JayC

I was answering his question on how a SF medic might have come across ketamine as a drug to abuse...  That it is a common drug for them to carry and use on a regular basis.   I didn't mean to imply he got the ketamine he was on during the shooting from his medic bag...  only that SF medics, and other JSOC medics use it as a normal course of treatment in the field, and therefore have routine access to the drug as part of their jobs.    

Again, wrong numbers, there are over 200 million licensed drivers in the US in 2010, probably need to add in another 10-15 million for illegal immigrants and unlicensed drivers.   You're talking about such a small fraction of 'trips' each year that it's well within the margin of error...  We're probably doing 350-400 million trips a day in the US, and you're saying that 100 million a year it some huge number?    

Woah there Patton, those numbers are ALL wrong....   First only about 2.4 million people (2010) die each year in the US total, that includes all natural causes.  Alcohol isn't even in the top 10 list of those deaths...  Heart disease and cancer make up nearly 50% by themselves.   The 30% of fatalities are somehow LINKED to alcohol use...  the key is linked...  It's a creative way to inflate the number...  First NHTSA rule a crash 'alcohol' related if any person who was killed had alcohol in their system even if that amount is well under the legal limit, or the person in question was a passenger.  Second, in cases where the police didn't get a BAC on the drivers in a fatal accident, NHTSA assumes that 60% of those drivers had alcohol in their system.  And that creative math is how you come up with nearly 30% of all fatal car wrecks are 'caused' by alcohol.   The truth is the number is much closer to 20-21% of fatal wrecks are caused by a drunk driver, and only about 6-7% involve an innocent third party being killed...  That is a lot less than 36 MILLION people each year :)   And if you really want to have a fact based discussion on DUI checkpoints, then I'm all for it, because they are a complete waste of taxpayer dollars...  I can tell you how to get drunks off the street it's simple, and you don't have to hassle otherwise law abiding citizens.   BTW, if the DUI checkpoint is just to find drunks, why do you want to see my license, my registration, and my insurance card?  What exactly do those 3 bits of information have to do with whether I'm drunk or not?  Seems to me just starting up a friendly conversation at the checkpoint would be a lot more effective...  like asking me if I'm a sports fan...  or what do I think about the weather for tomorrow would give the officers a better chance to figure out if I'm drunk or not....   Also, why have drug dogs on station at the checkpoint?  If you're just looking for drunk drivers why do you have drug dogs there?   The reason is because DUI checkpoints are a fishing expedition...  They give you an excuse to do all sorts of things you couldn't otherwise due... a basic end run around the constitution.  

Take the money we're wasting on ad campaigns and law enforcement trying to stop it... and spend that money on a program to bring automated driving ahead a few years earlier.  We're wasting 100's of millions of dollars a year on preventative DUI enforcement, all of which would be better spent getting these types of technologies out on the road faster.    All this concern about drunk driving will go away over the next 20 years because of advancements in technology...  It's unlikely that my children will ever 'drive' a car like we do today, we are already seeing computers step in and prevent crashes in luxury cars today, over the next few years that technology will start to trickle down, and within 10 years we'll start to see fully automated cars that drive themselves.  20 years from now, I doubt you'll be able to buy a new car that doesn't drive itself.   And this technology will save even more lives than those lost due to DUIs, and will change the population in ways most of us can't even imagine.   BTW, while a 100 million times a year sounds like a lot, that's not even 1/500th of the traffic on our roads...  you're chasing a mouse around with a tank trying to kill it... and running over all of our natural rights in the process.    

Special Forces medic's use ketamine a lot in the field.  I know that it's part of the standard kit they carry.  I'm not sure if standard Army medics use it as well or not.    

Just because 9 old men and women who have no experience as regular working class citizens say so doesn't make it constitutional nor moral.  Our rights do not come from any branch of the government, let alone 9 men and women sitting on a bench is a far away land, they come from our humanity, they existed before the government, and can not be given or taken away, only immorally infringed upon by the government.   This is the same institution that said owning humans was 'constitutional', that locking up asians in concentration camps during WWII was 'constitutional', that 'separate but equal' was constitutional, that the government can throw you in jail for growing food for you to eat as 'constitutional', that killing unborn children up to the second before they're born is somehow 'constitutional', that the government can come and take your land away and give it to somebody else because the possibility of more tax dollars is 'constitutional', and finally that the commerce clause can force all americans to buy a product or face fines and jail times is 'constitutional'.   So, yeah some of us don't see the things as settled just because SCOTUS makes a ruling...  they have such a 'good' track record and all of respecting our individual rights.    

Sounds like we need to force the legislature to strengthen the preemption law huh?

I agree, life is about living, and carrying a handgun is about the best insurance policy to make sure you keep on living.  

I agree about being able to ask you to leave....  but my understanding is they are using more general trespass laws at that point correct?     If so there is a ton of case law on being asked to leave a public area, while performing legal activities ad most of it doesn't bode well for the government.  

I'm not sure 1359 is in effect at the Wilson County Fair Ground, I believe under the law that would fall under the park carry law and since Wilson County hasn't voted to ban carry in their parks.  I'm not even sure how they could legally prevent you from carrying a firearm into the fair if the grounds are covered under the park carry law - with a valid permit of course.  

The disorderly wouldn't stand up in court...  Go and look at the conviction rate of disorderly conduct that doesn't involve a plea deal...  It's removed or tossed in virtually every case that makes it before a judge...  Even so, first offense class C there would be no jail time.   The mental eval isn't going to work...  lets be honest none of us like this guy, but he isn't crazy, just foolish...  you're not going to find any doctor willing to put their license on the line to try and testify this guy is mentally defective.  He may very well have a warped sense of logic, and a desire to cash in on a lawsuit, but all of that behavior tends to remove mental illness from the equation.     

I'm sorry but can you please provide a definition of 'threaten' that matches this statement?  Stupid? yes. Bad idea? most definitely.  Threatening?  Not in anyway shape or form.    

I think there is a bigger issue here...  the way the TN law is written, a firearm does not equal a silencer...  and you're only required to 'retain' paperwork on a firearm under TN law.  Go read the 39-17-13xx definition of a firearm, and tell me how a NFA silencer falls under that definition.   Leonard is missing a lot of tricks a 2nd year law student would have used in front of the judge.  He should have made a bunch of different motions to dismiss...   1. The TN state law is in violation of federal law (the IRS 6013 rule). 2. TN State law doesn't require NFA paperwork to be retained on a silencer. 3. TN State law doesn't require that NFA paperwork to be shown on request by TN law 4. While the officers may or may not have had PC to perform the search, here is a copy of the paperwork, so they no longer have PC to proceed to trial.   One of those written motions would have worked, and ended this farce.    

Police officers do this every day...  day in and day out...  ever heard of a warning instead of a ticket?  Letting some kids go who bought beer but hadn't been drinking?  Catching some kids on lovers lane and not arresting them for indecent exposure?   How is this any different?  The Sheriff looked at the situation and applied common sense that the person in question had no criminal intent, and ordered his deputy to let the guy go...   Unless there is some documentation to indicate a bribe, kickback, or special treatment (son of a local politician), then what exactly is the problem here?    

As somebody already said, the Marshall Plan after WW2, and we did pay a high price in US soldiers even after the war 'ended' during that process.  

Clearly a settlement to save money...  15k doesn't pay for many hours of outside legal fees...   

No!  This is no better than 1 judge telling somebody what to do...  Show me in the state or federal constitution what power gives them the authority to dictate how I name my child?  I'll give you a hint it isn't there.   If a child doesn't like their name, when they turn 18 they can go to the court and get it changed easily.   I don't have any right whatsoever to force you to name your child anything...    

I think not only should the judge be impeached and removed from the bench...  but needs to go to jail...  this is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment - there can be no question based off of the comments by the Judge, who acted under the color of law.  The 'Judge' should be open to personal liability and should spend a couple of years sitting in a jail cell.

This was 25+ years ago...  And I might be a little off but I remember they were VERY expensive and I was only allowed to use it with supervision ;)  But I was 15 at the time.   And I agree they're not as sensitive as modern equipment by any means, but it's cool technology.  Here is a link to a wiki on the SDR's http://www.rtlsdr.org/    

Go re-read 39-17-1359a2:     39-17-1359 only impacts carry under 39-17-1351, not other defense under 39-17-1308.  Same reason law enforcement officers can carry past signs...  they only apply to permit holders.  

They tick somebody off that knows how to direction find the source...  most likely a ham radio operator who has nothing better to do :)  But it works.  Go pickup one of those 'special' cb radios at the Flying J, and start transmitting on one of the 'extra' cb channels...  drive around a big city for a few days doing that and watch how long it is before you get a letter for Uncle Charlie and a $10,000 fine ;) Along pick a picture of your license plate, and a recording of everything you said.   Tracking folks down transmitting/jamming is simple...  and the technology to do it grows cheaper by the day, you can now make a spectrum analyzer out of an USB TV tuner for about $15 dollars, and can see everything from 100kHz up to 2gHz on a single device....  When I was an intern working in a radio shop in high school the equipment to do that cost $50,000, and it wasn't nearly as good as this cheap usb dongle.  

You most certainly are wrong...  Jamming signals is easy, and with fixed frequencies, virtually impossible to evade.  I'll give you a perfect example of jamming at work...   Back in 2012 I had a buddy (25 series) call me up, saying they didn't have internet access through their satellite system and he couldn't figure out what was causing it...  They were doing everything right and couldn't figure out why it wasn't working... Wanted me to double check the settings they had gotten from their FSR... (which is an entirely different subject that should scare every one of us).   Turns out that the Russians had just put a sub into the gulf for the first time since the cold war, and the US Navy got the bright idea to start playing jamming games and in the process knocked out Internet access via satellite over large parts of the South East :)   There is only one good method of 'evading' jamming...  fire a HARM at the jammer and take it out :)  In the civilian world, perform direction finding locate the jammer, and charge them with willful interference.    

That is not exactly true...  I'd go read the FCC enforcement bulletin every month...  there are a lot of people $10,000 poorer for using jamming equipment and illegal radios on a regular basis.    

We don't have all the facts, he may very well make it a credible self defense shooting, he may very well had a reasonable fear at points in time...  clearly they didn't arrest him on the scene, so chances are there won't be any charges.   

As Dave pointed out, 39-17-1359 doesn't apply in this case since he is carrying under 39-17-1308...  not 39-17-1351