Kaiser7

I never thought this would eb a polarizing issue on NJGF, I figured most of us would, after the evidence came out showing Z injured and stuff, would support the guy who defended himself.

Except we know, from the 911 call that Z lost Martin, he couldn't keep up visual contact. Ergo, it is very unlikely that he COULD have initiated conflict. I used to believe Z committed a crime, but the evidence does NOT add up. Furthermore, if you read that article, it's more the logical presentations the author provides, which show that the currently accepted story does not make sense, logically.

HAHAHAHA!!!!! As a smoker, that's pretty good. Especially when my mom gets on me to quit, but bums off me, and spends tons of cash on costumes for my niece.

I doubt that highly. The police need to drag their feet with this, and let emotions calm down. If they end up not indicting him, and they do this soon, it will cause MASS rioting. Fortunately, if the riots of the past are any indication, people will burn their own neighborhoods down. You are forgetting that the back of Z's head was bloodied pretty bad which is not an easy injury to sustain. Not only is it unlikely that at JUST that time he fell, and hit his head open, but the fact that the police report cites, "multiple lacerations" or "lacerations (plural)" which would be conclusive with repeated blows to the head. Which, if he was not attacked first, where would these come from? Furthermore, if he had not been attacked by surprise, why couldn't he just pull his gun to get Treyvon to back off, or, assuming he did kill treyvon in cold blood, where did he get bloodied up? http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/misconceptions-in-the-trayvon-martin-case

I was originally going to have him build my AR, I had asked him if there was any way to cut the price on a few things, like if I could get a few cheaper parts, and he never got back to me....

I probably won't join until May or June. Money's a little tight, and I wouldn't be able to use it much until May anyway. Hopefully they'll be done by then anyway.

Sorry if I'm derailing the thread, but it's gotten pretty heated, and it is a pretty dark thread to begin with, so.... Speaking of names like that, my sister had a kid in the school she used to teach at whose name was Chlamydia (like the STD), and another whose name was Syx-Pece ("six-piece") Oh, and La-a (La"dash"a)

Haha, well NJ hasn't yet cracked down on legal cat ownership, but give them time haha. I think that, as a symptom of the anti-gun paranoia in this state, which we as gun owners know all too well, it makes sense that we'd worry about the worse case scenario that it could cause legal trouble. Sure they probably couldn't convict someone in this situation for anything, HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that NJ wouldn't try, and cause you a lot of legal headaches in the process. just my $0.02

He has a point, and (God forbid) if a neighbor's apartment caught fire, and spread to yours, they could find it. OR even worse, if there WAS a shooting in the area or something, and the police found you had guns (even if legal) the fact that you didn't disclose that to your landlord would look suspicious. Of course, I highly doubt you would do anything like that, BUT, as I'm sure you'd agree, such a situation would be a huge pain in the a** to deal with. Best thing is just to be upfront with it in my oppinion, we NJ gun owners shouldn't be ashamed of practicing our rights, even if the state tries to make us feel that way. We can show we are different from the riff-raff by being upfront, law-abiding, and honest in situations such as this.

That's fine. Like I mentioned, I plan to use it for both Real Steel and airsoft, so for me it's a real bargain. I wasn't sure if you could pay online or anything. I know the guy who runs the airsoft and stuff there, but I think I would be annoying him if I asked him about it.

School mang. Who do you pay for a membership there? I want to go so I can shoot rifles, AND for the airsoft they have every third weekend of the month.

Haha, this thread has me laughing. I imagine the clause was put in with the hopes that it would deter criminals, and drug dealers from moving in. Of course, as is always the case, it merely creates a sticky situation for the legal gun owner, since only a person who follows the law gives a darn what a renter's agreement says. Honestly, I'd have all my firearm paperwork with me, to show everything is legal, and just try and work it out with the owner up front. That's the best way to do it in my oppinion. Otherwise you may be screwed (not sure your personal situation) because I'm pretty sure it's illegal to store them in a storage unit, and unless you have someone you could trust to hold onto that stuff who is all legal, then you're probably going to have to sell of what you have, I imagine.

Well, I think the reason so many bring up Trayvon's history is because the media was QUICK to pounce on Z's past. After all, look at the stock photos they use, they use a 5 year old out-dated pic of Trayvon, and a mugshot of Zimmerman. That is NOT equal treatment. Hell, that is essentially going against the whole, "innocent until proven guilty" thing and basically presenting Zimmerman as if he has already been convicted by his peers (Which, if this does go to trial, is likely simply due to public oppinion over the case, and the biased media reporting.) Actually, if rioting occurs, it removes all credibility from the opposition. IF large riots occur, there's probably a greater chance of more property damage, injury, and even death. It would be ironic, in fact, that more harm would be done in an effort to condemn "gun violence" than was caused by the gun in the first place. Oh, and I thought this was interesting. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/obama-campaign-hoodies-sale-cancelled-controversy-183726871.html

No, you have to buy ammo there. I'm not a member since I don't have time to get our and shoot frequently (And being only 20 years old, I don't have a handgun to shoot there, only a .22 rifle which I actually bought there). But yeah, you have to buy the ammo there.

That's sort of a different situation, yet similar. The motives are still the same. Serial killers kill for pleasure, not only the pleasure, or thrill of the "hunt", but also for the pleasure in the suffering of their victim. If you look at some of the most famous serial killers, like Jeffery Dalmer, their motivation was not a quick, clean kill. It was usually something more prolonged so they could enjoy the act of killing their victim. Similarly, you may have noticed many serial killers kill via strangulation. This is because they can usually feel the victim dying in their hands and they enjoy the rush. Hate crimes are committed for similar reasons, the person who commits them does so to derive pleasure from harming someone of the particular group they despise, however hate-based killings, and most serial killings are committed for pleasure, not to gain any sort tangible asset, such as money. This makes these criminals all the more dangerous, since they obviously are less intimidated by the idea of being caught, and in some cases, want to be caught so they can get the credit for their actions. Personally, I agree, don't punish the motivation, UNLESS you are going to hold all people to the same standards, which, in America at this time, we don't. Not to mention that our legal system is in fact, put together to consider the circumstances in which a crime was committed. If we didn't do that, then people who killed in self defense, such as Z would have NO chance. It one looks only at events, and not at mitigating circumstances, then it doesn't matter if someone kills in defense, or stole bread to feed a hungry family, they would be guilty of a crime, even though ti was circumstance that dictated their actions, and not malicious intent. But i should mention again, I believe Zimmerman was innocent, looking at the circumstances, he acted in self defense, and did no wrong. I was just saying, there's a lot of abuse of the term "hate crime" and I am disgusted that our country so often ignores some crimes which are hate crimes, but ruthlessly pursues others, depending on the race of the individuals involved. There will be riots, I'd bet on it, in fact, i feel like i saw something somewhere where Sharpton was calling for civil disobedience, and some were gearing up for riots. ....Don't any of these people work?

I agree. However, I think one of the reason this has incensed people is because they are labeling this as a hate crime without that much evidence to back up that claim. However, a quick google search will reveal hate crimes, obvious hate crimes, where the victim was white, but they were not prosecuted as such. Personally, if it turns out this WAS, beyond a reasonable doubt, a race related crime, then they should hang Z at high noon. However, the facts coming out are showing that the media was not only biased in their presentation of the case, but that there is, in fact, evidence backing up Z's claims. The thing that has angered people is how the media, and many people jumped to conclusions hearing only one side of the story. Hate crime in my opinion, is perhaps the worst type of crime. If you kill someone in a robbery it is vile and evil, however, you at least did that act because you stood to gain something in the process. Crimes motivated solely by hatred are much more heinous because they are done for no other reason than to hurt and intimidate others. HOWEVER, if we want to move forward as a society, we cannot accept hate crimes by one group of people, and ignore those done by others, even if those others have traditionally be the victims. We must come down equally hard, and make sure justice is swift to ANYONE who commits a hate crime, especially if it is obvious one was committed. I don't think Z committed a hate crime, I DO believe that the black teens who set the 13 year old white kid on fire for being white DID commit a hate crime. I believe that that White guy who killed a black man by dragging him from his car DID commit a hate crime, and deserves to rot in jail (or sit in ol' sparky). There should be no double standard for the way we treat hatred in this, or any country. That is how we will move forward.

Those weren't so bad, however, didn't his facebook have people asking to buy weed off him? In the end, I think the most important data, which will either leave the protestors with egg on their face, or have Z arrested will be the autopsy. The position the body was in when it was found, and whether there was powder residue on trayvon's clothes, and the angle the bullet entered. I've been thinking about that stuff, like what position the body would likely be in if Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot, etc. Not to mention even the angle is important, since a shot fired (assuming Z is right handed) when someone is on top of you would probably naturally hit either the chest or stomach, enter in the person's left pec, or center of their chest, and go through the back right shoulder (if it exits.)

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/trayvon-martin-shooting-details-emerge-facebook-twitter-accounts-180103647.html In that article they mention that, apparently, his cousin mentioned something about trayvon fighting a bus driver or something before his death. I have to find more info though.

Well, the media can rest easy knowing they did their job. heh.

Yeah, I don't really need a rail on there. I like some of the flip-down sights built onto gasblocks though.

Not bad, will be adding this to my choices. I don't know crap about gasblocks though, so I guess I have to look them up and see what's up with them.

I think I have most of my stuff picked out, but I need some help with the last part, a 20" standard (That is, not bull) barrel with the low gas block. Otherwise I'm thinking about the Daniel Defense receiver, along with their 12" M4 rails. I don't think they come with either the bolt carrier, or charging handle. Anyway, I originally was looking for a Novesky 20" barrel, but I'll look at anything anyone recommends. There are few rifle barrels out there, most stuff is just carbine that I see. And on the rare occasion a company carries 20" barrels, and they're in stock, they're usually bull barrels. Anyway, any help would be appreciated. I've looked quite a few places Daniel Defense, BCM, Brownells, JSE (although they had a few things there that may be okay).

I'm not a member, but I'm in there all the time. I go to Rowan, and because of my nack for picking bad schedules ( such as my current 3 hour break between classes) I sometimes run up there to window shop, buy cleaning stuff, things like that. I also talk t them a lot. One thing I will say, they are fantastic, they don't mind talking to me, helping me learn more about the gun laws, and about certain weapon platforms, and all of that stuff. In fact, it was thanks to them that I was able to get my FID, since I didn't even really know where to start. Their staff is awesome, and they have a great selection. I also shoot their range the most when I go shooting ( For walk-ons, it's fairly cheap and close by). I don't have a pistol, but I can shot my .22 rifle, and my brother in law's hi-point .45 there too. It's realy just nice overall, and I would recommend them if you do a lot of pistol shooting. I'm more into rifles, which is pretty much the only reason I haven't gotten a membership there (Though I take my friends there who have never shot before, so they can cut their teeth on a .22). I'd recommend them 100%, they've always been great to me.

I LOVE the M14 for it's good looks and style, and I hate Bullpups. However, I would own this. Honestly, it looks like a great system. If money were no object, I'd probably have both a classic M14 with its beautiful walnut stock, and one of these, since I do feel like it would balance the rifle quite well. It's nowhere near as handsome, but it is pretty damn cool, and it's probably lighter than the M14EBR, but gives a lot of the same advantages (and has a more compact size) This is a pretty cool system though, it's amazing how the M14, the rifle with the shortest service life, and which among many is all but forgotten (well, until COD for my generation) keeps coming back to kick some a**.

Hmm... I mean, I'm surprised it hasn't so far, considering how charged things are in this country, I don't think we've ever been more divided. I mean hell, look at the NJGF, I would say MOST of the time, the most serious disagreements we have on here are "AK vs AR" or "9mm vs .45" but this issue has REALLY divided us. I've been coming around from condemning Z to supporting him based off the evidence that, at least now, seems to show he was attacked first. Not to mention the media hiding things such as people trying to get weed off him on facebook, and his 10 day suspension at the time of the incident. Then again, the Catholic Church has called for "Civil Disobedience" in response to the whole healthcare thing. Granted, I'm not really one to make a scene or anything (And I don't know what constitutes Civil Disobedience) but I haven't really seen, or at least heard of, Catholics acting out. Then again, I suppose if I knew what to do, I would, but whatever. I'm sort of worried this will blow up into a full-scale '70s race riot sort of thing. It seems that the people who think Z is innocent, or, at least, not as guilty as he is portrayed, are pushing back, which is most unusual in such a situation. I think in most past situations, once the allegations that it was a hate crime were made, the individual would lose all support. It seems though, that either people don't believe it was a hate crime, or that they just don't buy that card anymore. I've gotten to the point where I'm tired of arguing it, but it is interesting to see what is going on with it.