Hgunner

Big Zero and his minuions are doing everything they can to deliberately collapse the economy. They are hoping that when things fall apart we will all beg for them to helps us and take care of us so that they can institute a Marxist reginme. That we beg them to feed us and cloth us and make the pain go away. I just hope people will realize just who is to blame and take this country back and make it back into the Constitutional Republic it once was and should be.

Stopped in yesterday on my way back home.......they had some primers....they wanted your first born for them...$45 - 1K for Small/Large Pistol.....$55- 1k for Small/Large Rifle. Needless to say they can keep them....did buy some cleaning patches though.

Add a little Tar and some Feathers.......it would be a fine party.

Be delusional if you want too, A fair tax, a flat tax, a what ever you want to call it tax will not fix the problems with the Fed Gov or the current tax structure. The founding fathers spelled out in the Constitution how the Fed Gov. was to rasie it's revenue, That's what should be adhered too. However this will result in a drastic and needed reduction in the size and power of the Fed Gov, and return power to the states. The Federal reserve should also be abolished as it is not Federal and is not a Reserve,it was created in the dark of night by and is owned by 12 private member banks. The Constitution gave the Congress the power to coin and create money not the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.

Agreed

Came in the mail today, better than I expected quality and feel.. Double Diamond Red Black Linen

I hope this causes a big light to go off in a lot of peoples heads. We are nearing the tipping point. And these people vote themselves more and more milk from the public tit.

Like in your first reply you want to throw personal insults go ahead, hell while your at go ahead and call me Racist.

Where in this reply is a 2A inalienable right argument made.

Food for thought . The SCOTUS on Heller applied the 2nd A to DC (not a state) and stated reasonable restrictions were acceptable. Thats with a 5-4 pro 2A court. What do you think the out come would have been with a 5-4 con 2A court. What if SCOTUS applies the 2A to the states in MacDonald and reasonable restrictions are ok. Again with a 5-4 Pro 2A court, what if they say Chicago restrictions are reasonable? Lets assume though that they consider them unreasnable restrictions. How will this go a few years down the road if the court goes the other way 5-4 Con 2A. They could very well say dracoian restriction are reasonable, careful what you wish for in a SCOTUS ruling. Just being the advocate.

Go back and read your response you in no way mentioned any right when you replied to me.

No he came after because of my staement about the wealth of our poor. See page 3. I too believe the 2nd Admendment is an inalienable right, but does not yet appy in this case. Hopefully MacDonald will apply it to the several states, however we are fortunate that we have since the early 90's been able to effect our laws so that we can get carry permits. Again I urge TMMT if he does not like th way things are call you reps and do something about it. I do not see requiring training and a permit as a unreasonable restriction.

Well TMMT here is what I think you should do. I think you should take this whole social justice theory of permit issuance to the Tennessean, the Commercial Appeal, the Knoxville News Sentinel and the Chattanooga paper( don't know what it is). Contact the NAACP, Jessie Jackson's Rainbow coaliton, get ahold of Al Sarhpton and any and all other social justice groups and go after shall issue carry for a fee, license,tax, whatever you want to call it. Try and get it corrected, try and fix it. What you will end up doing is getting every shall issue law repealed, and hopefully that will make you happy. As we will all be miserable and worried about our saftey equally, and no one will be concerned about the cost. As a added bonus it should make your bleeding heart all happy and gay.

I haven't seen any in years but when I was youngster, I remember going in old country stores and them having pickled pigs feet in jars on the counter. Never could figure out the appeal of pigs feet.

Nothing wrong with that, what was the distance?

Ok let s say they are the perfect poor couple, don't smoke, don't drink or are in any way wasteful with their money, Can they not try and save few bucks every week until at least one can afford it. Then save for the other one. Personally I do not see the current setup as overly burdensome, or expensive, and I do not see it as a defacto ban on the poor. Another option is Vermont carry, change the laws so that anyone and everyone of a given age can carry open or concealed. I have no problem with this either, and would support it. A third option is start a charity that takes donations and helps poor people in need get the class and their fees paid. I'll make a donation if that helps. You can take the state to court and get it declared discriminatory and then ruin it for everyone by getting the shall issue laws repealed. Remember not to many years ago no one could get a carry permit. You just can't please everyone, all the time. Have we not learned anything in the past 40 years of the great society, the more we try to help those less fortunate, the more dependent we make them, the more freedom we lose. Not to mention the monetary cost.

I don't think any of it was a cake-walk.

This is just asking to get us nuked............

And I really like that show too........

Well it does not, it has not been given full force to apply to the states. This can be a good or a bad thing. The same court that can say it applies to the states on a 5-4 decision with 5 conservatives and 4 Marxist can easily take away that right with a decision of 5-4 if the court changes the other way. However if it is guaranteed by a state constitution you have a fighting chance of a states right argument. The decision in Chicago my vary well be the ruling that aplllies it to the several states. You always have to think of the consequences and sometimes try to forsee the unintended consquences of actions. Sorry if you don't like my view point. Again I don't neccessarily agree with the way the TN Constitution is applied. My "view to prevent crime" I know is different than most legislators of the past and probably current legislature.

Man be careful crimsonaudio came after me for say'in a lot less......

Again, this is what the Tennesssee State Constitution says, the United States Constitution does not apply in this instance. I am not saying that I support this position, however it is the law of the land of Tennessee. Tennessee State Constitution § 26. Weapons; right to bear arms That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime. Therefore carrying a gun in Tennessee is a privilege and not a right, nobodies rights are being violated. Change the Constitution if you don't like the law.

May keep the net open and free for a while longer..... Court: FCC has no power to regulate Net neutrality | Politics and Law - CNET News

I thought it had been reclassified as a felony, good to know it has not.

Well if it were me which it isn't I would be more worried as a poor man on how to get myself out of my current situation than aquiring a handgun permit and handgun that I could ill afford. We just view things differently, I would try and do something about my poverty first. I'm not saying the current law is right or just, change the laws if you don't agree with them. Oh and I did not grow up in a DC area project, just had the unfortunate experince of living in one for awhile.