Soju

Assuming you are referencing the OP, I think you are looking at his description as if that is exclusive. I'm pretty sure it was just some examples. See my above post. I also think that your generalization is just as bad, if not worse, than the generalize descriptions in the OP, though I assumed you were using a hyperbole. Now, I guess I should explain why I think your generalization is bad. It is almost as if you are implying that every young 20 something with an AR gets his knowledge about them from video games. Is this really the case though? I had an AR when I was 22, did I fall into that category? I mean, after all, I did play CoD a bit, and was quite into Battlefield BC2 the time. Well the fact is, I got almost none, if any, of my knowledge from video games. You are stereotyping young people as bad as the OP may have been stereotyping old people. I'm sure there are young people who just have guns because of video games. But I don't know any. I shoot with a number of people my age, and not one of them is like you describe. There has to be a reason for this discrepancy though, right?

I always post this video on the assembly/disassembly of the MK III. He does a good job of explaining things I think. It helped me out at first.

1.0 Stuck in their ways, not accepting to change. Doesn't like when people do things differently than them. 2.0 All others. You can like bolt guns, wood on your shotgun, slow fire, and not much else, and fall in this 2.0 category as long as you either don't care how others shoot, or understand that others like shooting differently than you and are okay with it. It is usually pretty clear when you meet these people. You pull out your AR or something and they give you a stare down, or shake their head and sigh, or even try and prevent you from shooting or having a good time. On the other hand you can run into somebody who looks old as dirt, has on think glasses, is doing his own, slow fire with ancient looking rifle, yet when he sees you bring out the AR with an ACOG or something comments on how he needs something like your sight as maybe it would help his old eyes see better, or something in a friendly manner.

I was actually just thinking that. With so many there, everyone is thinking someone else is going to do something, so nobody does. Or then maybe you have a younger officer who thinks he should do something, but sees the others not, and figures he shouldn't anymore.

Blued slide on a stainless frame, very interesting. Not quite sure how I feel about it but I think I like it...

I know right. I see that on tv and in movies all the time! That would be the easiest solution. Problem solved.

But did either of you think how painful the sting of pepper spray in a knife wound would be? Didn't think about that one did you! (Of course I am kidding, if the smilies didn't give it away)

There is a difference between judging someone saying they are wrong, and illustrating a point and making conjectures based on what we do have... But you know, there wasn't a thread started on the subject was there...oh wait.

I believe the point he is making, is that if in many places you yourself have the right to use deadly force and could intervene, wouldn't it make sense for a group of 7+ police offers to do a little more then stand around saying "stop" in NYC?

Those decisions are not exclusive to police officers. Most also don't consider what it would be like to be the one being attacked (the victim) either. So it does go both ways. I'm not saying their actions were wrong. But just as I don't know that there actions weren't wrong, you can't possibly know that there actions were right either.

Your first order of business should be a bolt gun (or lever gun if that sort of thing floats your boat more) or a pump shotgun (or semi auto if you want to go that route instead).

Well, it was hard to tell exactly what was happening, but actively stabbing or not at that moment, is almost a moot point. The point others are trying to make, is that the officers (at least 7, probably more) just stood around while the man was on top of another man with a knife in his hand. You hear the people around yelling for them to do something, hit him or anything. Of course shooting him dead based on that clip alone, may be an extreme. But the fact that only one officer made any attempt to stop him was a bit disturbing. That man was an immediate threat to the man he was on top, and not until he got off and dropped the knife was he restrained. I mean, could they really not safely hit him with something, or thrown him off, or used a taser on him? I certainly don't want to be too quick to judge, but it seemed like the officers weren't too quick to help either.

Where?

I agree with Bob. Seems like a great choice. From what I've read, in terms of a nice bolt action .22lr, the CZ is a great. Don't have one, haven't shot one, so take what I say with a grain of salt. I'd pass on a 10/22, but that is just me.

There is something about not exercising your rights and losing them that is coming to my head but I'm not quite sure what it is.........

Generalizations suck. We know. We get it. It happens all the time, with all types of people, in all professions. Who isn't a hypocrite these days?

Ok then, I guess I'm going to have to be more direct, because I've read your post multiple times now. What exactly is your point? I thought I was clear before, but now I am just confused. Okay, I'll answer. Yes and yes. In fact, he did get a group of people to rally behind what he was saying, so I'm surprised you are even asking. Well I wasn't there, and that isn't what happened, so it is fairly irrelevant. But you know what, I'll play anyways. If I was walking down the street, and that was happening, I would probably ask someone what was going on. If they told me he was upset because he witness the police hurting non violent people, I would probably to both. So what point are you trying to make? You keep going around things and to be quite honest, confusing me. I thought you were saying that you didn't like the way he was handling himself, but understand his right to do so. Now I think otherwise. It appears you do have a dog in this fight or you wouldn't be trying to debate me. Edit: Crap, I missed the last couple of posts! Sorry!! BTW, is that a slimmed down Farva from Super Troopers?

I will attempt to make this clear before I respond in order to avoid my post being misinterpreted. I respect your opinion however don't agree. With that said... (Each paragraph referring to the bold portions respectively.) Now you may not have meant it, but you did imply it. By saying that the way he was conducting himself was wrong, you are implying he shouldn't have been saying anything. Furthermore, by saying it could be viewed as "inciting a riot", you implied he should have been stopped. Both those things are IMO, a violation of the 1st Amendment. Now again, that might not have been what you were saying, or what you meant, but that is what I implied, or in other words, what you were implying. If you didn't watch the second clip, the interview one, I encourage you to do so. He explains what his intentions were a bit better. I certainly didn't think he was saying that in hopes that he would magically get his way as you are 'implying'. He was making a point (to both the police and the crowd), and he did so very effectively. To clarify what I mean by effectively, a cite the second video as evidence, as well as the fact that this thread was started based on is actions. It garnered media attention. That I would say is effective, though you may disagree. I don't see it that way. I guess I don't actually understand the relevance of that statement. How does your particular mood that particular day make any difference in the point you are trying to make UNLESS your actions show differently? It is actually impossible. Only the way you act can have an effect. Sure, I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. I was quoting someone else, refering to something else they said. That though doesn't have much to do with what I said or was talking about though...

I am disappointed by a number of posts in this thread. With so much on this forum about our 2nd Amendment rights, and how NJ is infringing on that, I would think that some of you would have a little more humility. I am in no way condoning the actions of those trying to start something, of those who try and push the police and back peddle when it doesn't work out the way the thought, or those who do things in a violent or otherwise illegal manner. I am also not saying that from what I saw, the police handled things badly. I think from the video shown, they did a great job. I am not even going to touch the 1st Amendment issues with this (4 things in it actually), but answer me this. Just what would have been the right way to get his point across? Maybe a sit down over coffee? Seriously? I am struggling to find a way other then what he did that would have gotten his point across in any capacity in that situation. So if you know, please do tell. Second, enticing a riot? Really? Maybe if he was yelling some NWA "#^$@ the police" I'd buy that. But he was promoting NOT using violence. Sure he could have. But he was making a point. That wouldn't have made his point clear to anybody but himself. Not to mention the total lack of effectiveness it would have. But I digress. If I could just go up and ask for all the officers names and badge numbers, or business cards that I saw hurting people, and they would just willingly give them up, then there probably wouldn't be officers beating people. So good luck with that one working out. Agreed. Cool man. Solid argument straight out of the "inept way to win an argument" school. First thing you do is make a petty insult, then end it with a rhetoric question. Then say no more. Argument over right? Hope I got them one right. It has been a while. I thought it was pretty clear he was no longer serving. But no matter, you would still be wrong about the bold portion. So your point doesn't stand anyways. It probably wouldn't have gone very well for him!

How much would shipping be? I simply am not willing to drive over an hour...

Took me a second. BCG = Bolt carrier group, and not birth control goggles. Threw me off there. Now I kind of want to find mine haha. Sorry to get off subject.

Blasphemy! Doesn't everyone have a smart phone with a camera on it these days? *looks around, slowly backs away into the shadows with his ancient flip phone*

Even though I am sure it looks exactly like mine, it doesn't matter, because... !! And that ammo above, the Federal Champion bulk stuff, I have exactly 1041 rounds of it through my Mk III hunter in the past few months without any sort of issue, and a small amount of CCI mini mags. So if you were wondering about how it works, it works fine. If you weren't, well then disregard my rant.

There already is. Go to Camden, Newark, and Trenton for the full experience. But of course you aren't talking about that I assume...

Don't listen to the "shouldn't be crowded" comments. I had last Friday off, figured that it shouldn't be bad, as people should be working. Wrong. I showed up before 1 (opening) and the line was out the door to shoot. All tables filled, only 1 table opened up after first hour, so there were people who would have had to wait for 2 hours just to shoot. So to say it shouldn't be as crowded as a weekend is a huge understatement. I find if you go on a Friday, go late. It usually empties out toward the last few hours. They turn on the lights when it gets dark so you can indeed shoot till 8. It seems people come in waves. I was forced to shoot the pistol range for an hour while I waited for a table at the rifle range, and that very next hour there was only 2 other people shooting...