DevsAdvocate

I may go there as well, same time.

I know you mean well Jim, and this is as far as I will agree with you on mandatory firearms training: we should definitely have it. In our schools, as early as possible, and reinforced every year. We should have kids 12 and up learning basic marksmanship on shooting ranges outside of school. We should have school shooting teams competing against one another, and womens' shooting teams as well. That's how training should be done if you want a safe and polite firearms society. However, it should not be a direct requirement to purchase a firearm, or to be eligible for one. I'm sorry, but it's our right to keep and bear arms, and I'll be damned if I will trust the politicians or their dogs in law enforcement to ensure my rights are not infringed. Like I mentioned earlier, any state or even Federal Gov't can take a mandatory training requirement and turn it into a means of blocking firearms ownership. Just like Southern states used poll taxes and voter eligibility requirements to dissuade blacks from taking part in the democratic process, anti-gun politicians will use qualification requirements as a means to curb gun ownership. Sorry man, history (even recent US history) is rife with examples of the Gov't doing crap like this. You can't give em the inch, or they'll take you for the whole mile.

Personally, seeing as we're not in Iraq/Afghanistan, you could get away with owning a regular AR-15 without much issue. I never clean mine and they tend to work fine using Mil-Surp ammunition. That being said: if I were to go the piston route, I would try to buy a rifle explicitly designed for it like the AKM, ACR, SCAR, XCR, Sig556, ARX-160, etc. It's just an engineering thing for me... The AR-15 platform was designed around a DI design from the get-go to be lightweight and minimize parts... the piston complicates that.

Any reason in particular that you want a Piston Upper?

Only those willing to learn and practice new information will benefit from it. Force it on people, and it's less likely to stick. Frankly, it's not my problem if someone buys a gun and doesn't know how to use it. I'd rather let them learn the easy way or the hard way... on their own. Lord knows, the same people who think mandatory training is a good idea also thought FPIDs and Pistol Permits were brilliant thoughts as well. They also think AWBs are effective, and that Automatic and Silenced weapons are just plain evil. This is where the whole "our own greatest enemy is ourselves" kinda comes in.

That's up to the shooting range (private citizens owning private property) to decide, not the state. Simple as that.

Sick little rifle.

It doesn't matter. The state has no say in the matter. If some poor schmuck buys a gun and doesn't take the time to read the safety manual or seek instruction from someone who knows a thing or two about guns, and shoots himself, then that's his fault. I will not be inconvenienced for the stupidity of others.

FN has been getting it's butt kicked in contracts lately...

As an addendum: I like to take a very methodical and engineering approach when it comes to trying to correct any major societal issues. The VAST majority of gun laws are supposedly designed to fight the concept of 'gun crime' (which is utterly ridiculous since we don't have 'car crime' or 'knife crime'). Crimes involving guns are no different than ones involving baseball bats, knives, brass knuckles, etc. Yet none of those items are heavily restricted, are they? Furthermore, does having the gun make the criminal? Or does the criminal just use the gun to carry out the act? This logical distinction is ultimately the reason why all gun laws are simply pointless. If the former is true, then we're all criminals waiting to happen, or we're all just normal people with weapons for any and all practical purposes. Fighting crime is not done using petty little laws, it's done via economics that provide jobs, money, and quality of life easily. Perversely, less laws also equal less crime. The thinking there being that the less you enforce, the less you need to punish.

Why even need a background check? They do one when you go buy the gun anyways... seems redundant and pointless if your rid yourself of the FPID/PP system... As for a safety course, 43 other states manage just fine without mandating them... Don't see why NJ is any different. I disagree with those as well. They're infringements. If there are people walking the streets who have been deemed to dangerous to own a gun, there is nothing stopping them from getting one. They can beat up a cop (not difficult to do) and steal his, they can steal one from a family member, use a straw purchaser, or black market it. The mere fact that felons are constantly arrested on weapons charges means that the restrictions set in place to keep them from buying guns are completely and utterly useless. As for the mental issue, this is a matter of confidentiality on the behalf of the patient. Not to mention: how is this even tracked? Most mentally ill folks can go most their lives without seeing a doctor about it or getting arrested for it. Heck, that Loughner kid and the VT Shooting Kid managed to get guns just fine. If all else fails... they can steal one, straw one, or black market it.

I've heard rumblings of this too. That the majority of all failures in every weapon was traceable to magazine issues (including the XM8/416/SCAR). However, even with those removed, the failure rates were still the highest in the M4. Something like 640 malfunctions were due to the weapon, and 240 due to the magazines. Regardless... the Army is quite set to go to a piston design.

The biggest issue with AR piston gas systems is that there is no standardization of parts. Each manufacturer is a bit different in their attempt at this, and parts are usually costly and incompatible. Whereas, with a traditional AR-15, you can pretty much buy any 'mil-spec' component and drop it in... this is helpful, especially for replacement parts. As for piston AR-15s in general... If Eugene Stoner wanted that from the get go, he would've done it. It's weird to see attempts at Piston driven ARs when Stoner created a perfectly capable piston rifle in the AR-16 (now AR-18)... Piston guns don't need buffer tubes and action springs, as those features are contained entirely within the receiver. It's just a weird engineering decision to retrofit one operating system (piston) onto something designed and limited by a different one (DI). I get it from a financial/marketing perspective... but I feel most attempts at adapting the piston to the AR-15 Lower are simply inelegant and were done just wrong. Examples of AR-16/18 inspired rifles: -AR-180B -HK G36 -Remington ACR -SA80

Sorry, but mandatory training requirements are about as Constitutional as Poll Taxes and Voting Tests. The way I see it: you buy a gun, anything you do with it comes back on you, for good or for bad. Then again: look at the games Chicago is playing with their training requirements... you can get training on the 1st full moon night of the month in the City Hall Janitor Closet if you can apply and reserve one of the 3 spots available... oh... and there's a $500 service fee for that... I know folks who ask for this mean well, but the second you get the Gov't involved, they tend to mess things up... kinda like what NJ is doing with the FPID and PP process. Why do we even need those? PA manages just fine with a DL and a NICS check... but we need to go above and beyond and just short of an anal probing to buy a neutered handgun that can't hold more than 15 rounds. F- That.

A hidden room with about 12 shotguns and 10 AR-15s... lol

Okay, so you stated the 4 rules? Are you any safer?

Cost-wise, a piston upper is a good way to go since you only need to replace half the rifle... performance though, is another issue entirely. Even during the Dust Tests (SCAR vs. XM8 vs. 416 vs. M4), the guns built from the ground up to use a piston system (SCAR/XM8) did a bit better than the 416. Then there is the issue of ergonomics. I think, given that most troops operate from within vehicles, that the buffer tube design typically found in the AR platform is pretty restrictive for the platform. You really can't fold the stock with it, and if the stock/buffer tube assembly is damaged, then the entire rifle goes with it. This may come up in the Practical Testing portion of this competition.

ARDEC and NSRDEC decided it based on testing and common complaints of the platform. But if no clear winner emerges, the new carbine for the US Army is gonna be a piston driven Colt.

Yep, because a mop and bucket is such an effective defense against an armed assailant. This would work if the custodian were given a weapon they can use to defend themselves and neutralize the threat.

Background info here: Wiki - Individual Carbine Basic Rifle features: -Semi-automatic capability -Full-automatic capability -Fully ambidextrous Key Factors: -Ability to mount existing optics and accessories using MIL-STD-1913 (Picatinny) attachments -Ability to mount suppressor -Sustained rates of fire -Ice, mud, dirt, sand, water testing -Cost -Contractor ability to produce 2000 carbines per month and surge 4200 -Consistency of performance over lifetime of use Optional features: -5.56x45mm compatible (Particularly the M855A1 'Green' Bullet) -7.62x51 compatible -Other ammunition types are open to bidding, but the cost of supplying the ammo will be placed on the contractor... Competitors: Colt Defense* - Enhanced M4 Carbine (Piston driven) (Link) ADCOR Defense - Bear (Link) Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal - SCAR-L (Link) Remington Military - ACR (Link) Heckler & Koch - M416 (Link) *Should no other carbine be selected, Colt's enhanced carbine will be procured by default. Former Competitors: Colt Defense - CM901 Smith & Wesson - M&P 4 Knight's Armament - SR16 (Link) Recent News: Army Times Article (11/25/2011) - Link Defense Review Article (11/29/2011) - Link

Yep, perhaps. Accuracy for them may have been a major factor, but also weight as well. Sometimes, even if one weapon is more rugged/durable/etc, you tend to gravitate to a system you do know. I think I've gotten enough of my say in here... I will create a post re: the Individual Carbine Competition to discuss this new acquisition effort further.

If the police are having such a hard time doing their duties, they should complain to the CLEO and petition a change to the law to reduce their workload. Trenton may not listen to us taxpayers, but the traitors tasked with enforcing their crap laws may hold more clout. Until then, continue being the squeaky wheel and use the courts.

NJ Devils and lot's of gun and prepper related talk. The patient has an 'arsenal' in his house... I wonder if they're all NJ legal?

I built a 20" Gov't Profile M16A4 clone recently with a PSA upper and lower. I pinned muzzle brake (thanks Jet Agent!) from EGW in PA to give it the characteristic A2 birdcage look. Thing shot well this weekend. Didn't get to sight it in properly though. :-/

I don't know about that... PEO Soldier buys M4s and M4A1s directly from Colt Defense. Colt purchases steel for barrels and aluminum for lowers and machines them directly. Railed handguards come from a subcontractor (Knights Armament I think). Heck... Colt is the only owner of the M4 TDP. That alone has causes ARDEC a lot of headaches when trying to make changes to the platform. The only other contractor that has ever produced for the M16 platform is FN in Columbia, SC... and that is only for M16A2/A4s. This was a result of the UAW strikes in the 1990s that impacted the quality of M16 production, and forced the Army to go to a second source. Interesting note: the M16A4 is unofficially done. They are never buying anymore of them. Even the USMC is going to the carbine... bs. The USMC uses the same M4 Carbines the Army uses. Anything else is more bellyaching from the Corps. The only thing they need to worry about it getting the rifle wet and sandy, and that's usually accounted for in testing (salt-spray tests, etc) FYI, this is what I was referring to in regards to the Individual Carbine Competition. This kind of stuff doesn't happen every day. The last time something like this happened was the XM8 procurement (2002-2005)... The "Dust Test" was in response to criticism of the existing platform.