SJG

Have never fired a Shield. I don't have any "fit" issue with the 43x and purchased it with the optional night sights installed. Based on the position of the sights relative to the slide, I believe they were installed properly but I still had to move the rear sight to the right to compensate for the gun shooting left. Prior to doing this, I did the best I could do with trigger control etc but none of that resolved the issue to my satisfaction.

My Saiga variant started keyholing. Tier One finally diagnosed it as a brake issue after a new brake was put on and the old one could be carefully inspected. By Process of elimination, ammo switched , barrel inspection indicated barrel was ok. So, what else could it be---the brake. Turns out the pinned but non welded brake was moving all so slightly, probably thousands of an inch when the rifle was being fired, just enough to effect bullet spin. Put on a brake recommended by AKOU and sold by them--BD2, (great brake and good price)- Tier One pinned and welded the new brake. Problem solved. If you rifle develops keyholding, go through the steps before you spend the $ for a rebarrel. Sometimes a non welded pin can start to walk out and you might not even realize it.

Gen 2 will be 1/2 the weight

curious if a 43 slide would make any difference?

I have many 9's by different mfg, with small paws-- my only two semi autos that have tended to shoot to the left are the G26 and the G43x. I sold the G26 quite a while ago. Yes, I can correct for the tendency to shoot to the left with the G 43X by making an adjustment by slightly putting my POA to the right, but decided, I would rather make the adjustment with the sight. Now my POI matches, my POA. I have not needed to make any sight adjustment on any of my other guns. I do not have this issue with my G19. On follow up shots with the G43x, it is still an issue, but less so, utilizing only trigger reset pressure. Watch this video

Tends to shoot left, as most Glocks do, but more pronounced then my G19 Gen4. Less of an issue on the second round with proper trigger reset. Corrected with rear sight adjustment Trigger, sucks, corrected with addition of reduced striker spring, reduced ejector spring and ghost connector; total cost of parts about $30 or less. Another trigger issue is that it tends to bite your trigger finger, problem is the ridge on the safety/trigger. Problem resolved by using a Dremmel very gently to smooth the edge/tip If you are not going to carry it, and plan to use it at the range, skip this model and get a G19 or CZ P-10C, which costs less then a Glock and is just as good.

don't answer this question on a public forum, but the date of your acquisition of the receiver may be significant

Yes, he has complete jurisdiction to address all Quote

Mass carry permit case similar to NJ permit case now also pending cert in U.S. Supreme court In the Supreme Court of the United States ________________ MICHAEL GOULD, et al., Petitioners, v. MARK MORGAN, in his Official Capacity as Acting Chief of the Brookline Police Department, et al., Respondents. ________________ On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ________________ PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI ________________

Maybe you are too quick.

Maybe you should look at my comment above

Vermont Mag Ban https://vtdigger.org/2019/03/20/judge-rejects-states-motion-dismiss-high-capacity-magazine-ban-case/ Wonder if Judge will look to California decision

Disagree, this interpretation omits the modifiers to "as related by blood or by law" Also, in laws are not related by blood or by law, even though they are referred to as in laws. Those persons related by law are those potential takers under the laws of both adoption and/or intestate succession

If you like the 43, get the 43x which has the G19 grip and a slimmer slide.

In actuality, it is more complicated. While 10 rounds is the common element, the two statutes are not identical, and a conflict between two or more circuits does not require the Supremes to hear the case. There are lots of instances were Circuits disagree on a point of law and the Court denies review. That is a big problem, the Court should be required to grant review

If no final judgment yet entered in the N.J. District Court (3rd Cir. Sent it back) this Calif opinion could be used to try and convince the N.J. District Judge (who only denied a preliminary injunction) that 10 round NJ law is unconstitutional

If I was in Calif, I would hold off buying any to see if a stay is issued pending a decision of the Ninth Cir.

Good question. Just a guess, but the State will probably request the Ninth Cir to stay the decision for now

Already denied. THIRD CIRCUIT REFUSES EN BANC REVIEW OF MAG BAN APPEAL Case Must Now Proceed in Lower Federal Court Before Supreme Court Review is Available Earlier this week, the full panel of judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit refused to overturn the December 5 decision of a 3-judge panel that failed to temporarily halt NJ's ban on magazines holding between 11 and 15 rounds during the appeals process. The decision leaves the mag ban in place, and paves the way for an eventual appeal that could lead to the U.S. Supreme Court. See a copy of the court's decision here. The next step is for the main case (which seeks to permanently overturn the mag ban) to return to the lower federal district court for further proceedings and final disposition, after which the case can then be further appealed. THIRD CIRCUIT REFUSES EN BANC REVIEW OF MAG BAN APPEAL Case Must Now Proceed in Lower Federal Court Before Supreme Court Review is Available Earlier this week, the full panel of judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit refused to overturn the December 5 decision of a 3-judge panel that failed to temporarily halt NJ's ban on magazines holding between 11 and 15 rounds during the appeals process. The decision leaves the mag ban in place, and paves the way for an eventual appeal that could lead to the U.S. Supreme Court. See a copy of the court's decision here. The next step is for the main case (which seeks to permanently overturn the mag ban) to return to the lower federal district court for further proceedings and final disposition, after which the case can then be further appealed. En Banc review was already denied

No

Yes, subject to you getting permits for the handguns, and waivers regarding the number of handguns-OGAM, the firearms can be transferred to you via a FFL. He would not be considered an immediate family member, so he can't directly transfer long guns to you so you would need an ffl for that also. Of course you need FID and DL.

Great decision. For us it is meaningless at the moment. Also, it is not an Appellate Court decision, it would carry greater weight if the Ninth Cir. affirms his decision. Then it could be used more effectively on any case raising the same issue that reaches the N.J. Supreme Court or the U. S. Supreme Court. However, I think his reasoning and logic is very compelling

Any decision of the IL. Supreme Court has no binding or precedential impact in N.J. This case is just not U. S. Supreme Court material.

Different issue.

No relevance to N.J.