Worriedman

I did not say we are "called" to go armed, I quoted the Constitution as saying we have the Right under restrictions placed by the Legislature, which by the chains placed on them by the document, must be related to reducing crime. The distinctions I draw relate to being a law abiding gun owner, reading and understanding the rules. Willing to use the system in place to attempt to change the things I think are incorrect, and which do not adhere to the written words of our current Constitution. As most applauded the change in law that allowed HCP holders to carry their long guns in their vehicles with ammunition in the magazine, just not in the chamber, (until such time as conditions warrant) it is an incremental regain of our Rights. This was a change won by talking to our Legislators, and having the law mitigated from it's previous restriction on that ability. The next year, we were able to remove the ridiculous restriction against the non HCP holder being able to carry their long gun with ammunition in the same compartment of the vehicle, (just not in the magazine of that weapon), again, small steps. Different abilities for different groups based on the current laws. Good changes, I think so. We will not win all we want in one fell swoop, but approaching our Legislators with the document in hand, pointing out the words and making them understand is the first step in regaining what were our rights in the original Constitution.

We have to start with the situation at hand, and as of now, we HAVE the HCP restriction in place. Returning to Constitutional legality will take years to achieve, but, it can not begin until we assert the basics. As the Legislature is given the power to restrict the wearing of arms, we must abide by the laws in place, until such time as we can change them, in the Legislature. We must affect change incrementally, and as such, offering up the ability of HCP holders to enjoy the ability to keep a weapon locked up in their vehicle seems salable, legal gun owners vetted to be allowed to carry by virtue of background check and at least some modicum of schooling, I believe is the best place to start. And I did not say no one should be able to "Post" a business that they own, just as any persons home is their "castle", and inside the confines of that, they should be in control. But, that home owner does not control whether a visitor can leave a weapon locked in their vehicle parked on the street. The home owner's ability to control stops at the confines of his castle, and does not intrude into the visitors vehicle. I believe that business owner should have the same ability, if they want to preclude carry inside the physical work space, then so be it, but not in the vehicles of it's employees. Again the Constitution states it is up to the Legislature to decide all things related to the keeping and wearing of arms, that is an irrefutable fact. No other entity is entitled to be responsible for restrictions, not City Councils, County Commissions, or business owners, it is a black and white thing, for those who will see it and honor the Law. As to what class of individual that should be able to have a weapon on their person or in their vehicle, at this point we have laws in effect, rightly or wrongly, and till such time as we can change them, render unto Caesar.....felons and the proved mentally incompetent accepted of course.

If in fact, the Tennessee Constitution has any bearing on this discussion, then the only individuals who are to have a say relative to this issue are in fact our State Legislators. Article 1 Section 26 clearly states that the people have a Right, (and that is the word that is used, not privilege), to keep and bear arms for the common defense. Note that there is no mention of a militia or protecting the People from a despotic federal government in this document, merely the Right of the citizens of this State to provide for their own defense, knowing that the State has no charter for any other entity to provide the same. The Legislature shall have the power by law to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime, only. There is no mention of land, property or business owners to have a hand in that decision, only the Legislature, and then, and only then, if they can prove that restrictions on the Right as written down in the document can be proved to prevent crime. We have already had an opinion from the Tennessee AG to that effect, that any law restricting the keeping and wearing of arms MUST be proved to prevent crime, or that law is unconstitutional. The only "property right" which is germane to the conversation at all is the one which decides whether every citizen of the State of Tennessee personally owns the Constitution of this State, or whether it belongs only to those who own businesses. Or more clearly to whom does the Legislature owe it's allegiance, the President and CEO of Fed Ex or the average Citizen. Fed Ex sits in Mogadishu on the Mississippi due to geography and cost of running it's business. Why else would it chose to locate in one of the most dangerous locations in America. The price of Jet A fuel is the single biggest limiting factor for it's location in Memphis, and being the geographical center of the US is the reason why. They are not going to pick up and run if the State Legislature grew a pair and decided to honor our Constitution, allowing HCP holders to keep their handguns locked in their personal vehicles on their parking lot. The millions of dollars already invested in infrastructure, and the Government teat they suckle on at the airport to their benefit will preclude that from happening. They just have the bluff in on our Representatives and Senators, and we as the money stream to them allow it, because we bicker on the issue instead of reading the document that controls it and demanding our Legislators do the right thing according to the Constitution.

I sat on a panel with MR. Peck at the First Amendment Center in Nashville Nov. 3, 2009 where we discussed the "Right to Carry vs. Right to Know". He stated that his reason for publishing the database of HCP holders was to provide parents with a method of finding out if a home their children were going to visit housed weapons. I asked him at that panel discussion why he did not push to make public all Hunting License holders as well, given that each and every one of those homes would have weapons there as well, I never did get a straight answer to that question. I further posed the thought that HCP Holders have a FBI background check run prior to issuance of that permit, but no such background check is done to certify suitability of "character" for the millions of hunters who legally obtain and keep weapons, which normally are much more devastating in their abilities than the handguns used by HCP holders, he had no retort for that either. I do applaud the effort on the part of Mr. Peck to allow Mr. Givens' statements to be published, it is the first time I can recall a balanced presentation of gun owner's perspectives in the Commercial Appeal.

Maybe an answer to this would be to make the Lawyers pony up if the civil case was found in favor of the defendant. As attorneys take the cases on a contingency factor, betting on the come so to speak, make them, as experts in determining the validity of a suit, be responsible for the 1/3 of a judgment against the person bringing a spurious suit. The attorneys basically finance the suits, banking on getting paid if and when a judgment is made, let them be responsible if it goes in favor of the defendant. If the suit has merit and they are able to convince a jury they enjoy the benefit, if it is found to be sans merit, let them share in the down side as well.

On that we can agree, people love to flap their gums but never open their purses. Till we as gun owners have a PAC with some beef to it, we are simply political wannabes.

It is very simple, the Legislators do not follow the Law, they make up stuff to appear that they are controlling outcomes, for the benefit of getting re-elected. It is after all, just as simple as it appears, we have too many individuals in power, put there by money, that have desires of control over the population. If gun owners put forth as much cash as trial lawyers towards candidates in elections, gun owners would have a much more ready ear in the Legislative process. The NRA did not spend a millionth of what the trial lawyers did in the last election cycle in Tennessee, who do you think is going to get the most notice. It is that simple, money talks and BS walks!

Per AG Opinion, and a cursory reading of Article 1 Section 26 of the Tennessee Declaration of Rights, any legislation, (restriction) of the Right to keep and bear arms for the common defense, MUST be predicated on a reduction in crime. "Reasonable restrictions" are Unconstitutional unless they satisfy this chain placed on the Legislature by our Constitution and Declaration of Rights. Feel-good attempts at Citizen control by what should be servants of the People instead of would be controllers of the same do not meet Constitutional muster. Empirical data has to be proffered as a foundation for ANY Restriction to the general population's ability to enjoy those Rights involving arms, if they are not convicted of crime which limit that Right by choice of action on the part of individuals, or having been adjudicated mentally unfit, it says so in black and white. In this you are right, the founders intended us to go about our daily lives armed to prevent the Government from taking over control of us, the fact that we can use the same weapons protected by the 2nd Amendment to cover or shield us from exposure, injury, damage, or destruction of our persons from criminals is gravy, ie:"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." --George Washington

Excellent thread!

Anybody that believes Alexander would consider signing on to uphold firearms' owners rights it several brick shy of a full load. If Olympia Snowe told him to he might, but what are the chances of that happening?

I have been tumbling loaded rounds coming out of the Dillon to get the sizing lube off the rounds for years, just like the major manufacturers do. Seriously, loaded ammo gets a lot of vibration in shipping. Ever run I-55, think the ammo shipped up and down the road does not get jostled pretty good? A pain on hollow points, but nothing a dental pic and scrutiny does not cure.

Please post the names of shops that are going to discount ammo or components.

Are you serious? Does IL have State preemption on municipalities (Counties and Cities) with respect to gun laws? Can the average Chicago resident drive down the street with a long gun in the vehicle, with ammunition in close proximity legally? No permit required in TN to do that.

Wonder how much vibration a plane trip to the Sand Box from the US imparts to loaded ammo?

The wife and I have baby sitting duty for the grandkids. They range from 7 years to 2 months, that is all the danger I need. I will slide out to the reloading building when the squeals get to much for Papa, otherwise, we will chase each other around the house and have a large time!

+1

Who said Reid was Pro 2nd Amendment? NRA Now Leans Toward Endorsing Harry Reid | RedState

It allows me to be in control of my ammo. Buying large volumes of components makes the finished product cheaper. If they stopped selling ready rolled, I should never run out.

Picked up this stock AR 10, and never having been able to leave well enough alone.... This is my final rendidtion, or so I tell myself.

I have gone to using stainless steel media (pins) in an aqueous solution with a little dish washing liquid soap and a touch of Lemishine. It cleans the cases inside and out, removes all powder and primer residue. I always deprime prior to cleaning, as it get the primer pockets really clean as well as the inside of the cases, especially the necks. The system requires a Thumlers Tumbler, but to me is worth the quality of brass I have after cleaning with this method. Pic of a batch of .243's recently done. This was some of my Dad's last year deer hunting, varmint brass, been sitting up all summer. There is a site that shows the steps and results, and gives you a place to buy the necessary equipment here: Stainless Tumbling Media, reloading supplies, reload brass

I am sure it is a measure of both. The average person sits on their hinneys and expects some one else to do the heavy lifting, it is the case in all endeavors. Then they piss and moan when things do not go to suit them. Those who get involved, open their wallets, burn up their shoe leather and raise their voices are labeled extremist. (The enemy of my enemy is my friend, for as long as the fight is on). Then there is the normal Republican Party of Tennessee, middle of the road, quite moderate, only wanting to deal with the so called Concervatives when they are needed to fund the races and help beat the Democrats. Once in Power, they go about their standard Moderate/Liberal agenda's, and when the Democrats take back over they whine and wonder why!

Last time I checked, the House was supposed to belong to the People. We pay the taxes that they redistribute, and which goes for their salaries. They are supposed to be Representatives for God's sake, which the last time I checked, meant that they were to take into consideration what the bosses want. That would be the ones who pay the bills, or so it works in every other situation where there are services rendered for dollars expended.

Jobs Take Legislative Priority Over Guns, Harwell Says - Nashville Public Radio

If you are so well connected on the facts about Casada, spill the beans to the rest of us. Inquiring minds want to know what you are privy to.

You don't get it. The Democratic House normally voted in support of gun issues, if they ever got the chance, outside the hard core Libs and the Memphis group. Naifeh kept the 2nd Amendment bills bottled up and killed in the House. Senate versions would pass, and the House version would never get on the floor for debate or vote. The Speaker wields way more power than the Governor, by virtue of being able to say what Legislation even has a chance to get voted on. Plus, picking the committee chairs is paramount to setting the scope for what will be allowed.