RobertNashville

I never said to to buy from local dealers who charge more/unreasonable prices for their products...I'm saying buy from local dealers who give a s**t about the community they serve rather than store like Walmart who could not care less about the firearms community. Local dealers and fair prices are not mutually exclusive.

I retired from a company (Nissan North America) where the parking lots were NO posted, thus, carrying and leaving my firearm in my vehicle was not a criminal matter. BUT, around 2005 or so, the company did a 180 and made it a matter of company policy that firearms were forbidden anywhere on company property, including vehicles in the parking lot. This caused quite a lot of angst among those who routinely, for example, carried their gear/firearms with them in their vehicles so they could go hunting, shooting after work. I've never received a good explanation for "why" the company so suddenly and completely changed its mind. Also, while they claimed the right to do so, as far as I know they never once demanded that an employee allow a search of his/her vehicle which sort of makes me wonder just how serous their policy was???

I understand economics..I also understand that many things "work out in the end"...it's the in-between times that concern me me...I'm also concerned that so many firearms enthusiasts don't seem to care about supporting the vendors that support what we say we are enthusiastic about. I also find it very odd that less then complementary posts about Walmart keep showing up here yet people keep going there anyway. P.S. An "economist" is someone who is very, very good with numbers but isn't smart enough to be an accountant or an engineer.

As I don't and won't darken the door of Walmart I don't know how cheep their ammo is but I would be surprised if it's any more of a savings than a few pennies per round at most than what I pay for my ammo. The more folks frequent Walmart for firearms/ammo the more business it takes away from those who who's entire business is serving the firearms community...do that long enough and all that will be left IS Walmart. I guess that's fine, for a while...but what happens when some idiot in Arkansas decides that floorspace in all the Walmarts would net then a few dollars more per s foot per year if they got rid of all their firearms products and put in something else...where do you go for your ammo then (since firearms dealers will be few and far between)? Yeah I know, it sounds like a far-fetched scenario...may well be a far-fetched scenario but I've been in the business world lone enough to see decisions like that made on a routine basis. Okay; rant off...I feel better now.

What I find odd is that people still buy ammo or anything else as Walmart. What I find odd is that people still buy ammo or anything else from Walmart but especially ammo or anything firearms related. I really mean no offense to anyone but come on folks, do you think ANYBODY in Walmart management from local store management right to company headquarters gives a flying you know what about firearms or those who support our passion/past time/rights? Obviously everyone can do as they please but I buy firearms related items from firearm dealers or other firearm enthusiasts...I really encourage others to do the same.

We just both need to get up there some weekend! My March is already full; every single weekend, but surely we can find a Sat or Sun sometime soon can't we?

I agree with bkelm18 (surprise ) It's very true that an experienced shooter can pass on a lot of good information to a newer/less experienced one and I certainly appreciate all the guys who have passed along their knowledge to me; I try to do the same thing. However, after having taken a few classes with professional trainers, I can say that it really is true that a good class taught buy a professional is worth every penny.

MCSC is my favorite outdoor range in Tennessee; actually one of the best I've been to anywhere. It's a bit of a drive for me from M'bobo but it's good enough that I still make the drive a few times a year!

Maybe I'm wrong but I think the OPs question was answer satisfactorily a long time ago...the rest of us were just talking.

I've not taken classes as ether CCA or FF. I will day that FF staff have always been friendly and accommodating when I've been there but I haven't really had any problems with CCA either for that matter. As far as training, there are certainly good places to train in Tennessee but the two I tend to recommend is "Rangemasters" in Memphis and "Tactical Response" in Camden. Both are a bit far from Knoxville but I don't think they are far enough away to take them out of consideration. Also, at Tactical Response, you can stay in the team room for free when taking a multi-day class.

You might think so; the law won't

That's interesting...and it may well be true. I've been more concerned about a "have" vs "have not" war/unrest/rioting than something based strictly on race (although there would almost certainly be a racial component to that as well).

I'm glad the charges were dropped but I do think this guy was in the wrong. I've always been taught and I've always operated under the concept that in Tennessee and in most locations in the U.S.; if you aren't justified in using deadly force and shooting the bad guy to stop the threat then you aren't justified in pulling your weapon at all; that certainly leaves firing a warning shot out of the equation.

Hey folks! I wasn't sure if I should start a new thread or just continue this one but I've noticed something about the show that I'd like to discuss... Each show usually has three families and each family seems to be preparing for only one particular "disaster"; super volcano, shift of the magnetic polls, pandemic, financial collapse, etc. I've never even considered preparing for just "one" kind of event...am I being stupid or are these preappers on the show the dumb ones? Starting about two years ago I've been preparing on a "scale" of most likely to least likely event; i.e...I consider it much more likely that my area will suffer a natural disaster than, say, an EMP from a nuclear weapon detonation. I'm not saying the EMP can't happen or that a complete financial collapse can't or won't happen; just that those problems are not the most likely scenarios. My plans include "bugging in" and staying in place if I can but being prepared to bug out if the situation calls for it. I realize that preparing for any specific situation is going to help you be prepared for any emergency but it seems to me you are at risk if you concentrate all or most of your efforts on just one kind of event. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.

The best way to get people to agree with you about anything is to make them think it was their idea and I think you can help them think it was their idea just by pointing out the obvious. We all know that disasters happen, be they man made or natural and it just makes sense to have essentials put away for such emergencies - I think if you start "there" the rest could well follow of its own accord. I thought about prepping for a lone while but about a year ago I went from thinking about it to doing something and it was what has happened in just the past few years that got me moving...I SAW an F5 tornado pass a 1/2 mile form my house...I saw the results of major flooding in Nashville and the results of Katrina in New Orleans...after a while a person would just have to be a bit crazy to not prepare (either that or they simply refuses to accept reality) and preparing for possible emergencies is not "nutty"; it's just common sense. I can pretty much guarantee that if you start out with "end of the world" talk you'll almost certainly lose them and they will think you are nutty.

Is it a Barrett? If so, I would think a good starting point would be to look at what they offer at the factory (at least I think you can have a scope installed at the factory).

Keep in mind, while not true here, I am fairly certain that at least in some states, you do have to have a specific permit for each gun you own or even have to get "permission" to buy one before you can do so.

Not at all...it's just that I have an S&W 29 8 3/8th and when I think 44 Magnum, I tend to think "Dirty Harry" and revolver.

Yeah; it is a bit more expensive but my practice ammo is $22/box of 50 (I buy online).

What's not affordable about it??? If memory serves my G20 wasn't significantly more expensive than any of my other Glocks and ammunition cost for just about any Man-sized caliber is pretty much the same no matter what caliber you buy.

I love my 1911s; I've carried them and I still sometimes carry one but I came to the conclusion some time ago that in most cases, the Glock is a better choice for a carry weapon. I'm not saying that a Glock or any other more modern design is necessarily better than a 1911 or that the 1911 can't get the job done; it's just that I've found my Glocks to be more dependable and less complicated and you get a "bang" almost every time you pull the trigger which is what you need if your life is on the line.

Which is why REAL men carry 10MM in an auto pistol/44 MAG in a revolver, right?

And just what exactly are you trying to say????

You didn't say that but you seem to imply that...you keep alluding to the "pointy stick" so what did you mean to imply if not that a "mousegun" is no better than that? And if it's no better than that it follows that the "mousegun" is not worth carrying. If that's not what you mean you haven't said so; you just keep talking about the pointy stick. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "same level of service" but I am quite sure I never said that a small caliber is equal to (provides the same level of service) as a "big caliber". My personal experience jives with the experience of the 92% in the study I cited that had a similar outcome; that would indicate that my experience is not unusual nor simply due to luck. I've neither denied or as far as I know, even hinted that there aren't plenty cases where it was necessary to shoot; of course there are; but that doesn't mean doing so is the most frequent use of a defensive firearm. What's important to me is that anyone reading this thread not come away thinking that if they don't carry a large caliber that they are wasting their time - it's important because a little 22, 25, 32 or 380 can most certainly save a person's life one day if it's with them and not not sitting in a nightstand drawer somewhere. Arguing about the effectiveness of handgun calibers can be entertaining but is otherwise a bit useless anyway and sort of misses the point...people should carry the largest handgun in the biggest caliber that they are willing to carry, able to carry given their circumstances and are competent using regardless of how "big" the handgun or the caliber that might be. However, let's be clear; if we ever are in a confrontation and we have a CHOICE of weapons, it would be rather stupid to depend on ANY handgun of ANY caliber rather than a good rifle. The best ballistics of any handgun is pitiful compared to a good fighting rifle; we carry handguns because of the convenience and because in most places; you can't just walk around with a AR on our shoulder. P.S. "You are only outgunned if you miss" - Col Jeff Cooper

So a "mousegun", as you call it, is inadequate and that, therefore, someone shouldn't bother to carry at all if that's all they are going to carry??? Please tell me the last time you volunteered to be shot with one and if you have never volunteered, why not? I mean...it's only a "mousegun" after all.. Actually, I didn't say it was the "mere presence"; I was assuming a willingness to not just "flash" a weapon but to show the intent and ability to use it. In any case, your opinion seems to be just that, opinion. I've actually had to pull my weapon twice in my life and both times I've avoided what I believed was going to be a life-threatening situation; I didn't need to discharge my firearm but I was most certianly willing to do so and had the thugs not backed down I am sure I would have been justified in shooting...beyond that, I'd encourage you to do some research on your own. "Despite this stated willingness of gun owners to shoot under certain circumstances, most defensive uses of guns do not in fact involve shooting anyone (emphasis mine). Data from the National Self-Defense Survey indicate that no more than 8% of the 2.5 million annual defensive gun uses involved a defender who claimed to have shot their adversaries, or about 200,000 total." - Source; Guns and Self-Defenseby Gary Kleck, Ph.D.