300winmag

If universal background checks (the way California does it) are not about backdoor gun registration, then why is it the anti gun folks do not go with a system like North Carolina has where you use your handgun carry permit or a purchase permit?  At least in North Carolina you can show folks your handgun carry permit or a purchase permit when you buy from a private seller in NC, but the sale does not have to go through a FFL and there is no registration with the state.  I'm not saying I would want to go that direction because I don't think it prevents crime.  I do think though the NC system is much better than California's gun sales law because you can buy privately from individuals and there is no gun registration.  The handgun carry permit or the purchase permit is your background check to show people selling that you have a clean record.

We are lucky to live in a republic where there are three branches of government and the president cannot just change up the US Code on his own.  It is important to remember that Obama is very limited when it comes to firearms laws.  He can stop imports of certain firearms and ammunition, just like Bush #1 and Clinton did because importation falls under customs, but he cannot stop the manufacture of firearms and ammo here.  A president cannot on his own change the US Code in order to make all gun sales go through dealers or make certain or all guns illegal.  He can get behind initiatives behind states' efforts to make gun sales go through dealers, just like what has recently happened in Washington and Oregon.    It's important to remember that in itself a background check is not the worst thing.  The bad thing is that EVERY firearm transfer would happen at a dealer with dealer paperwork and you will pay extra for that to sell your own piece of private property.  Also, requiring all sales to go through a dealer is basically backdoor gun registration.  The anti gun folks aren't satisfied with individuals being able to call a phone line to make sure someone is not a felon.  No the whole point is registering all sales through dealers by making folks fill out dealer paperwork on everything.  Basically, the anti gun folks want the California gun sales laws (everything going through a dealer and now handguns and long guns also registered) nationwide.  Those laws are just meant to hassle honest people.

First, the president cannot make all gun sales go through FFL's.  That would require a bill passed in the House and Senate and then signed by the president.  That type of bill is not going to pass through Congress.   I think Congress would be on shaky legal ground by even passing a bill requiring all intrastate private gun sales to go through an FFL.  Congress can only regulate interstate commerce and that is how they get away right now with the feds requiring out of state private sales and of course commercial sales to go through FFL's.  How is the sale of a private piece of property where both the buyer and the seller are residents of the same state involved with interstate commerce?  That would be quite a stretch for intrastate sales to be classified as interstate commerce.  What next, will we be required by the federal government to sell our homes and cars by hiring a realtor and car dealer?  

The way I understand it, you can target shoot on your own property as long as you are not in the city limits and it is safe to do so.    You can even hunt within the city limits as long as it is safe to do so, even if there is a municipal ordinance against shooting in town.  State hunting laws pre empt city ordinances against shooting while hunting within city limits.  You better have a good bit of room if you are gun hunting within city limits.  Of course some places are incorporated that really do not have any sort of development so it would be safe to gun hunt.   It seems like this concerned mother should not have bought a house in the country and needs to move in town.

I guess you'd have to open carry or buy a non resident license to conceal.  Do you have to still lay your handgun on the dashboard/seat so that it is not concealed in a car or can you put the handgun anywhere in the car concealed?

The president cannot make a law ending private sales of firearms.  Private sales are addressed in the US code.  To change that, you need Congress to pass a bill and president to sign it into law.  The president can look into an executive order but that doesn't mean he can make an executive order that is binding over the US code.

I'd be afraid to leave a nice rifle in my vehicle in Memphis very often.  We have a lot of car break ins.

Another facility will probably be glad to take that gun show and rent space to the show. 

This is so petty and similar to how some school teachers will punish a whole class room because the teacher does not want to discipline one trouble maker.   Whether a few people like it or not in Nashville, private sales of firearms are perfectly legal in this state.  They cannot keep non criminal people from swapping guns in a gun show or in the parking lot of the show.    I wonder if the gun show operator had a contract with Nashville for using that facility for a period of time and Nashville broke the contract?  I do think another facility will lease space to the gun show operator.

Just keep your gun concealed and secure on your person and dont tell people about it.  There is not really any advantage for others to know that you are carrying.  I kind of look at carrying as a personal decision that is not discussed with many people.

You have to remember that the zoo policies you are seeing on the website are general policies that probably 90% of all non profits and also companies have.  So are you going to write every company in America about their book policies because they have a no weapons policy?  Remember that these policies generally do not make it illegal for you to carry with your handgun carry permit at say ABC store.   The handgun carry permit is meant to keep you from having a weapons charge in the odd chance that someone discovers that you are carrying and calls the police.  Also it is important to remember that not many people out of the total population legally carry handguns.  We are a small exception just like LEO's and armed guards.  I'm quite confident in carrying at the zoo or any other park in Memphis and would not expect any sort of major problems out of it IF I was discovered to be carrying because we are legal carrying in those locations.  The chance of being discovered is pretty low as long as I conceal and mind my own business.

You are legal carrying at the zoo, so why contact the zoo and ask?  We are extremely lucky we got this park law passed in the middle of opposition from the more populated cities in the state.  I'd lay low for a while and conceal carry in places like the zoo.  Concealing means it is out of sight and out of mind.

Blackhorn 209 is expensive, but it is a lot easier to clean up than Triple 7.  You can just use regular gun solvent to clean it up.  I don't mind that Blackhorn 209 is only a loose powder because I like to weigh the charges on a powder scale.  I have heard that you can shoot Blackhorn 209 and wait several days to clean, but I try to still clean the same day.  If Blackhorn 209 was not available, I would probably have looked into buying a smokeless muzzleloader like the discontinued Savage or one of those smokeless barrel conversions on a Remington or Savage action.  You do need a blackhorn specific breach plug if you are using a CVA rifle.  The plug that comes with the gun will not work as well as a blackhorn plug and you risk misfires.  Also, western powders advises people to use standard shotgun Federal or CCI Magnum primers.  Muzzleloader 209 primers you use with Triple 7 or Pyrodex are not hot enough.

You have to be glad we have a constitutional republic with three branches of government.  It is not perfect but helps keep things in balance.   A president can desire a law but if he can't get Congress to pass it, then nothing happens.  Even if Congress passes a bill, and the president signs it into law, it still needs to be constitutional and can be heard by the supreme court.

Maybe Hillary should live by example and give up her lifetime provided by the US taxpayer Secret Service protection to encourage others to give up guns.  Until that happens, I wouldn't take her very seriously.  Hillary has a do as I say not as I do mentality. 

Why would you ask a police officer if there were certain no gun signs?  By asking that sort of question, you are basically advertising the fact that you are carrying to someone you do not know.   If you didn't see any legal no gun signs, I would keep my mouth shut and if you think you can carry without being found, then carry. If you think you would be found carrying, then I wouldn't go.  Now you have given those folks the idea to stick up the right signs.  Remember they don't have to stick up legal no gun signs to use a metal detector on private property, but once they stick up the signs, then there is a possible weapons charge.  As of now without the signs, you don't risk a weapons charge.

As of now, the Supreme Court says that you have the right to own a handgun on your own property for protection.  The court never invalidated the magazine laws in several states that ban certain mags.  The court also never invalidated may issue or no issue carry laws.  That is why most people in NYC can only get a license to possess a handgun with a limited capacity magazine at home and the range.  People in DC are limited the same way in having to get a license just to own a handgun and if they want to carry they have to get a separate shall issue license that is almost not even worth getting.

Get some wording like this for the school property and the no gun signs.  Basically if you are smart and carry concealed, you are not subject to a criminal penalty in Kansas.  Missouri has a similar law where properties, including schools, can just ask you to leave, but you are not subject to a criminal penalty if you have a license.   This kind of law lets the busy bodies feel good about sticking up a no gun sign but the people who carry concealed and don't advertise it don't have to worry about a weapons charge.   (e) (1) It shall be a violation of this section to carry a concealed handgun in violation of any restriction or prohibition allowed by subsection (a) or (b ) if the building is posted in accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the attorney general pursuant to subsection (h). Any person who violates this section shall not be subject to a criminal penalty but may be subject to denial to such premises or removal from such premises.

No state should force people to be sitting ducks and less able to defend themselves after they have gone through the trouble to get a carry license.  It is a pathetic shame that adults going to night classes at Univ of Memphis, which is not in that great of a part of town, cannot legally carry.   I understand, though do not agree, with the reasoning of making illegal people without licenses carrying at schools, but why keep people with licenses from carrying?    We need to work hard at least getting rid of the no gun sign fine and also create an exemption to carrying on school property for people with licenses.  If the NRA and state level organizations would focus hard on those two things, instead of Constitutional or open carry, we might have a chance at passing a decent bill.  Mississippi and Kansas both recently fixed that problem for people with licenses, so why can't it be done here?

One of the few good things about having a CCW in California is about to end January 1, 2016.  Governor signed a bill that makes it illegal for anyone with a CCW to carry on any school property.   You can find it on the main Fox News website.    I'm sure that will keep the crazies from doing what they do at schools.  

As far as I know, it is legal to carry.  I wouldn't call and ask because you know what the answer will be.  Just conceal and go about your business.

I think with the difficulty we had getting the park carry law passed and signed into law shows the great difficulty we would have in legalizing carry in colleges and more so K-12 schools in this state with a handgun carry permit.  You will never get college carry legalized in a Constitutional Carry law in this state.  In roughly half the states you can carry on a college campus, with a license.  Out of that half, maybe ten you can legally also carry in K-12 schools, again with a license.   The politicians in this state somewhat tolerate the handgun carry permit system and like to throw a few crumbs toward improving it every so often so they get a vote.  It is important to remember that the House Speaker and the Lt Gov/Senate Speaker could have never allowed a floor vote on park carry.  The recent democratic house speaker never would allow floor votes on any bills that improved the handgun carry permit.   I think you'd have a greater chance in dropping the 'no guns' signs penalties for people with permits and maybe college carry with permits before you would ever get Constitutional carry.  With limited time during legislative session, that is what I would focus efforts lobbying for.   Gun rights organizations just need to work the best way that they can with committee chairs and other key legislative leaders, especially with realistic bills that make sense in improving the permit system.

At least an individual in Oregon can make the choice in legally carrying at a school there if he or she has a license.  We don't get to make that choice here.

If you are taking the handgun from one house in TN directly to your house in MD, I would just unload the handgun before you cross into MD and drive directly to your home in MD.  It looks like that follows the law in MD.

It looks like you can take your handgun directly from your house in TN to your house in Maryland but you don't want to just be driving around with an unloaded handgun in your car in MD.  Or you can take your handgun in MD directly from your house to the range.  It doesn't look as bad as NY where a non resident can't even have a handgun there for the most part.