RobertNashville

Of course, to someone who actually shoots, 1,500 rounds is no big deal...to the person who has never owned a firearm 1,500 rounds sounds like a phenomenal amount; more than then can even imagine anyone having. Most of those folks think you can just keep shooting and shooting without reloading ever since that's how it's often portrayed in the movies. ;)

That article is in direct contradiction to what was supposed to be an "official" police announcement three or so weeks ago which was that the only guns he actually used were pistols.   One would think that after more than three months post this event we could get the real story but I'm about at the point to call BS on anything I read about it now.

Thanks for the info...the only caliber I really would like to buy right now is 22LR and I've had a heck of a time finding any...I may just have to make a trip over there. ;)

Although this is going back quite a few years, I used to be good friends with the director of the VA hospital in Seattle.  I don't say this just because he was a friend (now passed on) but he was an extremely dedicated man and truly sought to do the best he and that hospital possibley could for the veterans who came there for care. However, he often related to me just how discouraged he was with their funding, burauracy and the level of care he was able to provide.   What is wrong with the VA has a lot more to do with systemic problems than anything else and I'm doubtful it can be fixed with the way it exists today...I think the only answer is to start over with a clean slate.   What is most sad is that we are failing many of our veterans TODAY and I see little hope that will change anytime soon even if they started trying to fix it today.  It's a badge of shame for our country that we have allowed this to happen for decades.

I understand that ammo prices, when you can find ammo, is high and I understand that people don't like to pay more for something than they are used to paying. However, the great thing about our free enterprise system is that when someone wants to sell something they can ask any price they want and if someone want's/is willing to buy it at that price then fine. If not, then they don't sell it until they lower their prices.   One parting thought...whether someone is "price gouging" or not is something that you cannot know unless you KNOW what the re-seller had to pay for the ammo they are trying to sell.  While I know nothing of this store nor do I have any inside knowledge of what manufacturers/distributors are charging dealers, I wouldn't be surprised if those who have ammo in stock had to pay a good bit more for it to have it than they used to. If so then of course they are going to charge more to the end user.

Police agencies around the country have been shifting from the ubiquitous 12GA to .223 for a while now and mostly because of the advantages of the cartridge as well as fewer (note I didn't say "no") concerns about over penetration.  I've seen lots of tests of various firearms and calibers in simulated home situations and the 5.56/.223 seems to be the best combination of effectiveness and the least likely to over penetrate (especially with the HD ammo made specifically for that purpose).   Someone mentioned the noise earlier...a valid concern but then again, ANY firearm fired in the enclosed space of a home is going to be LOUD; that's one of the reasons I keep a cheep pair of electronic ear protectors by my bed next to my shotgun and/or rifle (the sound gathering is ALSO and advantage of these ear protection devices)...of course, I may not have time to put them on but they are there in case I do have time. Otherwise, I'd rather lose some hearing and still be alive.   Another consideration is that juries tend to see (per one of our fine attorneys here) use of an AR as an over reaction and may consider your claim of self-defense as lacking...something to think about.   For me, I have a handgun close by in every room but I have either a 12ga or one of my 5.56 rifles in my bedroom...I'll grab whichever I can get to first depending on where I am and where the bad guy is. 

Buying ammunition or other supplies should really be no different than buying any other "essential".   While plenty of people won't, most of us know instinctively that we should be saving a minimum of 15-20-% of our income every month (at least in some form, investments, cash in the bank or cash, silver, etc in our home safe); have at least a few months of non-perishable food items put up and same with such things as TP and other non-food but nonetheless pretty important items.   As with most things "firearm" related; we tend to spend more (might even say too much) on getting the next new firearm and spend, far too little on things like ammunition, spare parts and especially training.   I haven't really cut back on my range time but I tend to shoot a little less ammo each visit that I might have otherwise...I had the good fortune of training with retired Navy SEAL Larry Yatch (Sealed Mindset) a couple of years ago and he really drove home the idea of training without ammunition (an outgrowth of the U.S.S. Cole tragedy when a friend of Larry stationed aboard saw the need for much better training but they had no money to buy bunches of ammo so they created training regimens that didn't use ammo). So, I do a lot of my "range time" at home using his ideas. Anyway...not trying to chastise anyone here (except maybe myself) as most if not all of us could do better with being prepared (for whatever)...if we all just bought a little extra every time we buy we would probably all be better off the next time a "crisis" hits. ;)

Yes...life isn't fair...we all know that.   Yes, fairness isn't guaranteed in the Constitution either...I thik most of us know that as well.   And, based on this and the many other threads on this topic; quite a few folks seem to believe that the people, through their legislature, shouldn't seek to be treated fairly even when artifical entiteis like "businesses" seem intnet on and go out of their way to be pattently unfair in how they treat their employees/customers.  :shrug:

I don’t believe this issue is (or at least isn’t just) about “firearms”.  I see the real question as “just how much power should an employer have in controlling the lives if its employees”?   Do employers really have the RIGHT to dictate the contents of an employee’s vehicle just because they want to?   It seems as if whenever discussions about these “parking lot” laws come up you see a lot of words like “should” and “ought” being proffered as legitimate reasons for being for or against these laws but are they legitimate reasons?  Why “should” an employer be able to fire any employee for any reason?  Is it just because that’s how it’s been in Tennessee?  Is it just because someone thinks it “should” be that way?  Do considerations of fairness or logical thought paly no part in these discussions or are we limited to just opinions about what “ought” to be?   This reliance on words like “should” is not just the argument of posters on forums…such tend to be the arguments offered by businesses who have sued states to stop the enforcement of these laws.  In challenge after challenge, business (and their very high paid attorneys) have had the opportunity to present their arguments against these laws and their arguments have been found wanting. When I see a lack of well-articulated reasons coupled with a lack of Constitutional substance for opposition to these laws, it seems only reasonable for me to be in support of this kind of legislation.   I think it also worth mentioning that other than megalomania on the part of businesses such as Nissan and Bridgstone and FedEx, there is no reason why these businesses couldn't have reached a reasonable compromise with employees and customers about the contents of their vehicles that would have made legislative action completely unnecessary. It is, I submit, this "you can't have it in your vehicle because I say so" attitude of businesses that has forced legislatures in 19 other states (and now Tennessee) to see a need to step in. Perhaps these states shouldn’t have done so but I’d suggest that it is the hard-headedness of businesses that has brought us to this point.   One parting thought; aside from the reasons mentioned above; I find it difficult for me to be on the side of businesses on this issue because they want it both ways. Those of us who carry generally do so because we understand that there are evil people in the world who seek to do us harm and we also understand that a firearm is, for most of us, the single best tool we can have to protect ourselves or others from evil men.  When businesses, by signage or by policy or both, tell us that we can’t have a firearm in our vehicle they deny us the use of that tool should we need it yet they refuse to accept any responsibility for the possible consequences. If an employer believes they have the power to dictate the contents of our vehicles then I would suggest that concurrent with that power is the responsibility for consequences of exercising it. If they are unwilling to accept the responsibility whey then should that have the power?

Why?   Because good people who should have known better let these laws get put in place (a lot of it had to do with racism and wanting to keep firearms out of the hands of blacks). That's why.   If you want it changed the only way for that to happen is to get involved.

The TFA is and has been working on that but you won't see it happen under the triumvirate of RINOs we currently have in charge.

Yes...stupid people elected by stupid people. Apparently, Colorado has been taken over by California and New Youk rejects because no one I've ever known who was from Colorado could be that stupid!

Thanks...it is.   I suppose I should have been worried but I really wasn't...whether it's devine providence or just dumb luck I seem to ahve acquired skills that tend to be in demand. My biggest worry was that most of the recruiters who were contacting me were doing so abotu jobs out of state and I reall didn't want to leave Tennessee (although there are proably a few folks who woudl be happy if I left, even one or two on this board! ;)  ).

Well I don't know...I can be had pretty cheep  ;)

Thanks guys!

I'm happy to report that I am once again gainfully employed full-time!  I did get to do some consulting work during my job hunt period which was great but I'm glad to have something a little more consistent!   Aside from being thankful that I found something I think I'll really like, I'm especially thankful that not only do I not need to move out of state (as it was looking I might) but my commute is less than half of what it was and about a headache free as commuting can get.

If you want to watch live TV the only option I know if (aside from cable or satilite) is going to be with an antenna and how good that will be will depend on where you are in relation to the stations you are trying to pick up. Most everything eles you can get through a service like Netflix. Personally, I'm an Amazon "prime" member and there is a boatload of stuff that you can stream from Amazon that way. Recent releases, etc you still pay a fee for though. Generally I've found that if I"m looking for something and can't find it on Netflix I can find it on Amazon and vice versa. I still have sat service but I'm thinking very hard about going the route you are considering as I watch very little that's actually on "TV".

I know it's a long drive but Nashville Armory has several very nice 1911s that you can rent; if memory serves, even a couple of very high-end versions.   Heck, for that matter, if you want to meet me there some evening or weekend I'll let you/your wife shoot a couple of mine. :)

Okay...so...when will you be organizing your first meeting?  ;)  

You didn't know that? Really??? According to the likes of Feinstein and Obummer, our guns are so evil they break out of our gun safes, load themselves and go on killing sprees without any human intervention at all...how could you be so blind to such evil???

We used to have have that; it was called a free press and it worked pretty darn well until those who became part of the press forget what their primary role was. No future generation is truly bound by previous generations...once the future generation becomes the current generation (the ones holding offices and those who are voting them in) have the power, if they chose to use it, to change anything that has been done before. The problem is not just with those like FDR (and the Congress of the time) that saddled us with entitlement programs; it's also with those who, through the years and right up until now who have refused to fix what everybody knows is a broken system. Most of what we blame on "the government" is really OUR collective fault...the problem is that the government has been out of control for so long that I don't know if there is still time for us to save ourselves without tremendous pain; or maybe even time to save ourselves at all.

I think the point is that if a majority of voters in a majority of the states are going to continue to put into office, those who look at the Constitution with contempt, hatred, just don't care or are outright socialists then that "majority" will prevent the rest of us from moving the country back to its roots as a republic. And yeah, not only will those "low information voters" be the first to starve to death when their Obamaphone can't get a connection to the foodstamp office they'll also be the first to march in the streets, terrorize others and try to take by force (of numbers if not with guns) from the prepared whatever the prepared have.    

Move from Tennessee because of our firearm laws? Some people move here because of our firearm laws are so good. ;) I've lived in several states, visited just about every other except Alaska and Hawaii and and for the most part, TN is pretty damn good overall as far as its firearm laws go. I'm not saying there isn't significant opportunity for improvement but on a state by state comparison, I think Tennessee holds up pretty well. Anyway...to each his own I suppose.

One thing you didn't mention, there are several trigger events that could cause a complete economic collapse even if the government starts to turn around and do what it needs to do.  What I'm saying is, even if we/the government does the right thing (which is unlikely I grant you), it may all be for nothing. Two examples, if the world starts valuing/trading oil in something other than dollars as that is one of the few things that is propping up our currency now even as we devalue it by monetizing our debt. Another would be a rise in interest rates just to their typical, historic levels which would mean that most of the revenue that government takes it would have to be spent just to pay the interest on the massive debt we already have. I suppose what I'm saying is that I don't think we'll ever have a chance to worry about armed rebellion because if we don't change course and quickly, I think we are looking toward a time when simply staying alive will be our primary concern.

Humm...I don't know...armed drones, tanks, helicopters and grenades can make up for big differences in numbers.   How many of the "300 million" are the right age to fight effectively? How many who are the right age to fight effectively hold to the same philosophy that you would be fighting for?   Of those, how many would actually put their lives on the line to go out and kill other Americans?   I don't believe war is the answer nor that such a resistance would ultimately win even if war was the answer...if we can't turn things around at the ballot box (and I've no illusions about that) then I think the great experiment is over.