East_TN_Patriot

IIRC, it's the other way around. The deeper you seat the bullet, the higher the pressures will be all other things being equal. If you reduce the bullet seating, you can add more powder, thus increasing pressure, but it would be easy to overdo things. Perhaps someone with a bit more knowledge will chime in and give us a more authoritative answer.

I expect either an economic collapse that will result in widespread civil unrest, or a regional collapse of the power grid. I teach classes in Homeland Security and terrorism. If people realized how vulnerable our power grid is, many more would be concerned. As a side note, I don't necessarily "worry" about it, but I do find it enough of a concern that I prepare to a reasonable extent. I feel like I have enough on hand to get me by for a little while until we can adapt and carry on.

We owned a Canon Digital Rebel and sold it to buy a Nikon D5000. I personally preferred the Canon because I thought it was easier to use, but my wife prefers the the Nikon, so that's what we went with (because we all know how that works). Neither one really performs better than the other overall. It's like comparing a Springfield 1911 to a Kimber 1911. Like others have said, you really can't go wrong either way. Just pick the one you like.

I am considering having my factory standard 22" barrel replaced with an 18.5" Criterion barrel. The cost for the conversion would basically even out with what it would cost to buy a new scout rifle if I were able to sell the standard M1A that I have now for what I paid for it. I'm thinking that the better quality barrel would get me great accuracy and performance over the standard barrel, plus I would knock almost 4 inches off the length of the rifle. I currently have a Springfield barrel comp installed, but I hear that the Vortex flash hider works just as well and is quite a bit shorter as well. I've even read that with the proper setup, you can get a 18.5" rifle that is only slightly longer than the SOCOM 16 as it comes from the factory. I'd like to go with a shorter barrel to make the rifle a little more handy, but not lose too much performance. I've read that the velocity loss is less than 100fps between the 22" and 18" barrels. It just seems that the 18.5" makes the best compromise between performance and portability. If I could afford a whole new rifle, I'd just buy the SOCOM II listed in the Trading Post at the moment. So what do you folks think?

I don't currently reload for the M1 Garand, but I will as soon as my current supply of surplus ball ammo dwindles (I'm saving up my spent brass for that purpose). At .50 - $1 per round for loaded ammunition, it makes total sense to reload. You can pick up a nice Lee Classic Turret Press kit for a little more than $100 and save that much after a very short time. Lee also has some less expensive single stage presses.

I don't completely disagree with you, especially when it comes to parenting. That said, we are seeing a multi-generation problem of parents who simply don't know how to parent. Efforts to start programs with the goal of addressing this problem are frequently met with criticism from society as "liberal" drivel. I would also challenge your use of "Christianity" as a monolithic category. Christians come in all sorts of flavors and too many of them claim to be the one true application of Jesus' teachings. It's telling that the vast majority of Americans believe in God, but don't affiliate themselves with any particular denomination. I would suggest that it's because mainline denominations failed to effectively apply the scripture to the world we live in. Rather, they preach to people all of the ways they are going to Hell. And I don't see marijuana as the ultimate scourge of society. I was a cop for a decade, started my career as a hard-core drug Prohibitionist and left my career with a very different perspective. More frequently, drug use wasn't the cause of our problems, it was the illegal drug trade, especially related to crack cocaine and methamphetamine. In the cases where drug addiction was a direct problem, our CJ response certainly didn't do anything to help the addict overcome their habit. I also never encountered a single person under the influence of marijuana who was violent, combative, or had killed someone in a DUI crash. I would say that it's not the drug that's the problem, but the social conditions that lead people to abuse intoxicants.

Sure, people are already using the kid's name to make money. If it were my son, I wouldn't want people using my dead son's image or his death to make themselves rich. Once you trademark it, people can't use it without your permission. Now, if she starts using it for her own personal monetary gain, then I will criticize (and I don't mean using the money to put into some sort of legal fund, scholarship, or charity fund in her son's name). This woman is grieving the loss of her son. Even if he wasn't the perfect kid (who among us was?) and even if she wasn't the perfect parent (who among us is?) she is still dealing with the loss of her son. She is surrounded by race hustlers, media reps, lawyers, protesters, and opportunists who are all using her tragedy for their own benefit. Perhaps she did this in a move to try and exert some measure of control over the use of her dead kid's name and face. What if some wealthy activist was able to invest a bunch of capital into a clothing line that specialized in "Justice for Trayvon" hoodies with his face on them? They make a bunch of money on this woman's loss and she is not entitled to a penny of it. Is that fair? I think people need to take a step back from this and remember that the family of this kid is grieving. I also think that white folks need to take the race-based rhetoric out of this. By engaging in this sort of talk, we are no better than Sharpton or Jackson. In fact, to return to the topic of white privilege, this response by whites in society is exactly the sort of thing that the concept speaks to. Are we talking about Zimmerman's shady past that includes a criminal record? Are we ranting about how Zimmerman appears to have been a wanna-be cop and followed a kid around just because he didn't like the looks of him? Are we discussing why Zimmerman felt it was acceptable to use deadly force when being confronted with what seems to be non-deadly force? No. Instead, we are digging up as much dirt as possible on the dead kid trying desperately to determine if he was actually a gang member or street thug. Why? Some would argue it's partially done to relieve some of the guilt we have as a society that a young black kid was unjustly killed because he happened to be hanging around in a place where someone didn't like seeing him. The kid was wearing a hoodie, which is the style for young people, plus it was raining that night. Just because we are predominately conservative gun owners in Tennessee, and many of us prefer to wear t shirts and ball-caps, that doesn't make those who dress differently or act differently bad people. There is a book called "Code of the Street" that talks about how "decent" law-abiding families who are stuck in the ghetto struggle with raising their kids in an environment where "street" culture is prevalent. The author, Elijah Anderson, talks about how these kids have to "code switch" between dominant pro-social behavior and "street" behavior to survive their environment. Consider a kid who is being raised by decent parents, but has to go out into the real world where gangs and criminal activity thrive. To make the walk from home to school, this kid has to figure out how to act just thuggish enough to keep from being targeted as an easy target in the neighborhood to victimize without being labeled as a delinquent and lose the opportunities that the rest of society demands. Perhaps Trayvon was one of those kids, especially since he had no official criminal record that we know of (juvenile records are generally unsealed upon death). I don't know if he was or not, and neither do any of us. This incident was the result of a variety of factors that involved both Zimmerman and Martin. Both were partly to blame, but there seems to be a push out there to lay this all in the lap of Martin and now his family. For those interested, here is a link to an excerpt of the book I just talked about: http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/a/anderson-code.html There is another book by Geoffrey Canada called "Fist, Stick, Knife, Gun" that talks about this in a more condensed and less academic way. If any of you choose to read it, be prepared that he calls for gun control policies to curb youth gang violence. I don't agree with that aspect of his book, but the rest is great to read. It also does give some background to the argument that many gun-control supporters use, which I find helpful in constructing a legitimate response in support of gun rights.

It does make one wonder if this is another part of Obama's "under the radar" effort to undermine Second Amendment rights. It really looks to me like they are doing everything they can to construct a crisis situation to use for the purpose of pushing gun-control legislation (and I am not one to make such a broad claim lightly). Fortunately, so far all of them have backfired. We live in a period where special interests control politics, and politicians, both left and right, cater to these interests instead of honoring their oath to uphold the Constitution.

Or perhaps she is trying to prevent other people from profiting off of her dead son. Considering people are already making shirts, I think it makes sense.

Sharpton and Jackson are a part of the problem in the black community, but from my own personal experience their influence is waning.

The content of the original post is correct. The SYG law only removes the duty to retreat in the face of a threat. The Florida statute is 776.013 and subsection 3 is the pertinent provision of the statute for this case: The entire statute can be seen here: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Actually, there are several black students in the class (it counts as an elective in the Africana Studies program) and even a few of them said the same thing. This does make some sense because young black men do commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime. Roughly half of murders in the US are committed by black males from the ages of 16 - 24 (or something close to that). One said that they expected it to be young black males because they felt that is the only type of crime the media covers on a regular basis.

Or underlying racial/ethnic/gender/class bias. Here is an example I used in my classes this semester. I read a story about a middle class white male who was murdered by three men who were identified as either Hispanic or Middle Eastern. When I read the story, I left out all references to race, social class, gender, or ethnicity. Before I read it, I told my students to try and visualize the crime in their minds. When it was over, I asked them to describe the crime and discuss what factors contributed to it. Then I asked them to describe the victim. Virtually everyone described the victim as a young middle class white male. I then asked them to describe the suspects. Virtually everyone described them as teenage poor black males and suggested it was gang related. When I revealed the full story, asked why so many people described the suspects like they did. They didn't really have an answer, but one said that he "wasn't trying to be biased" in his mind. I told him that was exactly the point and tossed out an open question wondering how many police officers went onto that scene with their own unintentional biases. How many jurors have these same unintentional biases? How many employers have these same unintentional biases? It's easy to assume that everyone in our society has exactly the same opportunities and/or the skills and knowledge to take advantage of these opportunities. When most social scientists talk about the topic of white privilege, it's simply an acknowledgement that our society was shaped by wealthy white males using the culture and traditions of western European society. To be successful in our society, we must be able to successfully negotiate the institutions of our society, so those who come from that white middle/upper class background are going to find it much easier to identify and take advantage of opportunity. Knowing how to dress, how to talk, how to fill out a job application or resume, how to use a computer, or how to perform well on standardized tests are the types of skills (what social scientists call social capital) that are essential to being successful. Where does this sort of social capital come from? Much of it comes from your family and intimate social interactions. When your background doesn't teach this, as is the case in many segments of the black community, you are at a disadvantage. There is a reason why many colleges teach classes on etiquette, interviewing skills, and interpersonal communication. Really, this issue speaks to issues of social class more than race, but when you consider that blacks are twice as likely to be in poverty than whites, it's more visible in the black community. When you look at the history of race-based policy in the United States, it becomes pretty clear why the black community lags behind economically. Polices such as segregation and discriminatory lending/redlining have only been gone for 2 generations. When you look at police patrol practices, they are more concentrated in poor black neighborhoods. Does this mean that wealthier people don't commit crime? Not at all, but the types of crime that are committed in poor black neighborhoods are the types of crime that street cops have the ability to detect and investigate. Innovations in policing, especially "broken windows" policing, zero-tolerance policing, and "place-based policing," put people in the low-income neighborhoods at a greater risk of being brought to the attention of law enforcement. Studies have shown that middle class youth involved in criminal activity are more likely to be dealt with informally while poor kids are formally charged. Data shows that whites use illegal drugs at roughly the same rates as blacks, but blacks are twice as likely to be arrested and incarcerated than whites. When you read and hear the words of the original LA gang members who started the Crips and the Bloods, they speak directly about being denied access to employment and opportunity during the 1950s and 60s on the heels of segregation and discriminatory policies. Generally, the discussion of white privilege is not one of white folks being blatantly racist, but one of white folks being unintentionally ignorant of the challenges faced by many blacks in society due to the continuing residual effects of over 2 centuries of blatantly racist policy in the United States. Are things improving? Certainly, but it takes time. Just because Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation didn't make all of the inequality in Southern society disappear or change the minds of people who had been socialized into the belief that slavery was a religiously justified and essential social institution. Would most whites in society give a black person the same opportunities as anyone else? I believe so. The problem is that it's far too easy to assume that the only reason that someone doesn't do all the things to be successful is because they are lazy or don't care. Do people take full advantage of this social problem and manipulate it for political and financial gain? Absolutely, and therein lies the part of the problem. Instead of educating society about the issue, they play games and help perpetuate a victim mentality in the black community. And with that, I have to put together a lecture on genocide that I am giving in the AM.

I would opt for a rifle in .223/5.56, a handgun in 9mm, and a 12 gauge shotgun. The 5.56mm and 9mm are extremely common in the US and are standard issue for our armed forces. Ammo like 7.62x39 or 7.62x54R are primarily imported. If we see TEOTWAWKI, those imports are going to dry up in a hurry. No matter what, those two calibers are going to be much easier to get a hold of. For something in .223, you could look at one of the Kel Tec SU-16 rifles. They are around $500, use AR mags, and some variants fold up. I would go for a basic AR rifle due to the easy availability of parts, but at least the mags are interchangeable. For a handgun, I would go for a Glock 17. Parts and mags are easy to get, they are reasonably priced, they are simple to work on, and they are reliable (this coming from a guy who normally carries and shoots a Sig P226). For a shotgun, I would opt for the Remington 870. They are reasonably priced, parts are plentiful since they are one of the most commonly owned and issued by police agencies, and they are durable. If you did some shopping around, I think you could get all three within your budget. Then start collecting some ammo.

All I will say is this. I am in academia and I teach a class on race & crime. I talk about the issue of white privilege frequently. I was a street cop and someone who thought the idea of white privilege was idiotic. The more I read, studied, and pondered things, the more I realized that it wasn't as idiotic as I once thought. There is plenty of data to show that institutionalized bias exists. The issue of privilege and bias goes to the deeper questions of why either of these individuals were involved in this incident, the motives for their behavior, and the public reaction to it. People see the world from their own worldview. We see it differently than people who have a very different set of life experiences. Some of the complaints made by various minority groups are legitimate. Some are not, but are based on flawed logic that is reproduced within their social circles. When I tried to look at the link, it wouldn't work for me so I can't speak to the content of that particular source. DaveTN made a very valid point. Our legal system doesn't account for bias. It's only interested in the basic facts. The basic facts of this case are important and hopefully will come out, but I would say that we should think about these incidents and our reaction to them more deeply. It's too easy to just write these things off as bad decisions and lay blame without thinking about the more subtle issues that contribute to these events.

In the Knoxville area, I like Nama on Kingston Pike or Sushi Spot on E Emory in Powell.

If the evidence shows that Zimmerman was indeed walking back to his vehicle and was attacked from behind, obviously that changes the scenario drastically. The law is clear in Florida that even if he had originally been an instigator, once he disengaged, the other party has no lawful justification to become an aggressor. That said, Zimmerman may still have a problem on his hands because it's going to take some pretty compelling evidence to use deadly force against an unarmed aggressor. Deadly force can only be used to meet deadly force and there are very few circumstances where someone using their fists would qualify as a threat of deadly force. As far as the "stand your ground" law, all it does is remove the duty to retreat in the face of a threat, it doesn't change the rules for self-defense as it relates to appropriate levels of force. As a side note, I guess this incident is further proof of the lethality of the 9mm round and the reliability of Kel Tec firearms.

http://www.southpark...3e12-the-f-word Priceless quote by Cartman: "Everyone realizes that people who are so needy for attention that they need to dress up and be as loud as possible are you guys and 16 year old girls."

Speaking of motorcycles, there's a cop who lives down the street from me who is a butt hair's width away from me taking some video and sending it to his police department with a request to have a little chat with him about the applicability of speeding and reckless driving charges to off-duty police officers. He LOVES to sit in his driveway and rev his engine with very loud pipes. Then he cranks the radio wide open on it (I suppose so he can hear it over the engine) and hauls the mail up our residential street. I know when he is coming home because I can hear him before I can see him and he's flying low back through the residential neighborhood. He reminds me of a cop I worked with in Florida who thought it would be amusing to do burnouts on a main drag in our city. I guess he didn't expect the Chief of Police to be on a late evening drive. After he took an unpaid vacation and almost lost his job, he mellowed out a bit.

I guess the same reason they speed, split lanes, weave in and out of traffic, go on the wrong side of the road on curvy roads, and put loud pipes on them. EDIT>>> BigK posted his while I was typing mine. I have a motorcycle license and used to ride some, but the irresponsible and annoying behavior of so many riders turned me off from ever dropping the cash on a bike.

That sucks, but why is this posted in the classified section?

Yes, the Feds are investigating to see if this qualifies as a hate crime and it seems as if I heard they are looking at the police department related to information that at least one officer has been involved in unethical or illegal conduct during the investigation.

Here is a decent article on the incident. Assuming these details are accurate, I wouldn't be surprised to see a manslaughter charge in someone's future. There will very likely be a through investigation and a grand jury hearing before any formal charges come out. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/294006/standing-your-ground-and-vigilantism-robert-verbruggen

For those saying "re-stamp it" that's not exactly the easy answer. If that is the number associated with the BATF paperwork, "losing" the serial number during refinishing is a major issue (for the BATF anyways). A few years ago, a buddy of mine who worked as a corrections officer laid his motorcycle down and his Springfield 1911 came out of his holster and got a nice bit of road rash that disfigured part of the serial number. In order to have the serial number re-stamped on the firearm, he had to go through a pretty lengthy paperwork process through the BATF that included submitting official police reports and a sworn affidavit from him about what happened. My friend couldn't simply re-stamp the number, but it had to be done by an FFL holder/gunsmith, and I want to say that an agent from the BATF actually had to be present to witness the process to make sure the correct number was stamped back into the firearm. Perhaps things have changed since this happened in the early 2000s, but anytime one mechanically alters or obscures a serial number, it's a big deal, and potentially a felony. Perhaps there is some sort of exception in place for damage to a stamped serial number during legitimate maintenance, but my strong suspicion is that it would only apply to one who is an FFL license holder that is doing the work. My point here is that I would be extremely hesitant to just re-stamp a serial number on a firearm without making sure that it is that easy, which I am pretty certain it's not. I'd hate for you to take your rifle to a gun shop or have it examined by someone with authority and have them notice something is amiss with the serial number. I am afraid your explanation, as innocent as it may be, would not hold up to legal scrutiny. Obviously, if someone more knowledgeable than I am on this subject I welcome them to provide more insight or clarification. EDIT/UPDATE: Here is a link from the CMP forums that discusses this issue and provides an BATF letter that says obliterating the serial number is illegal, possession of a firearm where the serial number has been removed is illegal, and gives an overview of the process that must be followed to have it replaced: http://s940.photobucket.com/albums/ad247/Gunny_2009_album/BATFE_rules/

I need to take my M1A out again. I have a bunch of 7.62 ammo in my gun safe waiting for me. I also ordered some CMI 20 round mags so as soon as they arrive, I'll be ready to go.