Old Glock guy

OK, I get the mag limits, because they foolishly believe that mass shooters will adhere to them. But what do they really hope to accomplish by banning cosmetic features?

How much are you going to charge him?

Wow, thanks ogfarmer. Nice find! Oh, and I guess I should thank the OP as well, for starting this discussion.

LOL! That was very funny! I can just hear him saying, "Jello Pud-ding."

Agreed. That's my thinking when I have one. Or in this case, a "trunk" gun.

Deleted

Do you really think they care the least bit about what their proposal would cost us? I don't even think they would care if it cost the state money. They certainly don't care about hindering our ability to protect ourselves. I think we should be asking them what they hope to accomplish by reducing magazine capacities to ten rounds. When they tell us it's to save lives, we need to remind them that's what they said when they limited us to 15 rounds. So where does it end? We should ask them what statistical evidence they have that it saves any lives. And in the end, none of what we say is going to matter. They're just going to do what they want to do, with little to no resistance from the citizens of this godforsaken state.

LOL! Can't wait to hear your "explainable purpose."

Another vote for the Bushnell TR-25. I have that on my 15-22 as well. lt's quite affordable, and all the optic you need.

I have said that if people on this website don't even know about this project, it's unlikely that the vast majority of gun owners in NJ have ever heard of it. We really need to get the word out on this if it is to have any chance of success, and I have no idea how to do it.

I agree with all of the above, about being able to keep long guns in one's car. But if I understand correctly, the catch is that if you were ever to load it (outside of exempted places), or worse, to use it to defend yourself, you have then committed a felony.

I hope no crooks are looking at those pictures!

Wow, that's great! But it looks like the wooden post supporting it is not going to last much longer.

Of course they don't care about him, or any of us for that matter. But that's just the kind of denial we need to get some traction against those who deny us of our Second Amendment rights in this awful state.

I have mentioned this to Anthony, and he is opposed to it. Have not had a chance to discuss it in depth to find out his reasons. For now, let's just wish him a speedy recovery.

Anything happening with this? Are people applying? Do we have a course of action plotted out? Is this being discussed on Facebook?

I have one of the Uplula loaders, and I'm thinking of getting a couple more for my other range bags. It's always a bad day when I forget to bring it with me. Sure, you can get by without them (and I have), but they sure make loading mags a lot easier.

I think Federal is a great company. Love their ammo. Good to hear that their customer service is equally impressive.

Norseman, you don't really need a specifically "tactical" belt. A wide, sturdy belt would work just as well. I recently got a thick Galco belt, and it's great, but I've been through GFH's entire pistol series using just a robust ordinary belt.

Do warning points go on your permanent record?

Well, that's right neighborly of you pardner. Would you mind coming up to Wayne? Ha, ha just kidding. I've got my regular guy lined up, but thanks for the offer

Boo, nice review. I've taken the class a couple of times with the previous instructors. You are correct that since previous classes were held at the police range in Cedar Grove, which is considerably wider, most of us were on the firing line on the same time, hence the higher round count back then. I think you are correct going with an IWB holster when you carry out of state. I think the better ability to hide your firearm vs. the extreme unlikelihood that you would ever need to use it is a good tradeoff. Yes, in prior versions of this class we spent some time working on dot drills. I think in a class of four hours or so, you are better off practicing things that are harder to do on your own, like moving and shooting, shooting from behind cover, etc. We can work at becoming better marksmen on our own time. Plus, it occurred to me that trying for precision shooting in a critical encounter could get a person killed. In that situation, I would agree with Bill, that getting hits on target as quickly as possible should be one's primary objective. Now on to UP2 and UP3!

So how was it over there? (I'm stuck in my office today, and can only participate vicariously.)

Looks like we are going to have this same fight every year. The likely outcome is that most will be defeated; but they will ram a few through, then a few more next year, and a few more the year after that. And they will gradually strangle us.

I think the point of this bill is to make the 10 round limit bill seem more palatable.