maintenanceguy

I finally got around to looking at the pistol to try to figure out what's happening. I took all kinds of measurements with feeler gauges and digital calipers. It looks like the hammer protrudes into the primer far enough to fire the round. And then I found... some wear marks on one side of the hammer. And it looks like the hammer doesn't sit in the middle of the slot it is supposed to sit in the middle of. I think the hammer is making contact with the frame as it heads toward the primer and is slowed down enough by the impact/side scraping that it loses some speed and hits the primer too lightly. So I found a flat file small enough to fit in the groove and widened it by .002 or .003" and it shoots fine now. Can't even tell it was modified. I'm guessing the hammer pivot pin is a little crooked.

Just curious, where do you get enough waste oil to keep it running?

Anyone who gets the same guidance should keep the email. If something happens and you're arrested and charged, you can use that email as part of your criminal defense. Entrapment by estoppel is the legal term for "I was coerced into committing a crime because the government gave me bad advice". It's a legitimate defense in court. Just need to convince 12 jurors and you're free to go - eventually.

Because it's all an illegal infringement of the second amendment. A tiny bit less infringing but still infringing. I'll stop complaining when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not infringed.

The ammo is old, maybe decades old. But I shoot a lot and haven't had any issues with ammo so I think my ammo is good. The primer strikes are obviously light so I think that's the problem - I just don't know the cause. Redeye might be onto something. I'll take the side plate off and see if the hammer spring is good. Maybe something inside will jump out at me while I'm in there.

I think "prohibited parking lot area" is pretty clear since it follows the description "the holder of a valid and lawfully issued permit to carry under N.J.S.2C:58-4 who is otherwise prohibited under this section from carrying a concealed firearm into the parking area of a prohibited location" They're both talking about the same location: Parking area of a prohibited location is a "prohibited parking lot area" even though the writers of the bill could have made it more obvious. And...I've now had several occasions to secure my firearm in a lock box in both my pickup and my wife's SUV. It's no longer an issue for me although I do think it would be safer not to unload and load a gun in a parking area. I can easily unload my gun while sitting in my truck and nobody is going to notice. Keep it all down on my lap and it's fine. Takes 30 seconds. I keep the lockbox in the back of the SUV so I'm doing the covert draw while turned with my hip to the car and the unloading/loading shuffle while leaning a little into the back of the car and nobody notices that either. Might look like I'm itching my hip though. Also takes 30 seconds. It's a poorly thought out law but I don't have an issue complying. Just dumb that 1000 people are safe around me at Walmart but the 3 people in the doctor's office are in danger.

North American Arms 22 Short Revolver. It's less than a year old and probably has 25 rounds through it, maybe 50. No failure-to-fires until this past weekend. This time, 5 of 5 rounds did not fire. Very light primer strike on the extreme outer edge of the primer. I'm pretty handy with things that are mechanical and made my living that way for a long time. I figured that there would be an obvious reason but I haven't found any. This is a very simple revolver. Hammer strikes the primer directly - no firing pin, no blocking bar. Hammer shows no wear, no burs, can't feel anything rough or imperfect with my fingernail. Hammer swings fully forward. I don't have feeler gauges that are narrow enough to measure the gap but it appears to be zero gap between the hammer and the frame. A narrow strip of paper can't be pulled out with the hammer forward. I thought the hammer might have a worn bearing where it rotates but there is absolutely zero play in the hammer. So, maybe it's the cylinder. But there is no visible wear on the bearing surface at the front of the cylinder or on the frame where the cylinder makes contact. The cylinder can move front and back with .004" play. That seems like a small amount. Any less and I think the cylinder would be difficult to insert but I don't know what the play should be here. Here's daylight behind the cylinder with the cylinder pushed all the way forward. You can see the gap is more than .004 but there is almost no play so I think the cylinder is where it's supposed to be. I'm stumped. Anybody have any thoughts on what's happening? I can ship it out to have it repaired but shipping both ways will cost me half what I paid for this. I would probably just order a new one instead. Thanks in advance.

Seems like homeless children should get first priority to housing....but, also seems like every country on earth should have some control over who they do and do not let into their borders. But, the crazy part of this story to me is that nobody cared until it affected a football game. panem et circenses

I agree that the laws are hard to keep up with. And the app was free so they owe me nothing. But, if you're in the business of gun law and you offer a product that gives legal advice that people will rely on to stay out of jail, getting the information wrong is serious.

I just downloaded the USCCA reciprocity phone app and I'm deleting it. See the screenshot below. This is probably the most relied upon reciprocity app available and I'm really disappointed at how sloppy the information given is. I can't rely on this when traveling to other states when they get NJ's info so wrong. People can go to prison over this.

The law requires that you complete both the new qualifier and the new use of force training before Oct. 1. I am not sure what you're supposed to do with it once you complete them. NJSP has the forms online here: https://www.nj.gov/njsp/firearms/forms.shtml

Sounds like there was a warrant to search the home. I didn't see anything about Liberty Safe being served with a warrant to provide the code. A corporate policy to not provide the code to anyone except the safe owner would make me more likely to purchase their products. If some judge served Liberty with a warrant, that's different - they the have to comply. At least they should remove the Statute of Liberty from their advertising.

I'm all the way down in Salem/Cumberland Counties. I would like to build it down here. Less political opposition and lots of inexpensive (for NJ) land. In construction, I've been involved in environmental projects, or projects that became environmental projects. I'm not specifically knowledgeable about the environmental requirements for outdoor shooting ranges. I've worked with a few environmental firms in NJ, maybe I'll start there. I actually never considered environmental issues being the big hurdle to overcome but it makes sense.

Vdep217 nailed it in my opinion. The thing that saves us is that one permit covers all guns you own, except that you have to submit a form listing the guns you own, except the courts limited the guns you can carry, except that the court removed itself from the process that they put in place to add additional guns to the permit. So many contradictions that I think the state's prosecutors are in a weaker position then if the law was never passed.

I'm toying with the idea of building a legitimate 25 yd. outdoor shooting range. I have a business plan in mind but not completely solidified yet. I have a lot of construction management experience including site work so I'm comfortable with the construction part. I'm going to take the NRA range design/construction course as a first step toward design. It would be a relatively simple 25 yd handgun range that can accommodate 8-10 people shooting at one time with a small classroom/restroom building. Probably not open to the public but available for rent to NRA/other instructors to use for courses plus my own CCW courses. I would be purchasing some very rural land, possible backing up to state land or marshland to keep the noise away from everyone and to make sure I had huge unpopulated area behind the berm. The townships I would be building in are very gun friendly so I don't anticipate any political opposition. I would be surprised if everyone on the planning board wasn't a gun owner. Local land use ordinances don't say anything about ranges. There is general language about public health and safety, noise at the property line, environmental hazards, etc. that would apply. Nothing specifically about shooting ranges being a prohibited use. What unusual hurdles would need to be overcome to get approval for this kind of project? I realize this is a very broad question. My planing board experience is with buildings, parking lots, other and other "normal" construction projects. I imagine that shooting ranges would come with additional scrutiny. If anyone here is on a planning board or has some professional knowledge of the process, I would love to know your thoughts on getting approval for a shooting range. Since most of NJ is so anti-gun, I'm also wondering if NJ has any specific rules to make this difficult.