DaveTN

Who cares if it was over his property or not? What was he “Protecting his property” from? If a 4 wheeler or a motorcycle ran through his property can he go out and blow the wheels off it? Of course not; what he did was reckless and criminal. Will he be convicted? That remains to be seen, if he has no criminal past the DA will probably make a deal with him that involves court supervision and paying for the drone. Or, the DA may use his case to set a case law precedent on the issue. This is a case of the legislature not keeping up with technology. When they address it will it create a free fire zone to shoot down drones? I think we all know the answer to that.

The guy said he didn't know if the drone was looking at the girls or not. The drone wasn't on or over his property when he shot it. If the value of the drone is over a certain amount it could be a felony and the guy could lose his gun rights. He sounds like the kind of irresponsible nut case that doesn't need to have a gun and gives all gun owners a bad name; we will see how it pans out in court.   If there is some law the operator violated he needs to held accountable.   I bought a small drone to learn on before I purchase a bigger one to use for entertainment and photography. Not everyone that flies a drone is a perv because there happens to be girls in the area, or a burglar because that explanation best fits the needs of a reckless neighbor.   I doubt the guy will go to jail, but I bet it will cost him enough that he will wish he never walked outside and criminally damaged property that was of no threat to him. He could lose his gun rights and that is what he deserves.

The “War on Drugs” has helped to keep our streets and homes safe. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it sometimes abused? Yes, we see that a lot in Tennessee, we should all be ashamed of what our top lawmakers allow in the confiscation on innocent peoples property. Is that a failure of drugs enforcement? No, its an indicator of our legislature and court systems not doing their job.   I doubt there are many people in prison for having a bag of weed for personal use. Usually when you hear some criminals sob story about how they are in prison for drugs it's BS. Saying you are in prison for drugs is more acceptable that detailing the armed robbery or burglary that they are really in for.   Legalizing drugs would not reduce crime; it will increase it. In the states that have legalized pot it costs more than the illegal pot on the street. Legalizing other drugs would just cause more addicts. Unless you are suggesting the taxpayers foot the bill for their habit; you will have more addicts and more members here will have their homes burglarized, family and friends robbed at gun point and their property stolen. I am not willing to accept that so someone can get high; if they are spending my money I want them building bigger jails and keeping criminals in jail where they belong.   I support medical marijuana; its use should be up to doctors not legislators. I feel the same way about prescription drugs. However, legal recreational marijuana is only about making those that can afford it feel good about themselves. It will do nothing to reduce crime or the number of people in prison.   Our morals and family values are at an all time low. Telling kids that getting high is okay is just adding to the downfall. It must really be tough for parents with teens to keep their kids off drugs when so many people seem to think its okay.   That Lieutenant made some excellent points and gave some excellent advise to the academy graduates. They need that kind of guidance in their Commanders. I'm surprised the Sheriff is using him as a PIO; seems like such a waste.  

I don’t understand? Why would the National Guard have to activated for recruiters to carry? And is the Tennessee Army National Guard not a component of the United Sates Army?

http://www.senategop.state.il.us/portals/0/concealed-carry/13%20concealed%20carry%20report.pdf http://gunssavelives.net/firearm-carry/illinois-state-police-post-official-faq-for-upcoming-concealed-carry-laws/ http://www.royandcompany.com/are-out-of-state-concealed-carry-permit-holders-granted-reciprocity-in-illinois/   The SCOTUS didn’t rule on carry in Illinois.(Except McDonald on the Chicago gun ban; not about carry) The 7th Federal District said a total carry ban was a violation; so they got carry. After that the Illinois Supreme Court said in a case that they felt anything other than reasonable restrictions on carrying off ones property was a violation; but that wasn’t the question they were addressing at the time. The people and politicians of Illinois (Republicans and Democrats alike) shut down the Chicago machine and the Governor on this issue, and that’s no small feat. They even elected a new Republican Governor. Illinois could easily become the next Constitutional Carry state.

Tell us about these “Federal permits”

If they are stationed here, they have the same “rights” (if that’s what you want to call them) as the rest of us. They can get an HCP. I’m sure there are plenty of people that would even donate to pay for them, and instructors that would give those classes for free. I don’t think they need an HCP to carry in the office. But it doesn’t help or matter if their Commanding Officers say they can’t be armed.

http://www.dnj.com/story/news/2015/07/20/armed-civilians-stand-guard-boro-recruiting-offices/30428097/ Haslam can't do much (if anything); its the military not the state saying they can't be armed.

Having a trade is what killed that deal on your end. If you could sell your vehicle for $10K you would have been a whole lot closer to where you wanted to be. They weren’t putting anywhere near the value on your trade you were, but didn’t want to tell you that. I love buying new cars. But I never try to trade; I sell mine after I get the new car.

Maybe sell it and buy stainless? You can’t hurt a stainless gun and you can make it look new anytime for free.

You aren’t doing car dealership math. No dealer is going to give $10K for a car that has a Blue Book of $10K. But if you don’t try you will never know.

Yes, that's who you want showing up for guard duty. A few idiots, and the rest of us will all be lumped into that group. That and the fact they realized they were the deep pockets.

No, but this does, it's why crime scenes are secured and houses entered. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lapd-guns-20150720-story.html

The result would have been the same from a court. No one is going to leave 1200 firearms in a house where the neighbors know the owner is dead. The same people complaining about the Police would be complaining and blaming the Police if they were stolen. You don’t need a warrant to enter a dead person’s home on an investigation. A dead body was found in a car, cause of death is not known, they are going to go check his home. No one as of yet is claiming the guns are illegal or illegally obtained. As of yet it doesn’t sound like they have refused to turn them over to a family member.   No, probably not.   No.   What would you do if you were the Senior Officer on the scene, you have a responsibility to secure the man’s property, you have a responsibility to keep the community safe, and you took both those responsibilities seriously?

Didn’t a woman that owns a gun shop in Arizona (?) do this not too long ago? Or am I not recalling it right?

Yes; it happens all the time.   If you die and your family is there; it won’t be an issue. If the Police are securing your house; they will take them. If you have large amounts of cash or a bunch of expensive jewelry they will take that also. It is tagged as “personal Property”. If a family member that is not barred from ownership comes forward, or someone that doesn’t need a “transfer” like a wife; the guns will probably be turned over to them. It is California though; they have a lot of limitations on what they can own.

That's good brass case ammo. I assume that was $34.97 + tax (what it shows on the web), that's a pretty good price.

It shouldn’t scare you; it should come from our law enforcement community, or legislators, and our courts, and should be a warning to people that threatens violence that it won’t be tolerated. Our founding fathers would not have tolerated it and it shouldn’t be tolerated today. Claiming that making threats is protected by free speech is ridiculous. However, you can obviously find bleeding heart Judges that will agree with anything. I understand that you don’t like cops; we all get it. Your comments in the past have made that clear. I don’t say that to be mean or disrespectful to you; you obviously have met some pretty bad cops. There are a couple of former cops on here that feel the same way you do. I assume they have their reasons for felling that way and that’s fine. I feel sorry that they had to be part of a Department that allowed whatever actions they disagreed with. I openly support law enforcement and am as proud of that service as I am of my military service. Anyone that knows me knows that when the cops are right, I support them, when they are wrong I don’t. I feel lucky that I worked shoulder to shoulder with a bunch of good cops. I am proud of them and the job that I did. I have helped people, I have saved lives, and I have put people in jail; all without violating anyone’s rights. I don’t fear our government. I don’t fear the Police. If they want to investigate me for something I said on here or anywhere else or something I did; so be it. If I threatened someone that was not a threat to me with violence I would expect to be arrested. Some people have the idea that making threats on the internet is not a crime; it is. Some think that if you are stealing using the internet it is not a crime; it is. The fact that law enforcement doesn’t always have the manpower or the jurisdiction to investigate them doesn’t make it okay. The Gibson guitar fiasco was an investigation into environmental regulations; not violent crime. I don’t know why agents needed to be armed with anything other than warrants and paperwork. Why they needed to have a show of force or send employees home (if that happened) is beyond me. The Justice Department and the Federal Marshals would need to answer that. I have said here many times I never supported unnecessary force on warrants or the seizure of innocent’s people’s property. But I have also said that’s a real easy one to hold someone responsible on; the Chief of Police or the Sherriff are the sole individuals for setting policies on warrants and entries and the DA is the sole person responsible for authorizing Police Officers to commit theft against innocent people. Seems to me to be an easy fix; but Tennessee is becoming as famous for it as Louisiana was. If the state doesn’t take care of it the Feds will step in and do it for them. My heart is on the side of the American people that are victims of crime; not the criminals that threaten them. That should not scare you.

I agree with you. But once again...investigation. Conspiracy requires one act in furtherance; threatening someone’s life does not. The government wasn’t backed down on Yeager. They acted swiftly and did what they should have done. Also, he did a 180, was remorsefully and apologetic. (Of course he did, he saw his business going down the tubes). He also had a good legal counsel to represent him. Had he tried to represent himself as our other local dumbazz; his business, HCP and possibly guns would be gone.

If I were the President or Governor of a state I would be doing anything and everything I could to keep and grow business here. Free land, tax breaks, whatever it takes. OSHA and EPA is a huge cost that many foreign competitors don’t have. We don’t want to give up many of those protections and standards so the Feds need to step up and divert some of that money they are handing out to social welfare programs to help industry with those costs. Then many of those people that want to work wouldn’t need a handout from the government; they would have a job. I understand there are many people that live off the government and want to keep it that way, but I believe the majority of people want to work at a good job with a fair wage. Increase manufacturing here and not only will the economy get better, but crime will drop. Unfortunately for some the word protectionism is a bad word. I am not part of that group. This is our country and it’s our responsibility and duty to protect our economy. The government isn't responsible to maintain it; we are. They just need to help where they can and not be against us.   Sure it is. But he isn’t a religious leader; he’s just a figurehead. I don’t care anymore about his opinion on gun control or abortion than I do about his opinion on a restaurant; it means nothing. The economy and jobs is something he can do something about and bring with him the people that can get it done. Morals? From everything I hear Hillary Clinton is leading the polls right now. So morals don’t mean much too many people in a President. I am amazed that anyone could vote for her. Unfortunately many of the people that would be good at the job of President; don’t want it. It’s pretty easy to find something in most anyone’s past.

Hence my comment of an investigation. Apply for an execute search warrants, interview and take statements from witnesses. If you have a case; arrest and prosecute. If you don’t; drop it. What we appear to have now is a bunch of hand wringing and criminal huggers. If you threaten your neighbor or co-worker chances are you will be arrested. What makes you think it’s any different when someone threatens to kill whitey/blacks/gays/Muslims/whatever? Just because you didn’t make a threat against a specific person doesn’t mean it’s not a creditable threat. Of course they are prosecutable; it just requires people with the ability to do their job properly. I’m a responsible gun owner and I’m tired of seeing us all thrown together. If you threaten someone with violence; throw your azz in jail and pull your gun rights. Responsible gun owners aren’t threatening to kill people and making dumb azz you tube videos about the violence they will commit if things don’t go their way. Or we can stand by and do nothing until these nut cases go active. Then we can all act appalled and pray for the dead and their families. I am not suggesting any form of gun control or enhanced background checks. I’m saying that when someone hears a threat and comes forward; it is investigated. That is eventually what is going to happen, and it’s what happens in many places now where they have responsible citizens, Police Officers, Prosecutors and courts. Hiding behind “free speech” to make threats is ridiculous.

Anything can be taken advantages of. There are no magic answers, but there are common sense ones. Yes, things can go wrong, but you deal with them when they do. You don’t wait to see the muzzle flash.

I agree. We should all be concerned about the economy and American jobs. Without that nothing else will matter. I could not care less what a Presidential candidates stand is on the 2nd amendment or abortion. He has no real ability to change either. He can however do a lot to help the economy and jobs in this country and can surround himself with experts that can get the job done. The current President (and Hillary) is more interested in promising those that don’t want to work or who are illegal with things they can’t deliver.

Investigate a threat of violence as it should be and not call it “Free Speech” which it is not and never has been. If you get on Facebook, YouTube, TGO or anywhere else and make threats that you are going to go out and start killing people; you are arrested and tried in court.

Anymore there isn’t a lot of difference in the “Republican Party” and the “Democratic Party”. It’s more of those that want to freeload off the government vs. those that work for a living. Both parties need the support of those that want to live off the government to get elected; they are a very big group...and getting bigger every day.