DevsAdvocate

I may be interested... Question: if I put an order in now via mail, will it take them awhile to send it to me? I mean, if it's quicker just to wait until 4/20 and get to pick and choose what I want, then I may hold off on my order and buy in store.

When is that?

Looking to buy an M1 Garand ("M1SPECIAL") from the CMP. Got my documents filled out and have the following: - Photocopy of my Passport (To meet US Citizen requirement) - Photocopy of my DL + FPID (To meet NJ requirement) - Photocopy of my Club Membership Card (To meet club membership requirement) - Photocopy of my NJ Hunter Cert Card for Shotgun and ML (To meet shooting activity requirement) - FFL address and phone number (I don't think FFLs will let me copy their State Cert) <--- Would this be enough?? If that's all I need, I'll go get it notarized and dispatched. Am I good to go?

Ahh, Shane had to die. He was becoming too feral and unrestrained. I mean, geez, he tried to kill his best friend TWICE in like a week. Let's not forget about the Otis situation... what.. the fugg... At least put a bullet in his head instead of leaving him there like that... Talk about unhinged.

So, I have a regular ol' 930, that has a cap of 4+1 then? I may get this, because shoot, more capacity is better than less IMO.

What happens if NICS is shut down for an extended period of time? Like say everyone there got sick or went on strike, or the 4 horsemen are riding around?

Where can one get a +2 extension for a 930?

Cool. Must've found a good deal someplace.

If by 'still used' you mean some remaining USAF M16A1s and a few cans here or there, then yeah. But all in all, it's 855/855A1 all the way. As for 1/4 inch of steel, how often do you need to do that when shooting at someone? Like I said, if your plan is to take on the Soviet Army crossing the Fulda, then you're fine. Most of us don't have expectations of fighting heavily body-armored foes. The nice thing about 193 is that it's cheap and better terminal ballistics. Especially if shooting out of a 14.5" bbl. Out of that, the effective range is 95m-100m... using 855, that drops to 45m-50m...

Disagree. What good is a 62gr armor piercing round with inferior ballistics to a 55gr FMJ ball? If anything, the loss of velocity propelling the 62gr is the reason it sucks at wounding unarmored enemy soldiers beyond a certain range. It just punches through them. The higher velocity 55gr retains it's speed long enough to retain it's catastrophic wounding effects. http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_fragrange.html http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_m855vm193.html http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_m193orm855.html Like I said: if you're planning on gunning down folks wearing body armor, then 855 is worth the extra cents per round. If your looking an unarmored folks, the 193 is much better.

M855 is currently used, but will be replaced by M855A1. M193 was used briefly in Vietnam and a few years after, but was phased out. The DoD only buys 855/855A1. http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/hist_curammo.html

Makes sense. It's a lot cheaper. I keep like 800 so rounds of XM855 around, but usually shoot XM193...

True, but the M193 was phased out along with the M16A1... Here is a good link on the subject: http://ammo.ar15.com/

M193 was never really used officially, hence the XM193 designation. But it was the first ammunition type developed for the AR-15 platform, and produced the nasty wounding effects that made the new 5.56mm famous. Out of a 16" barrel, it has a wider range of effective ballistics and better wounding than an M855. So the shorter the barrel, the more useful the faster bullet is.

Unless you're shooting at armored Soviet troopers crossing the Fulda Gap, the M193 is the better round. Higher velocity, better wounding effects.

Didn't Ray own a saiga?

I don't get it, it's an AK... one was made by a drunk Russian babushka, the other made by a drunk Romanian one... both shoot the same bullets, with the same reliability, out of the same chrome lined barrel. One just requires more work to be like the other though...

My thinking is: if the military can use it, so should I. Or else: how can I be necessary to the security of a free state?

Sigh... hate to bring this up again, but can't he just block it in PA with some wood and bring it here? I thought the "permanently modified" thing only had to do with dealers?

WASR-10s had issues... about 10 years ago. But they fixed them and their CS is quite good. I'm 2 for 2 with them and the only issue I had was a bent dust cover that didn't effect how the rifle worked, just needed some brute force to re-assemble. CAI ended up sending me a replacement anyways, and it was good to go.

SAKO, hands down. They are pretty damned sweet.

I really don't mind unions if the following criteria were met: - You do not have to join a union to work someplace. Earlier in my life I worked at Rite Aid for a summer job (3 months). They forced me to join the union and pay my dues and fees, so I lost 50% of my first two paychecks. I don't know why I needed to do that, but oh wells. - You must pay dues to union directly. I don't understand why the union gets to have the company/government fork over money for them, they should appeal to the members themselves and get paid that way - Opt-out from Collective Bargaining. If you can sue for better terms than the union, then you should be allowed to go for it.

That was part of it. The biggest issue was foreign competition and the shit quality of American cars compared to overseas manufacturers. Whether that was due to engineering and design, or the assemblyman, well... that's up to you. Oh, don't forget "Legacy Benefits" for retired union members. They tended to outlive their expiration dates and strained those fancy pension systems to death.

Really?? Jesus. That's a lot of money to put up for someone, especially these days. I'd like to see how any union stays solvent doing that... unless they bank on kids of union workers never going to college...

I think he was chalking those things up to "things we should thank unions for fighting to give us all". Which in some instances is true. I just think healthcare should be like car insurance and keep employers out of it entirely. I understand it's done as part of the employment "benefits", but it's best if we just took the employer out of the customer-health insurer relationship nation wide.