jackandjill

A supposedly defender of freedom giving up an internet debate after couple of days ? Please come back. Lot of writing, lot of judgement on what others dont understand and certainly lot of complaining. Yet, haven't answered my simple question. You wrote at length about this and that, claimed no one needs permission, admit current laws on infringe on a right. By your admission, you are already denied the right. So, What is stopping YOU from being a plaintiff in a SCOTUS case that Dr. Vieira could argue pro-bono ? Be the candle that you want others to be. Real Leaders lead from the front, not from behind. Be that light. Let us see a case brought forward. Note: I hope you stop by again with more concrete information, plan or better actual SCOTUS case.

Shipping ?

I am keeping open mind, and would love any updates from your friends. From Constitutional argument perspective, NH is already as much at risk as NJ. If anything, this aspect of the issue must be REALLY bothering someone in NH than in NJ, for we folks in NJ are busy battling the State for silly stuff. You cannot ask a starving man to right world hunger. I am perplexed too. One one hand you seem to argue that one needs "no stinking permission from anyone" yet you point out "legislature keeps rejecting the bills". Which is it ? Dare I ask that question, for I will be (again) called as someone who doesn't understand "13 words". I bring us back to - What is stopping YOU from being a plaintiff and Dr. Vieira from bringing a case Pro-Bono ?

Sorry, I see you are still dancing around the issue. What is stopping YOU from bringing a case as plaintiff and Dr. Vieira arguing it on pro-bono basis ? What do you need ?

Who said anything about picking a CCW state ? NH is Constitutional Carry, no "permission required". The way they tax, tells me someone up there actually understands Constitution. I am not sure how picking a State like NJ actually helps anybody's cause. If you couldn't get any support from a shoe-in State, how do you expect to get support in NJ ? I get it, you think and repeat that no-one, other than select few (or is it TWO people in total?) understand the 13 words. If you really believe that assertion, then you got your answer - Not Happening Anytime Soon. I am not going to highlight it, but ONE sentence in particular in your response tells me why NJ2AS (and other organizations) ran in the other direction.

Anyone know of a good deal for small rifle primers, appropriate for reloading 223/556 for target shooting ?

This is interesting. Paging @TheShootist. What does the following mean ? ------------------ 17-127 KOLBE, STEPHEN V., ET AL. V. HOGAN, GOV. OF MD, ET AL. The motion of Edwin Vieira, Jr., et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. --------------- So what good is granting amici curiae when the certiorari is denied ?

Why not Dr. Vieira himself or thousands of oathkeepers or even better, someone from a State that already has constitutional carry and very pro-2A, has a State constitution with clear 2A verbiage, so one doesn't have to engage in legal fight against a Nazi State like NJ and go directly against Federal laws ? Is Dr. Vieira ready to argue a case on pro-bono basis ? In my humble opinion, it could not get any worse than starting with NJ for something like this. @Mrs. Peel is waiting for me to adopt her (thats an inside joke she knows :-)) , but I would donate some money and time if Dr. Vieira were to bring a serious case to SCOTUS.

This is for kids. A real operator would use another operator in place of that mat.

As MOST OF AMERICANS agree with me, no body likes guns... sorry, wrong thread. It would be priceless to see certain people reaction if they were to publish stats on how ammo was bought - GAZILLION TRILLION rounds of ammo.. In all seriousness, good job folks.

Makes sense. Research the load data, write it down, double check, clutter free work space, basic safety around powders/primers etc. Small batches, building it slowly, testing small batches until you achieve desired & safe spec. Frequent double checking your ammo from reload against reference.

Don't mean to pick on words. But are you talking about "casting" lead bullets or loading your own ammunition ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet

Funny you ask... here you go.. https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/black-friday.cfm/sale/bolt-action-precision-rifles-for-sale/brand/RUGER?utm_source=112617-1&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=112617-1 BTW, is 6mm creedmoor a thing ? same or better than 6.5 or just different purpose ?

In certain aspect, it makes sense to me. HOWEVER, there is certain danger in bringing that argument to SCOTUS. The simpletons there (just like me) could say that the Militia purpose was to secure freedom of State (which is correct) AND that existing "State Guard" (or whatever each State calls it) in fact IS the Militia and that their right to bear arms was never infringed upon. In fact, that could pave a way to undo any progress made on individual rights side. Pro-2A organizations (and their lawyers) have been trying hard to get "individual right" designation to 2A and hoping that it will be an "incorporated right" so it was not something just against a centralized Govt but States too. Bringing "Militia" argument into that mix could be like digging own grave. Question is, can someone convince SCOTUS that its a Militia right AND an individual IS a Militia ? If so, bring the case NOW and bring it SEPARATELY from other 2A case(s). If Dr. Vieira (and associates) were to bring such a case, it would be VERY interesting to pick a plaintiff who is a member of existing State Guard.

THAT is something a simpleton like me can understand. Thank You (and I mean it). If I were to extend that, ANYONE ( by virtue of being a citizen, hence part of militia, hence govt cannot restrict) can bring a case. So my question to @TheShooter, what is it that Dr. Vieira waiting or ? No need for "the cause" to arise (it has already risen by virtue of Federal Laws against many categories of fierarms) and certainly no need for NRA (or any other organization that Dr. Vieira is complaining about) to approve, disapprove or even be part of it. There is not even need for any "community" to support it. If someone is so confident that they can beat it at SCOTUS, then they should bring a case TODAY.

I am a stupid, ignorant simpleton. Simpletons like me can't read thousands of pages of books. Nor do we have attention span to read few paragraphs. The fat lady who choked on the fat burger she purchased can take the case to SCOTUS but are you telling me ONE person (lets say thats you) and his/her lawyer (say thats Dr. Vieira) cannot bring a case to SCOTUS ? Fat lady example is silly, but the fact is individual (or a small group) cases end up in SCOTUS all the time, without any "millions of people" support. My brief look at the oathkeepers website gave me impression that there are lot of people out there who support Dr. Vieira. So you need a basis ?. If the argument about Militia and "shall not be infringed" were to hold in SCOTUS, doesn't existing NFA already provide you a basis to challenge ? For ignorant simpletons like me, things have to be communicated with clear, concise steps. And simple explanation as to WHY for each step. Step1: Step2: Here is what we need - Need1: Need2: -------- I still don't see why Dr. Vieira complains about NRA or any other organization. If he has a strong argument he think can convince SCOTUS, and can do Pro bono work, I dont see why he couldn't bring a case on his own.

You will not be disappointed. I resisted the idea of spending money on Mac for about 15 years. I used to buy windows / pc computers / laptops. Last one being a HP ultrabook, nice metal shell etc. But most of them physically fell apart with my usage. About 3 years ago I bought a Macbook Pro used from Criaigslist (I know..). Its still looks and works the way I bought it. Operating System upgrades are free, no virus infections, no UI changes every year.

On one hand some of these people argue that no body needs a "permission" to form a Constitutional Militia. In fact, some of these folks argue that We The People are ALREADY a Constitutional Militia by definition. THEN stop d*cking around making films, writing books and bring a case in front of SCOTUS. I still dont understand why these people complain about NRA. Is it the lack of money ? lack of plaintiffs ? $1 million ? $50 millions ? What is preventing these supposed scholars from bringing a case to SCOTUS based on Constitutional Militia argument ? We are back to square 1 where OP post started.

The problem is, the anti-2A crowd began to interpret (even the Preamble) to mean "a restriction on the federal govt". They also interpret the 2A purpose to be "to secure State freedom". And then they proceed to conclude, hence, any restrictions State itself comes up for its Citizens are ok. They follow that thread to also conclude that its not an individual freedom, rather a Militia (to serve the State) right. With Feds controlling pretty much everything under "interstate commerce clause" and taking money (taxes) directly from individuals, THEN distributing to States, they got the proverbial "carrot & stick" to string along States. Along the way, States got rid of concept of "Militia" and stood up a State National Guard, effectively separating the Militia from general public. In practice, (obviously) its a web thats been creatively crafted. and deliberately setup. Would be interesting to see couple of States challenge interstate commerce, bring back concept of Militia and challenge all Federal firearm laws as unconstitutional. But thats not happening until Feds hold the keys to the money vault. And States like Texas, although chest thump as "free", they have their agenda. Look no further than youtube videos on how they treat their own Citizens who exercise 2A rights. So highly unlikely any State would walk the talk. HUGE problem in all this is, members of SCOTUS actually believes in this shit. I hope that changes quickly. Note: I personally think the authors at the time were so caught up in worrying about a centralized Govt abusing its power that they could not envision States like Maryland, New Jersey and New York degenerating into the cesspools they have become against individual rights.

Agree with @Howard. Real end-to-end POTS is largely gone. Too much cost to maintain. Digital routing is cheaper, faster, optimized and better (for the company). All that copper is still buried, but disconnected. So highly unlikely what you have is a real POTS end-to-end, but a switch over to digital first opportunity it gets.

Any thoughts on Magpul Gen 2 MBUS Front & Rear Back-Up Sights Set for $50 including shipping ?

Anyone here is an old style goldsmith or know someone who is. Preferably someone who works out of their home, honest and reasonable. Looking to get some custom stuff done.

Welcome to the forum.

I think we are complicating the solution for OPs specific situation. There is a clear, documented, legal path for gifts when it comes to Feds and NJ COE seals the deal at state level. Done and done. WHY money should not be involved or if thats a fair requirements etc are for another thread, me thinks.

@gleninjersey I linked something earlier in this thread that shows original "net neutrality" came up AFTER some cable companies started to throttle / control. Just like you and I pay for "using" the net at home, companies like Google / Amazon / etc pay for connecting to backbones. In fact, service companies often pay by bandwidth measure and not a "$30 / month unlimited" deals that individuals are offered. "Unlimited" is just a marketing gimmick like it always was. People also quickly forget how some cable companies were fleecing customers by taking advantage of local monopoly. I dont believe fairness is in the DNA of some of these companies now complaining about net neutrality.