RobertNashville

I'm sure he has some followers but I'd bet few would be willing to identify themselves as such.

:snore:   While we need to be mindful of these things I see no reason, at present, to thing this bill will even make it out of committee (or ever heard in a committee meeting). This sounds like a bill these 6 Democrats sponsored just so they could say they tried. ;)

You aint from around here are you?  :)   "Him of whom we do not speak" but speak about anyway, has a long a storied history of asshole-like actions such as the subject of this thread as well as phenomenally crazy, irrational, condescending and combative posts on this and every single forum he's ever been a former member of (emphasis on "former" as he's been banned from all of them, apparently even a Golden Retrieve forum; go figure).   No one knows his true motivations although we all have our theories but at the end of the day, most of us seem to agree that his actions are stupid, and irresponsible as well as detrimental to the overall firearm community and for that, he is usually treated with scorn and acrimony.   P.S. And to simplify yes...he's an asshole.

Darn it Mike; you beat me to the punch by 3 minutes (according to the forum)...not bad for an old fart. ;)   Frankly, I think it was a matter of mere seconds as I got the message that there was a new reply just as I was about to hit "POST". Therefore, I believe there is probable cause for a full-on investigation into the operation of the forum software and in particular, its timing components.  :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

All that matters is if the officer can reasonably articulate why he believed that that particular rifle was loaded (the perceived weight, correct or incorrect, being only one component of that).   Arguing about weight difference between one AR and another within the same manufacturer or among various manufacturers has nothing to do with that officer, that AR and why he believed it might be loaded.

It should just languish in an evidence property room for a few decades gathering dust until some intern 50 years from now finds it in a stack of stuff that no one alive remembers...I can almost see the intern now, opening up the bag it's in, looking at the name on the bad and wondering aloud...   "Trayvon Martin?  Who the hell was Trayvon Martin and why do we have his skanky hoodie?"   Unless the Smithsonian is putting together an exhibit of "this is what happens when you act like a "gansta" I can't see how it deserves to be "preserved" for posterity.

How about things like the Pursuit channel, SEED channel, History channel, AMC, etc.?   Does one have to go find specific shows or does AppleTV (or one of the other services) give me the option of playing whatever is on a channel (like I can with cable/sat)? For my, my TV is almost always on "something" even if I"m not actually watching it. I may be SPEED, History, SciFi, or Animal but if I'm home it's likely on.  When I actually sit down to watch TV, that's another matter...then it's usually a program my DVR recorded for me (and generally, I record entire seasons of something or all shows by a specific title (Family Guy, for example ;) ) and let the DVR do the work of finding the show and recording it because it may be a couple of days or a couple of weeks or even months before I go back and watch the shows (if I ever do).   I guess I just need to go buy something, use it and see for myself if it can do everything I want it to do. :)

This seems like a  "well duh" sort of thing...of course taxpayers are going to pay for it...taxpayers pay for EVERYTHING the government does; mostly directly; sometimes indirectly but they always pay because there is no one else to pay. Government has no money of its own.

Tom Givens, in his Rangemaster facebook page was kind enough to find and post this article; I think it's well worth a read.           You can find the rest here: http://spectator.org/blog/2013/07/15/trayvon-crime-school-miami      

let me say this again...slowly...I understand your reasoning...I believe your reasoning is flawed and, therefore, I don't agree with it.

Wow...even I'm not that mean...   You old coot.

Maybe saying it's "good" is going to too far...I'll admit that it's sad for him/his family but I can't say I feel much sympathy for him because he has absolutely no one to blame for this except himself.   I've no doubt that if I went around provoking police like he did I'd be out of a job too (and I'd expect to be)...it's embarrassing to the company when one of their employees acts like an idiot and it becomes publicized; I'm not at all surprised that they took action to separate themselves from his foolishness.

So?  I've read his comments...I think he's wrong; I'm sure he (and apparently you) think I'm wrong...I'll still sleep okay tonight.

Voldemort's rights were simply NOT violated.   He has no legal right in TN to walk down a public sidewalk carrying what looked like a loaded AR15 which is exactly what he appeared to be doing.  How you can construe that his doing so doesn't give the police probable cause to search him and everything he was carrying, including the weapon, is beyond me...of course they had probable cause because Voldemort went out of his way to appear to be breaking the law.   This is not a 4th amendment issue...this is just an issue of one asshole acting stupidly and recklessly.

I didn't ignore it, I just think he's wrong (and I thought I said that???).

True conservative?  Not really...some are certainly closer than others of course.  Going back to the most recent race, I would say Michelle  Bachmann followed by Rick Santorum would be the most conservative of those who ran but they never seemed to have the "spark" necessary to get anywhere. More to the point, I'm not sure that either of them had the political courage to do what needs to be done (although I wish one of them had been given the chance to prove me wrong).   Romney was certainly no true conservative but I was able to support him with a clear conscious because I believed, at his core, that he was a decent, honest man who would at least try to do what was best for the country even if I didn't happen to agree with it...compared to the slime ball, America-hating, racist, tin-plated dictator want-a-be who occupies the oval office today I am still convinced I made the right choice. ;)   As I've shared in other threads, I frankly don't have any real hope left that things can be turned around at this point...I hope I'm wrong.  Unfortunately, no one, and I mean no one seems to have the guts or even the desire to do what needs to be done even if they had the power to do it...the only thing that will save this country from financial collapse is going to be massive, and I do mean MASSIVE spending cuts and a shrinkage of government (and government services) that will impact EVERYONE in a negative way.  Ultimately I think that pain will be easier to take than the pain that will come from doing nothing but it's tough to convince people of that and any office holder who takes the right course will have to do so with the near certainty that he/she won't win reelection (that's rather a tough expectation for a politician).  ;)

It's true that I don't that a true a conservative can get the nomination; not with current Republican leadership but that wasn't what I was talking about at all.   I was only responding to your statement that the electorate (voters I'm assuming you mean) would never go for (as in vote for) a true conservative; that's what I disagree with.  Whether a true conservative will ever again be given a chance to run (as a Republican) is, in my mind, an completely different (albeit related) issue.   I absolutely believe that the electorate would vote for a true conservative if one runs and is able to communicate with the people (has the finances, etc.) because I believe that issue by issue, most people tend to BE conservative even if they don't identify themselves as such. Obviously, hardcore liberal Democrats will never be swayed but hardcore on either side is not where elections are won or lost anyway.

What??? I didn't say anything of the sort.  :confused:   You said...   And I said I don't agree (that a true conservative can't get elected) for the reasons I stated above.   I never said anything one way or the other about a true conservative not being able to get the nomination; I simply pointed out that there hasn't been a true conservative running for President as a Republican for anybody to vote for in many, many, years.

Excellent point...some stretch the 4th amendment from protection against unreasonable searches to protection against virtually all searches and, as you just pointed out, such is not the case.  I'm not a judge but I see nothing unreasonable in the police searching his cased weapon. In fact, under the totality of the circumstances it would have bee wholly unreasonable for them to not have done so!

Sorry...don't buy it.  Carrying a loaded rifle in Tennessee in public is illegal. Having one on a city street (even ignoring everything else) provided more than enough suspicion that a crime was, is or about to be committed.   The police had not only a right but an obligation to find out for certain if the rifle is loaded or not.  Their suspicions that is was loaded is wholly logical and prudent and more than sufficient, in my layman's opinion, to provide probable cause to search the "case".  And that's the way it should be, at least until sometime in the future if that law is ever changed...I'm not sure what that is causing anyone heartburn.   If you want to keep believing that the police were wrong that's fine but nothing anyone has said gives me cause to believe their search wasn't completely legal.

  I think you are stretching here.   Under TN law no one is allowed to carry a loaded long gun in public (or what is easily/obviously construed to be a long gun such as in this case). Had the idiot been walking down a country road cops probably wouldn't bother to stop and may not even notice at all but, on a city street they damn sure are going to notice (even if there weren't 911 calls) and they are going to ascertain if the weapon is or isn't loaded.   Making that determination is not only reasonable and prudent but given what has been happening in recent memory the cops would be derelict in their duty if they didn't see if the weapon is loaded - we can dislike the law that says carrying a loaded long gun in public is a crime...we can dislike that sort of "automatic" suspicion of him carrying a loaded AR but let's face it, walking down the sidewalk of a major city street in this day and age with a rifle is simply NOT normal and hasn't been normal for a VERY long time now (even were it legal)...couple that with the rest of his appearance and recent history of shootings and heaven help any cop that doesn't stop him and search him and his belongings just as these cops did. Since it is illegal for anyone to carry a loaded long gun in public and given that the person carrying it was being totally uncooperative I believe they had plenty of probable cause at that point to suspect that a crime was being committed (carrying a loaded long gun) which gives them more than sufficient permission to search even the "case".   Ultimately this will (maybe anyway) play out in the courts but I don't think these cops have a "PC" problem here.  

Well then somebody had better start raising a lot of extra chickens and making/finding tar (where the heck does tar come from anyway???) because it would take a LOT of tar and feathers.  ;)

Average amount paid for most debt by a junk debt buyer is about $0.06 on the dollar so they have a HUGE amount of wiggle room to settle and still make a profit. Further, few debt buyers every have the documentation to actually prove the debt even exists much less any details about or even who truly owed the debt...trust me, these companies are lower than the sea floor (even lower than whale excrement) and they have one job, to get money...from the actual debtor...from someone with a similar name...even someone whom they can bully into paying.   With a small debt like this I doubt they'll be willing to negotiate much. However, getting paid in full may entice them to agree to stop reporting the debt at all in which case everyone wins. ;)

Oh now I most definitely disagree with that.  The only thing certain is that if a conservative isn't in the top spot of the Republican ticket (or a truly viable third-party) then the electorate will not elect him/her because they won't have the opportunity. The only thing really stopping a true conservative from being elected is that we haven't had one make it to the ticket since RR and even he had his "liberal" moments. What RR did do very well and what the R party seems incapable of doing is not just communicating conservative ideals and principles but also connecting to people.  I suggest that the majority of people (at least people engaged enough to vote) are more "conservative" than liberal on a majority of issues (not the same issue(s) for everyone of course) and if a conservative candidate can communicate his ideas and positions in a way that can resonate with those folks he/she can most certainly be elected.   Of course, we now have a "press" that is nothing more than a part of the Democrats campaign committee and it wasn't always that way but I think even that can be overcome.

Your charge of being called "stupid" prompted me to go back and read through the thread.   I can see where Richard got a bit abrasive in post No. 30. However, I'd say your response in post No. 32 was just as abrasive (or certainly could seem that way to the person it was directed to);l things only continued to worsen in succeeding posts. I'm not defending Richard; we've had some "heated" exchanges in other threads, but as the old saying goes; it takes two to tango and frankly, you both seemed to be willing participants!   Further, you are certainly not the first poster on TGO to present a specific scenario seeking an answer withing narrow parameters or  who tried to control the width/breath of a thread only to be disappointed...I'm not saying it should be that way but trying to keep this group solidly on topic or on a narrowly defined path is akin to herding cats.   If you really feel you've been wronged then report it to the Admins; they seem to be pretty fair most of the time. ;)