tntnixon

Actually, they already have (read the Heller decision in it's entirety, as I already said) http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf . They just haven't incorporated it, yet. As far as the states refusal to comply, the SCOTUS has a long history of sending down rulings on things that the states would "never stand for". Ever heard of Brown v. Board of Education or Roe v. Wade (the court incorporated an implicit right as opposed to an explicit right as outline in 2A). As far as your experience goes, in Illinois, the court system is more like a Crock Pot as opposed to a microwave. There have to be conflicting rulings by the Courts of Appeals, in order to get the SCOTUS to grant certiorari. There also must be a suit filed by someone or some group that has standing before the court (an injured party). You must also have a littigant that is willing to pay whatever money is required and take whatever punishment is required to keep them in standing before the court (stay in jail until the ruling), otherwise the case will be ruled as moot. The truth is, you may have actually had standing and may have very well gotten a hearing, but you were unwilling to go through the process because the process sucks (this is not an indictment against you, I probably would not have been willing either, but you never know).

It's illegal, that is why it is off shore. It doesn't matter what you call it, gambling is gambling and is prohibited by state and federal laws.

Have you read the Heller decision in it's entirety? Because that is not the majority opinion at all. As a matter of fact, Scalia wrote only about "sensitive places such as schools and government buildings" being places that were appropriately resticted in one's right to carry. The question that the court is facing now is incorporation, or whether or not the states and local governments are bound by the same Constitutional restrictions that Congress is, with regards to the 2nd Amendment (all other bill of rights incorporations have been upheld by SCOTUS). My suspicion is that the SCOTUS will incorporate 2A. At that point, all your arguements will become moot.

I've finally learned that firearm quality and utility has absolutely nothing to do with price. With firearms, you don't necessarily get what you pay for but some people are enamored by the H&K merely for the price (they want everyone to know they overpayed for something). The Glock, IMHO, is a better weapon and far more useful because it's easier to carry. With firearms, the weapon that you leave at home because it's uncomfortable, is of no use.

The business owner is not liable for the actions of the gun owner on his/her property. The business owner is only liable for his/her own actions, such as knowingly and intentionally serving alcohol to someone who is carrying a firearm (yes the fact that the business owner did know would be required proof it it went to trial). So basically only negligence, as Tennessee law has always been, would cause civil liability. Immunity, would prohibit civil suit even in the above action so that's not likely to be passed and shouldn't be.

This arguement just doesn't fly. The law doesn't present the business owners with any new liability that they didn't already have. The business owners are basically asking for immunity even when they are grossly negligent. Guess what, they're not gonna get that.

I've never been soooo torn on an issue like this. I'd love to have the convention here, but I also see the point in not wanting to support an anti-gun city and convention site. Very similar to my concerns about the SHOT Show venue, but I was told that I was a dumbass for questioning that.

Amen, brother. Does anybody here know how long it takes to get a case through the appeals process? IT TAKES YEARS!!!!!!!!! We've been waiting long enough. This, my friends, is a ploy not to vote anything controversial during a election year. So they can speak out of both sides of their mouths.

No, it's a joke video that is making fun of the Hellstorm 2000, which basically functions the same way. Actually, by all accounts, the rubber band works better.

Sorry, I'm not usually that pissy. I wasn't necessarily as aggravated with the posters as I am that the manufacturer is still making that crap. The trigger system that OS is using is actualy the BMF system which is a crank type system, not a bump fire, made especially for a 10/22.

I stand corrected. Yes, the only successful stories I've heard of has been on 10/22's.

One of the important things to know (maybe the most important), when purchasing a firearm, is how the trigger feels. If someone will not let me dry fire it, then they obviously do not want me to purchase it. Personally, I really don't care if it's a Ed Brown or a Perrazi O/U, I must feel the trigger first ,period, but it is polite to ask.

I'm not quite sure why people who have no idea posted on this subject, but yes they are legal because, like the sping assist knife, they must be operated manually (there is no automated part that does anything to make the trigger work). Now you're question is answered. The real question is does the thing actually work. The answer that nearly everyone that has been sucked in by the add will give is a resounding HELL NO. I think every firearm forum will have this question raised at some point or another, and the answer that always comes up is that nobody can seem to get the things to work because they don't. You will have much better luck if you just practice bump firing. But if you must have a "device" this one works in exactly the same way.

Mick/Injun, here.

Mike Hamilton is being referred to as a lot of things, lately.

I have the same issue and I carry mine in the proverbial bianchi fanny(fudge)pack. Yes it's gay, but I'm comfotable enough with my manlyness to pull it off.

I'm sure that was comforting. Kinda like having someone say "Don't have a wreck and kill you wife and kids and get 3rd degree burns from the subsequent explosion" as you're leaving.

Academy in Rivergate was actually fully stocked with ammo today in practically every caliber. No empty spots where ammo once resided.

I'm always amused at the way people want to "rack" their shotgun in a defensive situation but they wouldn't do the same with their pistol. My way of thinking is that when adrenoline is high, you want to eliminate as many variables as possible (the ones that can ultimately get you killed). So my unequivocal answer is B. Just point and shoot.

I was a naughty boy and followed the threads to the origins of the pistol in question. This was a known problem with this pistol as seen here: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/handguns/26306-hammer-follow.html If the OP is true, then this would not have been TripleDigitRides pistol.

Where is this from? I really like it.

But no one still answered my question of why they chose a convention center that doesn't allow weapons (and yes the notice to vendors says that the firing pins must have been removed and be inspected by the "organizers prior to display)? A show that big could have demanded, as the NRA always has, that the conventioneers be allowed to be armed.

Make milk sandwiches:D