Soju

Here is a link to the NJ statue governing the use of force. http://www.nj-statute-info.com/getStatute.php?statute_id=1489 Here are some of the key parts: Now you can read it different ways, but it seems to me, that if someone breaks into your house, and is stealing your computer, even if you don't think he is going to hurt you, and you tell him to surrender, and he doesn't, and you then shoot him, you are justified in doing so. It is your house, so you have the first part covered. It was sudden and unexpected, so that is covered. You were compelled to act instantly, you are still good. Then in says that either you believed the intruder would inflict injury OR, you demanded that he either a) disarm b)surrender or c) withdraw. You demanded that he b) surrendered. He didn't, you shot him. Am I reading that wrong?

I can see why this question is asked a lot. It is because people hear and are told the WRONG thing all the time. FID or FPID or P2P or any of that stuff called whatever you want to call it, not needed for transportation, ever. Don't even bother worrying about whether or not you have that stuff with you. Ammo separate from firearm, not a requirement. You have your pistol in a bag next to your ammo, and it is all locked in your trunk? You are fine. You have your gun and ammo locked in a case in the back of your SUV because you have no lockable trunk? You are fine. Here are the things to concern yourself with. Is the gun unloaded? Is the gun either locked in your trunk or in a closed and fastened case or securely tied package? If it is, you are following the law. Of course this is all assuming you are following the subsections mentioned, which deal with where you are transporting the firearms. http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/about/fire_ag2.html http://lis.njleg.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/om_isapi.dll?clientID=27281421&Depth=4&TD=WRAP&advquery=2C%3a39-1%20%20Definitions&headingswithhits=on&infobase=statutes.nfo&rank=&record={1A38}&softpage=Doc_Frame_Pg42&wordsaroundhits=2&x=34&y=12&zz=

It seems a whole lot easier to just put everything in one bag/case, with magazines already loaded, and simply not a) get pulled over, or b) let anybody search your crap then to take all these extra futile steps. If you are getting your stuff searched you probably messed up, and the fact that your ammo is in a separate bag or whatnot probably isn't going to matter. Paranoia seems to be running rampant...

You lost me there.

Can somebody show me the statue where it says that the ammunition must be separate from the firearm?

You could argue that, but you would almost surely lose that battle. If it is capable, whether or not it is capable at that time, to hold and feed more than 15 rounds, it is "large capacity". Even if it was permanently designed to do so (though I have never seen such a thing) I would bet you would still feel the strong arm of NJ up your.. Either way, if you want to both design such a magazine, and test your luck, you can. Unfortunately NJ has a way about interpreting laws and statues in a way to screw you over, even if you are right... So technically, you are probably right. But in actuality, it is doubtful you are.

Probably a upper like a Tactical Solutions with a threaded barrel and a silencer to go with it for my Ruger Mark III. Silencers and suppressors are the same thing. No need to correct anybody just because the name silencer can be a misnomer.

Actually, that isn't the point...

Hollywood inspired? Absolutely! Whether it works or not is dependent on the criminal and their intentions obviously, but it doesn't mean it can't be or won't be a deterrent. In fact, the fact that you bring up that it is inspired by movies is a good point. If at any point the 'perp' happens to hear it and think, "crap, I've seen movies where some crazy guy with a shotgun goes crazy on people", and leaves any amount of doubt, then it is already being somewhat effective. Also, the fact you hear shotguns all the time is quite irrelevant. Because when you hear them you are suppose to, you know, being at a range or someplace where people are suppose to be shooting. Maybe if you walked into say, a store, and the clerk racked a shotgun you might have a different experience. I'm not even sure why you brought that up to begin with. If you are telling me that if you were to attempt to rob someone or break into a house and heard someone rack a shotgun and it wouldn't instill any amount of fear or doubt in you, then you are full of crap.

How does one get taxed on a gift? He isn't paying for the seats, someone else is. That someone else (the one who gifted him the tickets) should be the one who is taxed for them correct? So if he was to be taxed, it sounds like the IRS would be double dipping, making taxes twice on the same things. Sounds....illegal. But then again, as we all know there are many things that are messed and sound illegal that are actually the law.

None of my pictures of Afghanistan look as cool. Everything looks like a bunch of crap from above. But just in case anyone was interested. Dirt strip in Tereen. Herat. I don't want to think what is is like for the guys on the ground outside the wire out there. I know I wouldn't want to have to do what they do.

So it got Alice Glass (singer for Crystal Castles) on the first guess, though had to ask a lot of questions. Tim Thomas (Bruins goalie) on first guess. Only answered yes to linked with sports, ice, over 30, wears a helmet, american....how?!?!? Jorma Taccone (SNL and Lonely Island) on first guess about 14 questions in. Impressive. Failed on Cam Neely (former Boston Bruin and current Bruins President) Dolph Lundgren (everyone knows Dolph) on the first guess after 17 questions. Not bad. Elisha Cuthbert on first guess. Didn't even ask any very specific questions besides being a blond non American actress from a American tv series. I'm impressed!

Double post. Damn my slow deployed internet!

Probably pretty close to useless. Night vision goggles can only focus on one distance. The distance where it becomes focused to infinity is going to be farther then anything in your house. Think of it like a scope and where the parallax is set and the distance where it becomes parallax free. Similar concept with night vision. Also, depth perception is terrible. For use in home defense? Pass. A light mount or simply turning on your house lights would be a better choice. Of course all this is even failing to mention that quality grade night vision devices cost thousands of dollars, are heavy and clumsy, require some light in order to be fully effective, but too much light will wash them out and make them immediately useless. My experience is based on the night vision goggles I use on a regular basis while flying.

If I were you, I'd get what you like to shoot more. Rifles or pistols? With that said, I will say, a .22lr such as the S&W 15-22 is indeed a solid choice as far as rifles go, if you go that route. In fact, most .22lr rifles are good choices. Fun to shoot. Cheap to shoot. Accurate. Overall fun stuff.

You said it yourself. You've never been asked for your car to be searched. Unless you are doing something to cause the officer to feel like he needs to search your car, you probably won't be asked. If you are asked, yes, you decline. Of course I can come up with about a million hypothetical situations that lead to a police officer discovering I have firearms and arresting me wrongly (or rightfully). But there is a reason they are hypothetical scenarios which is why aren't seeing tons of people being arrested because they left NJ to go elsewhere with there firearms.

The better question is: Why does the officer know you have firearms with you?

Why didn't you just say you were playing the devils advocate!

That's nice, but it is even nicer when you do all that on someone else's dime!

No worries. If you mean replace the original, with the same thing but of larger capacity, then of course it is still fixed. You are thinking into it too much. The original magazine, is loaded through the breach, if you want to take it off, requires you remove the trigger assembly, or in other words, start to dissemble the rifle. It would be more time consuming to do this every time you want to load. It is certainly not a "detachable magazine". It is part of the rifle. Can you even load it properly when not attached to the rifle? What about attach it back to the rifle already loaded? Any person reasonable would understand the statue, and "SKS with detachable magazine" to mean an SKS with the fixed magazine removed that uses something like this. http://www.parts4sks.com/sks_accessories/product/MAG6620B.html I don't see much more to it then that. Again though, this is NJ, which already means things are whack.

Actually, you hand them the rifle, and the magazine, and it latches right in just fine. It is when removing it you need the tool. So they wouldn't need a tool, it would accept it, and you would have just proved it accepts a detachable magazine. Kind of counter intuitive to your argument. Watch the video again. As for an SKS, you are actually replacing parts. Of course I could replace my stock with a collapsible one, or my 15 round magazine with a 30 round one, or my barrel with a threaded one, or my front sight post with one that has a bayonet lug, or any number of modifications. I'm simply saying, it my view, this modification does not alleviate the detachable magazine portion of the statues.

I agree with Bob. All you have to do is press the release (with something small enough). What if I had stick fingers and could hit it? No 'real' tool is required, you can use anything small enough to release the magazine, or in other words, detach it from the rifle. A stick, a tack, a bullet, a pen, a splinter from your wooden target, etc. That magazine is always detachable. And when detached, the rifle can accept a magazine. In order for it to even be close to being nondetachable, you would have to never remove the magazine. Not to load it, not to clean it, nothing. The second you remove it, the rifle has the ability to accept a magazine that is not connected to it, also called a detachable magazine. The difference with a pinned stock, is that it is suppose to be pinned in a way that that stock can no longer be collapsed, tool or no tool. I still have a pinned MOE stock on a buffer tube with stripped threads. I have tried everything to remove the pin, and it is still in there. No tools I tried worked. The only way I can foresee myself removing the pin would be to break either the buffer tube or the stock. That is quite permanent if you ask me. With that said, NJ laws are ridiculous and the interpretations of the laws by those with power are often senseless, so take my view with a grain of salt.

For handgun ammunition or ammo commonly used in a handgun (to include the brutal .22LR) yes, that is correct. For rifle ammo, not required.

I know none of you probably care, but best day of the year for me...by far. The Boston Bruins won the Stanley Cup!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bruins! Bruins! Bruins! Bruins! Dream come true. As a life long Bruins fan, one of the happiest times of my life.

I completely agree with the people who say to handle them both, and get the one that feels the best. In fact, if there are other similar pistols in a similar price range, you should try them too. Personally, when talking about handguns like this, there isn't actually a whole lot of difference in terms of reliability. Take your pick of any of the popular pistols, from proven manufactures. They should all go bang at a similar reliability rate if you maintain them. So arguing reliability of a glock vs. 92, or a M&P vs a XD/XDm is kind of moot. Pick the platform that works for you (in terms of comfort and shootability). If it was me, and it came down to the Glock vs the Beretta M9, I would get the M9 for 2 reasons. I already own a polymer framed pistol (M&P), and the M9 is my duty firearm, so owning my own would allow me to practice with it more and become more proficient. Assuming nothing like this applies to you, try them both out and let want you really want when you are handling them become your decision.