raz-0

The NRA is telling a half truth. Itar regs wouldn't apply to political speech, but they would apply to any technical discussion if they succeed in declaring on line publication as export. My first response would be to see how that works if you restrict to us addresses based on ip addresses. Of course vpns break that, but that would be like saying libraries can't have any gunsmithing books because foreign visitors might look at them while visiting.

It's a brand new item, it's not discontinued. OP probably just uses that as a placeholder form anything they won't backorder and don't have a current sku for is my guess.

All the stuff is linkable once you get below that menu. There's no reason the concerned lobbying entities could not publish meaningful info, and plowing through it, I'm not finding much to be concerned about. There's stuff about standardizing a location to serialize silencers, Some stuff that appears to actually expand the exepmtions that can be given to blanket disqualifications for ownership of non immigrant aliens and parolees. There's one regarding domestic violence stuff, but as far as I can tell it doesn't put down in the regs anything that isn't in the statute as passed by the legislature. There's a switch form specifically to specially in the verbiage of 922 regs, but that doesn't look like it would be meaningful to anything. There's a change to the definition of a pistol in one document, but that appears to simply move the verbiage form an amendment to the document into the definition proper. There's a number of explosives reg changes that don't seem to be RKBA issues. A change to the definition of the DV disqualification that doesn't look like it really alters the practical upshot much. One requiring that you actively affirm your state of residence on the 4473, big whoop. Something regarding cigarettes. One on loss or theft in transit that clarifies that the existing reporting requirements for theft out of inventory apply to the sender and not the recipient while it is in transit. One on changing the banned import list, which seems to actually ADD things to the unregulated list. Ones that look like they might be of concern are =================== RIN 1140-AA43 http://reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201504&RIN=1140-AA43 This means even if you go the trust route for an NFA,and you don't need CLEO approval per se, you do need new idntifying docs, and the CLEO have to sign off on them as legit and the reported use as lawful in their jurisdiction. So.... possible peril of CLEO not signing off on trust paperwork? It's not clear what recourse if any exists to that. ======================= RIN 1140-AA47 http://reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201504&RIN=1140-AA47 This appears to add military courts as one of the entities that can legally declare you mentally defective. It's unclear if being declared so by a military court under military law can be undone by the prescribed method of having one's rights restored by a court or being declared mentally fit to stand trial. Can a civilian court undo the military court ruling? Dunno. ======================== RIN 1140-AA10 http://reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201504&RIN=1140-AA10 This one talks about safe storage and availablity of secure storage or safety devices being available at any place where FFLs sell to non licensed individuals. Looking at the linked docs, I find nothing in reference to this, and the summary lacks any details. So I'd flag this as dangerous as it could be used to harass or shut down smaller FFLs without the capital to require required inventory, or facilities for storing and or presenting such since there's no documentation of what they are. It also hasn't had a comment period. So.... biggest red flag. Even so, I find it questionable that nobody is citing specifics.

Appreciate your attempt, but have and numbers to look for, I'm pretty far in and seeing nothing BATFE related. OK, I take it back. I was having some rendering issues.

Not really. What they say will happen: 1) Go to federal court, either win and loser appeal to 3rd circuit, or lose and appeal to 3rd circuit. 2) lose at 3rd circuit. 3) go to SCOTUS for the win. What will likely happen: 1) Go to federal court, lose and appeal to 3rd circuit. 2) lose at 3rd circuit. 3) go to SCOTUS and have them refuse to hear the case. About the only thing it does that is new and guaranteed is bring RICO into it, which means that if the defendants can be taken to court three times, they all have to live in peril of those in power deciding they want to go and seize all their assets without anything resembling due process. I'm all for someone else bankrolling it to give it a shot, but I'm pretty reluctant to call their legal reasoning sound unless their end goal is to simply demonstrate that signing on to a party platform plank as a no questions asked party line voter (i.e. not a true believer) comes with the peril of having to defend against lawsuits like this. Even that won't pan out if the federal court simply summarily dismisses the case. If it actually gets heard though, there's the implicit threat that it can be dragged as far as the guy suing you wants to pay for.

Solid state tool? They need to stop using words they don't know what they mean. Still cute, but not $54 cute.

They work fine. I have loaded about 7-8k that way without issue. With titegroup even. The only caveat is that I would not use them on an existing recipe on the upper edge for a given cartridge/powder combo. I used them in 9 with a ~137pf load without reworking it, and for major .40 I backed off my 4.5gr load a couple of tenths and worked back up.

One of the core tenets of core curriculum is that segments of the population are behind the curve because of poor teaching and underfunded schools. This solution tries to aim federal education dollars directly at that perceived problem. It ignores the fact that when you are multiple generations into being poor, there's a whole lot of behaviors already learned that don't help with doing well in school. Even if you could fix that part, it's not like there are enough jobs to suddenly eliminate poor communities if they only got a better education. The testing of course is designed to be borderline because it is essentially a certification process. It will be tuned so it will be easy to tell every school they passed, but... They will be constantly in peril of not being certified, and thus scared into constantly chasing the impossible solid score. This keeps auditors and compliance service industries making money.

Any actual content. That article has none.

The cleo can approve it. They don't and they are police officers. Simple enough?

Seating is browning. That's the Maillard reaction, and it's yummy. But it has nothing to do with keeping the juices in. It's the rapid cooking time that helps with that.

How much did you pay, because these days the cheap ones seem to be around $2500.

It wouldn't be surprising. IF the place is vacated, it's probably cheap to get the use of it. Local police have done the same around here for years while training. People in need of a building renting out an unoccupied building short term isn't exactly terrifying. Or maybe I should be flipping out when the Halloween stores pop up every year. I can understand not liking the whole exercise, but it baffles me how the use of a former wal-mart makes it more terrifying. Heck the scariest thing in that scenario is that wal-mart's business models clearly have issues being economically sustainable and are more or less retail slash-and burn enterprises.

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/Rockwell_Arms Probably more useful than anything the BBB has up.

With a giruad, you are int eh minors? You have a funny definition of minors.

1) At approximately 40, your visual reaction time peaks. There's some variance, but that where the median is. 2) The stat for greatly increased accident demographic is new rider at for and a displacement of 1000ccs or larger. They are disproportionately represented in accident stats. So you have older new riders buying either a REALLY fast bike, or a REALLY heavy bike. Both of which are rough on new riders skills (or lack thereof). Other things that are disproportionately represented in accident stats are. a) alcohol involvement. I know a few people who have wrecked and some who have even wrecked bad (buh-bye leg), and many of them involved alcohol.... but not a DWI. While I do question when I drive past on of the local bars popular with riders and see the same few bikes out front for HOURS, I also think that there's a disconnect in reasoning/judgment about how much drinking is too much if you are riding on two wheels. Riding can ask a LOT more of you than driving a car. b) Left hand turns. These are jsut plain old dangerous for bikers. I argue it is because the human brain is good at processing certain things. Two of those things are motion and faces. Cars have faces that can be seen for quite a long distance, and someone waiting to turn left doesn't really move much. This means you are seriously disadvantaged regarding oncoming traffic when making a left. c) excessive speed into curves for road conditions. This can be speeding, or this can just be unexpectedly bad road conditions. After this winter, between the pot holes, patches, and piles of sand/grit in the corners, I'm sure NJ will be offering up lives and limbs to this one. Those are the big risks, and you are not in control of a significant portion of them. Others, you are fighting your habits on. Act accordingly. NJ is a rough place to drive a car, much less a bike.

Except they also named the federal courts as part of the conspiracy. So....

Well I was right in that it is going down the RICO road. HOwever, unless he can shop it to a judge with an axe to grind, it will simply be denied as anything else puts judicial and executive branch in legal peril due to how the RICO laws work. While there may be something to the content by the letter of the law, structuring the conspiracy accusations ina way that logically has to include SCOTUS and expecting the chain of courts to eventually go oops, you caught us, is kind of naive

Well it does say that he admitted the claims were factually correct. That's where he dug the hole.

Okay, found some more videos where you can see the thing. The staggered holes essentially create slant baffles. Granted the choad saying it is awesome in the video has the thing installed upside down so the slanted baffles push the muzzle up. I saw another one that was a bolt gun off a bench. It also hopped around s ton but was installed right side up. It looks like it isn't very effective and is huge. The guy hawking it sends up warning signs. 1) bad terminology. 2) claims it reduces the ability to be seen when it will generate HUGE dust plumes and flash to the sides. 3) demoes it on a light ar without bracing it, which can mask muzzle rise. 4) films in low res far away. The latter is SOP for best brake evar! vids as it masks the smaller movement that really differentiates one comp from another. It might not be total crap, but for less than half the price you can do just as well in a LOT smaller package.

Lets see. $195. The guy starts by calling a flash suppressor a brake. Then he does a bunch of meaningless comparisons, and it still looks like it moves a fair amount. Then he shoots one handed (guess what? Doesn't require a brake to be done). His theory that it needs to be longer is wrong. I've been following a series of posts where an engineer has been picking up brakes and doing computational fluid dynamic simulations of them. Almost all the heavy lifting is done by the first baffle of most every brake. His design results in weird staggered baffles. That might or might not work well. However, the gun still has linear motion in his demos most rise comes from that motion interacting with your musculoskeletal structure. It'd still have that. That's why most good brakes have some form of top venting or angled/asymmetric baffles. My take? It doesn't appear to be particularly good, and certainly not $200 good.

Uhh the wind is blowing and the tree hits the branches of another tree? I'm not seeing anything odd.

Except you would be wrong. Shooting seriously involves visual processing and motor skills. People with better eyesight have more potential to be good, especially with iron sights on long guns, that's mostly genetic. Then you have how the visual cortex processes stuff, and how people have learned to see. You can get the best out of that, but a good chunk of it has been set dependent on environmental/experiential factors occurring before some pretty early developmental milestones. Then of course you have reaction times. Not everyone is the same, and it's not just about practice. Then you have things like blood pressure, one's natural stress and anxiety responses and what they do to your heart rate and blood pressure, etc. IT may not be raw physical strength or endurance, but it doesn't mean it isn't constrained by physical limitations that are genetic or a matter of early childhood development, and fall into the same basic pattern of physical ability.

The books already have them http://www.amazon.com/Death-Troopers-Star-Wars-Legends/dp/0345520815

Except it hasn't. 10k hours is supposed to make you world class good. Not semi-pro good. You don't get REALLY good plugging away practicing skills you think are good enough. You get good constantly improving. Some folks get instruction, some folks can figure it out, some folks spin there wheels. The 10,000 hour rule is just simply not right, even in the context in which it was developed, which was playing an instrument.