armed to a confrontation? If so that is going to show intent. Bottom line, folks that have a HCP should pay attention to incidents like this. Whether or not you think it's right, you will find yourself in deep doo doo if you start something that you end up finishing with your gun. That is a simple equation.

Ain't the 500A's w/ 20 inch barrels still pretty cheap? I picked up mine a long time ago but I can't imagine finding one under 300 would be hard.

Yep, the shotty used to be the primary HD weapon 'til the kids came along. There just is no good place to put it where they can't get a hold of it so it stays locked up. Even with a trigger lock I just don't like the idea of a toddler putting their hands on a firearm.

What model Kimber did you get? I love my CDP II and haven't come by another 1911 I would want over it. I've started carrying it again since I decided to go with an OWB holster, so now my Glock sits in the safe.

Well if I had to bet..... he should puckering up right now, not that it will help.

Yep, the similarity in these cases are that the prosecution will be centering their case over who instigated/initiated confrontation. The difference is that we don't know for sure if Zimmerman started it, but we all have our opinions on who did. The purpose of the thread was to bring attention to that fact that you will most likely be charged if you SD shoot someone after starting a fight. It will happen; it just will. On the Zimmerman thread it seemed like many folks believed that justification eliminates culpability and prevents prosecution. It doesn't. I know that folks disagree on whether or not Zimmerman started it, but some folks believe that it doesn't matter if he did or not. This case makes it pretty clear that if you go looking for a fight and end up shooting someone you will explaining your actions in front of a jury. It doesn't matter how many actors speak against/for you, the law will do its thing.

Libtards say so. This case should be proof that folks are still accountable for wrongdoing and can't successfully invoke SYG when committing murder.

^ Everything they said above.

Exactly. This is why folks that carry should pay close attention to these types of stories. I think that some folks misinterpret the law to the point of believing that somehow "castle doctrine" and "SYG" are magic wands that will prevent charges in the event of a shoot. Those laws should unless you're up to no good or have ill intent. I think it's good that this guy is getting tried and that it's getting media exposure to show that SYG is not a license to murder while at the same time showing irresponsible gun carriers that you can't do stuff like this.

He did far more than verbally confront. He was brandishing a weapon while trespassing on the victim's property. Beyond that I would say that intent is everything. Confronting someone who is trespassing on your property is reasonable behavior. You would be hard pressed to find 12 jurors to all agree that it isn't. Going over to someone else's property, brandishing a weapon and then refusing to leave is not. I bet you can find 12 jurors that agree on that. What was the intent of the suspect? Was it to get the music turned down? If so, why would he go over there and pull his weapon out? Why not just say turn the music down or I'll call the police? Why stick around and continue? Obviously at this point he isn't going to achieve his original goals so what is the intent of this man? His intent is clear in his words to 911. Using all the buzzwords to show that he is about to shoot someone in self defense. He intended to agitate that man so he could shoot him. That was his INTENT. If it wasn't he would have left. He is going to be convicted. No doubt. I hope he does. This is not what self defense laws and SYG is about. This is about a hothead that wanted to kill his neighbor and worked damn hard to construct a situation where he thought he could. That is premeditation. No matter what folks think the law is, when you do something like this you'll be answering for it. Even if you don't get convicted your life will be ruined. Intent is everything.

I'd be interested too in finding a decent rail (9 inch) for cheaper that isn't junk. I haven't committed to getting a cheaper one because I'm concerned about quality, but I'm not spending $300 on a DD. They're nice but I'm just not going to spend that much for a rail. Be interested in hearing about the quality of some budget rails some folks here have.

I made the leap in logic that he was under the influence of something because it is not rational to handle a loud noise complaint by brandishing a weapon. I'm not saying that these guys handled it the way I would. If I'm drinking I'm not wearing a pistol, but if someone comes over to my house acting like an a-hole and wearing guns I'm putting down the beer, arming up and waiting for the cops to pay him a visit. If he comes back before the cops do (like he did) it'll be looking down a barrel of something superior to what he has.

Stuff like this is making me believe that the only reason we have the 1st Amendment is to enable idiocy.