GRIZ

It reminds me of last year when labor unions had a big rally in Philly were they were demanding a "new Bill of Rights" which also happens to proposed by the Communist Party USA. Who's in bed with who? I'd like to find out who's idea it was at the National Constituton Center to pich the 2A as the first to be rewritten.

Correct. Too many evil features.

Flash surpressors are not illegal in NJ but they are an evil feature as folding or pistol grip stock, bayonet lug, etc. If you had a flash surpressor permanently installed it would be legal. An example would be a Mini 14 GB in a regular stock with the bayonet lug ground off.

I've been carrying 1911s for about 40 years. I have a Combat Commander for nearly and don't find any advantage to it. A LW Commander will save you a few ounces but I don't see that being much of a concern. I carry a full size.

Accuracy in a stock Garand is a crapshoot. Almost all of them are not tack drivers. Keep in mind 3" at 100yds is acceptable in a brand new Garand for issue to troops. The best shooting Garand I have is a field grade with a VAR barrel and a lot of Beretta parts. That will shoot under 2" @ 100 with Greek ammo. I intend to get a RM1 Special. You can't bring a SG Special to the same spec for $45.

HE, you are correct.

I think your percentages may be off a bit but I won't argue that point. You have to face the fact success of resistance units rely heavily on outside help. Yes, they can result in major headaches for the invader but you have to look at what constitutes resistance. I'll use the French Resistance in WWII as an example. It not only consisted of people shooting at the enemy. That was only one aspect. It had people printing underground newspapers, getting Allied Airmen out of France, espionage, and sabotage. The sabotage was not always blowing up trains. It might be an engineer pouring some grinding compound into some critical part of a locomotive resulting in stopping or at least delaying some critical troop movement or delivery of some material. They were not very effective until they were supplied by the OSS and SOE in 1943. Later on the Jedburgh teams (British, US, and Americans sent from Britain) formed the Resistance into combat units attached to Allied forces. At the end of WWII, France decorated all the people who worked in the resistance in any capacity (as I discussed above). Keep in mind being recognized as working in the Resistance was a high honor. I don't know what criteria the French used but 200,000 people were officially recognized by France. That's .5% of the wartime population. You speak of zealots during the American Revolution. Yes there were many but far from the 4% you claim. At the start of the Revolution the colonists were pretty much equally divided between for, against, and I don't care. Depending on which stats you want to believe Washington had 20-30% of his army desert at Valley Forge. The Continental Army hit its peak in 1776 with about 45,000 troops and steadily declined to about 13,000 in 1783. Colonists did their hitch, got out and the Revolution was not as popular as it was at the start. There were over 1500 recorded engagements with the British and the fact is the rebels lost most of them. The only thing that saved the American Revolution were: 1. We won the important battles. 2. The British never maintained enough troops to occupy areas they won. 3. The British saw continuation of the war as a money losing proposition and decided to quit. If the British committed more forces and fought a few years more the Colonists may have given up. You claim the British were the finest fighting force in the world at that time. Maybe, but not the force sent to America. Most of the senior British commanders had purchased their rank (a system that still exists). They were more capable of throwing a party than commanding troops. Most of the troops had come in the army with the option of prison or the army. They had no training to fight on american terrain. The colonists were better off in many respects. The senior commanders (and many of the troops) were for the large part veterans of the French and Indian War which gave them experience fighting here. Still they were a pretty ineffective force until von Steuben developed European organization and training adapted to American terrain and mentality starting in 1778. You speak of the effectiveness of militia units during the Revolution. Washington thought differently. Militia units were known to retreat early in a battle if they didn't have overwhelming success. This trait was so well known it was incorporated into the Continental Army's plan at the Battle of Cowpens. Watch the end of "The Patriot". Another problem with militia you point out yourself. They would fight on their own land and only their own land. During the Revolution, I don't know of any militia unit that fought in any state other than their own. There were only a handful of militia units that existed throughout the entire war. Most were formed for a year or two. Having been there done that, combat is not paintball, IPSC, or other games people play. Most of those who sound off the loudest will be ready to give up at the first sight of blood or sooner. I lived in many parts of the country and agree some areas are more prone to offering an invader resistance than others. You seem to think pointing out there is not going to be 10,20,or 30 million resisting invaders is somehow unpatriotic. I really take exception to your comment, "If any of you think we wouldn't get that many to fight invaders you and your thinking is the problem and not the numbers." I'm basing my assessment on over 40 years of experience with the military retiring from the Army Reserve as a lieutenant colonel (having started in 1967 as a private). I've been through a lot of assignments and education many of them dealing with insurgency/counter-insurgency and low intensity conflict. I base my opinions on my experience, education, and history not on chest thumping patriotism. If you want troops to follow you you have to be honest with them. Remember what Patton said, "the idea is to make the other SOB die for his country". You fail to see there are many points you make I agree with. Yes, you don't need massive numbers to interfere with an invader's operations. But you can't plan on getting 10% or even 5% to fight. You can't expect them to maintain success against the enemy without outside help in organization and supply. I would hope we would fight and the enemy won't stand a chance but I'm basing my opinions of fact not emotion.

Where can you get one fixed?

If Afghans didn't have a foreigner to fight they would just fight one another.

I've watched this fantasy invasion thread for a few days. There are many things people haven't considered. Logistics If you are the invader before you select where you will invade you need to figure out how to keep them supplied. This is crucial when you're trying to figure out where to launch your invasion. You will need thousands of tons of supplies a day to keep your army going. You need seaports and railroads to move that much stuff. As far as American guerilla fighters go this is also a major consideration. Forget your 338 Lapua sniper rifle. You will have to depend on help from the outside, as partisian forces did in WWII, or rely on whatever your enemy is using. Where to Invade The Northeast US is way too congested for military operations. Alaska is out as there is no road network. The invader wants to gain ground, inflict the most hardships on the defender, and also leave a central command somewhere to call for a surrender. You need to consider weather, terrain, and other factors. IF (thats a big if) the US were to be invaded the best place would be from Mexico. Large population centers could be bypassed, you can deny the US food and oil resources, and towns aren't built up next to one another making them easy to bypass. You would have to deal with winters invading from Canada. Defending the US There could never be any surprise invasion even if we were limited to 50 yr old technology. There would be many political indicators way before any invader put boots on US soil. There would be time for a build up of some sorts. The idea of mating up civilians with a few active duty guys has been tried before. The Russians literally drafted men off the streets when the Germans were close to Moscow. You signed your papers and were given a greatcoat hat, a rifle, and a small supply of ammo and put on a truck. Somewhere enroute to the front you got minimal instruction on shooting and then were sent off to the front to positions with the regular Soviet Army behind you. Your mission was to make the Germans use up their ammo. Yeah, cannon fodder and that's what handing an untrained civilian a rifle and expecting them to be a soldier amounts to. The Resistance We all like to talk about Red Dawn. There would be small groups but any real success will depend on outside supply and organization and coordination of missions. That's what made resistance movements successful in WWII. Even the most successful partisian fighters in WWII, the Yugoslavians, got outside logistics help and allowed the Soviets to cover their flank. BTW the Yugoslavians were the only occupied country to liberate themselves in WWII. There are not that many people in the US who would be that willing to fight in a resistance movement. I see comments on this forum like, "I support the military but think we should get out of all the places we are in the world" That's like telling you wife you love her but hate everything she does. Another comment I've seen on this forum was, "I support the military but wouldn't enlist because I don't like mindlessly following orders." That says a lot of what they really think of the military. The American fighter doesn't "mindlessly follow orders". There are times you need to follow an order but don't have the details but that's having faith in your superiors. Shooting 3 gun matches and other gun games don't make you able take on a military force. I don't doubt if we were invaded there would be a resistance movement if this country were invaded but it would be no where as big as many think. Someone mentioned the effectiveness of a rebel army. Well it can be but I hope you aren't thinking of Libya, Syria, or Egypt as an example. Arab armies are quite ineffective. This is the only reason Israel still exists. If Israel had to fight the US, the UK, or some other well trained well equipped army they would do a lot of damage but lose a prolonged conflict. The Taliban in Afghanistan is another story as they are religious zealots. There are substantially different rules of engagement even for the Taliban. If you read "Sole Survivor" you know the only reason Mark Lutrell survived is because the chief of the village nearby put him under protection of the village. The chief even confronted the Taliban and chased them off when they came to take Lutrell. The fact is our geography still protects from conventional military invasion. There will be a lot of changes in world politics before one has to worry about it.

Amtrak requires firearms to travel as checked luggage.

Shipping it Fedwx or UPS might seem like a good idea but they won't let you ship a gun to yourself. Only to a FFL or manufacturer. The only time I encountered Port Authority Police at Newark or JFK is when I was still working and carried my guns on the plane. Since I've retired I never had a police encounter checking my guns.

If all drugs were legalized what do you think the people involved in the business do? Do you think street dealers will see the error of their ways? Gangbangers will all get educations and discover the cure for cancer? Drug lords will take their millions and invest them in eco-energy businesses? Do you really think criminals will stop being criminals?

BTW if you are active you don't need to carry proof of qualification. The rationale being if you're working you qualified. This reinforces following your agency's rules. Retired LEOs need to carry proof of qualification.

I qualify retired LEOs and that's also good for LEOSA. You need to have something recorded regarding what you qualified with. I give the qual sheet which lists the guns you qualed with to the shooter. I don't maintain any record of what they shot and am not required to. You can qualify with any caliber 22 short to 500 S&W. Your agency dictates caliber if you are active not LEOSA. That's the same for all agencies. If you are state or local any restrictions have no force outside of the state. However, I think you are better served carrying what your agency permits as that gives you a basis for having had training no matter who you work for. If you are Federal you won't be charged criminally for carrying something other than your agency issues but you might lose our job. Also if you're Federal you may get agency backing in an off duty shoot as long as you're playing by their rules. Although LEOSA says "firearm" not "handgun" I have never had anyone ask me to qual them with a long gun or an AR or AK pistol. To me "type of firearm" means revolver or semi-auto pistol. IMO if you qual with a only a revolver you shouldn't be carrying a semi-auto. While the definition of "type of handgun" is not clear I qual with a DA revolver, 1911, and Glock.

Nuclear attack would be much more likely. I think the US Navy could deal with an invasion flotilla well before it gets here. However, there are already OPLANs to deal with any contingency including going to war with Canada.

Moreso because it is two nut bag sheriff deputies?

Revolvers are forgiving but will fail if filled up with crap.

I usually shoot a quality lead (not plated) bullet in my 617 and have had no problems. However, the most I shoot a range session is 150-200 rds and it gets cleaned after every session. Never have any problem shooting shorts either. You may have a timing problem and if so it should be evident by slowly dry firing the gun.

I was thinking this may be why it was in his vehicle. Domino's policy may forbid "carrying" a firearm. I guess we'll see.

Most burglaries are not done by professionals. Also most professionals don't want to spend more than 5 minutes in the house. I'd say that safe offers substabtially more security than putting your guns in the closet or under the bed.

carguy3j you gave the answer in your #4. The housewife defending herself may not make the papers but the subsequent arrest of her would. While not acting in an official capacity #2 also applies. Emergency situation where actions are reasonably necessary. In response to your #3 the gun store owner was asked. He gave them willingly. It wasn't the reason he did so but he was rewarded by selling those guns as the actual ARs used in the shootout for a substantial monetary reward (good for him).

Courtd Courts have long recognized someone may break a law, moreso a malum prohibitum law, in order to defend themselves or save a life. Was the gun shop owner who handed out ARs to LAPD during the bank robbery shooting charged? Legally no difference than the OP's question. No one is advocating breaking any law simply because of convenience. There is also conflict in the law itself regarding transfer of a firearm and possession of a firearm in your home. If you ask a lawyer in their professional capacity if its legal to do something in a gray area they will always advise you not to do it. Their personal opinion may br 180 degrees from that but they will tell you not to do it. I spent over 30 years as a LEO and am not a lawyer. That said I can't see any way you could be charged as an accessory, aiding or abetting, or conspiracy in discussing this matter. You are not participating in any crime or doing anything material towards its commission. Getting "wifey" (which I find insulting to women) her own FID and guns don't fully solve the problem either. What if she's closer to your gun when the cretins break down the door? Too much overthinking on something that's apparent. That's my take.

Where did you get the OAL from?

I like the Lee water soluble lube although may say its not as convienient as a spray. Apply the lube, let it dry and size the cases next week if you want to. After sizing, wash the cases in hot water, dry and a short tumble if you feel you need it. Never any issue regarding lube inside or outside of the case.