Dan

Uhm, they were blanks, and its a training exercise. Odd they have been using populated areas for training exercises, but the excuse is that the areas they pic closely mimic areas of operations that they will be deployed to overseas.

Another example of anti 2A/CCW idiocy... pro-ccw "I want to be able to legally carry a concealed firearm for my protection" anti "No , you will turn our streets into the wild west shooting people who look at you funny" pro-ccw "You have been saying that for years, and now we have 40 States who are shall-issue, and this problem has not surfaced" anti "stop changing the subject, I'm talking about the saftey of my family against people with guns. Just call the police, and if you have to throw objects at your attacker" pro-ccw "The police can't be everywhere, and legally they are not held responsible or liable for my personal saftey. Throw objects... really?" anti "I do not accept more guns on the street are the answer, they are evil" pro-ccw "facepalm"

Nice to see one vendor helping out another.

I didn't see any provisions for out of state visitors in their new wacky laws. Unless you are traveling through NY under FOPA protections, I would steer clear of bringing anything into NY State other than non-SA rifles/shotguns.

Good letter, bravo! It would certainly resonate with an apathetic person, to help show them the light. I have found that the most clear cut and straightforward reasoning does not work against a true anti. It would take years of discussions and frustration to bring them around in many cases. Case in point my well-off friend in Brooklyn, logic and reasoning does not work. Anything that I say that does not involve "ban this, or that" to him means "I am not offering solutions" or "changing the subject" if I try to bring 2A into it. He even suggested registrations, and that I have to keep my guns at the club! I almost passed out. Basically unless I give up my guns, and agree to bans , then I am against the safety of his family and children. Very frustrating to try to reason with someone like that. Unfortunately there are those out there that do not respect the rights of others, and only wish to serve themselves even if it means demonizing and stepping on others. Pleading with these folks that your guns will all of a sudden be illegal... in their mind they hear "Oh good, more guns off the streets".

I thought about crates back when they were in the $80 range as an investment. Everyone seemed to think it was a poor investment as there are so many millions of mosins out there. Seems they were wrong.

Great article. Being a history buff of sorts, I get it. My main problem with this information when speaking with the typical apathetic or anti -gun citizen is that they "do not get it". It seems American's have been brainwashed with the concept that "it can never happen here", and subsequently claim that I'm being paranoid. Couple that with the unhealthy full-trust in the government that the typical member of the "sheeple" class harbors doesn't help. I'm as afraid of the complacency and apathy that our society has fallen into as I am around these absurd anti-2A laws passing. Next up , dependance and bondage.

Faxing now

This. The way to get the military or any assembled fighting force to fight back against any other opponent regardless of who they are is to put them in a situation where they feel they are acting in self defense of themselves and their group. Sure I do not believe the military would go around casually killing unarmed citizens, but if this was a gun confiscation situation... well the people they would be dealing with are no longer unarmed, and of course the training would kick in that if you have a gun, you are a "domestic terrorist", and you are fair game. This is how the governments who chose to fight their citizens in the "Arab Spring" revolutions went about things. The real epiphany moment would be for the military leaders to refuse to carry out such an order in the first place. If they don't then everyone looses. 2A would be instantly illegitimated, and any gun owners holding out with the "come and get it" would be deemed "domestic terrorists", stripping them of all and any real or perceived rights as a US citizen. Then again the probability of this happening is dreadfully low. This would mean that Congress has also turned on the people, as they have the power to impeach any President that attempted to give such an order. In other words, the US govt has turned tyrannical.

I agree with mipafox. Just keeping them at home won't be enough, and if I recall the figures for "registration" in NJ were dismally low. Every once in awhile here in NJ , someone would get tagged, and the state and media would try to make it an example case to keep the fear going. In NJ, the penalties are far greater then a $200 first offense fine, so the probability a mass civil disobedience of folks showing up somewhere with bayonet lugs and folding stocks is very low. If its true that with this new NY law, it is only a $200 misdemeanor fine, that's something I think people may be willing to chance. I hope so. Its either that or wait 4 years for SCOTUS, by which time you have to hope Bama hasn't corrupted it with one of his activist progressive judges.

Welcome, Old Bridge/Matawan here as well. 2 mos is pretty quick for OB PD. I know the clerk who takes care of them has been frustrated with how many PPP's and FID's people are applying for.

These are some sad times. It seems the tinfoil hat stuff is coming true.

Can we please have McLaughin as the spokesperson of the NRA?

Exactly. This is it in a nutshell.

They would just say that "I don't need it, and also they are not designed with lethal features, and are not being used by lunatics to kill innocent people". Have to be careful with this one, along with the automobile comparative. I prefer to argue that my right to own and use firearms is analogous to other rights we have as Americans both inalienable and constitutionally protected (freedom of speech, religion, assembly, due process, etc). One of the main uses for firearms in defense and hunting for instance, are their ability to exert lethal force at a distance. There is no disputing this fact. We must fight for our right to have this ability with our firearms for use in our own defense, along with the myriad of other legal uses for firearms such as competition, collecting, target shooting, etc.

Joeyd6, yup, I heard the same thing. The problem I had was that he wasn't addressing this "need" bullcrap. Just by pointing out that things were OK in the past, but aren't now is not good enough in my book. The anti's will continue using this "need" argument along with their distorted and subjective ideas of "reasonable and common sense" to wrap enough restrictions around 2A that we may as well not have it at all. All pro-gun and pro-constitution folks need to band together and provide clear and consistent responses to these trap questions.

Not trying to convince the person that doesn't want an answer, it is more for the benefit of the viewing audience watching. Also, not responding makes it look like they won the argument or that you conceded the point.

All I hear on the news is "why do you need xyz" when it comes to guns and accessories. I just heard some anti-gun woman on ABC asking a pro-gun rights person "why do you need a large magazine that can shred to pieces 6 year old children?". I almost threw up my french toast that I was eating. The sad part is the pro-gun person did not swing back in disgust. Most likely it was a lame duck put there to take a beating. So anyway, the question of "why do you need" inevitably comes up in any discussion with anti-gun folks. Here are some counter points, always stared with "the argument of need that you speak of is flawed" The "need" argument can be applied to any item , object, concept, or idea that does not involve the purest forms of survival such as air, food, water, and shelter. Why do you need to wear clothes, a television, or to have the freedom of religion? If they answer "but those things don't have the capacity to kill", I'd say "absolutely, for instance more people have died in the name of religion than anything else in the history of mankind". It is a very dangerous concept to give such freedoms to the people, so much so that countless governments work very hard to control it. People "need" the option to have access to firearms and their associated accessories for self defense. Creating frivolous laws that further limits access to these things is nothing but a pure attack against those people's ability to defend themselves. Are you an expert on using firearms for self defense? How do you base your so-called expert opinion that you know the limits of the thousands of types of firearms out there, and how many bullets, or what accessories can be on them before they are no longer effective for self-defense? Surely you want to make sure that you are not hindering a family's ability to defend themselves against a home invasion for say? The 2A was not created to protect hunters. It was created to make sure the government could not disarm "the people" , and to guarantee the rights of "the people" to have arms commensurate with those used by the government, just like back in the days of the drafting of the Constitution. Of course they will use the "nuclear bomb" thing, so I just say, of course people should not have access to WMD's, and we are speaking of common firearms that are held in the hands. If they try to bring up rocket launchers, etc refer back to "common types of arms held by the public for the past 200 years". Therefore, basing laws around the "needs" of hunters alone is flawed. And most importantly , please explain why do we "need" the rest of the individual rights based in common law and of those in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. Why do we "need" the freedom of speech, why do we "need" the right to a speedy and fair trial? We could easily use your argument of "need" coupled with the "for the greater good" to craft some clever words to abolish the rest of the bill of rights. After-all, isn't a society "safer" if the government could outlaw vicious words and hate speech, or restrict what types of religions people are to follow that are deemed "safe" religions? Perhaps we would all be safer if we allowed the government to indefinitely detain dangerous people; we trust their judgment right, no need for a trial? Your argument of "need" is not what our country was based on. It was based on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, coupled with the rights to defend those things. Millions of people have been safely using firearms for sport, hunting, and protection, including the types and accessories you speak of here for over a hundred years. Because of mentally disturbed and deranged individuals chose to perform heinous acts with firearms, does not give the authority or "green light" to our government to be able to hamper, restrict, and trample on the rights of those millions of firearms users in our country. We "need" to focus our ideas and energy around stopping these kinds of people from harming others in any capacity with any object. Sorry, kind of long, but it's been really bothering me!

This is so sad. Our republic was formed on the basis that mob rule (majority rule) of any one group or party cannot trample on the minority's rights, liberties, and freedom. This is nothing but an attack by a wayward government that ignores the law of the land (Constitution), violating the civil rights of a minority group, aka "gun owners and those that support the 2A".

You can get a ton of wax cheap from candle supply places. My wife makes them. We have a 50LB bag of soy wax in the garage. Paraffin is even cheaper. Link : http://www.peakcandle.com/category/Waxes/Paraffin-Wax.aspx

I'm finding myself at a loss for words a lot lately...

I have no words...

Was pretty dumb for the guy to not inform the cop that he had a weapon, especially since it was so obviously being carried with the loose shirt. On the other hand, the cop seemed to act pretty crazy, it is obvious he was pissed at the guy and wanted to teach him a lesson. IMO...

Welcome. I used to play pball competitively a lot back in highschool and college. Not so much anymore. I still have my Smart Parts Shocker NXT, Defiant, Sterling pump, and Sandridge electro-cocker. Relics I'm sure by today's standards. Every few years , me and a buddy like to head out to EMR in PA for their pump-gun event. I find all-pump games far more satisfying then spray-n-pray that pball has turned into.

Technically, the evil feature list applies once it is a complete rifle, or you have all the parts to make a complete rifle in the same vicinity/building. If you want to have a complete upper sent to you with a unpinned flash hider, you can do that , but be sure you don't have the rest of the parts to build a complete rifle nearby/vicinity/building, etc. I have my uppers sent to a relative's house a few blocks away. I then take it to the smith to have my choice of brake pinned on, then bring it home to marry with the rest of the parts to make it a rifle. This is the madness we deal with.