bulpup

My booth babe.

Hanover Powersports on Rte 10

My thoughts are that I hope the local stores can handle the volume. And after that I hope the volume brings the price down But if I can goto a local shop, place a semi large ammo order and skip the hazmat fee because it is part of a store's larger order, then all I need is a catalog and I'm set! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Excellent article. I want to add, only because of a recent discussion with a few of my friends that are very much on the "ban" band wagon (I don't call them anti's because they are simply rolling with the tide of the television broadcasts) the following: Here are the points they tune out anything I give the to read: "...agenda..." "main stream media" "lame stream Media" "...the gun grabbers.." " the Liberals" "libs" I only bring this up because they were so honest to tell me, but also because one of those phrases is in there, sorta. It goes like this: "well that guy has some good things to say... nice, ... interesting....hmm did not know that... WHOA, main stream media gun grabbing agenda? This guy is one of those nut jobs that care more for his gun than for dead kids. I'm outta here " It does no good to put all those thoughts together but then stick a thumb in the eye of the peopel you really want to read it. I don't want to sound critical of this excellent piece. I really like it a lot. I will make sure people I know read it because it sounds wonderful. However for those of us that are intending to write something along these same lines I say this - know your audience. Or, if you can't know them don't go on and on like you are talkingwith your buds at the gun range calling people libtards. Those are the one you want to convince if you feel the need to write a letter to the editor. Preaching to the choir get us no where.

Yea, i guess you did. I was already out the door looking for plexus at that point though. Props Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One of my anti gun friends said it best. "Aren't all weapons assault weapons?" He asked me because he was genuinely confused. I use that line now for just the same reasons you outline above. Not much more need to add to it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I bought some plexus as per the advice here but the guy at the the store persuaded me not to use it as decal prep. Says it has wax in it. Ended up using some distilled water and 91% alcohol as per the dealer advice. But using it after applying looks great!! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dentists have not. That rumor was started by an Seinfeld episode. While concern over psych test before granting firearms permits is certainly valid, stating that psychologists are unfit for the job is silly. Anyway, this thread started on silliness and I guess the oP is standing by it. Oh well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmm. Im thinking maybe 90% alcohol but I think i remember hearing that might not be good. I just cant remember. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is just a shot in the dark but I'm hoping someone can recommend a good way to clean plastic and Plexiglas so that I can apply decals. I'm worried certain cleaners will fog my plexiglass windscreen. Any suggestions? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was thinking "smart guns are stupid" but I think I would like something more on point. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I had a problem registering with all of my name and address info. Might have bern my browser. But I am going unregistered. But i am going. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't fall into the anti's mentality. First of all, it was briefly mentioned in the sixties and then never again. Second, that is like saying a having a black gun makes you a murderer. And lastly, if there is a bit of truth to it, wouldn't you think a person in a profession that is supposed to be able to treat dangerous people, identify them, make possibly make note to authorities that they thought a person was a danger and then be told that there is nothing to be done about it - wouldn't that person feel a bit of stress and hopelessness after that same patient shot a bunch of people in a movie theatre in Colorado? The people in that profession see things you will never know about unless it is a movie of the week every single day. Go talk to this guy for few years Please don't go spouting this sillyness as mantra. Those same people are the ones that are suposed to get the Holmes and Laugner's off the streets. BS like what you posted is why they can't

That's how I see it. However the term assault weapon may have been coined so that they could include things like Uzi's in the ban. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Doing both seems like a good idea Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One thing to consider is that people you call liberals might actually own guns. What I like to do when women in particular ask is say "now just imagine if we did this with the nineteenth amendment." Then watch them scratch their heads and relish the thought of what they think when they google it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

online ammo sale ban would totaly suck for us.

I am debating wearing my class A dress greens. I don't think I can under law. Any thoughts? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The video says 2012. Awesome. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pharma and drugs stepped in when managed health care became the fad. Once cost cutting from managed health care happened psychologists visits were covered for 3 visits a year, people were chucked out of hospitals after a day after giving birth and psychos that showed up in hospitals were given just as much time so long as they took a pill. Managed health care and these super pills ended psychiatric facilities as we knew it. State mental Health budgets were slashed and doctors that are "in network" are only in the network if they follow the strict guidlines of the managed health care company. Those companies tell them exactly how long they can personally see a patient and that they MUST prescribe a drug in certain conditions, often after only allowing 15 minutes to diagnose. The mental health care system is not just a joke, it is WRONG! Come on now. Throw all the mental patients on the street and try to take my guns at the same time? Sounds like a horror movie! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I found it spectacularly befitting and amusing. You funny! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

works for me

LIke this and even this feels long. Dear Sir, As a legal firearm owner living in Secaucus, I am pleased to see an article opening a discussion on firearms ownership. Your article in the Jan 2013 issue of the Secaucus Spectator began in the open spirit of covering some key facts about the number of households in Secaucus that contain firearms. I believe the numbers you give, 2,500 to 3,500 may be on the low side. However, these ownership numbers come in spite of the fact that New Jersey has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. NJ requires a prospective firearms owner to obtain a Firearms Purchaser Identification Card (FPID) and additional “Permits to Purchase (PtoP) for each handgun. The process to get either one involves completing an application form, fingerprinting, mental health check, character references and a background investigation by the local police department. Additionally, each Permit to Purchase for a handgun expires in 90 days, forcing already permitted and investigated gun owners to have another check performed, complete with new paperwork, should they wish to buy another handgun - even if they just had one done three months ago. You quite rightly point out in your article that this convoluted process can be construed as gun ownership as a privilege rather than a right. However I would like to further point out that this is contrary to the Constitution of the United States. As such, The Bill of Rights, which is where we find the Second Amendment, was ratified prior to passage of the Militia Act of 1792 that you quote, and it has nothing to do with the Constitution. In fact, the Supreme Court has already ruled that the second amendment is an individual right. The connection of the two documents is widely considered a stretch by Constitutional scholars. Being required to carry a musket in 1792 does not change the fact that the Second Amendment is a Right before, after and, most importantly, now. To believe the founding fathers could not conceive of progress that would make a musket obsolete is, frankly, a very condescending way to view the men that envisioned the United States. If the Militia Act were still relevant, where is your musket? Your suggestion of storing "all rifles and multi-round weapons” at the local police department is at odds with your quoted DC v Heller case which affirms that the Second Amendment’s is pertinent to self-defense in the home. Having to store a firearm at a police station is exactly contrary to the Supreme Court’s recent decision on how the Second Amendment applies. You would not only have to call the police if you needed to protect you self, but go there as well. If by chance you agree this is a good idea I will re-iterate that the DC v Heller case assures all citizens of this country that they can in fact defend their homes with their legally owned firearms. Laws contrary to that then are unconstitutional. Regarding the “bad man” part of your article; It is important to know that in the majority of tragedies the "bad man" did not wear any body armor. The fact that it is reported as such is contradicted by the actual police reports stating it was “tactical gear” or “load bearing vests. None of which are actually armor. The inclusion of such erroneous ‘facts” are as accurate as stating that the “bad guy” had a “rapid fire musket.” – It sounds about right, but is totally wrong. As for your assertion of the ineffectiveness of a lone armed individual against an active shooter –current law enforcement policy disagrees. Through careful analysis police have determined - and now teach - that an armed presence on-site will greatly reduce the number of casualties. Yes there are those that point out that there was an armed guard at the Columbine school, but wouldn’t you agree that the Police are the experts in these matters? If they don’t know how to do these things, who are we to tell them? The 10,000 people a year killed by guns, that you quote, is largely a result of gang on gang violence, which will occur irrespective of gun legislation. The actual number of firearm fatalities through accidental discharges and tragedies may be less than 20% of the number you quote. However it brings to mind a recent article on NJ.com about Corey Thermitus, a young man caught after carjacking a woman at gunpoint point. Corey already had 2 felony convictions and multiple arrests, but was back on the streets to, yet again, prey on the populace with an illegal gun. This I believe illustrates the fundamental differences in our approaches to guns and laws. On the one hand, I say the laws are there to put Corey away for a long time, but he doesn’t work that way. Therefore I would like to have my legal gun to protect me from his very persistent criminal activity. Laws such as you propose, since I oblige by being a law-abiding citizen, affect me only. And Cory just keeps coming and coming. Yours faithfully,

All that clearly shows is that what he believes as an appropriate restriction is already in place in the state he governs. He is not saying it should be expanded. Not great but his stated preference is neigh. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If he keeps talking the way he does and does not cave he could end up being "the guy that is nut a gun nut saying all the logical things we want". Whatever he says as a governor after he decides will be far more of a guidon than anything Piers Morgan or Wayne LaPierre has to say. I just hope he is for us. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk