JAB

I also think you misunderstood what OhShoot was getting at in an earlier post. In TN, it is illegal to have even a single sip of alchohol while carrying a gun in an establishment open to the public. I think OS was saying that it isn't necessarily illegal to have a drink while carrying in a non-public place such as at home, at a friend's house (maybe the neighbors invited you over for a barbecue and you are having a beer with your ribs, etc.) Whether or not that is a bad idea is for you to decide. Some think it is, some see it as not a big deal (within reason.) Some states apparently don't even see it as a big deal and will allow people to have a drink while carrying in public places as long as they are not 'intoxicated'. TN is not one of those states. I am not a lawyer and this certainly is not legal advice.

Academy apparently currently has the 'steel and alloy' version of the Taurus tip-up .22 on Clearance for $198.88. Don't know if there is an Academy near you that is one of the 'select stores' that have them available or not. The one pictured in the ad is a bit 'pimptastic' but that actually might make it kind of fun to have for a plinker, etc. Academy - Taurus 22GPRL .22 LR Pistol

It really needs a shoulder thing that goes up. Could be time to NFA this creation. I'd love to see the holster for it.

Nicemac, I am not challenging your decision. What precautions you feel the need to take (or not) are your business. I do, however, think that there are two, entirely different mindsets at play, here. I sit and watch TV with my house shoes on. I purposefully chose house shoes with real, rubber soles in case I do need to quickly go outside for some reason. They aren't shoes I would wear to the store but they are plenty comfortable while also being sturdy/dampness resistant enough to wear outside and are not an inconvience to wear inside. I honestly don't really like sitting around barefoot so those house shoes are a good compromise. I don't sit and watch TV with a coat on. Then, again, I rarely wear a coat at all - I tend to be warm natured so coats are often more trouble than they are worth. I do, however, wear clothes while I am watching TV. It might just be sleep pants or loose-fitting 'gym' shorts and a t-shirt but I will still be clothed. Concerns of decency aside, once again there is always the chance that I might need to step outside quickly, etc. and I'd just as soon not have to go through the house looking for clothes. Again, these might not be the clothes I'd wear to the store but they are plenty comfortable while being appropriate enough for wearing outside in the yard, etc. if the need arises. I also sit around watching TV with a gun on me. Usually it is my P3AT in a 'belly' band worn low so that the grips are positioned as if the gun were in an IWB holster. Worn this way - with pants that have a loose, elastic waistband that don't put pressure on the gun - I can more or less forget it is even there. Except for certain, very specific situations this is not how I would carry it (or any other gun) in public but it works well for having my P3AT on me while I am just watching TV, etc. It is no more an inconvenience than having a t-shirt on my back and, from an emotional/intellectual standpoint, doesn't cause me any further 'concern' than having house shoes on my feet. As long as I don't need it (and I probably won't) it is a not a big deal, to me. If I ever did need it, however, it would be a very big deal, indeed. I also always have a flashlight in my pocket when I am sitting around, watching TV. It isn't that I expect the electricity to go off but it can happen and has happened in the past, infrequently. It is often just a small keychain flashlight that weighs almost nothing but it throws plenty of light, if needed. Again, it isn't something I dwell on - it is simply there if I need it. This is where the two, different mindsets come into play. From your posts, I am getting the impression that you feel that having a firearm on you while lounging around your house would be an inconvenience, would not allow you to relax and so on. I also get the impression that wearing a firearm inside your home, to you, equates with being afraid inside your home or not feeling safe within the confines of your home. Fair enough. For me (and, I suspect, others), however, having a firearm on me while I watch TV, etc. is not an issue. In that situation, I am plenty relaxed and feel that I and my family are as 'safe' as it is possible to be (within my belief that nowhere is completely safe.) I don't dwell on the gun at my side any more than I dwell on the t-shirt, shorts and house shoes I am wearing or the flashlight in my pocket. I am not saying that you should adopt my mindset or that yours is wrong - simply trying to explain that your feelings about carrying in the home are completely different from mine.

My understanding is that the difference is that this style of 'holster' exposes the top of the gun, the slide, etc. I guess that since it looks like a gun with a piece of leather attached rather than being a 'wallet' that is actually a firearm (with the firearm completely hidden/disguised by the 'wallet') they can get away with it. For me, though, it isn't worth the hassle of testing that theory - especially for a 'holster' that does expose the trigger and that is going to make getting an effective grip nearly impossible. That latter part of that statement is not mere supposition - I have actually held one of these with a Kel Tec in it at a gun show and it felt just about as awkward as it looks (at least in my hands.)

Blech. Just blech. I like Doritos, sometimes. I even still like the occasional Taco Hell congealed-grease-and-mystery-meat-in-a-shell crunchy taco. Putting the two together, IMO, would result in diminishing returns in which the sum of the parts would not be as enjoyable as the parts taken by themselves. For crunchy tacos, I like the clean, crisp and light flavor of warmed white corn shells. It makes a nice counterbalance, IMO, to the flavors that go inside it.

The relative term here is 'safer'. Some places may be 'safer' or relatively safe but nowhere is completely safe. Personally, I'd feel pretty damned stupid (for the space of my last few, dying breaths) if I went to the trouble of carrying in public whenever possible only to be killed in my own living room smack in the middle of the relatively safe area where I live simply because I didn't take the very minor (and essentially effortless) precaution of having a firearm on me. For me, rather than be so much a question of, "Why?" it is more a matter of, "Why not?"

I'm not sure how good the conversions for the full-size Maglites are. I put a 3 LED conversion in one of my mini-mags, along with the tail switch conversion. The LED conversion is pretty bright but you lose both the ability to adjust the light (from 'flood' to 'tight' beam) and the ability to screw the front part of the base off and use the light like a candle (one of the features of a Maglite, both the minis and the full-size, I think would be most useful in certain situations.) I also have a Mini-Mag that came from the factory as an LED light. It has a single LED, the beam can be focused or broadened and it can still be used in 'candle' mode. Since the light is 'tuned' for the LED, I think it is actually as bright as - maybe brighter than - the 3 LED conversion. The tailswitch mod (at least the one I have) won't work on the factory LED Mini-Maglite. I think a Mini-Mag would be more useful if it had a pushbutton on/off like my full-size D cell light has rather than having to twist the front of the light to turn it on and off (which can be hard to do quickly, one-handed.) I think I might have seen some newer Mini-Maglites which have that option. I also saw a new Maglite model somewhere the other day that had a straight-sided body (unlike the more 'traditional' flashlight shape of other Maglites) that, iirc, had a tail-switch. The tailswitch conversion I used (Nite-Ize, I think) has a little, red LED that constantly flashes and allows selection of bright, dim or flashing settings. It doesn't always work all that great, though. In fact, I have considered putting that Mini-Mag back into factory trim but since I have a couple of others I haven't done that, yet. That one was my EDC light until I found the much smaller and brighter Inova X1 that I like much better.

The problem with that standpoint is that rights generally are not or even cannot be taken away until and unless an individual has done something to warrant having his or her rights curtailed. Curtailing the rights of all citizens in order to prevent a few morons from abusing said rights or doing something stupid does not jibe with the idea of real liberty. For instance, our own state constitution gives the legislature the authority to regulate the wearing of arms 'with a view to prevent crime'. That should be a very narrow scope wherein, for instance, people with a criminal history would have their right to carry firearms curtailed. Instead, it has been 'interpreted' to mean that they should make the carry of firearms completely illegal and that having an HCP or being on one's own property is merely a 'defense' to the application of the charge of illegally carrying/possessing a firearm.

I agree that they probably never thought it would be an issue. As I said, they probably felt that self defense was a natural right (as do I and probably most folks here) and being equipped for same was only common sense. That said, unless I am mistaken, I don't believe the Constitution gives the Feds the power to regulate the carry of arms. The Constitution further says that any power not specifically given to the Fed falls to the States or to the People. As the Constitution does not specifically forbid the regulation of firearms carry for self defense nor does it (to my knowledge) specifically grant that power to the Fed then that probably does make carry regulation, once such became an issue of laws and rules, a states' rights issue (although I agree that it never should have been an issue in the first place.)

My guess is that those companies don't make holsters for a Hi Point because people who would carry Hi Points are not their target market. Most people aren't going to pay Comp-Tac prices for a holster to carry a sub $200 gun. Heck, many people who would carry a Hi Point may not be able to afford $70 to $100 for a holster (which would explain why they are carrying a Hi Point to begin with.) No biggie. The 'best' way to carry a Hi Point, IMO, would likely be in a leather belt slide holster. Those are easy to make and a very basic one could be put together by an enterprising person on a budget for $20 or so including leather, thread and needles. In a pinch, a small nail could be used as an awl. A guy on another forum to which I belong had a pretty nice belt slide rig (with matching mag carriers) made for his Hi Point and it actually looks like it carries surprisingly well. As I said, though, I don't like the idea of carrying a striker fired gun of any make/model so I'd only carry a Hi Point (or a Glock or any other striker gun) as a last resort.

The curved 'pinky extension' makes no noticeable difference in any of the methods I have used to carry the P3AT. I do find the spare mag easier to carry with just the flat base plate and not only in the pocket holster. In fact if I am carrying the P3AT in its FOBUS I have found that the spare mag will fit into the nylon belt sheath that came with a cheapo Winchester mini multi-tool I got at Walmart. With the flat baseplate, there is enough room for the velcro that holds the flap down to fasten. With the pinky extension, not so much.

Looks like a pretty nice, little knife. As a person who has zero experience or training in fighting with a knife, I'd probably just hurt myself with a tactical knife. A blade like the one you posted would still be pretty 'stabby' as a last-ditch-I'm-fixin'-to-die-anyhow self defense tool while probably working better as a daily use tool.

Honestly, I don't see buying a holster that costs more than a Hi Point for use with any gun. I guess that is why I wanted to learn to make my own. To me, the purpose of a handgun is to throw a bullet with reasonable accuracy and reliability. Hi Points do that and so they fill the purpose. Beyond that, you are getting into 'features' and other aspects of the gun. I wouldn't want to carry a Hi Point just because I have guns that are easier to carry. Well, that and I don't particularly care for striker-fired guns as carry guns (just a personal preference - which is also why I won't be seen carrying a Glock.) I do own a Hi Point 9mm carbine and likely will have a C9 one of these days. I like the one that my mom has and think it would be pretty good as an 'extra insurance' gun - i.e. something to stash in an 'out of the way' location in an outbuilding, etc. As far as being a 'beer snob', well, that is different. Most 'cheap' beer just plain doesn't taste very good. That is why (if you are looking for a buzz) you buy a six of the good stuff and a 12 pack of Budweiser, etc. - after drinking six good beers you won't taste that yellow, fizzy water anyhow. Of course, as with Hi Point, there can be exceptions. Yuengling is pretty cheap and pretty good - especially their Black and Tan.

Whenever someone tries to throw out the 'well regulated militia' phrase as meaning that the 2A applies only to those serving in some sort of military capacity, I call BS and point to The Federalist #46. In that document, James Madison (who penned much of the Bill of Rights) speaks of a 'militia' in clear terms. He uses the term 'militia' to mean any and all able-bodied [implied male, at the time] citizens coming together to resist government tyranny. To my non-lawyer mind (which is, nontheless, perfectly capable of reading more or less plain English), it is clear that 'well-regulated' means that such a militia should have commanders chosen from within their number - i.e. it is the militia (if it became necessary to form same) that should be 'well-regulated', not the firearms. Further, as the stated purpose is to be able to repel the advances of a tyrannical government, backed by a standing military, it is clear that the Second Amendment applies to firearms used for military purposes. In today's world, that would mean that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with 'sporting purposes' and everything to do with protecting the individual right to own so-called 'assault rifles' and so on. Any and all 'assault weapon' bans are unconstitutional under the auspices of the Second Amendment as it was originally intended. That is all good but there is another side of the coin that we, as gun owners, willfully ignore when wanting to claim that the Second Amendment, in its original intent and purpose, also protects our right to carry personal arms for self defense. That is the Second Amendment, as written and intended by the Founders, has everything to do with military arms and nothing to do with a right to carry a self defense firearm. I believe this is because the right to self defense, as well as the right to hunt, was not only seen as a natural right by our Founders but was also 'common sense' that didn't require putting down in writing. IMO, the Second Amendment has never negated a state's right to regulate the carry of small arms of the type that have no significant, military purpose. In other words, the Second Amendment ain't about carrying a Kel Tec P3AT or a S&W 642 any more than it is about deer hunting. Carry of personal arms has always been (and remains) a states' rights issue, not a Federally regulated one.

Its just my weird sense of irony but it strikes me 'funny' that arsenic is allowed in apple juice. The reason is that it makes me wonder how much cyanide is allowed in apple juice? I wonder that because apple seeds naturally contain cyanide.

The plan to end the Crown Vic has been in the pipe for several years. They announced it around the same time that they announced that this would likely be the last production year for the Ranger (the best selling truck in its class for years - maybe still is for all I know.) In fact, iirc, they actually planned to end the Crown Vic around the time the announcement was made instead of waiting this long. This was despite (at the time) having multiple guaranteed sales for LEO contracts. Unless I am mistaken, that was why so many LEAs bought Impalas and Chargers a few years ago to begin with - because Ford told them that the Crown Vics were no longer going to be available.

I don't know about that. I do have a cousin who lives down around the Georgia/Alabama line who apparently hunts hogs with only a big knife (using dogs to bring the hog to ground, of course.) I can only aspire to the level of 'Bubbaocity' that most of my paternal side of the family achieves without even really trying. I'd just about be willing to try it, though, if it meant actually bagging a deer for a change. My mom says that she liked the name Jonathan (my first name) when she first heard of Jonathan Winters. I'm beginning to suspect, however, that it is actually an old Native American word for 'can't hunt worth a crap.' Hey, that is part of the reason that the idea of handgun hunting appeals to me in the first place. If I'm not going to shoot a deer, anyhow, at least a handgun is generally lighter and easier to carry. Then maybe I could even get away with claiming that I didn't harvest any deer because I hunt with a handgun and that is harder than hunting with a rifle. Reckon that's why they call it buckshot?

In 'public' I mostly carry mine either in a homemade pocket holster (which I made to be able to also carry a spare mag) or in a FOBUS. Even in the FOBUS carried OWB it is so small that it will disappear under just a t-shirt. I did find that with the grips against my skin the rather aggressive 'checkering' rubbed my side like sandpaper but a trimmed Hogue Handall Jr. solved that problem as well as making it easier/more comfortable to shoot (unless I am mistaken, Pachmayr now has a slip-on grip sleeve made specifically for the LCP, P3AT, etc. and last I heard Hogue was planning to release one.) The mag I carry in the gun has the 'pinky extension' while the spare mag has the flat, factory baseplate just because it carries better in the aforementioned pocket holster that way. I haven't tried a +1 extension but I do have one of the 9 round extended mags that Kel Tec sells (also extends the grip.) The length of that mag would defeat the purpose of a small carry gun if carried in it, IMO, but it could make a pretty good backup/spare mag for carry. One of these days I have to remember to take pics of my P3AT in its current configuration but as of right now I don't have any. Generally speaking, I can't stand IWB carry but I have found that I can do okay - at least for short periods of time - with carrying the P3AT in a belly band worn a little low so that the grips are positioned just above the waistband of my pants as they would be in most IWB holsters. At home, I often carry the P3AT that way under loose fitting shorts with an elastic waistband. With a t-shirt tucked in under the P3AT/belly band and a button up (dress) shirt tucked in over it, I have also used that method for carrying at a friend's wedding and a funeral for another friend's grandmother. It was completely hidden and no one 'made' me despite hugs being given and received, etc. I don't/wouldn't use the belt clip (my own, personal and somewhat contrarian opinion is that clips are for carrying ink pens and pocket knives - and I'm not so sure about the pocket knives) but it seems to work fine for those who do use/like it.

I think we are thinking along the same lines. I wasn't saying that a .22LR is a good deer cartridge because it delivers roughly the same energy as a compound bow. Instead, I was saying that since a bow and arrow will get the job done, even with low energy, muzzle energy doesn't make sense as the sole or even main criteria for a handgun to be legal for hunting.

Either way it is still the vamp, hands down. So they can run fast - zombies can't fly. Numbers don't matter when you can turn to mist and float away if you are overwhelmed. The vamps I am thinking of are the type that are ten times stronger than normal humans (or zombies), may have superhuman speed (much faster than even the 'fast' zombies), can call animals to their aid (wolves, rats, even cockroaches) and can crush a zombie's skull (and brain) with their bare hands/fists. The only 'advantage' zombies have is that they can tolerate sunlight. Shouldn't be too hard for a vamp to find a nice, safe, dark place to spend the day.

Looking at this years seasons/regs, it appears that may be the case in unit L. The regs for those of us living in Units A and B, however, indicate an entirely different story.

I wish they had changed this reg a couple of years ago. When I bought my Taurus 66 (late '80s model that looked nearly brand new) I was also looking at a Ruger Security Six. The SS was only a few bucks more than the Taurus and I really wanted the Ruger. Since there was the possibility I'd want to use it for backup when hunting (as if I'll ever get to take a shot with my rifle, much less a backup handgun), I wanted to make sure of the barrel length. Both were supposed to be four inches but the Ruger measured out to just under four inches while the Taurus measured out to a true four inches. I have had zero problems with the Taurus and really like the trigger pull and the adjustable rear sights but still would have probably gone with the Ruger if the four inch barrel for hunting weren't a concern. Honestly, as some others have mentioned, the four inch barrel thing has never made much sense to me. To be truthful, though, the 'muzzle energy' argument doesn't make a lot of sense, either. After all, how much energy does the average arrow fired from a compound bow - which is legal hunting gear - produce? I honestly don't know the answer to that question but can't imagine it is anywhere near the energy produced by a 158 grain LSP fired from a snubnosed .357. Heck, a snubnosed .38 Special likely produces more energy than a bow and arrow. I am not necessarily saying a snubnosed .38 or .357 is appropriate for deer hunting, just that muzzle energy requirements make no sense when hunting with a bow and arrow is an acceptable method unless the minimum muzzle energy requirement were set at the energy level a common hunting bow is capable of delivering. From what I can find the theoretical max a hunting bow can deliver is about the same as the muzzle energy of a .22LR ( Compound Bow Tech Review: Creation of the first 400+ fps Super Bow ) To me, then, caliber restrictions would seem to make the most sense and be the easiest to understand. Of course, how would that be enforced being that it is legal to carry a handgun for self defense while hunting as long as the individual has an HCP? In other words, with an HCP it would still be legal to carry a .32acp pocket pistol while hunting (as long as the hunter has appropriate hunting gear with him/her) so simply asking, "What are you packing," wouldn't work.

Actually, while there is some indication that the regulation may have changed this year, a minimum barrel length of four inches was [at least up through last year] a requirement for a handgun to be legally used for hunting in Tennessee. That was actually the one reason I chose to buy a used Taurus 66 over a used Ruger Security Six. Both were supposed to have 4 inch barrels and I would have preferred the Ruger but the barrel on the Security Six measured out to be just under 4 inches while the Taurus measured out at a true four inches. Since there was a possibility I might want to use it for a backup for hunting I didn't want to take any chances. Further, while the cylinder length is not included in barrel length, my understanding is that the length of a revolver barrel is measured from the front (face) of the cylinder. Is that not correct?

To my mind, although I don't like how some states handle the issue, this is an issue for the states to handle and to hash out between themselves. It is not an issue that the Federal government needs (or should have the authority) to get involved in. After all, a fedgov with the power to tell states that they have to recognize other states' permits also has the authority to tell states that they have to meet other states' criteria for issuing permits, claiming that such a 'compromise' is necessary in order to be fair to the states with more stringent (as in draconian) requirements. Such would be a Pyrrhic victory. Sure, your permit would be recognized in other states if you could get a permit in the first place - which would be unlikely if all states had to meet (for instance) the New York requirement that the applicant have a 'valid reason' for having a permit. After that, how long before the fedgov tells all states that they have to meet the criteria for purchasing a handgun that are used in New York, etc. requiring permits and waiting periods. After all, if someone might eventually be allowed to carry a firearm in New York shouldn't their purchase of said firearm be up to New York's purchasing standards? That sounds like a fair 'compromise', right? Think about it - do you really want the federal government, headed by the Obama administration, to get a foot or even a toe in the door of what has traditionally been a states rights issue? I don't as I can't believe for one minute that they would do so with a view of actually expanding our rights. Instead, it would be a way to get us to go along with their gaining some control of rights over which they currently have no authority.