RobertNashville

I comprehend quite well (of course you often seem to accuse anyone who doesn't agree with you as having a comprehension problem). ROTFLMAO

It hasn't always been that way nor does it have to stay that way; only our country's lack of balls to address the problem allows it to continue.

NRA is unlikely to support it because they've got their own garbage bill on the table that isn't going to see the light of day.

What's absurd are your arguments. No employer...in fact no ONE has a right to know or control what's in my vehicle...period.

We already tried the amnesty and close the borders - it failed...all we got were a lot of illegals who were suddenly made "legal" while those who were trying to follow the law got screwed. This isn't about whether their wanting to be here is understandable; it is. Of course the border has to be secured. We don't have to "round up" anyone; if they have no work here...no income...no social services to depend on...they'll go home on their own (as well they should). These people may be "nice" people...they may be "good workers"...they may be all that and more but they are first and foremost, criminals...they are criminals by coming here...they are criminals by staying here and they are criminals by working here (and that doesn't even touch the crimes they commit like robbery, rape, drunken driving, and even worse)...the "cost" is in letting them be here and stay here. Either we are a nation of laws or not...a nation is defined by its language, by its culture and by its borders if we aren't going to maintain them then we don't have a "country"; we are simply occupying land - if we continue to tolerate the presence of millions of illegals then all the angst and talk bout "Second Amendment Rights" and the "Constitution" is nothing but dust in the wind.

All illegal aliens should be gone...PERIOD. Easiest way is to truly start enforcing the laws against hiring an illegal...perp-walk a few CEO's/business owners on the 6PM news and I'd bet you would see the jobs drying up...no jobs and I'd be they'll leave on their own (just like they came here on their own). Yes; there would be a significant impact...much less strain on social services, school systems, less crime, less drunk driving, more employment for real citizens.

Frankly, I won't be surprised if nothing "gun" related passes this year although last I heard the "parking lot" bill was at least still alive and had a chance...the TFA website might have something more about it.

Absolutely; an employer/business has every right to control whether a vehicle is parked in his parking lot but if that employer doesn't want vehicles on his property then he shouldn't allow VEHICLES on his property (i.e. not have parking lots). However, dictating what can be inside of a vehicle is moving beyond the employer's rights and infringing on the property rights of the vehicle owner. It's no one's business...no one's concern, what is inside of a person's vehicle or a person's house or a person's shed in his back yard for that matter - the only reasonable exception to that is if what is inside is illegal/criminal at which point it becomes the "business" of law enforcement - even then, a LEO would need cause and/or a search warrant to force a search. I'd possibly go alone with the "employer's rights" argument if there were a know, demonstrable, negative impact on a business because of a vehicle's contents...something that truly infringes on the operation of the business...were that the case, I think the argument would need to change; but I've never heard anyone argue that otherwise legal items simply "being inside" of a vehicle parked in an employer's parking lot impacts the business in any way.

Yeah...I thought the same thing. Funny how those "No Guns Allowed" only seem to work with the law abiding...who would have thought that thugs and criminals would ignore the signs!

Welcome, neighbor.

Humm...seems I just read something from the North Carolina water folks that said not to use bleach bottled to store water because of something they put the plastic for bleach bottles...I'll have to look again and I'll link to it if I can find it. I believe there is also something in milk bottles that make them a poor choice for storing water...seems the one's that are recommended are soft-drink and similar 2ltr containers.

Welcome to TGO and to Tennessee...I'm a former yankee but I got here as quick as I could 15 years ago.

I really suggest you read the commission's report - it isn'a a N blast (radiation) that's the problem and subs still operating won't matter either. The country would be instantly transported back to 1930 (maybe even more like 1880) level technonogy which wouldn't matter if it werE 1930 but to suddenly put people there who have no idea how to stay aloce with no communication...so food delivery...no medicine delivery...no operating vehicles except very old ones; it would kill millions and perhaps not even as humanely as vahishing in a radioactive cloud.

I'd recommend you read the book or at lest check out Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack, Volume I, Executive Report 2004 available here: Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack That report is not encouraging - virtually none of our modern electronics are hardened against EMP and as far as I can tell, nothing substantial has been done to change that since the above report was presented. Maybe there is some top-secret government program to save some of our assets...but most of our asses would be in a sling if we were hit with an EMP.

I've never bought Kroger brand bottled water....nor gallon jugs (I buy 16oz bottles in 24 bottle packs; then again, I'm not providing for a family)...maybe you should stick to a supplier that makes bottled water their whole business. Disaster preparedness, like home security, needs layers...if the normal source is of water is cut off I don't want to be stuck with only one other option; especially if the option could be contaminated. Any container system can fail but personally, I've never had a 16oz bottle leak (unless it wasn't sealed properly in the first place).

I've been reading a lot about bottled water and it appears to me that most of the stories about the plastic 16-oz water bottles are based more on urban legend than fact-based. In any case, you don't have to buy a lot of bottled water and then just let it sit...you can always use it slowly and then replace what you've used as you use it. The point is to have some when you need it.

I'm glad he and his friend or any other innocent wasn't hurt...it's too bad neither of these two thugs were hit...kudos to him for being armed and not simply bending over and taking it. A good object lesson for why you carry one in the chamber AND, use a proper retainage system for your weapon (i.e. a holster). Whatever training he's had, I'd say he could stand to have some more...maybe I wouldn't have done any better but I would certainly hope that I would (and hope I never have to find out)...he is damn lucky he didn't kill his friend or even worse, someone outside minding their own business.

If you want to be scared shi***ss and haven't read it yet, read "One Second After"...totally fictional storyline of course BUT based on real-world facts about EMPs and what an EMP strike could do. Being prepared for a potential EMP strike is something the Federal government should be doing instead of arguing over funding NPR (defunding NPR should not require discussion! ).

If the zombies come then they come...until then I'm going to pretend it's all just make-believe.

Isn't all this contingent on what the event/disaster was that caused the interruption of the water supply? I mean, if, God forbid, we are looking at an event that could contaminate the water supply (radiation, biological, etc.) then wells, springs, rainwater, etc would not be a solution would it? Seems to me that having a good supply of bottled water; at least enough to get you through a couple of weeks is good "insurance" even if you believe you have other sources.

I suspect that this is something you can do yourself. However, if you really aren't sure exactly what needs to be done to return it to a stock configuration it might be worth the small expense to have a good armorer do it for you if only to avoid replacing something that doesn't need to be replaced! Just my $0.02

Humm...maybe I should have told the lieutenant who stopped me 'cause I DID get the ticket. Of course, I absolutely deserved it but that's besides the point.

Teddy sounds like a good, decent man who loved his country and his family as well which is high praise even though a lot of people in this world wouldn't understand that. Rest in peace and prayers for his family. Death is the ultimate, inescapable end to life; but it's never easy for those left behind.

The real problem with questions like this is that it's almost impossible to answer and truly be "right" because what a person "should" do depends so much on the officer involved and the specific situation. That said... 1. I always keep my hands on the steering wheel and visible to the officer. 2. I don't "get" anything (our of my wallet, glove box, etc) without first telling the office where my hands area going to go and why I'm going there. 3. I've always advocated, and many "gun experts" seem to agree that it's a good idea to "inform" the officer you are carrying by simply handing him your permit with your DL (announcing you have "gun" is NOT a good idea). That said, about five weeks ago I was stopped by THP and I didn't tell him I was carrying (and I was carrying)...he was a lieutenant...VERY polite...he never asked if I was carrying so apparently, he wasn't worried (or at least he wasn't worried about me but I don't know if that's a good thing or not!). If for no other reason, I think telling an officer you are carrying (when you are) by handing him your permit (or in some other low-key way) is a good idea if only so that you don't inadvertently break the law in those states that require you to tell an officer you are armed.

I have in on order (and there is another thread on this game right now by the way). The consensus from those on TGO who have it as well as the general reviews seems to be that the single player game is Okay; not great but that the multiplayer (online) play is pretty good or even better than pretty good. I suspect it will at least be entertaining and provide a break from Black Ops!