Chucktshoes

The abuses within are one of the main reasons they went away and what would require the most oversight to prevent. I agree, it’s something that would require a lot of care and planning to make a thing again. An ancillary benefit to them making a return is that a robust mental health infrastructure would allow for better triaging of folks in crisis. Like the guy in Indy who apparently had concerned folks attempt to get him help, but the options are very limited as of now.

I think you touched on the key here. Something along the lines of at least two family members in conjunction with consultation from a mental health professional being able to make this call. Lots of checks and balances will have to be put in place top to bottom throughout the entire process and treatment phases. But the current method is untenable and I believe has a severe degrading influence on society as a whole

I understand the concerns, but our current method of dealing with the mentally ill by allowing them to end up on the streets until the commit serious enough crimes to warrant prison time isn’t working. As a society we shifted the responsibility of dealing with the mentally ill from medical professionals to police. That’s been terrible for everyone. The sick most of all.

I really do believe we need to bring back the asylums. While they absolutely had problems and needed reforms, they served a valuable societal role. In the zeal to address the abuses that went on within them, I believe that the baby was thrown out with the bathwater.

Are you using a mobile device? If so, down at the bottom you’ll see “Theme” and a down arrow to click. You can change it there.

I can appreciate that view. That said, I always have beef with any officer, hell, anyone, who injures someone through non-judicious use of their firearm. You shoot someone who needs shooting, I’m on your side. You shoot someone who doesn’t need shooting, Imma let you know you done wrong.

So, maybe I don’t have any beef with the SRO who got shot. The other guy...

I’m a heavy critic of policing, yet I fail to see what the other options were for the officer as it stands with the information we currently have. As the known information changes, my view might, but as of now I don’t have issue with the result. Doesn’t make it any less tragic of an outcome.

Here are some more pics of the Rhodesian troops from the Bush War. These next two pics are of Selous Scout troops. They are arguably the most effective Special Forces troops in modern history. Pamwe Chete

Oh, you know the way to my heart, don’t you?

My aim is terrible. There’s no worry about hitting a target that small.

Carrying behind the 3/9 line can often lead to printing when bending over. Along with that, small of back is the one position I would recommend be avoided at all costs. Besides danger to back if one end up falling backwards, it requires such an awkward reach it’s just not a viable location for defensive carry.

I guess I could mention the holsters I actually use, eh? For AIWB I use the Tier 1 Concealed Axis Elite/Slim. These are sidecar style holsters with the magazine attached. I also have some Squared Away Customs holsters for both IWB and OWB, but their website seems to be down. Don’t know what that’s about. I also have a Safariland duty style holster for when I’m needing an overt carry for larping at the range.

I have, and occasionally still do carry on a couple of different locales. The reality is that you’re going to just have to figure out what works for you by trial and error. No way around it. I’ve got a gut, but primarily carry AIWB with a sidecar. Pistol at 12/12:30. There is a comfort penalty, but that’s where I prefer it. It doesn’t work for everyone. I have carried at 3:30/4 o’clock. Anything further back, while generally concealing ok, just feels too far back to get to quickly and efficiently. A quality holster and a quality, dedicated gunbelt are a necessity if you wish to carry well. Without those two items, be prepared for a long struggle until you eventually drop the coin you needed to drop in the first place.

You can. But the purchase must adhere to the laws of not just the state of purchase, but also the state of residency of the purchaser.

Ehhhhh, not so much. The idea of using government power to engage in guild protection actions and having any part in determining who is and isn’t a “legitimate” journalist sound a cure far scarier than the disease.

Residency is what matters. There are rare exceptions like folks stationed in the military can buy in their home of record and duty station location. I am always open to being corrected, but I don’t believe that it is legal for him to purchase and take possession of a firearm in Tennessee until he changes residency.

I am a harsh critic of social media, and understand the desire to not a lump it in with news sources. The problem is that it is at odds with our current reality. Most people now get their news from social media instead of network news sources or print outlets. Is it to the detriment of society at large, absolutely. That said, it is the current state of affairs as it exists.

Then you didn’t see the story at the beginning. Not only was it mass shooting in the initial headlines, it was mass shooting all across the socials. I imagine the “if it bleeds it leads“ newsroom folks were quite disappointed when it turned out to be not what they were hoping.

This is a great (and pretty accurate) collection of memes about “What your pistol optics says about you”. A couple have some foul language so I am linking to them offsite. https://imgur.com/a/dMQmCla

Haven’t any of y’all ever seen The NeverEnding Story?