monkeylizard

  But who gets to decide what's "anti-American"? Obviously a dude with a bomb-vest yelling "death to America!" is anti-American, but it's rarely that easy to determine.   Example: A person supporting gay marriage says it's equal protection under the law. Standing against it is anti-American. A person against gay marriage says it's immoral and degardes the societal fabric of our nation and goes against the traditional Christian heritage of our nation. To support it is anti-American.*   McCarthy set himself up as the sole decider of what/who is and isn't anti-American and that in and of itself is very un-American. The goal was good, but that much power tends to corrupt and it ended up like LagerHead said. you didn't have to be a communist or a homosexual. all you had to do was disagree with Joe and he'd investigate you for one or the other. Even when the investigation turned up nothing, that stink stays around a long time.       *Just an example....let's not beat that particular horse into glue.

  They said it's OK unless you hold it sideways in your off hand. The manner in which you use it makes the difference.

There are douchenozzles on the Interwebz. News at 11.       Are you saying that censorship is the right way to handle speech with which you disagree?

It also sounds like the OP's contractor got some of his stuff back for $40 and can go about his day. Not right, but probably still more cost effective than taking time away from the job site to file reports and meet with a detective, etc.   Sometimes it doesn't pay to be right.

I've wondered how well a barge train might actually work. It's not something that would last a hundred years, but would it be workable? Could someting like this support enough food/fuel to be self-sustaining for the number of people needed to operate it? Any normal person wouldn't be able to have it prepared ahead of time, but if you survived the initial waves, would it be a viable option?   http://www.thehighdefinite.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/md_board.jpg

Does anyone know why Rutherford and Bedford are special?

The background kid sitting on his desk in the top center of Pic1 looks like Boyd on Tim Allen's "Last Man Standing".

  Tags yes, court proceedings no. 1350 doesn't apply to off-duty LEO attending judicial proceedings.

If it's easily identifiable as his, then I would think he should file a stolen property report against the scrapyard. If the local PD won't get involved, would the TBI or State Police be the next stop?

  Sort of.   1350 says LEO can't carry off-duty in schools during regular school hours unless they immediately notify the principal (or aother admin if principal isn't available). If this bill passes, we'd have to do the same. I suppose after hours parent-teacher meetings would be OK, but that's sort of splitting hairs about "regular school hours".

I'd pay you double that.   :D

I'll take it. PM inbound.           :D   That's gorgeous. What's the story on it?

  In related news, there are crazy people on the Internet.

  The way I read the FAQ, that's correct for the USPS (FAQ#7), but not for carriers like FedEx and UPS. I read it to say that you can legally ship handguns intrastate amongst non-licensees via contract carrier (FAQ#8). However, I believe that it's FedEx or UPS policy not to ship handguns (or maybe any firearms) to non-licensees. Did I misread #7 and #8?

  Nah, just hit it with a garden hose when he goes to town to buy Mt. Dew and ammo.   Or just wait for a few good storms to wash it all out and take care of the problem naturally.

It would be nice if it said:   WHEREAS, this legislative body began allowing guns in state parks and it has not developed into "blood in the streets" regardless of what Nancy Amons and Gail Kerr think.

Since it came up in this thread: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/85570-sb0207-hb0240-no-background-check-for-hcp-holders/   I'll add no BG check for HCP holders to my wish list.

  You know we were all wondering, right?

  Exactly what I was thinking. I see a new city ordinance being fast-tracked soon.

Joey Hensley filed the bill. The full text is not yet available on the GA site. I'd like to see what the actual text will be. I like it so far, though. http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/default.aspx?BillNumber=SB0314&GA=109

  I never said store owners can't request that I not bring a gun into their place of business. Removing posting laws wouldn't prevent shopkeepers from banning guns. It would remove the state-enforced criminal punishment for violating that private policy. It would make a "no guns" policy have the same force of law as a "no unattended children" policy. None at all, but still within the rights of the shopkeeper to have that policy and to enforce it through asking the offending person(s) to leave and filing trespassing charges if they refuse.

TiVo is set.

WHERE ARE THE PICS?!?!?!?

You got beat by a few hours.   http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/85464-2nd-amendment-tax-free-holiday-in-tennessee/

  The difference is that in post #2 you said you want statewide preemption on gun laws. We already have that. Local parks are not posted because the local council passed a law. They're posted because state law says they can and they simply decided to do so. The local park posting is not something in addition to state law, which is what preemption would and does prevent. If the state law were changed to not allow parks to be posted by the local gov't, then the preemption we already have would keep local gov'ts from passing their own laws to ban guns in local parks.   The difference is that we need to get one state law changed, not get a whole new law passed to override lots of little local laws. We already have the later.