raz-0

Didn't know that open carry in "common areas like lobbies, lounges and laundry rooms" was permitted in public housing in New Jersey. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-01/gun-restrictions-wilmington/56644990/1 I do understand why a public housing tenant might want a gun. But I thought that a landlord in the private sector can prohibit a tenant from keeping firearms -- not just in public areas -- just like he can prohibit tenants from keeping pets or parking trucks or RVs in the parking lot. AFAIK, illegal drugs are prohibited everywhere, including public housing in New Jersey and Delaware. One that landlord is a private party. The contract limits you. Contracts signed under duress tend not to be binding. your average lessor/lessee relationship pursued by a renter at large has a very viable option for the renter to choose another unit on the open market. They also can negotiate the terms of the lease. Two, the courts have set precedent that lease terms that ban arms open up the landlord to liability to provide increased security to their renters. The government's position as landlord in public housing to those financially unable to seek a unit elsewhere changes the mechanism by which a private party may offer you the opportunity to sign your rights away.

Perhaps you aren't taking it far enough. Perhaps he is implying that Cryan is a closeted lesbian.

As I understand it, she started carrying as she became more involved with the civil rights movement. 1957 is when she more or less told the souther democrats to go F themselves on the issue. You will notice that is the year on the permit to carry.

NJ statute does not define machine gun more strictly than the BATFE does, and the NJAC does not clarify, extend, or otherwise enhance the definition of machine gun beyond the statute that I can see. Therefore I would suggest that absent the features mentioned in the statutory definition of machine gun for NJ, BATFE's ruling on controlled parts is the strictest regulation we operate under. This is not the case in a number of other states. Several operate on different definitions of machine guns, kind of like NJ is seeking to operate under a different definition of destructive device than BATFE does with the .50 caliber ban bill. That's my $0.02. There's never a definition of what is really legal. Legal is what you can win in court with. I'd argue you can make a pretty sound case for not having a machine gun in nj if you do not have and BATFE controlled part in your gun, and it fires only one round with each pull of the trigger.

Hornady LNL size/deprime poweder drop with expander in one. lockout die seat crimp If you want a bullet feeder, you replace the lockout with it, and your job becomes to LOOK before pulling the handle rather than manipulating components and pulling the handle while keeping an eye on things.

BZZT, wrong (dont' feel bad, I used to think that too) It is way more variable than simple barrel length. Chamber comes into it a LOT more than I ever expected. I actually have a 16" mid length barrel with a .223 wylde chamber that gets slightly higher velocities than an 18" rifle length gas system 18" barrel with a 5.56 chamber. As far as recoil, gas system length is relative to barrel length. A mid length gas system on a 16" barrel is nice and pretty reliable. It move gas pressure at the port and dwell time closer to the original design of the 20" system. It's not the same, but it is closer. On an 18" barrel, a mid length gas system moves it back towards the dwell time of a carbine length gas system. A rifle length system cuts it below that of the original 20" barrel design and can introduce reliability issues if the gas port isn't sized right. IMO based on my experience, Noveske is probably right with their "intermediate" length gas being the best choice for an 18". Rainier arms also uses that on some of their barrels. Getting spare tubes though can be a pain. My take is that if you aren't building a really light gun, mid length will probably work out nicely as a heavier barrel will soak up most of the jarring feeling of shoving the BCG around harder. IMO any SPR profile 18" would fall in that category, especially if not fluted. If you are trying to get it as mellow as possible, rifle length gas is the way to go. Cold hammer forging will toughen the metal a bit. But in my experience, it comes at the price of accuracy over the button rifled barrels. I've asked people who know more than I do if this was hallucination on my part or sample bias. Their answer, cooked down was basically that anything that is cut and threaded for a muzzle device is usually done so after being rifled, and that opens up the bore at the muzzle, and that in their experience it tends ot be worse with CHF barrels as a whole. That with mil-spec barrels, you aren't likey going to get a sub MOA barrel, but that you ahve more chance of getting one that will hold MOA or close to it than we should have any right to expect, and that with a button rifled barrel the MOA barrels are lsightly closer ot the center of the bell curve than the CHF ones. durability wise, if you aren't going full auto or bump firing or doing mag dumps for fun, there's probably no discernible difference.

Well, even given the back of the napkin math I did, keep in mind it isn't all potential roses. For the guy who wants one handgun for home defense and isn't buying a lot more, they can either deal with the increased risk of not having an FID or are stuck with perpetual recurring costs, even if they do not move. For the guy who buys a shotgun because they hunt and want in on hunting season, they get that cost, or lose the benefit of being able to transport a long gun more freely. One could look at that as taking a divide and conquer approach to placing a barrier to entry. IT discourages the more casual participant in the sport/hobby/whatever you want to call it.

Like I said, you may just have an overinflated sense of your self worth. Why would I, and why should I give equal time and respect to an opinion not based on any knowledge. I explained in more technical detail why the concept was flawed and that it was not new by any means. Ignorance should meet information, learn, and re-evaluate. You refuse to do that.

Really, you think that is it and it has nothing to do with lawyers? If TV has a part to play it is by possibly overemphasizing your ability to be sued. Realistically, I do something to help, lots of places I'm getting arrested too, then possibly sued later. He starts beating the crap out of the lady, maybe I don't worry about that. He tries to snatch her cell phone? Why would I risk that for somewhere between $0 and $200 worth of someone else's property? This is what happens when they try to get rid of the good old punch in the face and replace it with lawyers and bureaucracy.

REad the article, it only reached that level due to a one time assessment. What the actual ongoing rate would be, who knows. Last I heard discussed was 75%, but I also recall the uproar that caused, and the article seems to imply that wasn't what was actually done. They just say a small number of households were taxed at 100% or over, and a larger number at over 75%.

The only way to answer that question is to know the ratio of FID applicants vs P2P applicants. once every 4 years would be a MASSIVE reduction in the number of P2Ps processed. Given that most municipalities handle a change of address on FID like you were applying for a new one, a move would be equivalent to the 4 year expiration. According to NAHB, by year 4, approximately 21% of single family dwelling buyers move. For condos town homes and other similar dwellings, that number jumps to 42%. Averaged over the last decade or so, for a stand alone single family dwelling, you are looking at 12 years for the move out rate to hit 50%. Under the 4 year plan, if it builds a durable 4 year P2P into the FID, you'd be looking at 3 or 4 visits to the issuing authority to get that done depending on if you renew shortly before moving or wait until you move to do it. If you bought one handgun every year, that's be 12 visits. To match a 4 year expiration with durable p2p you'd have a hard time getting it down to 3 visits unless you don't really buy much. From the what does it do for us perspective it is interesting as well. Given the above math, with a 4 year expiration and a durable 4 year p2p attached, for 3 visits you can acquire unlimited long guns and 48 handguns. What the dollar cost to achieve that in paying the man permit fees and background check fees is unknown. Best case scenario under the current system for three visits, if you are lucky enough to be able to get rubber stamp exceptions and don't count that as a visit AND you don't get hassled for new prints and a background check while doing this (which you shouldn't if you do it as fast as you can opn initial FID issuance), is get FID and 6 permits then file for extension. Repeat after 6 months, and repeat again six months after that. You get unlimited long guns and 18 pistols for 3 visits and about $137 under optimal conditions. IF one applies common sense (HAHAHAHAH), the most expensive license you can get form the DMV is $60 and they seem to thnk that is sufficient for a secure form of ID. Morpho will cost the same as it does now, so like $61. That's $121. In theory, they should be able to deliver this bigger better ID for this price.

You have a super low post count, and you showed up to talk about how awesome smart guns are. You are a troll or a shill. Option 3 is you are increadibly ignorant and incapable or unwilling to educate yourself on a subject. Come to any OB or CJ USPSA match, I'll tell you that to your face. I don't conduct myself here (or on the internet in general) in a manner that I wouldn't use in a face to face situation. I think you are GREATLY ignorant of what folks in the inner city do not have. The tools needed for most of the things I did fit in a pocket. Heck, if I needed to I could probably do half of them with a nail and emery board and a hunk of broken brick if necessary it just might mess up the finish. Second, go look at some of the hack jobs that get taken off the streets by police. Stop being racist and assuming minorities are inherently stupid, or stop being classist and assuming people who are not close to you on the socio economic ladder are inherently incapable of understanding a simple machine. Last I heard it isn't hard to get on the internet these days, and all the knowledge to get this stuff done is there. We have drug gangsmanufacturing home grown tanks, APCs, submarines and other interesting things for their side of the drug war. Adam Lanza spent a lot of time plotting. James holmes spent a lot of time plotting and building all sorts of things. If some piece of crap device that only had a legal statute preventing you circumventing it was all that posed an obstacle to them, do you REALLY think they would stop? I'll add to your list kids grabbing loaded guns from around the home and causing a tragedy. They aren't necessarily really determined or clever and very often are essentially opportunistic. In this case I ask why do we need a new "technological solution"? We already have a whole PILE of technological solutions for storing guns so as to limit access to them by children. Parents with poor judgment are parents with poor judgment, you can't legislate them away, and they are 100% the ultimate cause of those situations (ok, sometimes it's grandparents or other adult family member with poor judgement, but the same thing applies.. technology does not stop stupid, nor does legislation). How about YOU take a minute to examine reality and look at the people we are talking about here. As I have stated discussing this previously, anything that doesn't require electrically triggered primers to be part of the equation is easily altered or removed. Anything that does, in the end has a positive and negative lead that applies a voltage to the cartridge to make it fire. You can stick all the electronics you want in there, and I can yank it out and replace it with whatever I want that applies a voltage at the point of those leads and make it work, but even more of a problem is that lets me make it a machine gun very easily. BATFE will NOT permit something that easily converted to a machine gun on the market. Give me an arduino nano (google it and learn some more of the parameters of the engineering task you speak of perhaps rather than arguing that your ill informed emotional appeal is some form of "logic"), and I'm pretty sure I can build something that will pulse a voltage at any cyclic rate I like up to the limit of the clock in the arduino which GREATLY exceeds the cyclic rate of the mechanical bits of a firearm. I can fit it in the form factor of a weapon light and drop it on a rail too. This is NOT an ability you want to hand out to those intent on doing great harm. Personalized weapons are something that military and law enforcement have been trying to figure out how to make it work well enough for their needs for about 40 years now. This isn't something the internet generation jsut thought up because everyone over 30 is some kind of idiot who doesn't understand technology. The gun control crowd has been bringing up a "technical solution" recently as if it is not something that has already been researched. They are promoting nonexistent technologies or technologies that have failed not because they are a nice compromise. They bring them up because they know that to the uninformed they can make it SOUND like a reasonable idea. While in reality what they are discussing is a method to break the back of the firearms manufacturers by mandating a technology that will drive most of them out of business due to inability to comply, and will damage or destroy those that remain by reducing their sales to a level they cannot sustain their business. It will also complicate the firearms market for the consumer and increase the price of firearms significantly, which they see as breaking the back of the firearms ownership by eliminating a massive swath of potential new buyers. You can tell it is not a genuine attempt to implement the technology BECUASE it exempts law enforcement EVERY SINGLE TIME. They are the group in MOST need of this technology on a regular basis. If the legislation isn't designed to come up wiht a technology acceptible to police, it isn't designed to fix something, it is designed to discourage firearms ownership and place existing LEGAL gun owners at peril. PERIOD. This tactic isn't even new. It's just coming up AGAIN because those in favor of gun control are OLD. They don't grasp that the advent of the internet and digital media means that letting a decade or so pass since the last time this tactic failed has not erased the details of that failure so that the ploy can be tried again without baggage attached. So yes, based on your postings and absolute refusal to digest digest legitimate information given to you, while claiming to be interested in a practical solution, you are either a shill or ignorant and incapable of learning on your own or overly valuing of your opinion despite not a lot of merit to the topic.

No, that just happens to be a convenient characteristic to check. An example that fails that is the noveske fire pig. While the bullet passes through a hole just a bit larger than caliber size on the forward baffle, it is a flash suppressor. What you want is for it to not substantially reduce flash, at least to defend your choice in court. If you want to play it safer than that, you want it to NOT be advertised to reduce flash in addition to that. For most everything out there, there are night shoot videos on youtube comparing it to an A2 flash suppressor, which is a known bad feature, and to a PWS FSC556, which is a known 94 AWB acceptable muzzle brake/comp. This is a guide for California compliance, it is generally pretty conservative, especially when examined form the perspective of NJ compliance as CA DOJ can and has issued rulings on devices. In NJ it is more like NJSP maybe or maybe not make a deal of it by some random process if someone asks. https://sites.google.com/site/featurelessrifleguide/muzzle-devices

I have the ryobi version. Works fine. Have done several brakes with it. That some form of welder, and a dremel will get you where you can make brakes permanent.

Not that I disagree with your end conclusion, but plenty of 94 AWB complaint 10 rounders could be altered by drilling out the dimples stamped into the magazines, and tuning the mag to deal with any distortions form the process. Some you couldn't. Heck the bushmaster 10 rounders could be altered to ~15 with a drill, a saw, and some glue to fill the hole you drilled yet they qualified as permanent. Without the current panic, prices and availability were reasonable enough to be better off not worrying about it.

They'd have sensitive primers? like military ammo does? Uhh no. These guys are going to be doing administrative loads and what not. THe primers will not be super sensitive.

COuld be. With the demand on the ammo manufacturing pipeline, they could be getting bum primers. Poorly positioned anvils, improperly sized anvils, or going with a vendor that is producing less sensitive priming compound could al cause misfire issues, especially if combined with a worn gun. It's hard to say because nobody is being specific about the type of failures occurring. pierced primers and chipped strikers could be the striker and/or failure to maintain the guns. Light strikes could be that or out of spec anvils or flipped anvils. Poor maintenance (i.e. not replacing springs) could cause timing issues which could wear the striker oddly or chip it, and result in light strikes, even with good ammo, or could make less sensitive primer compound or exceptionally thick primer cups into something that would cause a misfire. Vendors usually don't like to point out that large customers are doing something stupid.

Look, if you like having roads to drive on, and since roads are funded primarily through fuel taxes, you are going to have to figure out how to pay for them in the face of declining demand for fuel for whatever the reason. The free market did not build our highway system, but it certainly does profit form the existence of it. I don't like taxes, but there are many things that are paid for by taxes that benefit the vast majority of people, and they are tax funded. I'd prefer for those things that we didn't waste that money, but spent it wisely.

NRA has a pdf of the actual memo with attribution. It comes from Greg Ridgeway, Ph.D. Deputy Director National Institute of Justice. http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

Quit complaining.. Vlad is out of the country, and despite his claims to not have changed the login to the website, what I have does not work. Scores are done, just not posted. Also the point of the nooks was not super speedy posting of the scores. It was to reduce the labor of match prep and follow up so that there was still a match. The largest chunk of free time I've had in the last two weeks has been about 2 hours. It was spent doing scores and manually fixing screwed up scoring entries for a match I didn't even get to shoot. Anyone wants 5to volunteer to take over the match, I'll be happy to move on to jsut shooting and scooting.

There isn't much of a difference between a muzzle break, compensator, or recoil check. In terms of the designs of actual devices, you will see some that reduce muzzle rise, some that reduce recoil, and some designed to manage both. However, I haven't seen much agreement on any of those attributes or combinations thereon beiung attributed specifically to any of those names. There's also barrel porting and popple holes that may figure into various designs, those imply more specific things.. usually. For NJ, you are mostly interested in "not a flash suppressor", and the rest doesn't matter.

Thank you for finding this. I completely and readily concede that the money did go into building a biometric reading "smart gun". The report they did states that the technology isn't there yet (which I also said previously). This still does not disprove how a less technologically advanced system (again, think "key") would hurt the quality of gun. The part of the article that I got this from was the line "Several possible ways of building “smart” guns includefirearms that only activate when you press a special ring into it". I don't see how that wouldn't be worth the time and energy of further research. The problem is you don't understand how guns work. There is nothing you could do on the simple mechanical device end of things that is not easily bypassed with some knowledge and tools. It is a simple machine that is very space constrained. You pass a law, and what you wind up with is yet one more law that doesn't stop a damn thing, and puts constraints on law abiding gun owners. Springfield 1911s come with an internal locking system. You can't fit a real key in the space available, so it is more like a security screw. I can operate it with a $3 tool from any harbor freight. I could disable it with 5 minutes and a punch. I totally removed it and all it took was 10 minutes and three spare parts that cost about $30. The inner workings of a gun aren't magic. A storage container is a much better place to implement a locking mechanism to keep it out of reach of certain people. You have all the space in the world for screwing around with technology and storing a power source. Of course five minutes with an angle grinder and I'll just go through the side. As for the research, multiple millions were given to the njit smart gun program. They turned a semi auto into a single shot gun with a briefcase attached by an umbilical. It also works like a turd under the best of circumstances. I'm done feeding the troll.

Magic phrase there. Work out. Kind of like a physical therapist would have you do. Other useful things are appropriate shoes for your needs.

Said it before, I'll say it again. I've gotten one really good piece of advice from a cop way back when. You don't want to get caught, only break one law at a time.

I've been to many chiropractors, and I have stopped. None of them were whackadoos. However, that does not mean they were really honest with my best health interests at heart. Here's the technical problem with chiropracty: Extrapolated over a fairly short time frame, it is almost always a no-op. Nothing happens in total. You start out in state X, they shift stuff around, it shifts back, you wind up in state X again with the exact same problem. About the only thing this isn't useless for is breaking a chain reaction of impingement induced inflammation causing a secondary issue, and even then, you may just be talking longer intervals between discontinuing treatment and recurrence of the symptom. In the mainstream medical world, they share many methods you will encounter in the world of non kooky chiropracty such as various forms of traction, application of heat or cold, massage, TENS units, etc. Mainstream medicine will also be able to prescribe you drugs. What mainstream medicine will often prescribe is physical therapy. Some chiropractors will too. Very often, if chiropracty helps temporarily, physical therapy combined with a lifestyle change will help on an ongoing basis. So, this leads to the real problem with it as a patient/customer: Money vs. your best interests. Chiropractors are stuck at a price point that has to be south of the actual medical profession. Even worse, unless they are at a price point below the actual medical profession as subsidized by insurance, they aren't worth going to with regards to comparative cost for most of their potential customer base. So how do you make money? Sell you too many x-rays and irradiate the snot out of you. Sell you unregulated orthopedic devices (beds are a popular one, as well as pillows and other fun stuff). Go full kook, and start you on bizarre made up holistic medicine. have you come in for more visits than you need. Have you do TENS treatments that do nothing. Add on massages. etc. None of it is good for your wallet, but some of that can cause issues if you don't need it. If they are really trying to squeeze you, you have to worry about them doing something that is actually going to make things worse. In general, they are mostly going to try and keep you coming through that door as frequently as possible. In the course of going to chiropractors, there was NOTHING AT ALL that was achieved that would not have been done cheaper, faster, more effectively, and with me experiencing less painful days per annum than had I just gone to physical therapy and kept up with the maintenance exercises.