GRIZ

i hadn't thought of a revolver, thanks for the suggestion i will defiantly try one when i can get over to a shop/range. The popularity of the K or L size frame revolver has waned over the years but IMO a 4" 357 Mag is just about the do it all handgun. As others have said you can use a wide range of power loadings to match your skill level and needs. 38 spl target loads, std loads,+P,+P+, and full magnum loads give you a power range that no semi-auto can match. Big enough to shoot well but small enough to conceal (if that's a concern later down the road). Learn how to use a DA revolver well and everything else is easy. Learning DA revolver shooting is not hard in spite of what some may say. Millions have done it for well over 100 years. Come on after all you said you would defiantly try one.

When police approached, they saw two guns on the back seat. Dustin Reininger told them he also had a handgun and an assault rifle. This case doesn't seem to be covered by FOPA unless the guns on the back seat were cased and secured as required by the law. The police apparently found the rest of the guns after they arrested the guy and were doing an unventory search back at headquarters. It made no difference to wherever he was moving to as the guns were not properly cased and secured. you are saying that if someone was driving to Maine with their pistol and was stopped in NJ, they would be arrested and then the case would be dismissed because of FOPA? http://njsp.org/about/fire_trans.html NJSP guidelines are pretty clear on the issue but leave a bit of discretion to the investigating officer.

You can go to a FFL in DE who will take the long gun from you and transfer it to the guy from MD.

Which I don't understand. If you got someone for committing one crime, then just stick with that. I don't understand why robbing a 7/11 with Body Armor, a 17 round Magazine, loaded with JHPs is any more dangerous than doing it without all those accouterments I generally agree with your statement. A holdup man wearing body armor indicates he is predisposed to shootimg it out. The assault weapon, magazine, and hollowpoint issues can be solved if they would just change the law by following possession or possessing with "during the commission of a felony" as it is with body armor. If the penalty for armed robbery while wearing body armor and using an AR with 100 rd magazine loaded with hollowpoints is to be sent through a wood chipper and used as chum I wouldn't care as I'm never going to do that.

The law concerning "permanently blocked" is as clear as mud. Each case of permanently blocked will be treated as it comes up. I don't have any magazines that can ever hold more than 15 rds so there are no questions. That's just me perhaps. To me your idea of a "welded rod" doesn't sound permanent if you can snap it off as you describe in your original post.

So you take a bunch of naval vessels, put nukes them. Steam into international waters and sit there. After a while go flank speed at our shores, by the time this administration reacts and gets a plan together you are very close to shore. Light off the nuke and render our shipping fleets and ports inoprable. Discuss. I don't think that would happen. The closer they get to our shores the closer they will be watched and when they are within a couple of hours of reaching our shores escorted 24/7. I can guarantee the rules of engagement for such a scenario are already in place.

Being that it has taken them over 30 years to get to Syria I would guess it might take them another 30 to get to the Gulf of Mexico. There are also the logistics concerns the Iranians would have just to get the vessels close to the US. They have no capital ships with a frigate (same as a destroyer basically) their largest. I'm not losing any sleep on this until they are on their way. Alternately, we'd have to call up more reserves to man additional ships, and raise our overall readiness level. I don't think we would need additional personnel and resources to take care of anything the Iranians could get to the Gulf of Mexico. Many ways to track them and if needed a pair of F18s from NAS Boca Chica could deal with any threat.

you can not take them out of state, ever again without the permits or FPID, even if you move. Again, bs. Thanks for saying that. NJ law covers transporting a handgun for specific reasons. There are many lawful purposes that are not covered by these specific reasons. If you are leaving on Friday to go to DE to go shooting at a range there on Saturday and returning home on Sunday it appears you have defined a lawful purpose under NJ law. You have to be concerned with DE law in DE and NJ law in NJ. As long as you go directly from your home to DE and return from DE directly from your home you are complying with NJ law. Neither state can project its laws farther than their border in regards to transportation laws. My answer to this is the same as it was in this thread: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/27299-ocean-city-police-charge-man-with-weapons-offenses/page__st__80 Read my post #89. If someone arrested in NJ while transporting a handgun in a legal manner for a legal purpose in another state the case would most likely be dismissed. Prosecutor would call the AG as there is little, if any, case law on the issue. NJ restrictions would be found unreasonable under Heller and McDonald and NJ would have to change their laws. Better to not bring it up and leave thingss they are in NJ as far as the AG would be concerned.

Its called a slide STOP for a reason. Some guns had them internally only, and could ONLY be slingshotted, ala' cz52/70 THANK YOU GLENN! I get frustrated when someone uses it as a RELEASE when shooting one of my pistols. I'm far from the firearms genius John Browning was but I figure if he put a knob on the end of it he intended it to be used as a release. I have seen slide stops/releases worn on 1911s. I don't know how many rounds were through them. As I said in my previous post I haven't worn one out with over 30K rounds (sometimes using the release, sometimes slingshotting). I use neither method with my Glock. I just slap the mag in. The inertia causes the slide to retract enough on its own to release from the lock and chamber the round. I have seen this on new Glocks. Glock told me that some slide stops/releases are under spec and sent me a new one which would make the gun function normally. If the person was comfortable with it and the slide going forward was reliable as yours I'd let the individual shooter decide if they wanted to leave it that way. I don't see any harm in it and it does speed up your reload. I imagine its the same issue with other guns. Never let the gun go dry, count your rounds. Ideal situation but not real life. If I was in a defensive shootout I won't be counting my rounds. I'm gonna shoot until empty and then reload. If your counting rounds during a gun battle then either you've been in many before or you where going in battle because your nuts. Ray is 100% correct here. It used to be standard to tell people to count their rounds in training and it will carry over to the real world. It doesn't work in real life however. Even if you did count your rounds there are too many ways you'll get thrown off round count. If you're under cover in an extended battle then partial reloading a revolver or doing a magazine exchange with a semi auto does make sense. The agency I worked for taught that after you stopped the threat first ascertain if there is another threat, move to cover (ideally you'd already be there), and reload. Always reload before you move (the Army taught me this long ago). All of this minimizes the chance of shooting yourself dry. This will carry over to the real world. Whatever your preference the fact is you have to train using both methods. Slingshotting is big motor skill as has been said but you need to practice with the release as well.

Either way it makes no difference. I have a Combat Commander thats on its first rebuild (30k plus rounds) still using the same slide stop or release it left the factory in 1974 with.

You're dealing with lower power rounds that need to penetrate, this means FMJ is better. This has been my attitude with 380 and smaller. Best functioning more penetration with fmj. My idea of a +P 380 is called 9mm Parabellum.

Functioning 100% in the gun is the first criteria. It is hard to find a modern 9mm that won't feed everything IMO. Next criteria is accuracy, some ammo shoots better than others in some guns. Gold Dot or Silvertips in Glocks and just about any 147 gr in Berettas, Taurus, or S&W to my experience. No +P or +P+ as there is not any real advantage in using these AFAIC. There is no "magic bullet". I don't think you should try to make a 9mm soemthing its not by using hot loads.

+1. There is something just right about a 4" barrel 357 revolver. The barrel is long enough to not lose a lot of velocity, but short enough to be handy. A 4" 357 is just about the perfect do it all handgun. You also have a long enough barrel to give you a decent sighting radius but not too long to carry concealed. Colts are way too overpriced and they are all used. Good guns but to to some they have a mystique that warrants a high price. I'd get a GP100 or L frame S&W as a first choice. I own 3 Taurus revolvers and have had no problems with them. I'd get the Taurus if the price difference was substantial between the Taurus and a Ruger or S&W. I wouldn't hestitate to buy another Taurus but too many places have them priced too close to a Ruger or S&W. The GP100 or L frame sized gun will be better it you want to shoot a lot of 357s as will a used Ruger Speed or Security Six if you want a K frame size gun. Porting is not needed in a 357 and limits its use as a SD weapon as where do you think all that blast goes if you have to hold the gun lower than eye level. I wouldn't buy a ported gun. Buying a stainless gun makes sense AFAIC.

I also need to change the address for my sig's registration. No need to do that as when you change your address on your FID card NJSP also tracks it via your SBI number. They will make the change without you doing anything.

The black helicopters have passed over my position so I can respond now. Posted Yesterday, 10:49 PM Anselmo, on 17 September 2011 - 10:19 PM, said: Is a prosecutor going to convince a jury that eating lunch was unreasonable and unnecessary? Are you going to go to prison because you ate lunch? I don't know - want to find out for me? These laws have been in effect in NJ for over 40 years and there is nothing I can find where a guy was convicted of eating lunch on the way home from the range. Please find me someone convicted of such. Hmm careless driving while on a return trip from the range. You get nervous because you're stopped with guns in the car. Cop sees nervous and ask to search. You say hey I have guns. Cop searches finds hollow points. You had them during te commission of reckless driving. You pissed of the cop because he feels you jepardized his safety by not saying you had guns from step one. You winde up in cuffs, guns taken, amd enroute to the police station. To me that is just a possible as dropping a loaded 30 whatever round mag on the beach You are 100% wrong. It seems you got stopped for careless driving and somehow got charged with reckless driving by the end of the paragraph but that makes no difference in my final answer. Both are MV violations. They are not criminal violations. The hollowpoint law is used as an add on charge to a criminal violation. Possession to and from a range is okay unless you are charged with a crime. There are other issues here you have here. Why are you nervous when you are stopped when you have guns in the car if you are not breaking any law? Do guns make you nervous? Do cops make you nervous? Why? There is a name for this and it is called paranoia. Being as nervous as you are in your scenario it would seem that you told the cop early on you had guns. Why does the cop feel his safety is jeopardized when your guns are being transported as required by law? There is no law for Pissing Off a Cop although there are other statutes that may apply. If I missed something please tell me what criminal law you were supposed to have violated. The cop can arrest you for any MV violation but the scenario you present is ridiculous. Another great example. Reminds me of the Brian Aitken case - he had bed sheets, dishes, silverware, and packed boxes in his car, but the judge did not allow this as evidence of him moving Please enough of Brian Aitken! Read this thread and try and tell me he is a poster boy, http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/22268-evan-nappen-and-brian-aitken-on-tv-sat-night/page__hl__aitken Ever buy a used car?? What if you buy a used vehicle, and the previous owner was a drug user/buyer/seller/dealer?? What if that car was not thoroughly cleaned prior to you buying it?? What if you get stopped, and the ensuing officer claims he smells something funny, and opts to bring the dogs out to sniff around?? What I found was a certain amount of a controlled dangerous substance tucked(or possibly has fallen there from another spot) up under the edge of the rear cargo floor carpet underneath the jack stowage compartment. No idea it was there, but should the situation have arisen, I guarantee the dogs would have found it, and I would be looking at time for that, as well as possession of weapons during that crime. Do you honestly think they would believe me either at the time sitting on the side of the road, or later in the courtroom, that it was not mine and I had never seen it before?? Okay I'm not saying you didn't find something in your used car but I do have a few questions. What did you do to make the cop want to bring out the dogs? I guess you let him run the dog on the interior of your car to find it in the spare tire well? You guarantee the dogs would have found it? Why? I am very familiar working with what are the best drug detecting dogs around and I would like to hear your rationale for a "guaranteed find". How do you know it was CDS? Did you field test it? Did you sample it? How do you know it wasn't something else? Was it sufficient quantity and purity to have you charged with a felony? I think you should read this regarding FOPA and Cabela's Carry Adventures: http://forum.pafoa.o...ely-report.html I would hadly call this "mounting evidence". It is an opinion of a person who states, "nothing contained herein should be construed as legal advice by either the source contributors or myself. The information is presented only for purposes of facilitating an individual’s assessing the probability of a favorable court interpretation of §926A in their particular circumstances. Obviously there is no way of guaranteeing how §926A will apply to a specific case being adjudicated (there is little on-point established case law) but a court may indeed use the same historical data and logic to reach the same conclusions as provided herein" His entire argument focuses around FOPA and that's all. None of the responses he got are definitive for various reasons. I'll give the same disclaimer and tell you my opinion. Both Heller and McDonald affirmed the right to own handguns for personal protection and allowed states to have reasonable restrictions. NJ law grants no exemption to transport a handgun to or from a store for sale or purchase and many other circumstances including transporting the gun to PA to carry on a FL permit. If someone from NJ were arrested for transporting their handgun to PA to carry on their FL permit, the question for SCOTUS would be "Is it a reasonable restriction that NJ law forbids a NJ resident from transporting a handgun to another state for a legal purpose?". Based on Heller and McDonald the answer should be no. Having a law that says you can't transport a handgun out of state for a legal purpose is unreasonable. NJ cannot define what a legal purpose is in any other state. My answer has no reference to FOPA at all. Test case? You'll never see one. If anyone were arrested for transporting their handgun to another state for a legal purpose in NJ the prosecutor would definitely call the AG on it. No case law. The AG does not want the Feds telling NJ they are wrong and will most likely make NJ change their laws. The AG will tell the prosecutor to drop the case. Easier to leave it as it is. This is "mounting evidence" to the contrary.

Way too much speculation and what if statements being made here. Quote lets not forget that he was also a CONVICTED FELON So what? If someone commits a crime, serves their punishment, and released, why should they not be a regular person again? Why must they be reduced to a second class citizen? The man paid his dues, he should be free the same as you and I. So what? Would you be saying that if he had raped your daughter? You are jumping to this guy's defense without even knowing why he was a convicted felon. That's not a very smart position. I guess you would be in support of all felons owning firearms. "Gun Owners Support Felons Owning Firearms" is not a way to convince peopel to come over to our side. And if someone is really so dangerous to the point where once they are out of prison, society must worry they will get a hold of a weapon and do something bad again, then why is that person out on the street anyway? The criminal gets out of prison because he served his time or paroled. You seem versed on the 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments and believe in literal translation. I suggest you read the 8th dealing with cruel and unusual punishment. Keeping people in prison because they were a danger to society was practiced by Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and Sadaam Hussein. That would be your approach? You would be the one to decide who's dangerous and who's not? I don't like the system as it is but its better than anyone else's. And secondly, do you know how easy it is to become a felon? Stopping for a hamburger on the way home from the gun range in NJ can make you a felon too. By letter of the law, yes. In actual practice, no. I started shooting in NJ about 40 years ago, have met thousands of shooters, paid attention to news regarding firearms, and have never met or heard anyone arrested for stopping for a hamburger on the way home from the range. If I have missed that one please cite me a case. Do you even know what his previous crime was? As I said before neither do you. Defending him at this time is not a wise move. Someone found: not quite sure what it means but it seems he was arrested in 2006 for "an open warrant for First Degree Escape" First Degree Escape would mean he used or threatened force or deadly force to effect his escape. A fine citizen to defend, One more thing for y'all spouting "the law is the law"...would you all have cheered the arrest of Rosa Parks for violating the "law" by refusing to move to the back of the bus?? Rosa Parks has no bearing on what is being discussed here. What she was involved in was a well planned protest where the NAACP lawyers were on board before it happened. She volunteered to get herself arrested as they wanted someone who was as harmless as possible. OK, then here's a scenario for you. We can post scenarios all day to support either side of an argument. If you want to protest something you do everything possible to avoid giving anyone a reason. That's civil disobedience as practiced by Martin Luther King and Ghandi. Your empty pistol protest should be an empty holster protest. Your civil rights examples are from accurate having lived through that era. FYI all protests in the civil rights era were not escalated to violence by the police. Did you ever read about the Black Panthers or the riots in Newark, Elizabeth, or Watts back in the 60s? Or would you cheer for the SWAT team that shows up to gun them down? Has that happened and I missed it? Or is that some secret plan that fell out of the black helicopter you found? Please verify your source. I support the right of everyone to keep and bear arms. So you've asnwered my previous question. If someone raped and killed your daughter you would support their right to keep and bear arms. Okay that's your stance? There are many other more valid things to fight for before anyone considers felons with guns. Dodge and insult - not surprising, no one ever actually answers that one. I will answer your question when you show me proof that that is the plan to deal with protests and you more clearly define what you call a protest. And last but not least, what makes you think felons don't get firearms anyways? They do get guns. You just want to make it easier for them. As anything else, the illicit gun market is supply and demand. If the demand is up that $35 raven costs $200. You want to make sure they can get if for $35. Stopping for food on the way to/from the range. How'd you like to never own guns, vote, or seek gainful employment again for the rest of your life because you rolled up a Wendy's drive thru with a locked, unloaded handgun in the trunk? You think every single "law abiding" gun owner is aware of this law? You're going one better now and not even getting out of the car. "They" are not all out to get you. Please relate an incident where this has happened. If a single hollow point were to roll under your seat and be discovered a week, month, year, later, while you're out on a milk run. Seriously, read the hollow point bullet exceptions. And tell me something never rolled under your seat by accident./i] Asked this question many times. Please cite me an incident this happened? Tin foil hats, huh? I guess you don't know much about our laws. I only know what I learned in 31 years as a LEO. I never saw anyone arrested for a crime without doing something stupid and thinking they'll get away with it. You can commit a lot of felonies without even trying. Being prosecuted for one takes effort.

If you Google "Daniel Craig and Guns" you will find the quote I refer to in my post #3 which is when he first assumed the role of 007 (2005-06). You will find he takes this stance up to at least 2009. There are newer articles saying he is trying to overcome his fear of guns. The links you post may be part of his therapy. I don't take this as he likes shooting. I haven't seen anything that states he has done that 180 on his gun stance. I just don't know if he has. If he were more vocal on the issue as Tom Selleck, Ted Nugent, and Chuck Norris have been we would know. There are plenty of celebrities and politicians that believe they should have guns and the capability of defending themselves but the proletariat shouldn't. They get enough air time as it is.

Daniel Craig made it very clear when he came into the 007 role that he is very much a gun hater and made comments to the effect "I would never touch a gun in my everyday life". Has he done a complete 180? Many movie stars are anti-gun...unless they can make money doing an action adventure pic. You have to look hard to find pro-gun celebrities.

Can an 03A3 shoot modern .30-06? I heard that the Garand has issues with that due to the gas system. A bolt should be more reliable, right? Forgot to say you can also shoot a Garand with any commercial ammo if you install an adjustable gas plug.

If you just want a shooter, get a national ordinance one. They are built from usgi parts on a new receiver. They are much cheaper than a usgi one I would stay away from National Ordnance stuff. Their original recievers (made in Yugoslavia?) were poor quality and the later ones were better. The receivers are investment cast and not made to the higher standard investment casting is today. None is up par with a GI receiver. The little bit more you pay for a GI receiver is worth it.

It's not so much damaging of the gas system, it's more of, sooner or later you will end up with a bent op rod. And they are not cheap to replace. The op rod is the only part of the gas system you can damage short of taking a hammer to the gas cylinder.

Can an 03A3 shoot modern .30-06? I heard that the Garand has issues with that due to the gas system. A bolt should be more reliable, right? A 1903A3 can shoot any commercial 30-06 ammo. A M1 gas system is set up for the pressure curve generated by M2 ball ammo which has a 150 gr bullet and a medium burning rate powder. If you shoot heavier bullets or hotter loads you will damage the gas system. The easiest and cheapest source of M2 ball is the CMP. There are also commercial loads available safe to shoot in a Garand. Not a case of reliability but a case of shooting ammo that was designed for the gun.

That was exactly going to be my question, if purchasing a refurb or used vest i would want to know how long it would be good for. I herd the average life of a vest used often is around 5 years and the less it's used the longer it will be good for. How its treated has even more to do with the life of the vest. Wash it in something with bleach weakens the fiber as does putting it away wet. If it was left on the backseat of a patrol car the UV can do a lot of damage. These are some of the reasons manufacturers put a 5 year life on the vest. I've been told by chemists (not by vest manufacturers) that if you bought a new vest and put it on a shelf in a dark closet at room temperature for 10 years, there should be no degradation of the material. The first vest I had I bought in 1976 (Level II) and used it or a daily or at least a regular basis until about 1982. I cared for it as per the manufacturers instructions. I decided to see if it would still work in 2001 (25 years old). It still stopped everything it was supposed to. These are my results others may vary.

I got to like country over the years. The Armed Forces Network Radio always had a country show so in some of the places I was that was the only station to listen to. There were a few country stars that had hits that crossed over into pop music like Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson, Patsy Cline, Merle Haggard, Randy Travis and others with one or more songs crossing over back in the 60s,70s, and 80s. Bluegrass had a few years of popularity in the 70s. The last true pop rock song was Kokomo in 1988 IMO It was an exercise for the Beach Boys who wanted to see if they could have a number 1 song again and it worked.. It seems as rock and roll has faded country has become more popular. Country got more of a following after 9/11 as all the patriotic type songs were country. A lot of the pop country today, Carrie Underwood, Taylor Swift, Toby Keith, Sugarland and others, would have been pop rock songs in the 60s.

Losing his job is far worse than any charges that would be filed. LEO, correct me if I am wrong, if he is fired, there goes his pension and benefits? Maks, I'd say any effect on his pension is a lot more than the $1000 and 6 months (maximum penalty) for a DP offense. As far as how it affects his pension it depends on what the law in NM is. It could be hit the streets with nothing (if the agency makes all his pension contributions), refund of his contributions, or reduced pension and benefits if he is alreday vested. Him getting fired is an important part in maintaining the PD's moral capital. The taxpayers/public don't like it when folks who are supposed to be out there, doing a job on their dime, are fooling around and not doing their job. DA has it right here, as I illustrated in my previous post a criminal prosecution is not a slam dunk. What do you think would happen if they did prosecute criminally and he was found not guilty as all elements of the crime were not met as I explained? Dealing with the guy via departmental charges (lower standard of proof) and firing him less than a week after it all became public was swift. I'm sure it pleased the masses with the torches and pitchforks outside NMSP HQS. He'll always have to give the reason for leaving on his resume or job application. Keep in mind he has appeal rights. He may wind up getting his firing turned into a hefty suspension without pay.