TMF

Like I said in an earlier post, it never would have got to the point that it did. From the story on the news earlier it was reported that he had gone over to the victims house before the incident with two pistols strapped to him. That would have thrown up a red flag from the get go. Either way, if someone comes on my property brandishing a firearm it's safe to assume they have intent to do harm. I know my capabilities and limitations and am confident that I would have no problem up against a drunken redneck. I don't think an acceptable solution is to capitulate and accept I can't shoot faster or more accurate then they can. To me that would be accepting death. I would prefer to die fighting than die begging for my life and the lives of my family. These guys were dumb for thinking they could deliver a butt whooping to an armed whacko. That still has no bearing on the actions of the shooter. He knew what he came there to do and now he's going to be in fear of his freedom and butt virginity.

Some of us (like the dead father) have kids. If someone comes on my property making a scene I'll wait for the police. They come one my property brandishing a firearm and making a scene they are getting lead poisoning. When police can respond faster then a bad guy's bullets I'll start considering the notion of waiting. For now, I have too much at stake to risk a whacko on my property that is likely to start shooting with my children in a non-bullet proof house. As is proven by the three people he shot, he had no problem pulling the trigger. I'm not waiting on a 5-10 minute response time from the police to find out just how committed an armed trespasser is. This guy did and he died. Pretty simple equation.

Another thing that bothers me about it is how hard is it to ask someone to be respectful and turn the music down? If they tell you to pound sand then call the police. If someone came on my property brandishing a gun and making threats/demands they'd be getting a 5.56 injection before it got to where it did. At the same time, if someone came to my door and asked me to turn down the music I would be embarrassed, mortified and apologetic. I just don't get folks. Seems like everyone is to the extreme these days.

There are a lot of things the Germans do to mitigate risk that we don't do though. A big one is hefty fines for following too closely using lines on the road and cameras to calculate safe distance. 85 mph speed limits mean that drivers will be going between 90-95. Driving like an ahole at those speeds is far more deadly than 75. Something they understand in Germany which is why they do it safely there. I don't see Americans being able to balance speed and safety. Not with a generation tommy texters and reality show whore wannabes.

That statement presupposes that smart folks outnumber morons. The argument the antis will use on this is that the shooter was emboldened by the SYG law, and if it hadn't been for the law he wouldn't have done what he did. Let's just say that's true. It doesn't change anything. If he gets convicted he had committed a crime, therefore, was not following the law to begin with. His misinterpretation of the law doesn't mean that it is the fault of the law in place. If I go to a park that allows dogs and bring my pitbull fresh off the Michael Vick ranch I'm still responsible when it rips out the throat of a kid. I'm not going to successfully argue that because it's legal to bring my dog I am not responsible for the actions of the animal. It boils down to personal responsibility which is a concept lost on the left. They believe that the gov takes care of us plebs and protects us from harm. It is impossible to reason with them because they don't believe in our logic. So SYG is evil because we have police to protect us. When we give the plebs the right to defend themselves there will be chaos and disorder, such as in this case. Everyone involved is a victim, to include this piece of human garbage that took a little girl's father away over some loud music. If he never had the right to own a gun or if SYG didn't exist this wouldn't have happened. That is their logic and if you put that on the tv enough people will believe it. God forbid we say that this piece of sh*t knew he was doing wrong and committed premeditated murder and should be first in line for the chair once he's convicted; that would just be wrong.... in their opinion.

Growing up in Florida stuff like this is common in regards to hurricane preparedness. County emergency management would conduct town hall meetings in the retirement communities (for the snowbirds) to educate on having an evacuation plan, or at least to have on hand supplies to survive independently for weeks after a major hurricane. Distributing pamphlets at community events was also a big one. These pamphlets included lists of all the stuff you need on hand and suggested having these items all the time, not just when the storm is bearing down on you. This is because the stores would get bought out before the storm. We had a closet full of everything we needed to last a while. Down there prepping is normal and not seen as batty because every few years someone gets hit hard down there.

I'll deal with the uncomfortableness of man hug instead of insulting an elder. I'm not touchy-feely either, but I'm way more uncomfortable insulting someone than dealing with man-hugs. I'm immune anyway from dealing with cultures where man-hugging and cheek kissing is a formal greeting. I'm not saying I like it, but I tolerate it out of respect.

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/man-claims-self-defense-fatal-shooting-neighbor-115652180--abc-news-topstories.html Anyone else following this? Unlike Zimmerman, there is no doubt here that this guy initiates the incident while armed. An example of being in fear of your life doesn't matter if you start/escalate it.

Are there many documented cases where Tennesseans were charged in an SD shoot in their homes? Other than cases that were shady? I know it happens all the time in freedom hating states but haven't seen any stories in TN. In fact, I've seen a bunch where folks probably did break the law, such as shooting at fleeing suspects, and they still weren't charged. The DA still has to depend on jurors to convict someone, and I don't see that happening in a state full of folks that believe in defending themselves. That's a lot of money to waste on the Government side for a case they won't win, hence short career. Not to mention the outrage from voters the next time the DA is up. I'm not losing sleep over any of it anyway. If I am considering the legality of whether or not I can shoot then I'm obviously not in fear for my life or the lives of my family and therefore not justified using deadly force. The question folks should be asking themselves in a situation like that shouldn't be "can I" it should be "do I need to?"

You'd be amazed how many people are involved in projects like this in addition to folks that are read on to it. It's a lot. What goes on at those high levels trickles down as well, even the goings on of the meetings and especially comments made by folks like the President and the SecDef. This could have been a lot of people. What I've seen from bipartisan cooperation is outrage and intent to fix the problem, not pointing fingers at the White House.

But their PM cartoons always motivate me to do a proper PMCS on all my eqioupment!

Oh I don't doubt that his administration would do it, I just know that there are plenty of other folks with a narrow view of things that could just as easily leaked it. Trust me, I'm a firm believer that Obama and politicians like him have no understanding of the second and third order effects of leaking top secret information. Look at the UBL raid. How friggin' ridiculous was that?? We will never be able to do something like that again anywhere in the world because no one will trust us enough to operate as a source in such high profile situation. At a time where we're using our intel community to full capacity to pressure Iran I couldn't believe it.

The title of that article is misleading. The FBI is investigating in all directions as far as we know. The only mention of White House involvement comes from a member of the Senate Armed Services committee. McCain suggests the White House because the manner in which the President is portrayed in the article, but that could be the style of writing of a left leaning journalist. Both Senate and House Intelligence Committees are seeking ways to prevent/punish in the future. It's not that I wouldn't put it past Obama to leak intel for political benefit, but there isn't any evidence or reason to suspect him over the other hundreds, if not thousands, of people with access to the same sensitive information. Only accusations from politicians that stand something to gain by accusing Obama. Of course, it would be very interesting if the FBI were to discover something that leads to Obama. It would certainly jeopardize a second term.

Whomever leaked it should be exposed and punished severely. With that said, there's no proof this came from the White House. There are hundreds of people involved in projects like this, and many have political/financial motivations.

I agree with you on principle. Yeah, these laws are BS in general and chip away at property rights, but it's these so-called enlightened folks that are so intolerant. I like seeing the tables turned on them. It makes me quite the hypocrite but not as much as this twunt.

Auto-correct has been the dominating personality on my iPhone.... I have surrendered to it. I am concerned for when auto-correct becomes self aware.

I cringe to say it but I'd rather see the bank robber get away then have several dozen law abiding citizens rolled up and handcuffed just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'd like to know more about the story, but it's hard to imagine a scenario where this would be appropriate. They apparently had no problem locking down the area. They could have done the same thing and set up a checkpoint for the folks to drive through, and get descriptions on the way out. Maybe it would have put the officers at an increased risk, but that's the game you play when you put on the uniform. Citizens' rights shouldn't be sacrificed for officer safety.

She broke the law. I wouldn't want to live there either but that's not the point. In those liberal states there are whole communities of military hating folks. Veterans and Servicemembers shouldn't have to worry about finding housing for themselves and their families because they served their country. I'm sure that acquiring housing in the Boston area is very competitive, and being a veteran shouldn't put you at the end of the line. She did wrong and needs to stand in court to answer for that.... and she needs some bone cancer.

Under Massachusetts fair housing law, Chapter 151B, military status, which includes veterans is a protected class. Protected classes are designated groups of people and their families that are covered under fair housing law. The military status protected class covers veterans, those individuals on active duty, and those persons enrolled in the Reserves.

Unforgiven. Best western IMO.

What is fair housing and how does it relate to veterans? Fair housing is a set of principles, civil laws and regulations which provide equal access and opportunity to housing for protected class members. It impacts the property owner’s policies, practices, procedures and services in terms of advertising, application, tenant selection, amenities, and termination. Under Massachusetts fair housing law, Chapter 151B, military status, which includes veterans is a protected class. Protected classes are designated groups of people and their families that are covered under fair housing law. The military status protected class covers veterans, those individuals on active duty, and those persons enrolled in the Reserves. Yep, this is Massachusetts law and this commie hooker broke it. She deserves a heaping portion of some bone cancer.

Is this not a violation of the Soldiers and Sailors act? He is still a Guardsman. I don't know if refusal of housing is, but I know it covers active and reserve military, which he is. Veterans are a protected group in regards to employment; I would assume housing would be the same.

It's pretty standard now having the brass deflector on the receiver. I don't think it's really necessary to have a L handed AR for left handers, I just took it to mean in your earlier post that you want you mag release and bolt release on the right hand side. If that is not an issue there are plenty of good quality ARs that you can put an ambi safety in and tac latch on.

Save up and get a lefty AR. My uncle has one and he loves it. If price is an issue keep your eyes peeled for used ones being sold online. I can bet there are few people out there that shoot out the rifling on their ARs so there is nothing wrong with buying used.

I'm gonna make a wild guess and say not a single gun store will have a protester outside of it on June 16th. It ain't gonna happen, JJ is just babbling.