TMF

[quote name="DaveTN" post="1165571" timestamp="1404576038"] I think by most Officers it would not even be an issue unless they see something that makes them have a good reason.[/quote] I recall a thread here where a TGO LEO said he disarms every lawfully armed person he stops. His argument being that it is his right to do so under the law. I don't believe he is the only LEO that thinks this way. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Mike.357" post="1165594" timestamp="1404578877"]don't those two countries subsidize the cost of fuel at the pump?[/quote] I would think so. It would be necessary for the working class there, and the Kingdom can afford it. In fact, if the Saudi govt didn't subsidize and control the price, the market could allow for fuel at $10-20/litre, and the workers would be screwed. Them foreign workers need to get where they're going; they do everything there. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is it that little? Last time I rented a car in that part of the world gas was more expensive than it was in the states... and they don't sell it by the gallon. If gas is that cheap right now in Saudi, I wouldn't believe it has anything to do with their oil production. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I see he conveniently mentioned his seminars AND his book in this thread. Seems like if I was a TGO vendor who advertised classes here I'd be pretty pissed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165506" timestamp="1404536842"]Well, don't pussy foot around, man. Show me where I've promoted links here--or, hey, I'll be generous, where I've promoted links on ANY THREAD I'VE PARTICIPATED IN THIS YEAR--to my work product, and I'll send you a free copy of my book. Autographed, if you like (and many people do). Sure, I'll wait. But seriously, you few people don't have anything better to do than hate on someone trying to inform gun owners about how to not accidentally overstep the bounds of lawful self-defense? The vast majority of which I do for free--including 100% of what I post here? I mean, do you WANT them to go to jail? What kind of monsters ARE you? --Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/quote] You're being obtuse, and we both know why. People add to the discussion around here all the time. The difference is when you do it you're trying to sell something. Yeah, it's been a while since you came here hocking your crappy book, but it remains a fact that it happened. Now you conveniently mention two seminars you have coming up in Tennessee in the first thread you start since then. We can look at the time stamps to see when you started the other threads, one of which you chose not to mention that part after I called you out here. I have a well calibrated BS meter. It utilizes an algorithm which is likely to get a classification once DARPA cracks it. Sometimes it detects trace amounts of BS. With you, my BS meter is at full tilt. If you had come here to discuss topics without bringing up your "business", I never would have given it a second thought to your ulterior motives. But you did, and this isn't the first time. If your "business" is legit then you can pay to be a vendor like others do. Otherwise, stop mentioning your crappy product. Remove mention of your upcoming side show-- er, seminar from the first entry in this thread and the other thread you posted. Bottom line, you're dishonest and unethical. We both know what you're doing. It is akin to a guy posting here for two seconds, then making mention of an upcoming training event that he's taking reservations for; for a fee. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It sucks, but that's freedom for ya. If you really want to get depressed, watch those "man on the street" interviews they do on Kimmel and Leno. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh, and you're free to send me one of your books. My uncle has birds and your book would make a great cage liner. It would be better utilized there, rather than in an ever growing stack in your mom's basement. You suck at life. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165506" timestamp="1404536842"]Well, don't pussy foot around, man. Show me where I've promoted links here--or, hey, I'll be generous, where I've promoted links on ANY THREAD I'VE PARTICIPATED IN THIS YEAR--to my work product, and I'll send you a free copy of my book. Autographed, if you like (and many people do). Sure, I'll wait. But seriously, you few people don't have anything better to do than hate on someone trying to inform gun owners about how to not accidentally overstep the bounds of lawful self-defense? The vast majority of which I do for free--including 100% of what I post here? I mean, do you WANT them to go to jail? What kind of monsters ARE you? --Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/quote] You're being obtuse, and we both know why. People add to the discussion around here all the time. The difference is when you do it you're trying to sell something. Yeah, it's been a while since you came here hocking your crappy book, but it remains a fact that it happened. Now you conveniently mention two seminars you have coming up in Tennessee in the first thread you start since then. We can look at the time stamps to see when you started the other threads, one of which you chose not to mention that part after I called you out here. I have a well calibrated BS meter. It utilizes an algorithm which is likely to get a classification once DARPA cracks it. Sometimes it detects trace amounts of BS. With you, my BS meter is at full tilt. If you had come here to discuss topics without bringing up your "business", I never would have given it a second thought to your ulterior motives. But you did, and this isn't the first time. If your "business" is legit then you can pay to be a vendor like others do. Otherwise, stop mentioning your crappy product. Remove mention of your upcoming side show-- er, seminar from the first entry in this thread and the other thread you posted. Bottom line, you're dishonest and unethical. We both know what you're doing. It is akin to a guy posting here for two seconds, then making mention of an upcoming training event that he's taking reservations for; for a fee. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165298" timestamp="1404492746"]You're free to spend your time however you like. :-) And I'm free to not lower my own discourse to the level of "elephant dick". :-) Have a nice day! --Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/quote] It was just a suggestion. Do with it what you like. I just assumed you're better at fellating a pachyderm than dispensing legal advice in Tennessee. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165291" timestamp="1404492193"]Hahaha! SMFH. :-) Have a safe and happy July 4th! --Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/quote] Same to you Mr Boston. I would hope that you would address all the valid points I brought up rather than focusing on elephant pecker alone, but as you say, it's a free country. I'm gonna keep dumping your thread until I get told to stop. I don't like it when I see people trying to take advantage of others. It angers me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wouldn't put it past those organizations either, but these people do exist, and they tend to look like these idiots. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165243" timestamp="1404486238"]Oh. I see. Well, that's your right. I care a great deal what the court says, because it determines whether or not a use of force against another results in an acquittal or 20-to-life. That matters to me. But it's a free country. I wish you luck with your approach. :-) --Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/quote] Now, I'd like to bring you in on the chronological events of this thread. When I was taking a dump this morning I saw a thread with your name as the author. Based on your previous postings regarding your book, I knew you'd be trying to sell something in this thread before I opened it. I made the choice, before reading, not to bother commenting, as the mods will either take care of it, or they won't. Their site, their rules. But then I saw the case you were citing, and that really pissed me off, as you completely skimmed over the fact of what happened and focused on how the court ruled, but not why. You tried to turn the murder of a respected member of my community into "unfortunate" (to use your words) side effect of self defense, rather than identify that the defendant was engaged in the criminal world and was blindly firing in a parking lot of women and children with no regard to their safety. What's more is that you're trying to fill seats at your seminar by using this as an "in" to bring up a talking point that you can relate to your bulls*** enterprise. For that you can suck start an elephant penis. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165244" timestamp="1404486362"]Book? I'm pretty sure the only person who has mentioned a book is, well, you. Thanks, I guess. :-) --Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/quote] And, to borrow your words, it is also your right to be a liar. The only other time you came here was during the Zimmerman fiasco in an attempt to capitalize on the hype by starting a thread, then hocking your book in it. I called you out then like I'm calling you out now. The mods didn't see fit to delete your nonsense, so I guess it didn't violate their policy. If I had a few more minutes to devote I'd locate that thread real quick to show what a POS you are and your obvious intentions here. However, it is a violation to thread dump all over someone selling something, but since you're not paying for the advertisement, I'll assume that doesn't apply to this thread. If I'm wrong then I'm sure the mods will delete this post at your request. By all means, please let them know. MEMBERS OF TGO: DO NOT ATTEND THIS MAN'S SEMINARS OR PURCHASE HIS BOOK!!! Here is why: he is a dishonest man, as he came here under false pretenses of debating a court case that took place over 5 years ago, with the intention of selling seats at his seminar for the purpose of selling his book. I would not suggest you seek self-defense advice from someone so clearly of low ethical character. Furthermore, what he is offering is a regurgitated version of the hard work of other self-defense experts, so I wouldn't waste money on this community college dropout dispensing the opinions of others as his own. In fact, what he is doing is looking to cheat folks out of their hard earned money just to tell them information that can be readily accessed over the internet. I would argue that his information is largely irrelevant, since he is not even living in this part of the country; how can he be more of an expert than the dozens of resources my fellow Tennesseans have locally? This man is a snake oil salesman, peddling meaningless tonic that will not improve your understanding of self defense laws in Tennessee. I encourage TGO members to PM this assclown and tell him to kick rocks. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165197" timestamp="1404478224"]Well, the trial court disagreed, and it was (always is) fully within the court's discretion to disallow an argument of self-defense if the defendant fails to meet his burden of production. But you knew that, I'm sure. --Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/quote] Disagreed with what? He was a felon, a gang member and a drug dealer. I don't much care what the court says. You're attempting to parallel the case of this bottom feeder with actual, law abiding citizens. You think his record played no role in his conviction? Of course the defense can make a compelling argument for why this person was illegally in possession of a firearm due to fear for his life. He's a gangbanging drug dealer. Violent death is an occupational hazard. Seriously though, you've only come here in the past to peddle your book and now you're trying to peddle your seminar. Meanwhile, there are vendors here who have to pay for that. Nobody wants your snake oil. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="dralarms" post="1165187" timestamp="1404474500"]So true, I used to pull and tug on my shirt to keep mine covered, but now it's like if you see it so what.[/quote] Yep. I've gotten so used to seeing those large phones on people that I don't notice OCers unless I'm right next to them and do a double take. I see their gun out of the corner of my eye and assume it's a cell phone. I was at Lowes last week and was standing right next to an old fella who was OCing. Was standing there for a good few minutes until I noticed it wasn't a cell. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody notices that you're carrying. In time you won't care if they did notice anyway. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Sam1" post="1165184" timestamp="1404473895"]Ah, so basically that victim was caught in crossfire, not by an accident.[/quote] The victim was a retired teacher and well respected member of the community who operated a fireworks stand. These thugs should have been tied to horses and dragged through the streets until there is nothing left of them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Law of Self Defense" post="1165045" timestamp="1404425327"]Hey folks, I was reviewing recent TN self-defense cases for my Memphis and Nashville seminars next weekend, and I came across an interesting one from just this past May that I thought those of you in the Volunteer State might find interesting. The case is [i]Jarvis v. State[/i], 2014 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 453 (TN Ct. App. 2014), and it is interesting because it involves a facet of self-defense law that TN shares with only a few other states. All of us are, of course, aware of the fact that we’re responsible for every round that comes out of our PDW. TN is one of the few states that formalizes that responsibility in statute, specifically in [font='times new roman']39-11-604, Reckless injury of innocent third person.” That statute provides that:[/font] [font='times new roman']In [i]Jarvis[/i], the defendant was engaged with gunfire by an attacker driving away in a car. The defendant retrieved his own gun from his vehicle, and returned fire. [/font] [font='times new roman']Unfortunately, one of the defendant’s rounds went awry and struck an unlucky fellow by the name of Willard Ross who was working a fireworks sale as the backstop to defendant’s fire. I guess things could have gotten REALLY dramatic, but in any case the fellow who was struck died of his wounds.[/font] [font='times new roman']At trial the defendant was up on a wide variety of charges, and he raised a legal defense of self-defense. Of particular interest here was the murder charge he faced for the death of the poor Mr. Ross.[/font] [font='times new roman']On that particular charge he was found guilty of the murder of Mr. Ross, and sentenced to 25 years. [/font] [font='times new roman']The defendant didn’t fare much better on his other charges, but it’s important to note that this murder conviction was not at all dependent on the others—even had he been fully acquitted of the other charges on the bases of self-defense, his reckless shooting of Mr. Ross would have been denied legal justification under 39-11-604.[/font] [font='times new roman']So, in every state we’re at least theoretically responsible for every round we fire, even in purported self-defense. But TN really puts some teeth in that admonition.[/font] [font='times new roman']I didn’t hyperlink the case here in this post because I’m not sure about the rules for such things on this forum, but anyone who is interested can find a hyperlinked version of this post on my blog, with a link to the full-text of the court decision.[/font] [font='times new roman']Have a safe and happy Fourth of July, everyone, and I look forward to seeing a bunch of you next weekend and Rangemaster, Nashville Armory—or, heck, both! [/font][font=wingdings]J[/font] [font='times new roman']--Andrew, @LawSelfDefense[/font][/quote] Just so everyone is tracking, I recall this shooting. It was a big deal here in Clarksville. Both sides were gangbangers and all involved had a record. They turned a Walmart parking lot into their own personal shooting gallery. The result was a retired teacher being MURDERED. He was murdered because a bunch of drug dealing thugs forgot to keep their business in the ghetto, where they normally shoot at each other. This has nothing to do with self defense. The man who returned fire was illegally in possession of the weapon in the first place and was wildly shooting in a parking lot full of mothers and children at a car that was well out of range. Trying to represent this as an issue for lawful carriers is absolutely ridiculous. I also believe this is a backdoor way to advertise your seminar without having to pay any site fees. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you can't carry an AK47 into a target anymore? Hopefully broadswords and chainsaws are still okay. Seriously, why is this an issue? You can still carry concealed. They just don't want folks bringing an arsenal into their establishment and scaring off customers. If there was a rash of dudes open carrying dildos into the kids' section of Target I'm sure they'd come up with a policy for that too. This has absolutely nothing to do with the second amendment. Target will still have my business. Just shopped there yesterday, as a matter of fact. Had a bullet launcher on me the whole time. Hooray for discretion! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Erik88" post="1164674" timestamp="1404330548"]My friend is a LEO for a small department outside Knoxville. Recently, he admitted that he has no idea what all the laws are surrounding the carrying of firearms. He also stated he hates open carry. None of which was surprising.[/quote] He'd get an education when he attempts to have someone charged with a crime that doesn't exist. I've heard many stories first hand and here on TGO regarding officers who warn lawful carriers they are breaking the law. I'm not one to lawyer from the side of the road, but if an officer tells me it is illegal to do something that is actually legal, I have no issue informing they don't know the law. I'm surprised when I hear stories of officers telling people they are breaking some law in regard to carry, yet they don't cite or arrest the individual. That tells me the officer either isn't confident enough regarding the law, in which case I would educate him and provide him with reference, or the officer knows the law but doesn't agree with it, in which case I would encourage the officer to call an adult to the scene or take me to jail. There was one I was reading not too long ago where an officer insisted that having a round in the chamber (of a pistol) was against the law (for permit holders). The officer unloaded the weapon and returned it to the driver. I would have told the guy he was wrong, then informed him that I will load it as soon as he walks away. If a cop wants to take someone to jail for a made up law it will only inconvenience me for a few hours. He has a lot more to lose. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Volphin" post="1164537" timestamp="1404317648"]I just got back from MI. It went from $3.66 to $4.00 in one hour last Thursday. Personally I'm glad to home to a free state. Also saw TWO convoys going south on 65, each 1.5 miles long in IN. Seriously loaded stuff. Another buddy of mine mentioned a number of trains in NJ pulling 100+ cars of MIL items moving south as well. That ain't guard action friends.[/quote] You realize that military units from all over the country travel to Camp Atterbury in Indiana to use their state of the art training facilities, right? I was in a few of those convoys years ago. Boy, I bet that got the Alex Jones' of the internet all riled up. Anyone from that area is immune to seeing that stuff go up and down the highway. Just because you happen to see it on your way back from MI is an indication of nothing. You aren't used to seeing it and you had probably no idea the tens of thousands of military personnel that travel there every year. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Chucktshoes" post="1164579" timestamp="1404321524"]If we were talking about private individuals I would totally agree with you, but we are not. Now, if you remove qualified immunity from the equation entirely, I wouldn't care what LEAs equip themselves with to do the job as they would be on the hook not just collectively, but individually for what they did with it. That fact is that a SWAT team can drive their bearcat through someone's door at 3 am, shoot everyone and then when they find out that they raided the wrong house, the taxpayers get the bill for the settlement check to the next of kin. The officers don't go to jail for murder. They might get a couple of days of paid vacation and then the LEA releases a statement that while it was a tragic accident, "the officers acted within the guidelines of departmental policy." Then it is back to SOP and the next midnight raid/murder.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD[/quote] Then the issue here remains accountability, not equipment. I do agree that there should always be accountability for such cases, and when a PD decides to go hot on a target and kill a bunch of innocents there should be responsible person(s) sitting in the defense chair. That is what we should be focusing on, not inanimate collections of metal and glass. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="Chucktshoes" post="1164527" timestamp="1404315257"]Sometimes the demonstrated tendency for abuse of a thing outweighs the possible benefits of it.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD[/quote] I disagree with that sentiment. It is the same argument liberals use for gun control. They believe the mere ownership of a firearm will compel otherwise law abiding individuals to commit crimes with said weapon. I don't believe police are any more compelled to violate a person's civil rights simply because they have an aggressive tool to do so. There were dirty cops violating civil rights back when citizens were better armed than police, per capita and armor didn't exist. I understand what you're trying to say; that cops having a new toy are gonna be excited for an opportunity to use it. I'm sure that's true. I don't agree that driving an APC to serve a warrant as opposed to driving a golf cart violates any rights. Perhaps it makes them look scarier, but that is a policy issue that can be changed by the people if they engage the civilian leadership. Personally, I don't care if cops serve a warrant in chain mail on the back of a dragon. What matters is whether or not they violate a person's rights when the do it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote name="TrickyNicky" post="1164538" timestamp="1404317701"]That's why I go to Nashville Armory, D&T, and G&L. In the case if Nashville Armory it's all about service. Their pricing is mostly good, but nothing ever super great. Their service on the other hand is impeccable. No type A commando jerks there. Well, one guy who worked the range, but I haven't seen him in months so I'm guessing the issue corrected itself one way or the other. [/quote] I've been into Guns and Leather 4 or 5 times and never had enough of a conversation to determine the personality of the staff. It is just always so packed full of people, I get in, do my business and get out. I thought with the new store being so much bigger it would be a little less cramped, but they just have more people in there. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some of these small gun shops would do better if they would smile more and not talk to folks like they're idiots. Not saying that is true of every gun store, but it has been a recurring theme I've noticed in gun shops around the country. Dudes behind the counter who assume you know nothing and act as if they are super type A personalities. Crack a smile. Tell a joke. No one will think you're a puss for doing so. They just might come back for the friendly service. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk