RobertNashville

The police can take you to jail for a lot of reasons; that doesn't mean you are guilty of anything or that they can prove you guilty of anything. It's pretty simply for me, if I'm carrying (and that means in a holster on my body or off-body in my vehicle or anything in between then I don't drink - if I know I'm going to be drinking than the gun stays home. Problem solved. That said, if you are below .08 and/or there isn't a lot of other contributing evidence to show you were impaired I think the court is going to have a difficult time convicting you of anything especially if you have a good attorney (which I would highly recommend you have).

[quote name='JohnC' timestamp='1355025513' post='857101'] I don't carry. This is mainly a "poke holes in paper" hobby for me. Now if someone is armed and threatens my life or my families at home, they're screwed. [/quote]Wasn't directed specifically at you but even if it were, not carrying only reduces your risk of a lawsuit slightly. Most of the risk of owning a firearm is when it's discharged (in you home, on the street doesn't really matter)...if a round goes somewhere it isn't supposed to go you are going to be in for a ####storm of lawsuits (and that will likely be the very least of your problems). That's to say nothing about the incredible risks everyone who drives a car on public highway takes every time they are out on the road...one tiny mistake and you could easily take a life, maybe your own, or wind up with vehicular homicide charges. There are probably hundreds of things we all do every day that could result in a civil lawsuit with the potential or ruining our financial lives. The point that I was making is about choosing to not live life in fear, most especially, not living in fear of a stupid civil lawsuit. The other point I was making is that my question didn't ask if I "[u][i]should[/i][/u]" do it.

[quote name='leftyk82' timestamp='1354980610' post='856879'] With respect, let's keep the topic to IDPA indoor. There is a long-existing thread about reloads at the NA [/quote]I agree...sorry I brought up the issue. I understand that people like to reload for a variety or reasons and - I was just thinking out loud as it seems to me the benefit of regular, indoor matches at a premier facility is worth a little bit of sacrifice to participate in even if one of the sacrifices is using factory ammo...I didn't mean to get anyone into an argument about it.

I appreciate some of the should or shouldn't do it replies but Honestly, I don't understand how some of you justify owning a firearm Much less carry one in if you are that worried about lawsuits.

Yuup....they'll have some 50BMGs there; it's a great store (which has gotten a good chunk of my money since it opened). They just competed an expansion late spring and added a lot of space and you can buy individual 50BMG rounds there, live and not live

Barrett does not have tours open to the public unless that has recently changed. They do that are "sold" at Friends of the NRA auctions and include shooting the 50BMG. If you want to do some shooting I'd be happy to meet you an On Target or, if you want to come into Nashville, the New Nashville Armory.

[quote name='DaveTN' timestamp='1354937476' post='856753'] No that is not correct. If he hadnt chased TM down and scared him he would not be having to answer for his actions to a jury. [/quote]Chased him down? Where exactly did that "fact" come from? Followed him, or tried to follow him but I haven't heard any sources other than the Jackson/Sharpton crowd paid a picture of Zimmerman chasing Martin down.

[quote name='DaveTN' timestamp='1354937093' post='856748'] I wouldn't have put myself or a neighbors innocent kid in that situation. If I did, and started getting my azz kicked, Im pretty sure I wouldn't make things worse by killing someone. [/quote]Innocent kid? Is there a third person in this case?

[quote name='DaveS' timestamp='1354927216' post='856679'] Folks I can only judge based on known facts... A 17 year old was walking through a neighborhood he had full right to be in. Zman was in a truck and wanted to follow TM and 911 said "we don't need you to do that". Zman did it anyways. Some kind of way he got his *** handed to him, and shot/killed a 17 year old kid over it. I know, I know...all ya'll gonna say Zman shot TM in self defense. Well folks, maybe, just maybe..TM beat the P*** out of Zman in self defense....ever think of that? Zman will have his day in court and so will TM's parents. Good luck Zman! Dave S [/quote]Dave I think you are leaving out a couple of critical things that can have a big impact on who was really at fault in Martin's death... 1. Zimmerman did nothing illegal, as far as I can tell, in initially following Martin no matter what the 911 operator told him to do or not do and Zimmerman had as much right to "be there" as anyone else. 2. And this is where things seem most unclear, it appears that Zimmerman had stopped following Martin and was either headed back to his vehicle or even getting into his vehicle and it was then that Martin, according to some, began the physical altercation. Looking at it from the Martin's side...if Zimmerman really was "disengaging" then any "threat" Martin might have felt, legitimately or otherwise, was gone and he should also have disengaged just like any of us who feel threatened, pull our weapon and the bad guy runs away. We don't have the right to shoot at that point and Martin didn't have to right to start pounding on Zimmerman. Now, I'll admit...I'm going from memory here so if could be I have some of the "facts" wrong. Also, I think there will be a lot of facts to come out that we simply don't have. All I'm sure of right now is that I haven't seen enough verifiable facts to cause me to believe that Zimmerman is guilty of anything other than trying to protect his neighborhood.

[quote name='DaveS' timestamp='1354922714' post='856654']...When we entered the forward torpedo room, he showed me the bunk he slept in (on the Sunfish). This was the first time I have ever seen tears in his eyes.[/quote] I think I can understand that. Anytime I visit a decommissioned ship; even if it's nothing like the one I served on, those memories come flooding back...it seems like it was yesterday but my service was some 30 years ago. When you serve aboard an American warship you become attached to it in a way that's difficult to put into words...the sailor depends on that ship for his very life, most especially when a shooting war is going on.

[quote name='Gwith40' timestamp='1354907350' post='856572']...The state attorney and the chief did not want to pursue an indictment because the evidence indicated Zimmerman was telling the truth. Nonetheless, there was a presentation scheduled in front of a grand jury. This was the proper way to handle the case. By taking the case away from a citizen grand jury, Corey tacitly admitted she didn't think an indictment would happen. This is legal in Florida, but in my opinion circumvents the spirit of the Constitution of the United States.[/quote] Don't really disagree with your take on the whole issue but I thought I'd comment on the Grand Jury issue. As far as I know, it is not necessary or required that any case be heard by a Grand Jury and that a DA can always proceed, file charges and go to trial without a case ever going to the GJ. So...what I'm saying here is that I don't think there is anything improper about a case not being presented to the GJ. What [u][i][b]is[/b][/i][/u] curious here is the question of why was the GJ appearance cancelled. Of course we'll almost certainly never know but given all that happened in this case, it's not unreasonable to think the the DA that took over didn't want to go to the GJ because she (I think it's a she) was, shall we say, less than confident about their evidence convincing a GJ and didn't want to risk getting a no bill. Of course, some will say that the evidence was so strong that there was just no reason to go. I guess each person will just have to decide for themselves what the real reason for cancelling the GJ appearance might have been.

[quote name='mcurrier' timestamp='1354918554' post='856636']...Prosecutors sometimes shoot higher than what they want to get to leave room for a lower ruling or a plea deal.[/quote] That's right...I seem to remember something about some Duke lacrosse players and an overzealous DA that I believe is not only not a DA anymore but not a licensed attorney anymore either.

[quote name='TankerHC' timestamp='1354911334' post='856604'] The book and movie are both great. If you like WWII Submarine movies, watch The Boat. "Das Boot". It was filmed in Germany on the backlot at the studios in Munich. I visited there and saw the model they used and the conning tower and saw the movie when it came out in German and English. It has to be the greatest WWII Submarine movie of all time. [/quote]That is a great one...been a while since I saw it. I'm envious that you actually got to sen the production site and model. I don't go to Chicago anymore but one thing they have there that is fascinating to go through is the German U-boat, the U-505. It's been years since I went through it but as far as I know it's still there and open to the public.

[quote name='DaveS' timestamp='1354834219' post='856077']Tomorrow is the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. I only bring this up as I would like to honor my uncle "Thomas Lowery" who served on the submarine USS Sunfish during WWII and passed away last summer.[/quote] Wow...I know of the Sunfish (SS-281)...the submarine war; especially in the Pacific theater, has always fascinated me and I've read most everything written about it, fiction and non-fiction. One of my favorite authors is Edward L. Beach Jr; among other works wrote "Run Silent Run Deep" which was also the title of a movie based on the book (the movie included Clark Gable and Burt Lancaster). Anyway, condolences to you and a salute to your uncle and to all who served and still do...Some gave all; all gave some.

I've learned one very important thing form the Zimmerman/Martin case... When I see someone walking through my neighborhood at night and it's someone I'm pretty sure doesn't live there (and yes, I do have a pretty good, although not perfect knowledge of my neighbors) and he looks like a gansta the only logical course of action for me is to cower in my house and hope he doesn't decide to break in (and if he decided to break into a neighbors house that's there problem). I now know this because obviously, if I make any attempt to leave my home and figure out if this 6'2" "kid" is a threat to me or my neighbors or whether he is just out for some skittles and soda and the "kid" decides to attack me because he thinks I'm following (even though I've clearly disengaged and is heading back to my vehicle) then I'm obviously the one in the wrong and I should just let him beat my brains against the sidewalk. Got it. I'm glad that's been cleared up for me.

[quote name='monkeylizard' timestamp='1354905806' post='856558'] For pretty much all other purposes, I'd agree. But that's not how the definition in sec. 921 reads. It's pretty specific that for the purposes of the chapter (Chapter 44 - Firearms) active duty residence is the PDS state. It makes no mention that I saw for being a dual citizen of sorts. It makes sense. In these rare cases like Robert's, it hurts the active duty person. But without that definition, the man in MO wouldn't be able to buy a handgun at the local gun store or PX. He'd have to come home to TN to do that then carry it back. That's not so bad when it's MO and TN, but would suck if you're from Florida and stationed in Alaska or Hawaii. It reads to me like the lawmakers were trying to help service members out by making their state of residence for firearms purposes equal to their assigned base/post/station/port/camp/craphole so they didn't have to keep changing official residency after every PCS to not run afoul of these laws. Like most well intentioned laws it has unintended side effects. Any lawyers on here know different about dual-state-residency for active duty in regards to federal firearms laws?[/quote] As I've looked at the applicable laws here it doesn't look to me as if, in the case of [i]loaning[/i] a firearm to someone, the state of residence matters as far as Federal law goes. If I'm misinterpreting that I hope someone lets me know.

I'm going to do my best to be there...I can't give an absolute answer yet as my "Christmas" related plans for that weekend are still in flux but I thin the 16th will work for me and I'm going to do all I can to arrange things so that I can be there!

[quote name='DaddyO' timestamp='1354899454' post='856506'] Sorry, man, but I really don't get what you're trying to say. I find it hard to believe that you haven't read one of the many stories or heard any of the many news reports on TV where it was stated that the person charged with a crime had a permit. Maybe you're just not paying attention. Have a nice day.[/quote] Sure I've read stories and stories are pretty much like assholes. Statistics are facts derived form large, scientifically conducted studies using mathematical tools and principles. Stories can make good fodder for internet forums I suppose but they make a lousy basis for substantive discussion.

[quote name='mikegideon' timestamp='1354897841' post='856488'] Z was only arrested and charged after a huge media frenzy. That wouldn't have happened if the thug wasn't a 12 year old black kid that looked like Obama's son. [/quote]There you go again....confusing fantasy with reality. The sweet, little, innocent "twelve year old" black kid was who the media and the race-baiters wanted you to think was the "victim"; not the thuggish, gansta looking 17 year old. EDIT: Now, just to be clear; I'm not in any way suggesting that someone deserves to be killed for the way they look...I'm just commenting on the outright lies presented by the media and the "black community".

Well, okay...sorry I won't see you there then, apparently. Probably a good thing since I'm sure you would clean my clock (of course that's probably going to happen anyway)

Anybody who would shoot a dog that isn't actually dangerous or presenting a threat is a sick and likely unstable sonofabitch and sure as hell should not be carrying a firearm, whether that person is a private citizen or carries a badge.

You said "[b][i]Not true. The media is quick to point out if someone who committed a crime with a gun has a permit[/i][/b]" I'm asking if you have stats rather than vague references to "media stories"...apparently you don't. Thanks for your concern for my happiness but it's unnecessary.

[quote name='Hershmeister' timestamp='1354896136' post='856457'] I mitigate my risks by ensuring that I don't loan them out [/quote]And I carry a ####load of insurance including insurance specifically to cover me if I'm sued related to firearms...to each his own I guess. There aren't many people I would loan a weapon to (other than allowing people to shoot my weapons at the range)...this man is one of the bravest people I've ever known...four tours in Iraq and a dozen other ####-holes as well; some of our country's highest awards for bravery and service (the weight of his medals when he wears them all almost add as much weight as his battle gear)...I've no doubt he would give his life for me without a second thought and I'd like to think I'd do the same for him. Even if it were illegal and even if I did get sued he still deserves my help and I would give it to him. What I wanted to find out here is if offering my help in this way would be illegal and it looks like I'm okay with this legally; if someone, someday sues me then they can take their best shot.

[quote name='DaddyO' timestamp='1354888049' post='856381'] Not true. The media is quick to point out if someone who committed a crime with a gun has a permit.[/quote] So you know the stats? Do you have real sources or just media stories? Can you tell us how many cases of a permit holder inappropriately shooting someone, or more specifically, a LEO at a traffic stop there has been in the U.S. in the past month? In the past year? In the past two years? In the past ten years? "Stories" that appear in news sources and/or on websites are [i][b]not[/b][/i] statistics; they're just stories....stories that may be factual or not...may be complete or not...stories that once read are probably not even remembered correctly after a short amount of time. I don't often back up DaveTN ; but I don't know of any competent or easily accessed statistics on such issues - if you know of any, I think many of us here would appreciate knowing what they are/where to find them.

[quote name='Hershmeister' timestamp='1354894663' post='856435'] I'm not a lawyer but have enough personal experience with civil suits to know that people can sue you for complete bull$hit and you'll spend money time and emotional energy defending yourself. [/quote]Yet you, apparently, own a firearm or two (admittedly an assumption on my part but I think a reasonable one given your presence on the Tennessee Gun Owners Forum)...If you are that worried about potential lawsuits wouldn't it be prudent to stay away from firearms altogether?