tnguy

Ideally this is what the police are for. It seems to be a crap shoot if that happens though.

  I was walking home one day and heard an alarm and saw a guy climbing out of a broken window. If someone's determined to get in, they will. I'm sure the alarm helped though as he wasn't carrying anything.   Kwikset is well known to be extremely low quality. I got locked out once and used a small screwdriver to pop the faceplate off the Kwikset and was in in seconds. I upgraded to a better lock but it's diminishing returns. The people who lived there after us had someone come in through the patio doors.

  This is my understanding also. Might still end up being tried by 12 but should be in the clear legally.

They could at least get the logo the right way up. Looks like they're into S&M

Just amateurs looks like. That little button behind the latch is there to prevent credit-card style attacks (when it's pressed in by the striker, the latch part can't be pushed in). Though maybe on some models, holding the button down defeats that? Either way, they're likely to graduate to more serious stuff. Hope they catch them. You might want to consider a recording camera system.

You assume there's that much warning. Not that we know the details in this case so there's not much point speculating.

  Hospital not required.

Slow down. It was a what, three month old miss-carried foetus. Now, I agree that that's (was) a human life but it's not like they had a toddler in a bin bag back there. And where is this jump to car bombs coming from? Calm down, people.

  Though don't forget he (or she) may have accomplices.

They were stopped for a minor traffic violation. The cops wouldn't have cared anything if they hadn't volunteered the information. If the cops had wanted to search their car for some reason, they would have. This is such a non-issue.

Could be a way to advance her career (if she wishes to do so) by running on changing the law. I'm not sure she's in the right area for it to be a benefit though.

Would have to make sure that the door was electrically connected to the body also and probably also have electrical connectivity at points around the door too. The Faraday cage I once worked with had spring contacts all around the door to ensure good conductivity. I did think that a mechanical lock would be best for a safe door but having watched a few videos, I'm no longer so sure. Of course, the people in those videos are typically selling something so you have to decide for yourself. However, digital locks are faster access and an EMP is an unlikely event that you're not likely to need your guns in a big hurry from. Then again, there are mechanical digital locks also which might be the best way to go.

Yep. Best to leave it to the court. Telling the police that someone has a gun may be PC, telling someone that you saw they had a gun next to their purse on facebook, not so much.

Just like happened to Barb Sturgeon? And they may find the gun anyway but that would be from a search done without probably cause. The question is would you rather take your chances with a cop or (possibly) the courts?   It's still a right, just abrogated. Legislators only make laws.

  Well, considering that if you do tell him, you're looking at a class e felony...   When the law pits cops against good guys, things start going wrong.

    OK, that explains it. Though I'll have to take your word about it being obvious as it is certainly less-than-obvious to me. I guess I see what was meant previously about it being poorly worded.

That's kinda my point. If that's the case, clause c is irrelevant or redundant, no?

I'm looking at 39-17-1309. I believe she's being charged under section b. Section c seems a lot more lenient but it doesn't seem like you would be able to be under section c without being under section b in any case (from what people have been saying about "intent to go armed" in other threads). Can someone explain the logic to me?   I'll paste them here:      

Heavy too. Which is good if recoil is an issue for you.

I think Eray has the right idea. Avoid selling guns that have FTFs. Those are broken in my book. Would you accept a TV which didn't turn on? A bad reputation will lose you customers. There are plenty of cheap but good quality guns.

As far as I can tell, this is the location of the building in question. Unfortunately Google streetview is just black for me right now. Excuse me while I adjust my tinfoil hat ;)   https://goo.gl/maps/T2les

Note that I am not saying that there was or needed to be PC. From what I can tell, the search was requested and she consented.   If she had refused, it's hard to see what they could have done to her. If she were carrying, arguably she should disclose or else *penalty* but if she also did not, there's not much they could really have done because again, no PC.   I suspect some of this may come down to what language was used to initiate the search thinking about it.   The real problem I was trying to bring up though is school property that may not seem like school property. It could theoretically get any of us and I'm wondering if we should push for this kind of place to be posted (or exempt). Though I am open to the argument that she should have known. It isn't stated in the article but this was the support services building in Franklin.   Edit: This report states that the building is clearly posted so she almost certainly should have known   http://www.wkrn.com/story/27416523/williamson-county-commissioner-accused-of-bringing-gun-to-school

I just got a laser engraver last week but I haven't tried it on aluminum yet.

I have no idea of this woman as a politician but was wondering what people thought and whether any good might eventually come from this or whether it is an open and shut case and should we be lending our support:   http://www.wkrn.com/story/27568898/williamson-commissioner-indicted-by-grand-jury-on-gun-charge.   I guess the real take away here is not to consent to a search (having seen something on Facebook is not probable cause I don't think).