johnott

Spotted a Mossberg Flex 500 hunting shotgun a Cabela's for $430 (online). They seem to be popping up here and there... except maybe in NJ. In any of the gun shops I've asked... they just gave me a strange look and said they've never heard of a Mossberg Flex. From what I've seen around the web they tend to go for $340-$550 depending on the model. Don't know the prices in NJ.

"They would also have the option of giving a five-cent credit to customers who packed groceries in their own reusable bags." Operative words "the option".

And those plastic bags keep getting thinner and smaller... I guess more money for the bay eh? The insanity in this state just keeps getting worse.

Hats off to Nick Meli. (Cool heads prevail.)

I don't agree with the reasoning behind rule #2... I mean the term "pocket knife" by sheer definition would imply carrying it concealed in the pocket; if that were illegal then why isn't it specifically pointed out in statute that all pocket knives are illegal. The item is a TOOL. It doesn't become a weapon unless you specify that it is or you use it as a weapon... the purpose decides whether or not the item in your pocket is a weapon. If it is determined that you are carrying it as a weapon and it's in your pocket it would be a concealed weapon no matter what the item is.... BUT conversely, if you carry it outside your pocket and it's purpose is as a weapon you're still in trouble for carrying an illegal weapon. Lawful purpose is everything.

A petition was recently started requesting congress to address the issue of gun control. ..."The goal of this petition is to force the Obama Administration to produce legislation that limits access to guns. While a national dialogue is critical, laws are the only means in which we can reduce the number of people murdered in gun related deaths. Powerful lobbying groups allow the ownership of guns to reach beyond the Constitution's intended purpose of the right to bear arms. Therefore, Congress must act on what is stated law, and face the reality that access to firearms reaches beyond what the Second Amendment intends to achieve. The signatures on this petition represent a collective demand for a bipartisan discussion resulting in a set of laws that regulates how a citizen obtains a gun." https://petitions.wh...ngress/2tgcXzQC Petitions need 25,000 signatures in order to prompt a White House response, so far (at the time of this posting this petition has almost 105,000 signatures. It's sad that at a time of great tragedy political opportunists try to take advantage of every issue. I'm getting so tired of politics being interjected into every action or conversation we have in this country. When are we ever going to have a serious and thoughtful dialog in this country concerning the 2nd amendment? When is the SCOTUS going to finally step in and settle this issue? Why does there have to be a legal case in front of SCOTUS for them to affirm our constitutional rights?

Wow. This is just absurd but so cool. The implications of this type of technology is mind boggling. Unfortunately once everyone has this technology it's just one more thing to worry about. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/claim-secret-camo-can-make-american-solders-truly-invisible-the-photos-will-blow-your-mind/ "...it works and does so without cameras, batteries, lights or mirrors…It is lightweight and quite inexpensive." "...you would literally have to “walk right into” a solder wearing the cloak in the same room as you to know he was there. You wouldn’t see him at all."

(As I see it) While it is true that Illinois could take the path of NJ, NY or California... the difference is Illinois is currently under legal scrutiny for the "right to carry" whereas NJ and the rest are not. If they were to do what we have done in NJ I think the court would still consider Illinois as trying to subvert the right to carry, as the practical implications would still effectively be a ban for the majority of it's citizens. Therefore Illinois would have to go the extra mile to show the court that they truly have reformed their prior position and are not trying to do an "end run" around the constitution.

The thing is... both my wife and I shoot. So it's usually the family membership for us unless a regular membership allows a free guest (as did Hagues). And then consider an NRA membership on top of that and we're right back where we started. Telco would cost a total of $235 before tax for a single membership, the one time initiation fee and a spousal membership. But Telco is even further away. Thanks for the suggestion though.

I was a Hagues' member for over a year. I bought a pistol there when I first became a member and it turned out to be very expensive compared to other places. Yes the range can be very loud at times... I wear earplugs and earmuffs together and still come away with my ears ringing. But in spite of those things I was seriously considering renewing my membership since I only live a few miles away, but $400 was just too much. My membership expired earlier this year and I haven't been to a range since. It's outrageous what we're paying in NJ for range time. My brother lives in York Pa. and the range closest to him is nothing more than a piece of land where you can put up your targets and shoot... cost $20 (twenty dollars) a year. My other brother lives in Manheim Pa. the range there has a lifetime membership for $400. A family membership is $65 a year and they have an indoor pistol range and an outdoor range for rifle, bow, shotgun and trap shooting just to name a few.

I couldn't find any FBI data as to what percentage of robbery victims are armed and what affect that may have had on any resultant injury or death. Since most people don't carry a firearm, I would have to assume that the FBI statistics represent victims who for the most part are not armed and therefore are told to cooperate for their own safety (there is little else they can do if they are not armed.) You may say my chances of surviving are better if I cooperate, but it's my life and I'd rather not take a chance that I may meet one of those "crazies" (many don't need an excuse). Having a firearm doesn't mean I have to use it, but if all else fails at least I have an option. Anyway that's how I feel about it. No offense.

In todays environment it seems a rather dumb idea to be walking past a school with a gun, even if it's a toy gun. I realize this person was a juvenile and kids often have poor judgment, but it was an irresponsible thing to do. These days no one should be "walking around" public streets with a gun in their hand... toy or not (especially past a school). It causes way too much panic and draws negative attention towards legal firearms ownership. Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean that you shouldn't be prudent about it. Responsible gun ownership at every level is what we need to allay peoples unfounded fear of firearms. If that kid would have had his gun in a book bag or a case until he arrived at his destination (or at least stayed away from the school)... this probably would never have been an issue. If kids want to play with air-soft guns let then do it in their own back yard or another appropriate place... just not on the street. Having said that, I would hope that the police at large would not hassle an individual on their own property using an air-soft gun.

I have a Sig P226R DAK in .40 and I love it. The DAK (DAO) trigger isn't a problem at 6.5lbs. It's the same trigger pull first time every time and it's nice and smooth. It's a decent size handgun with a little weight to it. Feels solid in your hand. The only issue (for some) is that the grip tends to be on the "fat" side because of the double-stack magazine. You can also modify the DAK trigger by replacing it with a short trigger (same 6.5lb. pull but shorter travel length).

Congratulations to the both of you. May you have a lifetime of happiness together.

I feel like I'm watching a train wreck in slow motion... and I'm on the train and there's nothing I can do about it.

The National Guard evolved from colonial state militias. Though they are the "National" Guard in name, they tend to have an obvious allegiance to their home state. (I tend to view the Guard as a State Militia with the ability to be tasked for duty at the federal level.) The role of the Guard is not "humanitarian relief" (although they can assist in such a role). Their mission.... "providing to the states units trained and equipped to protect life and property". http://www.nationalguard.mil/about/. I believe the state and/or federal government can expand the role and duties of the Guard via executive order. The Guard can be given the power to arrest or detain individuals among other things. example: http://www.infowars....f-u-s-citizens/. “The New York National Guard assisted in more than 2,000 arrests last year (2010), and had almost $150 million in drug, property, and weapon seizures,” I am not arguing whether or not the Guard should be used in this case (as per the OP). I do take issue that the NG may have been denied the opportunity to provide support because they are "armed" and that their help is some how inferior. -sounds like a judgment made by someone who never served in the military. - I am not a Guardsman. I am an AIr Force vet. But my observation is that the NG is the Rodney Dangerfield of the Armed Forces... they get no respect. I think they deserve some credit and I think Bloomberg really did a disservice to the NY NG by making them seem like incompetent morons who can't be trusted. Shame on you Bloomberg.

What if scenario: I know that "Emergencies" are not covered in exemptions for firearms transportation.... but what would you do if you were asked to evacuate? I don't feel comfortable leaving my firearms behind in the sense that they could be stolen or damaged in my absence. I would like to take them with me unloaded and locked up (even if it meant leaving all ammo behind), but I'm not sure NJ would see it my way. There is the letter of the law verses the practical application of such restrictions. DISCLAIMER: (All comments in this thread are to be considered as "opinion only" and in no way should these comments be construed as premeditated intent to perform an illegal act.) aka "just because I say I might do something doesn't mean I really would."

I've been researching different holster types and manufacturers for the past two months. The Galco King Tuck IWB, DeSantis N38 pocket holster, Alessi deep cover holsters, Crossbreed Super Tuck, Don Hume holsters... etc. Things I have to consider... I have a very stiff back and stiff knees. The standard IWB holster sitting at 3-5 o'clock would be very uncomfortable while sitting, whether eating at a diner or driving a car. I need to lean back against the chair and with a holster in my back I don't see that being possible. The standard AIWB would be a problem, esp. when driving, as the seatbelt would cover the holster. I think that would be uncomfortable as well. Pocket holsters may be an option... although in most reviews I've read people complain about them being too bulky and easily printing. -This might work if I wore really baggy pants with deep or modified pockets. An ankle holster would be fine for sitting... but due to my back etc. getting to it while standing would make it a very slow draw. That is why I thought the Stealth Defense holster might be a good option for me. You have complete freedom of movement and are not restricted in it's use. If it performs as advertised then the size of the rig doesn't matter that much to me. Also, I won't have to buy a variety of holster types to match every situation. As far as carrying an extra clip of ammo... we could have an endless debate about how much ammo is enough. For some people, carrying one firearm isn't enough. I'm fine with just a 5 shot revolver. I appreciate the input. I was hoping I would find someone on our forum who tested or owned the holster in question. I have found numerous positive comments and reviews on the web. I've looked at concealed carry forums and found reviews like this one https://www.usconcea...-strut-holster/ . Anyway, I'll give it some more thought and wait for any additional feedback. But as you can tell I'm leaning in that direction.

(Looking for a ccw holster for my j-frame .38.) Saw this website the other day http://www.stealthdefenseholsters.com Anyone have any feedback good or bad about his holster... I'm thinking of getting this one unless I hear enough negatives about it.

There are many SHTF scenarios, but to answer the original question where I am limited to only one handgun in a bugout bag I would choose the .40S&W. As cited by others it is a good self defense round and it shouldn't be too hard to find. (I assume it is a SHTF scenario and it generally implies the use of a bugout bag.) As I see it... (if I have to bug out) the most important concern is personal safety. You need to stay alive in order to hunt for food. I would bring my .40S&W and a couple #110 conibear traps, and/or some fishing line and hooks and perhaps a couple feet of wire. Trapping small game is a lot quieter than using a firearm of any caliber. You also can make deadfall traps and snares. If the questioned was reworded and I was asked what firearms would I bring if I wasn't limited to just one or what items would I bring in a SHTF scenario... my answer would probably include a .22 rifle with scope and a shotgun. The long guns could be used for hunting or self defense... ie. keeping attackers at bay that are out of accurate handgun range.

Great video. Thanks. Speaking for myself, the "coolness" factor goes to my all time number one favorite aircraft... the SR-71 Blackbird.

As I see it, the problem for the pharmacist is twofold: 1) he continued the chase outside the store and 2) he fired on the fleeing suspect. When he stepped outside the store was he still on his own property? If not he may be in for trouble. And unless the suspect was firing at him while he was running away it will be hard to claim shooting in self defense. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Just went out to check on my peach tree today... someone took (stole) all the peaches from off the tree. Totally empty. The odd thing is that they weren't ripe enough to eat yet. Whoever they are I hope they got a good belly ache.

It's about time! (I've held Holder in contempt since he was placed in office.)

When are these lamebrain politicians going to get it through their thick heads... this type of feel-good legislation just doesn't work. >>>(IMO)<<< The penalties are too harsh for an overly broad possession rule. I think it should only apply to 'real' firearms which are loaded and/or improperly stored, carried or transported. Oh, guess what; there are already laws covering that. [sarcasm noted] Seemingly, most criminals are not deterred from carrying a firearm because of possible jail time. (read the daily newspaper) The crime(s) they'll commit with a firearm will more than likely give them a far stiffer sentence than mere possession would. Assemblywoman Linda Stender seems to assert that school shootings can be averted by increasing penalties in the possession law. So where is the evidence of that? And as far as school shootings go, they are usually committed by a young person who is a student or former student and who's motive is revenge or something similar. Many seem to have serious mental and personal problems and are not thinking straight. Many seem to have a death wish of their own. How is any law going to stop people from using poor judgement, or who are not in their right frame of mind and don't care whether they live or die? Laws based on mere possession of an item should be used sparingly. In NJ it seems a way of life for our legislators. They see crime anywhere in the nation and decide 'they' have to act in some preemptive way. -Anyhow that's how I feel about it.