bbk

Its debatable that someone with a concise plan to kill people wouldn't care if people are armed or not. Look at the Ft Hood shooting, or the attacks that target LEOs specifically. We talk about deterrents, like security system signs outside of homes, but those homes are still targeted with little discrimination (given there is something worth the trouble). I don't know what there is to be learned from this incident yet. This isn't a gun-violence issue IMO, but something closer to home... perhaps the alienation/bullying argument (and what it can lead to). After having read a myriad of different stories about this same issue, a lot of the language points towards this, plus this guy might have had a screw loose.

Some of us probably get the emails from 5.11, but for those who didn't...

Agreed, that is a highly pretentious thing to say, BLF. I applaud MDTS. I've seen the Serpa fail firsthand, repeatedly, and while we all have as-- I mean opinions-- I feel better knowing that there won't be any near me when I'm training in an environment where we're drawing from the holster. Is the problem a core issue? Yes; this is an operator issue at the core. Does the Serpa exacerbate that core issue? Yes, yes it does. What I don't get is how offended people get. Its a piece of plastic. There are better options, no doubt. Why not even consider other possibilities? I'm not saying go out and buy certain products, I don't care-- do what you want. But why not embrace the free market? At the behest of another forum member, I dropped my Serpa (long before this debate started), and tried out the G-code holsters ($18 or something at Natchez). This is now my go-to, and not because of the possible inherent dangers of Serpa (though its in the back of my mind now), but because the G-code is an infinitely better holster.

Blue Moon, Hoegaarden, Fat Tire; gin and tonic

Picking one is way too difficult. So, I too will have to go beyond the prescribed number and list my top three movies that I will watch whenever they come on TV: Collateral, True Lies, and Grosse Point Blank (admittedly this one isn't on TV much, once in a blue moon on Comedy Central). Oh, and why... I guess they're all kind of action-y, but I think that is a prerequisite for a flick that I can zone out to. GPB because it is legitimately a great movie.

Yea, I was about to say the same thing. I actually met the guys last year when they had a booth open at an expo I had gone to-- pretty cool guys. They were doing custom orders with a turn-around time of within a day or two for around $40 at the time. A vet company too.

The +/- is my guess

Yes. The original post has also been updated with the new price.

I don't see myself signing back up for a membership there until they finish the renovation. Two of the past three times I've gone, I'd get there at like 9-9:30, and they would be booked for the rest of the day. So, while its relatively cheap, it is hardly accessible right now. Should be soon though that they're done with the renovatins, so, that's a huge plus.

Follow up question to your first question. When you pulled the trigger, what happened? Did the trigger feel mushy or was there a definite *click*? Were there imprints of the firing pin (even if slight) on the casing of the unfired round?

First problem was, I would get 2-3-4 rounds out with no issues then a round would chamber (bolt fully closed) but when I went to go pull the trigger nothing would happen. I would have to pull the charging handle to eject the unfired round in the chamber and chamber the next round, then it would be fine. This happened a few times with both mags throughout the session. This sounds like a possible ammunition problem (bad primers), though possibly something wrong with your AR. Internally, make sure you didn't lubricate the firing pin. I'm one of those who believe that wetter the bolt, the better-- but you never want to lubricate the firing pin as that can cause a build up of gunk/carbon, which can result in your issue of FTF (failure to fire). Another possibility is just a bad firing pin, though this seems pretty rare from my experience. Second problem, when ever I would shoot the last round in the mag the bolt would catch open as it should, but the charging handle would stay in the closed position. When you shoot the last round and the bolt catches open isn't the charging handle supposed to also be fully open? No, the charging handle for ARs are non-reciprocating. In short, it means that unlike systems that have reciprocating charging handles (AKs for example), the charging handle is stationary throughout the firing process. In fact, the charging handle should be closed unless you are specifically doing something with it (similar to how, IMO, the dust cover should be closed unless you're firing).

To a very, very, very, very slight degree I agree with Tmost regarding his comments about Sharpton. While I wouldn't necessarily thank anybody for Sharpton, the man does serve a purpose-- which is to create a sort of awareness of situations. While I don't think Tmost could find a scrap of evidence that would ever show that Sharpton would go out of his way to stand up for non-black issues as passionately as he is about black issues-- Tmost is not wrong in that Sharpton is a polarizing figure... that, again, brings awareness to issues. With that said, I don't personally support a lot of Sharpton's actions, notably when he calls for civil disobedience over an incident that is still being sorted out. The topic of race in America, specifically, is fascinating though to observe from beyond the bubble. I won't lie, I'm Asian-American who served honorably in the military, and developed roots and a passion for what many would consider to be "white." Being Asian, I am considered more "white" than other minorities by minorities, but am not considered "white" by non-Latino whites. Economically my family does well, so we're not discriminated in that sense. And the fact that I served, honorably and proudly, only bolsters how people perceive my loyalty to my nation-- and hence my "whiteness." My point being is that even as a minority, I have things pretty good-- I won't lie (though stereotypes are still insulting, and if anybody were to say them to my face, they'd get a piece of my mind-- which they have). For me to comment on social injustice is difficult, even though my parents, back in the 80s, faced a lot of overt racism, at the personal and business/formal level. So, for me to go on about race and its factor is difficult because I know for a fact that it is the most polarizing issue in America (this is a country of, unfortunately, absolutes and empirical data)... and yet because it is the most polarizing factor, it will never, ever be resolved. So, while we stand here and comment, we only continually feed a system that if wasn't addressed would continue to bury people.. aka not giving them an equal opportunity (which goes against every principle of this nation). Its tough, because I understand that regardless there will be prejudice and discrimination. Whether its racial, religious, sexual preference, socio-economic, etc. There will always be those in power, and those who want said power... and this is not in a Shakespearean sense (as in absolute power), but in a sense of having agency. And its pushed from the highest seats of power from all over the world, going back thousands, if not tens of thousands, of years ago to when man first birthed civilization in mud huts that lined river banks. Anybody familiar with Foucalt would be familiar with the term 'biopower' and 'heteronormativity,' and their crazy and super-negative impacts on society... and yet they are embraced, and would probably be defended by most across the globe. Personally, I feel for what Tmost has to say because I know that while there are too many social problems that are just too large for any one person/group/civilization (some problems are only solved with time); there are problems that can be addressed at the lowest of levels-- even if slightly.

Not necessarily zombie-related, but disaster-related. In the same vein as what Petey posted above, here is a lecture-series on YouTube from Dr. Lee Clarke from our very own Rutgers University. It is titled "Disaster and the human response." Anybody with Sakai access probably saw this on the main screen, haha, so, sorry if this is redundant. For background info, Dr. Clarke was featured in the History Channel special "After Armageddon," so you might recognize him.

I reserve any judgement from any side regarding the incident itself until more comes out... and honestly not until after the dust settles. However, it does drive me nuts, as in many "social injustice" cases like this, the defendant is made Public Enemy No. 1 before they even get a fair chance in court. It drives me more crazy when the rest of the community (firearms community that is) is put under the microscope unjustly and made to be bad guys because we hold on to our [guaranteed] belief. Further, some of the opinions that have come up publicly from certain news source's really make me /facepalm. There is a way of thinking known as 'cultural relativity,' and is the basis to understanding cultures that are not your own. How fair is it for people that have no grasp or understanding of certain cultures to broad-stroke them based on their personal beliefs? (This is also known as cultural naivety; and this is when one believes that every other culture shares the same exact qualities as their own.) To read opinions from people who do not understand the reasoning behind 2A, or have depended on the government their whole life, arguing against policies, such as the stand your ground, really makes me scratch my head... especially when its major news sources that have the access to millions. In the end, as much as I want to avoid having an opinion on this case until its over, I think Z will be found free of any fault, and in fact was just in his actions-- and rightfully should be the case. But, to be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if there as a turn of events-- considering the media sensation/bias being created (especially since it reached the Top). As for this being a hate crime, or even notions of it-- no way. I do strongly believe there is basis for hate crimes in general, as 'hate' crimes is not about racism, but discrimination in general being the basis of the crime committed. Arguably the most horrific hate crime in history was inflicted upon a number of minority groups that may be considered white by most-- the Jewish (religious discrimination), eastern European gypsies (discrimination based on socio-economic status), and homosexuals (sexual preference) during the Holocaust. In the case of the Holocaust, it was in fact, mostly, intraracial (within the same race) violence (as is the case with most violence). So, is it feasible for people of the same race to inflict hate crimes upon each other? No doubt. In this case, I don't see this as a hate crime because unless further information comes out, this was about a person who most likely was defending their own life... a case of self-defense. Race is negligible IMO.

Crazy enough, that was my former battalion, and I knew all of those Soldiers. This video was made by SPC Braxton (who delved into amateur film making after he separated) for our annual Army ball and the Overhead Conference, and is the reason why a lot of those scenes are actually battalion jokes (though I guess all unit issues are pretty universal, allowing everybody to relate pretty easily). Since my unit was only a battalion, everybody got to know each other pretty well... hmm, good times. Also, another interesting tidbit, this YouTube video is the most public information on my unit available on the public internet!

Sorry for the late response, Chris, was at work. But I do agree with what you're saying, that hate crimes are perceived to add unnecessary weight to a decision... often resulting in a public-favor skew to the sentencing, and tipping the scales of "balanced" justice (whatever that means in America). However, there are many, many cases in which hate crimes were committed as the basis, with homicide or aggravated assault being the tool. In these cases where someone is targeted specifically for their beliefs (and I leave this wording ambiguous because I do believe non-Latino whites can be victims of hate crimes by minorities [aka "reverse-discrimination"]), if these are not addressed as such-- arguably the cycle continues. I definitely see what you mean though, and it makes logical sense... "common sense," but when has common sense ever been so common here in America? The way the justice system operates, and has always operated, has always pushed back against minorities... the whole damn system has always pushed back against minorities. If crimes were committed that were blatant hate crimes, but were simply categorized as just "homicide," then while it may be PC (in a way), it would be covert vs. overt discrimination... but regardless that discrimination would continue to exist (whether or not it is acknowledged). By acknowledging it as the precedent, the issue comes to the forefront... and, as I noted before, there is a large danger in that. However, ignorance never resulted in any good... a problem that this country, specifically, continues to grapple with today regarding racial and sexual discrimination.

Being a fellow Rutgers student, I agree wholeheartedly with what Luke_WO said. The reaction when the incident first occurred during the Fall 2010 semester was relatively large. Maybe not in the public-sphere (in terms of national news like CNN, FNC, etc.), but the reaction was fairly widespread across campus-- and notably with more social-based news (MTV had coverage, my class was actually one of those that was interviewed, as was my Prof [who led the movement]). The buzz has been fairly low key on campus regarding the trial itself; and I think that's mostly because the trial itself was ongoing, and there were certain legal boundaries that couldn't be crossed in terms of those who testified coming out and publicly speaking about it. I know this firsthand as I know one of those who did testify personally. I think once the sentencing wraps, and the case itself is in the past, there will be a secondary, widespread reaction across campus-- and possibly that spreads further. Personally I don't know what to think. Ravi is from my hometown, and being a relatively small town of 20K (albeit Plainsboro and West Windsor are pretty much joint communities), the whole thing has been tough on the community. He hasn't brought shame per se, as his actions are not indicative of the young people that are produced through the system here... but it doesn't lessen the impact of the lack of social awareness that apparently either did not exist within him, or was so blatantly forgotten by Ravi-- which is arguably fault of the community. As for hate crimes, I have to respectfully disagree, Chris/lunker. You're a good guy and I like and respect you, and I normally agree with you so I'm not calling you out at all, I promise! But I think hate crimes need to be labeled and addressed because prejudice and race are still polarizing aspects in American culture. Whether or not I agree with that principle (I don't), it exists. And while the topic of 'race' is often times approached in PC ways that actually end up being wholly stupid (Affirmative Action for example), there has been some good that has come out of it (Equal Opportunity, though that is twisted in the wrong way sometimes). As a minority, I can say firsthand that the American system (socially, culturally, legally) still does look down on minorities, and they do need some level of protection. Should it be a crutch? No. Should it make the sentencing more harsh? No. But should it be addressed? Definitely a yes.

Issue with Google, and similar companies, is that they make you believe that technology equates progress. And so technology = collective and collective = progress, and anything that creates an imbalance is bad for their bottom-line. Reason why you don't see many tech companies that support the post-modern movement (Toshiba arguably, though I would say they poke fun at it more so). Not that firearms are essential to the post-modern movement, but that individualism is [essential].

I heard and saw them in and around my town last spring and summer. Ever since the years I spent in CO, I'll never forget their 'chatter' sound that they make when in roving packs.

You're right, but information is not collected on US citizens (the broad definition, not the obvious one) without consent from the AG. Even the infamous wire-taps were signed off by the AG-- and I know this for a fact, regardless of what was reported, or what some whistleblower said. To speak to that, the major issue with the wire-tap fiasco was with the release of privileged information by cellular providers (like AT&T, etc.) to the government. As for emails and other related data, I can't divulge details because I don't want to go to the pen, but it falls under the same umbrella as the above. There are policies that must be followed, or the intel analysts can be sh*t-canned very quickly, to the point of being removed from duty. These orders were so serious that we had to test our knowledge of said orders on a quarterly basis, including keeping up-to-date with any changes. My disclaimer is that I saw things from the ground-level... the operational level. Everything that I saw was legit, including the process in which things had to be done-- as that was a part of the main objective of the mission. Simply getting the information wasn't the whole job, but doing so in the legal and correct manner. However, beyond my periphery, and to the upper echelons of the food chain, I can't comment because I simply don't know. But I never saw any type of unlawful orders pushed down upon anybody from up top.

In the graphic novels, its more complicated then this, and I think for the sake of integrity of a spoiler-free story, plus who knows what the producers will do for the show, its probably left best unsaid for now.

I preferred season 2 to season 1, though that's not saying much as I wasn't a huge fan of season 2. I understand the pace that AMC is taking as the focus is at the micro-level, and day-to-day shenanigans are rarely "epic" for most people... similar to the show 'Jericho', which I'm still a huge fan of and am anticipating when they finally make a movie to wrap up the story (sorry for the tangent). The prison has the potential to really, really spice things up. The continuing device used by the producers and writers in seasons 1 and 2 is to simplify the story by containing the characters to a set back-drop. The campsite and a few shots in Atlanta (virtually the same areas in Atlanta for that matter) in season 1, and pretty much the farm in season 2. I imagine that season 3 will pretty much take place at the prison for its entirety, and that's not necessarily because the graphic novel's story puts a lot of emphasis on this portion (and its character development)-- but because that is the continuing trend by AMC. As for the prison spicing things up, I think it will add a whole new element as the survivors face a totally new host of characters (I mean, they are going to a prison), and some major plot points have already spilled... so, yea, I think the audience is going to see some type of progression of the broader picture, but I can't say whether its going to be leaps and bounds or just another whisper at some point in season 3. I really can't wait though as I think season 3 will really blow people's minds, given AMC really pushes the envelope.

This is an interesting article, and I'm a bit surprised with some of the information that out got to Wired. With that said, I support it, even having worked for NSA/CSS during my Army days (unclassified, don't worry). With that said, even with the article, there is a lot that hasn't been told with how these things work, and, in the end, this is NOT ground-breaking stuff, at all. As KDP said, NSA has been doing it foreverrrrrrrrr, going back before the 60s to agencies and units that predate the NSA. So, if people honestly think this is a game-changer of sorts, you have officially eaten from the hand of disinformation! ETA: The difference that the UT center will provide is the potential cloud capability, which I'm not a big fan of because it goes against the whole philosophy of how intelligence is suppose to work (compartmentalization). But there are smarter people then me that obviously think this is how it should be.

As you wish, spoilers below: The robed figure, as stated previously, is Michonne, who is actually a female. Her chained up walkers are actually, according to the original source, her former boyfriend and his best friend. She removed their appendages and jaw so they pose no threat to her. As you could imagine, she has some serious mental issues, which are exacerbated further in the story that I won't reveal. Of course all of this can change as the writers see fit.

I won't spill it myself, or Ray will get angry, but the reasons for Michonne dragging around the walkers are far more simple then suggested. Remember that these are still just people, not super heroes or anything.