JSF01

I can pretty much guarantee that it’s simply an accountability error. While I am Air Force not Army, I am in the munitions career field (or AMMO as we like to call ourselves). It’s not hard at all to think of a few dozen ways to “lose” 14,000 rounds paperwork wise. Examples include someone not doing the expenditure sheet, not filling out an expenditure sheet out right, not sending that expenditure sheet to the right people or at all, the expenditure sheet being lost, the accountability system they use being down when the expenditure sheet was sent, so someone forgot to do it when it came back on line, and that’s just expenditure wise. Speaking from experience, currently we are in a situation where it look like we are missing about 200,000 rounds according to our accountability system because the transaction cannot be processed until the account they are were issued to is unfrozen. If one of the dozen or so pieces of paper documenting the transactions goes missing before they are processed in the accountability system suddenly we are missing 14,000. Of course that won’t happen because we are Air Force and not Army, we are much better at accountability than them .

Not that I mean to argue, as I realize that regardless of the fact, NJ is going to treat them as a firearms, but even if you intend to use it does not mean it’s not possessed as a curiosity, or its historical significance, or value. I think that if someone had the time and money, as well as being willing to risk it they could successfully argue it in court.

That paper work is all to determine if you are legally aloud to own a firearm, not for the firearm it's self per say. You cannot have someone just send you a firearm though because that is illegal. It’s kind of hard for me to explain the in and outs of NJ law since they do not currently affect me as I am currently stationed in a different state. The gist of it though is that as long as you have legally acquired the firearm and it is legal to own in NJ, you are good to go.

I was going to guess "into the wild blue yonder", oh well. On the plus side Congratulations, to random fellow forum member I don't actually know in real life, from a random forum member that you do not actually know in real life. My advice for a long happy marriage is all marriage problems can be solved by going sky diving together* *Disclaimer: I have never been married, been skydiving, or known anyone who actually took my advice and go skydiving. Use my advice at your own risk. Seriously though Congrats, and have fun.

I demand the hoverboard!!!

Just became number 60

I thought that was a more of a matter of state law overriding any local laws when it came to guns. where this case it would be a state law, and as far as I understand the federal law just says states would just have to recognize other states permits but those permit holders still have to follow all that states law, and there is nothing saying that a states laws cannot be unreasonable.

I sure hope it passes. While it may not help us directly it still gives us more ammo for us to use in an attempt to change NJ's right to carry laws. Of course I would expect that instead of taking this laying down, NJ instead enact a law saying something like you can’t carry within a 2000ft of any government owned facility or property (including roads), without special permission from the state police. Than NJ could claim that they do in fact recognize other states permits, it would be just almost impossible to actually carry in NJ in practice.

The problem is as soon as they tried those laws would suddenly be enforced. Also there is the risk that in such a scheme that you would end up paying more to get the rifles if many of them turn out to be stolen or just plain illegal than you would get from selling the legal ones.

I found this interesting article on gun buyback programs in NJ http://www.shotgunnews.com/2011/08/19/questioning-no-questions-asked%E2%80%94are-gun-surrender-gimmicks-legal/ Quick Summary: Basically Nowhere in NJ law does it permit organization to perform gun buyback programs. Even if it’s the police performing one it’s questionable. Now on the other hand if you can find somthing that does permit it you can get a $5000 reward.

Cool, though it needs more images. The pictures that are there are very good.

So any one put together a storm play list Of the top of my head I've got "Stormbringer"-Deep Purple "Stormy May Day"-AC/DC "Riding the Storm Out"-REO Speedwagon "Riders on the Storm"-Doors "Shelter from the Storm"-Bob Dylan "Crying In The Storm"-Clee-Shays "The Lightning Storm"-Flogging Molly and of course "Rock You Like A Hurricane"-Scorpions Feel free to add to the list, I am sure there 1000's of storm songs

That gave me a good laugh

Went to the range today with a friend set up a silhouette target at two hundred yards. I brought out my M1898 Krag Jorgensen for some fun. Now it’s only the second time fired it, and the first tie at two hundred yards (actually its my first time at two hundred yards period, usually I am at 50 or 100 yards.) By my third set of five shots I had settled down and put them all in the neck area. (My target is the one on the right) Despite being 113 years old it is a real nice shooter, with relatively low kick to it, and quite accurate. I would recommend that if you come across one you should diffidently pick it up.

Fixed it for you.

and now your single again.

The first Sherlock Holmes movie received a lot of mixed reviews, but I really enjoyed it. Seeing the trailer for the second one, in my opinion, I expect that it will be just as good as the first and personally cannot wait for it to come out. Also some cool firearms in the trailer. http://youtu.be/lNxhpNpnAkk

The website is currently down though they are clever about it so it gave me a little chuckle

Over all thats some smart thinking.

I said this before but it is now true. Like 1994, once again God did not have Chuck Norris’ permission to pass judgment.

Someone needs to sue the government over the 1968 Gun Control Act for being unconstitutional and get it repealed.

Little known fact is that most of the time it is women that are the perpetrators of domestic violence. The reason that most people don't think so is cultural. For one the general population does not think that women commit crimes like this so whenever there is a case of one the first thing people do is think that the man did something to cause the woman to snap. Secondly as a society there is a belief that men should just take it. If you can't take it then you are not a man, combined with pride and not wanting to be known as the guy who was "beating up" by a woman leads to them not reporting it. Of course this fact is not helped by the fact that men tend to be stronger than women so when they commit acts of domestic violence serious injury is more likely.

That can't be a real movie can it?

I’ll be telling a new Chuck Norris tale. Like 1994, once again God did not have Chuck Norris’ permission to pass judgment.

Its been less then a week and I just recieved number 6 in the mail today Springfield Model 1898 Krag-Jørgensen, built in 1898