DaveTN

And??? Amazon will pay the tax in California. They lost the battle in New York and they will lose in CA. Their vow to fight in every state they can fight in might bankrupt them; there will be someone willing to pay the tax standing in line to take Amazons place. The government will never reduce spending. If sales taxes drop; property and gas taxes will increase. I vote for taxing the internet sales.

You are kidding… right?

Just like a Federal Vehicle Code or a Federal Carry Permit; it would require all states to comply. I doubt that will happen. State tax should be collected on internet sales. Someone is going to pay it; I think it should be the buyers not the home owners. “Cut Spendingâ€â€¦. Really?? Did you really type that in there?

Illinois is looking a legislation right now that would allow carry. I would hate to see this lawsuit cause a problem with that. The SCOTUS has been clear on the states rights to legislate carry; I doubt they will hear another case this soon.</SPAN>

You can pass through, but it has to be cased, and unloaded as per Illinois State law. The Chicago gun registration and Illinois FOID requirements do not apply to out of state residents, the laws on transporting a firearm do.</SPAN> </SPAN>

A little girl is dead. If her Mother killed her and dumped her body; there is no justice for her and our system failed miserably. If her Mother is innocent; the system worked. I didn’t watch the trial so I don’t know if she did it or not. Those of you that watched know if she did it or not.

It’s a cool toy, but I wouldn’t give $800 for one.

If we assume what’s in that story is the truth…. Paul was armed and followed Dickens into the parking lot and started the sequence of events that led to his death. You don’t stop and get involved in road rage incidents when you are armed. Obviously Dickens was no longer in danger when he killed Paul. It’s hard to tell what a Grand Jury will do; they generally are just a rubber stamp for whatever the DA wants to do. My feelings are that Paul screwed up and paid for it with his life. Even though the threat to Dickens was over I can’t believe a person would be thinking straight after they had been shot… twice. For that reason, coupled with the fact that Paul stopped, I could not convict Dickens. If I was the DA, I wouldn’t be convening a Grand Jury unless there is more than what is in that story. Of course all this is based on my arm chair quarterbacking of an event described in a couple of paragraphs in a news story.

Appears to me that’s exactly how the jury saw it.

By two separate issues I mean that one involves what is legal, the other is the whim of the shipper; no one is required to ship a firearm. Yes, I was at the main hub (in Murfreesboro). I called UPS corporate. There was no “working it out”. They told me that because a firearm was involved they would not override the decision on the local “Security Officer”. Its hit or miss, so I decided not to do it any more; too much drama.

Selling a firearm face to face to a Tennessee resident and shipping a firearm to a Tennessee resident are two totally separate issues. If you tell someone you will ship; make sure you can. I accepted an offer and told a forum member I would ship overnight; UPS refused and it cost me a drive to Chattanooga. I just don’t buy/sell any more from private individuals that would require shipping.

My 308 Panther feels like I’m shooting a .22 compared to my Remington 700 308 bolt.

At least Police Officers have to answer for their actions; TSA answers to no one. The only way to stop this is a boycott of the airlines. If the airlines (even though it isn’t their fault) are damaged financially congress will step in. The President and the AG don’t have the nut sack or the desire to rein in these animals. We wouldn’t stand for that from any other agency acting openly in the public; why should we accept it from the TSA?

DPMS 308 Panther The 19 rounds and semi-auto advantage are just added extras. Everything is application driven.

Safeties fail. I had one fail on a 1911 while at the range showing my BIL how they work. I can’t believe anyone would be dumb enough to do what he did. Liquor?

The demand for copper is steadily rising. The people of China need it for building the new homes you are paying for.

If you need a lawyer…. You have screwed up.

Double Tap

The Threat of force in this state is justifiable to protect property. However the use of deadly force is specifically addressed by statute. I don’t see anything that would prevent you from the threatening someone with a gun if they were stealing your property. However the use of deadly force would require that the situation escalated to the point of a reasonable person (a jury) believing that you were in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm. No one in their right mind would want to go to trial to justify the use of deadly force to prevent a theft. Once the threat to you becomes real it isn’t about property anymore. The mistake many people make here is that no one cares what you thought the level of danger was, only what a Police Officer, DA, Jury or Judge will think you should have done when. “Imminent danger†is only one element and refers to time. A person can be a threat to you one second and that threat is gone the next (they turn and run). A “Reasonable Person†and “danger of Death or great bodily harm†is also key required elements. Car-jacking is not the theft of property; it is a crime of violence. I highly doubt a person is going to ask me nicely to get out of my car so he can have it. He is going to threaten me and then I have to make a decision based on that threat. If he is threatening me with a deadly weapon it is no different than threatening me with a deadly weapon walking down the street; it is armed robbery. I think the Officer may be confused by SCOTUS decisions that address a Police Officer using deadly force in the case of a fleeing felon; there are many. However, arguing about what she knows or meant is useless without her to explain her position. The bottom line is… protecting property won’t cut it; if you use deadly force a jury would need to believe you were protecting your life and that they would have done the same in your situation. I never want my freedom to be based on a jury decision, so I have my own rules for my use of deadly force that I believe will work no matter what state I am in.

It would be over if it was in fact “assistant district attorney Stareâ€. But Stare is her attorney.

Or they do think it about it but their conclusions are generally based on their desired outcome instead of facts or science.

I don’t care if she was standing in her yard or the middle of the intersection; she was warned and refused to comply…. She suffered the consequences of that decision. But that’s old news, and another thread, what does it have to do with this thread?

I’m not sure it was the Black Panthers. I just remember seeing a video of the incident described above. But I can’t remember who/where/when it was exactly.

No myth and no slaves. Someone help me out here with dates and a place. But I believe it was a bunch of Black Panthers in the 60's that got off a bus, and engaged Police, wearing uniforms with berets and their boots bloused, carrying rifles and shot guns that scared the beejesus out of some white folk and really started the ball rolling on gun control.

Being a former cop, you know as well as I do no one is going to lose their job over this. But if a Command Officer did this without the Chiefs consent their career would probably take a hit. My point is that I would like to know if the Chief knew of, and supported this action. I don’t think there is a person that will read this story and not agree that this is retaliatory (if this was in fact involving the woman that was arrested). It goes to the character of whoever ordered it.