JAB

I didn't say I haven't hunted. In fact, I said that I have hunted deer, off and on, for much of my 40 years. I currently hold - and have for the past, several years - a hunting license and big game stamp. What I said was that I have never shot any deer - largely because I have never had a chance, during a legal deer season, to take a legal deer. I have had opportunities to take deer illegally or to take illegal deer during a legal season and could have done so - probably without getting caught - but being a person who obeys the law has kept me from doing so. Therefore, the points of my statement were: 1. I obey the regs even though I believe many of them are wrongheaded 2. There are already enough regs in place to keep law-abiding hunters from taking game. We don't need any friggin' more. 3. (Which goes back to my answer to the original question of the thread) Because of that, I am going to take any legal deer I have a chance to shoot, be it a spike, an eight pointer, a doe - during the very short period of time when that is legal - or whatever. I want to take a deer because I enjoy venison. I can't eat antlers (and, yes, GunTroll I read in the other thread where you said that phrase annoys you but for me it is simply the fact of the matter) so I couldn't care less what kind of 'rack' it has.

Another thing that comes to mind is that I often carry either a S&W 642 (snubnosed .38+P revolver) or my Kel Tec P3AT. I feel fine with those weapons because I practice with them and believe I could use them effectively to defend myself or my loved ones at the most likely self defense distances (10 yards or less.) Because the reason I carry is only to defend myself and my loved ones, that works, for me. If I were that close to the gun wielding robber, I suppose I'd have to at least consider the possibility that he poses a threat to me and mine - but that doesn't necessarily mean that going for my gun (and turning an armed robbery into a shootout) would automatically be the right thing to do. If I were further away (which, again, is how I interpret the scenario as originally posed by the OP) then I sure as heck am not taking a shot at (say) 25 yards in a crowded store with a pocket pistol as long as there is any other option available to me (such as getting me and mine to cover and calling 911.) Even with the largest pistols that I routinely carry in public (my Ruger P95 and my CZ82) with which I am capable of putting all shots COM on a B27 at 25 yards (well, on a good day, anyhow) I still wouldn't start shooting under those conditions. Further, I sure as heck am not moving closer to the threat in order to get a better shot unless one of my loved ones is directly in harm's way. Give me a carbine or a rifle with a good optic and a clear shot and I might try it - if I had to. I'd even feel pretty good about my chances with the open sights on my Super Blackhawk .44 Mag with it's seven inch barrel and all - but I'm not likely to be carrying a rifle or a big, hunting pistol around Walmart.

Why, of course I'd just invoke the Brady Bill and that would summon unicorns and faeries to ride down the rainbow bridge and leap to my aid. Any weapons the intruders might have would be turned to bouquets of daisies, they'd see the error of their ways and we'd all sit down to have a good laugh together over milk and cookies. I guess someone should call 911 so the police could come and have milk and cookies, too - although the police are so darned busy keeping everyone safe and happy that the cookies might be starting to cool by the time they arrive. Seriously, though, I keep a 4-inch .357 revolver...um...somewhere accessible... and it is kept holstered in a large waistpack (fanny pack or whatever you want to call it) along with a flashlight and two speedloaders so I can strap the whole setup on very quickly - or simply pull out the revolver. My house shoes (which are a cloth 'sebago' style with pretty good, hard rubber soles rather than a style that will easily slip around on my feet, etc.) are kept where my feet pretty much hit them when I sit up in bed. If I have time to get it, there is also a shotgun with a mounted weapon light that is accessible to someone who knows where to look (and I ain't sayin' where.) I'd have my wife call 911. Beyond that, while I trust my fellow forum members, I don't feel comfortable posting any more detail of my plan on a public website.

Very sad. I've been around guns and have shot them for most of my life. However, one of the main reasons I finally got off my duff three years ago and got my carry permit (after years of 'meaning to do it') was my fear of seeing my wife or another loved one killed in front of me and being powerless to do anything about it. God, if I accidentally/negligently killed someone I loved - with the very type of tool I carry to help me protect them - then I'm not sure what I would do.

And let me try to put this in equally as simple terms...THAT IS ILLEGAL IN ALL BUT UNIT L!!! Again, in some parts of Units A and B the 'antlerless' season is only a couple of weeks in December and only one antlerless deer can be taken, period. Some counties in those units may have a couple of weeks in another month when antlerless deer can be taken and some may allow more than one but there are large portions of Units A and B where, according to the way the table on page 30 of the hunting regs reads, DOE SEASON IS ONLY A COUPLE OF WEEKS OUT OF THE YEAR AND YOU CAN ONLY LEGALLY TAKE ONE DOE (ANTLERLESS DEER) PER SEASON. Shooting more 'for the meat you need' is in violation of the the regulations. Therefore, any more regulations - such as point restrictions - would place even more limits on the ability of a hunter in these parts of the state to legally take a deer, period, much less fill the freezer. So, no, Bubba won't care that some group of folks in a TWRA meeting room decided that he could do without the meat so someone else can put a head with a nice looking set of antlers on his wall.

On the Kel Tec forum you'll find plenty of people who have never had a single issue with their P3AT. I'd be willing to bet that the LCP forum has posts from folks whose Rugers have been jam-o-matics, too. I bought my P3AT as a first gen and it was not reliable. I finally sent it back to the factory and they built me a new, second gen (which is the version that Ruger copied) under warranty at no cost to me. I haven't had a single hiccup out of it, since. Also, didn't Ruger pretty much immediately issue a recall on the LCP just after it came out? I'll trust my life to the gun made by the people who originated the design and have had years of making them to get it right over the Ruger that is just trying to play catch up by ripping off a smaller, less well-known company.

A fishing vest does not necessarily stand out and yell, "Gun," if you use one to conceal your firearm while you are fishing. Works for me when I'm trout fishing, anyway. Then, again, a big waist pack works better for hiding my full-size .357 and does a good job of keeping the gun out of the water and dry when I wade out thigh-deep after trout. So if you see me standing in the middle of the Tellico river wearing my fishing vest (I only wear it for trout fishing, not for other types of fishing) and a large waist pack then you'll know why.

Cost to hunt divided by how many deer you can take. Well, let's see: $28 for a basic hunting/fishing license $28 for the big game stamp (which only allows one method - archery, gun or muzzleloader - you have to spend $28 more to use a different method) $21 for a type 094 That's $77 in total license fees. In any unit besides unit L, there is a much tighter limit on the number of antlerless deer (does, etc.) that can be taken. For instance, in Loudon (where I live) antlerless deer can only be legally taken between the dates of Dec. 17 and Dec. 25 and the limit is one. Not one per day (at least not the way the regs read) but one, period. So if someone manages to take their limit of antlered deer during the season (three) that is a total of four deer. Not too bad for $77, I guess but start throwing in point restrictions, etc. like Troll wants to do and it quickly becomes not worth fooling with. As I have said, even without point restrictions (and with an aversion to hunting on public land) I have never even taken one deer. I can imagine how hard it would be if there were even more BS regulation piled on top of the BS regulations that are already in place. Sometimes more laws and regulations don't keep people from doing things they simply turn otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals when the regulations become so ridiculous that even the most law-abiding get frustrated and ignore them. Sure, if I were hardcore interested in hunting I could travel to Unit L, spend a couple of days, put up with all the BS required to hunt on public lands and maybe even take a deer. However, folks who live in Unit A or Unit B and truly need to hunt to feed their families (thankfully I am not quite to that point) probably can't. If they could afford to make the trip, stay a few days and hunt then they could probably afford to go to the grocery store and not fool with hunting in the first place. Therefore, they are restricted to the deer they can take under the regulations in Unit A or Unit B and the fact that anterless deer can be taken in such great numbers in Unit L really wouldn't mean a hill of beans, to them. Now, remove the antlerless restriction or institute point restrictions only in Unit L and that might work a little better - except it would be just one more restriction that could turn an honest hunter into a 'poacher' just by crossing some invisible, arbitrary line made up by TWRA (from a Unit A county into Unit L county.)

WD40 was talking about people who need meat to feed their families. In my mind, there is no hunting or fishing law or reg that trumps a man's need/right to feed his family any way he can. Unless he is on your property (which is trespassing and doesn't need a hunting-related law to prevent), I don't believe that any 'authority' has the right to tell him he can't shoot any animal to feed his family any more than I believe in the right of any authority to tell him that he can't defend himself or his family by whatever means he has at his disposal. Also, to my mind, that is why the regs in TN are so confusing in the first place - TWRA has tried to make a business and money-making venture out of deer hunting and put ridiculous regulations in place on all other hunting because they are so afraid that someone will 'poach' a damn deer or two and they won't make their $56 off of it. This doesn't mean that I think it is okay to just wantonly kill deer or anything else willy-nilly but a man's need to feed his family is a heck of a lot more important, in my book, than another man's 'need' to put a big antler rack on his wall. Again, this is coming from someone who has never shot any deer, period.

Not bad except for the $20 on top. Twenty bucks is 'real money', to me and I ain't giving the SOB a $20 if I can help it. I don't carry around a lot of cash so it isn't unusual for me not to even have a $20 in my real wallet!

I don't automatically think GUN. I also don't automatically assume the guy is gay nor that he is a pansy, a nerd, a geek or whatever. What I think when I see a guy with a waist pack is, "That guy has more stuff to carry than he wants to cram in his pockets. Hey, that one has a separate pouch specifically to carry a cellphone. Where can I get one of those?" Yeah, I know a lot of folks consider them 'sissy', etc. For my part, I say that folks who think that carrying an extra bag/pack etc. to carry stuff in is 'sissy' should stop and think about how 'sissified' the likes of Davy Crockett, Daniel Boone and Lewis & Clark were. They - and other frontiersmen - all carried 'man bags', after all. And I guess if carrying a waist pack makes one 'gay' then there must have been a whole lot of gay Scottish Highlanders since that is all a sporan is - and they wore it with skirts, to boot. I wouldn't have wanted to say that to their face, though.

I have a P3AT that I carry, sometimes. A few months ago, I bought a S&W 642 (snubnosed revolver in .38+P.) I have had the P3AT longer and still shoot it better although I am SD accurate with the 642 at typical SD distances. I prefer revolvers to semiautos so just in general I prefer the platform of the 642 to the P3AT. I also don't wear tight pants. That said, there are still times, with certain pants/shorts, that the P3AT fits better and is the better option. Also, even though a snubbie revolver is kind of the archetypical BUG for an ankle holster, I find that (on the rare occasions I have a need to carry that way) the P3AT - due to being thin and flat - is a much more comfortable/easier to deploy ankle option than the 642. Further, I really don't understand why some folks say the trigger on a P3AT is stiff, difficult to pull, etc. Now, the trigger on the P11 I had was abysmal but the trigger on my P3AT seems pretty good for an SD gun, to me. I have stated in other threads that crack-addled, male silverback gorrillas aren't a common threat in my area. Neither are psychotic rhinoceros. If they were, I might worry about the ability of the .380 to do its job. As it is, I still like to carry something 'bigger' when clothing and situation allow but I do not worry that my .380 would be ineffective against potential human assailants. One thing that I do believe is very important when carrying a smaller caliber such as a .380 is ammo selection. To my mind, larger calibers would certainly be more 'forgiving' of poor ammo selection. Personally, I stick with (now 'older' tech) Federal Hydrashoks. The reason I choose to do so is that the results of every test I have found indicate that, while they do not expand a great deal, expansion appears to be pretty consistent across the board and they also consistently penetrate a gel equivalent of 12 to 13 inches.

I wore one for nearly the entire time I was in college. That was in the 1990s and a lot of guys wore them - especially at UT. During that time, I came to like them as I hate having a lot of stuff in my pockets. Before I carried, I still sometimes wore one just because I like them. Sometimes, I might still wear one even if my gun is in my pocket because having a gun in my pocket really leaves little room (just the one, remaining pocket) for cell phone, pocket knife, flashlight and other stuff that I wouldn't carry in a back pocket. As far as it not being fashionable, if I tried really hard I might be able to manage to give less of a damn about 'fashion' than I already do. Probably not, though. Carrying in a waist pack/fanny pack or whatever you want to call them is not my first choice. My main concern has always been that such a pack might be easy for a thief to grab from around the waist and run. I now have one that is specifically made for concealed carry, however, and in addition to the integrated belt/strap it also has a belt loop on the back of the pack, itself, so that your normal belt can be passed through it. With that, there isn't any more danger of the pack being 'snatched' than a regular holster. Maybe less than some. Being that I live in an area that is surrounded by 'out-doorsy' type tourist destinations (the GSMNP, the Cherokee National Park, many state parks, the Tellico Mountains/Cherohala Skyway/'Tail of the Dragon' and so on) I really believe the idea that folks see a fanny/waist pack and automatically assume the person is carrying is a myth propagated by gun magazines and other HCP holders (personally, I assume that anyone I meet in public could be carrying, fanny pack or not) just as I don't believe a normal, fleece vest worn in the Fall will make most members of the general public assume you have a gun. I will grant, however, that I would no more wear a camo waist pack in an urban/public setting and think I was being 'discreet' than I would wear a photographer's vest and think I was 'discreetly' carrying. I actually have a camo waist pack for possible hunting/fishing use but the ones I would wear in public are either black cloth/nylon or - in the case of the one made for concealed carry - black leather. I think the camo pattern (ubiquitous as it is among the 'fashionable', right now) would draw more attention than the pack, itself. I don't carry in a waist pack very often but they can be useful for certain situations. The reason I bought the one I have that is specifically made for concealed carry was that we went to Florida earlier this year. Our TN permits are valid for carry in Florida but the Sunshine State law requires 100% concealed carry. As I don't know how picky they are when deciding what qualifies as legally 'concealed' in their state, I bought a concealed carry waist pack. I figured (and rightly so, I believe) that at the beach - much like in the mountains - waist packs would be so common as to not even draw a second glance from most folks.

The way I read the story, the burglar wasn't already in the car and fleeing. Instead, he went to his car and appeared to be reaching in it for something. At that point, the homeowner (who was still on his own property) believed that the burglar was reaching for a gun. Such a belief, IMO, would result in the homeowner having a reasonable fear of death or serious, bodily injury as nothing is to say that the burglar wasn't planning to retrieve a gun from the car and come back into the homeowner's house - possibly planning to kill the homeowner and the homeowner's young son. As the burglar doesn't seem to be coming forward to tell his side of the story, the homeowner's version is the only one being told and I imagine LEOs are willing to take that at face value. Even if the lowlife had been killed and there was no gun, the homeowner had no way of knowing - at the time - that there was no gun and no reason to believe the burglar wasn't reaching for one. Therefore, based on the fact that the scumbag had just broken into his home, it would seem to me that the reasonable FEAR of death or serious, bodily injury would still stand. Of course, I am not a lawyer. I'm simply stating why, if I were called as a juror in such a case, I would refuse to go along with a guilty verdict of any kind. I know state law says we can't shoot in defense of property and can't shoot if the assailant is retreating and I would abide by that. That doesn't mean a jury would convict someone who did (I know that if I were on the jury it certainly wouldn't - might end in a hung jury but not a conviction.) Personally, if a lowlife gets killed as the result of his own actions (i.e. breaking into someone's home) I don't really give a crap.

Cool! I checked at some point yesterday and it still wasn't. Thanks again, Fallguy!

I think we can all learn a lesson from this. That lesson is - with a through and through on an adult male's thigh leaving enough energy to also penetrate the opposite ankle when fired from a handgun length barrel maybe the little .410, at least with slugs, isn't as anemic as some would have us believe. As far as other, possible lessons - such as having your firearm in a holster or otherwise secured and not picking it up by the trigger - I have faith that my fellow TGOers already had those covered.

This is an interesting discussion. My take on the scenario as posted by the OP is that there is sufficient warning/space that I and mine can hide, get away and call 911 without drawing attention to ourselves. That is exactly what I would do. I will not risk my life for that of a stranger (with the possible exception of a small child.) Sure, it might be hard to live the rest of my life thinking about that poor, murdered cashier but it would be a whole lot harder to live the rest of my life if I am dead. I also think I have a slightly different take on protecting my family than some others. To me, protecting my family doesn't just mean ushering my wife, my mom, etc. to safety in an immediate incident. It also means being there to help care for my mom as she gets older. It means being there for my wife on a daily basis in the years to come and being around to help protect her and our home for as long as I can. No one can know how long they have but getting myself killed over a stranger for whom I honestly have no real feelings does not fit into that plan. I have a much greater responsibility to my loved ones (whether friends or family) than I do to the cashier at Walmart.

I have a P3AT and see no reason to own another pocket .380 but if I didn't already have that P3AT and were in the market for a pocket .380 I'd be looking awfully closely at the Bersa CC or even the Taurus PT 738 TCP (although I am not so sure about trusting Taurus semiautos.) For me, neither the Hellcat nor the Ruger LCP would be in the running because if I were going that route then I'd just buy the gun that both of those more or less ripped off - the aforementioned P3AT. Is your Bersa Thunder the standard model or the CC (Concealed Carry) model? It has been nearly two years since I held one of the CC models but from what I remember, while I don't think it is quite as small/lightweight as a P3AT/LCP, etc. it is a little smaller and lighter than the standard model - not to mention being pretty much completely 'dehorned'. In case yours is the standard model and you haven't seen one, this is what Bersa's Thunder CC .380 model looks like (I only mention it because you said your wife likes your Bersa):

This. And this.

I rarely watch that show because the pawn shop owner and his kids are all annoying, bullying a-holes (not to mention I hate most reality shows, in general.) The pawnshop owner also strikes me as a bit slimy and probably crooked. I did happen to see that episode, however (actually watched it because the fact they were buying/'training' with firearms figured so prominently in the previews) and rather than thinking the gun shop owner is just a hot head I had to wonder what the jackass pawnshop owner had already done/said previously that producers, etc. edited out. The gun shop owner had probably told them no discounts on the front end or maybe had already given them discounts on other stuff and the pawnshop owner probably just continued to push his buttons. Why in the hell did the pawnshop owner think he should get a 'discount' on the holsters, anyhow? After all, he was buying new gear from a regular store not some second hand stuff from a pawnshop like the one he owns.

Not only that but also I believe that the over-use of antibacterial soaps and hand sanitizers, just like the over-use of antibiotics, can result in germs that are simply more resilient and resistant to existing agents. The country's obsession with killing 99.9% of germs all the time, any time, anywhere they might exist will just lead to 'superbugs' and 'megagerms' that won't be killed by anything short of highly caustic chemicals. I'm not saying that being sanitary isn't important - of course it is - but exposure to a few germs here or there is better than helping engineer the 'master race' of cooties. Heck, there are bacteria and micro-organisms that have evolved to be able to live in the hot, highly acidic pools in Yellowstone Park. If the little buggers can evolve to live there then they can eventually evolve to survive anything, including antibacterial soaps and cleaners, which will make it increasingly difficult to maintain a sanitized environment where it is really needed, such as in hospitals and similar locations. Throw in a general lack of immunity/resistance from living in such a sanitized world and you get a recipe for the same thing to happen to us that smallpox did to the Native Americans a few centuries ago. We won't need zombies or Al Queda to devastate the population - an overly sanitized lifestyle could do it just as well.

While I do believe that the former officer deserves stiff punishment for his actions, I also find it disgusting how the friends and family of Mr. Brown seem to have tried to turn him into some kind of a saint. They talk about what a great father he was. His wife talks about what a great husband he was. Sorry, to me a great father and husband isn't out drunk off his ass, hitting the clubs and bars in the wee hours of the morning and groping a woman who isn't his wife, and who he doesn't even know, against her will. I'm not saying he should have been killed for it but Mr. Brown played his own part in the events that lead to his death. I'm also going to say something else that may not win me any popularity contests - simply having been a veteran of the Marines or any other branch of service really doesn't mean jack about his character any more than having been a cop is any testament to the character of the now former officer.

Good info! My EDC flashlight (which I carry even when I can't carry a firearm) is an Inova X1 that I bought at Target for around $20. It has a 'button' on the tail cap that acts as a momentary switch with the end cap not twisted all the way tight (with bright and dim settings) or the cap can be tightened all the way for constant on (also with bright and dim settings.) It is rated at 55 lumens on the brightest setting. It isn't a laser cutting torch nor is it a lightsaber but it is plenty bright and throws a nice beam. Best of all it uses a single, simple AA battery. I replaced the first battery after about two months, just to be on the safe side, but it was still powering the flashlight. I used to carry a minimag in a belt holster but this light is smaller (fits in my pocket) and brighter - even though I had the three LED conversion on the mini-mag and it uses more batteries (also AA) that didn't last as long. Now, I am not an 'operator' nor am I very tacti-cool but the little Inova serves me and my more mundane needs just as well as I believe a Surefire, etc. could do. Inova X1 Features The one pictured at the link is 'greyish' in color. Mine is black.

Halt or I shall say, "Halt," again!

Nah, they were already dead. My coop is subdivided into three, separate sections and that section held a pair of bantams that were (unlike the full-sized chickens in the other two sections) more or less pets, to me. Something had killed them the night before which is why I was on the lookout for the culprit to return. Being there was no visible way for it to have gotten in (as in no hole dug in the ground under the coop) I figured than any critter who knew how to get in there was probably the killer. Finding the possum in there the very next night I decided I needed to take it out before it did get to my other chickens. Not long afterward I bought a 6.5 inch barreled Rough Rider so I could use .22 WMR for such tasks. I didn't make a meal out of the possum (blech!) but a few years later I had some more chickens killed (again, some of my bantams - why can't they pick on the bigger chickens that I don't think of as 'pets'?) That time the killer who returned to the scene of the crime the next night was a raccoon. Once dispatched, I figured it had eaten my chickens so I would return the favor. I cleaned/processed it, boiled it a little to remove the fat (although there really wasn't much) and put it on the smoker over some red oak and cherry. Made a nice, homemade barbecue sauce and had some 'coon sandwiches. To me, it tasted a lot like barbecued beef but the texture was different. I took some in a ziplock bag to see if my sister, brother in law or any of their kids wanted to try it and my youngest nephew (was about six at the time) ended up eating every bit of what I took them, straight out of the bag with no sauce or anything. He loved it. There are jerks and bad people involved with anything. For the most part, though, I believe that an animal that lives its life in the wild and meets an end through ethical hunting practices has it a lot better than many or even most animals that are raised/butchered by factory meat farms and processors. Just for informational purposes only, my grandfather in law did call TWRA about some raccoons that were destroying his garden and scattering his compost pile. He planned to trap them in a live trap and wondered if TWRA had some sort of relocation program. He was told that TWRA does not relocate and that it would be illegal for him to do so. The advice he was given was to trap them then kill and dispose of them. That isn't to say that others shouldn't call, too, if even just to have a date/time/name of TWRA personnel from whom they received the advice, just in case.