Underdog

That is probably the most sensible thing I think he has ever said. When he was on TV on Friday he was extremely upset. I know I have felt numb all weekend.

If they made a single-stack 92FS I would buy it in a heartbeat. I like the CZ 75B, because, for a larger, metal handgun, it fits my hand much better. I would recommend the 92A1 or M9A1.

Has anyone seen any of the TALO limited edition Ruger 22/45 Lites w/ the black finish, locally? I think I want one. Can the 22/45 Lite take standard 1911 grips? I may have sell my Mark III stainless Hunter to fund the purchase of one of these.

You should be afraid. This president is a smart man. But, he is a radical and statist in his second term who has little regard for our country and its laws unless those laws can be used directly to assist with his agenda to fundamentally change this country. A large part of the population largely by design is completely dependent upon this rogue government and it does not understand the principles and responsibility needed to remain a free people. Additionally, there is a clear effort to destroy the US economy and to make the US dollar worthless. That will create a very dangerous society in which there will be rioting and looting when it finally happens, and suffering on a large scale. And just about everyone will be dependent upon the government at that time just to survive and get daily essentials. That environment will be ripe for the individual that promises these things and salvation to assume the position of dictator. And also by design, the current government we have is continually being shown by the media as being ineffective and unable to govern, except for their anointed one. And, while all of that is going on, that same main-stream media is being controlled by the government and continually telling its people what they should think and conditioning them in an Orwellian fashion.

Those who love freedom in this country had better stand together to defend their rights and principles. It will be incremental, although this rogue government seems to do things in leaps and bounds. Good for Paul. The people that believe in the Constitution have to stop just being reactive to the statist agenda and everything that would be put upon them, and instead, they need to go on the offensive.

Oh, you mean the practice that tries to criminalize and abuse lawful and generally decent citizens? I wonder if our outspoken governor and presidential man-at-large will address this seemingly unjust practice.

My police department attempted to contact my place of work. I don't know what was said, etc. but where I work they charge something like $15.00 for any confirmation, etc. so he didn't get anywhere with them since he didn't pay them. The investigating officer contacted me and told me that I needed to follow up on it. I told him that there was no legality for me to have to pay to have an employment confirmation. This delayed me getting my permits about a week. Lastly, he said that if one of my coworkers at work just verified over the phone that I worked there, then he would take that as an OK and be done with it. So, I gave him the phone number of the guy sitting next to me and he "unofficially" verified that I worked there. The officer still had to place a call to him, though. As a side note, when I go to my department for firearms related things, I have to sign in and put a reason and my address (as anyone visiting the station had to do). So, anyone that came in and saw the sign out sheet that day could easily see who else applied and have a street address, etc., for that person. I don't think that is right in terms of privacy, etc. for the public to possibly have that info. So, I brought it up with the person processing my paperwork and was told to take it up with the chief.

I am not saying that they are not fully responsible for their actions. A drunken accident or a kick to the dog would be solely that person's responsibility. I am just saying that the actions you take (whether you feel responsible or not), could result into some unintended consequences. Again, my suggestion would not be to let it slide, but remain in control of the situation, make your point and with a little humor attached, and then move on. Had that action been taken it would not have put a damper on the rest of OP's evening and it would have set an example for his son on how to handle rude people. Meeting rudeness with anger/rudeness back, etc. almost never wins out. All that he might have changed was the delivery of the way that he said it. If he had been as sweet as pie in his delivery, then his wife would not have been angry because she was embarrassed. That's all I am saying. Everyone is responsible for his or her actions. Besides, the OP's only mistake was eating a buffet. How he handled it was OK. It's just humor could have made the point equally as well and then diffused the situation.

Playing devil's advocate... It's all good and all to call somebody out. But, maybe that person will take that negative energy with her and then be mean or abusive to her son or her dog, for example. And, although it may not be a dangerous scenario, you never know if you are messing with someone that is a little off-balance, on drugs, or possibly someone that has some kind of illness, or dangerous. Perhaps that person has just lost a loved one and is distracted. Or, perhaps she will drink to oblivion from you angering her/calling her out and then kill somebody in a drunk-driving felony when she leaves the restaurant. Now, I am not making excuses for anyone being rude, etc., but YOU are responsible for YOUR actions and the outcome, and, although tempted in these situations, it is almost always better, in my opinion, to turn the other cheek... and to diffuse the situation. And. although it is hard to do it sometimes, if you must, it is probably better to make a point with a little humor, being subtle goes along way. Look at her and give her a little smile and while smiling, say something in a pleasant tone like, "You must be really hungry to cut in front of all of us. Please go ahead. Bon appetit." And, being the bigger person is probably a better way to represent yourself in front of your wife and child. And, you wouldn't have let that rude person damper your evening's festivities by souring things with your wife.

Should have been 5" barrel with the fiber optic sights. The 4" one has night sights.

That animal would have found another way to commit this crime whether he had a gun or not. He would have had a vehicle drive him to that location on that day. Is it logical not to use your car because you have one, too?

This appears to be a good deal at Buds for someone wanting a budget 1911: TISAS ZIG M 1911-A1 45ACP 5" BLUE

1. Check out the 22/45 Lite or the S&W M&P 22... my recommendation would be the M&P 22 2. And, since you are going with the M&P 22, then the M&P 9 Pro would be logical. If I was going to get two 9mms, I might get a more concealable one as a second choice, or go with an all-steel one... The CZ 75 Compact might be nice and would kill those two birds with one stone. Or, you could get a M&P 9C or M&P Shield. As an off-the-beaten path idea, why not check out the Charter Arms 9mm revolver? 3. In a .45, you might want to stick with the above theme and get an M&P 45 or 45C. Or a Remington 1911 R1 would be nice and I think the Ruger SR1911 is nice, too. I am sure that the Kimber would be very nice, too. You may want to check out a STI Spartan as well. I would probably avoid a .40 unless you have available .40 ammo. You might want to consider an M&P or Glock .40 and a conversion barrel/mags to shoot 9mm as well.

686 SP101 GP100 Not bad, but the older Ruger Speed Six, or its brothers the Security or Service Six would be nice, too....

Although it would be nice to have and certainly could have a place in a select battery of arms (and it might become the most reliable and most versatile 9mm carbine out there), it would be hard to justify its cost over a competing carbine in a real rifle caliber. However, it might be nice to shoot with little recoil and might have benefits for some who have ranges limiting what can be shot there... What is the price that these will be released at?

This sounds kind of cool; I cannot say I wouldn't want one! But, I think a Saiga in 7.62x39 is much more versatile than one in a wimpy pistol caliber. Still, if you had to run off into the wastelands, a Glock 19 and a Saiga 9 and boxes of 9mm would be nice.

Revolvers are usually more difficult for some to shoot because the hammer and the trigger can require quite a bit of strength. Since this is a single-action, it would have a light trigger pull, but you would still have to cock the hammer. And. although you will not have a lot of recoil with a .22, revolvers do not buffer that recoil too much, like the semi-automatic action and the polymer frames do. However, their heavier weight often does dampens the recoil a bit. As for safety... A gun is a gun and your children should be taught to respect it and not given the opportunity to handle one. I think a double-action revolver would be safer, though, as it would be easier for you to visually check the cylinders. And, although the newer single-action revolvers have a firing pin block when not in use, if you get an older one, it would be unsafe leaving a round in the chamber, because if you drop it and bang it hard, the round could go off. That's why, especially with older single-action revolvers, the chamber lined up with the firing pin is kept empty while carrying it. For a range gun, though, that would pretty much be a moot point. .357s and even .38s would be more expensive to shoot than guns in the 9mm caliber. .22LR and .22WMR are not really adequate for self-defense, though. In a pinch, sure I'd use one, but as a dedicated defensive handgun, I would do as others suggest and get a 9mm. A positive for a revolver is its simplicity and the way it feels in your hands. But, you would want to master the double-action shooting with it. I would still prefer a defensive semi-auto handgun for my first one, and then branch out into something in .22LR. And, in my estimation, .22 revolvers are a pain to clean. If you want a practice gun, .22LR, I would check out the S&W M&P 22, however, I would get a polymer 9mm such as an S&W M&P 9 or Glock 19. Another option would be to check out the Ruger Blackhawk Convertible 9mm, .38, .357 in Single Action, or look for a 9mm revolver... Taurus 905, Ruger Speed Six, or Charter Arms.

This was amusing and interesting... DIY: Shovel AK

There isn't really a better value out there than a Glock, and few things come close in a number of one or more key characteristics or categories, and certainly nothing else beats a Glock when you look at the whole package and the price point value. That said, there are a number of handguns that I enjoy shooting more, but if I put them up against each other and my Glock and had to keep just one, the Glock would be the one that would stay. Glocks are light and yet still have relatively low recoil. They would be good for a full day of shooting or for concealed carry due to their lighter weight. Glock slides and polymer frames are tough. They have anti-corrosive properties and extreme durability. Glocks are produced at a lower cost than many other guns and need little or no maintenance to continue going. They can be run almost completely dry and they still go bang every time. But, when they do, Glocks are simple to work on and owner could possibly do a fair share of his or her own gunsmithing. And, Glocks have only 35 parts (less parts to break) and which increases chance of reliability due to mechanical integrity and simplicity. The slide is much heavier than the frame which, along with the resistance of the return spring, and the recoil suppression of the polymer frame, significantly reduces felt recoil and decreases vibrations. This cannot be overstated... Glocks are durable and have a proven record of use that is more than just about any other pistol, except for perhaps maybe a Beretta 92. Additionally the barrel bore, which isn't designed for lead bullets, is designed in such a way to reduce wear and aid in higher muzzle velocity and energy. As far as maintenance is concerned, Glocks are easy to clean and maintain. Breaking down is simple and quick and a Glock can be field stripped and cleaned very quickly. There are just about more aftermarket parts for it than any other gun, except maybe for the 1911. The tenifer surface finish is excellent in protecting the Glock against rust and wear as well, especially for someone carrying it every day or in harsh environments. Glocks work well across a large temperature spectrum. Another key is the ease of use of a Glock. Everyone has an opinion on which semi-automatic gun action he or she likes best from double action only, DA/SA, to the "safe action" of the Glock. Glock's are simple and with their safe-action system, they will not fire (if maintained) unless the trigger has been pulled. They don't have hammers, decockers, safeties, etc. to distract the user and complicate the use. Glocks have the same trigger to get used to on every shot and they have a relatively quick and effective reset for quick follow-up shots which aids in the owner/user becoming proficient. Glocks also have durable magazines that are comfortable reloading, have less chance of being damaged if dropped (like steel ones becoming dented or rusty), and the mags don't have sharp edges and they are quite dependable magazines (which is very important in the reliability of a semi-automatic). They are plentiful and relatively cheap to produce, and in cold weather it would also be more pleasant handling the polymer mags than metal ones. Glock's come in a variety of sizes and calibers, all of which work the same way. There are many interchangeable parts, and smaller Glocks of the same caliber can use the larger magazines of their big siblings. And, again, there are more parts, more people to work on the Glock and more accessories. Are stock Glock's perfect? NO, in particular, I don't like the polymer sights. Even with the GEN4s, the Glocks still don't have enough grip size variation and/or ergonomics to fit some hands. For most people, Glock's feel blocky in the hand, however, the GEN4s do have some ergonomic improvements. Glock's have a lower bore axis which aids in recoil management and consequently quicker follow-up shots. And, although Glock's have a different grip angle than say 1911s, they still work well and just about anyone can quickly learn to shoot a Glock quickly. Additionally, I am not crazy about the trigger. That little safety thing on it sort of rubs my index finger the wrong way and some may not be fond of the finger grip placement on the grip. But this is all minor. The fact is that Glock's work and they work well, and again, NOTHING else comes close in most of these areas and at the price point that Glock's can be had at. Lastly, if you shop around you can get a used Glock for about $400s (they are so plentiful from being so popular that they have a relatively large used market to draw from) and that is an incredible value you are getting. Are they the most fun guns and the most comfortable guns to shoot? Probably not. Can some people shoot other guns, better? Sure. But, most people can shoot Glocks well and they can be beneficial in terms of being a home defense, SHTF gun, there is currently nothing on the Market which beats them. You know what they say about cost... two Glock's in the safe are better than one SIG or custom 1911 at the gun shop with your drool spittle at the gun shop. They are popular for a reason and that popularity in itself keeps them running like clockwork and with all the parts, accessories, night sights, holsters, etc. to make them the ultimate minimalist and survival and defensive handgun. Would it be nice for Glock to have better sights? Would it be nice to have a single-stack Glock? Would it be nice to have even more options in grip size, grip angle, etc.? Would it be nice for some owners to have an additional external safety? Probably, but the Glock can hold its own. There are other fine handguns that will work and work well. In particular I like CZs and S&W M&Ps, but there are others as well XDs (I don't like the grip safety and don't like it on 1911s, either), Rugers, Walthers... But, even though I prefer shooting a S&W M&P 9 FS with a trigger upgrade, and setup with the smallest grip size, or a CZ 75 Single-Action, or possibly a Walther P99/PPQ, I can still hold my own with and would not get rid of my Glock 19. And for all of you Glock haters that have read this far. This is not Glock Koolaid, but an objective analysis.

The main things are the rail and the removable front sights for the A1 varieties. The difference between M9 and 92 is the sights and the magazine sizes. Look for an Italian-made Beretta.

These seem to work well ONLY with the Advantage Arms Glock .22LR conversion kit.

I like the bulk-pack Blazer.

Mine leaves my packages on the back of my mailbox post with essentially a big "please take me" sign on it. In fact, I had a pumpkin sitting there and it was knocked to the ground and a package elastic-banded to the post. A little card at Christmas with some green goes a long way... My garbage men will take anything I put out! It's a shame my postal carrier switched midyear.

The Shield is too big for pocket carry.

You can't go wrong with either a Nikon or a Canon DSLR. It's mostly preference and whether or not you already have lenses. I prefer the Canon EOS system, personally, as when I became involved, I could get more features, etc. and at a more reasonable price than Nikon. The bodies aren't that important, it is the glass (lenses) that is. Save money by getting a Canon Rebel body and some good glass... something like a Canon 70-200mm L F/4 lens.