Shane45

You continue to operate under assumptions. Im sure you aren't so illogical to draw the conclusion that the presentation of a weapon always results in a shooting. But your penchant for jumping to conclusions and speaking in absolutes makes the discussion...... tedious. I called you out, you choose not to offer the least bit of validation or even a frame of reference for your position. It doesn't even need to be to me. Who would you like to validate to. Want a SWAT officer to verify your claim? Would you prefer a federal agent? I can provide any of the aforementioned to validate your certifiable's.

Your like a little kid, so sure their answer is correct, they don't even consider they may be wrong. If training can perfect behavior, how do you explain all the cases of highly trained individuals that either fled or froze at the moment of truth. Particularly observed in the sniper community when they froze and failed to take the shot when called upon. You assume I was unarmed. You seem to want to look down your nose at what you think civilians think and thus you imply a non civilian view. So here I am, calling you out. What verifiable credentials do you bring to the table that your opinion should be given any more weight than the youthful belligerence it appears to be. I have known many people that talk like you do, until they got a few years of experience in the real world under their belt.

But it doesn't seem to work out the way you in vision. I travel a lot to the Midwest to places where when I walk in the door of an office and ask who's carrying, almost every shirt goes up to reveal a handgun. Oddly these places aren't the death traps you describe. So your handwringing theory about how the sky will fall if people carry just doesn't play out. As for your quip about my emotion and anxiety, luck favors the prepared. My life experience paints a very different picture for me that doesn't line up with the statistics you like to tout. I wont go into detail but there are about 5 times in my life where a gun was desperately needed. One was when a literal axe murderer tried to get my wife in his car where he had a hatchet under the seat! As for my motivations to move, yes, my rights being infringed are beyond my toleration in all aspects of firearm ownership here in NJ. Its funny to me that you paint a ccw holder with such an unflattering brush. It has not aligned with the personalities of those I know that CCW. Im not sure how you tolerate all those people out there that.... drive a car! I have personally improved the shooting skills of way to many LE to believe there is a great divide in the skillset of the average officer and the average recreational shooter. Response under stress, not something really teachable IMO. You can indoctrinate a bit, but those that will fold, will, those that are strong, wont, regardless of who they are.

Im not interested in throwing statistics around till I puke. Im sure if I looked hard enough I can find why statistically im more likely to die from rabbit hamsters. Reports from legitimate sources back up logical conclusions. You may just be hard wired to come from a place of emotion and anxiety, I am not. Interviews with the bad people of this world about what they fear most is armed people. All your talk about competency, your hand wringing fearful position, none of it means anything to me. It is my right to protect myself and my family no matter how you feel. The totality of context makes it VERY clear this was our forefathers intentions. NJ has an issue, a legal one, because they don't see it that way. Unfortunately there are too many like you here that unlawfully cause an infringement on my rights. So in the end I will vote with my wallet and move my family and my employees out of here to a state that sees more clearly. Oddly enough it will be a statistically safer state too!

Crime is down because more people are carrying today. It is easily extrapolated from data. When the CCW trend was occurring it was easy to see violent crime go down. But if there was a border state without CCW they observed their crime go up along the border as criminals picked their targets. As for being needed more now than ever, I would agree with that statement. I have been a keen observer of RTKBA for about 35 years. The situation upon us these days is a significant upswing of seriously random acts of violence. These incidents don't move the needle statistically but they are the very ones that drive the concern of most people seeking CCW I think.

Griz, I'm not trying to be contentious with you but I think if you take a step back and look objectively, this don't pass the smell test. Use the Brit adoption of the LMT MWS as a sample. It was all over legitimate press and in the community. But a bolt gun is a giant secret that only the "whose boob flopped out" tabloid got the scoop on? Furthermore, consider how much else in the article posted was just plain fantasy. The story its self wreaks. No 338 round is made to tumble in flight, let alone make a 1400 yd headshot while tumbling. Complete decapitation? Even the 338 is a little light on energy to pull that off at that distance. Yes I agree units test stuff. All kinds of stuff. Even stuff they aren't interested in because its free. My optics mount was on rifles tested on the IAR project by the Marine Corp. You don't see me running around spouting how its being tested by the Marines because it don't mean a damn thing. Frankly I think its a contrived article to create buzz on the DAN....

Griz, find me 1, just 1 reputable article stating SAS is officially deploying with this SWS. Additionally we aren't talking about a common use item here. We are talking about a very specialized tool that the individual spends a ton of time on. Add to that they are already issued a rifle where the performance overlay is pretty much identical(assuming the DAN can pass on accuracy req's) but the AI is extremely battle proven. It just doesn't make sense. Your correct, I am no operator. But my business affiliations and some of the projects I have had a front row seat to have given me exceptional access into that community. Additionally, being a long time study on the topic and having owned most of the current crop of Sniper weapons systems gives me a pretty educated position on the topic.

bhunted, LEOSA-HR218 is basically what changed.

I could be wrong on this, but I could swear that if memory serves, retired LE, dependent on dept, county, etc etc did in fact run into the same difficulties we all do acquiring CCW. It wasn't until fed law that state law changed.

tagged

I like to look at Katrina/LA as a case study. Some mil and le refused to perform confiscations. Ones from anti 2A states, not so much

"Everybody's definition of best is different." In this case, not really. The criteria for selection of a SWS all seem to center around common operational requirements. Here are the solicitation requirements for the PSR solicitation from a while back as an example. https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=3ccd2299344355c0c55149b2637158d1&_cview=0 But in the interest of discussion, I haven't uncovered yet what the IWI offering brings to the table that is an advantage? It seems behind the curve of where current SWS systems have in terms of capability. The FN Ballista, Accuracy International AXMC, DTA SRS, Remington MSR all bring to the table the ability for quick barrel changes to include being able to go from short action to long action. I cant find any mention of this capability for the DAN. If it doesn't it would not even have been able to submit for any of the recent US solicitations.

Griz, look at what goes into a selection process for a SWS. Look what it took for them to select the LMT as their DMR rifle. Do you think that a dramatic change like that would go down with no one knowing about it? I cant find anything on the SAS fielding this rifle other than the mention posted which doesn't exactly strike me as a reliable resource. I cant find references to anyone adopting it. Honestly it would be like Ferrari said yeah for our race team we are going to run a Hyundai Genesis this year.

I understand what your saying but..... I seriously doubt, even with operational latitude, that they are just going to start fielding an unproven rifle over one that is world renowned for its accuracy and combat reliability, in use as the SWS of choice of over 74 countries, and the rifle that is responsible for their own world record shots and fully integrated into their own support, armory and supply lines. I wonder if Craig Harrison is unhappy with his current record holding shot of 2707 yards with his Accuracy International 338LM

The current iteration is the AI AXMC. It is a switch barrel and can go from 308 short action to 338LM.

I just cant see it. It makes no sense. Maybe the British are going broke and cant afford their own rifle?????

Because they are issued one of the finest SWS from their own country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_International

I assure you the SAS doesn't use a DAN

Its what we have already been told to do

I understand and I get it. Im just saying be mad at the right people. Our elected officials that have no interest in the will of the people, only their own agenda and the judges that selectively apply the law and ignore what doesn't align with their anti 2a agendas. These are the ones that we need to hold accountable.

No it isn't because its in response to Fumanchu's post that cites statute exceptions. As I understand it that statute exceptions are in place to allow for instances of on duty necessity specifically.

I wonder who the source was because they are clueless. Im pretty well versed in precision rifles and I have no idea what a Dan rifle is. I'm not aware of ANY 338 round designed to tumble its way to a 1300+ yd headshot!!!

Fumanchu, so if a US Marshal is transporting a felon through NJ, they should have to disarm while they pass through? If the Ruskies are landing an invasion in Atlantic City the US Military should get rape whistles? I don't think you understand the fundamentals of NJ law in regards to firearms. All firearms possession in NJ is under the guise of exceptions to the law(Firearms are illegal except by exception). The statute your quoting is to allow for the exception of possession for LE/Mil in accordance with their duties. Keep in mind NJ doesn't really do much for LE and if they could get away with it I am certain NJ would NOT allow CCW even for retired LE!!!! NJ does not want firearm ownership. End of story. Everything we have available to us now is either by federal decision or an unwillingness by the state to risk lots of laws being overturned. This is why the law has a lot of movement in it. The state gets away with whatever it can and the people push back as much as they can.

Zeke, love yer avatar! But take a re-read of the posts in this thread. I think the hostility is pretty apparent. Its my opinion its simply misplaced. If the state decided tomorrow to actually start issuing CCW to people in wheelchairs, would I start taking a position I don't care at all for this group and they get no sympathy etc etc? No, I would be happy progress is being made and I would still be looking to vote out all politicians that continue to limit law abiding citizens. Keep in mind my personal view is the govt, state or fed, has no right to limit my 2nd amendment as a law abiding citizen. I shouldn't be chased out of the state because the state has decided to encroach on a right they have no business restricting.