Shane45

Do a barrel swap on a SCAR and an FAL and get back to me which was easier. I actually contest the statement the FAL is easier to brake down. In MY opinion the ergos of the FAL are terrible. Forget about mounting optics. Its a band aid and duct tape fest. Having owned both, without any hesitation I would take the SCAR over the FAL. I would take the FAL over a G3. I would take a KAC SR25EMC or later over all of them.

Read where? Havent seen any serious advocacy of a FS2K over a Tavor...

Bushmaster the question will become how you came into possession. Was it by legal means? These are some of the statutes you should reference: N.J.A.C. 13:54-3.12 N.J.A.C. 13:54-3.13

It varies which part is the firearm. Some examples: SCAR the upper is the firearm. FAL the upper is the firearm. Robarm XCR the lower is the firearm. AR15 the lower is the firearm. Ruger Mark2 Pistol I believe the upper is the firearm. 1911 the lower is the firearm.

Its great people are finally starting to catch on. Maybe some day Ill stop getting dirty looks when I reveal that many trainers out there report that they have yet to see a SA M1A complete one of their classes. With that being said I think Wojo summed it up nicely with the muscle car analogy. Even knowing what I know I find myself looking at a LRB M1A every now and then

Indeed AIWB seems to favor the slim of build! But I seem to be able to somehow pull it off with my Dale Frick holster. Im a 1911 guy so I couldn't get used to the high safety. But I really like the LEM trigger. Some people have trouble with it but for some reason it just works with my "software".

Roger that HE. I think I gravitate to AIWB because I already have so much hardware in my back Not putting pressure on all the Ti rods is a good thing for me. bhunted, good question! I have run through the gambit of 3 P30's. 1st one was DA/SA decock no safety. Second go was DA/SA with safety in an attempt to go cocked and locked but couldn't really do it well with how high the safety was. Round 3. LEM. Ahhhh digging it! But here was what I found. I found that although the molded ergonomic grip felt great, it presented me issues on the draw for anything less than a perfect initial master grip. Add the grippy texture of the P30 to the molded ergonomics and its a pistol I find hard to correct the grip on the fly of the draw if its at all off. I found that I was not having this issue with my HK45CT. I realized that however I gripped the P30 on the draw I was essentially stuck with unless I really slowed down to manipulate the change. The "blockyness" and absence of a lot of texture on the HK45CT allows me to easily adjust the pistol in my grip on the fly which actually speeds up my time from draw to shot. So moving to the P2000 made a ton of sense to me to allow my grip changes and to also unify the systems/feel of the two pistols. Added bonus, an XGrip on my spare p30 mags gives me 15 round mags on the hip Down the road at some point I will likely get another P30 as a range gun but it will be one of the rarer P30L Lem no decocker pistols.

Really, fumanchu182? Really? Do you also do Captain obvious commercials for Hotels.com in your spare time?

So should I have titled the thread "Be carful before we see the rise of the NY trigger"?

Vlad, to answer your question on pistol selection, maybe?!?! I don't want to shoot myself anywhere. And so when I take a step back from the conversation on that notion, you are correct. I generally do not select the pistol purchase based on appendix carry. I already made the decision to mitigate risk on any method of carry by picking hammer fired pistols. It so happens that Im comfortable with appendix carry because of the previous decision. However, my recent purchase came down to an HK P2000LEM or a VP9. Because I do intend on appendix carry the P2000 won the nod. If I had bought the VP9, I indeed would not carry that particular pistol AIWB. So the location of carry played a factor in the decision. BUT other factors were key in the decision process as well. But back to my original post, I don't think its a lot of people, its a lot of "new" people that concerns me. I mean practically everyone on this forum has more than a casual interest in shooting. Unfortunately I think we are in the minority. So I visualize a sea of new shooters picking things like the VP9 as their first pistol. That is my concern.

Vlad, keep in mind you are getting wrapped around what I choose and why. If that is food for thought for others, that great, they can choose to take it as good input or ignore it entirely. But to focus on your debate on my logic for a second, its not about the odd parameters. Its a simple matrix of yes and no. Do I want to carry AIWB for a given scenario, yes, will it be a striker fired with no external safeties, no. Would I LOVE a VP9 with a 1911 style thumb safety, YOU BET!!!! For ME that would be an excellent pistol meeting a ton of checkboxes in what I want in that type of pistol. It is not about bias. We all have different levels of comfort. If your fine with a 5lb trigger, no external safety, and a AIWB holster, have at it. Several I know and respect indeed are. Conversely I find those that carry empty chamber to be at the other end of the spectrum and this is not something I would do. I consider myself somewhere in the middle. On the topic of pistol selection, I have not yet discovered the striker fired pistol with an external safety that works for me. But based on your statements, you would never carry AIWB. So clearly no mitigation at all would be enough to make you comfortable. So my logic about mitigating risk will be lost on you. But does it mean that a method to help reduce risk for that method of carry has no merit?

The concern is not the proximity if it is a pistol I can mitigate risk with.

So there is no scenario in your mind where reholstering without looking could happen? How about retreating to a back bedroom with baby in one arm, needing to keep visual on the hallway for threat and needing to open a door? But I digress, the point is being missed. Even if I look, it doesn't mean I see. Could be poor lighting conditions or whatever. The fact is there is no way to stop a striker fired pistol with a light trigger from firing should an accidental trigger press from a foreign object occur. I can mitigate that risk with a hammer fired pistol or one with an external safety. If I chose to carry AIWB, I chose a pistol with either mitigating feature. Its odd to me that picking equipment to help mitigate risk is an actual contention. Checking for obstruction when you can, going slow, being carefull are all self evident. But planning around worst case scenarios with a simple way to help mitigate risk seems prudent to me. If you all are so sure of your self in every possible scenario, I tip my hat to you. But after my post I took a look around to find I am not alone in my concern. Well pedigreed trainers seems to share the same concerns....

If you are referring to the premise of the thread, no mountains out of mole hills here. This is just thread drift and discussion. My original post centers more on the notion of a light trigger no external safety style pistol is becoming very popular. Think of it more this way, if 20,000 new shooters went out and bought revolvers, and another 20,000 new shooters went out and bought VP9's, which group do you think will have a higher ND count in 5 years time? If you are referring to my comments about striker vs hammer in an AIWB, I don't see where I ever mentioned, brought up or advocated speed holtering so Im not sure where that idea even came from. But I can see the situation where I need to holster and cant take my eyes off what Im looking at. Thumb over hammer is an easy insurance policy. Vlad, consider for a second if you had a ND in a AIWB. Where is it pointed? Right at your manhood and femoral artery! An accident with this holster has a major likelihood of being fatal. Its not like carrying at 4:00 and skinning yer ass with a bullet or 3:00 skinning your outer thigh as seen with the texas tactical pirouette king.

I will not carry a striker fired pistol in my AIWB holster. I chose a P2000 over a VP9. Why? Because I can put my thumb over the hammer while I re-holster. If some obstruction in the trigger guard should occur, I will know and can physically prevent it from firing. There is nothing I can do to insure a VP9 or PPQ would not fire on re-holster. So while I agree with your assertion that it largely doesn't matter for the negligent, those of us that try not to be by building in habits to protect against human error or unlucky circumstance, it indeed can matter.

Another consideration, you may be able to sell off the 30-06 to a hunter and then chase down something like a lightly used Remington LTR. Its a rifle I have found to consistently shoot well out of the box, sky is the limit for accessories, customizable to no end, and in 308 which you will find obtaining factory match ammo for easier.

If precision is your goal, I have significant doubts about the stock thin barrel. Especially once it heats up.

Will you be re-barreling it?

Id rather not get derailed into the grey area. I agree with Vlad that it is somewhat grey. But forget about the technicality of mechanics for a second. Pull the trigger on a VP9 or PPQ and you will see what I mean...

Blake, glad I can help. On the topic of carry, keep in mind my holster is appendix carry where a negligent discharge would upset women everywhere, thus more concerning . Also consider that re-holstering while calm at home, is a different affair if you just had a violent confrontation. Diamondd817, first, a glock is not fully cocked like this latest iteration of striker fireds, that have a pretty darn light smooth trigger. Second, look at the statistics of PD's going to glocks. Many departments observed a rise in ND's. Some even turned around and dumped the glocks as a result. Training issue? Of course, but it still makes the point. Medic Yeti, just for clarity, ND's are indeed the fault of the person, AD's are the fault of the weapon.

Ive had to do a lot of ridicule...er um education!

Thanks for the heads up. Passed it on to someone looking.

I could see a zero net difference in situations where "I thought it was empty". I think Im focusing more on while handling a hot weapon. In a 1911 you still have the thumb safety saving you (provided you don't prematurely go off safe). But I do agree a 1911 would likely be in the same category which is why I do not recommend them to new/casual shooters. But for some reason, even from somewhat seasoned shooters, them cocked and locked 1911's are dangerous but a fully cocked VP9 is just fine

I like my 16" 308's! If I had to run out into the apocalypse, its what I would grab out of everything I have. I have not had obvious overbore issues with my rifles and factory ammo.

Sorry to hear man! Good luck to you!!