monkeylizard

****SPOILER ALERT FOR PEOPLE NOT CURRENT ON THE SHOW***** I was wondering about their direct body count, and this is what I came up with. So far, Walt has killed Emilio, Krazy-8, Gus, Hector Salamanca, a pair of Gus' henchmen, and then last night's victim. You could argue that Walt also killed Jane, since he moved her onto her back and then didn't help when she started choking on her own vomit. It's getting easier and easier for Walt. He means to have his empire, no matter what. Jesse killed Gale. Indirect body count is in the hundreds once you add up Tuco and friends, DEA, the cousins, motorcycle kid, and the airplanes.

Yes. The top of page 4 (the instructions) of the application states: The fee for this license is $30 for three years. You can pay by credit/debit card (if you chose this option, complete item #8), or check or money order made payable to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

For me, that's just Jesse. The rest of them can go. I like Jr. too, but he's such a minor character this season, that even he could get whacked and I wouldn't be surprised. Perhaps that will be what drives Walt to his M-60 Scarface moment.

Tonight was inevitable. Unfortunate, but inevitable.

Great choice. I love my PM9. Most days I forget it's there. I use a Remora holster and am very happy with it..

Thanks. I think I may have phrased my point improperly. I agree with you. I have no problem with active duty/reservists being armed at 18. That wasn't meant as a sarcastic comment. We trust them with a tank, but not a .38. That doesn't make sense to me either. 18 and active duty will have far more firearms training than the average HCPer of any age. Besides that, it never made sense to me that you have to be 21 to buy handgun ammo, but can buy rifle/shotgun when younger. To be clear, I'm all for setting an age at which one is considered a legal adult. At that point, they obtain all rights, privileges, responsibilities, and repercussions of any other adult. If that's 18, let it be 18. If it's 21, let it be 21. That includes a driver's license too, IMO. Since Uncle Sam isn't about to let go of his steady supply of high school graduates in exchange for 21 year olds who may have found steady jobs, started families, etc. and then may not choose a path of military service that they may have chosen when finishing high school, that leaves lowering the things restricted to 21 down to 18. Just my opinion. It's worth what you paid for it. Maybe less.

So. This thread does that from the start. why stop now? Military age is federal. Drinking age is state (though more or less forced by federal).

If we're going to drop the alcohol age to 18 to line up with the other adult activities (military service, voting, contracts, marriage, etc.) I guess we have to drop the handgun purchase age and HCP age to 18. On base, I'd make it good-to-go for anyone with an active duty/reserve ID. Anyone else would go by the laws of the state in which the base/bar is located.

That's correct. Actually, I think that by the letter of the law, we could be charged, but those charges would be dismissed by a judge because the HCP is our defense against the charge. No cop/prosecutor is going to waste their time doing that, but I think that techincally, it could happen.

Right or not, it's the way the law works. The officer has reasonable suspicion that the MP5 clone (or an AR pistol in your example) could be an automatic weapon. If so, he/she can require the carrier to present ID and the ATF stamp. It wouldn't be reasonable to suspect the same of a Ruger Vaquero. In TN, an officer doesn't need reasonable suspicion of it being automatic, just reasonable suspicion that a person is armed. It's against TN law to carry. The HCP is just a defense to that law.

+1 on the CMMG stainless .22 kit. I have one for my M&P AR and love it. CDNN tends to have one of the lowest prices on it.

No need to go grave robbing. There's a fresh one going right now. http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/51364-chic-fil-a-at-turkey-creek-knoxville/

nevermind

Wow, I can't believe that I didn't put those 2 things together. That's awesome. Finally, something to like Skyler for. It looks like I was wrong about them not bringing in another drug kingpin for Walt to need the M60 for. Walt means to defend his own turf, and now he'll be wanting theirs over in Phoenix too.

No, I don't think you do.

TCA 39-17-1359 says that the posting has to be at the entrance to the property or area of the property that is being marked as off-limits. In theory, a big gun buster up behind the bar would not be legally binding since you don't have to walk past the back wall to sit at the bar. Picture the typical O'Charley's or Outback restaurant. To properly post just the bar area, they would have to have a gunbuster or properly worded sign at each of the walkways that allow access to the bar. They could also stick a gunbuster on the bathroom doors and then the bathrooms are off limits. It's not a "bar" or "not bar" so much as it's a section of the building vs another section of the building. That's my interpretation of the letter of the law. Your DA may disagree.

Comcast has DVR options now. I have TiVos and love them. It'd be hard to justify their cost now that Comcast has their own DVRs, but the interface of a TiVo is the best. The downside is that you lose the OnDemand option.

The old signs will reference TCA 39-17-1305. That portion of the law has been repealed. Someone else on here (Fallguy or Dolomite perhaps?) mentioned some time ago that they thought some alcohol boards still required the old signs to be up even though 39-17-1305 had been repealed. It was just a matter of a department's policies not changing quickly enough to reflect the then rapidly changing gun laws. In those cases, you can't really hold the restaurant responsible for that. nysos makes a good comparison to the state parks signs. No longer legally binding, but not required to be taken down, either.

Robert's right, if the bar area is posted. It can be posted while the rewst of the restauarnt is good to go. If you're referring to the old signs that said something like "It is an offence to carry a firearm where alcohol is served" and cites some part of the TCA, those are old, and would not contain the language needed in the current posting law found in TCA 39-17-1359 to make the bar off limits. That seems to be the general consenus around here. since there's no test case on 39-17-1359 yet, nobody's exactly sure how those old signs might try to be enforced if someone wanted to really push the issue.

That sign is out of date and no longer applies. You're good to go unless it's posted property. You can't drink when carrying, posting or not.

I don't always hunt deer, but when I do, I prefer piano wire.

Fixed it for ya

Maybe not, but equipment is. My cheap Dell mouse at work nets me around 228. My much better mouse at home puts me around 190.

It looks like TGO David may be using Siri's body hiding services...... Is this going to be the new TGO trend? PIcs of guns and phones instead of guns and steaks?

Weatherbug