GlockSpock

Schadenfreude Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It may be childish - but I would have paid $5.00 to be able to witness exactly what you described.

I will admit that I haven't personally read into all of the times police had been called to Cruz's house, but all Trump had to do to "polish" that statement was say "I think police would have been justified based on existing evidence had they confiscated Cruz's weapons". That sounds a lot better. From my understanding, he made verifiable threats and to some of the calls had to do with domestic violence. Is this correct? If those are true, wouldn't police have been justified in confiscating his weapons based on existing law?

Just a hair over two weeks left for this. Door Devil was kind enough to grant us this discount code, so I'm simply encouraging others to take part.

"Missed" is an opportunistic way of putting it. Just wanted to say, thanks for joining up. Hopefully we can encourage a few other TGO members to do the same and also write/call their congressmen.

But it’s dumb to begin with. You would either see sub-21 aged people steal guns for their crimes or a greater influx of of crime for just-21 aged people. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Brings up a good point. If legal via both State and Federal law, isn't it age discrimination if someone is legally allowed to purchase a firearm at age 18? FFL's can refuse any firearm transaction from what I understand, but "We don't sale to anyone under 21" could theoretically be construed as age discrimination. To some extent, it would be the same as "We don't sell to Muslims" or "We don't sell to women". Interesting thoughts. Which may null considering there's a decent chance the Federal age limit gets raised to 21.

In my opinion as well as many others here at TGO, GOA is a much better organization that the NRA. I've heard a lot of people at work making claims about supporting or donating to the NRA, I just started putting it quite bluntly: The NRA is too anti-gun for me. They do not represent my views. The GOA is much better currently. As such, I signed up to be a life member, you can do so here: Normal Membership ($20 Minimum Donation) Life Membership ($500, can be split up into payments. I did $50/Quarter) But even more importantly, in my opinion, is their "Current Action Alerts" page where they show you various ways to contacts your US Senators and US Representative regarding specific issues. They make it very easy to do so via email, but also give numbers to call as well. https://gunowners.org/current-action-alerts/

https://gunowners.org/current-action-alerts/ This shows you relevant ways to contact your Senators/Representatives for corresponding bills and the like. This makes it so easy that there is zero excuse for anyone truly 2nd Amendment not to contact their congressmen.

I truly hope you are 100% wrong. No matter what the rides going to be bumpy for awhile. Well, considering that ultimately the only "anti-gun" thing that was ever accomplished under Obama was that trusts changed a bit. If I recall correctly, that's about it. So in my opinion, something as simple as getting "bump stocks" banned is already shadowing Obama by my counts. I'm more curious the methods that are tried in all of this. If they try and garner support for legislation and do it that way, at least maybe we stand a chance in either the House or Senate. We shall see, I suppose.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/breakingnews/story/2018/feb/28/police-responding-report-shots-fired-dalton-high-school/464838/ By all accounts, no-one was shot but perhaps a few injuries from trampling in the hallways. It will be very interesting to see where this goes, but I could very much see an anti-gun teacher thinking "They think it's a good idea to arm teachers? I'll show them how horrible that idea is!". That, of course, is just a theory.

Thanks for posting this, I hadn't read the whole thing. Gee, with "2nd Amendment Supporting Friends" such as this, who even needs enemies? To me, the icing on the cake baked mostly with irony, the statement "If even one life is saved, it will have been worth it" regarding gun restrictions has always infuriated me the most. Does that mean that if by allowing "assault rifles sales" saves even one life nationwide, it would be worth it? What if by legalizing machine-guns nationwide it saves one life, would that be worth it? I guarantee you if every state in the nation allowed for concealed carry it would save "At least one life" (not an endorsement for national reciprocity). And then I go down the rabbit hole of thinking about all the things they could ban and it would actually save thousands of lives (cars, swimming pools, hammers, , cell phones, marbles, etc). Would anyone consider banning those to save "even one life" and consider it worth it? No, people would consider that preposterous and a violation of freedom. But careful manipulation and now loads of people jump on board with "even one life" regarding firearms. Bullarky!

You can alternatively do this with the "Gun Owners of America" by selecting "Gun Owners Foundation" instead.

Dick's Sporting Goods claims they will restrict all gun sales to 21 and stop selling "assault rifles". I can honestly say I've only been in one of their stores once maybe twice, ever. Looks like this is a good reason to not go back. I can honestly say, I don't see this ending well for them, it might just push them out of business. But, maybe enough soccer moms and schoolteachers will shop there now because they'll feel like they are saving society by doing so. https://gizmodo.com/dicks-sporting-goods-will-stop-selling-assault-rifles-1823385203

Eh. Maybe. I think most evidence seems to suggest gang related. Chattanooga doesn’t heavily promote this fact but there is decent gang activity around. Not as bad as some area in the state but a bit worse than others. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Haha. True. With that extended magazine you’d think it would by dying to shoot someone. We ate at Boathouse instead. Phenomenal place by the way. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Try this: https://camelcamelcamel.com/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Funny story. My Wife called them at least three times before we left. “These people won’t answer their phone” is what she said. The grill is in the mall. Closed of course. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What is most interesting to me is the fact that dozens of eyewitness posts claim that gunshots were heard. Police double down on no shots fired inside or outside of the mall. Weird. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My Wife and I were headed to try Rodizio Grill for the first time tonight. As we got closer to the Hamilton Place Mall, I noticed something seemed up. Patrol cars surrounding the mall and an officer diverting traffic away from the mall. Popped my head out the window to ask someone what was going on, they claimed a "gang related shooting" had happened. http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/breakingnews/story/2018/feb/24/police-responding-reports-active-shooter-hamilton-place-mall/464521/ What's interesting is that multiple eyewitnesses all claimed to have heard gunfire, but authorities say that no evidence was found to suggest any shots had been fired. Most notable, in my opinion, is this comment: "We are safe, a fight broke out beside us, they walked off with one of them had a ripped shirt, there was a mall cop that came running in our direction and a guy pointed up the stairs and said 'gun.' And then a citizen that was carrying pulled out his gun and yelled 'drop your weapon'" he wrote in a message to reporters. So it seems possible that an armed citizen engaged the theoretical shooter almost immediately. Good. However, Hamilton Place is mostly a "posted" location so I'm curious whether this person will be in any hot water themselves. This entire story seems odd. Seemingly no victims, apparently no evidence of shots being fired, but a gun (appears to be a Glock and an extended magazine) was found in the parking lot. Thoughts?

I hope so. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m not excusing what he did (fail to engage) anymore than anyone else here, but I’ve been questioning the following. Considering that multiple times over the years, the various response from various LE has been to barricade and contain while SWAT later engages. Sometimes LE has been on the scene for quite a long time before actively seeking and engaging an active shooter. I wonder if, via via any training, presentations, etc that the officer honestly thought he was doing “the right thing”? Honest, sincere question. I know what the majority of us would have done (I think most would have done) in his situation, but seeing as I’ve never been in that environment I suppose I couldn’t guarantee what I’d do. I know what the moral thing to do would be: Give all it takes to save the kids. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Define "plenty" I've had in mind, for a computer desk, to do the following. Approximately a 2'x8' top (the length going from one wall to the other in my home office). Then, with angle brackets, fasten the ends to the left and right wall in that room. However, it'd be ~1" set forward from the wall for cable routing, etc. It would be completely flee floating off the floor, tied to the studs on the sides and somehow tied to the back wall studs with some ingenuity (either the "right" bracket, a cheater piece of wood going along the backside wall that is low enough for cables, etc). Do you think these would be good for that, and what would you charge me for that amount? I'm not sure I'd do it, but just thinking about it and that is very pretty wood.

Ok. So if it is up to the law to protect us, what happens after we ban bump stocks and then someone pulls the trigger really really fast? Do those lives in that scenario not count as being “owed”? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk