Soju

What a terribly written, inaccurate, close to being completely full of crap article. From what I gathered, what happened was something entirely different from what the article said. I'd say more but wouldn't want to get arrested for it.

I fold it into a paper airplane and throw it toward the nearest state police station.

Certainly baller status level stuff. Unfortunately it isn't feasible, and the costs outweigh the benefit. Like many programs and aircraft like this, I wouldn't expect there to be many of these things, and they will have minimal operation use, if any.

It isn't the 40's anymore. That isn't to say that all military personnel get training on handguns, or even that some of the ones that do should even be qualified with them, but this notion that only officers handle handguns is quite humorous, and terrible inaccurate.

The only people bullied in dodgeball were the people who sucked. Of course they were going to get thrown at first. It is not like the athletic kids get higher grades than the nonathletic. Banning dodgeball is akin to giving everyone the same grade in science class because the kids that did the experiments right must be bullying the kids who didn't. The pussification of America continues.

Terrible situation. While doing the emergency trace, the ATF lost track of the firearm somewhere in Mexico. Bad joke?

Finally someone agrees.

Agreed there. I was just pointing out your 'grand' idea wasn't a total solution, which is how your post made it sound. If it wasn't intended to be so, then I digress. I was simply pointing out some cons that effect the holster specifically, as we are discussing them specifically.

I wasn't saying that isn't the case, just that I could see or understand how it could be possible. How does that help someone who is in the field, where there is grid, mud, and dirt. Just stop what they are doing, call a timeout, and clean your gear? Sure everyone should clean and maintain their gear, but people are in different environments and situations where that grand ole idea doesn't always work.

Prior to reading the responses, I was going to mention 2 things, not that I noticed, but would make sense just knowing the design of serpa holsters. 1. The issue of the button being prone to malfunction due to dirt, ice, etc, seems like a valid gripe. Whether it is true or not, I am not sure, but I would imagine it would be, as it makes logical sense. If you don't like the Serpa for this reason, I completely understand. That is an issue of function and design. That can be a problem. 2. Having little experience with Serpas, my thought on the button causing you to put extra pressure, and somehow as a result cause a ND, seems like it would only be an issue based on the location to the button and the location of the trigger/trigger guard itself. After reading Maks post, it seems like his thoughts substantiated my thoughts, where mine were in fact based on nothing more than holster design, and not on any specific examples. I do have a 1911 Serpa holster, and to disengage the button, my index finger extends out straight, the same way it does when holding the firearm. That, is a non issue. However, if a firearm is smaller for example, and the button is not as far out, I could see one having to curl their finger a bit, and not have it indexed outward. This could increase the potential of it going into the trigger guard, and hitting the trigger. If this is the case on any firearm, I would say that is an issue, and a good reason to not use one. In summary, like anything, there are pros and cons. You'll have to figure out if the pros outweigh the cons, and visa versa.

I always here this argument, and people hating on "lower end" AR's, and saying they would never use anything not top tier. Do you concider Colt top tier? I'm sure said folks will blame the ammo, but there are many people that shoot plenty of steel cased threw their "low end" AR's sans issues. So what do those high end/top tier AR's have that lower end AR's don't again?

The video said the intruder also had a gun. Now the fact he did or did not would not matter to me, but I'm sure it matters to others and in this case it actually probably a good thing that he did. Good shoot.

Would not it first have to be a rifle to then be an SBR, as SBR stands for short barreled RIFLE, correct? If it isn't a rifle, then it cannot be an SBR. At least that would make sense. With that said, this is NJ, and absent of any clear instruction (and even sometimes when there is), it will be looked at as illegal unless you can prove statutorily that it is not. Of course this goes against basic logic and practice in most other places, but that is a different issue.

Certainly sounds fishy. I am hoping that it was some sort of terrible mechanical failure that caused it to discharge twice. However that sounds about as likely as, I don't know, something that isn't very likely.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1651 states: Whoever, on the high seas, commits the crime of piracy as defined by the law of nations, and is afterwards brought into or found in the United States, shall be imprisoned for life. They got lucky that the Supreme Court ruled on a stricter definition of piracy than many would have.

I stand corrected then. Thanks for the info. Either way, the point remains.

It is indeed a great little gadget. Maybe I am just retarded, by I can never fully load a magazine. It loads 9 no problem, but I have issues getting the 10th round. I'm tempted to say, that this sounds like a personal problem. For those of you that have a tube fed .22lr rife, the Spee-d-loader is amazing, and a must as well.

I hate his videos. I hate most of the videos from guys like hickok and fpsrussia, or any of the guys who have a ton of videos. They all make me so damn jealous! Jealous of the firearms they shoot. The places they have to shoot. The stuff they get to blow up. How good of shots they are. I man damn, if I could trade my job to just do that, that would be awesome. Of course I am kidding when I say I hate them. Hickok always throws me off when he makes something up and starts talking about it in a serious manner, and goes on about it for a while. Sometimes he does it so well I actually believe him at first until he mentions how that firearm was originally designed for killing zombies or something.

Hopefully not often, or even better, never! However we have these discussions for the unusual time that it may happen. If it happened all the time we would probably have a pretty good idea what to do and there wouldn't be much merit in discussing it! Being prepared, gaining knowledge and learning, and hearing other perspectives and things you may not have thought of before are a good thing, and kind of the entire reason internet forums exist!

Well sometimes when the lies are so obvious, like when they say something like "we never made that claim" or "I've only once ever said that", and then you do a quick search and find clips of them making that claim, or saying whatever it was dozens of times. I am not sure how much of an expert you have to be to figure out that stuff. But now I'm simply getting off track.

I didn't mean to come off condescending. I apologize. I didn't intend to mean that there couldn't be repercussions, or nothing to fear as you put it but rather that nothing good comes from giving up your rights. Certainly negative things can still happen. They do in fact happen with disturbing frequency. I am always in favor of exercising your rights, and with not letting people in a position of authority push you around or scare you into doing something you have no obligation of doing. Nothing good comes from that. I guess I am saying is you shouldn't be afraid of exercising your rights just because a police officer says you shouldn't. Or says you are better off doing something else. Or threatens you or coerces you. When you begin to give up your rights they will simply be taken away from you. In fact, they already are, and that is why you need to fight against it. I hope that better explains my position.

And you see voluntarily giving up your constitutional rights ending better? I guess if you hate liberty and love the idea of a police state that would make sense.

I think you know I am not suggesting anything. I've been pretty firm on that. I am stating there is another side to it, and things are not as black and white as you sometimes suggest. Personally, my feelings towards these type of things are probably pretty darn close to how you feel. But how I feel, how you feel, what the law says, they only matter so much. There is more to the way things are than you make it seem. Also, there is a huge difference between worrying about things, and understanding them.

Sure is! Indeed. My example however was based specifically what a LEO said in this thread, so it is a bit more than mere speculation/guessing. What you seem to think, is that things are black and white. Again, that is how it SHOULD be. But it is not. That is why there are these debates/discussions. Because there isn't only ONE way to follow the law, and there are literally thousands of examples to substantiate this (not just this topic specifically, but in general). The best solution is to avoid all police interaction entirely. Then it doesn't even matter if you are following the law or not.

What you say, is correct, in that it is how things should be, and how they are suppose to be. But how things actually are, is a different thing entirely. Look no further than an early reply in this very thread. You have firearm in a closed and fastened case on your backseat. Legal? Yes. However Officer X sees it, decides that is probable cause to search your vehicle (whether it is or not is irrelevant), finds your pistol, and arrests you because he believes that it must be locked. Again, the fact he is not right, is irrelevant. In this very thread, we have evidence of LEO who thought this. Same scenario, but instead, it is in a locked case. As Officer X thinks it must be in a locked case, and it is, so off you go on your merry way. So now, in scenario 1, you are facing potentially felony charges for doing nothing illegal, yet doing a little extra (scenario 2) may have saved you time, money, and possibly a criminal charge. If people were only ever arrested and charged with crimes with 100% accuracy, there would be little need for a trial. But that is not how things work. You can be charged and convicted of something you never did if some DA or someone wants to push the issue, or make a statement. That happens more then you think.