RobertNashville

See what I mean!Bill to ban online ammunition sales: http://www.tngunowne...orado-shooting/ Can a bill to ban assault calibers be far behind???

Gee...obviously if I buy 10,000 rounds online it's obvious that I have evil intent but if I boy it from my local gun store it's okay. Typical liberal idiocy at work.

Based on 40 years of being a part of the Republican party I don't believe that's true; I don't believe it's true if the usual Democrat either. I suggest that most Republicans love their country and truly want what is best for it and I believe that's true for Democrats as well. The problem is not the people who identify themselves as a Republican; it's with those who hold the reigns of power in the party...especially those who put "party" ahead of everything else; those are the ones who are blinded. Part of what the Tea Party movement is about is wresting control from those who have steered the Republican party for so many years...if the Tea party can get Republican candidates elected who truly embrace what the party has historically stood for (and usually must do so in spite of what the party "leaders" want), then we can once again see a real difference between an "R" and a "D".

Are you sure that caliber won't be a political discussion soon? I mean, it wouldn't surprise me if we don't soon have politicians trying to outlaw "assault calibers" since civilians don't need such things.

I don't think I can agree with the above. I was no fan of McCain but John McCain, I believe, truly loves America and while he may not have governed well I do believe he would have at least tried to do what was right. Further, while our spending would still likely be out of control I doubt we would be looking at $Trillion deficits as far into the future as you want to look. I also think our foreign policy would have been handled far better. Juxtapose McCain against the Marxist/communist who I truly believe has nothing but disdain for the basic American values most of us believe in and who truly believes in socialism and I can't accept the we are lucky Obama won and that's especially so after nearly four years of a President who refuses to enforce laws...who circumvents or completely ignores the Constitution whenever it suites him and who truly doesn't seem to care about the financial cliff he is pushing us over.

Yes, it's a bit over the top but it isn't exactly untrue...the political ads I hate are the ones that are absolute lies. The main problem I have with this billboard is that last I heard (and perhaps the facts have changed now), the dirtbag in Aurora did most if not all his killing with a Remington 870; not an "assault rifle".

Wow; I wonder how many times are we going to go over the same ground. Does anyone really think there is something to say that hasn't been said 500 times before in 100 different threads??? There are differences, stark differences between Romney and Obama but if you want to know what they are you certainly aren't going learn them from a bunch of sound bites with no details given about them. That's especially so when the sound bites have been put together from a site that seems biased in favor of Ron Paul. If you like the communist in office either vote for him, vote for a third party candidate, vote for a write in or don't vote - any of those four acts serve, either directly or indirectly to keep the communist in office. If you don't want the communist to remain in office then Romney is the only person who has a significant chance of beating him. It's a shame that we don't have a better choice but we don't and another 500 threads is not going to change that....can't we go back to debating Glock vs 1911 or which caliber is truly the most manly?

Now, why would we bother to do that? If they've got them and they use them we're toast; literally. Unless of course you have a hardened bunker capable of surviving a hellfire you can get to into which case, if we let you know are you going to let us in there with you?

I agree. the phrase "It Can Never Happen Here" is a very dangerous mantra - I suppose part of the reason why it's dangerous is that the when we starting thinking that way we tend to stop looking at what should be obvious signs that it's getting ready to happen to us.

Many times when I read info like this I think “so whatâ€. It’s not that I’m not concerned, even outraged at the amount of government intrusion and potential intrusion into our lives; it’s just that I believe that the ability of the government, through technology, to monitor just about anything we do or say is so pervasive that any one example such as drones overhead just doesn’t, by itself, get me that excited anymore…I think we completely lost the ability to lead truly private lives a long time ago. What we know the government could do 20 or 30 years ago is enough to turn your hair grey (if you still have hair); what they can do today that we don’t even have access to know would probably simply cause us to get out the tin foil and go live in a spider hole. Although not the only encroachment, the Patriot Act dealt a serious blow to our rights; Obamacare if it’s allowed to continue will pretty much be the final nail in the coffin. I looked at some of the record keeping and reporting requirements of Obamacare for a health informatics Master’s level class I just finished a few weeks ago and when it comes to privacy; we’re screwed.

We have it much better here than many states but you are absolutely correct, we need some major (and most would say common sense) changes to existing TN laws. If you want to see things change - GET INVOLVED. Join the NRA if you aren't already a member and the TFA (Tennessee Firearms Association) which does a lot of good work trying to improve our laws (including our ability to carry at all)...most importantly; learn about who is running and support the best, Constitutional conservative candidates. Things can't and won't change overnight but there are more of "us" than there are of "them" and the more of us that get involved the more we can accomplish.

Actually, all we really need is to return the power of the Supreme Court to the level it was intended to have based on the Constitution and the founders.Most people believe, incorrectly (because that's what they've been taught by people who also didn't know), that the three branches of government were supposed to be equal in power and that the Supreme Court renders decisions that MUST be obeyed. In actuality, the power was not supposed to be equal, Congress holds the most, the executive branch second and and the Supreme Court was and technically still is limited to render an "opinion". Much of the power of the executive branch cam about under Wilson and FDR (which of course was are start down the road of socialism and centralized power). Of course, just like we used to have senators appointed by the states they represented rather than elected, I doubt we'll ever return to what the founders actually intended...we've simply strayed too far. As to Scalia's statement; he's probably right; at least to a point. I don't believe the 2A intended the average citizen to have nuclear weapons, or other extraordinary weapons (bio-weapons, etc.) but should be able to own any weapon that our troops would routinely be issued and carry, fully automatic or not. Same thing if Star Trek phasers or Star War's light sabers should those ever get issued to troops; the 2A isn't about "firearms"; it's about "arms". Just my $0.02 of course based on my currently understanding of the Constitution - I've been know to change my opinion as I learn more.

This has nothing specific to to with the topic of the thread but I'm wondering who among us (and it may be many) who feel they need or should give reputation points (negative or positive) to posters based on what that poster says about a candidate or issue? It was my understanding, based on David's post on the subject, that reputation points was not intended to become a popularity contest but it looks to me as if that's exactly what they are being used for, at least when it comes to posts about political issues or candidates. I would hope that we are grown up enough that we can disagree with each other without making it personal but maybe that's a false hope. Okay..soap box put away now...have a nice day.

I thought so too. I had a message exchange with him on the Range Master Facebook page and I think he makes a lot of sense - I wish he was local to Tennessee as I wouldn't hesitate to take a class or two from him.

Oh well that clears it up...statements that show Obama's gun grabbing wishes and VOTES on gun control measures don't count, only that he hasn't signed anything yet. How lucky for Obama that he wasn't a governor and signed something before he ran for President. LOL

Please tell me when I have ever said he is "pro gun"? Please cite that post for me would you because if I ever said that I need to edit it. What I have said and do say is that Obama is a Marxist/communist who would confiscate all guns given half a chance and will push for gun control measures in a second term (and in fact already is now pushing for an AWB which you seem to want to totally ignore) and his record shows Obama, among other things, doesn't even believe a person has a right to a firearm in his own home to use for his own protection per his vote on such a measure when he served in Illinois. Vote or don't vote for whoever you wish but this argument that Romney is somehow more dangerous to 2A rights than Obama is simply without merit.

Absolutely and that goes double for what you say online anywhere, here, Facebook, email....anywhere. I think a lot of people forget that..."posting" on a forum or other site is the 21st century version of a public meeting in the village square and you most certainly can be held accountable for what you say. Come to think of it, I need to edit a few posts.

Well...you seem to have a bit of a selective memory of Romney's record; but if one is going to assert that Romney is/would somehow be worse for gun owners than Obama I can understand why

Yeah...facts...you know, like what Obama has actually said and what he as actually voted on and what he actually pushing now...you know...the ones you keep conveniently ignoring.

I won't claim that the 1911 is the best combat pistol available right now but one thing I do know, going to a 9MM round was probably one of the stupidest moves ever made by our military.

Facts often don't care what someone's confidence is. If you really think Obama won't push an AWB after re-election (when he already IS pushing one) then good luck with that.

Where is all this supposed anti-gun stuff from Romney aside from the AWB which seems to be the only thing you care about? I ask because the NRA doesn't seem to agree with you and all the other sources I've checked seem to have a habit of leaving out a lot of the pro-2A things Romney did as governor. But, if you think Romney signing an assault weapon ban in Massachusetts is the only thing to be concerned with then I guess that's what you'll think. Yes, Romney signed the ban in MA - the law included other elements welcomed by gun-rights supporters that, for some reason, you haven't mentioned and you haven't mentioned it while you seem willing to give Obama a pass because a couple of good things have happened on his watch??? Here is a bit of Obama's record... "Do you support state legislation to … ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes." (Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire, Sept. 9, 1996 "I’m consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry." (Chicago Tribune, April 27, 2004) "I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manufacturers lobby." Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope (2006). Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sports shooting. (United States Senate, vote no. 217, S. 397, July 29, 2005) Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense. (Illinois Senate, SB 2165, vote 20, March 25, 2004) In his only two votes on confirming Supreme Court nominees, Obama voted against two of the five justices (Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito) who later affirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller. Obama has long and consistent record of being vehemently anti-gun even to the point of believing that Illinois residents should not have the right to defend themselves with a gun in their own home. Further, Obama is CURRENTLY pushing for a new nation-wide assault weapons ban and Romney says he is opposed t any such ban. If an AWB is your "thing" I still fail to see how you think Obama should stay in office.

I understand that there are never any guarantees but do you truly think, deep down, that the people Obama appoints to the Supreme Court won't think just like he does and won't erase and destroy everything gained in the last 20 years or so?Do you really think that two or three or four more like the two gun-hating, ultra liberal socialists he's already appointed would have voted favorably in the DC or the Chicago decision? Where would we be right now if the Supreme Court had decided that the Second Amendment wasn't an individual right? Do you think maybe, just maybe the ability to carry in ANY state might be in jeopardy? And that's just the "gun" issue...there are others equally as if not more important to be concerned about. I mean no disrespect but while Romney is far from perfect I have a difficult time believing that people can't see a difference between him and the Marxist in the office now..

Yeah but I think that was mostly by murdering people after the birth process...maybe gene manipulation would not bother people as much.Then again; we would still have that "free will" problem and a little thing called "evil" in the world; I don't there there is a gene for "evil".

I wouldn't bet on that.