JAB

Some people - hell, sometimes I think most people - need a big, ol' dose of Mind Your Own Damned Business! Sounds like this guy is one of those people.

Took a look at that, online. The ankle holster I use for the P3AT is the same type of ankle holster - sort of a 'generic' version that I bought at a gun show for fifteen bucks. It works great with the thin/light P3AT.

TN laws are also in line with so-called 'Castle Doctrine' in that if you are in fear of death or serious, bodily injury there is no duty to retreat or attempt to retreat before responding to the threat with deadly force. This applies not only in your own home but anywhere that you have a legal right to be. In other words, apparently in some states if a BG kicks down your front door you are legally required to try and escape or 'retreat' from him, even though you are in your own home. Only if the BG chases you to, say, your bedroom and has you cornered where you can no longer retreat are you considered 'justified' in using deadly force. Thankfully, this is not the case in TN nor in most other states that have laws based in the Castle Doctrine. 39-11-611. Self-defense. ... ( (1) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force against another person when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. (2) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, if: (A) The person has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury; ( The danger creating the belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury is real, or honestly believed to be real at the time; and © The belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds

I don't ankle carry very often. When I do, FWIW, for me even my Airweight 642 isn't nearly as comfortable in an ankle holster as my P3AT. The revolver would probably be better, overall, as an ankle gun but it starts to 'bother' me after a couple of hours. I can wear the P3AT all day and even, sometimes, forget it is there. That could be partly due simply to the different style of ankle holster I use/need for each, however.

Thanks!

Probably not important for the OP's target shooting needs but I have been wondering if the Vaquero models are built as strong as the Blackhawk models? I know some ammo companies make (or at one time, made) Redhawk/Blackhawk specific hunting ammo, and some reloading manuals have loads that are only supposed to be used in Redhawks, Blackhawks, etc. because they are built tough enough to handle those hotter loads. Will the Vaquero models handle such loads, too? I've been kind of wanting a single-action centerfire revolver. In that format, I would actually prefer fixed sights but could accept adjustable if it meant getting a stronger gun.

Last summer we went on a cruise that left out of New York City. I have pics of the Statue of Liberty that I took from the deck. We only spent one night and part of a day in the city. There are plenty of things that I didn't get to see and would have liked to but I really don't give a damn if I never set foot there, again. The coolest part about it, to me, was the cemetary that was across the street from our hotel. It is the Calvary Cemetery and is one of the oldest and largest cemeteries in the U.S. As of the 1990s there were three million burials there - I am sure there are many more, now. I enjoyed having the opportunity to eat lunch at a Peruvian restaurant (food was good) and the Irish-themed neighborhood pub where we had dinner was pretty cool. That said, Atlanta is about as big a city as I care to visit and there are plenty of good restaurants there to keep me busy for a long time without having to leave the good, ol' South (or leave my gun at home.) Somebody had/has some money to have a family crypt like this - the statues are pretty much lifesize: Unfortunately, this one had a broken window so I got a pic of the inside, too. Strange that the only marked entombment there is a girl who died in the 1920s - where are her parents (who must be dead, by now) and the rest of her family? And finally the chapel: I have a lot more pics of the cemetery, crypts, monuments, gravestones, etc. but I won't bore you with more. Yes, I am exactly the type of person who goes to one of the largest and most culturally diverse cities on Earth and finds a cemetery to be my favorite part. Just so I don't come across as completely nuts, though:

Funny (and pretty accurate with regard to the liberal example.) Still, I have to call BS. A real, modern Republican would get an illegal alien to do the lawn work for twenty bucks.

Which is why a better law would be one that simply says that an employer has no right, whatsoever, to search my property (my car) or tell me what I can have inside it regardless of where it happens to be parked. Such a bill doesn't even have to specifically mention firearms.

Our 'Republican' governor has said that he won't push such a bill but that he would sign one if it hit his desk. By the fact that he is (BS statements claiming he has nothing to do with running Pilot aside) part of a large company - an employer (one that at least some reports claim forbids employees from having firearms in their vehicles in their parking lot) - and by the fact that he belonged to Bloomberg's anti-gun group until he saw that showing his true colors might not be politically expedient, I'd say that he is reluctant to sign such a bill. The best way to not have to sign such a bill into law but not break his promise would be, of course, to use whatever influence he might have in the state Senate and House to kill such bills before they even have a chance of getting to him. For that reason, my guess is that it doesn't make a damn bit of difference how much support such a bill gets or from where because the Republicans in the legislature will want to 'play nice' with the Republican governor. Throw in the fact that the Republican Speaker of the House has said, basically, that she didn't want to fool with any firearms related legislation this year and the claims that he changed the bill due to 'lack of support' starts sounding like a line of bull to cover the reality that he rolled over to pressure from within his own party. Funny, if we had a Democrat in the Governor's office right now then the Republicans just might try to push such bills and even over-ride vetos if only to embarrass him. With a Republican who I don't believe to be particularly gun-rights friendly in office, however, they will want to play nice, kiss butt and back off when told. As it stands, even if passed this bill will do little or nothing. Many companies seem to put their 'no guns in the parking lot' statement into their HR rules and procedures. Such companies have no reason to go through even a slight amount of trouble or spend even a minor amount of time changing those policies so most if not all will take the easiest route and leave those policies in place rather than fooling with it.

Cluttered up? The purpose of the subforum seems to be to alert us about places that have either legally posted or attempted to post. If it were intended for places that were legally posted, only, then I doubt that the owner of the forum would have put this in the FAQ that is stickied at the top of the page telling how he intended the forum to work (I have underlined and bolded the pertinent line):

Maybe, but that is an 'if' that we can't know for sure. I'm not suggesting that we give them the Friends of Handgun Carrier Recognition Award or anything but I still see the bottom line as them not outright prohibiting carry/hanging gunbuster signs on all their locations (TN or not - although those signs would have no legal meaning in many states) despite having received complaints.

Damn it, I'm starting to itch just from reading this thread.

Again, I don't even have the option of running him through a computer. Just because someone is a cop doesn't mean I automatically trust them, their judgement, etc. as an individual. Therefore, if I have to tolerate his being armed while our transaction is carried out then he should have to extend HCP holders the same courtesy. Further, citizens/taxpayers have every right to question the judgement, actions, etc. of any public servant, period. I don't, necessarily, have a problem with police. I do have a problem that apparently, somewhere along the way, our society seems to have forgotten that police, politiicans, FBI agents, the ATF and all the other government employees work for us, not the other way around.

Honestly, I am not crazy about their food, either. The boneless, fried chicken breasts on Sundays are pretty good and some of their breakfast is okay but generally I grew up on 'country cooking' and would say that just about anyone's grandma in the South could kick the hell out of Cracker Barrel's food any day. Heck, I can cook that sort of thing better than they can. Still, some members of my family like eating there and my sister in law does work there. Further, I appreciate that they didn't just take the easy way out and prohibit carry, period. I will support them from time to time if for that reason, only.

To me, the bottom line is that we are still 100% legal and welcome to carry (concealed) at Cracker Barrel despite apparent complaints from antis. I call that a win and a very reasonable decision on the part of Cracker Barrel. Sure, maybe they didn't take the stand of risking losing business and $$$ based on a very small (insignificant, I'd say) number of customers/potential customers who insist on OC only and refuse to cover their firearm while they eat chicken and dumplings but for the vast majority of legal carriers this was a good compromise. Hell, I sometimes carry a Ruger P95 OWB in a belt slide holster right on my hip with only an unbuttoned shirt covering it. I have carried that way in Cracker Barrel both before and after this policy came about. In fact, I have carried that way in many places (where carry is not prohibited) and have not had anyone make a negative comment or even mention it. Not one, single time. A gun doesn't have to be jammed down your pants halfway to your knee or hidden in a secret pocket in your jacket to be concealed.

I currently have 'custody' of a revolver just like yours that belongs to my grandfather in law. He never shot/shoots it. I just wanted to try it out just to have shot it so I bought a couple of boxes of ammo for it. We found that my wife could shoot it well and liked the low recoil (this was before she got her HCP and a Kel Tec P32) so he told me to hang on to it, just don't let it go anywhere. We don't shoot it all that often as .32 S&W ammo runs in the neighborhood of $21 per box for Aguila lead round nose ammo. Still, I wouldn't sell the little guy even if it were mine to sell. In my opinion, unless the cash is needed to pay a bill, etc. guns like this are 'worth' more to keep and shoot, occasionally, or maybe to load up and hide somewhere in the house as a last-ditch (though not exactly optimal) SD tool than the relatively small amount of money they would bring if sold. That said, I could probably see using such a gun as 'trading fodder' if the price were right and if it would help sweeten/seal a deal. That is just me, though. Anyhow, based on the few I have seen for sale, I'd say that $100 estimate is pretty much the right ballpark.

I can't/don't drink much, at all, right now due to health issues that may or may not eventually prove to be permanent. I am also not a lawyer and don't even watch 'courtroom dramas' on television all that much. That said, I will not be a prisoner in my own home, unable to even have a beer or glass of wine with dinner occasionally just because some low-life scumsucker might decide to break into my house. I mean, how far do we take it? I have a bad cold and can't sleep but I'm afraid that if I take NyQuil and have to shoot someone who is invading my home then the DA might say I was impaired? My allergies are flaring up but I dare not take any Benadryl before I go to bed just in case I have to shoot an intruder in the middle of the night?

First, there is such a thing as uniformity in company policy. I don't know if this is true but have read more than one comment claiming that Costco started posting because of something Kwik did - and that is only one person. I would think that something like handgun carry policy would have to be pretty well uniform at all stores. Further, I didn't necessarily word the post to which you responded as well as I could have. What I intended was that more than one Cracker Barrel seems to have had one or two individuals who frequently ate there and OC'd while doing so about whom other customers complained. By that, I mean that I don't think there was a problem of thousands of different people OCing in Cracker Barrel - just a relatively small number who seem to have garnered a lot of negative attention. So, yes, I will say it and people can spout that 'troll' BS if they want - OC in places like Cracker Barrel and similar, public places is, in my opinion, likely to do more harm than good to the ability to legally carry as I believe it is much more likely to bring about more restrictions than it is to 'educate' or 'desensitize' non-carriers. I have no problem with the general practice of OC but there are places where open carry is appropriate and places where it isn't. OC while pumping gas, walking across a parking lot at night, walking the sidewalks in town - I completely understand why someone would prefer OC in such situations (although such is generally not my choice) but I do not see it as being worth the risk of negative attention while sitting by the fireplace at Cracker Barrel. The fact of the matter is that, if it comes down to complaints by non-carriers, we who choose to carry are vastly outnumbered and such establishments can better afford to piss us off and lose our business than have it become a big issue with the public, at large. Jeez, why can't OCers just throw on a damned shirt that covers their gun, eat their biscuits and gravy and not spur policy changes that may well eventually have negative results for everyone who chooses to carry? As I already said, I understand OCing as a deterrent to crime in certain circumstances. That said, last I checked Cracker Barrel wasn't exactly a big-time thug hangout. What the hell are folks trying to deter while sitting at Cracker Barrel? The grandma from the next table bludgeoning them with her walker so she can steal their last bite of country ham? All joking aside, I realize that there is a possibility that bad things can happen anywhere and, more importantly, leaving a firearm in the vehicle when we go in and eat just opens up too much potential for the gun being stolen from the vehicle, etc. Just cover it up and you will have it if you need it while lessening the possibility of some, stupid sign hung on the front door preventing any of us from legally carrying there. I would much prefer the minor, extra step of brushing aside my cover garment before presenting my handgun to having nowhere left to go for entertainment or dining out after even places like Cracker Barrel post because a few people insisted on OCing.

I had a buddy whose father died when we were in the seventh grade. When he graduated high school and got ready to go to college, he and his mother moved to a condo in Knoxville. I was there visiting one day and someone (a telemarketer, it sounded like) called asking for his dad. Now, keep in mind that this was something like six or seven years after his dad died, his dad had never lived at that address and they got a completely different phone number when they moved. The best part was my buddy's response to the caller (I guess we were buddies because we were equally smartass.) What I heard on my buddy's end of the conversation: "Uh...no. He isn't here. No, I really don't expect him back any time soon."

I generally will avoid businesses that even attempt to post even if posted incorrectly simply because they are telling me they don't want my money. However, I do not view entering via an entrance with no sign as an attempt to pretend you don't know the other signs are there. Instead, I view it as being in compliance with the law which requires a business/corporation to post all public entrances in order to legally be wholly off-limits to legal carry. I believe the law also speaks to posting certain portions of buildings as being off limits. In other words, my non-lawyer view is that it is in complete compliance with the law to enter via a public entrance that isn't posted while carrying no matter how many other entrances are posted. I do think it would not be wise to enter via such an unposted door with a Drako pistol slung over your shoulder just to make a point, however.

I'd like to know what the 'certain circumstances' which are excepted are. It would make sense if the law said, "except when the Sheriff, an officer or staff member of the Sheriff's office or person with known connections to or official influence over the Sheriff is the subject of the seearch and/or arrest." Too many more exceptions than that and it starts becoming a 'feel good' bill that will have no teeth. EDIT: I read the actual bill summary and it looks like the 'exceptions' are pretty much the ones I listed (with a couple more sensible ones that didn't occur to me.) Looks pretty good!

My understanding is that this was more a problem with one or two individuals who frequently eat/ate at (and OC'd in) Cracker Barrel - and about whom other customers complained on more than one occasion - rather than a high number of OCers.

I generally use the term 'magazine' or just 'mag'. I wonder, though, if there was argument about the term when it first started being used in the current manner. After all, a magazine is actually a building or room where gunpowder, explosives and munitions are stored, not part of a gun, right? The clip vs. magazine thing doesn't bother me but now you have hit on one of my pet peeves. Why would anyone eat smoked barbecue if they don't want to taste the smoke? Too many places around here somehow manage to cook with wood, in a smoker, but still manage to make the barbecue taste like it was cooked in an electric oven. Why go through the trouble of smoking the meat? Me, I want to taste the smoke. Sauce should be secondary - and complimentary - to the flavor of the smoked meat - emphasis on smoked. Heck, do the smoke right and you don't necessarily even need sauce - especially with a good dry rub. I like ribs that are smoked so heavily that they make my lips a little numb and my hands still smell like smoke three hours later no matter how many times I wash them. Clipazine. Magaclip.

Tactically inferior or not doesn't matter to this thread. The FACT that open carry has caused problems and policy changes at Cracker Barrel does. That Cracker Barrel's response to customer complaints by banning open carry, period, likely indicates how other establishments will react is also quite important. The possibility of having establishments that were previously not posted become posted establishments due to customer complaints about open carry is also important as simply posting a sign banning all carry would actually be a lot easier than making it necessary for managers, etc. to approach those who choose to OC in order to ask them to take their firearm back to their car.