East_TN_Patriot

Well, actually this is true. When you shoot hollowpoint ammo through wood, drywall, and some clothing, it fills the hollow in the bullet and reduces or prevents the bullet from expanding, basically turning it into a FMJ round for all practical purposes. It's not that the clothing slows the bullet down, but that it retards the expansion and hence the benefits of hollowpoint ammo. Different rounds perform better and worse when being fired through different mediums. The police department I used to work for did tests by firing through different fabrics and materials before picking Speer Gold Dot as our duty round. It was least influenced by the majority of materials, although wood and drywall generally clog up all hollowpoint bullets. One of the big turning-points in the transition to larger calibers in law enforcement was the Hollywood bank robbery and shootout when the LAPD encountered those two crims wearing full body armor. After the incident, many officers blamed their inability to take down the bad guys was the small 9mm bullet. Does the 40SW hit harder? Sure, but it still won't penetrate body armor. The fact of the matter is that the LAPD didn't train their officers to shoot anywhere but center mass and they sat there shooting into the BG's body armor wondering why they weren't going down. Simple fact of the matter is that every study I am aware of clearly shows that shot placement trumps caliber every time. If you don't believe that, Google Trooper Mark Coates and you will see a gun battle between a cop with a .357 mag and a bad guy with a NAA .22LR pocket pistol. The cop lost and died there on the side of the road with a single gunshot wound while the bad guy lived after being hit 5 times including one shot that shattered his right arm, which was his dominant shooting hand (he fired the fatal shot with his left hand). As a former police firearms instructor, I am comfortable carrying a .32ACP, a .380ACP, or a .38 revolver because I know that they will do the job in a close face-to-face encounter.

As a fellow who is almost done with his PhD in one of the social sciences, I can speak first-hand at how neo-Marxist ideas permeate politics, economics, and education in the US. It has been a very slow progression since the early 1900s when 'progressive' politics was imported from Europe and it accelerated after WWII. It has been such a subtle and gradual process that the majority of Americans have no idea it has happened and they naturally assume it is just part of the way of the world. It exists through the labor unions - all of them, yes, all of them since they all have their origins in the Marxist ideology in some way. It exists through ideas such as 'social justice' and 'progressive' politics. The minimum wage, public schools, estate and inheritance tax, and the progressive income tax that we have in the US are straight from the Communist Manifesto and related ideology. If you have not actually read that document, you need to. It's as essential as the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence because it serves as the most concise statement of how the socialist movement intends to destroy the democratic republic we have in the US. From the Manifesto: We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible. Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production. These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable. 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. 4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. 10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c. Here is an excerpt of a document titled "A Communist Confession of Faith" published in 1847: Question 15: Do you intend to replace the existing social order by community of Property at one stroke? Answer: We have no such intention. The development of the masses cannot he ordered by decree. It is determined by the development of the conditions in which these masses live, and therefore proceeds gradually. Question 16: How do you think the transition from the present situation to community of Property is to be effected? Answer: The first, fundamental condition for the introduction of community of property is the political liberation of the proletariat through a democratic constitution. Question 17: What will be your first measure once you have established democracy? Answer: Guaranteeing the subsistence of the proletariat. Question 18: How will you do this? Answer. I. By limiting private property in such a way that it gradually prepares the way for its transformation into social property, e. g., by progressive taxation, limitation of the right of inheritance in favour of the state, etc., etc. II. By employing workers in national workshops and factories and on national estates. III. By educating all children at the expense of the state. Question 19: How will you arrange this kind of education during the period of transition? Answer: All children will be educated in state establishments from the time when they can do without the first maternal care. Take this info for what it is and interpret as you wish. The link to these documents in full is here: Manifesto of the Communist Party

OK, sorry I misunderstood you there.

You, sir, need to rethink your position a little bit. In case you never actually bothered to look at a history book, when the US was founded everyone was an "east-coast liberal elite" since the entire nation was concentrated west of the Appalachian Mountains primarily along the coastline and in the northeast. Also, the concept of "liberal" government in 1776 is far different than the "progressive" brand of liberal politics now. Lincoln was far from a God-send for this nation; many historians are now starting to recognize how flawed his ideology and policies were. For starters, he was a racist and an elitist. Far from the ideological inspiration we are taught in school. Andrew Johnson was always a southern sympathizer, which is why he got elected VP in the first place. He was chosen as the VP candidate because he was from Tennessee and they thought he would balance out the ticket and attract southern votes. He too was a racist - as were most whites in America at that time. So let's not pretend that these two held some moral high-ground here. Frankly, sir, although I do agree with some of your points about the tone of political rhetoric today, your decision to refer to differing opinions and their speaker as "BS," "kooks," "idiots," and "fools" shows me that you are the typical left-wing thinker who resorts to insults and name-calling when faced with an opinion you don't agree with. It's interesting that you choose to engage in the exact behavior that you say is the problem in America. The simple fact of the matter is that we clearly disagree on what is in our "own economic interests" and I tend to believe that democratic-socialism is not in our nation's economic interest. If you think that makes me a "kook," "fool," or "idiot" then you need to rethink your strategy because I assure you that I am none of these and have the resume to illustrate that fact. Rather, sir, you are the type of person who proves the very flawed logic of the political left that exists in a self-righteous haze and believes they have the answers to all of society's woes. Just take a look at the very left-wing "progressive" havens you appear to support and show me one that has even a shred of economic or social prosperity. When you can do that, come talk to me. Otherwise, take your insults, baseless criticisms, and hypocritical rhetoric and cram it.

As if the political left hasn't been conditioned as well? Really? You seem to be ignoring much of your own arguments here.

From what I saw, the official part of the event was pretty calm, logical, and they actually made some good points. Many of the attendees took the opportunity to make political statements that were exactly what the organizers were talking about (and undoubtedly those particular attendees were too stupid to realize it). I'm definitely not a fan of Colbert or Stewart, but they have the right to say what they want and just because I don't like their politics doesn't mean they don't have anything legitimate to add to the debate. I'm glad to see folks on the left who are actually willing to debate the issues openly instead of just throwing insults. And let's be clear on crowd counts: There is no 'official' crowd count. If you really care about the 'truth' of these counts, just Google any particular event and you will find that event supporters always inflate the numbers while event detractors low-ball the numbers. Case in point is the Beck rally. Supporters (such as Beck and FoxNews) claim 300,000 to 1 million. Detractors (such as CBS and Huffington Post) say 80,000 or less. The One Nation rally shows almost identically opposite results. Left-wing sources gave really high estimates of 200,000 plus while right-wing sources go far less. The Colbert/Stewart rally will be the same. From the pics I saw, there were obviously more there than I expected would actually show up. I also know that the One Nation and this rally were attended by people bussed in by left-wing groups like SEIU. It is entirely possible that the same sort of 'astroturfing' took place at the Beck rally, but I don't know for sure. Just looking at the pics myself using my unscientific eye, I would suspect the turnout was about the same for each. One problem is that Beck used the Lincoln Memorial for his rally, which stretched the crowd out all the way down the Mall. The other rally was concentrated near the Capitol, which concentrated the crowd there. Crowd counts are far from an exact science and since they are done by people - who are potentially guided by their own biases and political ideologies - I don't put much faith in them. A lot of people showed up for all of them. I do know from my reading of reports that the crowd at the Beck rally was mostly white and the media made claims of racism. The crowds at the other two left-wing rallies were also mostly white, but the media made no such accusations of racism.

Although violent crime overall has been going down for over a decade, it seems that we have been having quite a few home invasions here in the Knoxville area by pill heads looking for cash and prescription meds. We like to spend the cool months with our doors open to let the breeze blow through, but being the first house on our street just off of a larger road, I am a little concerned that someone strung out may take a chance on our place (someone did try to break in right before we bought the place by going through the crawlspace and ripped out the HVAC intake to get into the house, which we found during the home inspection). I keep a pistol close at hand when we have the doors open just to be safe. If some P.O.S. does decide to come in uninvited, they will meet me in the most unpleasant way.

Well, in searching for other Freemasons on TGO, I too opened this, and now I am resurrecting it from the dead for the sake of entertainment.

I did quite a bit of research when I was looking for a pistol caliber carbine and in the end I came up with the following basic info: 1) The Hi Point carbines are surprisingly good for the money, but have the major down side related to the single stack mags. 2) The Kel Tec Sub 2000 carbines are also very good for the money and they make it in different configurations that allow you to use major manufacturer mags (like Glock, Beretta, and Smith & Wesson). The Sub2K also folds in half for easy carry and storage. It also has some neat aftermarket add-ons. It comes in 9mm or .40SW. 3) The general consensus is that the Beretta CX4 Storm carbine is the top of the line in pistol caliber carbines, but one of these will run you 3 times what a Hi Point or a Kel Tec will run you. 4) The old standards such as the Marlin Camp Carbine or the Ruger Carbine are hard to find and come at a premium if you do find them. So in the end, I opted for the Kel Tec Sub 2000 in .40 with the Glock magazines. I love that little rifle and in comparison to the Hi Point, the size is much more what I want in a little pistol caliber carbine.

I agree with that 100%. People can't complain about what they don't know about.

It depends on where the carbon buildup is. If it's inside the cylinder chambers, I use a stainless steel cylinder brush that cuts right through the carbon ring. If it's particularly stubborn, I will soak a patch in Hoppes solvent, push it into each chamber, and let it soak overnight. If it's carbon on the face of the cylinder, I use a stainless brush to scrub it away, but this isn't such a good idea for a blued gun since it will take the finish off.

For pocket carry, I have a Seecamp .32 that I carry in a pocket holster. It's an easily concealable little gun that is very reliable.

I agree with the other posts, however, stainless firearms tend to hold up a little better than those with a blued finish. Stainless steel firearms don't have a finish to wear away like bluing does and it is much more rust resistant than blued steel. Many small revolvers now use a variety of metals including aluminum, which also holds up well. My particular carry revolver is a Smith & Wesson model 642 Airweight that has a stainless barrel and cylinder and aluminum frame, which comes from the factory painted to help match the stainless steel parts. After a while, the paint started to chip and wear off, so I sent the whole thing to be silver hard chromed with a matte finish. It was the best thing I ever did for that little gun. For durability, a quality silver hard chrome is impossible to beat due to its rust protection and hardness that resists wear and scratches (of course, the cheap high-gloss bumper chrome you see on some of the cheap handguns out there doesn't have the same benefits as a professionally done hard chrome finish). Just bank on any firearm you carry on a regular basis to end up with some sort of holster wear and minor blemishes, which are totally unavoidable. Just be sure to check it fairly regularly for rust, dirt, lint, etc. and keep it properly lubricated. Also, it's a really good idea to rotate out your old carry ammo every year (some do it more often). What I usually do is to use the old stuff as practice ammo and then load up the new before I leave the range. It was a habit I got into when I was in law enforcement. I qualified with the stuff I had been carrying every day and got a fresh box to replace it.

Well, it's no secret that the NRA gives Haslam a B- rating. He and I are definitely not on the same page when it comes to gun policy.

Wondering if you ever found out any more info on this?

There is a reason that virtually all law enforcement officers either prefer a firearm without a manual safety of carry it with the manual safety off. It's a carry-over from the days when firearms didn't have all of the passive safety features they do now. The military was especially paranoid - and still is from what I hear since they generally require soldiers to carry their firearms without a chambered round and the manual safety engaged (I would hope this doesn't apply in a combat area). Heck, there are still some folks so paranoid that they still follow the old Colt SAA trick of carrying without a round behind the hammer even if their revolver has the firing pin disconnect/hammer block. If you are using a properly maintained and quality built modern firearm and you use proper gun handling practices, you will have no need to carry with the manual safety engaged unless it just makes you feel better. Most unintentional discharges are the result of people not following the two most basic firearms rules: 1) Always assume the firearm is loaded and check and recheck it before fooling with it; and 2) Keep your finger off of the trigger until actually ready to fire.

I have one of the mil-spec grip-pods with the steel insert in the legs and it's pretty darn sturdy. I have it mounted on my rifle length AR with a heavy barrel and it holds the weight without flexing. I think for my needs it would make more sense to just purchase a folding bipod for my rifle, but for a shorty AR, it's fantastic.

My understanding is that actual military MREs have a MINIMUM shelf life of 3 years, but if stored properly they are good for as much as 10 years or more. Of course, most of the MREs that you get out there are commercially produced aftermarket meals so you probably have to follow their recommendations more closely. If memory serves me, it's actually illegal to sell the actual US Gov't MREs and it is actually marked as such on the packaging, and I read somewhere that the companies who make the meals for the military are restricted from producing civilian versions of the military MREs. It sucks for us, but I guess it makes sense so that Al Qaeda isn't munching away on our high-quality combat rations ordered off of Amazon.

+1 on this. My thought is that instead of cursing Bloomberg, we need to be calling out these folks who are selling guns illegally. If you disagree with gun laws, that's an issue by itself, but as long as the laws are what they are, gun owners/dealers/sellers are obligated to follow them. There are reasons why people are not able to pass a background check. They do try to get their guns from sellers they know are willing to break the law to sell them a gun. We have an obligation to make sure that we don't knowingly violate the law by selling them a gun. Bloomberg called us out and handed our butts to us. He may be a liberal douchebag, but he was right and is going to use that against us. Maybe their efforts are unethical or maybe illegal, but that's the ultimate point. The investigators made it clear that they were trying to buy a gun illegally and sellers were more than happy to oblige.

Just as an added note, transferring in guns purchased online is a pretty lucrative business venture for some stores in my area. I had one transferred into Coal Creek Armory recently and they charge $35 for the service unless it is something they have in stock or can order easily, then they charge $50. I asked the fellow how many of these they do and he said they usually do dozens PER DAY. The thing to realize is that gun stores don't really make their money off of guns, but off of ammo, parts, accessories, repairs, etc (kind of like how theaters make their money off of concessions and not ticket sales). Big online sellers make their money by doing mass volume with small mark-ups over their wholesale price. When local dealers transfer them in, they make money for doing nothing more than some basic paperwork that they would have done anyhow if you bought it from their inventory. The transfer fee is pretty much in line with what their mark-up on guns in their inventory would have been, but they don't have to sit on the cost of inventory or pay any interest on credit used to buy inventory. Then the local shop also gets you in the door and the chance to sell you the ammo and accessories they really get their money on. Online sales will not put local shops out of business, it's just basically a different way for local shops to order their inventory. Besides, that is the nature of business and if a shop is not willing to adapt to the changing market or can't provide services that people want, they will go under. The reality is that online sales is here and the shops that find ways to use it to their benefit will find it to be a source of business while those that don't will likely suffer. It's not right or wrong; it's just business. I think the general consensus here is that people prefer to buy locally if the shop provides the best price or good service that makes the extra money worth it to the buyer. I'm with you on that. However, like I said, some shops in my area simply don't want to provide any extra service and if you ask them to do any searching to find what you want, forget ever hearing back from them. If you are one of those folks who refuse to shop online, fine. It's your money and your choice. I value every dollar I have and when local shops don't offer a good value for my dollar, I will go elsewhere. Finally, any shop that discourages "window shopping" is a gun store that is doomed to fail. Window shopping is part of selling guns. One of the best shops in my area encourages window shopping and gives out free soda and coffee to customers encouraging them to hang out and look around. The key to successful business is getting the customer in the door. Until you have done that, you can't hope to ever sell them anything. The shops that alienate customers who just want to browse, ask questions, and handle the guns are turning away potential future customers. Shops that alienate customers who want to use their services to transfer in a firearm are turning away potential future customers.

So... you are saying that the use of the exclusionary rule to suppress illegally obtained evidence due to a stop not conducted upon probable cause like the Constitution requires is a "miscarriage of justice"??? It seems you don't understand what the purpose of due process is in our legal system. Our due process rights guarantee our freedoms and the ideology of our justice system says that if the government is going to take away your freedom, they must adhere to the requirements set forth in the law. This idea is so important that we are willing to let a guilty man go free in order to preserve our rights and rule of law. I appreciate your passion for fighting crime and enforcing DUI laws, believe me, nobody hates drunk drivers more than I do, but I find what sounds like your blatant disregard for Constitutional rights and due process concerning. Just to be clear, are you suggesting that it is OK for officers to disregard probable cause in the name of making arrests? Incidentally, one of the other big reasons I became disillusioned is due to the tremendous amount of unethical behavior of officers I saw at many levels of law enforcement who would do just that - you know, stuff like saying they saw things they didn't really see (like they actually saw the guy toss the bag of crack that is laying on the ground when they didn't really see it) or "articulating" a report to make their reasonable suspicion or probable cause sound much more solid than it actually was. Yes, I was dressed down by a supervisor once at my department in Kentucky who said I was "too honest."

Your comment suggests that you find it impossible to believe that someone who was a cop actually has the ability to break free from the jaded police subculture and its inherent belief that all people are either dirtbags, wannabes, or *******s. Sorry, but I am an educated cop who now teaches college classes in criminal justice so our society can have law enforcement officers who respect rule of law, the Constitution, and their role as public servants. What left me disillusioned were all of the stupid laws that I saw do nothing except make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding people. Perhaps you should read up on the history of law in western society. There are two categories: 1) mala en se (crimes that are considered wrong in themselves and have nearly universal agreement regardless of place or time) and 2) mala prohibita (crimes that are defined that way by a specific society and do not have universal support). Open-container laws are a form of the latter. I have made hundreds of DUI arrests in my time and virtually all of them involved me making a very detailed investigation that included vehicle observation, roadside sobriety evaluations, and then a breath or blood test if they submitted to it. I never lost a DUI case in court. NONE of these would have turned out any differently because neither of the states I policed in allowed any open containers in the vehicle. I regularly stopped drunk drivers who had open containers with them although it was illegal. With the exception of one particular case when I worked in Florida none tipped a beer back in front of me. In fact, most had the thing tucked down by their leg or tossed it in the floorboard when they saw my patrol car. I guess you won't like my argument that DUI checkpoints are a violation of the 4th Amendment, but I digress. I'm not particularly concerned about my family being the victim of a violent crime, primarily because I know that the crime statistics show violent crime has been on a steady decline since the early 1970s. I'm definitely not concerned about someone riding in the passenger seat of a car drinking a beer because they pose absolutely no risk to me or anyone else. If any officer demands that a violation as senseless as an open container law for passengers be made a crime for the purpose of making it easier for officers to make DUI arrests, I do find that abhorrent. If an officer can't detect a drunk driver without something as obvious as an open container, they really need to hone their skills. Using the standardized DUI detection cues, it is rather easy to detect a DUI. Using your argument, we should outlaw all sorts of behavior on the off-hand chance that it would make it easier for officers to make other criminal charges. That is a very dangerous attitude and one that I will never support. We have rights as citizens of the United States to live our lives free from unreasonable interference from government agents, especially the police. When the police begin to encourage the creation of laws for the express purpose of creating precursory stops, we are heading towards a society where liberty no longer has any meaning and freedoms are regularly taken away "for your own protection" and "for the kids." But kind of like an earlier post said, being a libertarian is not popular and requires folks to exercise their brain and question reality, which most people are unwilling to do.

After reading this I did a quick Google search on how to store food like rice and beans and found this site that has some pretty good ideas. I suspect you may be able to get them cheaper elsewhere if you look around, but this seems to be a good shopping list to work with. Kitchen Packaging Supplies @ FrontierSurvival.net Food Storage mylar bags and more. http://www.squidoo.com/MylarBags http://survivalacres.com/information/shelflife.html

Of course, when you are hungry enough, flavor means nothing. When it's a survival situation, plan for the worst and hope for the best. If you stock up on a bunch of heavy food and water, you are pretty much assuming that whatever emergency has happened will allow you to stay in one place. I have some purification tablets and plan on investing in a good water filter. I also have a metal cup, a good knife, fire starter, a map, compass, and lightweight .22 rifle so I can easily move around, collect and boil water, shoot small game, etc. I am also learning about wild edible plants in the east Tennessee area. I hope I never have to use them, but better to be safe than sorry. If you are only concerned about short term survival in case of a storm or natural disaster, my decade in hurricane country taught me that keeping plenty of dry foods like rice, beans, and powdered potatoes is good. I also kept a couple of cases of MREs on hand. Get some collapsible plastic water jugs for a last-minute supply of water if you have time to do it. You can throw it all in the back of your car or truck and hit the road if you need to evacuate (and keeping a couple of jugs of fuel on hand is a good idea too). When I worked as a cop in Florida, I volunteered to work in the Pensacola area after Hurricane Ivan. There were areas that had been completely devastated and the only things people had left were what they had taken with them. I recall one fellow who was sitting on the slab of what used to be his house with a little camp stove, a lantern, and a tent. He had some food, not a lot, but had packed enough to get him through until help arrived. He was fairly upbeat because he was treating it like a camping trip and had prepared. The guy offered me something to eat and a cup of coffee. I laughed and told him that it was supposed to be me offering food. I gave him a case of MREs and he was good to go for another week.

I don't think this is a mag issue since the problem is reported as a failure to eject/stovepipe. Many times this is caused by a bad extractor or broken ejector. Perhaps since it was happening on the last round is evidence that the rounds in a partially full mag help keep the empty casing from hanging up. Maybe the rim on the cheaper ammo is a little thick and the extractor isn't getting a good grip. Maybe it's got some crud behind it. I also suspect it may be a combination of the cheap ammo and a new gun that needs some more rounds fired through it to get it broken in. My advice is to clean and inspect the extractor/ejector, get a few different types of ammo and shoot them using your mag and see if the problem reproduces itself. Then try with your wife's mag.