RobertNashville

I've been aware of this "trick" for many years...I'm not sure it even needs to be all that elaborate to work...a simple money clip with a $20 bill over a few $1bills...you get approached with a demand for your wallet and you pitch the decoy money clip toward them (but hopefully, far enough away that hey have to take their attention off of you to retrieve it...at the same time, you beat feet in the direction opposite the money clip/bad guy. If they are getting (or think they are getting what they want) they probably aren't going to care that you are leaving the area. Of course, you have to be prepared it if doesn't work but if it doesn't, you aren't really in an worse position than you started out in!

I know i can't meet this Sunday as I have company coming over (and I'm sure she is better looking than any of you! )...so...looks like I'll miss this one too. Damn.

I'm not expecting Christy to get in although I wouldn't be stunned if he did. Sarah Palin I think is close to getting in but I'm not sure she will either...looks to me like she is biding her time (maybe waiting for the current field to self-destruct). At the moment I'm just not overly excited about any of them and and very unexcited by a couple of them...Bachmann is the only one I've given money to so far and I'm not completely sure about her either!

Lt. Governor Ramsey has been quite a disappointment this past legislative session (and not just on firearms related issues)...he continues to disappoint with this endorsement. Other than the simple fact the Rick Perry isn't Obummer, I've seen little about the man that looks good and I've read some disturbing things that cause me to believe that the Republican party can do MUCH better than Perry (and I certainly hope they do).

I guess I missed it...didn't intend to but I didn't realize that you all decided to do it THIS Sunday! Oh well...if you guys meet again I definitely want to be there if at all possible.

Whats' "legal" and what's "prudent" are two different things. If someone has shown a firearm and made a demand for my money then I'd be a fool to believe that he would not use it nor do I have to wait for him to point it at me to...in other words, at that point that it is reasonable for me to think that my life is in danger and if my life is in danger then in my opinion, I have a right to defend myself with the use of deadly force and would be perfectly within my right to draw my weapon. Of course, all that is meaningless unless I have the opportunity to draw and bring my weapon to bear before he can do the same...if he, effectively, has the drop on me then me drawing my weapon may be a very unwise more. All that said, the most unwise move would be that I was so unaware of the potential threat that I let myself get into that position in the first place.

It of course depends on just what the emergency is...are we talking about wide-spread civil unrest...an almost complete breakdown in society...a natural disaster affecting a specific area, etc. You also have to decide, ahead of time, how to decide whether you need to leave or stay in place and typically, you may have a very, very small window of time in which to decide; taking more than a few minutes could quite literally make the difference between getting out of an affected area in very little time or being caught up in total gridlock. I have friends and family scattered all over the place and depending on what happened that made me decide I had to leave, going to one of those friends/family is where I'd go (just like if something happens to them, I'm where they are going to head for). I also don't plan on steeling food from anyone or anyone's garden nor setting up camp on someone's farm...I plan to have enough water, fuel and food to bug out with that I can be self-sufficient; at least long enough to get away from a regional issue to an unaffected zone.

If this is done on a Sunday that I can be there I'm in..emergency preparedness is something that has not only be on my mind but something I've been actively working on. We aren't the only one's thinking this way either...alumni weekend at Tactical Response last month was ALL about disaster/emergency preparedness! The only Sunday that would be difficult for me would be the 28th.

I've read somewhere recently that since banning personal ownership of firearms haven't stopped crime the police are going after scissors next...can rubber bands and spit balls be next on the list of banned "weapons"?

Apparently you/we need to be given that county/city "parks" are not required to post at all yet we who carry would be breaking the law by doing so. I've always understood that ignorance of the law is not an excuse but for crying out loud, how is anyone really supposed to know the policy in any given park if there is no requirement to post? I guess I'm just to uneducated to understand the mindset of our elected officials because I can't understand why this state can't have one simple law about where a person can or can't carry which is; if it's posted, you can't and if it isn't posted you can.

Businesses price their product the way they want and of course they want to maximize their profit. Buyers either buy the product at that price or they don't and go somewhere else (or just don't buy at all)...what's wrong with that? Complaining about a gun shop's prices seems both silly and a waste of time.

The possibility of a severe economic depression or even a collapse of our economy is most certainly possible and frankly, a lot more probable than facing most of the "disasters" most people (who worry and prepare for such things) worry about. I've been in the "financial" end of business for nearly 30 years and what I've seen recently truly concerns me...I'd like to think that there is still time to avert the disaster that is coming (if we don't change course) but I'm a little less hopeful of that with each passing day...that's why I've been preparing. I'm not nearly as far along as I'd like to be but I'm in about 200% better shape than I was even a year ago...it's one of the reasons that much of my discretionary income has been going into things that are real...that will always have value. I think preparing for such things is simply the smart thing to do because everything I'm buying will eventually get used whether it's because of a disaster or simply "because".

I really mean no offense but that's pretty much the same pattern of thought as "bad things always happen to other people; never to me".

Hyperinflation has happened more recently than 1930s Germany and it can happen here too. A country's money supply get's expanded unchecked making the currency worthless...we like to think of it happening only in second-rate economies and/or where rules about such things (as monetizing the country's debt) prevents it from doing so but the U.S. is already effectively doing exactly that. I'd like to think that the country can avoid it...can put some common sense back into our economic policy but I'm not hopeful about it.

Very true...and that's why I have gone from thinking about it to seriously preparing for a breakdown in the economy because I've just about lost any hope that there are people out there who will run, will get elected, and will make the hard choices when they get there. I believe the only real uncertainty now is not whether we are going to face a severe economic crisis but simply "when" and "how bad". People my age or older haven't seen what stagflation can do...people my parents age don't know what a real depression is like but I suspect that people who don't know are going to find out and then some.

Yeah...you are right and wrong...we've already got a national debt of $14.5Trillion; add another 10 Trillion over ten years (based on the legislation just passed last week) and we are looking at a national debt of around $24.5 Trillion which, as I said before, doesn't include any accrued interest and assumes the "cuts" the bill proposed actually do happen (look me up because if those cuts really do happen I'll happily buy you a keg of your favorite brew). Ultimately, I had too many zeros...the bill comes out to only about $70,000 per individual...very true, not as bad as what I was suggesting but still out of the range of most people's budgets; especially when you consider that's everyone of any age. It's even worse if you divide just the current debt by the number of actual taxpayers...that bill is already over $130,000 per.

I don't think our children can help. Even the most optimistic scoring of last week's budget deal says we'll add 7-10 TRILLION dollars to the national debt over the next ten years...combined with the debt we already have and assuming a population of around 350 million (and assuming my math is working this morning); that works out to a bill of roughly $68.5 BILLION owed by every single person alive in the U.S. (and I'm not even adding the cost of interest into those figures). Now...I know for a few, $68Billion is almost pocket change but I have a feeling that most people don't have that much laying around.

I can't believe it! I mean, just about all of the Tennessee delegation who voted for this wonderful "2011 Budget Control Act" have been crowing about what a good deal it was and how it saved us from default and a rating downgrade - even those who voted against are claiming that they've "changed the talk in Washington from how much can we spend to to how much can we cut". What utter rubbish. Blackburn and Black and Alexander and the rest of them seem willing to sell the country down the river in exchange for staying on the invite list for the Washington social calendar. I hope all you are prepared for higher interest rates on your credit cards, student loans, and mortgages...next step is the U.S. Dollar no longer being the standard world currency. I've little hope for our economy and, therefore, little hope for our country.

No...I mean evidence to support your unreasonable fear that police agencies have been or will be sued just because some legally disposed of firearm is eventually used in some crime somewhere. You said...."I’m a former Police Officer and a Tax Payer. If someone’s kid was killed by a gun that was sold by the Police Department many people (including many here), would be going nuts wanting to sue the cops. The public outrage would be overwhelming" yet you later admitted you had no evidence of departments being sued and you've haven't offered any yet to support your fears of all these lawsuits. Unless it's a relic, pretty much any firearm used in a crime is traceable to someone...so what? Unless the "someone" didn't didn't do their due diligence/didn't follow the law in disposing of the firearm (i.e. sold it to someone who cannot legally buy/possess a firearm) then the source of the firearm is immaterial. Being afraid that some spouse or family member might sue someday because their spouse or child was killed or injured from a legally sold firearm is surrendering to the same irrational fears that drive the anti-gun culture and placing blame for crime precisely where it doesn't belong rather than on the criminal.

Interesting place to put their sign...a good conspiracy theorist could think of a couple of reasons why they would put one there!

You have it backward; you are the one surrendering to fear of something that might happen based, by your own admission, on nothing at all. As was identified by East_TN_Patriot above; there is at least some evidence that this is being done with no problems. Unless you have some actual evidence of problems, your argument against the practice is baseless.

The more time I spend with people, the more I appreciate my basset hound. I hadn't had a dog in many years before I picked up my eight week old hound and I dread the day that I have to say goodby. I'm sorry to hear about your loss.

I'm sure some police agencies already do sell seized firearms...has there ever been any lawsuit filed because of it? Has the plaintiff ever won such a suit? Law enforcement agencies would and should have the same immunity as any other business selling a gun to a person who, constitutionally, has a right to own one (and no more)...it's time to stop bending over and taking it up the backside just because someone might get sued - otherwise we all just might as well pull out the white flags and bow to the irrational fears of the ignorant public and/or those looking for an easy way to take care of their retirement by suing.

Humm...I may have to look up that opinion; seems pretty clear to me that everybody has to post if they want a "no firearms policy" to have legal meaning. I understand that any property owner (or a legitimate representative) can ask you to leave, etc but I thought the law was pretty clear that if there is not proper signage then there is no violation of the law. I realize we are talking about the "law" here and not common sense but I can't help but wonder how the average Joe Citizen is supposed to know the park's/city's policy if there is no signage to tell them of their policy? Do they expect every potential visitor to call the city's officers to find out before they dare step foot in the park? Maybe we need a new AG???

Just my $0.02 but I wonder - what do law enforcement agencies do with any other seized property? Whatever they do with other property I suggest that they should do the same with a firearm (subject to background checks per Federal law, etc.). The only thing that makes a vehicle or any other piece of property different from a "firearm" is public perception, usually fueled by unjustified emotion-based opinion.