Jumping Through Hoops in Tenneessee. This has to change

[strickj]

Sheesh....

 

Wish someone would insult me by saying I've never been poor :lol:

Edited December 14, 2012 by strickj

[Kalel]

     God bless America, land of the fee home of the rave. No body got whooped or shot here, what a concept.

[RobertNashville]

Sheesh....

 

Wish someone would insult me by saying I've never been poor :lol:

 

---

Edited December 14, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Guest 270win]

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/alabama.pdf

 

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/missouri.pdf

 

 

It looks like you can legally carry in schools in Missouri and Alabama.  I know you can also carry in schools in Mississippi with an 'enhanced permit', which is basically the same class we take in Tennessee.  I wish we could get that fixed here for those with permits before we have Constitutional Carry.  Also, in Missouri, Alabama, and Mississippi (enhanced) you can basically carry anywhere you want legally.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Wasn't there some kind of federal law about guns and schools, or am I remembering wrong, or was it repealed?

[strickj]

And the "new handgun" issue is wholly in your imagination; if you think "decent" means the same as "new" then that's your incorrect assumption.

My apologizes for making such a jumping assumption

 

:lol:

Edited December 14, 2012 by strickj

[Oh Shoot]

Wasn't there some kind of federal law about guns and schools, or am I remembering wrong, or was it repealed?

 

Exception is one with gun "licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located".

 

Technically, carrying in a reciprocal state is not covered, so many of us are guilty of breaking that statute frequently.

 

- OS

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I know I'm being a hard ass about it but I still think it is probably how it should be done even if such a policy wound up affecting me directly at some point.  People need to have some real skin in the game if they are going to play.  I suppose the prohibition could be limited to exclude only those on specific forms of welfare (food stamps, etc.) and it would still accomplish pretty much the same thing. :)

 

Yeah it would be nice to devise some bulletproof way to exclude idiots from voting, though one man's idiot is another's genius. 

 

Today accidentally ran across a quote from a 1958 Heinlein novel, "Have Space Suit - Will Travel"-- A mere decade or so before the handheld calculator instantly eclipsed the slide rule-- "Dad says that anyone who can't use a slide rule is a cultural illiterate and should not be allowed to vote."  That sounds rather appealing because it would deliver the fate of the nation into the worthy booger-hooks of a few million elderly geeks such as Mike Gideon and even myself-- The Golden Age of a Techno-fossil-ocracy! :) The Few, the Proud, the Incontinent!

 

Am just examining aspects rather than arguing a position-- Presumably it would be good to prevent welfare recipients from voting on welfare law? Assuming that to be valid, then would it be equally valid to prevent the religious from voting on religious issues (501C3 regulations, freedom of speech limits, etc)? Would it be valid to prevent farmers from voting on farm issues? Restrict military personnel from voting on military matters? Prevent gun owners from voting on gun issues? Prevent business owners from voting on business laws? If the idea would be to prevent people from voting themselves government favors, then wouldn't all those examples be equally fair game?

[RobertNashville]

My apologizes for making such a jumping assumption

 

 

And that's exactly what it was; a jumping assumption likely jumped to because not doing so would not have supported your already formed opinion.

 

Most of the firearms I've purchased in my life have been "used"...there is nothing wrong with a used firearm and I never and have never said otherwise.

Edited December 14, 2012 by RobertNashville

[RobertNashville]

Yeah it would be nice to devise some bulletproof way to exclude idiots from voting, though one man's idiot is another's genius. 

 

Today accidentally ran across a quote from a 1958 Heinlein novel, "Have Space Suit - Will Travel"-- A mere decade or so before the handheld calculator instantly eclipsed the slide rule-- "Dad says that anyone who can't use a slide rule is a cultural illiterate and should not be allowed to vote."  That sounds rather appealing because it would deliver the fate of the nation into the worthy booger-hooks of a few million elderly geeks such as Mike Gideon and even myself-- The Golden Age of a Techno-fossil-ocracy! :) The Few, the Proud, the Incontinent!

 

Am just examining aspects rather than arguing a position-- Presumably it would be good to prevent welfare recipients from voting on welfare law? Assuming that to be valid, then would it be equally valid to prevent the religious from voting on religious issues (501C3 regulations, freedom of speech limits, etc)? Would it be valid to prevent farmers from voting on farm issues? Restrict military personnel from voting on military matters? Prevent gun owners from voting on gun issues? Prevent business owners from voting on business laws? If the idea would be to prevent people from voting themselves government favors, then wouldn't all those examples be equally fair game?

Your dad was a wise man; I could go for that rule.

 

No need to get overly complicated with the idea; it's simply that if you are a taker of other people's taxes more than a contributor you don't get to vote, period. ;)

[Guest sventvkg]

It may be unconstitutional although I'm not entirely convinced that even Madison or Jefferson would say that the states have no say so in carrying arms...and more to the point, the courts are starting to make it clear that while people have a right to bear arms, the states have the right to regulate it.

 

I don't care what the courts say.  I HAVE READ THE WRITINGS OF MANY OF OUR FOUNDERS, the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers and it's CLEAR exactly what the founders meant the 2nd Amendment to mean. NO GOVERNMENT be it state or Federal can infringe on our God Given Right. PERIOD. Go read the founders writings and then then get back to me on it,. The Courts are a fraud and they damn well know it. 

[strickj]

And that's exactly what it was; a jumping assumption likely jumped to because not doing so would not have supported your already formed opinion.

 

Most of the firearms I've purchased in my life have been "used"...there is nothing wrong with a used firearm and I never and have never said otherwise.

 

It really doesn't matter if you said "new" or not.

I will repost my comment here without it since you believe that one little word nips my [point. :)

 

 

A poor man that eats Ramen noodles every night has every bit of the same rights as you. He might be able to scrape up $150.00 for a Highpoint but it might be impossible for him to come up with another $200+ to purchase his right to carry it.

And who says that poor man has to buy a new handgun anyway? Maybe his weapon(s) are hand-me-downs, "loans" or gifts. Does he forfeit his rights because his gun was a free gift and he's poor?

 

It's a sad day when we are willing to put a price on God given rights.

 

You still think rights should be purchased.

You still think the poor can afford unconstitutional taxes if they can afford a weapon.

 

The word "new" does not change anything here.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yeah it would be nice to devise some bulletproof way to exclude idiots from voting, though one man's idiot is another's genius. 

 

Today accidentally ran across a quote from a 1958 Heinlein novel, "Have Space Suit - Will Travel"-- A mere decade or so before the handheld calculator instantly eclipsed the slide rule-- "Dad says that anyone who can't use a slide rule is a cultural illiterate and should not be allowed to vote."  That sounds rather appealing because it would deliver the fate of the nation into the worthy booger-hooks of a few million elderly geeks such as Mike Gideon and even myself-- The Golden Age of a Techno-fossil-ocracy! :) The Few, the Proud, the Incontinent!

 

Am just examining aspects rather than arguing a position-- Presumably it would be good to prevent welfare recipients from voting on welfare law? Assuming that to be valid, then would it be equally valid to prevent the religious from voting on religious issues (501C3 regulations, freedom of speech limits, etc)? Would it be valid to prevent farmers from voting on farm issues? Restrict military personnel from voting on military matters? Prevent gun owners from voting on gun issues? Prevent business owners from voting on business laws? If the idea would be to prevent people from voting themselves government favors, then wouldn't all those examples be equally fair game?

I could live with that. :D

[RobertNashville]

...

 
I don't know why you are so intent on grinding this ax but if you are really that concerned that "the poor" can't afford the HCP process, why don't you move on the suggestion I made earlier in the thread to someone else and put your computer keyboard down for a moment and start a 501c3 foundation to accept donations so that the foundation could then pay for part or all of the process for a poor person to obtain his/her HCP.
 
You can rant all day long on the internet about what is costs in Tennessee and how people are forced to "buy their god given rights" but ranting about won't change jack shit.
 
Let me know when you have it up and running and I'll contribute.

Until then I am done with this thread and with you.

Edited December 15, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Oh Shoot]

Let's see: according to the various "who should vote" threads:

 

 

1. I'll have to own some new property, even though I have in the past.

 

2. Since the economy has tanked on my investments so that I'm getting close to the no income tax line, may have to go back to work to make sure I pay taxes, even though I've paid them most every year since I was 16.

 

3. Will have to find a way to stop social security benefits

 

4. And learn to use a slide rule.

 

It's true, the country has really changed!

 

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Let's see: according to the various "who should vote" threads:

 

 

1. I'll have to own some new property, even though I have in the past.

 

2. Since the economy has tanked on my investments so that I'm getting close to the no income tax line, may have to go back to work to make sure I pay taxes, even though I've paid them most every year since I was 16.

 

3. Will have to find a way to stop social security benefits

 

4. And learn to use a slide rule.

 

It's true, the country has really changed!

 

- OS

Now, Mac. It would take you five minutes to figure out a slide rule. :D

[Oh Shoot]

Now, Mac. It would take you five minutes to figure out a slide rule. :D

 

But will BHO give me one? That matches my phone? ;)

 

- OS

Edited December 15, 2012 by Oh Shoot

[Guest Lester Weevils]

But will BHO give me one? That matches my phone? ;)

 

- OS

 

I will give you one of my own if you promise to vote for Dickie Weed. The proposition as I read it is that you must know how to use a slide rule-- Not that you know how to use it well or know how to properly set up the problems it might get most appropriately used on. If not, I'd probably be out in the cold as well.

 

However, even with such loose restrictions it could slash millions of liberal arts graduates from the voter rolls. Sometimes I suspect that more than half the owners of scientific calculators barely know how to find the ON button, and I'm not much advanced above that level myself, so its a sure thang that those folks would never puzzle out a slide rule. :)

 

I have a small collection of antique slide rules and keep planning to one day put them in a glass wall case with a little hammer on a chain and a sign, "In case of power failure, break glass." The very scarcity of the ancient instruments would initially suppress voter turnout and vastly raise the price of antique slide rules on Ebay. But the chinese can make cheap slide rules as easily as cheap calipers. Similar mechanical technology, so the supply would meet demand soon enough.

 

In all fairness, abacuses should also be accepted. The slide rule was an early analog computer and the abacus was an early digital computer. But I have an abacus too so its all good.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[RobertNashville]

I don't care what the courts say.  I HAVE READ THE WRITINGS OF MANY OF OUR FOUNDERS, the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers and it's CLEAR exactly what the founders meant the 2nd Amendment to mean. NO GOVERNMENT be it state or Federal can infringe on our God Given Right. PERIOD. Go read the founders writings and then then get back to me on it,. The Courts are a fraud and they damn well know it. 

While I intended to be done with this thread since you responded to me I'll reciprocate.

 

I have a pretty good library of the founder's writings and historical reference works and I've read them; I simply disagree with your interpretation. However, even if I agreed it wouldn't matter because whether you care what the courts say or not, the reality is that States have the power to regulate...that's the reality supported by the courts...you can ignore that reality if you chose but as has been said; you can avoid reality but you can't evade the consequences of reality.

 

You started this thread complaining about the steps necessary to get a carry permit in Tennessee and espousing the need for a "real political action movement" and in the same sentence, disparage the most effective firearms advocacy group on the planet.

 

Well, if you want a real political action movement start one.

 

Whether you like or hate the NRA, join it and contribute extra to their PAC then join the TFA, USCCA, GOA and every other pro-firearms group out there.

 

Spend some money...spend some time and get some other people to do the same; that's how you effect change.

 

The TFA in Middle Tennessee meets the third Tuesday of each month in Hermitage...the next meeting will be in January. Their website is easy to find as is their Facebook page.

Edited December 15, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Wheelgunner]

I absolutely and wholeheartedly agree. Which begs the question of what are YOU doing to get things changed?

 

"Not enough" is the answer.  You make a good point.  It's time to put some thought into new ways to make an impact, cause this ain't cuttin' it.  Thanks for the push in the right direction.  

[strickj]

To no one in particular:

 

It isn't about the cash strapped not being able to afford to purchase a right.

It is about the state putting restrictions and a tax on rights for the sole purpose of creating additional revenue and profit.

It's not that complicated. Taxing rights is wrong.

 

 

The above post is not directed to the guy that is ignoring me.

Edited December 15, 2012 by strickj

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I see you two are still at it while not being at it. :D

[Guest 6.8 AR]

But will BHO give me one? That matches my phone? ;)

 

- OS

We need to get a petition going for "Slide rules for Everyone" so everyone will be still able to vote. Betcha he has

one with your color. :D

[Guest sventvkg]

While I intended to be done with this thread since you responded to me I'll reciprocate.

 

I have a pretty good library of the founder's writings and historical reference works and I've read them; I simply disagree with your interpretation. However, even if I agreed it wouldn't matter because whether you care what the courts say or not, the reality is that States have the power to regulate...that's the reality supported by the courts...you can ignore that reality if you chose but as has been said; you can avoid reality but you can't evade the consequences of reality.

 

You started this thread complaining about the steps necessary to get a carry permit in Tennessee and espousing the need for a "real political action movement" and in the same sentence, disparage the most effective firearms advocacy group on the planet.

 

Well, if you want a real political action movement start one.

 

Whether you like or hate the NRA, join it and contribute extra to their PAC then join the TFA, USCCA, GOA and every other pro-firearms group out there.

 

Spend some money...spend some time and get some other people to do the same; that's how you effect change.

 

The TFA in Middle Tennessee meets the third Tuesday of each month in Hermitage...the next meeting will be in January. Their website is easy to find as is their Facebook page.

I don't believe the 2nd Amendment leaves much to be interpreted Robert. It's written very plainly. That said, Politics in this country is broken and I agree with Mao who said real political action comes from the Barrel of a Gun :) I believe the criminals in Washington believe the same thing. I know I'm in the minority on this board for sure. I'm fine with it. As I said, i'm much more libertarian minded than most. 

[Guest Lester Weevils]

We need to get a petition going for "Slide rules for Everyone" so everyone will be still able to vote. Betcha he has

one with your color. :D

Slide rules lose mystical function as a true magic talisman unless you also wear a pocket protector with multiple mechanical pencils and at least one rapidograph india-ink pen! :) To say nothing of the de riguer short sleeve white shirt and bowtie. Not to mention a leather sheath on yer belt to wear the monster slide-rule as a defender of the realm sword wreaking revenge against imprecision! Optional but highly desirable would be freckles, a bad flat-top burr haircut, wing-tip shoes and a severe case of acne.