Defender

[quote name='JGunner' timestamp='1354663752' post='854967'] I usually carry a g26 iwb with a Kholster (crossbreed type holster). I'm 6', 290 lbs, so I'm not small (har har). The other day I decided to try carrying my full size 1911 OWB with a cheap nylon holster of some type, and it was WAY more comfortable than my G26 has ever been IWB. I usually wear jeans and a button down untucked if I'm carrying, so I didn't change my dress at all, and I was well concealed. I've now ordered an OWB for my G26 so I can start trying that. Honestly I need to lose some weight, but until that happens I'll probably start carrying OWB more than IWB. (I also ordered one for my G21, which I think is gonna work well). edit: forgot to mention, I also keep a Ruger LCP in my front pocket no matter what else I may be carrying. [/quote] As a big guy, I also prefer OWB holsters. I have found that the Don Hume 721OT works great for me. I have those for my 1911s, and also for my EDC, a FNP-45. It has a sweat guard or slide guard as some call it and is very comfortable. Mine are black leather. The FN 45 is a BIG gun, and with a good belt, its very comfortable and I wear a oversize untucked shirt that usually covers it.

[quote name='kieefer' timestamp='1354628104' post='854720'] this thread is racist. [/quote] ...and its George Bush's fault!

I have a 14 year old daughter in Davidson county schools. It's a constant battle to keep her from being indoctrinated. I had a yard sign for Romney and she even was concerned about her friends on the school bus seeing it! She loves pop music and that's yet another attack on values when her favorite singers endorsed Obama...I have to sit her down regularly to talk about this stuff. One argument I use is the one about how I'm gonna take part of her allowance that she works for and give it to the "poor" kids who won't work for their allowance. That seems to help , lol.

A bite at a time..these mass shootings just help inch things along...

This was a very nice thing to do. Even tho I didn't win, I still thank you!

One thing I don't understand is the apparent double standard that exists in these issues...the Confederate flag is perceived as racist by many...as would be any references to white magazines, beauty pageants, magazines, tv channels/shows, college funds, etc...yet calling those same things BLACK seems to be just fine.What about all the black racist things you see in public everywhewre, why is that ok? Last year I saw a black lady on a new show, cant remember which, but they were talking about racism, and she she was asked if something or other was racist, and she replied, "NO! Blacks cant be racist, only whites." I just don't understand how that works. I also like that flag. Its a symbol to me of my heritage. Years ago, I decided not to display it publicly because it just seemed to cause controversy, and I dont want to have to hurt someone over a flag. I accepted that perception sometimes is important.

I want one!

I carry a iTp SA2 Eluma (2X AA) in a belt pouch and a Fenix TK-15 (2XCR123A) in my EDC Bag. Both have high/low and strobe functions. The iTp is about 190 lumens on high nd the Fenix is 400. Both great lights but the fenix is a bigger tube .

That's just plain mean! lol

Ive got the Bersa Firestorm in .22LR..love it!

Looks a little cheaper here: http://lapolicegear.ecomm-search.com/search?keywords=5.11+Tactical+Sabre+2.0+Jacket&searchsubmit=&vwcatalog=policestuff

seems like a private poperty owner should be able to have one of these on his private property only, if he so desired, shouldnt he?

Well written article. Doesn't change MY mind, but I do like that the author talks about "informed decision." He also mentions that one shouldnt just go with what this guy or that guy says. Carry in the manner that works best for you, but how could you go wrong in making "informed decisions" vs impulsive ones. For me, when I think of the best method of carry, I carry my FN-45. My 1911's are more emotional decisions, lol. In every personal analysis of mine, I will carry the FN, except for those occasions when its just too big to conceal in certain, limited situations.

[quote name='DaveTN' timestamp='1353619691' post='849548'] Correct, and the legislature has outlawed the carrying of loaded firearms throughout the state for all citizens. For $115 plus the price of a class a very small (less than 5%) “Special group” has purchased a privilege that permits them a valid defense to this criminal charge. It’s beyond me how anyone can even compare something that is not a right with the commonly accepted right to control your own property. As a gun owner I would like to turn my head while the state of Tennessee tramples all over the rights of a property owner if it allows me to carry a gun where ever I please; but as a Patriot I can’t. The fact that a court in another state and a different Federal jurisdiction put their stamp of approval on it means absolutely nothing to me. Explain it? Why would I or anyone else try? I don’t even have to read the decision to know it’s wrong. The smoking ban was wrong, all the stuff the feds passed after 9-11 in the name of National Security is wrong, the decision on Eminent Domain was wrong. But the courts will uphold them. That doesn’t mean that free thinking Patriots have to agree with them, only that we have to abide by them. As I said before; [b]this would be a different argument if this state recognized the right to bear arms[/b]; but they do not and until they do they hopefully will not be allowed to push this down the throat of business owners. [/quote] How would it be different?

So, let me try again to understand the point of view of those who oppose this...are y'all saying, basically that the government can't or shouldn't control private property? Or is it rather that sometimes they can and sometimes they cant?

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1353532190' post='849232'] Here's the thing. I have repeatedly said that it can be offensive to have [u]who and what you are[/u] compared to a personal choice. Not only in this discussion but in several others as well. To be told that being disabled, to be black, to be mentally disabled, to be born in France, to be... whatever, is the same thing as putting on a pair of shoes, is offensive. But what really get's under my skin is explaining why it can be offensive and politely asking that it not be done... and coming back to see the same people making the same offensive comments over and over. And not only that, but also making passive digs about it and me in the process. I will stand by my comment above and will not alter it. If a person is unable to make the behemothic distinction between a person's race/disability/etc and a personal choice, they are either being impetuous or are just plainly stupid. And if that statement offends you, well, cry me a fricken river. [/quote] Apparently it sucks to be you. I won't ever engage you in a debate of any kind, trust me. You lack the capability to debate with someone that disagrees with you without you attacking that person on a wholly personal level. Also, since you continue to bring it up, I’m sorry you are in a wheelchair, for whatever reason, Im sorry, I REALLY, REALLY am. But you know what? I didn’t put you in it. I believe MY arguments have merit, that’s why I present them in friendly debate. And even though I have changed my mind on this issue once already (to my current view), I find that name calling and belittling do not help change anyone’s view at all! It’s childish and usually used when one runs out of intelligent things to say. And, I am as entitled to MY view as you are to yours, and other than with the intent of changing minds within a spirited debate, I don’t really care anything about you. Like I said, Im through debating with you. I know your type HAS to absolutely have the last word, since in your mind that somehow makes you right, so go ahead, have it. But I'll say this, and I do realize that TGO David is watching all of this as evidenced by his comment above. Its HIS board and obviously his do do as he pleases. As good as this board is, and its the best I’ve seen, with the best moderators, overall. But, if a moderator can’t make a point in a debate without resorting to name calling and belittling his opponent in the debate, then I think he either has no business being a moderator, or at least no business engaging in that debate. As a matter of fact, I would have expected a moderator to be the one “moderating” someone who resorts to belittling and insulting comments, NOT being the one who uses them.

My policy covered them up to a pretty small limit, so I added a rider for a little bit more...don't forget also, that if you are a NRA member they automatically give you a little bit of gun insurance too.

I see that some on this thread seem to have the opinion that government control over rights is ok in some cases and not in others. Seems like we all want to have it both ways. It has also become obvious to me that no minds are being changed on this thread, only arguments become more heated and devolve into quasi or outright personal attacks, and/or mis-perceived personal insults. I might add that this is not good even when/if it comes from a moderator. Think I will devote my time to other, more productive threads now.

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1353352369' post='848275'] thanks. Why are farms excluded? NFPA Kinda goes hand and hand with wage and tax laws then, since everyone has to comply, not just businesses. Would still like for someone to post a law that blankets all businesses like this bill will. Yes, it is offensive. In case you didn't know, I use a wheelchair to get around with. You are comparing[u] what I am [/u]with an inanimate object. I can not change that about me no more than a black woman can change her race and sex. That is why these are protected by laws and your [u]inanimate object and [b]choice [/b]to carry that inanimate object [/u]is not. And no one has removed your inalienable right to defend yourself. A gun is only a tool used for that. Chuck E. Cheese does not remover your ability to walk by requiring you to remove your shoes to enter their ball pit. Same thing here. Please do not compare what I am with an iinanimate object. Thanks. [/quote] Your constant claims thats it's offensive offend me, lol. (kidding) I made absolutely NO reference to your physical attributes or limitations. I mean no disrespect to you or anyone else, here or anywhere else, but my argument makes as much sense to me(and at least a few others) as yours does to you. Accept that an keep your emotions out of it. They have no place in a rational discussion. AND, my right to bear arms HAS been infringed, and it was the government that enabled that. Since your brought up the wheelchair, let me ask you another question. Your wheelchair is a tool is it not? A tool that enables you do do something that you may not ordinarily be able to do, or do well, correct? Remember a while back, when wheelchair users were even more severely limited in what they could do in public buildings and spaces? Now a few years ago, the ADA act was passed that really changed that. Was THAT wrong? I think it would be by using YOUR logic. After all, the wheelchair is simply an inanimate object, right?

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1353268575' post='847733'] I am really, really getting tired of seeing these comments. A person's skin color, sex or disability is in no way similar to an inanimate object and comparing them as such is offensive. Gun - inanimate object\ Shoes - inanimate object Hat - inanimate object Ice cream - fun inanimate object Skin color - not an inanimate object Sex - not an inanimate object Disability - not an inanimate object Age - not an inanimate object See the difference? [/quote] Offensive? I dont think so, and besides...Im not talking about guns here, Im talking about behavior that is mandated, just the same as the laws that mandate behavior to people based on race. I simply do not understand how, if its all about property owners rights. why dont race issues have the same merit? I'll tell you why, its because its wrong, thats why, same as in this case. The big problem here is by banning on property period, the owners are effectively disarming a person, not just at work, but to and from as well.

[quote name='RichardR' timestamp='1353332552' post='848100'] Yea AR pistols & SBR's are definately "a blast" to shoot that is for sure, probably one of the most just for fun guns out there except ones with a happy switch on them. You are more than welcome to put some rounds through one of mine to see how you like them before decideing to buy/trade/build yourself one. [/quote] THANK YOU

IF I decide to get an AR pistol, I'm leaning towards one with a buffer tube and a 10.5 inch barrel.

I feel ya. Ive had my share of inconsiderate nieghbors over the years. My current nieghbors on one side are immigrants from south of the boerder and speak little to no English. They have several small dogs that pestered the heck outta me when I was trying to sleep. They are inside dogs, but they let them out in their back yard thasts close to my bedroom, and they yip and yap for an hour to get back in. After getting so upset once that i wanted ot go shoot the damn dogs, lol, I went instead to walmart and got a nice fan, that masks the noise. Not only can i sleep better now, but I also sleep cooler, lmao. Used to have a older lady on the other side who hired a company to cut her grass and they would also blow it into my yard. I learned that if I went outside when they were cutting, not only did they NOT blow it my way, my scowls at them resulted in them coming over onto MY driveway to blow the cuttings back onto HER property? But overall, so far my nieghbors arent bad. Most of us dont know each other except to wave hi, and I hate that part, but at least we stay out of each others business. Wish i could afford to live in the country on enough land to not have to worry about any of this.

[quote name='DaveTN' timestamp='1353252054' post='847611'] Because the interpreters of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court of the United States, has ruled that while you have a right to own a gun, where and how you carry it will be controlled by the state you live in. In the state of Tennessee carrying a loaded gun is a crime. Approximately 5% of the state’s population has purchased the privilege to carry; but that is not a Constitutional Right. Last I checked being black was not a crime in any state and I fail to see how that keeps getting brought up in this discussion. [/quote] If it were all about states rights, and not the Constitutional intent, then we wouldn't need ANY Amendments, or interpretations, that impose limitations on States rights, would we? Wasn't the 14th Amendment put in place because Southern states, after the 13th Amendment abolished slavery, enacted laws (perhaps similar to Tennessee's that make carrying a gun a crime) that were unjust? While I DO believe in property owners rights, I fail to see how the discrimination argument is not also very similar to carrying gun arguments here, and elsewhere. Just as others (RobertNashville) far more eloquently than I have already posted here, one can argue either way, but you cannot, or at least should not, be able to have it BOTH ways. Either it makes sense to leave it all up to the States, or as I believe, leave it up to the states, but WITH certain guidlines that prohibit limitations on basic rights.

Are civil rights allowed to be violated on private property, as in the parking lots of the workplace? How about in restaurants? Is it permissible to discriminate against blacks in these places? Then why is it ok when its the 2nd Amendment that's being violated?