monkeylizard

^^^^ This   I carry my Kahr PM9 (and once I find the right holster, the G43) IWB. I often forget it's there. I can carry the G26 that way, but I know it's there. I always know it's there.

Wow, that horse must be huge to make Spots look like a little kid.  :D

Yep. It's like polishing a turd. I have 3 of them, but I didn't buy them for looks.   That said, while I'm not a fan of the gray, it's nice to see something besides black, FDE, and clown colors on a polymer framed handgun.

  FIFY!  :)

  Ah, I was assuming the OP has a permit for 1. When did 2 happen? I knew that the employers got the limited liability a year or three ago if something happened, but I either didn't know or have forgotten about the prohibition.     ETA: Now that you mention it, I do recall it and I remember posting on the thread at the time that you'd have to have a stupid employer for saying that was the reason. Even if it was, it might be hard to prove it. Doh!

  That's not correct. While it's no longer a violation of the law in normal lots, it can still be prohibited by an employer. Think about it this way: It's not illegal to get caught calling the boss a slimy piece of worm ridden filth, but it's a good way to get fired. Gun in the car if the employer prohibits it is the same way. Not illegal, but still grounds for termination if caught.   Sounds like you may be at a federal facility, in which case it's both terminable AND illegal if posted.

  Mac's math shows that we only issues 31.48 visas per mile that would need to be walled. Think about how much the fee increase would have to be on each visa to cover that cost entirely from increased fees. Mac's right. The math just doesn't work to make this wall and pay for it with visa fees.

The premier of The Walking Dead: Season 6?  

Any island nation that's not near a major land mass would work. Something out in the Pacific like Fiji or Tonga. With the long range aircraft of today, they have little strategic value so nobody really cares what happens out there. I suspect that the major powers could nuke each other into oblivion, and other than a possible nuclear winter, the islanders there would just go on about their business as usual, other than going back to sails and oars instead of Evinrudes.

Everything OS said.   Anyone not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm may have one loaded in any vehicle in which they are a lawful occupant if the owner of the vehicle doesn't prohibit it.

And be sent to a reeducation camp sensitivity training.

From the article:   Doh!

I need to get one of those crates. I'm going to need a place to sleep when my wife kicks me out.  :(

I know.   :stir:

Dang it! I just got separated from more of my money. Why did I have to watch that video?   I think I need to find a meeting to go to.....     "Hello. My name is monkeylizard and I'm a gunaholic. It has been 3 hours since my last purchase..."

Yeah, it's a misapplication of the term by the journalist or the DA whom the journalist is interviewing. Castle doctrine just means that you're presumed to be in fear of your life during an invasion of your own home (maybe business too?). The evidence can show otherwise, but it's the default starting position. It basically means that instead of the invasion/robbery victim having to prove the shooting was justified, the prosecution has to prove it was not. Even if PA has a Castle Doctrine, I don't see how that could apply to this case since it happened on the sidewalk in public. Protection from civil suits in a justified SD shooting is something else, but doesn't have a catchy name like "Castle Doctrine".

I'm using a Glock.

  You didn't miss that!

I'm still unclear on Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. Are they or are they not exempt? TCA says nothing about it, but TDOS has it on their site. Not that it matters to me or the OP, I just want to know.

Holy cow, that's tempting, even at those current market prices. Shipped directly to my door? Yes, please.

That may be true, but it's the way the law works.

  We can argue "reasonableness" until the cows come home, but that's something that is and will continue to be defined by a judge or jury. What you don't seem to be understanding is that no jury in this state is going to disagree with ANY officer who chooses to disarm an HCP holder for the duration of a stop regardless of any other factors, including a complete lack of any aggression on the part of the stopee. In a police officer's line of work, it is reasonable to think that any encounter can go south quickly and therefore removing a firearm is always going to be considered a reasonable action by a LEO. You may not agree with that scope of "reasonable" but it doesn't matter what you think. Or what I think. Or what any of us think unless we are on a jury determining reasonableness. Good luck convincing 11 other people who have never so much as touched a gun that the officer wasn't reasonable.

Cross-edit.   Oh Shoot, I see that TCA 39-17-1359 makes no provision for other states skipping the class, but the TDOS site still shows New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas as exempt. Do you know if those 3 are still exempt or not?   https://www.tn.gov/safety/article/hgqualifications The 3 states are listed in the paragraph with the For Persons Holding a Handgun Carry Permit from Other States and Applying for a Tennessee Handgun Carry Permit

Only people with permits from New Mexico, Oklahoma or Texas are waived from taking the safety course. All others must take the class or meet one of the following criteria.     FYI, you have 6 months from the time you move to get your TN HCP. Until then, your MA permit will be honored.

To be comlpetely fair, many of those recovered jobs were offshore. Fiorina has always said that the jobs will go to whoever competes for them, and California didn't compete for them. Some went to other states, but primarily Asia. She's a staunch anti-protectionist. You can agree or disagree with her on that, but she has been consistent across the years and what she says lines up with what she does.