JSF01

Why??? Its really pointless, and it appears to be simply slam fired which means the firing pin rests on the primer until you pull it back. So not only is it pretty much useless, it may fire if dropped or something hits that knob forward.

I would love to see these two guys be kicked out of the school, since this would make a perfect case to bring up that college students are being denied their Second Amendment rights. Can you imagine if the college had denied those students other rights. Suppose if a college (or land lord in general) said you could not practice religion in the dorms/apartments, or that students living in the dorms could not vote. There would be a law suite filed so fast the ink on the paper the college wrote that on would still be wet. In this case there is noting really negative connected to it. They had firearms in there place and nothing bad happened with them. They than used the firearm in a 100% justifiable way, that even the police congratulated them on the act. It happened off campus so they cant claim "there are the campus police there to protect them so they don't need a gun". It is also a bit easier to filter out some of the anti's hysterical emotional BS for when it comes "guns on campus". The only way I could think that would have given even better odds was if this was a case where the college made it so students had to stay in the college dorms.

But how many types of those people are there? I am going to say its a very small number, so the chance of them buying from a counterfeit dealer are pretty low

this is pretty much how I respond when ever I see that stupid graphic. Than I add that not all of those car regulations are true for public roads either. There is at least one state that does not require car insurance that I know of, multiple states do not have inspections, at least one state that does not have a written test, at least one state that does not have renewals, and I am not sure of any state that requires a title and tag at the point of sale.

Selling counterfeit body armor is a pretty smart idea at least from a criminal stand point. People who buy body armor generally all buy it for just in case SHTF type scenarios. Even limited SHTF scenarios are quite rare to begin with, so in reality that armor will probably never be used, and therefore never be discovered to be counterfeit. If the person that bought that armor were to find themselves in that situation, there is still a good chance of them not ever being shot, so still not discovering that its fake. Even if the person did get shot, it being a SHTF scenario means that there is a higher chance of them dyeing from there wounds, and there fore unable to talk and if they didn't they still would have to remember who they bought it from to begin with which most likely would have been a few years prior. As long as nobody goes to test it, and I doubt very many people regular people do, there is a very slim chance of being caught.

Hmmm... I just checked Wikipedia to make sure the Rasheed was the version of the rifle I was thinking of, and something caught my eye that I cant believe is correct. According to Wikipedia only about 8000 were made, but I have seen like a minimum of 3 of them for sale in the past year for sale at gun shows. That seems to be quite high of a number for something that only 8000 were ever made much less the total that made it to the US. If It Is true I need to go kick my self for not buying one, especially when I was so very tempted to one time but opted for a VZ. 52 instead just because I had never seen one before.

My brother did the same thing. He figures that in the middle of the night, if some one breaks in he could scare them off with it, since he does not have the money or the time to get a real firearm currently.

So at what point do you consider a firearm no longer shoot able, because technically based on your very brief description of your Veteralli Rifle, it sounds like it could still physically shoot? I am not quite understanding what's wrong with your Belgian Hunting Rifle? They still make .32 Long, while quite expensive for what it is, it's still under $1 a round.

Thanks for the advice every one, Ill take all my future questions to the proper section, since we are kind of going off topic here. Since it seems the answer is universal for having ammo on hand, In your opinion does the same hold up for firearms chambered in a cartridge that you can not buy or make yourself? For example suppose you had an original 1860 Henry rifle that's been passed down in your family since the civil war, chambered .44 Henry, the only ammo you will find for it will be at least 80 years old and has a pretty good chance that it won't fire. Do you still buy 100+ rounds of it? Would you try to find a way to have new manufactured ammo made for it, which would probably cost at minimum $10 a round and most likely a lot more? Would you keep ammo on hand for firearms that are generally considered unsafe to fire such as a very late last ditch Type 99 or one of the low serial numbered M1903s? (assuming you did not have any thing else in the same caliber of course) What about a family heirloom that's no longer considered safe to fire?

Do you have a good recommendation for a pistol powder? Also what would you consider to be the best source for the reloading tables, that also covers some of the rarer military calibers?

I eventually did find more ammo, for those firearms, and for a better price than what the first box of ammo cost. Having a minimum of 100 rnds for each of my firearms is a goal I try to maintain and have been doing a pretty good job of maintaining it recently. I am only a little short in 3 calibers that I bought ammo in, and two more that I have yet to find any ammo in so I have not officially started my ammo count for. I had been thinking about getting into reloading for quite a while now, though due to my complete lack of knowledge on reloading, I had been very hesitant. Two weeks ago I decided I have been hesitant to long so I purchased the small lee hand press. So now I am currently in the process of buying the rest of what I need to reload, though I have not yet started to looking at powders. It is something I have no knowledge of other than there are many different types. Right now for example I don't have any clue why IMR 4350 is significant enough that you based you the comparison of Alliant Reloder 17 too. (if I had to guess, I'd guess either its a military powder, or it's the most common powder) Obviously I am going to need to do a lot more research into before I actually start reloading.

I am kind of curious, and it just may be me, but do you feel the need to always have at least some ammo on hand for all of your firearms chambered in rare calibers, no matter how rarely you shoot that firearm? For example when I bought my Type 99 I bought one box of Ammo too, since the person was selling it for $35 and I figured I could find it cheaper online. Turned out I could not at the time as all online places that listed it were sold out. Well I took the Type 99 to the range and fired only 10 rnds, and saving the other 10. It really bothers me not having ammo for one of my firearms. I just feel the need to have ammo for all my firearms just in case, even though there is literally no conceivable situation where it makes sense that I'd need to use a Type 99 with only 10 rnds. I did the same thing with my luger that's chambered 7.65. I bought one box because how expensive it was, than shot 40 rnds and saved the last 10. So do any of you feel the need to keep ammo on hand no matter how little the amount, for even your firearms chambered in very rare calibers? If you have a highly collectible firearm, that no sane person would ever shoot would you still feel the need to have ammo on hand for that firearm even if you had nothing else in that caliber?

Anyone Without checking the link do you remember what the prices were? I just checked the link and it's a $30 difference, and I am curious if the $20 difference was just a math error by the OP, did they lower the price another $10, or did they sneakily increase the "regular price" by $10 to make the deal sound better?

How tough are solar panels? I'd worry they could be damaged in something like a hurricane.

Cool fact, Did you know that it is not friction that that causes things to burn up on reentry, like is commonly believed? While the friction will heat up an object, the friction produced by the air relatively minor, and gets no where near hot enough to melt rocks or metal. The actual culprit is Ram Pressure, the compression of the air by an object. The air itself rapidly being compressed becomes supper heated, which in turn heats up the object past its melting point, as it passes through that superheated air.

I like it. Unfortunately I do not see this passing. The democrats can't afford to pass it due to the fact that it puts a hole in their argument that If more people were armed would not have helped. Especially at this time where they are trying to use every bit of fear of firearms from the mass shootings in the past year in order to push for more gun control.

There is something weird about request. To me it seems to be casting a very wide net, which to me says they don't have any idea on the show that they are trying to create. A show about a judge and daughter would be quite different than a show about a LEO and daughter. Most of the time Reality TV show are based around some unique family or some interesting private business. For the jobs they want these people to have you really can't have people around recording most of that type of stuff, which takes out the business part of the equation (which seems to have already been taken out of the equation since hey are also looking at retired LE officials). So that leaves just family life for the show to be about in which case you need an interesting family to be the stars, so why limit your self to LEOs. There is no special relationship that a LEO parent and daughter would have that others wouldn't. (If it was specifically an active cop and daughter you could use the parent is often in danger angle, but they are looking at attorneys and judges including retirees too. That danger angle would not really apply) Than there is the fact that it's NJ only residents they are looking for, why? We know this show must be focusing mainly on the family, and interesting families can be any where. In fact being NJ only limits the uniqueness of what you may find quite a bit, just based on how populated we are. We don't have the smallest towns, or the biggest cities. It just seems to be a very strange limitation to their casting.

Do you mean that there was only 850 rnds or that you paid 850?

A friend of mind made this post on face book, I liked her reply to the first guy's reply.

Worth the hassle financially, Well I'd guess probably not though I do not really know much about them (at least in the short term, hold on to it long enough and it will probably be worth more than you put into it. Of course if you had bought an all original one in the first place it's value will probably increase greater than rebuilding that one you are looking at.) On the other hand if you are not looking at it as a financial investment and more as a fun project then I would say it's probably worth it. That's a matter of opinion though. Personally I do not like seeing historical equipment being altered in any way that is unnecessary, so I prefer to see sporterized firearms changed back to original configuration.

There is definitely something missing from this story.

The thing is in this case, one way or the other the police did something wrong, and therefore deserve to be called out on it. I think this thread provides a great example why many people distrust the police. It's not the fact that there is a police officer doing something wrong that's the problem, it's the fact despite a police officer doing something wrong, it's other wise good police officers feel the need to try to defend an officer that obviously did something wrong no mater how minor the actual incident was. How can you trust a group of people in a position of power that will not hold others in that group accountable for wrong actions. As a side note, this case has nothing to do with the Second Amendment. Reading the original forum posts, it seems quite clear that the neighbor who started this whole thing, didn't do it because he was Anti-Second Amendment (though he might have been any way). That guy's neighbor was one of those angry old grumpy people that believes the world should conform to the way they want it and they will make your life miserable as hell in order to force you to conform to their ideas. For example that guy did not like kids playing in front of his house, so he set up the sprinkler system to face the street and made it activate by motion sensor. I don't believe it mattered what the sign said, that neighbor was going to complain.

@BLF No mater how you look at this that cop did something wrong. Either he did it because the police were simply tired of hearing the neighbor complain which is absolutely wrong. Or the sign was illegal to have there and the police are allowed to remove the sign there should have been at least a warning issued if not a fine. Even if the cop was just trying to be nice by removing the first sign with out trying to stir up trouble, after if not the second definitely the third one, there should have been a warning or a fine. Compare this to another situation where the police may remove a piece of property. Suppose If you were on patrol and you saw an illegally parked car that creates a hazard you would have that car towed and rightfully so. The thing is though afterword the owner is suppose to be notified.

Well I decided to go with the sr22. It seemed like it would be the most fun to shoot, and besides teach my sister and any other person in the future, that's all I mainly would be taking it to the range for myself.

From what I remember reading, the worry over the low serial number is generally overblown, and the ammunition it's self probably played a large part for the failures. If I remember correctly the low numbered receivers tested all with stood higher pressure than what proper ammunition would produce it just was not as high as they would have liked. If I had one of those 1903's I would not think twice about shooting it, though I definitely would not use any thing like a hunting round and prefer to only shoot stuff less powerful than M1 ball ammo. That's just me and I am willing to take the risk, but if you asked me whether or not I think you should fire yours I'd tell you don't. unless you absolutely willing to have it blow up in your face.