RobertNashville

And acting stupidly...openly carrying without regard to where you are/when you are/who will see you is what causes school lockdowns and previously "un-posted" properties to be posted against carrying at all - it harms the entire HCP community. At least as I understand the Tennessee constitution, carrying a firearm at all (openly or concealed) is a regulated PRIVILEGE in this state; we can complain about that all we want but unless or until the constitution is changed; that's the way it is. When an HCP holder refuses to to use discretion; acts stupidly (i.e. Leonard E.); and/or does other things that unnecessarily causes problems it does NOT help the cause of improving firearm-related laws in this state. Being intelligent about how and where we carry is not about succumbing to "political correctness"; it's about being politically smart. There is also nothing wrong with deciding to not unnecessarily offend people and that's true whether we are discussing "firearms" or just life and living around other people in general.

Morning or afternoon is fine with me but I think bigwakes needed it to be afternoon. How about 1PM? Also, is this the same range that used to be Owl Hollow Gun Club? If so I've been there once so I can probably find it okay...if it's someplace else then I may need directions!

Wishful thinking I think

There are a number of other arguments that can be made against OC; all of which have been made. In fact the subject of OC vs CC has beaten to death on more than one occasion on this and many other forums and are generally about as useful as counting grains of sand on a beach. Carry openly to your heart's content but do so understanding what Tennessee law says about it and the possible consequences. Carrying openly without regard for where you'll be/who will see you, etc. is what causes things like the subject of this thread to happen.

I'm saying...don't cause problems that can be avoided and don't provide the "anti-gun" radicals ammunition. Sometimes, it's good to make a "statement"...sometimes it's good to keep a low profile...common sense helps you know which is best.

They are not the same...you change the words; you change the meaning. You comparison is flawed; mine is common sense; theirs is not. My position...my "common sense", whether you agree with my position or not, is based on facts, logic, and experience. The "anti-gun people's" position...their "common sense" isn't "common sense" at all because it is based on hatred, ignorance and fear and they ignore the abundant facts and experience that unequivocally demonstrates how illogical and incorrect their position is. Well...let me see here...I think my answer would be YES; THAT'S MY POSITION. Every situation has to be judged based on its own facts but in general, I think not causing a problem is better than causing one. Do you really find that an odd position to take? I'm not the one "going there" and why you seem to want to is difficult to fathom.

You may think there are positives here but that's pure conjecture on your part. At lest as likely, and admittedly my own conjecture, is that this incident will simply provide more fodder to feed the hysteria about firearms among the anti-gun crowd and could even serve the interests of those who would like to see open carry made illegal as it is in so many states. And I doubt that the school administration and students who were locked down see positives and I don't see any positives about the tax dollars...some of which were mine, spent on the response to the "man with a gun near a school" call. The only "positive" I see here is that it gives armchair quarterbacks with nothing better to do, something to talk about on the internet.

I don't think anyone said that it was and whether he does or doesn't change is up to him. However, I think he should. Well, changing someones words and then claiming the sentence says the same thing is bad form in my opinion. In any case, my"common sense" is based on logic and facts; their "common sense" is based on fear, hatred, ignorance and emotion.

So you change the words, change the meaning and claim both examples express the same sentiments? Really??? In an "open carry" thread that you started, you once said... In this case, we know that this person openly carrying at that time and at that place did caused a problem. That isn't "theory"; that's fact - a fact you seem absolutely opposed to acknowledging. We can open carry in Tennessee but openly carrying can, and sometimes DOES cause a problem as it did here.

My common sense says you don't open carry at a time and/or in a location when there is any significant chance that it will cause a problem. My common sense tells me that openly carrying anywhere near a school and especially during the time of day children are arriving or departing might cause a problem and therefore, probably not a good idea. This man's decision to openly carry DID cause a problem. We can bemoan the fact that in this society today many people out there don't like guns/hate guns/are afraid of guns/think that "guns = bad", etc. and will often overact to seeing a man with a gun...we can bemoan that until hell freezes over...I wish things were otherwise. However, to not understand or to ignore that many people are that way and to not understand or ignore the possible consequences of openly carrying in places where we might encounter such people is to be reckless and to shirk part of the responsibility that goes alone with strapping on a firearm and walking out into public with it. One of our responsibilities we have as HCP holders is to NOT so stupid things that reflect badly on all other HCP holders. This man may have had good intentions...he may be a great guy...he may be a very responsible HCP holder in many, many respects but his openly carrying where he did and when he did certainly did cause a problem and did not help bolster the acceptance of civilians carrying a firearm in public.

Well...maybe because it can (and in this case did) cause a problem??? There is a great line from the Star Trek movie "The Undiscovered Country" where the chanchelor of the Klingon Empire, making the opening speech at a peece conference said, (paraphrasing here) "Let's acknowledge that just because we can do a thing it does not follow that we must do a thing". We can legally open carry in Tennessee but just because we can doesn't mean should. Exercising some common sense and discretion about how we carry can go a long way. Perhaps you do know but I don't know how close this man was to the school in question...I don't know, when he was seen (and which generated the call to toe police/school) if he was heading toward the school or away from it...I don't know why he decided to carry openly (maybe he thought it necessary given his medical condition/restriction he had to deal with...maybe he just "always does"..maybe he wanted to "make a statement"??? Bu however close he was and whatever direction he was heading and whatever precipitated his decision to carry openly, we all DO know his openly carrying, albeit it perfectly legal, DID cause a problem; one that could have been avoided.

One of the bad things about getting older is being around as other good people pass on...whether family, friends, or even just someone you are aware of; you can't help but notice that the universe has lost something good. My thoughts and prayers for the family.

Actually; this general subject (conducting some type of organized protest/public action) has been discussed at length. One thread that comes to mind is a thread stated by DRM last January - DRM has several posts in this thread (LINK: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/general-off-topic/52280-organizing-tn-open-carry-day.html ). I'm not opposed to promoting "open carry" and/or of educating the general public but, I do think such public acts can go the wrong way. And, as I said before, I think (and this is just my opinion of course) that there are several more "important" firearm/weapon related issues that need the attention and involvement of the pro-firearm community than the issue of "open carry" (especially since we already can open carry).

To what end, exactly? You already can open carry if you want to (doing so without exercising some common sense is where trouble usually happens). I'd say there are any number of firearm related issues that deserve attention and action more than "open carry". What I can't figure out is why every so-called firearms enthusiast in Tennessee isn't a member of the TFA and the NRA because, especially with regards to the TFA, if you want to see real change in the laws then banning together in an issue driven organization is the most effective way to do so. If the people who come to this board and complain about this posted property and that overreaction would expend the same amount of effort on real political action instead of just posting, we might actually see some significant improvement in the weapons laws in this state.

So where were you a couple of weeks ago when I was heading over to Knoxville on I-40???? :)

So now it's an "automatic rifle"? Can't wait to see the actual facts come out concerning what the weapon actually was and what this guy's motive might have been.

Oh but it's so much more fun for LEO to chase down those nasty speeders than to pull over someone going 50MPH in a passing lane on I-40 in a 70 zone (such crimes usually perpetrated by 80 year old's coming from or heading to Florida and/or those LEO want-a-be who think it's their personal responsibility to enforce the speed limits by blocking faster traffic). Of course, the bigger problem to freely moving traffic these days are tractor/trailers passing each other; one trying to maintain speed at 62.3 MPH being passed by another trying to maintain 62.5 MPH (because those respective speeds have been determined to be "best" for them to enhance their fuel economy). http://www.slowertraffickeepright.com/

Assuming that it really was a semi-auto then I see no problem with it being reported that way and I note the headline says that the people were shot by the "suspect" rather than shot by "the gun"! In any case, this is sad...but a good example of why those of us who carry do carry...it's too bad someone couldn't have stopped this guy before he shot eight.

Yeah...and red light cameras are all about stopping people from running red lights too! ROTLMAO Speed limits on city streets and in densely populated areas are generally appropriate...on open highway, however, speed limits are often arbitrary and generally set either to match the skills of the drivers with the worst skills or to raise revenue or both. As I hinted at earlier, if "safety" was the real concern of most speeding laws then the requirements for getting a license to drive would be a lot more difficult and require proof of actual driver skills. Yes, government entities need "revenue" but revenue from speed limits (and especially speed traps) are just another form of taxation with the public having little or no representation in the setting of the tax rate...something this country is supposed to be NOT about.

I really don't see a problem here (unless I'm misunderstanding the requirement)??? If someone isn't a Republican they shouldn't get to decided (i.e vote on) who a Republican nominee for an office is and same goes for a non-Democrat voting for who a Democrat nominee is. I think it correct to say that "Independent" is generally not recognized as an actual political party and doesn't hold "primary" votes/have nominees on a primary ballot. I'm sure, whether declaring a political party of not, that a person can still vote on any issues on the ballot.

I stopped calling myself a Republican quite a few years ago. It's still how I vote most of the time but "political parties" aren't the answer to our nation's problems (nor have they ever been). Unfortunately, the only "political" home for those with a serious conservative/libertarian bent is the Republican party.

Yes there is; it's called revenue!

The majority of "traffic laws"; especially "speed limits" have NOTHING to do with safety and everything to do with revenue streams. If law enforcement/public officials were actually concerned about safety; half the people who have a drivers license today wouldn't have one because they don't have a clue about how to actually drive and control a vehicle (especially in an emergency situation) - if they had to pass a test that actually tested their abilities they would fail miserably.

Mike...I don't "like" the reaction of the people who called or the police or the school authorities either but I do have to ask... Given that he was openly carrying and apparently "near" or "approaching" a schoolyard, is it really a surprise that someone would call the police? And, what are the police and school officials supposed to do when the get a report of a "man with a gun approaching a school yard"? Maybe they could have done something "less" but what? I would assume that their tactics have been well thought out and planned with the goal of minimizing any possible threat to the children and as such, almost certainly seems like an overreaction when, as in this case, the threat isn't a threat at all. I'm not sure, however, that it was wrong of them to assume there was a threat until they knew otherwise - in today's society after incidents all over the country of school shootings...what are the police/school supposed to do? I've been around firearms for many, many years but I have to say; if I'm someplace and see someone with a firearm where I'm not expecting to see someone with a firearm and/or it seems out of place; my radar is going to go up and I'm going to wonder what his intentions are too (unless I know him of course) and I'm going to evaluate him until I'm sure he's one of the "good guys"...I may not call the police but I'm certainly going to keep an eye on him until I'm sure he isn't a threat.

You are right the right to keep and bear arms IS a right, recognized and guaranteed (but not "created) by the Constitution. Unfortunately, the United States today simply isn't fully living under the Constitution - if it were a WHOLE lot of things would be different. Today, we live under a lot of federal and state and even local laws that abridge our rights and we've (and prior) generations have let that happen...the only way to change it, short of another violent revolution, is to elect representatives at all levels of government that understand those principles and will work to undo the damage done. Whether or not it's too late...whether or not there are enough men and women out there who have the courage to do what has to be done (and will run for office); that's another question.