GRIZ

No permit needed to transfer a gun to someone is the correct answer. No information you need from your father's permit. Being this thread is 6 years old and had been brought back to life, how many of you have been hassled by a cop when legally transporting firearms?

Depends on how bad you want it. I've paid a bit more for things I really wanted.

As 14k said no real collectibility for commercial models. They were also made in Italy. What's the asking price?

Going for things you can win vs going after things you know you can't win sounds like a better strategy with limited resources.

Not my comparison. I didn't bring up Scientology. You did. The IRS doesn't see any sense in spending $3 million to get $4 million and net $1 million when we can net $2 without spending another dime in the example I gave. They get the most bang for their buck. Scientology bases it's arguments on being a religion. Touchy subject for any one, including IRS, going out to prove something is not a religion. Scientology doesn't have to raise money from supporters. It already has it and enough generous supporters to replenish their coffers. Your idea of hammering the opposition with frivolous lawsuits won't work. You really think you can get supporters by telling them you're going to waste most of their money?

@Soclydeza just because someone complains doesn't make them an "Anti" or a dick. I know many say gunfire is music to their ears but they dont hear it all the time. Dont compare it to hunters. Interim shots by hunters is much different than you putting a few hundred rounds through your 9mm or a mag dump from your AR. Try talking to them as Peel suggested. Do you have a backstop?

Big difference is Scientology lawsuits were based on its claims as a religion. Is the 1A holier than the 2A? There are few laws governing religion in the US. Many laws governing firearms. Yeah, most of them are bs but that's the way it is. IRS always has it figured how to get the most bang for their buck. If IRS says a billionaire owes $4,000,000 and the billionaire responds he or she only owes $2,000,000 IRS does some thinking. If it's going to cost them $3,000,000 to get that 2 they will just settle for the 2.

A shotgun is about 170 db.

@Pizza Bob one chart I have shows: 38 special....158 decibels 9mm.............160 decibels 357................164 decibels I know how decibels work. A +P 38 spl is probably right around a 9mm.

You're talking about the 357. Of course it's louder. Refer to my first post in this thread where I quote you energy figures. The 357 has about 60% more energy. If you're getting that much more energy expect more noise. Using ammo comparable in power to the 9 (125 gr +P 38 special) the revolver is no more louder than the semiautomatic. I still stand by what I said. If you want the best all around handgun get a 4" 357. If you want the best all around 9mm get a Glock 19. JMO

45 ACP and 9mm Parabellum are great combat pistol rounds. If I only could have one handgun it would be a 4" 357. OTOH I've never had any use for the 40.

Not for a war.

I was always Army Ray. Never got to Asia until Vietnam. @Ray Ray I could have used that for some Marine Jokes but I didnt!!!

Two years before D Day in Normandy we were in the battle that marked the point we started winning the war. We stopped Japanese expansion in the Pacific in May 1942 at the Battle of the Coral Sea. This also was the first aircraft carrier battle that marked the end of major naval engagements being decided by battleships duking it out with big guns. Six months after Pearl Harbor and a month after the Coral Sea we started winning WW2 at the Battle of Midway (June 4-7, 1942).

I've had to shoot a 357 several times without hearing protection. Both indoors and out. Yes, I have hearing loss but most of that I attribute to 12 months in the artillery in a combat zone at a young age. I much prefer the hearing loss over being dead. There are a lot of standard 9mm loads with a lot of muzzle flash. +P and +P+ loads rival a 357.

Another thing, practice with speed loaders and you can reload faster than most do with magazines.

If I only had one handgun? Going to give you the standard Griz answer. You can do just about anything with a 4" 357 magnum. Some details: Ammo- there's a wide range of power loadings avaliable OTC. From target wadcutters, std 38s, +P, +P+, to full magnums. With a semi auto you pretty much have to start with std loads as they are needed to have the gun function. A std 124 gr 9mm at 1100 fps gives you 333 ft/lbs of energy. A 125 gr 357 at 1400 fps gives you 543 ft/lbs of energy. You can pretty much get the power of a 9mm in a 38 +P. You can work up thru the power levels with a 357 until you can handle full magnums. Size- a 4" 357 is big enough to shoot well. It's not that hard to conceal. DO NOT BUY A J FRAME 357!!! AFAIC J frame 357s are there just to show they can be made. Not fun to shoot. Get at least a K frame size gun or better yet a L or N frame size gun. The Ruger GP100 is a fine revolver and usually a bit less expensive than a comparable S&W L frame. Flame suit ready...I like Taurus revolvers. More on that later. Reliability- semiautomatics have come light years in this category over the past 30 years or so. I've been a firearms instructor for over 40 years. Yes a revolver can have malfunctions. Over the 1000s of guns I've seen firing and millions of rounds I've seen more with semiautomatics malfunction. Over the past 25 years or so most of those malfunctions with semis are ammo and magazine related. Revolvers are not ammo sensitive and as long as the bullet gets out of the barrel that's all the power needed. I've seen 357s go 20,000 rds in trials with zero malfunctions. My 30 year old Taurus 669 lost the rear sight because the screw came loose after over 10,000 rds of full magnums. That's my fault not the gun's. The gun would still shoot. Taurus replaced it free with a 2 week turnaround. Other than that zero problems. I'll say something against what most people suggest. YOU DON'T NEED AN ACTION JOB AND LIGHTER SPRINGS ON A REVOLVER. If you decide to shoot USPSA or something like that those things help. You'll also only use that revolver for games. Smooth is most important than light. A DA revolver is harder to learn how to shoot vs a striker fired or SA auto. However if you learn to shoot a DA revolver well everything else is easy. S&W and Ruger comes with a pretty smooth trigger from the factory. Taurus not as smooth but will improve with use. Easiest way to smooth up a DA revolver is to dry fire a couple of thousand times. It will also build up the muscles in your hand and fingers so that "long, heavy DA pull" so many complain about isn't so long and heavy. If you're willing to come down to Ocean County I'll host you at my range and help you decide what you want. PM me.

I know Miranda is not a law. I used it as it is something everyone is aware of and understands. It's revalence is it has to do with Constitutional Rights and unconstitutional acts. No you never said holding politicians accountable would be viable or easy. You don't write an amendment to enforce another amendment or write a law to enforce a law. You might as well be discussing how people will go to Trenton with their torches and pitchforks to tar and feather all those politicians that voted for unconstitutional laws. Yes, the 14A applies the Bill of Rights to the states. SCOTUS has also said states can "reasonable restrictions" regarding firearms. How "M1 Carbine type" made its way into the NJ AW law is an oft discussed issue. Although someone in this thread has already labeled me an "Anti" I can assure you I am very much a 2A supporter for more time than many on this forum have been alive. The AWB is stupid and accomplishes nothing as far as reducing crime or unnecessary violence. I don't understand what you're saying when you state, "It's just a matter of NJ Police not having enforced state laws up to that point". Are you saying they passed another law (the AWB) because police were not enforcing other state laws?

Very optimistic IMO.

Probaby good that Miculek or even someone with half his talent doesn't shoot USPSA. He doesn't use slow steady pulls, shoots accurately...and is really fast.

Okay. How many years is it going to take for SCOTUS to hear all these cases?

Yeah, throw out that ANTI label when you have nothing else to say! I know where I stand and you can believe whatever you want. If you think SCOTUS is going to rule all gun laws unconstitutional you're wrong. Based on your unlimited interpretation of the 1A and 2A there should be no state laws governing either. How does any state get away with having any gun laws? They all would be unconstitutional by your standard. How do municipalities get away requiring permits for assemblies? A 1A violation by your standard. The fact is all rights are regulated. You are compelled to submit to a search to get on a commercial airplane. You can be compelled to submit to a Customs search entering or leaving the country. You're required to prove your citizenship when entering the country. All can be considered 4A and 5A violations by your definition.

Not wrong. 50 states, 50 different sets of gun laws. Arizona gives one more gun rights than NJ. That's the way it is. As long as the state permits citizens to own guns that's in line with the 2A. UNLESS, the state law is contrary to the 2A. That gets determined by Federal courts.

So you're saying all those executive, legislative, and judicial jobs are for someone else not me. Hold them personally responsible but its not going to be me? As i said before a law may be in effect for years before it gets in front of a court and is ruled unconstitutional. How are legislators supposed to predict what the court will find after they pass a bill? How is the chief executive supposed to know? Do you have a crystal ball that will tell them? If it were your 18 year old daughter that was kidnapped and raped would you be saying "Good for Mr. Miranda" when his conviction was overturned? It is not the executive or legislative branches responsibility to determine if a law is constitutional. Its the judicial branch that does that. Thats in the COTUS. That's following the COTUS. Don't you think if good argument could be made against the NJ AWB in the nearly 30 years it's been in effect someone might have taken it to SCOTUS already? There is 10A which reserves any powers not given in t b e COTUS to the states. 50 states have their own interpretation of what the right to keep and bear arms means. That's in the COTUS. Your idea of "personal responsibility" is very unrealistic. You talked of a new "amendment". You obviously have no idea what it takes to amend the COTUS. The founders made it that way so it couldn't easily be changed. Your concept of the NJAG redefining what type means and scooping people off the streets is fantasy. Any malum prohibitum law contains a compliance period. That was done when the original AWB was,passed in NJ and is in all the legislation currently in the works. Spirit and intent are open to interpretation. Do I always agree with it? No, but that's the way our system works. SCOTUS ruled that separate but equal were fine at one time. Years later they said it wasn't.

All officials in all branches enjoy a certain degree of immunity for official actions. Who would take any of those jobs if this weren't the case. Lets take a real life case for example. Ernesto Miranda confessed to the kidnapping and rape of an 18 year old. His conviction was overturned by SCOTUS. Going by your idea of everyone being held personally responsible the cops, the prosecutor, the judge and jury that convicted him, the state appellate court that upheld his conviction, the state supreme court, and the federal appellate court should all be held personally responsible. Where would you get anyone to take these jobs if they all were to be held personally responsible? Legislators are the same way. A law gets reviewed before it is voted on. If it passes the legislature, signed by the chief executive, it can't be found unconstitutional until someone brings it to a court's attention. That may be years after it was signed into law. You want to hold everyone personally responsible. Who would want to be a legislator or chief executive.