Chucktshoes

[quote name="bersaguy" post="1112058" timestamp="1392578761"]Hope so cause sure will make him a lot easier to see just before his hears incoming expendable projectiles in his direction..........jmho[/quote] I hope not. This gentleman is actually part of a self-defense force group that is fighting against the narco's.

[quote name="Worriedman" post="1112047" timestamp="1392577572"]Well, get you some Ramsey! I will be on that team, but, you might want to check and see where his PAC is at dollar wise. He has the backing of Big Business and nobody is going to challenge him in his home district, but by all means form a group, announce your intentions and we will see how that goes. My vote is Vance Dennis, he is low hanging fruit that can be taken. Those who have watched the actual machinations of the legislature will know that he is Establishment through and through, and is no supporter of firearms Rights.[/quote] When I tell them that I think the citizenry would be morally correct by shooting the lot of them, I doubt they will want to hear anything else I have to say. :lol:

I'm pretty sure the caution tape was being used as part of a makeshift sling.

[quote name="gun sane" post="1112025" timestamp="1392575254"]The vid was posted to YouTube after the 9th Circus Court affirmed the constitutional right to carry arms. Maybe the natives thought the 2A also meant "recklessly discharge" as well.[/quote] You know, I think that video is actually a better representation of what happens when the majority of the people obey bad laws. It erodes respect for the law in general, emboldens the criminal element and leaves them free to do as they wish because the law-abiding are defenseless against them.

I don't think I have ever been very coy about what I think the correct and appropriate consequences are for the legislators who seek to usurp the individual's liberty and the lickspittles in the media that support their totalitarian schemes with their propaganda work. You kill them.

Some of us have counted the costs. The question I must ask is who has really counted the costs of continuing to allow the state to do as it pleases without consequence?

No way the rifle in the middle arrived there without the assistance of Eric Holder.

Exactly. Who's on the committees that are hanging this thing up? Where can we apply pressure? Who needs to be told that they will get the Maggart treatment if they stand in the way of this bill? To whom do we actually need to give the Maggart treatment to the next election cycle? (My vote is for Ramsey)   There was lots of back patting after Maggart was shown the door with help from the entire state and there is lots of talk about the message it sent. Well, the real message is that it was a fluke unless it can be done again as many times as needed, every time it is needed. 

[URL]http://m.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/13/ninth-circuit-strikes-californias-restrictive-rule-against-licensed-carry-of-handguns/[/URL] The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Peruta v. San Diego, released minutes ago, affirms the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for lawful protection in public. California law has a process for applying for a permit to carry a handgun for protection in public, with requirements for safety training, a background check, and so on. These requirements were not challenged. The statute also requires that the applicant have “good cause,” which was interpreted by California to mean that the applicant is faced with current specific threats. The Ninth Circuit, in a 2-1 opinion written by Judge O’Scannlain, ruled that Peruta was entitled to Summary Judgement, because the “good cause” provision violates the Second Amendment.

[quote name="Lester Weevils" post="1109982" timestamp="1392253805"]Make room for the new atty general Van Jones.[/quote] Talk about time to up the irons.

I actually own and wear this one. I usually save it for when I am going to a place with a high hipster quotient.

[quote name="RobertNashville" post="1108059" timestamp="1391892093"]I think this was a more than correct decision by the DA. Anybody who breaks down my front door and invades my home is probably going to be facing some significant fire coming their way. I may well wind up dead but I'm not going to just assume the people invading my home are supposed to be the "good guys". Further, if they're breaking down my front door and invading my home I'm not sure I can consider them to be "good guys" no matter what badge they might have on underneath their bulletproof vests. Let us not forget the 61 year old man shot to death in Lebanon during a raid on the WRONG HOUSE! [url="http://www.datehookup.com/Thread-212688.htm"]http://www.datehookup.com/Thread-212688.htm[/url] Perhaps the Judge says it best... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24Yl904di34[/quote] Just as a point of correction, the DA charged him with Capital Murder. The Grand Jury returned a No Bill. This wasn't a correct decision by the DA, it was essentially a case if jury nullification and the people saying "no more!" Otherwise, I agree with the rest of your post.

  I agree with everything you said 100%, so take that as you wish with regards to the effects of the painkillers on your mental state. :lol:

Because double jeopardy is OK if we don't like the verdict, right?

It is my understanding that No-Knocks must be stipulated as such in the warrant. It is my impression from the reading I have done on the subject that the primary reason for a No-Knock is to prevent the destruction of evidence. That is not a sufficient reason to introduce the high levels of violence and danger that are part of a dynamic entry. I hold firm to my position that the ONLY justifiable reason for a dynamic entry are when there is an imminent threat to innocent life. Any other reason is just an excuse to play action guy or justify the existence of the SWAT team. 

[quote name="sigmtnman" post="1107959" timestamp="1391880414"]Whoever approved the no knock raid and also the warrant should be held accountable.[/quote] Agreed. I would say it qualifies under the same doctrine that considers all members of a criminal conspiracy guilty of a murder if one of the members kills someone during the commission of a crime.

[quote name="Dolomite_supafly" post="1107945" timestamp="1391877167"]Or moving to places like Tennessee because we are a lot cheaper than Canada. Problem is they are true liberals. They only want to be conservatives when it comes to certain things, everything else they would support. Then after they have instilled the agenda here and it again becomes too liberal for them they move onto another state to ruin them. They supported the liberal agenda until THEIR government struck a nerve and they decided to move. So when they come here they might want some firearm freedoms but they also want all the social programs and other liberal benefits that they have lived with and supported for the last 3 decades. We are seeing it now with a lot of liberals moving here because their home state became too liberal but they want to turn Tennessee into the utopia that was their home state right before their leaders went too far in their home state. It is easier for them to move here than to fight for their own state. Then when things get too bad here they leave us to fight the battle they started. Personally I would not be against an immigration system for our state. You cannot become a resident of Tennessee unless you meet certain requirements. If you get caught living here without it you get shipped off, in the middle of the night, to your previous state of residency. And even after you are permitted residency you cannot vote in state or local elections for 7 years. Not sure what the requirements would be but one would be that you must pay taxes, either income or property, to be allowed to become a Tennessean.[/quote] Need a TN version of this sticker.

I have no sympathy for the dead officer. According to other reports I have read, he is the one who sought the warrant and raid. I consider this a case of suicide. When you initiate violence, you have to accept responsibility for the outcome.   There are times for kicking in doors and all of them involve an imminent threat to innocent life. If that does not exist, you do not make a dynamic entry. "No knock" warrants are an illegitimate initiation of force by government that creates a danger to life where none existed before agents in uber-tactical-ninja-gear kicked in the door. The possibility that the target of the warrant may destroy evidence is not sufficient reason to endanger the lives of the public or the officers.

http://www.startribune.com/nation/244006841.html          

Fill up the tank, empty bladder before crossing into enemy territory. Drive the speed limit, don't stop for any reason, and pray for safe passage.

I would like to see DMX get his arse whipped mostly because of the dog fighting. In reality, I think Georgie Porgie is gonna get creamed.

Not just any SEC program, THE SEC program. Hold on tight fellers, it's gonna be a bumpy ride down.

HA!

http://legiscan.com/TN/bill/HB1885/2013     As introduced, specifies that the Class C misdemeanor offense of carrying a firearm, knife or club with intent to go armed is committed only if the person carrying the firearm, knife or club is prohibited by law from purchasing, owning or possessing a weapon. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.