Joelk

I will go point by point from my perspective, with my comments in red: As you can see I have little in common with your 2.0 description, which seems to me to be of an ignorant young person obsessed with style and video game culture, who has yet to really learn much about firearms. It is good that they are getting into firearms, but don't think that they are the only non 1.0s out there. On the other hand we both like Bonesinium's decription.

GREAT description!

Looks like RTSP a new north jersey range. If they do Sims I may have to check it out, as I am a big believer in Sims training.

I am trying not to assume, but go off of your description of 2.0 in the OP: That mostly style based description does not fit Wastegate, Shane, several others, and myself, who would like to be on your side. As far as the tool discussion, I have met quite a few people in training classes, who were excellent shooters, many with combat experience, who were not "into" guns, but just considered them tools that they use to defend themselves. There is noting wrong with appreciating a gun's style, but some people couldn't care less about style, just function. I am just trying to make you aware that you have many potential allies who would say that they do not fit your 2.0 description.

With the *if done safely caveat we agree. Unfortunately I have watched people doing uncontrolled rapid fire put rounds over the berm more than once. Edited to add: You don't need to get defensive as to what kind of training you are doing. I am a big advocate of firearms training and attend as many classes as I can. I am really looking forward to an upcoming carbine class with Kyle Lamb and taking ECQC with Southnarc again. I just wish we had more good classes in NJ.

What kind of training are you talking about? No mater what type of shooting you do you need a firm grasp on the fundamentals. Anyone who knows me knows I have no aversion to rapid fire. Shoot as rapidly as you want as long as you can hit your target. On the other hand, I have nothing but contempt for those who go to the range and dump lead into the berm as fast as they can because they think it looks cool, without any ability to actually hit the target.

I think you are missing my point. My point is that your description of 2.0 contains motives such as coolness, styling, and video game pedigree that you feel cover self defense shooters and ccwers. I, and several other people in this thread, disagree. I am not saying we should not include anyone (regardless of their motivation for owning guns), I am just saying that your description, which is based significantly on motive for ownership, alienates people like myself who would otherwise identify with you.

I own, and have used Bladetech, G-code, Comptac (among others). The vast majority of my use is with Glocks. Within those 3 I like Conptac best by a small margin, then G-code, and lastly Bladetech. By the way use code SPOOK-3111 for 15% off at Comptac through Sunday.

I agree we should be as inclusive as possible, but how can gun owners "speak with one voice" as Bob said, when some gun owners say that the firearms that other gun owners own/use should be banned, and who vote that way? I have also had gun owners tell me that they don't think anyone but police officers should be allowed to carry a gun. How can I be unified with that person when my biggest concern is concealed carry?

I disagree as I don't know anyone who is a serious student of self defense who would describe them self like the 2.0 description below. This sounds like a description of a kid who likes guns because of video games. It also sounds like the airsoft kid who finally got old enough to buy real guns. It is all based on image and style, without any though as to real world function and substance. The concealed carry guy does not love guns because they are "fun and tacticool" but because they can save his or his family's lives. I own ARs and Glocks, not because they are cool, are black, or are "tubberware", but because of their functionality. I don't care about aggressive firearm styling, just function. I don't "enjoy" tac vests, nor do I "enjoy" tac lights, I just need a light (or NV) to see in the dark. Etc... I do see and agree with your point, I just think that your description ignores and alienates a lot of people.

I think those two groups leave out a large number of people, of various ages, who view firearms a weapons or tools for self defense, who are neither Fudds (1.0), nor competition shooters(2.0) or Tactical Teds(2.0).

I agree, the Dillon is the way to go.

I definitely agree with that position. Good job Anthony.

Yes it is Jemima Mt. Please pardon my ignorance but where is it OK to drive, and where is it not? I was under the impression that all of the dirt roads are Ok to drive, and both my GPS and my map show that as Jemima Mt Road. The only road I have ever seen closed is Old Lower forge road right where it crosses the Batsto River (if there is a sign saying closed I don't go there). I am not familiar with Apple Pie Hill. By the way, what is a "geodetic control station"? As it is inappropriate I will remove the pictures from my original post as well. Are you coming out to the 10th annual pine barrens clean up on the 23rd? Unfortunately I will be out of town on business, but I have tried to spread the word about the event.

Driving up a hill = tearing it up?

How about a picture/video thread of your 4x4 or any BOV, with the caveat that the pictures must be off road (anywhere other than in your driveway or a parking lot)?

I guess I missed hearing about any NJZed training events. Which trainers have you brought in for them as I am always looking for more local training?

I can't find the politics section, so I am guessing I can't access it as a basic member?

I am not looking to start a political argument here, and I thought we were not supposed to talk politics. If politics are OK I will do a poll thread on who voted for Obama here and on the other site and we can see what the results say.

Just to be fair I posted that, not Creeper I am not saying everyone here is like that, but this is by far the most liberal gun forum I have ever seen.

But political appointees in charge of agencies do

Please exlain to me how states are doing away with federal NFA forms? For anyone interested HERE is a form 4.

That is what can happen when the shooter is ejecting a live round and tries catch it in his support hand. If it bounces back into the chamber and the ejector hits the primer when the slide goes forward bad things can happen. The easy way to avoid that is to not try to catch the live round but let it fly. Also if the gun is canted toward the ejetion port it makes sure a live round, or what happens much more often, an empty case in a failure to eject malfunction, doesn't fall back into the chamber.

Thanks for the info. I am still curious because it seems to me if you can lock the slide back then there is enough travel to release it with the overhand method. If anyone has a commander length 1911 with a buff would you please vigorously try the overhand method and let me know if it works. I find all of this interesting as in training I regularly participate in malfunction drills involving setting up and fixing malfunctions on other people's guns, and I am yet (in 100s of different guns) to encounter any where the overhand method does not work. I know Tosser was joking, but as in most good jokes a little kernel of truth makes it funnier

Thanks Lorenzo. As the shock buff limits slide travel does it also prevent manually locking the slide open on a commander length 1911 as well? Also, does it truely prevent the overhand method from working, or just require more effort to overcome the resistance of the shock buff?