Shane45

I don't like open carry for the sake of. I like it because it may indemnify you. If someone sees your concealed carrying it becomes a non issue in states with open carry. At least that's the way I was looking at it.

bl@ckvr4, that is the comp I put in mine. I like it a lot.

They do not understand that the narrative doesn't change based on the inanimate object used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/01/world/asia/china-railway-attack/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

Over 60% of all gun deaths in the US are suicide. It stands to reason this is going to be likely a when, not an if at the range especially in a state where obtaining firearms is more difficult. Its my opinion that they see this method as the most painless and quick method available and that's what draws them to use this "out". So to me this is another topic that is not a gun issue, its a mental health issue. If there were a method that was perceived as being as quick and painless and had even easier access, I suspect you would see that take the lead. But as usual, inanimate objects are sure to take the blame. I think the consideration of the safety of others in this type of event is a very real concern. A saying that I think captures the essence of the issue at hand is "Hurt people, hurt people."

Sometimes free AINT!

Coincidence, I think not!

I know of no confusion surrounding the Battle comp. There are concerns about the BCM do to its odd opening shape etc etc.

Find a lightly used Remington LTR. Solid rifle and can be the basis for turning into a mild or wild custom in the future.

Yes, some are better than others. Much like cars, the spectrum runs from the Yugo to the Ferrari. If you have a budget in mind this would help.

Why wouldn't you expect it? They are pretty vocal about it. If I remember correctly they even said they carry HK's around the house in an interview. They also had a couple custom 1911's built for them by Jesse James. http://jjfu.tumblr.com/

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jun/01/vince-vaughn-guns-in-schools-will-prevent-mass-shootings

I handled an Arak at a gun show in Kentucky last year. Fellows behind the counter seemed nice. But I remember coming away with the impression that it felt very heavy and front weighted. Much like a Springfield Armory Socom II.

ps. On the triji 1-6 I have been told repeatedly they wont do it. Especially with a real usable reticle. BUT they also have said they have been asked a lot. So my hope is they finally caved!!!!

Im here! When I first looked at this thread when there were stipulations around selection, I didn't bother. Seen it was still rolling and took another look. I wont go to deep into rehashing what's already been said but the important takeaway's I see are, mission drives the gear, and selection is a very personal decision. What works for me, may not work for you. What may be a consideration for you, may not be one for me. So let me say up front that budget is a topic I really cant speak to. My interest are focused towards the upper echelon of optics. I have nothing to offer in the category of low to mid level optics and mounts. So the two things I have to add to this conversation are this. Instead of calling it zombies or apocalypse etc etc, Im just going to call it operational envelope. How many things do you want your optic to allow you to do and how well you can do it? Something like an Aimpoint has a much smaller envelope than say a US Optics SR8C. Now of course a consideration in selection is what trade offs you are willing to accept to expand that envelope. An increase in weight for example. Now it sounded to me like the OP wanted a broad operational envelope. At least that's what I would interpret the needs to be for an optic that can cover the broadest spectrum of situations. That's what I think would be ideal for a scenario that knows little limits to what you could run into. So completely identifying what you want to accomplish (mission drives the gear) is going to give you your check box list to use against the optics you are considering. Do your research and determine how broad that envelope is. This will largely be determined by your own comfort level on what compromises you are willing to make and what outlier scenarios you may feel are an unworthy pursuit. It probably makes sense to separate your selections into 3 categories, RDS, fixed and variable. Off course the scope of the optics need to match the capabilities of the weapon system its self. Now, lets talk about software for a second. By software I mean the program running between your ears. THIS is what, in my opinion, makes optics a truly personal selection. What you see, how well you see it, how fast your brain(software) interprets it all plays a part in that selection. Some people's brains can accept the visual input of seeing a reticle much better than others. Other peoples brains seem to want a red dot for input and have a hard time dealing with a reticle. So if your one of those people that has a software issue with reticles, the tradeoffs may not be worth it. It may cause you to have a glaring operational hole. What good is it to have top end if at the bottom you shoot MUCH slower than you would with a red dot. Something to consider. There are a bunch of other considerations too. Night vision compatibility. Eye relief. Adjustable diopter. Your own vision. Its a deep rabbit hole. A lot to consider. Optics is a world of compromises and trade offs. But one thing I have found to be true, buy the best that you can. Cheap optics are more expensive in the long run.

It may have not been reality, but a old Bushmaster Commando Carbine I had that was unthreaded seemed like the loudest, blastiest AR I ever owned!

The other advantage of a FFP scope is in engaging moving targets. Your leads do not change in different magnifications. This could be problematic for a SFP scope who's correct values are usually at max mag. You may not want to be at max when trying to hit a moving target at closer range. FFP its always correct. SFP if your at anything but max, the subtentions will be wrong.

I have the Geissele. Its a great tool.

Indeed!

Well, all recent small arms solicitations seem to have ended in cancelation, so I think that is the most likely result.

The gas system and the proprietary bolt. From what I understand not a single one in civy hands has broken to date. Travis Haley put over 90k rounds on his. I believe Costa did as well. Ive been following a guy on another forum that has put 15k on his with no cleanings! I have had 2. I have not put volume through any of them but they have been superb. A number of friends followed suit and bought them. Not a problem with any of them. That's a sampling of about 7 rifles FWIW. In addition, I very much like the BUIS. They are what I would put on any AR. Shane

My point is there are plenty of high end AR's at the 2k mark and up. So from that perspective, its in line with the market. Considering that you get a FF rail, quality BUIS, hammer forged chrome lined barrel, ambi lower, tuned gas system, and a bolt system unique to KAC that truly makes a difference in reliability and longevity, I at least think a case can be made there is even a value there. The market seems to bare it (to your point on capitalism )

Again, Im not sure I would agree. The SR15 is, in my opinion, is one of if not the best AR15 out there and considering all you get, the price is well within line of the market.

Why do you say that? You have to consider what is entailed in being a govt contractor supplying weapons to DoD. A facility tasked to do so has to meet a LOT of requirements. Knight's is already configured that way as the military is their focus market, not civilians. So their faculties are already DOD approved. Most anyone else wanting to play in that market would have a lot of catching up to do with a significant capitol expenditure to go with it.

I actually thought it read like a setup for KAC

And in my opinion this is where the P2K/G19 sized pistols of whatever flavor you choose hit a sweet spot for CCW. Special circumstances notwithstanding.