Patton

I don't believe Craig's got the buisness, I read it was someone else. A Sig 220, department price is $700ish at GT Distributors. I know for a fact GT's will give $300 credit for a average condition G22 gen3. KPD got raped by whoever they did this deal with.

The judge interest me only because it's versatile to shoot 45LC or .410's. The availability of .410 shells has been pretty good during shortages, and so has 45LC at some times. My FIL has a judge, overall not bad. There has been a few weak primer strikes and it is a really dirty gun. I have shot a lot of revolvers but the Judge throws more powder and bullet shavings out the sides than other revolvers.

That is about the figures I was thinking but I was affraid to calculate them. OMG, this is insane.

For what ever reason they had the .22's they decided they didn't need them any longer.

Truthfully what worries me more than anything is it seams like KPD got raped on the deal.

A lot of currently married enlisted/officers got married as enlisted/enlisted, enlisted/civilian, And then one went the officer route. I don't know that I have ever heard of an officer marrying an enlisted person.

I have yet to meet a retired police officer that didn't have a story of how hard it was to carry as retired. Some departments won't issue a retired ID card and some have given retirees trouble when needing to qualify. One of the problems with Military Police carrying is the DOD has always been neglectful to allow DOD cops and MP's to carry on post, let them qualify with personal weapons, and support any off duty involment at intervening with crime. Even if the law says its ok it's hard getting the DOD on board.

A third gun or for me as a BUG because I won't carry anything else.

Since the craze I was hearing Monday's but there was a couple of Mondays that they had nothing new. They said check back Tuesday then Wednesday. I was there at 0900 when they were putting out primers so I don't know if they came in seperatly or they were just putting out a little at a time.

I have read of some very recent misfires with the Hornady rimfire ammo. Have you had any?

I was aware they stock on Monday's, just trying to let people know what was still available. I figured most people can not be there at 9am on Monday. I have not been able to make it by early in the week and was surprised to see what was left.

A NAA revolver is a last ditch, hide out gun for me. It's either a NAA as a bug or no bug, people are talking about using a LCP or a J frme as a bug which is great. What about when my j frame or my LCP which is my primary? I shoot a NAA gun really well, but I carry it even better. I could carry a NAA in a hat, in my shoe, or in a pack of cigarettes. The point is for me having a BUG that someone may not find, would not suspect to give me a chance out. How many people can say they have a BUG 99% of the time? I can. Sure I would rather have a G22 and a G27 all the time but it is more likely I will carry a J frame with a NAA more frequently.

It is not only Walmart. The day after Christmas I bought a Shield at Axademy that wasn't in the computer. It was plain as day in stock on the counter. The computer was showing 0 in stock.

I will not even look at the online inventory, I have seen ammo on the shelves that wasn't online as well.

The Walmarts around Chattanooga have nothing. I have been in them all over the last few days and have seen one box of 40, some .410 shells and a few .45LC. One of the associates said I had just missed 3 boxes of .32acp. I guess this shows the desperation, someone is stockpiling .32acp. I ran into a manager I had once known very well and he said they had a meeting and were expecting a lot of 40, 45, 38 plus some unknown others in a week. He specifically stated no .22 and no 9mm.

At Sportsmsns this morning they had a pretty good assortment of primers with a fair amount of 40, 45, and there was some odd ball calibers in self defense.

I don't know how they ever determind who he was but it sounds like him.

The actually found out his real name, Mikey, and he had a weird last name. Supposedly he did time while he was in the Navy for assrape and child rape.. He seems like a quality fellow.

I have never heard of an insurance company working with you to remove a down tree, except when it lands on the house, car, neighbors. It did land on a fence which might be enough for them to do a removal. Here is the reason I would not make an insurance claim. Homeowners and automotive insurance companies can and have in the past dropped customers after too many claims. I know someone who had them bundled and after a roadside claim, a wreck, and requesting a new roof from hail damage she got a letter that she had 30 days of coverage left. A tree that may or may not cost as much as a deductible to remove isn't worth contacting them about. As long as your yard is solid, I think you could find someone to cut it up and haul it off as firewood for no more than $200. I know a guy that would drop that tree and haul it off for probably $200.

Www.appleestatesales.com

Honestly you are growing to probably have to cut it into ~18" logs to get someone to haul it away. If they can't drive a truck and trailer right up to it you may not be able to even give it away. Sawmills won't come after one tree, it normally takes a few for it to be worth their while. They prefer it not be from someone's yard anyway.

I have not seen a sig 2022 for under 500 in a couple of months. They were the best deal.

The mystery of the 225's/P6's, where did they all go?

Agreed the officer should have made the restaurant wait for the info, this wasn't a car wreck or some other incident of a timely manner. I would assume that the officer was probably still investigating the incident. He probably looked into enough to see what we see. That the restaurant may have/did committ a crime. Not knowing what to do from here his case has stopped cold. Does he put the restaurant in the subject block? Chances are this incident was given a case number (just about every call gets one when it comes in) and that officer will use that number when he finally does a report. Just because there isn't one now doesn't mean there wasn't going to be one. The officer should have told them to wait and get it off the report. It is to my understanding that the DMV will give out information if you have a reason, abondoned vehicles are the most common reason. They make you read the Drivers Privacy Act. but seeking damages would meet the criteria.

"If" there had been a crime, he could have given just about any information. I'm sure this officer thought that there was a crime or was convinced that there was a crime. He probably gave the "suspect" information out at the scene and figured he wouldn't do a "information" report, although he still can. The officer is lucky he didn't make an arrest, like me he probably figured this was simply a civil matter and all he is required to do is assist in identifying a suspect. For a criminal court to convict the officer the DA would have to prove that the officer knowingly acted in complete malice. Otherwise, "A Law Enforcement Officer Acting in Good Faith and Possessing Probable Cause Will Not Be Liable for Constitutional Rights Violations Under 42 USC 1983, Et. Seq." Actually this may not apply but the officer was acting in good faith, or so the court most likely would believe. I can think of two examples similar to this; An officer I knew once supposedly helped someone break into a house that they were ordered by the court to not return to. The court saw that the information provided to the officer was sufficient for the officer to believe the suspect still lived there(his license said so). No civil or criminal action was taken against the officer. The second one was when a woman called saying her kids went to their dads and they have not been heard from in several days. The police went to the house and made forced entry to find no one in the house. The family returned to find their door busted in. The police had every reason to believe a crime may have been committed but actually the family went on vacation. It turned out the mother wasn't even in the kids life's, she was just stirring up trouble. The Police said they didn't have an issue with fixing the door. The courts would not take an action against the officers or the department.