East_TN_Patriot

Darn right! Gay marriage, women in infantry units, abolishing Jim Crow, emancipating the slaves, interracial marriage, letting women vote, repealing Prohibition; what's this world coming to?!?

Don't forget Newt and Rubio in that group.  I took a terrible beating from conservatives when I spoke out against these two and now look where they stand as well.  The problem, as I see it, is that most Republicans don't really know what they believe in comparison to what the Republican Party actually stands for.  They *think* they do, but not really.  The Tea Party is just another in a long line of populist leaning movements that doesn't really adhere to any set system of beliefs or values.  There was a similar movement just shy of a century ago.  It too failed for this reason.  Adherents don't like corrupt big federal government.  That's the only thing they have in common.  If I had time to write a paper on the subject, I would do a comparison to the populist movement back then to the Tea Party movement today and predict the Tea Party's collapse within another 5 years.  

Also sounds like a lot of conservative Republicans I know as well.  Free thought is not a strong point for either party.

That's is not so dumb when you consider that Kyocera just released a waterproof smartphone.  Apple users are accustomed to getting cutting-edge technology (let's face it, they are the ones who revolutionized touchscreen smart phones and tablets, those devices that Android platform manufacturers are constantly trying to copy and improve upon).  That said, there's no way in hell I would dunk my iPhone on purpose, even if Apple released such a feature.  I'd just assume it's there and hope I never need to use it.  

Glad you have it back up and running, but should this happen again, follow these easy instructions:   1) Try to copy any unsaved data from the drive. 2) Throw the PC in the trash. 3) Buy a Mac

It doesn't matter what the building inspector says.  If the ordinance says signs are not allowed within a certain distance of the roadway, then that's the law.  There is a reason non-attorneys (building inspectors included) are not allowed to give binding legal advice.   Also, the "strict scrutiny standard" you mentioned above does not mean that there is no restriction to a right.  Instead, it simply means the government has a much higher level of justification to restrict that right.  in the court rulings I am familiar with, the strict scrutiny standard has been applied to ordinances prohibiting political signs in totality, restricting the content of the signs, or placing limits on when and how long signs can be posted.  In looking for some different case law, I found this good article discussing the case law related to this topic:   http://www.mtas.tennessee.edu/KnowledgeBase.nsf/PrinterFriendlyProductWeb?OpenForm&ParentUNID=2B0DB231D83EADE98525723F005F6773   I also found this information on an attorney's website discussing what is required for a jurisdiction to pass a constitutional sign ordinance:   http://www.ga-lawyers.pro/Articles/Sign-Ordinances-and-Right-of-way-Encroachments.shtml

First mistake is to use The Blaze as a source of legitimate news.  Second, the First Amendment is not an absolute right, just like the other rights specified in the Constitution.  When I was a LEO in Florida, we regularly confiscated political signs from city rights of way without "leaving a note."  We also confiscated real estate signs and yard sale signs.  If the sign was in someone's yard, we tried to notify the homeowner.  Cities, like it or not, generally have a certain right of way on property extending in from the roadway.  If I recall correctly, in Panama City, FL it was 3 feet.  The logic is to prevent multiple signs from blocking the view of motorists and causing a general nuisance.  If the city has such an ordinance, signage is not permitted within that distance from the roadway.  It's obvious the guy had been contacted about the issue and continued to put his sign where it was allegedly not permitted.   I also enjoy all the ignorant posts suggesting this incident is a sign of the impending apocalypse.   :panic:

Well done open-carry zealots!  You sure showed them who is boss! As many others on this forum say regularly, if you go looking for trouble, you're certain to find it.  Stop your ignorant open-carry "to make a political statement" BS before you make things worse. EDIT: This was posted by one of my FB friends and it expands on my point above.  If it has been posted already, I apologize, but did not see it.   http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/starbucks/  

I don't have a .22 like that and have no use for an optic that delicate.  If it breaks, it will become a target.  I'll just visualize the douchebag that ripped us off when I squeeze off the round.  

Just to clarify, I am out $125 and some holsters I made for him (it's a side business for me so he got free leather work in lieu of cash).  He and his other friends are out $300 each for them.  That price for a used EOTech seems within the realm of possibility.   Heck, maybe I'll just toss it onto my Benelli and see what happens.  

I won't buy another used one unless I can lay my hands on it. I doubt the original seller will ever get caught. Like I said, live and learn.

There is no serial number. It's obvious it's a fake. All 9 points I made show it's a t-total fake. Just sharing to keep others from buying a counterfeit sight.

Well, I bought an EOTech from a LEO friend of mine who works in Mississippi and as soon as I started to fool with it, I thought something didn't seem right.  Turns out, the thing is a fake.   :doh:  It looks pretty darn convincing at first glance and the markings look correct; much better and more accurate than other fakes I've seen.  He bought two of them from a shop that told him they were factory refurbished.  Other than the markings on the sides being accurate, this one has all the classic signs of a fake EOTech: 1) smoke tinted lens, 2) visible parallax at the edges of the lens, 3) light reflection on the lens, 4) visible light source inside the sight, 5) switches from green to red, 6) no manufacturer label on the bottom, 7) no automatic turn-off, 8) battery compartment not quite right, and 9) the biggest giveaway on this one: when I tried to adjust the windage, the markings on the screw are backwards (to move the dot left, I had to turn in the direction marked to the right). I told my buddy and big surprise, upon trying to get a hold of the guy he bought them from, the email address is dead and the phone number is disconnected.  What's bad is that he had the other one installed on his duty shotgun and some of his co-workers have them installed on their patrol rifles.  I just thought I'd pass this info along as a reminder to all about being very certain about what you are buying, even from people you know.  I should have asked for a couple more pics before I bought it.  Live and learn.  I'll stick this fake on one of my play guns and see how long it takes to break.  Fortunately, I'm only out $125 and a couple of holsters I made for him.  I'd like to think he'll offer to get my money back, but I doubt he can afford it.  A cop in Mississippi doesn't make that much money, at least not as much as I do so I can eat the loss and chalk it up as a lesson learned.   Here is a PDF from EOTech with some info and pics.  I hope this helps some other folks out there. EDIT: The more I think about it, I'd bet that EOTech doesn't sell factory refurbs either...

And basically this is the reason why we don't have a true "free market" in our society.  It's not possible to have a completely unregulated "free market" as long as we have sellers who are considered unethical and consumers are considered to be acting unwisely, and that is a reason to regulate the market.   What I do see here going on is the free market at work.  The opportunist who is being marked as unethical is being called out by more informed consumers who will educate other consumers and stop supporting the unethical seller.  This loss of support will discourage unethical practices in the future by hurting the seller's bottom line or drive them out of business.  Those sellers who foolishly spent panic prices on guns, ammo, magazines, etc. will eat the loss and learn from it.  The manufacturers who did not have adequate production capacity or product on reserve will adapt by producing more or keeping more stock on hand in the future.  Griping about price gougers and criticizing them is not anti-free market. IT IS the free market.   The only time I am in favor of some degree of governmental regulation is during times of emergency when people need stuff to survive.  Even then, I am somewhat leery because high prices for gas and fuel do help prevent people from wasting those resources and/or hoarding them.  In those cases, I think rationing is perhaps more important than controlling gouging.  Let the prices rise to an extent and keep people from using their wealth and/or wastefulness to take more than they need thus preventing others from having access to that necessary resource.  What that magic formula is, I can't claim to know.

I tried Bates and Rocky boots, but always went back to my Magnums.  Just like wearing really high-top sneakers because they are lightweight and flexible.  They would always last me about a year and a half before I needed to replace them.

Put me down for one.  I might be interested in a matching upper if someone can clarify if it is a billet upper or a forged upper.

Yup. Started bidding at $100 and didn't get a single bid.

I have a large collection of Nolan Ryan cards from the mid 1970s through the end of his career that includes hundreds of cards. I tried to sell them about a year ago and couldn't even get $100 for the lot even though book value on them was many many times that including on eBay. Cards are darn near impossible to sell anymore. Among the dealers I spoke to, they all said they were only interested in old cards in excellent shape. Newer cards from the mid 1980s on have very little value with collectors because everyone put them in plastic and saved them.

I'm with that guy. Life's too short to carry a plastic holster.

Yes, I just found this: http://www.gunnuts.net/2013/03/01/caracal-c-recall/ Looks like the pistols can have a catastrophic failure with the slide breaking in two. Not the first recall on Caracal handguns either it seems.

Yeee-ouch! A permanent recall of an entire line of pistols that cannot be fixed? That's gonna hurt! I wonder what the problem is?

Per TCA 39-17-1359  "(2) Possession of a weapon on posted property in violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only of five hundred dollars ($500)."   And, of course, you'll likely lose your carry permit.

East Town Mall is now posted???  If there is a mall around Knoxville where I feel compelled to carry a firearm, it's that place.  Very unfortunate because I shop there more often than I do West Town.

Plenty of folks are killed every year with a .22 pistol and those who think otherwise are definitely misinformed on the lethal potential of that round even out of a small NAA revolver.  The killing of South Carolina Trooper Mark Coates is a very unfortunate case in point.  Trooper Coats shot his assailant 5 of 6 times with his .357mag duty revolver at a distance of about 10- 15 feet.  The assailant returned fire with a .22 caliber NAA mini revolver using his off hand and struck Trooper Coats with the one round he fired.  The .22 bullet entered Trooper Coates' body around his armpit above his body armor, began to tumble, and severed his aorta.  Trooper Coats was immediately incapacitated and died within a couple of minutes.  The assailant is currently serving a life term in prison.  

Right... Because every 4 year old has a mini slim jim unlocking tool and people always leave their lock box lying loose on the floor. I like the combination on the first one "1-2-3-4". Very credible demonstration.