RobertNashville

One real concern remains the wording "privately owned vehicle"...are leased vehicles covered under the legislation?  What about a rental vehicle while yours is in for repairs?   To me, and I suspect to most thinking human beings, unless a vehicle is stolen it's "YOUR VEHICLE" while you are using it just as your hotel room is YOUR HOME and has the same protection under the law as the house you live in.   Frankly, much of what is wrong with the current legislation and the whole "parking lot issue" would be solved if TN law made it clear that a person's vehicle (owned, financed, leased, rented or borrowed) is a legal extension of your home and deserving of the exact same protections. Therefore, you can have anything in your "home" at any time provided it's something that is "legal" to possess in the first place.

I heard of it a few years ago...but it didn't change how I use the terms in the IT work I do. :)

I will freely admit that after living in Tennessee going on 18 years now, plus my own study, visiting Gettysburg as an adult, etc...my overall view of the civil war has altered somewhat. It's altered at least to the extent that I have a much better understanding of some of the philosophical and economic currents that precipitated it.   That said, there is the very simple truth that at one time in this country, one man could actually "own" another as one would own a cow or a horse, It was a despicable thing and a stain on our country's history and, rightly or wrongly, that stain is inevitably linked to our civil war. That being the case, I think it is at least understandable (even if also regrettable) that cities and governments and groups would like to "forget" our history and eradicate reminders of participation by those states that seceded.

And at your advanced age your old fart, tweaking my nose is about as exciting as it gets for you! :)

Well, you should be EXTREMELY capable considering how many ****ups you make! LOL

Well, I didn't even notice the emoticon!   In any case, the pictures posted do appear to not actually depict what some allege they do so they sort of are BS in that regard aren't they???  :hiding:

Thanks for posting that, Mike...I have several Isralie friends and they've never mentioned that they carry such as depicted in these pictures so that above story makes a lot of sense.   I haven't been inside of Israel but I've been to Lebanon and Syria and most of those carrying there were Hezbollah!  :)

Where exactly did Mike or anyone call your statement "BS"?  :shrug:

Yeah...that still doesn't mean we should be carrying a loaded AR through a shopping center.

Don't really disagree with the above but I don't see how what they do in Israel has anything to do with this story in particular nor with the whole concept of carrying what appears to be a loaded AR15 in in a shopping mall in the U.S.    Frankly, I hope we never reach the point where our lives are in such constant danger that we NEED to do what they do in Israel...more than that, I would much prefer we lived in a world and in a country where we NEVER needed to be armed.

I'm neither "sheepish" nor a "nervous Nellie" but in this day and age if I see a stranger walking through a shopping mall with what appears to be a loaded AR15 slung across his back I'm going to call 9-1-1 (while I have my hand on my holstered pistol looking for cover) because given what has been happening in the world I'm NOT going to just assume that the stranger is harmless.  I'll let the LEOs come and they can sort it out and either arrest him or let him go on his way.   If some folks here don't like that reaction so be it; I'd rather be safe than dead.

I'm not (and don't think I did) say it should be excused; I'm just noting that encountering such in law enforcement is likely going to become more of the norm than the exception going forward.

Well, I didn't say it would be illegal...but I do think it would be pretty stupid. :)   Although it's worth noting that in this case; the AR appeared to be loaded which is illegal under TN law.

We have a labor shortage in this country for two primary reasons...   1 We have too many uneducated people in this country or people who don't have the job skills that are needed in today's job market - these people either refuse to learn new skills and/or they have the skills but won't move to where the jobs are; OR   2.  We have to damn many lazey ass people in this country who won't take the jobs that exist because they can get by, and sometimes MORE than get buy on all the free stuff they get from government. Yeah...solving the illegal problem might cost some money but so be it. Problems need to be fixed and if fixing them costs money then it costs money; that's the way life works. We could easily cover the costs and/or cut taxes by billions if we stopped spending so much to support people who won't work.   If you are already concerned about your business' labor and administrative costs what do you think is going to happen to prices and the cost of doing business when all that cheap, illegal labor becomes legal and qualifies for all the free stuff and/or they start joining unions and start demanding the same wages that it would take to get Americans to take the jobs?   Those illegals who work under the table are likely not going to be willing to work under the table anymore and those that currently take real W2 jobs but at wages that many American citizens are unwilling to take because the wages aren't high enough to entice them to do so are probably going to start to demand the same level of wages that it would take to get those current American citizens to take them meaning that any way you cut it, amnesty/citizenship for these criminals is going to result in MUCH higher costs for businesses and ultimately, for consumers - we'll all pay for it one way or another.   I guess I don't understand why some folks (not you...just in general) are so blind to the very real threat these people pose to the United States...it's no less of a threat than 200 million Chicoms screaming across the border...it's a threat to our very existence as a country...if stopping that isn't worth spending money on then I don't can't think of anything that is. I wonder what some of those folks are going to think of our open borders when we get some Iranian terrorists inside the country who sets off a couple of suitcase nukes in Chicago or Memphis or NYC or some other major city???  I wonder if anyone then will think that maybe open borders isn't such a good idea and that it might have been worth it to spend some $$$ to fix it. :shrug:

And if you carry a long gun, especially one of those "evil assault rifles" in a shopping mall in Tennessee I can guarantee you'll get a much less pleasant reaction that this guy got (as well you should).   If I see some idiot walking around a mall in TN with an AR or something similar I'm going to have my drawing hand on my holstered sidearm while calling the police with my free hand; concurrently looking for a place to get the hell out of this guys sight until LEOs arrive.

Well, I am a bit lost as to why someone who lives in GA spends so much time on the Tennessee Gun Owners forum or why it matters whether or not you "would be way more surprised to see someone with a gun case than someone with a gun on there back down here" (meaning there in GA I assume)! LOL   I don't have cases for ALL my long guns but I I most certainly have cases that I could (and do) use for my long guns and up here, or anywhere else for that matter, if I was going to walk around in a public mall with one of my long guns (although I can't imagine any reason in the world why I would do that) it would absolutely be in one of those cases.   Maybe this guy was totally innocent in intent but I can't really imaging any logical reason why he would need or want to walk around a shopping mall with an AR15 (real or otherwise) carried openly on his back..I'm thinking he either had a momentary brain fart (i.e. acted without thinking or caring about the possible consequences of his actions), or that he was specifically looking for the encounter he got.

All the more reason to believe that not having it cased, boxed or not carrying it at all was simply an effort to tweak noses/instigate an encounter and why I don't have any significant sympathy for him as I think he got exactly what he was going after.

Yuup...as a city it's as progressive/liberal as any in the country so their taking this action really isn't surprising at all.

I suspect that the county's refusal to budge will hurt them FAR more (financially)  than it will hurt the gun show owners/promoters. 

Aside from all the other moral and financial reasons why we should get these illegals out of the country (and stop more from coming in) it seems to me that with just your costs alone you've provided many excellent reasons for why we need to get them out of the country and why no one should vote for any politician who isn't willing to do so.

Should he have been charged? I don't know but whether he should or shouldn't have been being charged with something is not the end of the world.   He'll get his day in court assuming the charges aren't dropped before it even gets that far. Further, if this really is nothing but harassment on the part of police he may well have something actionable against the police/city and if so then I hope he pursues it.   I also suggest that we keep in mind that many of the younger LEOs are NOT civilian firearm friendly because jsut like a lot of America; they've not been raised around guns and have heard nothing but bad things about firearms and those who own them so what this guy is facing may well be exactly what all of us will have to deal with in the future.

Are you actually a business owner and do you have employees? If you are a business owner that has/hires employees then, based on your above statement, are you saying that you are purposely not following the existing law that requires an employer to verify legal eligibility to work in the U.S. before you hire employees??? If you are following the law please explain what “cost” you are shouldering because when I’ve hired employees I can’t think of any costs involved at all. It’s very interesting that you raise the issue that you shouldn’t have to check citizenship of an employee because it’s actually the government’s job to close the border yet below, you make it clear that you don’t think you want a fence to close the border! :screwy:   I’d love to see no public education money (meaning my tax money) spent to educate the children of illegal aliens but whether that happens or not is somewhat moot because if you do what I suggest and take away the reasons these criminals came here in the first place and stay here than they won’t stay around so their children more than likely won’t be here for us to spend money on.     Actually, I didn’t say anything about a fence, I just said close the border…fence…5,000 more border agents with permission to use deadly force…the military…I don’t care how it’s done; it just needs to get done.   No one…and I do mean NO ONE should be allowed into this country until they have been vetted, then tracked while here and then deported if they violate their visa and/or if they don’t leave voluntarily when they are supposed to do so.     There are good solutions to the issues at hand; all it takes is enough people with the balls to do it. Whether the “American people” will tolerate it or not is immaterial…that’s why we need representatives in Congress who will do the right thing even if the public doesn’t like it. Anyway; you asked me a question and I answered it…I will not vote for Rand Paul or any other politician of any party that is willing to give amnesty to 20 million criminals...PERIOD. Any country that will not protect and maintain its own language, culture and borders is not a country at all and if the United States continues to coddle criminals who invade our country then it deserves to be relegated to obscurity (which is exactly what is going to happen).

...working

He hut us because people see yet another news story about a guy carrying a rifle around in public and giving the gun-grabbers yet another story they can sink their teeth into all of which would have been a complete non-issue if he hadn't carried this rifle openly in the first place. My gut and my readings of other stories tells me that this guy was not carrying for self-protection (in fact there is some indication that it wasn't even an real gun)...it appears to me that this guy was fishing for an encounter and found one and I've no sympathy for those who do that whether it's Voldemort or anyone else. If, where it's legal, people believe that carrying openly is the best for them and where/when they will be going in public then fine...if they do it just to make a statement or to feel like a big man or to fish for an incident then they should be hung out to dry as far as I'm concerned.  

It would be a great piece of history to have....a bit out of my price range though!