Leaderboard

I have no axe to grind with AVB-AMG or anybody else. I am merely an observer and want to make an observation. The pro-gun rights side vs the gun prohibition side is constantly being badgered to "compromise" and to "find middle ground". This cannot be achieved because the gun prohibition side of the argument is dishonest. They claim to be compromising but never give up anything. They just move their goal posts to a lesser ban for the duration of any negotiation - e.g. "just give up 15 round magazines and make the limit 5 but we will compromise at 10". The only compromise they are really making is that they won't demand total disarmament of everybody just yet. It is an incremental approach that needs to stop. The goal is a ban on everything. The "nobody is trying to take your guns" is a lie. Not one more inch. I'm done. I had all my pistols confiscated in England in 1997 to allow the politicians to say they did something after Dunblane and before the inquiry was completed. They will never admit they did something completely ineffective and they will never admit how much they spent from the public purse compensating law abiding people for stealing their property. When one side argues from a position of lies, there is no way to negotiate.

WTF dude? Unnecessary. If this is how we treat folks after having their eyes opened a bit? It is no wonder we are always fighting, and often losing our rights. Everyone in this world is a victim of their own frame of reference and no one holds all the keys to the kingdom. We each view the world, the people in it, and the things that happen with a bias towards what we have experienced, what we have come to believe is the truth of this world. Not everyone has been a victim of a violent crime. Not everyone has seen evil. You can not expect everyone to come to the same conclusions as “you” on their own. Some folks need a little help. This is the part we are supposed to be better at. Using facts and logic to defeat emotion and rhetoric. A lot of you in this thread are lacking that ability - some of you all sound like Democrats with your idle threats, and attempts at silencing. Screaming over an attempt at dialogue - shit some of you sound like you’ve been triggered and need a safe space. Russian shill? Come on. A bunch of folks here have met him - hell, he came to a shotgun shoot. I expect better from my brother and sister gun owners. I am very disappointed. Be gracious. Take the win. You actually changed someone’s mind. And if you look, it wasn’t the ones who gnashed their teeth add wrent their clothes over AVB’s statements. It was those of us who held true to the core values of our side of the argument - the ones who used calm and directed knowledge, undisputed facts, and truth, that changed AVB’s mind. AVB, I am directly opposed to the statements made by the congresscritter from Florida. Many others in this thread have covered the big points but basically it boils down to this - You can not legislate evil, and people are evil. Guns are tools. We are facing a software issue, not a hardware one. I believe that the big issue we are facing is the fact that those with mental instability of any kind are placed in a “protected class”. By doing such we are doing everyone a disservice. I think we need a complete overhaul of the mental health system before we will see a drastic change in the kind of behavior that can creates someone that thinks shooting up a school is a good thing. In the meantime, we need more SROs - I have many thoughts on what it means to be an SRO but that is a different topic.

A primitive army can wreck havoc on a modern Army if they are willing to take the casualities. The Chinese took over 50% casualties when they first went into Korea. It also depends on the type of war you're fighting. If your fighting a guerilla war you choose the place, time, and target. Castro had as little as 200 soldiers in his command as late as 1958. Batista had over 35,000 in his army and police. A string of victories and more joining his cause led him to victory not only over Batista but the other revolutionary groups. A better example is Yugoslavia during WW2. The situation was compounded by the fact that many of the partisan factors were also fighting each other as well as the Nazis. All the anti-Nazi factions had were small arms and what they captured from the Nazis. The Nazis had armor, artillery, and aircraft. It wasn't until about 1943 the Yugoslavia got any real outside help from the Allies. The Allies had to take some time to figure out who to support. Tito won. That's with limited preplanned air support from the Allies and depending on captured Nazi equipment. Tito's success was due to 2 factors. One is it embraced an ideology not a ethnicity as other groups did. Second, he had experienced soldiers to organize and train his partisans. Tito himself was the youngest sergeant major in the Austro-Hungarian Army in WW1. He was in his early 20s. Interesting to note Yugoslavia was the the only country to liberate itself from the Nazis by itself without any outside ground forces. So can a group of citizens with their ARs, AKs, FNs, and M1As who run out in the street to engage a well equipped army. No. Can the same people who are trained and organized do it? Certainly, if they are committed to their principles and willing to die for them. There are always those who would never stand up for anything if it would put their life in danger. Many won't stand up for anything if it might cause then some discomfort. That is the reality.

Sadly at times - we can and are victims of our own passions and beliefs - sometimes we are no better than our 'enemies' real or perceived. Was I a bit harsh - yes - was I very harsh - I am not so sure. However, I do see your point and it is well taken. While it may take time for me personally to accept what I might think is drivel, I can sit back and understand those that I agree with on most matters where I may have faltered, being lead by my zeal. So that being said @AVB-AMG - Please accept my apologies for being condescending, belittling and otherwise a downright dick to you. I hope that the patience that others provided to you in this and others posts help to truly open your eyes a bit wider than they are as it pertains to firearms ownership. That being said - - you must understand the environment you are in - and the passion there runs deep - this is a not an RC model hobby - or a MC forum talking about oil and tires - right? At this time an place we are skiddish of anyone that may be perceived as an appeaser - especially in our own ranks. I am going to be cautiously optimistic about You (not that you should really care what I think ) and hope that you become the poster boy for real 2A rights and not appeasement. @High Exposure - appreciate the feedback

Ahh, there it is, I was waiting for it to put in an appearance, and it is no surprise that it was in a post from AVB-AMG. The "C" word - compromise. The tool used by every snake oil salesman, just before they sell you down the river. Gun owners have been sold the "compromise deal" ever since someone decided that the general populous having guns was a bad thing - and screw the 2A and its "shall not be infringed". Lets see, there was the GCA of 1934, the GCA of 1968, the ban on full auto weapons under the guise of the FOPA of 1986, the AWB of 1994, not to mention all the "me-too" legislation enacted by various states and municipalities. I think that someone needs to show our politicians the meaning of the word "compromise". Here's how Webster defines it: settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions. What concessions have we received? Where is the compromise in all of the above? Gee, the government has allowed us to keep guns it approves of, but it keeps coming back to the table for another bite of the gun control apple. There should be no more compromises - we've given up enough, it's time to draw our line in the sand. Adios, Pizza Bob

This sounds like another lawsuit needs to be filed. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

^^^ Fucking THIS!!!! This is why we must encourage and not dog-pile those with opposing views. No one ever won an argument by calling their opponent an idiot, shill, or anything derogatory. Lay out the facts. Put out good info. Don’t take it personal. Be pleasant but firm. Be rational not emotional. This is how you change minds. The first thing you have to do in any discussion like this is to convince the other side that it’s OK to change their mind, and they weren’t stupid for believing what they believed in the first place. You can’t let them get defensive. Once they are defending themselves, and not their opinions, it’s over. Luckily, AVB has thick skin and an open mind. This is very uncommon in my experience. We still may not all agree 100% but that’s ok, as long as there is mutual respect and we act like adults.

Jeff Cooper said, "Anyone who deserves to be shot deserves to be shot more than once". You shoot to stop a threat. You keep shooting until the threat stops.

SRO was the hero at my wife's high school, Orange High, in Hillsborough, NC. Zero losses of life. Look it up. Anything is better than nothing. You never know how you'll react until you are put in the same situation. Also things can change in your own life that can flip you. Knew a guy who was going to stay in combat infantry until he was forced out. Complete 360 after he became a grandfather in mid 40s.

Gotta appreciate his resilience. Most people’s eyes would be swollen shut after such a beating. Instead his were opened.

During the opening lecture in every one of Pat Rogers’ classes he used to give a pretty good talk on combat mindset and how many rounds are necessary to stop a threat. In the end he would say: “Keep shooting until he changes shape or catches fire” I think this is good advice.

First off, your prior post is and I call.bull crap...you don' believe what you typed your placating the forum...to attempt to save face and be relevant. Why do i say this.....becuase if the statement that I pulled from you post is the take away that you have from all this, and you never realized that before - you truly are a special kind of stupid. If it took an Internet forum to explain this to you - well, you can figure out from that whatever you want..... What you need is a long hard introspective look as to who/what you are as are human being, man in a free society and the responsibilities that go along with it, and gun owner....with all those responsibilities to keep the society free as well. I can already tell, if it has not happened, you are dreading the conversation - trying to convince your wife of your new found revelations is giving you angst and you are not looking forward to it. Best you make peace with it...it could ruin your marriage. Lastly the 2A is not at all about sporting clays, hunting, collecting, recreational shooting, investing in collectibles etc.... those facets are all bonuses - it is solely about resisting tyranny and personal defense. We are in my opinion quickly approaching a time whereby good men with guns might need to make a decision as to where they stand at the line and which side of it they wish to stand. Those men and women that choose freedom & liberty and belive in this nation may soon find themselves pushed onto the two way range by those that would seek to destroy a nation from within. Those that crave nothing but power prestige and money on the backs of a law abiding citizenry. That cult of personality that thrive on the media spotlight, the look at me relevance as they look at the serfs from their limos and Ivory towers..... Where will you stand - I am sure your wife will tell you where you should....

I have a few minor caveats re: the points I highlighted in blue above: 1) I think "armed LEOs vs. armed teachers" is a decision best handled locally. For instance, in some parts of the country where gun ownership is an ingrained way of life... many teachers already carry in their personal life... police departments are hard-pressed to cover large geographic areas... and local citizens are accepting of the idea - it would be perfectly logical to see if teachers wish to volunteer to help protect students. It's already being done in some parts of in the U.S., in Israel, and perhaps other places I don't even know about. Why rule it out? 2) I also like Israel's plan which involves training students to be more proactive as well - more than just "run, hide and wait to be shot" (which seems to be the prevalent philosophy here). Engaging students to be active in their own self-defense (even if it's rushing the shooter if cornered, throwing objects, using a fire extinguisher, whatever) gives kids an extra chance to fight for their own survival. Why not give them the disciplined techniques to do so? 3) As far as diagnosing mental health problems and intervening... as I've stated on another thread, some of these killers had red flags all over the place! People KNEW they were sick.... but they dropped the ball. We now know in this most recent case, the school passed this kid around like a basketball, the local LEOs visited his house 39 times, the FBI was warned about him TWICE with the 2nd time a very and credible threat, 4 officers who were onsite FAILED to engage the shooter... EVERYONE failed, again and again and again! Tightening up our response to these signs of a potentially violent kid is absolutely critical IMO.... and holding people responsible when they fail! As a side note, I read one article that said Switzerland, after one of their own school shootings, began to fund an in-school psychologist in every school to help identify potentially violent kids and pull them into treatment. That's another idea worth exploring. I just think "we're doing it again" - we're sweeping the mental health issue under the rug because it's too "challenging" to deal with...? No, I can't accept that. Other than that, I agree "lock, stock and barrel" with everything you said!

Thank you.. London is now considering a knife ban I understand. Still boils down to people behaving badly

JohnnyB: Maybe you should now go pour yourself a beer or mix yourself a cocktail to help you recover from your shock.... AVB-AMG

HOLY SHIT!

@AVB-AMG I’m curious. When LEO shoots someone the left blames the cop. When some psycho kills someone, the left blames the gun..

More like you e-mailed the criminals.......................

It’s all math. They get a ton of free press by “breaking from the NRA” while it is en vogue. Then, later, when the heat is off the go back to the NRA. The number of anti-gun people + pro-gun people who will forgive them > pro-gun people who won’t.

How do I pin these for 15 rounds?

JackDaWack: If I was or am so effective in manipulating people’s opinion of me or my stated beliefs, then maybe I should run for public office. It certainly worked for you know who.... Then again...nah.... I would not want to have to be answerable and beholden to the special interest groups that I would need to fund my election and re-election campaigns. Instead, I can just enjoy living off of my extensive $ proceeds in retirement, that I have received from G. Soros from all of my posts here.... (Let’s all try not to lose our sense of humor....) AVB-AMG

At this point, I think that banning any semi-automatic firearm would be an infringement on MY interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. As importantly, I believe that ANY ban on semi-automatic firearms, not just AR-15’s, would ultimately be ineffectual in preventing or deterring a determined, crazed individual from obtaining and unfortunately using that firearm in a mass shooting. I think that is the important message that is needed to be shared with and digested by the American public. AVB-AMG

Does skin thickness determine post-length? If so I’m kinda wishing he were more of a pansy.

High Exposure: Thank you for your very thoughtful and considerate post. Not too many people have risked breaking away from the group-think here to actually defend someone (me) who claims to have actually learned and now agrees with some valid claims and arguments, thus changing their mind. I appreciate your taking the time and making the effort to take the higher road, as well as a higher altitude perspective on why we all are here on NJGF and sharing it here. YSRifle30Cal: Thank you for taking the time to further elaborate your feelings on this sensitive topic, as well as about me. We all, myself included, can become very defensive and may be too quick to react to statements made by others on our respective keyboards, trading snarky insults and/or making libel statements. I appreciate your “reconsideration” of me and my motives and being willing to have some faith in my being honest and truthful in my epiphany on this topic. Also, I apologize to you for my earlier critical rant that included you. BTW, my wife and I disagree on a number of things but she is slowly becoming more tolerant about guns and the national debate. I get her out to the RTSP range every several months to practice with our personal defense handgun. As importantly, I am savy enough to realize that it is worth paying for a female instructor to help her review the fundamentals and in order to be truly effective, that instructor should not be her husband... I understand and do not blame the skepticism of some here, such as Golf Battery, that I am being honest and sincere in my “conversion” on this particular issue. (BTW, I have not denied that I can, at times, act like an ass....). Aside from the thread I started 3 years ago on Donald Trump, I will say the reason I make my comments and start new threads on firearm-related topics here is because I find them interesting and want to start or partake in a discussion to better educate myself. Yes, sometimes I may present my opinion as an absolute statement, which does not come across as a question or as a willingness to being open to change my mind, but I do not think I am alone in doing that. I need to work on that more... I think it is worth repeating part of what I said in my last long post: I know a fair amount, but the more I learn, the more I realize just how much I do not know and need to learn. While I do have strong feelings, beliefs and values regarding many things, when it comes to firearms, I am still evolving my position on this sensitive topic, since I only re-started my connection with firearms in the past several years. I read and listen to both opposing sides of this ongoing debate and digest their respective arguments and do believe that there is some mutually acceptable middle ground that the majority of us can eventually reach. I am comfortable with that and am not a zealot and am wary of both extremes. My position may not be acceptable to either the radical right or left wings politically, but it is my position. Unlike some here, I am willing to change my mind based on rational, logical and sensible arguments, based on reason, historical facts and honest truth. I have done that on other topics we have discussed here on NJGF, such as how to deal with North Korea. I expect that my beliefs on other topics may also continue to evolve since our nation and world are constantly changing and we need to be willing to adapt to that change and not be statically stuck in a retrospective view of how to deal with progress. Now, on to the next topic... AVB-AMG

Even I (who has never taken defensive shooting training and knows exactly "diddlysquat" about it) can see a lot of things that I think they did wrong. The things that jumped out to me were: the mother let the killer get too close to her (close enough to grab the gun) the daughter shot the intruder when the mother was right behind him (she could have shot her own mom!) there were several additional times when it looked like the 2 ladies had their guns pointed at each other. So, sure... I really hope they sign up for defensive firearm training! THAT SAID, let's keep the blame where it should be... this piece of garbage/career criminal tried to steal from their business and put them in fear for their lives... and instead of making off with the cash, he ended up bleeding on the floor with 4 pieces of lead in him. All in all, despite the ladies' technical errors, still a pretty good ending if you ask me!

AVB I'm glad you were reasonable enough to listen to opposing views as well as able to withstand the forum beating long enough to open your eyes ...lol [emoji106][emoji106]

Well said USR30c.

Let's not eat our own here..... Keep it civil......

I'm also intrigued. If some of the northern contingent wants to pre-organize and carpool, let me know.

JohnnyB: Yes, I am for real and am being totally serious.... Per your Soros raise comment, I only wish that I was being paid for my posts here on NJGF and if I was I would insist that it would be calculated on my word count in each post... AVB-AMG

1A does not apply here. This is a privately owned forum.

I bet you could get a side job doing vasectomies with that thing. Zeeker, you fixed?

Trying to have a debate with AVB or Zeke. That's like asking if one wants to get smacked in the head with a hammer or shovel. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Yes, WE are

Whoops! Under New Jersey state law, manufacturing, transporting or possessing a slingshot without "an explainable, lawful purpose" is a fourth degree crime which is punishable by up to 18 months in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. Yep! Believe it or not. Singshots are already illegal in the PRNJ!

Didnt SCOTUS rule that the state can’t be required? P-something V. state back when Brady Bill was enacted and NICS still being set up.

All my guns identify as a Sears & Roebuck 1941 16ga single shot.

We should ban drugs too, so nobody ODs. We should also ban drunk driving, so nobody drives drunk and kills innocent people.

@GRIZ Thanks for the clarification. Something I did not know which I had just looked up is that JSOC encompasses several units under it's command. It makes sense that when you are attached to JSOC, you are also entitled to it's exemptions. Regards, TokenEntry

Your pimp hand is strong son.

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.

Me likey!

Nothing. I have girls and enjoy taking them to and watching them play soccer. I think he was just making a point of calling AVB a soccer Mom, or a Pansy. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Seems Brian Mast learned quickly how to be a scumbag politician. He took $100k from sugar farmers then claimed he gave it all back when in reality he gave back $12k. When questioned by Republican running against him he called them a piece of shit. http://floridapolitics.com/archives/220282-brian-mast-fudges-promise-return-sugar-money-blasts-opponent-calls Maybe Soros gave him a nice payday to right that Op-Ed or just sign his name to it? He is a proven sell out.

I was wondering that myself. For the M16 the aluminum 20 round mags I understand were preferred, but I've never read or heard about 20 round mags being preferred today. Also the .40 seems strange, especially in a combat zone from a logistics standpoint. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Reddit had this as the "Why did I buy a maverick?" deal haha

Wait, the government and it's employees failed at every possible level surrounding this shooting, so I should give up my guns. OK, Got it.