JAB

I have taken to pocket carrying a lot.  It isn't my favorite method but it works, keeps the firearm accessible and is a pretty 'low key' way to carry as far as being 'made'.   I do prefer to carry in a belt holster and I will carry that way at times.  When I do so, it is in an OWB holster with a cover garment.  Depending on a person's build, I think it is possible to conceal just as well using that method as with an IWB holster (I simply cannot do IWB.)   Obviously, if I carry one of my larger handguns then I cannot pocket carry and will belt carry but I also sometimes choose to belt carry even when carrying my J-frame.  One thing I have noticed about myself that I have also seen mentioned by some, other people on this forum is that I have changed my carry habits after having the HCP for a few years.  There was a time when I would most often belt carry a 9mm OWB with a cover garment, a spare mag on the weak side and a small BUG in my weak side pocket.  On some, rare occasions I would even have a second BUG in an ankle holster.  Now, most often I carry my J-frame (either in a pocket or in an OWB holster) along with a single reload in a speed strip and feel adequately armed for the environs in which I normally find myself.  That, of course, makes concealment much easier.  Now, if I am going to an area where the threat level is higher than the areas I normally frequent there is a good chance I will still go with the higher capacity pistol and a spare mag with a cover garment but those times are relatively few.   So as far as OC or CC goes, I tend to CC in public.  Sometimes, though, for me CC means simply using a cover garment over an OWB holster.  On such occasions, I generally don't stress too much about 'incidental exposure' nor am I overly concerned about 'printing' when I pocket carry.  I believe that is a big part of the reason TN didn't go with 'CC only' when writing the carry laws - not so much to encourage open carry as to prevent folks who are CCing from catching grief over accidental/incidental exposure such as their cover garment blowing aside in the wind, etc. (although OC is perfectly legal and, of course, up to the individual.)   At home or at my neighbors' houses (my mom is my neighbor on one side and my sister, BIL and their kids are my neighbors on the other) I pretty much always OC.  Heck, for that matter we live in a rural area so a lot of the time around there I will be carrying a shotgun instead of or in addition to a handgun.

  I don't recall seeing any post in this thread where anyone is calling for the government to step in and stop the stupidity.  Instead, some of us are pointing out that if people who are buying ammo at inflated prices from profiteers would simply and voluntarily stop doing so then the stupidity would likely come to an end all on its own and that would be better for all of us who want to buy and shoot ammo.

  Not so much telling them what to do with their money as telling them that paying such inflated prices is pretty stupid and only perpetuates the problem.   I still do not agree that this is simply the 'free market'.  Unlike the normal 'free market', where the majority of the ammo buying public has the same access to, for instance, Walmart ammo at Walmart prices, the profiteers are interfering with such access by using dishonest tactics (such as bypassing the purchase limits) to clean out the ammo case at Walmart before anyone else has a chance to make a purchase.  Further, these profiteers are not buying ammo for personal use but with the intention of reselling the ammo at a markedly inflated prices - prices not driven by normal, market forces but by the fact that they have created for themselves a defacto 'monopoly' on ammo supplies.  So, again, these people are interfering with the normal flow of the free market.

  Well, some of them, anyway.  I don't shoot my centerfire, semiauto pistols much, anymore and I have some ammo onhand for them.  In centerfire handguns, I mainly shoot .38/.357 revolvers and I do reload for them.  I still buy a box or two here and there in .44 Mag but will keep the brass to reload - plus I don't shoot a lot of .44 so that isn't a big deal.   My main gripe is .22LR and, to a lesser degree, .22WMR.  Those were the guns I was shooting absolutely the most before the 'shortage'.  I have a decent amount of both on hand so it isn't like I can't shoot them, ever, but I was doing a pretty high volume of rimfire shooting - both handgun and long gun - before the current silliness because the ammo was relatively inexpensive.   I know your solution is that you don't even own a .22LR and reload other calibers just as cheaply but I have guns in LR and WMR that I love shooting and that are among my most fun guns to shoot.  Plus I am not in a position where I am ready to take the bullet casting plunge - at least not at this time.

  I have no authority to tell anyone what to do with their money.  However, when someone does something stupid that negatively impacts my ability to purchase ammo at a reasonable price then I damned well have the right to speak up and say that I don't like it and wish that such buyers would stop making dumbass decisions that negatively impact anyone who would like to purchase ammo at a more reasonable price.   Further, skirting purchase limit rules and cleaning out shelves of ammo at normal, retail price then reselling it is not simply the 'free market'.  It is profiteers creating a false market and, in a sense, interfering with the normal operation of the free market.

  Because in this case someone else's willingness to pay an inflated price to purchase ammo from profiteers directly impacts the rest of the buying public's ability to walk into a Walmart, LGS, etc. and purchase ammo at normal, retail prices.  It continues to give the profiteers incentive to go into Walmart, skirt the purchase limits by having their friends make straw purchases of ammo for them, clean out the Walmart shelves and not leave any ammo for people who just want to buy a box or two to shoot.  This creates a false market which negatively impacts all, potential ammo buyers - not just the one who decides to pay inflated prices to a profiteer.   If it were just a matter of one guy saying, "Hey, I happen to have more ammo than I need.  I will sell some of it to you at a premium," then that would be one thing.  Encouraging profiteers to continue buying up all the ammo they can get in order to resell it, resulting in a lack of ammo on the shelf for 'regular' shooters to buy, is a completely different matter.

  That was kind of what I was getting at - if enough states would pass such laws.  I'm not saying that I think they will but if they did and if the state legislatures, state LEO and local LEO had the determination needed to enforce them then it really wouldn't matter what the SC said.  In that case, such state laws wouldn't be 'meaningless'.       I agree with you on this.  That is partly why I say that neither the Dems nor the Repubs are our 'friends' on this issue.  The Repubs whine that if we would just vote for them then they would change things - then we give them control of the legislature and the Governor's mansion and all they do is hem and haw about how they can't pass more pro-gun laws because it would hurt businesses and other such bullcrap.

  Man, that sucks.  There are few enough places accessible to the public for bank fishing, camping, etc. left as it is without having one of them ruined for your kids and grandkids by something like this.

  True, and that got boring.  Honestly, while characters who are 'conflicted' can be interesting, I think that the Rick character on the television show is too conflicted.  He is beginning to seem too wishy-washy to have survived this long in a post-apocalyptic world.  The Rick character in the comic is not as 'likeable' in some ways and his version of being 'conflicted' is that he sometimes feels bad about having brutally killed someone (which doesn't stop him from doing it) but I think I find the comic book version to be more interesting.   If it had been the comic book version of Rick who had been approached by Herschel and told about how Carl shot the young guy who appeared to be surrendering after the raid on the prison, I think he would have said, "Well, that's too bad.  It really is.  But I'm sure Carl used his judgement and thought the kid was a threat.  Better him than one of us."

  I see what you are saying and I even agree to a certain extent where the television show (but not the comic) is concerned.  I think the 'human conflict in a zombie filled world' angle is possibly 'easier' to work more effectively in the comic.  That said, if all they are doing every week is running around killing zombies then the show just turns into an extended version of another (bad) B movie.  There has to be a balance between all out zombie fighting and the human drama aspect.  Again, I think the comic does a little better job of it but then the human vs. human conflicts in the comics are generally a lot more violent and bloody - exemplifying that even the living are 'The Walking Dead' because survivors, even the 'good guys', have to be every bit as brutal as the zombies in order to survive.   Gouging out the Governor's eye with a shard of broken glass was Sesame Street material compared to what Michonne did to him in the comics (after he repeatedly and brutally raped her.)  Let's just say it involved a board, some nails, a pair of pliers, a blowtorch, a spoon and her sword and left him, um, violated, missing one arm, one eye and one other, important part of the male anatomy.  And she was careful to make sure there was at least a decent chance that he would survive the ordeal and have to live with it.   I don't necessarily think that the writers need to get back to fighting zombies all the time and I think that, as long as the zombies remain an important element, the living vs. living conflicts can be more interesting than the living vs. undead conflicts.  However, in order for that to work the writers will have to find some way to bring more 'tension' to the living vs. living conflicts - a feat which the comic manages through the use of a level of brutality that probably wouldn't make it on television, even on a basic cable channel - while not letting the zombies drop out of the picture completely.   Heck, in the comics there is a group of people with whom Rick's group comes into conflict who are, basically, marauders running a 'protection' racket on a few, other settlements.  These marauders actually keep zombies staked/chained around the perimeter of their headquarters as a first line of defense against living invaders.

  Could be.  I am not a turkey hunter so I didn't realize that the 2 3/4 inch #4 and #6 loads (the ones that, in the Remington version, for instance, usually have a picture of a rabbit on the box) were popular for turkey hunting, too.  I thought most folks used the 3 inch Magnum version or the ones marketed as 'turkey loads' for that.       I know they generally ramp up their stock on the shells specifically marked as 'turkey loads' during turkey season and don't really stock them at other times but I was thinking that I remembered, in the past, that one could buy the 'regular' 2 3/4 inch #6 and even #4 at Walmart just about any time of the year.  I could, of course, be wrong.   Not a huge deal, I guess.  Mostly I wanted them for (to paraphrase one of your posts) blow stuff up at close range while conserving my other ammo.  I know the 100 round value packs of #8 are available but #4 and #6 just seem like more fun. 

Pretty funny - but I am not sure that the 'I survived the gun control scare of 2013' statement isn't still a bit premature at this point. 

  Well, if enough states would pass such nullification laws and enough people decide that these nullification laws do have meaning then it may not matter what the Supreme Court says.   If I remember my history classes correctly, when Andrew Jackson was POTUS, the Supreme Court ruled in a case blocking him from removing the Cherokee from their native lands.  Jackson responded that they had made their decision but he wanted to see them enforce it.  They could not, of course, and so the Trail of Tears proceeded.   Why not a reversal of that?  If enough states declared such Federal laws 'null and void' - instructing the state agencies and LEO within their states to not enforce these Federal laws and perhaps even to block Federal enforcement of said laws?  What if enough of the citizenry of those states supported their state lawmakers in doing so?  In such an instance, it would be sort of a reversal of the Andrew Jackson situation - as in the Supreme Court has made their decision supporting the Feds, now let's see them enforce it.   The Feds would then be left with a choice: stop enforcing such laws or send Federal forces to overwhelm local and state forces as well as private citizens in order to enforce them.  I don't think anyone wants another Civil War so that option would likely not be a very attractive one for the Feds.

  The same begins being true in the comics as the storyline progresses along.  In the later issues of the comics, hoards are still a concern but individual or small groups of undead are no, big deal.  In fact, in the comics, the group becomes so blase about zombies that it sometimes causes them to be less careful than they should - which on occasion comes back to bite them (literally.)   I am coming to realize that the comics (and the show) aren't really a 'zombie story'.  Instead, both are attempting to tell a story of human survival in a world that happens to be overrun with zombies.  The story also investigates how some people may become downright evil while others may do some pretty dark things even as they attempt to remain 'good'.  It also explores why even the 'evil' people may not think of themselves as 'evil' and sometimes even gives some decent justification of why they would feel that way.   I have also come to realize, from reading the comics, that The Walking Dead does not necessarily mean what I thought it meant.  At one point in the prison, in the comics story line, Rick states that the group knows that they are all already infected.  He also says that they have no idea how long each of them will survive.  Further, he talks about how they have had to do things and will have to do things that might have been unimaginable to them before the dead rose.  He ends with the statement that he and his group, not the zombies, are really the walking dead (and he actually uses the term, 'walking dead'.)  So, in that sense, the title of the comics and the television show - The Walking Dead - isn't talking about zombies.  It is talking about the survivors, how their former lives have ended, how a less than peaceful death is almost inevitable for all of them and the idea that the people they were, before, are largely gone - i.e. 'dead' - already.   Possible Comic Series Spoiler:   There is even a scene in the comics where a hoard that is at least as big as the one that attacked Herschel's farm in the television show manages to break into the walled community where Rick et al. are living.  At first, everyone is fighting them.  Eventually, the town is overrun and the living retreat into the shelter of buildings.  Due to a need to protect building Carl is in, however, Rick ends up back on the street, fighting the hoard alone.  Michonne comes to help him and, not wanting to leave the two of them to die without trying to help, other members of Rick's group as well as other folks living in the community come out to help.  In the end, roughly twelve or so living people with mostly melee weapons kill off the majority of the hoard and save the town.   At one point in the comics, Rick even comes out and says, basically, that the dead aren't really that big a threat.  He goes on to say that the dead are manageable and that they don't even seem all that scary, anymore.  Instead, he says, it is the living that are the real threat.  He says that it is the living that he and his group really need to fear.  For that matter, just doing a quick 'from memory' calculation in my head, I am thinking that by time the comics reach the current issue, more 'main' characters have been killed by other, living people than have been taken out by zombies.   Another, Possible Comic Series Spoiler:   In the comics, Rick's group runs into and ends up being stalked by a group of cannibals.  When they find and confront the group, Rick and a few of the other characters hold them down, hack them up with hatchets, knives, etc. and throw their bodies into a fire.  Rick kind of feels badly about it, later, but not enough that you get the sense he wouldn't do the same thing, again.  That is just one example (of many) that the Rick character in the comics is much more ruthless than the Rick in the television series - and that the Rick in the comics is very much changed from the person he was before the outbreak.

  Sorry about your ordeal but you did just answer a question for me.  I was in the Athens Walmart on Saturday and noticed that they had the Savage/Stevens just like the one I bought at Academy in their case.  I don't recall having seen one of them at any Walmart, before and I thought to myself, "I wonder if I could have gotten it cheaper here."  The answer is nope - sounds like Walmart's price was $10 more than what I paid at Academy.   I do wish you had been able to get it - having just bought one, myself I would have liked to have read your impressions of it.   I hear you on not buying firearms at Walmart, though.  My mom bought her .410 pump at the Lenoir City Walmart and it took over an hour of just standing there, waiting for them to get the paperwork done, locate the box and get a manager to walk us out of the store with the gun.  Academy was at least a little better - another guy was buying a shotgun when I was buying mine and they got me out in about half an hour or so.   Academy's setup was kind of weird, though.  They don't have registers at the gun counter (at least at the Knoxville location) so I had to walk up front and pre-pay for the background check, bring the receipt back to the gun counter, fill out the paperwork, wait for the check and then go back up front to pay for the shotgun.    For 'good buying experience', nothing beats my LGS and that is the reason I prefer to make most of my gun purchases there.  I just saw the Savage on the Academy website and couldn't pass up the price.

  Maybe serviced by different warehouses?  During the last ammo shortage, I asked a Walmart Sporting Goods employee (I think she was the Dept. Manager but can't swear to it) at the Rockwood store that same, basic question regarding her location and a few, other specific locations.  I was able to find .380 ammo at Rockwood when the other stores I visited hadn't had it in weeks.  She said, "They get their stock from a different warehouse."  Now, before anyone gets too excited, I was in the Rockwood store yesterday and they are pretty much as cleaned out as the other locations - although I did manage to pick up a couple of 'value packs' of Remington 12 gauge Sluggers which I haven't seen at other WM locations, lately.   Now, why do some warehouses seem to have more ammo to send out than others?  I have no idea and the employee I asked really wasn't sure, either.   On another, related note has anyone else noticed that plain, old 2 3/4 inch small game/field loads (like #4 and #6 shot) is as scarce at Walmart as .22LR?  They have the 2 3/4 inch #8 'target' loads and they have #6 in 3 inch Nitro Express Magnum.  They even, sometimes, have 2 3/4 inch 00 Buckshot loads but no 2 3/4 inch in #4 or #6.  That just strikes me as odd.

Wow...that is nice work.

IMO, felt recoil is dependent on many factors other than the 'gauge' of the gun.  For instance, I have an old single shot Stevens 20 gauge that I can't stand to shoot without a slip-on recoil pad.  I honestly cannot bear to put more than one or two through it and I am not all that recoil sensitive (I don't generally consider the recoil of a Mosin-Nagant to be a big deal, for instance.)  Honestly, that little 20 - even with target loads - hurts many times worse than my BIL's O/U 10 gauge using 3.5 inch loads.  With that slip-on recoil pad it is fine and even pleasurable but without it the darned thing kicks my butt.   Also, I don't think that semiautos always have less felt recoil.  I inherited a 16 gauge semiauto from my grandfather and, without a recoil pad, it slaps me just as badly as the little 20 I mentioned in the above paragraph.  Again, with a slip-on recoil pad it is fine but without one I just about couldn't stand shooting it - and certainly couldn't handle more than one mag-tube full at a time.   Further, I don't notice any more 'felt' recoil from my 12 gauge, 20 inch barreled Maverick Security 88 or my nephew's field model Maverick 88 12 gauge than I notice from his Remington 870 20 gauge (none of them have anything more than the factory butt plate/pad on them.)  I also have an old Sears bolt action 20 gauge that is pretty pleasant to shoot with no extra cushioning.  My old Springfield field length 12 gauge pump isn't unbearable without a recoil pad but it will certainly get your attention.  Point being that even within the same 'gauge' there can be a pretty wide range of felt/perceived recoil and going from a 12 to a lighter gauge will not necessarily guarantee less felt recoil or a more pleasant shooting experience.   Just yesterday evening I bought one of these from Academy:   http://www.academy.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product_10151_10051_519201_-1__?N=39632025   Since I live in an area where I can shoot in my back yard, I have actually tried it out, already.  I wanted to do a quick, informal pattern check so I ran one Remington #6 shot load, one Remington 00 Buck load, one Winchester Super X 00 Buck load and one S&B 'special' slug through it, back to back, and my shoulder is no worse for wear.  All of those were 2 3/4 inch loads - I generally don't even fool with 3 inch loads in 12 gauge (or 20 either, for the most part.)  For my type of shooting, I don't really see the need.  To me, the recoil from my new Stevens is more of a 'push' than a hit/slap.  This probably has to do with the angle of the buttstock as well as the extra stability offered by the pistol grip.  I was actually worried that the little fellah was going to kick the crud out of me because I think the buttstock is partly hollow but it proved to be pretty pleasant to shoot.  It isn't a high dollar shotgun but I am pretty sure I am going to like it.  I can only imagine how much more pleasant the recoil would be with one of the more expensive, recoil reducing stocks that has the pistol grip and a full stock.   My mom has a basic model Mossberg 500 .410 pump.  It has plastic, faux-wood furniture and its recoil is not unpleasant in the least.  In fact, it is a pretty fun little shotgun.   Mostly, I said all that to say just because one, particular shotgun in any, particular gauge might 'hurt' you, don't give up.  I'm willing to bet that somewhere out there is a gauge/gun/recoil pad combination that will be just right for you.  Heck, none of the shotguns I mentioned as being 'pleasant' or 'fun' to shoot had a price tag anywhere near $400.  At that price point, I would imagine you can find something that is both fun and comfortable.

I think I'd skip the .22.  I can just see the first encounter with a walking corpse going something like it did in The Return of the Living Dead where they put a pick-axe through a cadaver's brain and it didn't kill the thing.  I remember the one, young guy saying, "You mean the movie lied?"   Well, I ain't taking any chances on the movies/TV shows being wrong.  If I make a headshot on a zombie, I prefer that it remove most of the thing's head.  Even if destroying the brain doesn't 'de-animate' the corpse it would be pretty hard to locate me - much less bite me - after I turned its head to goo with a blast of 12 gauge buckshot.    I have said, before, that 'bugging out' would be low on my list of options so being able to carry around a bunch of ammo isn't that great a concern, for me.  If I get to the point that I don't have much ammo on me I'll just go back inside and get more.  For that reason, i would tend to lean more toward the 'horsepower' end of the equation.  Further, right now 12 gauge ammo is available and it is possible to get set up to reload 12 gauge ammo.  Good luck on finding a lifetime supply of .22LR if the undead apocalypse starts tomorrow.  Actually, I guess finding a 'lifetime' supply wouldn't be that hard - it's just that your 'lifetime' may not be all that long.   So, for my 'shelter in place' plan, my guns would be:   1. Long gun:  Short barreled 12 gauge pump with buckshot   2. Backup/handgun:  .44 Mag SBH. For slow shamblers, single action/reloading gate wouldn't be as big a concern and I am set up to reload for .44 Mag.  In a world where I am likely to never find parts, much less a gunsmith, I like the idea of having a handgun that is an absolute tank.   3. Melee:  No intention of going hand to hand with those things but would probably keep a good, stout ball-pean hammer at hand for 'just in case'.  I wouldn't want a bladed weapon because it would be too easy to get something like that stuck in a bone, skull, etc.   Now, if the 'any trauma to the brain is enough' argument proved to be true and if for some reason I had to hit the road, I still don't think I'd want to rely on .22LR.  Instead, I'd opt for .22WMR for increased ballistics and, IMO, better ammo reliability.  In that case, my choices would be:   1. Long gun:  Rossi .22WMR pump rifle.  Hey, it worked for Little Rock in Zombieland, right?  Plus that thing is just plain fun to shoot and I am pretty accurate with it using open sights.  If I am going to have to try and survive the undead apocalypse by shooting zombies in the head I might as well enjoy it, right?   2. Backup/Handgun:  .357 revolver.  In this case, the revolver would be more for dealing with potential breathing threats than for the undead - though it should pretty effectively splatter a zombie brain, too.   3. Melee:  A good, sturdy crow bar.  No, not a pry bar but a true crowbar aka very basic 'wrecking bar'.  One of about 18 inches in length.  Easy to slip through my belt for carry and good for smashing zombie skulls as well as for getting me into locked places if necessary to escape or scavenge for supplies.

  Oh, but slice Spam (not any of the knock-offs, not Treet or any of that second rate Spam wannabe junk) and fry it up nice and crispy in a skillet then put it on a sandwich with mustard and those 'parts' taste pretty, darned good!   I honestly do like the occasional fried Spam sandwich - but I was kind of using that to illustrate that I wasn't saying I had to have 'luxuries', necessarily, just that I don't want to live on mud pies with a little gravel for 'texture' and sleep in a rotten log for 40 years.

  When I was in the local Wally the other day they still had no handgun ammo but they did have a pretty good supply of Winchester Super X 00 Buckshot (I bought 2 of the 15 round boxes.)  They also seemed to have a pretty good supply of the 100 round packs of 12 gauge bird/target/field loads (those were scarce for a little while.)   Because shotgun ammo supplies seem to be trickling back in and because I honestly believe it will be the Summer of 2014 (at least) before ammo gets back to 'normal', I think I am starting to think along the same lines as you, Oh Shoot.  I honestly like shotguns but, strangely, don't usually have as much fun shooting them as I would think.  I am actually considering buying another 12 gauge to set up as mostly a 'fun' gun - just to bump up the 'enjoyment' factor - and maybe a sometimes truck gun.  I am thinking maybe a pistol-grip only pump (I have shot pistol gripped pumps - I know they are of limited use, which is why I don't want to convert any of my current ones which already have their own purposes - but they are fun) or a short-barreled, side by side double.  Right now - especially in the current market - the pump has a little bit of a lead over the double if only because I could get into a pump like I want for a good bit less $$$.

The story is pretty amazing.  However, to me, while the family 'survived' in that harsh environment for decades, they did not live.  Eating potato and seed patties, always on the verge of starvation, their hearts still beating and lungs still drawing air but with nothing to really enjoy in life.  No, thanks.   Truthfully, that is why I don't worry so much about maintaining a long-term 'bug out' bag, etc.  I try to have enough supplies at home to live for a while and I could see 'bugging out' for a week or so, depending on the situation.  However, if it means surviving in the wilderness, living hand to mouth and always being miserable for years on end then screw it.  I'm not talking about always having 'luxuries', I'm just talking about not spending years just surviving and being miserable the entire time.  I'll make it as long as I can then die at home with a beer in one hand and a Spam sandwich in the other.

I couldn't help but laugh at the way the guy in the 'training video' just stopped what he was doing and more or less jumped out the window, trusting a likely untested piece of equipment to keep him from a long fall with a sudden stop without even finding out what was going on, first.   Man, he is going to be seriously embarrassed when he finds out that someone's kid was visiting his mom's office and tripped the fire alarm without knowing what it was.  It will be a while before he lives that down around the water cooler.   "Hey, Ron, somebody left a bag of popcorn in the microwave too long and it scorched.  Better grab your backpack and be ready to hit that window!"   or, maybe,   "Yo, Jack, we just had a light bulb to blow out in the conference room.  It could be a fire hazard - better get your backpack!"   I'm not saying that something like this might not be a good thing to keep on hand, just in case, for someone who works in a high-rise (which, thankfully, I don't.)  I'm just saying that their demonstration video was so cheesy as to make it difficult to even take their product seriously.

  So if it is sometimes in a truck but sometimes in a car and sometimes in neither (as in when it is being shot, hopefully) would that make it a part-time truck gun?   Is this like the guys who wear Harley-Davidson shirts but don't own a motorcycle?   Then, again, there are Harley-Davidson editions of some pickup trucks (Ford F-series, I believe) so would a gun being hauled around in one of those be a truck gun, a Harley gun or what?  Would it make a difference if the driver were wearing a Harley-Davidson t-shirt?   Oh, and what if the vehicle is a Ranchero, an El Camino or one of those Subaru Bahas?  Would that be a car gun, a truck gun or maybe something like a cruck gun?

  See, I disagree.  I don't believe that either decision is inherently 'right' or 'wrong'.  Instead, I would agree with the second part of your statement and say that only the individual can decide, based on each, specific situation, what the 'right' thing to do would be.