btq96r

I'm far more upset that even with a permit I can't carry into buildings I help pay for at least the maintenance of through tax dollars than I am at having to pay what isn't a horrible fee for that permit.    I get it, to some the principle of the cost of a permit is BS in the first place, and it certainly is when you know full well that the program is being billed to the public well above the cost to administrate it.   However, I don't disagree with the permit process itself, nor the qualifications and restrictions we have in place, as I'm not opposed to a standard that establishes who is in "the militia" as we would define it today.  But having the government tell me that even though I meet the standard established, I'm still not allowed to carry into buildings owned by the public, and that LEO's or other government security are allowed to do so so they (the government) can be protected is a particular insult in my eyes.   So, I'm in favor of non-restrictive over Constitutional Carry.

Seems the Army Chief of Staff is getting frustrated with the process. http://taskandpurpose.com/army-chief-eyeing-glock-pistol-services-next-sidearm/?utm_content=buffera13f1&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=tp-buffer Side note: Wish I could buy a Glock 19 that cheap. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk, because I felt that Oh Shoot wanted to know that particular bit of information.

  If it can be proven that his mindset was one of disregard for life, which led to him escalating the conflict, or at least failing to deescalate it if he had that ability during this encounter, than what he has on his weapon, and any other forms of personal expression (which the dust cover wording represent) are valid, IMO.  Also, whatever departmental procedure is on the books for the situation will come into play as well, if he didn't follow it, that will be used against him as well.  Everything combined has to be taken into account to determine if it's a reasonable use of lethal force or not.   If it wasn't, that wouldn't be murder 1, or even 2 as the law defines it, but rather manslaughter (unless AZ is different).  It wouldn't be the first time a DA charged someone with murder to make a plea bargain to manslaughter more attractive, or get a conviction from a jury on a lesser charge.  But that's a separate issue altogether.

I saw this on another site and was shaking my head.  While I don't think it's an indication that the officer was enthusiastic about killing people (not by itself anyway), I do think it shows a lack of judgement and maturity on his part...so much so I'd question if he has the judgement and maturity to be a police officer in the first place.  If I'm the one prosecuting him, it's a line I'd pursue for the charges at hand.    Also, there is a failure of management in allowing something like that to be on a weapon used for official purposes.  I don't care if it was incompetence, apathy, or approval, on the part of the officers supervisory chain, any reason is unacceptable.

Damn, that's pretty.  The tungsten looks great, and I'm normally opposed to any finish other than evil black rifle.   What kind of muzzle break/compensator is on there?

  Just because I'm being critical in looking at the shooters actions, doesn't mean I'm defending the thief.  I also don't think this lady committed a crime.  I don't know the exact details of FL law, but in TN, I doubt she'd be charged based on what we know so far.  As to the kid, he's dead, so there isn't much to go over on his side of this.   If you're in the house, and the trouble comes to you, scan your lane and fire when ready.  Hell, if you walk in the front door after running errands and see people who came in through the back window or something, same advise.  But I'm wary if a person just decides to "Team America" it once they get a text message from their security company or any other situation where they know there is trouble.  There are just a lot of ways I can see this going wrong in a hurry.   ETA: This would probably be a good time for Chip or one of our resident lawyers to give us their input.

  Again, if you wouldn't do it without a gun, why would you do it with a gun?  Carrying a gun is to protect your life, not give you courage you wouldn't otherwise have.    And you can what if it all you want, the police came in this case.

The thing I want to know is exactly at what point, and where did she see the kid, and what exactly transpired (the 2nd part will be incomplete without more witnesses, probably).  Since the alarm alert came to her, and the police were on the way, she probably should have waited for the police to handle things, or at least clear the home to let her know it was empty.  When a 50something female decides to check things out, she all but put herself into a situation where her only option for self defense is lethal.  While I agree she has the right to defend her life, I would submit that she is culpable for putting herself into a situation she may well didn't have to be in.   In the big picture, what I'm worried about is people stretching "stand your ground" into some vigilante version of "movement to contact."  Basically, if you wouldn't do something without a gun, why would you think it's okay to do so with a gun?  Aside from the obvious issues of untrained, non-LEO personnel putting themselves into those kinds of situations, it's a fast way for those indifferent, or on the fence about gun rights to think the liberal side of things is the more relevant argument.       "Confrontation" is a wide spectrum.  Assuming it escalated to the point of life endangerment is assuming a lot.       I wasn't making a judgement, just pointing out there are inconsistencies against a clear case for self-defense that I could see.  As noted above, there is are a few things I'm wondering about just where the confrontation was for starters.

Iron sites or a red dot, it takes the same fundamentals of a proper position, breath control, and trigger squeeze to shoot well enough with either...so learning all that good boring stuff is more import than how much high speed-low drag gear you can put on the gun.

All this I said the last time we discussed this still applies: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/89164-military-handgun-contract/?p=1285002   I'll also add, that no matter how high-speed or supposed low maintenance a handgun is, unless it has proper maintenance from the user and the armorer, it's going to crap out eventually.  And sorry to pull back the curtain too far, but most unit armorers aren't some gunsmith in waiting, they're just someone who got picked to go to armorer school, and trust me when I say that it's usually not a stud from a line platoon that are picked for this duty.       You have to account for the fact that big Army is ordering for the Reserves and National Guard as well, so that's slightly over a million authorized personnel in uniform.  Plus, as TrickyNicky pointed out, that's the total number of guns produced over the life of the contract.  The military will just hold onto any extras and replace broken/damaged ones as needed.

That was over 20 years ago, and he's had his NRA rating rise back up to an 'A' as recently as his last race for re-election to the Ohio Governor's office in 2014. http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/06/29/kasich-has-won-backing-of-once-hostile-gun-rights-lobby.html

Usually I side with the cops when a group of bikers are involved, as it seemingly doesn't take much for a large group of bikers to think they have special rights on the road.  However, this story has me wondering which side deserves my scorn more.  If this were a cop in my area, I suppose my tax dollars paying his salary would factor into the decision. 

Not sure how Florida law treats things, but if this were Tennessee, the lady would have opened herself up to at least a civil suit since she wasn't in the home when the intruder was there, and actively went back after getting the alert.  If she shot him while she was outside, I'd go as far as to say this may well be an justified shoot, as I'm not seeing how her life was in danger when she pulled the trigger.  Might be the same if she saw him going out the window from the inside as well since she actively went back into the house.  Again, Florida law would need to be looked at, but if Zimmerman was put on trial for shooting in a fight, then it's quite possible that she could be charged for shooting someone without any immediate danger as the kid was leaving the scene.   As to the circumstances that led to this kid engaging in, at a minimum, breaking and entering...desperate people will do desperate things.  That's not excusing what he did, but it's important to remember that things aren't getting better for a lot of people, and criminal activity isn't hard to justify if you feel you have nothing left to lose, and a growing number of the population are reaching that level.

  Naa, just one born in the 1980s or 1990s, not the 1940s.  :D     Same thing happened to me on the walk to chow one night when a C-RAM not too far away went off.  Loud noise startled the bejesus out of me, then I see the red line in the sky like a phaser from Star Trek.  It's a show, that's for sure. 

  No, but that's not what I was referencing with the phalanx gun.  They had them in Iraq to shoot down incoming rockets.

It may not look all that great, but hearing that phalanx in action is something else.  And a bit of a shock when it's for real and you don't get the test warning before it happens.

Ugh, ticks...we used to do a count for how many we pulled off for each platoon after coming back from the field.    This winter that wasn't is going to mean a lot more bugs a lot earlier than usual.  I already have to cut my grass sometime this week as it's getting unseemly after all the rain and spring like weather we've had.

I'm still undecided if the actions were right or wrong.  I suspect they could be either and will be examined thoroughly...but the tactics seem a bit Hollywood to me, and that's not a good thing.       If that's what any officer thinks is priority #1, they're in the wrong profession and should find a job without the inherent dangers of police work.

  Why spend all that money when you can just get 6' of '550 cord and take care of it the old fashioned way. :P

  It's called Bambuser.  It's more of a mobile sharing site, but the upload of videos is super easy.  You just configure the app how you want it, then all you have to do is press record and it takes care of everything.  I tested it out a few times at drive-thru's after dark and it picks up video and audio just great if you position your phone properly.  It's also free for individuals and charities. https://bambuser.com/ https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bambuser.broadcaster&hl=en https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/bambuser/id344600665?mt=8

I have an app where the video I record is uploaded to the net at the same time and I can view or download it off a website at my convenience.  Even encryption can't protect the hardware if it has an "accident" while in police custody.

  I turned fifteen not too long after that movie came out on VHS.  It most certainly was not the worst movie ever at that time in my life. ;)

  I think it would be the perfect closing music as an episode fades to the credits for some premium cable TV show.  It totally could have fit into an episode of Californication under the right circumstances.

  Key word in that sentence, when. And not just California or Illinois maybe with the rampant spending we'll have to bail out, but some of the red states that refused to raise taxes in revenue shortfalls.  Louisiana is currently feeling the pinch after Bobby Jindal's pre-Presidential campaign tax cut budgets that left them completely unprepared for the price of oil dropping.  Don't think they won't come to Uncle Sugar for some more money the worse things get.   Wait for it to get horrible in 10-20 years, when the federal government is occupied with debt repayments, the states will get less federal funding, which make up a scary amount of their budgets these days.  They'll either have to raise taxes and fees, or cut services dramatically to make ends meet.  For how that looks locally, Tennessee's FY 2014 budget had just over 41% of its total spending come from federal funding.  Again, scary amount of dependence there.

This is what "call the police" as a catch all for problem solving gets us.  The individual officers who have to respond are probably rolling their eyes while trying to be respectful, but the system and the powers that be are probably happy people are responding well to conditioning.