leahcim

I think you could transport an unloaded HG in a hand carried Ziploc bag-as long as it's closed/fastened. I wouldn't recommend,but I think it complies with the law. I actually -not hypothetically- transport my HGs to range inside a bag on my bicycle's rack. The bag is zipped shut, pretty sure that complies. And unless I become incapacitated (e.g. by an accident) no one will know I am transporting.

If you want real-estate exposure, buy a REIT--but it will be a lot less interesting than a 4-bedroom/2Ba home with 15 resident owners. If you can get a reality show contract with TLC or A&E then I might be interested.

This is the best thread I have read in awhile! Walkie-talkies? Seriously??? Let's maybe get a few crystal sets and some CB radios while we're at it.

Never been required to notarize a reference. Questions sound normal though. Stupid stuff like: Is this person a habitual drunkard? I don't know Criminal? You are the police, you should know that What kind of person is he? American

I bought my Beretta at LGS. Price difference was not that big after factoring in xfer fee. Other guns I bought online because they were hard to find at LGS. I did most of my research online and I also rented several at large, well stocked ranges in other states. My next purchase will probably be a Glock, and I will almost certainly buy it locally, as most shops will have it in stock. Again, the price is not that much different.

<TRIGGERWARNING> How about the fighting Irish? Cavaliers? Colonel Reb (Oh, already banished) Valparaiso U Crusaders Hope College Flying Dutchman Fairleigh Dickinson Knights Golden State Warriors Spartans Scarlet Knights Vikings If this is upheld, practically any name could be challenged on the basis that someone is offended. <\TRIGGERWARNING>

McBethr: Good to see you are still active--I have not seen you post for quite awhile. Great response to Lassiter Jackassiter. Although he does have some good points about Sweeny's inept response to all that threatens him, his words indicate an obvious anti-2A bias. I am sure that in Jackassiter mind the "mainstream" is fully represented by his views and those who agree with him. The rest are just clinging to their religion and guns.

I started seeing this with IE11 awhile ago, so I switched to chrome. I recently noticed that IE11 stopped allowing me to download files--the download window that pops up at the bottom of the browser will say "<filename> couldn't be download." No explanation, no ideas to fix it. What the hell happened Microsoft? You used to be one of the cool kids! Now you are like IBM of the 1980s--but with a lot of cash.

This website can be used for verification of current military or civilian employees, has to be initiated by the service member or employee, encrypted file is sent to your email and the service member will provide you with a password. http://www.cpms.osd.mil/subpage/EmploymentVerification/ The site talks about verification of former employees or retirees, but it does not specifically address service. Or you could contact China, I am sure they can tell you;-)

The WSJ had a pretty good explanation. "The Columbia police department’s report of the arrest stated that Mr. Roof admitted he was in possession of drugs. Under federal law, a drug arrest doesn’t bar a gun purchase, but Mr. Comey said that admitting to having drugs—even without a conviction—would have been grounds for denying the sale." So the arrest without conviction would not have barred him, but the admission (without a conviction) does. It is not clear if the FBI actually issued an approval after investigating and not finding the arrest and admission, or if the delay-pending period expired and the dealer sold it to him. The FBI had contacted the wrong PD--West Columbia instead of Columbia--and they had no arrest record. If you want to look at how often these kind of fails occur, I would make a distinction between an instant approval (which they say is about 99% of the time) and "delayed-pending." I would bet most of the failures occur with the delayed-pending cases. So 99.999% of the time the system works, and the FBI needs to figure out the issue with the 0.001%. Of course the opposition will use this to say that anyone can pass a background check and the whole system needs to be "fixed" starting with registration and confiscation. From the WSJ: FBI Erred in Gun Sale to Charleston Suspect Director says Dylann Roof should have been stopped from buying handgun in April By DAMIAN PALETTA and VALERIE BAUERLEIN Updated July 10, 2015 7:01 p.m. ET 552 COMMENTS WASHINGTON—Federal investigators should have prevented the accused South Carolina mass shooter from purchasing a handgun in April, FBI director James Comey said Friday. An error made during a background check failed to disclose all details of the alleged assailant’s criminal background, which would have disqualified him. The agency’s admission that an error in the gun-background check program played a role in the deaths of nine people at a Charleston church last month came on the day that South Carolina removed the Confederate battle flag from its Statehouse grounds, a move made in response to furor stemming from the alleged shooter’s affinity with the symbolic banner. Mr. Comey in a meeting with reporters acknowledged the seriousness of the oversight, which occurred under the nation’s Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993. He said he has launched an internal review to determine whether FBI officials should overhaul their firearm-review process to prevent such lapses in the future. “It rips all of our hearts out,” Mr. Comey said. “The thought that an error on our part is connected to this guy’s purchase of a gun that he used to slaughter these people is very painful for us.” Dylann Roof, accused in the June 17 rampage at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, has been charged with nine counts of murder, three counts of attempted murder and also faces a weapons charge. He hasn’t yet entered a plea or made any statements. His next scheduled court appearance is in October. Mr. Comey laid out the details of how Mr. Roof came to procure the handgun used in the killings. Mr. Comey didn’t specify what kind of gun it was or where it was purchased. A law-enforcement official said Mr. Roof purchased a .45-caliber Glock pistol at Shooter’s Choice, a store in West Columbia. A man at the gun counter at Shooter’s Choice declined to comment Friday about the background check or whether the store sold Mr. Roof the firearm. “We’re familiar with it, but we don’t have any comment about it,” he said. He declined to give his name. Mr. Roof attempted to purchase the handgun on April 11, a Saturday, the FBI director said. The Brady act requires sellers and law-enforcement agencies—either the FBI or state agencies—to check potential buyers’ backgrounds through a system called the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS. That also gave the FBI three business days to determine whether he should be denied permission to buy the gun. On Monday, April 13, his background screening was assigned to an FBI official in West Virginia. The official attempted to scrutinize Mr. Roof’s record, and contacted the Lexington County sheriff’s office and then the West Columbia, S.C., police to obtain details about a recent drug arrest. West Columbia is located in Lexington County, as is a small sliver of the city of Columbia—though records referenced by the examiner didn’t list Columbia as being part of Lexington County. The county sheriff’s office referred the FBI official to contact the Columbia police, which had arrested Mr. Roof six weeks earlier for suspected drug possession. But because the FBI official didn’t understand that a small part of Columbia was located in Lexington County, she instead contacted the police in West Columbia, who had no record of Mr. Roof’s arrest. The Columbia police department’s report of the arrest stated that Mr. Roof admitted he was in possession of drugs. Under federal law, a drug arrest doesn’t bar a gun purchase, but Mr. Comey said that admitting to having drugs—even without a conviction—would have been grounds for denying the sale. Mr. Roof’s admission, Mr. Comey said, should have stopped him from purchasing the weapon. However, because the examiner had made no contact with the Columbia department—before the three-day review period ended—the sale to Mr. Roof was completed, on April 16. Mr. Roof’s case was in a “delayed-pending” status while the background check was under way. Under federal law, customers are allowed to purchase the weapons if their cases are in the delayed-pending status, although some retailers still won’t make the sale. The gun he purchased that day was the same gun used in the church shootings, Mr. Comey said. “We are all sick that this happened,” Mr. Comey continued. “We wish we could turn back time.” Mr. Comey said FBI officials were briefing the shooting victims’ families on what he described as a “mistake.” South Carolina State Rep. James Smith said it was poignant that the FBI made its announcement the day the Confederate flag was lowered from a pole on the Statehouse grounds. “The fact that there was a serious mistake that may have made the difference is something we’ll never know,” said Mr. Smith, a Democrat who served in the South Carolina legislature with one of the victims of the shooting, Sen. Clementa Pinckney, for more than 15 years. “It’s tragedy on top of tragedy. It helps us remember why we’re here,” removing the flag. In 2014, the FBI conducted background checks for 8.2 million firearm transactions. Of those, 228,000 went into the “delayed pending” status because examiners couldn’t determine whether or not the person should be cleared. Tommy Tipton, a firearms trainer and gun-seller in Lexington, S.C., where Mr. Roof once lived, said with federal background checks to purchase a gun, “it’s relatively easy to fall through the cracks.” Mr. Tipton, a 63-year-old former law-enforcement officer, described the background-check process as practiced at his shop, Defender Firearms. He said he has people fill out a form declaring that they are not suffering from mental illness and answering several other questions. Then the prospective buyer, who must be from South Carolina, must provide identifying information, which is fed into the FBI-maintained NICS database. That database quickly gives one of three responses to the gun dealer: proceed, delay or deny, Mr. Tipton said. He said 99% of customers receive a “proceed,” and buy their guns immediately. Under the federal law, a “delay” requires gun sellers to wait up to three days for a response to proceed or deny from the system. If they don’t receive any message, they can legally sell the weapon at that time, and many stores do, Mr. Tipton said. Rarely, the system issues a denial, he said. “The onus is not on us, it’s on the FBI with NICS,” he said. “How much of a background check can you really do in 10 seconds?” He said the system has several flaws, including no robust check on a person’s mental illness. “If you walked in and robbed a bank yesterday, I’ve got no way of knowing that,” he said. “The whole system needs to be taken a long look at.” Mr. Roof’s attorney didn’t respond to email inquiries Friday and couldn't be reached by telephone. The police departments of Columbia, S.C., and West Columbia, S.C., didn’t return calls for comment. A spokesman for the Lexington County Sheriff’s Office in South Carolina didn’t return a call for comment. —Cameron McWhirter and Gary Fields contributed to this article.

I have always understood the command "If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also." to mean that you should not seek revenge or escalate a situation when confronted with evil. Contextually, just prior to the command, Jesus says “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. But I tell you, do not resist an evil person." He was citing the law of that time--eye-for-eye--and saying that just because you have legal claim on someone does not mean you should use it. But rather it is better to exercise mercy, forgive and let it go rather than seeking revenge. Just be cause you can do something, does not mean that you should. As Paul also says, "I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but not everything is constructive [or beneficial.]" I Cor 10:23 I do not think this precludes defending oneself or others against violence and evil. However, I am not familiar with any NT or OT passages that discuss the relative merits of OC vs. CCW or Glock vs. 1911 ;-)

I always recommend transfer out of former employer plan. Do a direct rollover, otherwise the plan may withhold for taxes. Although I do keep a small amount with a former employer stock fund, mainly for exposure to big defense market. Transferring out give you more control and flexibility. However, I generally prefer low cost (low expense ratio)funds like Vanguard, which has a huge number of low cost index funds. If you feel comfortable with individual stocks, chose a low cost brokerage that offers good online tools. Personally, I am pretty lazy, so I mostly rely on Vanguard index funds, and a few stocks,which I tend to hold forever.

I think a sling psychrometer is among the best, but less accurate at very low humidity, and it can be difficult to use inside the safe. Hygrometer calibration needs to be done fairly often and can drift, but I think you really just need a ballpark idea.

Well then did you make that roux or bechemal? You said you had until 2000, it is now almost 22 of the next day. Did you use it or not? What doesn't kill you... But of course it only takes one thing to kill you after millions of things that don't kill you.

I think so--as a reasonable person would understand the law; but you never know in NJ. If asked, say that you are going to a range in FL. Just to be safe ;-)

As long as they are pasteurized they should be fine

The first judge was total activist, agenda-driven a-hole. He would not even provide the jury with any information on exemption for moving. I think I read he was recently passed over for re-appointment. But even the appeals judge ruled against Aitken on the HP issue. And he got lucky on the hi-cap issue because they never demonstrated that it could continuously feed more than 15 rounds. The HP ruling is patently ridiculous though. However, I do not see anywhere in the law that you have to "stop at the range for the purpose of shooting." I think you only have to be going to or from the range--for any purpose. I don't even believe the range would need to be open for business.

The LEO threatened to do that to coerce Aitkens consent. If Aitkens had refused, I doubt the LEO would have followed through.

No worries, good questions. I know there is more to the case, I was only trying to make the point that, while extremely unlikely, these things can happen. Be aware and be careful. According to Aitkens book, he was upset over his ex trying to use their child to mess with him. He said to his Mom something like I don't even see the point of being here--by which he meant in NJ (having moved back from Colorado), she interpreted "being here" as being on the earth. And yes there was a LOT more to the case than just getting pulled over out of the blue. For example, at one point the officer returned everything to Aitkens father, told him to secure it in his safe. That could have been the end of it. A few minutes later his father returned and said he did not have room in the safe. I am sure the father must feel pretty bad about ever doing that. My point though is that no matter how remote, I can imagine circumstances where I am searched (auto accident, mistaken identity, etc.) and the consequences in NJ can be devastating. So when I go to the range I will have everything out of sight (even though I believe that a Ziploc bag on the passenger seat would qualify as a closed and fastened case or a securely tied package), drive careful, and never consent to a search. Again, these are very unlikely (I have never ever been asked if they could search my car), but I can imagine a scenario where it happens. Keep in mind, this is mostly what Aitken is telling us. So it is one-sided. However, a lot of what he says is borne out by the court information (just read the appeals court per curium, it is really disturbing).

After reading the appellate court decision, and Blue Tent Sky, I am much more careful. As I have said before the odds of running into trouble (traffic stop, search warrant, accident, etc.) are very low, but the consequences are potentially very bad. And the lessons from Aitken: Never say anything that could be misconstrued as depressed, despondent, suicidal Never agree to return to Mt Laurel or any other municipality when you are driving in the middle of a move Never respond with "I don't think so" when asked if you are transporting weapons Never ever consent to a search--no matter how they try to coerce you.

This is from the Aitken appellate decision (per curiam II-E-I-ii): Brian also argues that, using the rule of lenity, we should interpret N.J.S.A. 2C:39-3(g)(2)(a) as including an exception for moving hollow nose bullets between residences, even though it is not included in the statutory language. N.J.S.A. 2C:39-3(g)(2)(a) provides as follows: "Nothing in subsection [(f)](1) shall be construed to prevent a person from keeping such ammunition at his dwelling, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, or from carrying such ammunition from the place of purchase to said dwelling or land...." In contrast to N.J.S.A. 2C:39-6(e), which concerns exemptions with respect to the possession of weapons, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-3(g)(2)(a) does not contain a specific exemption for possession while moving between residences. Citing the concept of lenity, Brian argues that we should read that exemption into the statute. http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20NJCO%2020120330329 I don't think the court cared about what seems reasonable. While it seems to be an oversight in writing the law, the interpretation by the appellate is that there is no exemption for moving with HP. Prior to this decision, I would not have worried about going between residences--that would be ridiculous, right? Now I would drive to the range between the two residences.

The likelihood of getting stopped is extremely low, the likelihood of PC and search if you are stopped is even less. However, if you believe Aitken's book, if this infinitesimal chance does somehow occur--and you get an officer who does not understand the law, it may not end well. According to AItken, the jury was instructed by the judge that, according to his determination, moving exemption did not apply and they were ordered to not even consider it in any of the three counts. I think they came back a few times to ask to see the actual law themselves, judge repeatedly told them that he had already determined that it did not apply, and they should not worry about it. In the appeal, two counts were dropped (on by moving exemption, the other by lack of proof on high-cap mag), but the HP ultimately stood because the court determined there was no moving exemption for HP! So drive careful

Read Brian Aitken's "Blue Tent Sky" and you will see what goes on between the prosecutor and the judge and their instructions to constrain the jury to their desired outcome.

You think this is the best place on the internet to be asking for advice on milk quality?

It is now 2027, did you consume the milk? Are you still conscious?