Combat Auto

Thanks - works great - now folks can't claim they are being personally tracked (not that there was ever a danger of that :-))...

I just did this though I had it done but the result just disapeared (I don't see the poll. It is a good idea do you want to try it? (just yes or no - Did you contact politicians about Feinstein Bill?)

Well, all I can say is that all the commiserating that we do on the forumn (to each other) isn't going to do a bit of good unless we direct it at the right people. I am not trying to mind anyone's business by this poll - just a simple measure of how involved we "really" are and willingness to protect our rights... We need to get "outraged and offended" by that thing Feinstein has floated....The Left gets outraged and offended (ie showing passion) all the time..OBama himself gets outraged and offended alot...And it has been working for them over last few years...In general, the Left shows much more passion then the Right on their key issues...The Right needs to adapt that more (Tea party where are you?)...They have Oboma we have Bainer...Who would you put your money on...Obama, if nothing else is a steet fighter, passionate, goes for jugiliar...We have none of that in the current generation of Politicians on the Right...Maybe when Mark Orubio comes into his own we will see this.

So far only 45 people have achnowledge they contacted thier politicians about the Horrible Feinstein Bill (612 have viwed the thread)...(see this thread under "General Firearm Discussions": Poll: If you have contacted Politicians about Feinstein Ban - please post here.) This is not very good folks....I'm guessing there are thousonds of members? Anyone know? I find this result rather odd, given what is at stake and how much discussion we have had on these kinds of issue - especially since the CT shooting. Only 45 people??? Anyone care to offer a reason why (cause I can't figure it out)?

GunByte, Thanks foir sharing your interesting encounters...Yikes, why were 3 people after you - what was the context? (Always good for orhers to learn from these experiences). I agree that most bad guys will back off at sight of gun (and unfortunatly go after a weaker target), unless you get a mega-phyco path like the CT/Colorodo shooters for example. I also agree the 9mm can do the job, but statistically the 45 is a more powerful round - but your point about shoot what you feel confident shooting is valad and there are so many variables so we each make our choice...The .357 mag is right there with the 45 as far as stopping power and I think a great self-defense round also. I will say though, all things equal: Statistically, 44 mag, 50 mag - stop a bear - but lots of recoil/recovery-time. 45 acp, 357 mag - proven man stoppers, managable recoil. 9mm, .38 - less effective 1 shot man stoppers - easer to shoot (they say, I've never shot these)

btw, you can get the best 1911 10 round 45 acp sticks from Tripps...

I'll admit up front, I am biased to the .45 cal acp..With the federal hydrashok round, you have a statistically 94% one-shot stopper...This is exactly what you want for personal defense 1 shot - 1-stop...Never got the 9mm thing - sure fine for uspsa and what not...But I would easily give up several pmm rounds for 45 acp...There are many exeples of Cops riddling the bad guy with many 9mms - and they don't necessairily go down...Tough to find examples of that with th 45 acp....Sure yo can even go heavyier with 44 mag, 50 mag - but then you do indeed have recoil challanges....The 45 acp is managable as far as recoil but will require practice (the rewards are wonderful though :-))...It is the perfest trade-off of stopper vs controlability, IMHO. So given I sold you on the 45 cal ;-), chosing the actual gun depends on lots of things...First off your price point?...The best/accurate of these 45 autos seem to be Wilsons ~3K$, Kimbers ~1200$, and HKs ~1000 (and I am sure others can add to this list)....The 1911 platform, is a known, proven, 100+ year gun. The feel is awsome and the are sweet shooters...It is in fact the original "Tactical-Pistol" still carried by many eliete forces (I shot my first one in the USN back in the 70s)...BTW, the HK is not a 1911 but is a great platform of itself....You can also get a revolver in 45 acp from S&W (I just learned this today myself and I may be getting one too!)....You also need to decide what size you want - all these come in various sizes.

Agree - Feinstein's proposal (if folks thought there was fairness involved up to now) makes it clear what their agenda is...Liberals want guns - all guns - out of honest folks hands...They want you smoking pot (anything to dumb you down - and they will legalize it everywhere if they get their way)...They want you not to believe in God (only believe in the state)...These are all designed so you become totally depended and controlled by them...And before anybody complains - if you want to smoke pot and/or be an athiest - God Bless you! ;-) and have at it...I am just trying to make a point and point to the trend...This Gun fight is just 1 cog in the Socialist agenda...And the ongoing struggle free people have been fighting for a long time.

Oh yea, one more thing - If "She" gets her way, My brother can't even leave me his 12 round berreta pistol if he goes to heaven before me...Feinstein will confiscate it! This is Commi-Crap if I ever seen it...We got to fight this for what it is and it goes well beyond the Gun debate!

I was originally for some small compromise on mag size...But after the Feinstein bill came out - I wisened up...They will not stop until they take all our weapons/sports guns, not even pistols will be left...We would be shooting muskets at USPSA, oh until some nut used a musket to kill someone, then we would be throwing rocks at the USPSA meets... There are nuts driving cars killing people all the time - should we ban cars...This whole thing is BS...The Socialists want to tell you how to run your life: Smoking Dope - OK - they want to legalize it. Drinking Large Cokes - NO! Sports Shooting - NO! Self Defense - NO - the Nannei state will protect you! Who the heck are they to tell me how to live...This is never going to end, this fight...It Burns Feinsteins ass that you enjoy shooting... I was outraged and offended when I read the Feinstein bill - and I let everyone of my politicians know...I didn't give 4 years to the USNavy for Feinstein to tell me not to defend myself!

I hope I am not breaking any Foroum rules (and the Administrator is welcome to shut this post off If I am. But, I think it would be interesting to see over next 2 weeks or so who has contacted their Politicians (e-mail/snail-mail/calls) urging them to vote against the Feinstein Gun/Amo Ban. If you have, please post a "Yes" or whatever to this thread...If you have not, please do NOT post...This way we can look at the # of respondents to see very easily how passionet this forum really is about the Lib's comming after our rights... There was so much passionet discussion on the NJ-Forums since the sad attrocity in CT...I think it will be instructive to all of us to see how much of the passion translates into action by our community. So her is mine: "Yes" - I e-mailed every one of my Elected officials up to Obama both in the Federal and NJ chain of command. (The NRA links I posted on other threads make it easy - see below) Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must here from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nramedia.org/t/972116/67869130/10093/0/

Handyman- you make an excellent point about the History here! I put elements of that in my letter above about discrimination against the gun community - but your point is much better...Send it to the politicians...The NRA links make it easy. We do need to get outraged - her bill is disgusting!

Your letter is too "limp" - you are a law abiding citizen with a very honerable character-building sport - who is Feinstein to tell you what magazine to use? Crank the letter up some. Demand your rights!

Here is what I sent via the NRA links to all politicians: I am a 50 something year-old US-Navy Veteran, and I am outraged and offended by Senator Feinstein’s unethical, immoral, and unjust, attempt to take away and diminish our 2nd amendment rights via her 2013 Gun and Magazine Ban. I urge you to vote against this attempt at your earliest opportunity. It was my Honor to give my Nation 4 years of my life via service in the United States Navy…This was to protect our Constitution against foreign and domestic enemies. This is one of the many reasons I am so outraged about the Feinstein attempt to degrade my right, and the right of all law abiding US citizens to keep and bear arms…I have a right to defend myself even as politicians, the rich, the famous, sports stars etc., have the right to defend themselves…This was a right given by our Founding-Farther, not anyone living today, not by Feinstein…And I am offended in her attempts to take them away. Singling out the Gun-Community like she would like is un-American, biased, and a form of discrimination. These are not values any American should be proud of, nor support! Every decent American is sadden by what happened in Connecticut, but Feinstein’s attempt at using this tragic event to further he political agenda is disgusting, and immoral – and will not solve anything. A more honorable approach is to protect the children with armed police or professional guards – just as our politicians, the rich, the famous are protected. Thank you for your support and doing the correct thing in this matter by voting against the Feinstein 2013 Gun and Magazine ban.

Go for it - but show a little more passion, and some human eliment.

NRA links make it easy - you can use a form letter or create your own - see my creation below - went to all my politicians up to Obaba. I am a 50 something year-old US-Navy Veteran, and I am outraged and offended by Senator Feinstein’s unethical, immoral, and unjust, attempt to take away and diminish our 2nd amendment rights via her 2013 Gun and Magazine Ban. I urge you to vote against this attempt at your earliest opportunity. It was my Honor to give my Nation 4 years of my life via service in the United States Navy…This was to protect our Constitution against foreign and domestic enemies. This is one of the many reasons I am so outraged about the Feinstein attempt to degrade my right, and the right of all law abiding US citizens to keep and bear arms…I have a right to defend myself even as politicians, the rich, the famous, sports stars etc., have the right to defend themselves…This was a right given by our Founding-Farther, not anyone living today, not by Feinstein…And I am offended in her attempts to take them away. Singling out the Gun-Community like she would like is un-American, biased, and a form of discrimination. These are not values any American should be proud of, nor support! Every decent American is sadden by what happened in Connecticut, but Feinstein’s attempt at using this tragic event to further he political agenda is disgusting, and immoral – and will not solve anything. A more honorable approach is to protect the children with armed police or professional guards – just as our politicians, the rich, the famous are protected. Thank you for your support and doing the correct thing in this matter by voting against the Feinstein 2013 Gun and Magazine ban.

Outrage and offense is a favorite tool of the Left - Obama used it in the debates if you recoil...It is apparently very effective in our mordern society...So always something to learn - even from "the other side".

Yes, we need to get outraged and offended about Fienstiens proposal...And take action... Her proposal is discusting and offends at the core what this 50 somthing year old Navy Veterain believes in... I just made another donation to the NRA and will contact everyone on that list above.

Let's get behind the NRA - see ta'do's below...Donate, write, call, protest (peacefully of course) etc. --- This is the big fight! Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012. According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows: · Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features. · Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban. · Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list. · Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including: · Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS. · Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s. · Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel. · Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines. · Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government. · Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture. · Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection. · Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.” The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.” “Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein’s “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, available here. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation’s murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type. Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade. Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it. Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must here from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx Millions of Americans own so-called “assault weapons” and tens of millions own “large” magazines, for self-defense, target shooting, and hunting. For more information about the history of the “assault weapon” issue, please visit www.GunBanFacts.com.

He did much better on Meet The Press last Sunday - came across with much conviction and made his points really well...He inspired me....We need to get behind NRA - else we are in big trouble.

This Semi-Bald m an has it right: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/27/Sen-Feinstein-s-Assault-Weapons-Ban-Is-Really-A-Handgun-Ban

Some hope accordint this guys view that it will not pass: http://www.policymic.com/articles/21525/dianne-feinstein-assault-weapons-ban-is-political-suicide-for-democrats

BTW, Fienstien is usuing the Current New York City Model in her proposed bill: Police inspections, confiscation, etc. - Been going on in NYC for quite some time.

Guss you do see that the Socialists will not stop till all your guns are confiscated...NRA-Chief has no choice but to take hard stance...Chemberlin tactics will never work with the Socialists....You think if NRA-Chief wispered sweet nothings in Fienstiens ear she would soften up? Doubt it.