RobertNashville

Yuup...very good advice. Mine are recorded in several different places.

I would agree. Based on what has been said about this guys actions he only seems to be escalating and if so, where will he stop? The sooner it's dealt with the better for all.

No worries...I'm not crazy (even though some here would disagree).If I could create the perfect President there are elements of Christie I'd want in the mixing bowl but I'd be cutting a lot out too. I'm looking forward to his keynote address!

Based on the number of videos posted; one could come to the conclusion that there can be no information provided or thoughtful discussion possible without a video.

That's not an unusual restriction in my experience. Frankly, if I had just spent a ton of money building a state-of-the-art range I'd be damn particular about what ammo was being used too.

I find the above extremely irresponsible. So much for HCP holders being law-abiding citizens.

Unless there is a lot more to this story; it sounds to me as if the city of Minneapolis is going to need to find some big money to pay for the actions of these officers. A sergeant with Davidson Metro told me a few months ago that many of the current generation of officers coming onto the force have a very different view of civilians carry than older officers...that many of the younger officers have been told and have come to believe that only cops should have guns. We can blame it on our school system or whatever but, at least according to him, the difference in view is significant. That said, I'm wondering if that is part of the reason for incidents like this hapening?

I know I gave ArmyVeteran quite a few negative 1s so I'm apparently one of the bad apples that precipitated the system change and the dressing down. For the sake of clarity, however, the negatives given to him had a lot less to do with the political message and a lot more to do with the quality of the sources of the videos (and that there were so many videos; all of which seemed to say the same thing). That said, I am not sure why these reputation points are such a big deal...as East_TN_Patriot noted, I saw it much like the "like" feature on Facebook and although I did later find an explanation for how reputation points were intended to work, I had to go look for it...something I suspect that few did. As has been said, this is an internet forum - no matter what opinion someone holds there will always be some who agree and others who disagree...if the forum has negative and positive reputation points then I don't know why those who disagree/agree with what someone has said or has any similar reasons wouldn't be expected to do give negatives and positives.

Probably because that's the legal concept that applies.I never thought this was a "stand your ground" incident; it was the press, trying to score points for their prejudices, who keep trying to make it into a stand your ground issue.

Given the rabid nature of RP supporters, I'd want an oath signed in blood. My experience, while admittedly limited, is that RP supporters seem willing to do almost anything to get their man nominated despite the outcome of the primaries and regardless of most any other consideration - their allegiance sometimes reminds me of an almost religious fervor.

I find a lot to admire ab out Christie...frankly, seeing someone who isn't afraid to call BS BS is refreshing. That doesn't mean I want him as President; just that I admire the fact that he has some balls.

As I understand Tennessee law, no...having or not having a permit would be a non-issue. I don't have access to the specific code at the moment but as I understand it, the only consideration in such a case would be the determination of whether they use of deadly force was appropriate (and frankly, if it was not appropriate then you are going to have a lot more to worry about).

Anger may well be a part of it even though I rewrote my response several times in an effort to not be overly confrontational or insulting. I may never know precisely why he did it...I emailed him later without receiving a response...time will tell.

About a week or so ago, a very liberal Democrat friend who is decorated Vietnam veteran had posted a like to an "Assault Weapons Ban" petition on his Facebook page. I generally don't comment on such things on his page but as a couple of people with different views from each other had already made several comments I added some of my own and we actually had a reasonable conversation about firearms in general but not so much the AWB petition. At this point, my friend commented and wanted to turn the conversation back to strictly "Assault Weapons". As a combat wounded vet, I knew my friend knew what a true "assault weapon" was but try as I might, I could not get him to admit that the AWB was only about cosmetic appearance, not the function of the weapon. He finally asked my opinion about whether the 2A truly allows civilians to own such weapons. I speny over an hour crafting a detailed answer giving the history of the 2A with quotes from from the founders, supreme court justices, the Federalist's Papers, etc. and posted it. My friend's response was to delete the entire thread from his FB page and "unfriend" me. The message about not casting your pearls before swine came to mind. My friend is a good guy...he truly is...he's literally bled for this country...he's still my friend in real life; however, I have to conclude that attempting to have a legitimate, honest, and meaningful conversation with someone about the 2A is pretty wasteful use of you time because those who are truly against firearms are almost never interested in facts, or history or common sense. You'll never beat an emotional position with facts and logic.

I don't see any good reason at this point to be negative about Romney's chances...it certainly isn't a lock by any means but Obama is more than vulnerable.A lot of Obama's prior support has is, at best, not very enthusiastic right now because he hasn't given them enough "Obama money" yet or because he hasn't done enough for their particular pet concern. That may not translate into Romney voters but it might translate into non-voters. A lot is going to depend on how well Romney and Ryan can counter the onslaught and the very nasty, dirty, lies about them that Obama and Obama's minions (UAW, SEIU, NEA, etc) will be throwing at them.

I'm glad this ended well but as others have said, what was this woman thinking? I'm not against helping someone who needs it so if one of my neighbors that I know comes knocking for help I'm going to answer (even than I'll be armed) but if I don't know you and I'm not expecting you I'm not going to open the door; PERIOD. We had an incident in my neighborhood with a "kid" (very late teens) knocking on doors around 9PM ostensibly to sell magazines; we called the police and they arrested for drug paraphernalia and apparently he already had a record for burglary. In the past couple of years we've started a Neighborhood Watch program and thankfully, some folks have been educated about what to do and what not to do and it's made a difference in the amount of break-ins, etc. Aside from our revolving-door justice system, I think that one of the major causes of crime is the stupidity of victims.

I was floating around the Medetarian irritating the Russian's during that summer so I saw none of that convention or the primary season (other than voting). However, I think what happened there was part of what prompted some rule changes about primary delegates wasn't it?In any case, Romney has a vastly superior lead in delegates so unless Paul (more so his supporters than Paul, actually) want to destroy the convention and any chance to defeat Obama I don't see anything happening at this convention that wasn't sanctioned in advance by the RNC.

You must be almost as old as dirt then! I don't think that's actually happened in almost 50 years has it?I do remember, back around the JFK time frame that there seemed to be a little question about who would be the nominee but even then that may have been more for keeping the viewers interested than any real doubts about who would be the candidates.

Preparing for emergencies...all emergencies, is a very good thing but I've been hearing conspiracy crap like this for the last 50 years and I suspect that it was the same 50 years prior to that and 50 years prior to that. I put about as much stock into it as the stuff I leave in the toilet.

It's bound to happen now and then.

The problem is that Ryan doesn't want to cut it enough or fast enough and his answer to SS and Medicar insolvency wast to simply turn them into welfare programs with means testing (which only serves to punish those who have been the most fiscally responsible with their retirement savings) but leave them otherwise pretty much unchanged...we need to support those programs for those who are already on them or are too late in the game to do without the programs; they need to be fundamentally changed for everyone else (i.e privatized).The primary positive about Ryan's budget was that is did, eventually, get a balanced budget. Of course as VP, Ryan's policies are a bit immaterial anyway so I guess it doesn't matter. As for bringing in Tea Party folks and other conservatives, I don't see the need...unless the Tea Party folks (of which I am one)/conservatives (of which I am one) want four more years of the America-hating socialists they had no where else to go but Romney...I don't see how Ryan is going to help Romney where he truly needs it which is undecided voters in the key battleground states. All in all, I don't see Ryan hurting Romney's chances but I don't see him as a big plus either.

From the perspective of Dem attacks, who was picked was inconsequential - the Democrats are going to spread lies, damn lies and outright rumors about whoever Romney picked. Ryan may be better equipped to fend then off than some others if only because he is used to doing so.

Well, the only thing really important about a political convention is that the candidate in about the whole. Everything else is secondary.

That's okay...I don't take disagreements personally.

Lousy choice for his VP; nothing against Paul Ryan but of all those he was considering Ryan is likely the worst for this election cycle - he doesn't really add anything to the campaign except another body to go out and campaign.