Shane45

I just heard this myself. I don't know details of the type of shooting conducted by the students but so far it appears to be true. I guess all boy scouts will be next to be disciplined. If true this illuminates the bias we know exists in the school system. It is amazing to me the school system believes it has reach outside of school over legal activities based on posts made on a non school owned medium!

I have been hearing the exact opposite. The Gen 2 mags reportedly have made a significant improvement.

Indeed it is! And it is the part I find most frustrating. The 2nd is an incorporated amendment, not some afterthought freedom granted at the will of the government. Ive said it before, the saying freedom isn't free doesn't only apply to the soldiers that protect this land. It also means we accept the bad with the good to remain a free society. Westborough Baptist church comes to mind. But where is the outrage and call for restrictions on the freedom of speech when the BLM movements hate speech and the liberal left medias bleating directly lead to the assassination of Law Enforcement officers? A root cause analysis reveals to me that the vast majority of liberal media is a fundamental part of the problem in todays society. The soap box is granted to all the kids wanting to stand up and yell about banning firearms. But that same voice is not afforded to the same kids from the same school that reject that notion. Media control is silencing us and misinforming the masses that don't know what they don't know. This is a huge issue in my opinion.

I agree completely and I reject all assaults on the 2nd. But the strategist in me wants a reciprocity for the thing I am sure we are going to loose on.

Valid question and indeed the reason I think the age limit will fall prey to "common sense" bleating's. But I fully believe that if we don't get something meaningfull for the further restrictions, then we have actually lost. It will be proof positive that its all about restriction, not compromise.

But before we digress into symantics, make sure you understand my position. Changing the age limit will not protect anyone ecept in possibly the narrowest of scenarios. At the same time the current climate is not likely to leave us unscathed. Additionally I believe I have valid concerns for the age group in question. But if I had my way, mental health would receive the reform, not the constitution. But Society is not going to be fixed in 10 minutes flat either. The Lib Dems ruling the roost of social programs for so long is largely to blame for our present situation in my opinion.

A revolver is not suitable protection?

Ray Ray, I said average, not the exceptions. But hey, I don't completely hate the idea of raising the age of what a minor is. In many states parents are still legally and financially obligated to their kids until the age of 21. They cant buy alcohol or a pistol until 21. etc etc etc so it seems there are many disparities to begin with. But my point was an overall concern over the avg 18 year old. Again AVERAGE 18 year old. But my thoughts are not to completely deny. Possibly the restriction could be center fire semi auto's. But the way the liberal left schools are effectively promoting their agenda in todays kids maybe voting too!

The fortitude, drive, integrity, self sufficiency, and emotional maturity at an early age for the average individual.

Here is the thing about the age limit. 18 when I was 18 equates to about 28 today!!! It may very well be a localized thing but the 18 year olds I see in this area = about 12 to 14 in emotional maturity. That's not to say there aren't exceptions. Of course there are. My 18 year old stands head shoulders waist and knees above his peers. The stay at home, no real social contact other than xbox, infatuated with call of duty and no real responsibilities for the avg 18 year old DOES concern me. Now let me be the first to say that in the big picture, changing to 21 will not deter a determined sociopath. But it could deter the 18 year old emotionally challenged individual that lacks any resourcefulness. But what that translates to is the squeezing of the balloon. So he cant buy a rifle, then he will buy a gallon of gas and propane tanks etc etc etc. Squeeze the bubble on one side of the balloon it just bulges out on the other.

I reject banning bump stocks because that ideology accepts that banning an inanimate object has an effect on the problem. With that being said, politics being what they are, I will accept some losses of derp items to gain real ones. One other consideration. Consider for a moment the executive order for an assault weapons ban that would already be in place if Hillary won.

Keep in mind that the 300WM is a belted magnum which adds complications to reloading and the amount of times the case can be reloaded compared to 300WSM. Someone more knowledgeable on reloading 300wm could speak more informatively on this than I. With that being said if you shoot factory ammo, the 300wm is probably a better choice. I think the 6.5's are great. ive been shooting them way before they became fashionable. However, they do not put the energy down range that some are looking for. The "heat" right now is the 300NM. Inherently accurate, high BC bullets, 80% the energy of 338LM with 60% of the recoil. Probably why SOCOM picked it as their new sniper round.

Since this thread seems home to walls of txt, here is another: Why are we allowing the liberal left to determine the narrative and course of action in protecting our children? In today’s society we clearly accept armed protection in many facets of our daily life. We pay men to carry guns to protect pennies, nickels, dimes and quarters being transported from stores to banks as well as deposits. We accept armed guards in banks. We accept armed guards to protect famous people and politicians. We accept high police presence in major events. We accept armed security in jewelry stores. Yet public schools that are clearly suffering from being targeted remain largely unprotected. Why is that? I have had a number of police officers relay stories to me on how they were picking up or dropping off their kids to school in uniform and were in some cases asked, in others told, they were not welcome on school grounds while in uniform and carrying a weapon as it made some staff members uncomfortable. Add all the gun free school zone rhetoric and all the resistance to police and armed security in schools and it becomes clear that the liberal left bias is what is keeping our schools from being properly protected. Why are we tolerating the least qualified group to assess and mitigate the risk to our children? Is it better if our kids are stabbed to death or blown up instead of being shot? Countries like Japan and China have suffered school killing sprees at the hands of evil men with knives that rival the number dead in American school shootings. Many are completely unaware that Columbine was planned as a bombing. Those two perpetrators had planned to bomb the cafeteria at lunch and then detonate a line of explosives out front specifically directed at the police, fire and ems first responders. So that would indicate to me that focusing all this energy on gun control is a complete waste of time and effort. See something say something? Clearly that isn’t working either! Case after case reveals everyone said something to include to the top Law Enforcement agency in the country! The evidence is already in front of everyone. People and systems will fail. Other people will never trigger the system to begin with! Look up John David LaDue for a case study of a threat that could have easily went undetected if it weren’t for a timely glance out of a window. Is arming teachers and faculty the answer? In my opinion it is not. To me it is a half measure. I believe that people should have the right to defend themselves. However, armed faculty are not going to have a duty to run towards the sound of gunfire! There may be a few that think that way but I don’t think that will be the vast majority. Why are we exploring half measures instead of embracing the fact that the only way to protect unarmed people is with armed people assigned to their protection! This is evident everywhere else in our society. I would think that every town in America has the ability to add to its police force and assign them to their schools. This might actually help with the drug problems that seem to be affecting just about every school in America as well. But Im not talking about adding 1 person for 3700 students. Clearly no risk and response analysis went on there! But this would cost money. Is that an issue? Are we going to spend money to protect money and valuables but we as a society are unwilling to spend money to protect children? I don’t think that’s the case. My conclusion is that we have fallen short of putting the correct response in place because we cant get past hurting the feelings of the liberal left that have infested the school systems. I don’t want to hear their cries about creating a police state in schools. I don’t want to hear one more stupid plan to have all the kids throw books or soup cans at an assailant! I don’t want to hear about teachers having a session in school with nerf guns to work out their own strategies. I hate to inform the faculty but the fact of the matter is that every kid with an X-Box has more tactical prowess than the vast majority of teachers at any school. I want to hear from experts that have a proven track record of providing actual security. Does it sit right with everyone that all of congress operates in a armed protected environment but its unthinkable by many of these politicians to provide any armed security for our children? In my opinion, this is why NOTHING has changed. The evidence is overwhelming that banning anything never solves anything or actually protects anyone. You CAN’T ban evil determination. I will be just as heartbroken for every child killed by a gun, a bomb, a knife, a sword, or a gallon of gas. I want them protected from as many threats as possible with someone capable of providing that protection. The time for allowing the liberal left to determine the protection for everyone’s children needs to end! We need to counter the bleating of the liberal left with a solid, loud voice of logic, reason and something that will certainly be more effective than passing feel good legislation and being shocked its still happening.

Save lives, that's funny, really funny. I guess we will be posting unicorns in the schools too.

Yes Im aware of the F2F sidestep but the question was what other laws restrict to 21.

I said buy, not possess. "When the Gun ControlAct of 1968 was passed, legislators raised the legal age to purchase handguns to 21."

..Buying a pistol.

I have found plain barrel 16" AR's to be pretty loud In fact seemingly louder than a braked or comped AR. I think this is due to the direction of the sound wave. With a plain barrel it can bounce off objects right back at the shooter. I think Brakes/Comps send it in a different direction and less comes back. This is in environments with things to reflect off of. If you were in the wide open the experience would likely be different. I find the Griffen to be pretty good at blast/concussion and it has a blast shield available. https://www.griffinarmament.com/M4SD-5-56-Tactical-Compensator-1-2x28-p/xhp556tc.htm I find it doesn't have the negative push down that the Battlecomp has. I have a Gemtech with blast shield too. I find that it indeed aides when trying to be considerate to fellow shooters. It does seem to counter the brakes effectiveness but when in an environment I need the shield, I don't care.

When are we banning facebook? Murder, Rape, Child porn, fraud, all facilitated through facebook. When are we banning that? Oh, its not the fault of the misused tool?????

It is legal under federal law. It is my opinion that it is illegal in NJ because the statute does not delineate between a citizen and a business. If I recall correctly it actually says "any person". I am unaware of any cases to reference but the language of the statute is pretty plain and clear.

And now they know how to end the school day early at will.

I never tried them. I remember JP Custom had sets back in the day and I know glock had some for a while. From what I remember reading reviews people had trouble with accuracy. With that being said I often felt the concept has merit if it was set up right. I think JP was on the right track. Don't know if any of the reviewers shoot ar too. Might be something that those of us used to peep sights might do better with.

I keep telling people on this forum we have allies in the right places.....

Negative. Much of it old inventory packaged in the 80's on. Not the "new" Germany