dats82

I have always felt comfortable around guns as long as I was in control of them, so if you are new to guns, I am not sure what advice would be appropriate to help you feel comfortable. Just experience, I suppose. From day one that I carried, I always had one chambered. My personal opinion of it is that if you think you will have time to pull your gun and rack the slide, there are probably other options for actions that your should concider rather than pulling your gun. You gun should be a last resort, so if you do decide you need to use it, it had better be ready to go.

I cannot fathom any reason why (1) the barrel would ever be pointed at yourself while "trying to clean the gun," and (2) why you would not just flip the cylinder to check it. Regardless of how well you know the weapon, surely to goodness you would know enough to be able to open it up.

It is not normally mentioned in the discussion of pocket carry, but I love my NAA .22 mag. I had a Taurus 856 that I pocket carried a little, but I am always annoyed with a bunch of stuff in my pocket. The NAA is more comfortable in my pocket and will get the job done in a pinch. Easily within your budget too.

I have only had one, and that is the Marlin 30-30 that was the first gun I bought. I wish I could find it some friends, but the finances have yet to allow that. A guide gun is on my short list as well as a 39.

Anchor Constructors LLC - 615-939-1453 I have known this man for many years, and I believe he has a great work ethic and treats people right. He did a tear-off and replacement on my parents house, and the only piece of trash I found after the job was a corner of a shingle that had fallen into a shrub. I found it a few months later while trimming shrubs. He does work from Nashville to Knoxville and will do a great job at a good price. Give him a try; I think his estimates are free.

I think the Hispanics are included in the White numbers. Further down the page where it is talking about the staff, it shows a section for whites who are non-hispanic. This would make it seem reasonable to me that if they offer no designation, then Whites would include Hispanics. If indeed this is true, then Blacks would be the most popular race in prison.

My fiance loves her Bersa 380. We have never had any problems from it, and it is easy on the wallet as well. What was mentioned above about her trying guns in the store is exactly what you need to do. I bought a 38 revolver for my fiance, and she did not like it one bit. I picked up the used Bersa on the cheap to mess with a little and possibly resale to make a few bucks. However, when she got ahold of it, it was all of a sudden "hers." A woman is hard to predict; let her pick it out.

I carry a NAA MiniMag as a bug in my pocket sometimes, but more times than not, it is just the Ruger on my hip riding solo.

That is indeed funny, but if you look it up on Snopes, it is not completely true.

I like doughnuts

I think this thread is support for the line about TN being the patron state for shootin' stuff. The target I enjoy most as of late is a little duelling tree type thing I made. It works fine for .22 fun, but I don't think the metal is hard enough for much else. I made a swinging plate to use for longer rifle shots, but it turns out, it is not as hard as I thought. It is 1/4 diamond plate, but a .223 goes through it like butter. I have not tried with any other rifles. Maybe it would handle something lower velocity like a 30/30.

I chuckled at that.

I agree, I think it is a SHTF kind of thing, but I don't really get into it. I don't think I am creative enough to go along with it all.

As I told a friend of mine, one way or another, I will never live to see this put into action. If this comes to pass, may God have mercy on the poor men who are sent to collect the guns. I can only hope that they remember the constitution they signed up to protect.

I have bowed out of this discussion, but sense Schiavo was brought up, I would like to interject one tangential issue. Make SURE you have your documents in place to handle things if you were to find yourself in such a situation. She had no living will or power of attorney established which is what allowed the two opposing positions to argue and lead to such a debacle. It is sad that young people are typically the individuals who are subject to the injuries that cause vegetative states and such, and the young people are the least likely to have arrangements in place. I am being hypocritical here, but I will be taking care of it this summer prior to my wedding. That is all. Carry on

Peejman got to it before I did, but I completely agree. A gun choosen for power over proficiency is a very poor choice. I do not know what causes your limitations, but if you lack the strength or function to rack a slide, you will probably lack the ability to control the recoil of a larger round in the same size gun. My father is in failing health and can no longer handle his 38 S&W. He rarely leaves the house, so carry is not an issue. He is looking closely at the Kel-Tec PMR30 simply because he knows he will be able to be proficient and more effective with it. Caliber is way overrated if you cannot control it. If you are well practice and comfortable with what you already have, stick with it.

I was just looking at the site. I don't know if it is all auctions, but the one I was looking at kept increasing the time remaining. Then I saw the fine print that said with each bid, the time increases by 30 sec. The way I understand it is that you pay for each bid, then you also pay the finished auction price. It sounds like these auctions could last forever and get really expensive if you get in on one on the ground floor.

6.8, you have not stepped on anyone's toes or offended me in anyway. I am not a communist tree hugger as you have implied, and I never said Jack was a saint. I have never met him, and I have no idea what his patient interactions were like. As I stated earlier, medicine is about caring for a patient, and my position is simply that these types of patients should be able to choose the type of care they receive. The biggest underlying factor is the patient's complete freedom in life. You can absolutely have strong opinions on subjects but still be open minded enough to try to understand the basis of the opposing positions. I still do not understand the basis of your argument, but those efforts seem futile at this point. Leroy, thanks for the clarification. I understand the difference. I just assumed normative ethics because that is what is generally used to evaluate conduct in the medical theatre. By the way, for any who are interested, the CBS morning news program had a story this morning about it all. I was headed to early service, so I did not get to see it all. It should be on their website.

Everyone knows this isn't true...trucks don't have trunks

6.8, are you a physician? I am not being a smartass, I am just trying to understand where you are coming from and what your strong opinions are founded on. From what I can gather, it seems like you are okay with the terminal patients taking proactive measures, but you have an unwavering objection to using medical practices to facilitate. Unless you are practicing medicine, I am having a hard time understanding why you are so adamant in rejecting the idea of physicians providing this type of care to the patient. I have a strong interest in these types of issues, so I am just trying to understand the basis of your argument.

6.8, I am sorry to hear that your father had a lingering death, but that goes back to autonomy. It was his choice to stick around as long as he could to spend precious moments with your family. That is noble, and I will never argue that he made the wrong decision. However, I will also never condemn a person who decides it is time to go when they have reached the point of medical futility. Your argument about practicing eugenics holds no water. There is not a fine line between assisted suicide and government killings with death panels. I think it would be more akin to an twelve foot prison fence topped with razor wire. There is a very clear distinction, and that distinction is who is making the choice. Your argument against assisted suicide is actually the more communist way to look at it. Telling a patient that they are not allowed to choose how they leave this world and allowing the government to decide what final care they do or do not receive is giving the power to the governmemt, i.e. less autonomy (freedom) for the patient. Practicing medicine is about the art of caring for the patient. Preserving life means nothing and is not noble or sacred when you remove the person from the equation. The discussion here is not about arbitrarily killing off people because they are old and are of no use to society. This is an issue on how you provide the best care possible for patients who have reached the point of medical futility and who wish to be in complete control of their care through the end. This dicussion should never involve third party money or the burden on society. It is strictly about a patient's complete freedom to decide how to live their life. Is one course out of life more noble or more right? That is not for you or anyone other than the patient to decide. It is clear this is an emotional issue. I have always been told you cannot use logic to argue against emotion.

The overriding principle in medical ethics today is autonomy. It is universally accepted that a patient has the right to choose the fate of their care. Generally this refers to the right to refuse care, but the underlying basis is the right to choose what happens to you. Leroy you stated that ethics do not change with the whims of culture. This could not be further from the truth. With the increasing technology and abilities we now have, principles of ethics have evolved and changed. You spoke about your grandmother in the fifties; autonomy was not accepted in the fifties. It was legally and ethically acceptable for hospitals to hold patients and force care upon them because the powers that be thought it to be the best course of action. Obviously, there exists a conflicted of interest in this type of system, and the short of the history is that autonomy emerged when we developed the ability to basically prolong life as long as we wanted. There are very few cases in which it is acceptable, both legally and ethically, to override a patient's autonomy. People like to debate the oath with the "do no harm" and "preserve life" and all the good stuff. The definition of harm you seem to have accepted is when one's actions helps to end the physiological life of another. So by this same definition, you would also believe that it would be in violation of the oath to "pull the plug." In both scenarios, it is an individual's choice to elicit an action which terminates physiological life. Through livings wills, durable power of attorneys, or signed consent, in both cases the patient is deciding when physiologic functions will cease. This leads to another point of debate. What is life? What defines the end of life? This is just as dubious as trying to define an acceptable point for the beginning of life. The problem with this question is that the answers can be as varied as the people answering. My definition of life is not that I have a beating heart or primitive brainstem reflexes, it is that I am able to live as a functional member of society, as a unique individual with my own personality, and exist without being an undue burden on those that I love. With that said, I could very much be of cognoscente mind and viable heart, but my life would be over. So you see, with this perspective, neither Jack nor his patients were actually ending life; they were merely hastening the demise the residual physiologic functions. The truth be known about, there are some terminal illnesses with such pain that if enough narcotics were given to control the pain, the respiratory drive would be suppressed to the point that the patient would fail to breath. What is more ethically in-line with your thoughts on "do no harm?" Allow the patient to live a few extra days in excruciating pain and at a cost of tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, or dose to control the pain and drift off into an eternal sleep. I know what I would choose for myself and anyone I love. Mr. Leroy, I usually agree with your posts, but I am afraid we could not be further from agreement on this subject. I do not expect my opinions or ramblings to change anyone's mind on the matter, but perhaps it will give you some different perspectives to think about. "Where there is love of medicine, there is love of humankind"

This place seems to have fair prices that might fit your budget idea. I have never ordered from them, but I have heard good things in the past about them. JSE Surplus

Ask her which she would rather. Take her shooting, and see what she likes better. All this speculation does you no good. In the end, either way, it will be her decision so just cut to the chase. By the way, for what its worth. My fiance hated the Taurus revolver that I bought with the intentions of her using, but loves the Bersa 380 that I bought with the intentions of me having another carry option. The Taurus is gone now, and the Bersa is "hers." So much for planning when dealing with a woman's mind.

Like Magic said, I think the idea of running 2000 rds through something without cleaning in order to deem it reliable is just plain ludicrous. I have never fired 2000 rds through anything without cleaning it, and if I did and it failed, I would probably blame my dumbass for not cleaning it and maintaining like I have always been taught. Who gives a damn if you can run thousands of rounds through it without failure? I am never going to be in a situation where I will have to do that. I don't even own 2000 rds for my carry gun. I would absolutely trust the above review over some dude that just says, "Yep, 2000 rds, it's good to go now!"