Chucktshoes

He left his driver's license in the car. He had his Georgia Weapons License on him and gave it to the officer when he was asked for ID. Earlier in the thread he stated that he always has a recorder on his person. I would say it is a good thing too as it saved his bacon this time by catching the officer in a lie when compared to the officer's reports.

Absolutely a case of fishing for a cop. The key part of the equation y'all are missing is that it is entirely up to the cop whether or not he gets hooked. If the cop acts within the limits and scope of his duties everyone goes on their way and the douche is just a douche. If the officer oversteps his limits, he gets himself into trouble or the agency on the hook for a payout and the douche gets the smug satisfaction of being right, and possibly wealthier. The lesson to takeaway from this is for cops to act within their limits. Yes, they have a difficult job. I don't think anyone denies that. It is a difficult job on purpose.

Most people assume that the LEO is recording if they are near the cruiser. Usually it is the LEO who seems to have a problem being recorded. That's why there are court cases affirming the right to do so. In this case it appears as if the recording caught the officer in a few out and out lies. If I was a cop that was prone to lying in the reports, I might not like being recorded either. 

I don't put guns in the hands of the unprepared for kicks. When I put one of my guns in someone's hands I take all possible safety measures to ensure that everyone goes home without any extra holes. There are plenty of videos all over YouTube of men and women who were unprepared to handle that gun experiencing double taps. Some of them firing quite close to the head. This woman happened to be unfortunate enough to have it turn just *that* much too much. The person who put that gun in her hands should have been aware of a known issue with that gun and is morally, if not legally responsible for an avoidable and foreseeable outcome. ~rant Like I said in my initial post, this kind of thing pisses me off. If you* are the kind of person who puts a firearm in the hands of the unprepared because you think it is funny, you're an asshole. Not only are you an asshole but you are a danger to anyone around you when you are in possession of a firearm. /rant * You is used in the generic sense, not specifically directed at anyone on particular.

I've said it before and I think it is appropriate for this thread. Concealed means concealed. I can get a new job, my family can't get a new me.

Bingo. Like I said before, this was entirely foreseeable.

Yeah, I caught that too. :lol:

This sort of thing pisses me off. This was an entirely avoidable tragedy if not for some idiot who thought it would be funny to hand an inexperienced shooter the biggest damn gun he could without even thinking "hey, let's be on the safe side and load just one round in the thing in case she loses control of it." Youtube is full of videos where the person being filmed managed to avoid this poor woman's fate by nothing more than sheer luck. The person who put that gun in her hands should be charged with negligent homicide as this outcome was entirely foreseeable. 

He's in Millington. There is only one range that I am aware of in Millington.

I got no beef with Amazon. I understand how the game works and as far as no sales tax goes, it was good while it lasted. 

So under all circumstances we must respect the officer's authoritah, eh? 

Twitter was afire with folks making the racist accusation before they even finished the skit.    I do have to say that Taylor Swift's face was hilarious. "OMG, they are making fun of the president! Can they do that?"

For some of the folks on this board who are so quickly making such harsh judgements, it might be worthwhile to consider that this gentleman's name isn't Lenny.

Well now, having all the information paints quite a different picture.

Not at all. As I mentioned before, The only rights you have are the ones you are willing to defend. If their governments oppress and strip them of natural rights, it is only because they have allowed it to do so. Our own government tramples all over our rights daily and we allow it. I say "we" because I include myself in that. Currently I am fighting it in my own way, but obviously haven't resorted to violence (even though I believe it to be morally just) as it hasn't crossed a line I am willing to die for yet. For I know that when the day comes that violence is the only option I have left, my death will soon follow. I hold no romantic notion that I will be victorious in a glorious third American Revolution. However sometimes even if you know you will lose, you still have to fight. 

:wave:

Even though I am a big supporter of the tech and am excited about the speed of advances, I would pretty much agree with your assessment. Where I personally see the value is that the democratization of manufacturing by making it cheap and easy to obtain scares the bejeezus out of the power structure. Whether practical or not, the idea than anyone can download a file and print out a working firearm is terrifying to them. They are going to run around in circles and wasting energy attempting to stop a signal that can't be stopped. All they will accomplish in the end is showing their impotence. 

Dolomite, you seem to conflate what is legal with what is right. They are not necessarily the same thing. When laws are just, they are right. When laws are unjust to resist them by whatever means one has available to them is more than right, it is one's moral responsibility. Every genocide, mass murder and imprisonment committed by a government was perfectly legal by the laws of that government. It doesn't make it right.   "...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...," Thomas Jefferson as written in the Declaration of Independence    "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." MLK Letter from the Birmingham Jail

Mike , a mill removes material, this is an additive process.   (Or are you just being facetious?)

Gonna have to call BS on that. The 2A grants nothing, it only acknowledges a natural right of self defense, and specifically the tools to effectively mount that defense. The government, any government, can make whatever laws they choose. It has no bearing on my rights. The 2A, like the rest of the first 8 amendments, enumerates negative rights that are intended to prevent infringement by the government. However anything one claims as a right is only a right as long as they are willing to defend it. So if those rights aren't defended it doesn't mean that they were a privilege taken by the government who granted them, but rights willingly surrendered by a people unwilling to defend what was always theirs.

A company has 3D printed a 1911 in metal. That ought to pucker up a few asses in the gun control lobby.     http://www.solidconcepts.com/news-releases/worlds-first-3d-printed-metal-gun-manufactured-solid-concepts/

These psychopaths give bad cops a bad name.

Fair point. All I would add is that the efforts put into denying ballot access to minor parties by the majors is just as dirty and wrong. Lawsuits should not have to be filed for candidates to have their name placed on the ballot or to have their party affiliation properly listed on the ballot. Ballot access is still a large problem for the LP, Greens and other minor parties. Ever since Ross Perot, both the Republicans and Democrats have expended a lot of time and effort to deny ballot access.

G&A handled it the way a screwup of this magnitude should be handled. They owned the problem, corrected the problem and apologized for it.

Either Classic or Arms Fair will have what you are needing.