Underdog

There are many options. On a budget, these are pretty good and you can check out the Schrade SCHF10 or the similar SCHF26, but there are ones with better steel. But, if it was me, I would spend a little more and for better value. Check out the KaBar Becker knives such as the BK-10 or maybe the BK-16 or BK-17 with 1095 Cro-Van Steel. Other options would be the Ontario series RAT-3 or RAT-5 or the Kabar Navy Mark 1. For about $140 you can get the Tops Brothers of Bushcraft, which is awesome, or you can get the Kabar Becker BK-2 for about $85. The Becker BK-10 is similar to the BK-2 but a little more versatile with a lighter and thinner blade. Both the BK-2 and Tops BOB are traditional bushcraft knives. And, you cannot forget about the versatile Mora Knife. Everyone should have a Mora Knife regardless of what else you get. These are awesome, light and a work horse. I prefer the carbon steel ones over the stainless, and in particular I like the pricier carbon steel thicker Mora Mora Bushcraft Black . Here are my recommendations at current prices: Ontario RAT 5, or if you really are on a budget, the Kabar Navy Mark 1. The Ontario RAT 3 is also on sale right now and is about 3-4 inches shorter and might be more concealable. These can be had at great prices right now. And, get whatever Mora you like as well. Really, for more concealable get a folder such as the Ontario RAT 1 or RAT 2. Or, you could get an awesome necker knife such as the Becker BK-24 Neck Knife. You might want to buy the additional grips for it.

In order to understand that, you would need to conceptualize who the president really has allegiances to. You would also have to consider that he may in fact favor one religion over another, and lastly, that a couple of secondary goals of all actions are to divide and conquer and of course to cause more chaos and strife. But to get back on topic, remember the photo op the governor did right before the election? The Gov, may in fact be much more RINO-like progressive than was previously thought, as reflected in this legislation. So, who is Christie trying to either appease or stick it to with this "feel good" legislation, and why is the timing of this now?

This law signifies four things to me. First, if Christie is willing to allow this, then he is showing his colors to the rest of the nation and that could mean that he has decided to forgo higher office and that any agenda for NJ that he sees fit could be enacted. This in turn would give him license to work with the NJ Democrats and the key law-enforcement officials he put in place to possibly go against freedom and personal property. This could be more along his personal anti-gun view toward firearms, or it could be a move to appease the overbudding, foolish liberal population in this state in order to remain governor. The second thing is that although the proposed laws harass legal gun businesses, and would make them, as victims of a crime, criminals in their own right if they aren't able to figure out and respond immediately as to where all their inventory is, that is just fluff in this bill. Yes, harrass freedom loving 2nd. Amendmet minded citizens that have legal, private businesses. The third thing is that these additional proposals are really meant to divert attention away from the real meat of this legislation, allowing the State Police to examine FFL records which would invade citizens' privacy and further really harass the FFLs who could be subject to an "inspection" every day or at any time. If that element of government invasion of privacy was the ONLY part of this proposed legislation, then it would get too much press, nationally. But, by putting it on "page five" figuratively, it is meant to bury and obscure it with the other flufff part of the legislation aimed at infringing on the rights of dealers. And, of course the fourth thing is the terror watch list which takes away someone's due process rights and has already been abused. Christie, earlier opposed this. But what has changed for him to flip? How does someone get on this list? How do you know if you are on it, and what can you do about it? How can there be as many "terrorists" on this list as there are, roaming around this country. Perhaps they are on this list to keep them from leaving. These laws do nothing to stop criminals and improve safety of the citizens, but rather are aimed to put more regulations and take away more freedoms of the people. And, when did the State Police and the executive branch become originators of laws. I thought that that was the job of the state congress. Lastly, why is this coming out now when Christie had said that NJ had too many arduous gun laws perhaps just a month ago? Why isn't he trying to rectify that instead of increasing them?

Are government officials with big pockets left alone with firearms when they do their inspections/audits? Maybe there is a sting going on named Pinch and Scoot in which the Feds are pressuring law-abiding FFLs to make their firearms unsecured and look the other way. It's hard to believe that there could be such a problem with firearms thefts at dealerships. The citizens should be able to examine those examples. And, how many examples of missing or stolen guns from police custody or police disarmament are on the books? Have any of these thefts been solved, and if so, where are the perps, now. Where any solvable in the 24 hours following the theft?

I wouldn't bother to contact Fuentes. Obviously he would be acting as a little dictator in his own right. I would contact Christie, though, and maybe the attorney general. I would also contact your NJ representatives. I am sure that the complacent, smug, indifferent fudd-types won't care. Until they change "semi-auto" to "any" by the stroke of a pen, and the list of features to "any".

You can buy locally off of Gunbroker, that works too. But, you want to be careful if you win the bid. Send an Email ahead of bidding to see if local pickup is an option. Get that on record. Unless it is someone working out of his or her house with an FFL, a shop owner shouldn't care. Also, when you go to get the firearm, check to make sure its there by inquiring BEFORE showing documentation about the winning bid. If the dealer is also selling in shop at the same time, it should be on display. I have had local FFL tell me it was SOLD when I went in to pick it up with winning bid that I had one because it was a great deal, because nobody else bid on it. I apparently won it at the "reserve" price which the FFL was never intending to sell it at. He made the claim beause many dealers reserve the right to sell in shop if the option permits itself, even while bid is going on. Because I had a hunch, I had one of my friends go in later that day inquiring and it was pulled out and showed to him with a much higher price than the winning bid. I would have liked to have gotten it as that price,and probably could have when I confronted him when caught. However, I decided to no longer do business with him. And, also as another warning, your selling party or buying party has been known to occasionally be of the government class.

You can buy locally off of Gunbroker, that works too. But, you want to be careful if you win the bid. Send an Email ahead of bidding to see if local pickup is an option. Get that on record. Unless it is someone working out of his or her house with an FFL, a shop owner shouldn't care. Also, when you go to get the firearm, check to make sure its there by inquiring BEFORE showing documentation about the winning bid. If the dealer is also selling in shop at the same time, it should be on display. I have had local FFL tell me it was SOLD when I went in to pick it up with winning bid that I had one because it was a great deal, because nobody else bid on it. I apparently won it at the "reserve" price which the FFL was never intending to sell it at. He made the claim beause many dealers reserve the right to sell in shop if the option permits itself, even while bid is going on. Because I had a hunch, I had one of my friends go in later that day inquiring and it was pulled out and showed to him with a much higher price than the winning bid. I would have liked to have gotten it as that price,and probably could have when I confronted him when caught. However, I decided to no longer do business with him. p And, also as another warning, your selling party or buying party has been known to occasionally be of the government class. But, I have gotten some really nice things off of GB... and one was pretty scarce at a decent price.

Find a Ruger Speed Six with Pachmayr grips, instead. It has a smaller grip and is built like a tank.

I really believe the most versatile and most upgradeable 22 on the market as a family target/plinkster is the reliable, time-proven designed Ruger 22/45 Lite with about a 4" barrel. I haven't really found any 22 totally reliable. Revolvers are probably the best. My SR22 has never had a hickup, BUT because I haven't been able to get 22 ammo, it really hasn't been used as much as the others, either. The trigger to me feels akin to my target stapler. However, since my hands aren't too big, the ergonomics are very nice and the sights for what they are worth, they are nice, too. Breakdown and cleanup is OK. Certainly better than the Marks, which aren't any big deal once you do it a couple of times. My favorite 22s are the M&P 22, the Colt Woodsman, and believe it or not, an old High Standard revolver. Many people think the Ruger Mark is an ugly gun. I actually don't like the looks of the Buckmark, but think it is a better gun out of the box. With time and money, the Ruger Mark is probably the best 22 out there (as a semi-auto). Mine ate everything until one day it started hickupping. I bought a Voltquartzen ejector and with a Youtube video, I have been in business ever since. My preference is for the 5.5" bull barrel stainless Mark II. I don't mind the mag release at the bottom of the grip. However, it is a rather heavy gun for some and that is where the 22/45 Lite comes in.

I would try out the SR22 before buying it. Mine seems to fire everything, I just do not like shooting it too much. I would not have purchased it if I could have shot it before hand. You might want to look into a S&W M&P 22. I think it is 12 rounds and the one I am familiar with seems to handle just about anything. I don't know anything about the slightly smaller M&P 22 compact, but it is made in USA and might be nice. However, you really cannot go wrong with a revolver if you want it to shoot everything. I'd stick with a DA/SA if you go that route.

Others that fell to the wayside: Sig 1911-22 - Loved the feel of this gun, I just didn't feel that the quality level was up to snuff for keeping it. Ruger Single Six - Admired this beautiful blued and accurate gun. Just hated the single action loading and unloading, and it was a new model one with a less-than-desirable trigger. What's next on the chopping block. For me, its the Ruger SR22. I like the SR22, but it is just not for me. I should have gotten a Buckmark, Ruger 22/45 Lite, or even a NAA Sidewinder. Yet, I know people that love that little SR22. Perhaps we should start a thread about the ones regret getting rid of.

Beretta 92FS... didn't have removable/upgradeable sights and the grip was too thick. And, I didn't realize that I didn't want a handgun that big and that I didn't want a DA/SA version, or one with a safety. I didn't hate it though. I thought it looked awesome, it was quality and well-made...

Maybe the Smart Gun technology will usher in Smart Shock collar technology for all the politicians. This article was also found in Human Events: NJ gun owners dodge new ‘smart gun’ regsNJ gun owners dodge new ‘smart gun’ regs

My friends and relatives don't believe me. They think that I am a big exaggerator. They really don't grasp the encroachment of the State and its largely absurd, costly, unjust, and somewhat comical (in a sadistic way), process. I think that is why some people visiting our state get into trouble with our firearms laws. They couldn't even imagine the processes and draconian laws put forth by a set of politicians that do not represent the people and hypocritical politicians that do not believe in personal freedom for all, actions and an agenda not to further safety and "common sense", but rather to further the State and its agenda.

I know. I would have thought that many/all of NJ's active gun culture wouldn't buy into progressive, statist BS, but there is an element on here that does. I want to believe it is just an occasional troll or two but rather believe it's part of the culture. This sickness is spreading and the unwary, everywhere take heed. This is why those of us fighting in a slave state are important and need to challenge this "armed-sheeple" thinking, the kind of thinking that got Booker reelected to office, or that wants a writ of permission to have a firearm and then wants you to attend Firearms Anonymous for training.

I could be wrong, but it almost sounds like you would consider not going through the justice system, but in taking matters into your own hands. You believe that that would be wrong and don't want to have to be placed in that situation because you don't know how YOU would react. I have often wondered about people with such exaggerated fears about firearms. They have either had a tragic experience (almost understandable), or maybe they have found that they are utterly incompetent with firearms safety... perhaps a discharge while cleaning, etc., or perhaps they are overly emotional or irresponsible and not able to control their own emotions or act responsibly and then they transfer this to others. Since they cannot be personally responsible, they feel that the state should step in and then they can go on auto-sheeple-pilot. Do you really think that a mandatory safety class would make gun ownership any safer? Repeat this mantra over and over.... "Many more people are saved on a daily basis through responsible gun ownership than harmed by it." They must be doing something right and gun ownership definitely appears to be a good idea amongst responsible adults.

This is ridiculous. Why would a gun manufacturer, range officers, gun dealers, etc. need to do this? They are already involved and have a vested interest. It is up to the INDIVIDUAL to get training and to learn how to operate the firearm. I already have to put up with the writing and such that lawyers have deemed reasonable all over my firearms. There should be options for training, etc. I see no reason that a gun dealer, etc. should not provide local training information for gun owners if they so choose. And, I see no reason why a gun manufacturer shouldn't contribute to organizations like the NRA (which provide the training that you are talking about) if they so choose. But, again, the responsibility is on the individual. If a gun shop doesn't provide it, YOU put together a flyer that they can display and ask them if they would. Gun mishaps, etc. are relatively rare and far in between. Many more people die from deer accidents, every year, in vehicles that ARE a privilege and not a CONSTITUTIONALLY backed unalienable right. If your goal is to save lives, then put pressure on the cops to slow the populace down. There is education out there. There are laws. The same with drunk driving.. there are laws and strict penalties. There is education, etc. and it still happens. More people are killed by hammers every year in this country, and yet there are no courses to have safe usage, and surprisingly, the MSM isn't sensationalizing these black hammer deaths or reporting on them continuously. You have a valid concern in calling for more safety education for firearms ownership, but it appears that you have an unreasonable fear of firearms when put in perspective. Your focus should be on punishment of repeat offenders ( a cash cow for our bogus legal justice system), and on helping those that truly have mental illnesses. You should write your representative and let them know that it would be nice to get rid of all the regulations prohibiting them, so we can have local ranges that are cost effective for practice. You should work toward getting rid of zero-tolerance BS that doesn't allow for our society to be educated on the use of primary and valuable tools... firearms. Push for the teaching of firearms safety in our public schools. That is where the initial focus on training should be. And, then if you are a big-government supporter (and I am not), push for incentivizing further training, for example, if you buy a firearm, and you seek out training, you get an $80 tax credit, etc. Don't mandated it, create incentives. The manufactures have it... if you buy a gun they donate money toward the NRA (our primary training system in this country). As far as the MSM goes, etc. we can't afford them "sniping" at us? That is ridiculous. We cannot cave; we are not victims. We need to stand tall. Most gun owners are responsible... GET that message out regardless of the government-run MSM. We are where we are because we have already given up too much of our rights and created an atmosphere where gun ownership is for 2nd Class Citizens and largely unacceptable. Again, this is just another layer created by the anti-gun statists that would take away nail clippers if given the chance. We have to stand firm and not give in. These laws and regulations are the pussy-willowification of society and further erode ANY hope of personal responsibility. I don't know your background, experiences, etc. but you seem to have way too much fear of firearms. They are not toys, and just as with other tools, they need to be handled correctly but it is not the gun manufacturers, gun dealers, gun organizations, gun culture in general, but again, it is the individual that is responsible for seeking out and getting that needed education. You are misguided.

You are finally starting to get it. I don't think that any of us on here would agree that training is bad for firearms owners. The whole point is that YOU have to take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for your actions. Just because a training course is "mandated" doesn't mean you will be any more aware, or act any safer. Only an individual can make that choice to learn enough to be a more safe and responsible firearms owner. Just because one attends a class, etc., it doesn't necessarily mean that anything is retained. It is up to the the individual to seek out training and to internalize that training. The responsible individual can learn from more experienced members in either a class setting, or through personal contact with more knowledgeable members. Again, the key is for intrinsic motivation... without government interference. The firearms community, itself, can provide incentives and opportunities by requiring training to use private facilities, etc., and by helping to make training both affordable and available for its fledgling and more advanced members. And, that is largely where the NRA, IDPA, and other groups comes into play. They provide both a framework and opportunities for increased firearms awareness and handling. And, there are certainly a few professional outfits to get that training, but at a premium.

You hit the proverbial nail right on the head. Does ANYONE on here think that those clowns would pass ANYTHING reasonable or good for our community? That thought can be extrapolated to the clowns down in DC as well. Instead of firearms training, lets have a mandatory class entitled Statism 101.

It amazes me the kind of people that this forum collects. What in the world does "I don't support it but I'm OK with it" mean? ... A budding statist Democrat or Republican politician perhaps! If you think this way, please don't do down South. Since the virus is already here, I hate to say it, but keep that viral mindset here. Keep South Carolina free of progressive syndrome. Also, get checked for acute lead poisoning. At the very least we live in a less-than-free world in which our freedom and security are being compromised on a daily basis by the State. We should not want and should not support further requirements for gun ownership. At the very least, gun ownership should be viewed as a 'necessary evil' essential for freedom. And, although I don't agree with that statement entirely (because firearm ownership is NOT an evil), and, although a few guns may get into the hands of the wrong people occasionally, the good of having an armed populace far outweighs the negatives of having some fools or bad people armed (bad people will find means of armament, anyway). This would just be one more encroachment, one more hurdle, and further abuse put in place by the State... a state bent on its crooked path to disarmament and total control of the citizenry, one more degree of shift of the Overton Window, and the further molding and brainwashing of the sheeple. And it amazes me how many do-gooder type, misinformed, disillusioned members of the community buy into it and would trade the appearance of a little more safety for less freedom. It would be fruitful if more training for firearms owners was available, but just as with healthcare, NEVER more government involvement. So, when someone says he or she is really OK with it, that person is really supporting it. I just have a problem with this bloomturdian thinking. Oh, and I actually would be opposed to more regulations and training even if it allowed for concealed carry, as that would still be an effective way of keeping firearms out of the hands of many citizens. It would setup a framework for abuse and one for further establishing an elite class. And, at a later point and time all the government would have to do is make the requirements even more arduous for gun owners. That argument is flawed as well. I say, Zero Tolerance for this kind of thinking on a forum dedicated to guns and the 2nd Amendment!

Yes, thank you for sharing.

That schmuck, Frank, took my money to hold a gun because I had to wait the full 30 days to purchase it. It was the end window for a permit that had already been renewed. I lined it up so I could get it within the 2 or 3 day window. He went and sold it to someone else and no other shop had it in stock. Of course he gave me my money back, but I lost the use of the permit. When I told him about it, he said, oh, you can just renew it, and then when I told him it couldn't be renewed, he said, Oh Well. He should have at least offered me a good deal on something else he had in stock. He does appear to be racist, and he seems to only cater to LEOS, and unless you are going to spend at least $700 on a gun, he really doesn't have the time for you. I would never give him another dime. And, if he was a veteran, I would still thank him for his service. I bought my first firearm from him and had given him follow-up business before this incident. It amazes me how many gun shops screw up things with their customers. Not only do they lose the sale of guns, they lose the sale of ammo, targets, bags, arrows, etc.

A neighbor that doesn't own guns and has a distaste for them told me that if the SHTF that he would be down to get a gun from me for protection. I quickly told my anti-gun neighbor, jokingly, that he should go and get his own guns because he wasn't getting any from me, and that if the apocalypse came I would be up at his house taking all his food, instead. In all serious, though, I know a few people that didn't like guns, but then went out and got them AFTER they became a target of a violent felony. I really do belief, though, that there are people that don't trust themselves with guns, they cannot control their temper, they are too emotional, etc., and that they then tranfer that lack of control to others and that is at least partially, other than cultural influences of a progressive, anti-gun state, why they become anti-gun and have such fear for guns. I don't really think that crowd can be reached and there is NO reason to let them know about or discuss your guns with them. There are others that don't want the stigma of being associated with guns. That seems to be the special case of conservatives that are anti-guns, and can be stretched further to the "Fudd" type that don't like guns unless they are for hunting purposes, only.

I walked into the RTSP even though I knew that I would pay a premium price; they are a quality range with an exceptional amount of inventory and of course had what I wanted in stock. With my permit in hand, I waited 5 minutes while there were people behind counter that looked like they weren't doing anything (just standing there) and one salesperson was just casually chatting with a customer. The ones not doing anything could of at least acknowledged me even if it wasn't their job to help me. They could have said, "He'll be right with you, or something like that. That would have maybe clued the other salesman that I was waiting. But nothing. I gave it exactly 5 minutes listening to a ridiculous conversation that had nothing to do with guns, the sale of guns, buying a gun or ammo, hunting, the Second Amendment, Range Policies, etc. and then I walked out and have not been back. And, the funny thing was that once I left, a manager/owner came out to the parking lot to talk with me as I was getting in my car to find out what had happened. He (I think his name was Pete) had been paying enough attention to see me leave, frustrated, but not enough to assist me when I was standing there. As GTO Nut said, he seemed to go out of his way to make it right. He apologized and didn't want me leaving that way. Kudos. However, they lost a sale and I left. I expected better service to begin with, especially when I am paying a premium for the goods (at least $25 more than other shops in the area, except for the one that also tacks on an additional "hidden" shipping charge). That one brief experience has certainly lost them business and I have not been back... I had had the permit in hand (they would know what that was) and I had that glow of someone about to buy a new handgun only to leave in frustration.

You have to proceed cautiously and feel someone out. I would avoid a group setting; one on one is better. I usually mention current news and then bring up a current gun control example thrown in and see the response I get. Or, I talk about the Bill of Rights, and of course then I can discuss the 2nd Amendment. Anti-gun people can be exceedingly close-minded, but they are all of varying degrees in their beliefs from calling for an out and out ban, to someone only agree to one being allowed to have hunting stuff. On the other hand, the curious and interested, once they realize you are not a kook, well, they always have questions for you once they know you are a gun person.... "My friend inherited a World War II Japanese Rifle. How does he transport it, and what might it be worth?" The thing is that most people won't see you differently, or judge you. But some might. And, then there are people that you tell that might compromise your belongings, or tell someone else who might compromise your belongings or judge you... Someone with a closet drug addiction for example. There really isn't any reason to share details about your firearms with strangers, but if you do, just bring out carefully chosen statements in a matter-of-factl way, like you expect everyone to be a gun owner and avoid catch phrases like the controversial "AK47, Glock, Black Rifles, Assault Rifles, etc..." Sometimes I find it is better to talk about ammunition, first. Like, "I cannot believe that 22s are $90 a brick", or "There is a sale on 12 gauge slugs".