Chucktshoes

Accurate.

My vote is shrink the government to match the revenues. If government is providing a service folks actually value, they'd be willing to pay for it voluntarily instead of at gunpoint. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

Well, I don't reload, yet. Just don't have the time. I forgot to add "Trophy Grade" to the description. It's finished factory ammo.

5 boxes of Nosler 165gr Accubond .308. Cabela's has them marked down to 30.74 a box.

In the interest of clarity, let me say that I never meant to infer that it was for the PD budget. I know those fines are directed to the municipality's general fund. That doesn't change the purpose, just who is behind it. As an example, the DOJ report after the Ferguson riots detailed how the municipal government exerted pressure on the PD to increase ticketing to generate more revenue. Or for another, less contentious example closer to home, Piperton as previously mentioned derives a large amount of its budget from traffic violations. The two biggest giveaways that the purpose of the traffic enforcement is for revenue generation are pretty easy to spot. Does the municipality have traffic/petty fines listed as an expected revenue source in its budget. Does the municipality report the infractions to the state or does it just keep the records, and revenue to themselves or "dismiss on court costs"? Here's a great op ed on the subject from last year. https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2016/10/26/police-collected-fines-fees-and-forfeitures-how-does-your-city-rank/#6dea23525202

Anybody got the over/under on how long it takes for a resignation?

It is only ever about the revenue. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying. Granted, they may be lying to themselves as well, but they are most definitely not in relationship with the truth on the subject. If it wasn't about revenue, then they would employ other methods to get folks to slow down. As an example, Covington employs empty squad cars posted in highly visible locales along 51. I've seen this tactic used in Dayton, OH and other municipalities before as well. You never know if the unit is empty or not, and folks slow down because of that. If the officer or detection device is not highly visible, if their presence is concealed or minimized (such as the trend in making the paint schemes less obvious so that they blend in with surrounding traffic better) then their purpose is revenue generation. Increased "public safety" is at best a byproduct, and more often just a convenient pretense.

Well, the story is gaining national attention and it appears the Sherriff is backtracking on his initial defense of the officers involved. I guess he felt the change of winds and can smell the ####storm that's coming.

I like her style!

Can you hear the whooshing sound of your comments flying over the heads of folks? I can.

That has to be about the best thing I have ever read about an AR accessory. I'm just dying over here.

I'm not finding that barrel nut or rail anywhere. I have a feeling the rail istelf was probably discontinued. The proprietary rail attachments is my clue there. Most everything is dickmod or Mlok at this point. I was trying to find a rail with matching nut, but there are just infinite options it seems. Everybody has got to be different. Sorry. The strap wrench may be the only viable choice.

Are there any markings at all on the rail? Can you post a picture of the full rail? It looks familiar but I'd like a full view before I start looking at some of the options.

Drive home? Who's going to drive the car off the lot. Hell, for that matter, who's going to walk you to the car?

That's Canada. The burden of prof rests on the person who uses a firearm in self defense. Unless you can prove beyond doubt that you had no other choice, you're going to jail.

Man, I wish. I'll be in Springfield, MO that day. Now, if some of y'all do go, pass up Central and go over to the BBQ Shop on Madison. Central is really good, but BBQ Shop is my absolute favorite.

This is utterly disheartening and simultaneously rage inducing.

Sometimes folks wish for a sarcasm font to ensure clarity of their statements. Sometimes that would be wholly superfluous. We've been here for about the same amount of time, so I will assume my views on law enforcement tactics and culture are not unknown to you. If you choose to dismiss what I have to say here because of that, so be it. However having been here as long as you have I will also assume that you are aware of how little tolerance TGODavid has for random and needless cop bashing. This is not that, because if it was I would imagine he would have stepped in long before now to handle matters as he, or other members of the moderating team are wont to do when it becomes an issue. I can think of many folks who received suspensions and permanent bans for cop bashing. This incident happened here in our state. The victim and the perpetrators are our neighbors, fellow Tennesseeans. Therefore this is a matter of great interest and concern for all of us. It is an important and relevant matter worthy of discussion. I know you're in LE, though I don't know the agency. I really hope your dismay at this discussion is due to fatigue from having heard so much about it already from your CoC and not at finding valid and justified criticism and anger at folks who abused the authority and trust placed in them. (I also hope that every LE agency in the state is emphasizing that this sort of behavior is wholly unacceptable because the alternative to that is wholly unacceptable.) I know that it's been a rough time for LE lately (and in the last couple of weeks especially) as a lot of negative stories have come to light recently that reflect badly on the profession. While the topic may be unpleasant for you, it is of merit and I think that if you chose to do so, you could add value to the discussion.

This seems like an opportune time to unpack my earlier statement about there being a difference between supporting the law and order, and supporting law enforcement. When one supports law and order, they hold the law itself in high esteem. They believe that the law exists for the good of the people. This means that while they may have respect for those that enforce the law, the law itself is paramount. Therefore, they seek to hold the enforcers of the law to the highest standards of the law and have little tolerance for those that break not just the letter, but the spirit of the laws they have sworn to uphold. When one supports law enforcement, instead of the law itself being held in the highest esteem, it is those that enforce it who are elevated. This leads to situations where one holds greater tolerance for those that bend the laws, or violate the spirit of the law as long as they don't break the letter of it. It also causes one to seek to explain away or excuse instance where those who uphold the laws break them outright and/or engage in gross mistreatment of the people they are supposed to serve. Some folks may view this as an unfair distinction, but it isn't. Just as one can't serve two masters, one can't hold law enforcement and the law itself in equally high esteem when the actions of one may cause conflict with the other. A choice must always be made.* (*There is a third choice, but that is a rejection of both and is not really applicable to the conversation we are having which is predicated on the position that the law is legitimate in its authority.)

Why would they be brought to full account for anything? After all, everything they did was "within policy guidelines."

Piperton is a speed trap city. They have a much nicer City Hall then their residency tax base can actually support. I will give you three guesses how they paid for it. Your first two don't count.

Not in the state of Tennessee. They are prohibited by statute from sanctioning you in anyway if you do not pay camera tickets. If you get one of those in the mail, throw the thing in the garbage. Or better yet, send it back with a note telling them to piss off and citing the statute.

I agree with everything you said Dave, with the exception of the quoted lines. The current administration and its Justice Department are very pro law enforcement, not pro law and order. They are different things and it is very dangerous to confuse the two. I believe recent statements to law enforcement about not being overly concerned with how tough they're being with suspects lends credence to my position.

Now, this is pure speculation on my part. Looks like some butt hurt over not having their authoritah respected. There is a word to describe what we are witnessing in this video, and it is torture. It doesn't matter what happened before what is shown on the video, every officer involved should be wearing cuffs.

You're telling me! I have at least one instance where I am certain that having my firearm on me allowed me to avoid getting jacked. .