wooly bugger

I know the logistical difficulties of ramping up production have been discussed before, but given the fact that things have gotten worse rather than better 3 months into the crisis, I wonder if companies will consider doing something. Capital investments are probably still out of the question, but maybe train more workers to keep the assembly lines running longer. They can pretty much decide how much profit they want next quarter, divide that by the margin in ammo, and gear up to produce that much. Pretty enviable position for a company to be in. Probably easier for .22, because don't need to rely on primer availability.

Honorable vendors like Midway and Cabelas haven't raised prices. They just can't get enough stock to keep up with demand. I think once every awake gun owner completes his hoard things should normalize. The question is when that will happen. I'd be curious to see an estimate of how much this craze will have increased the nationwide stock of ammo held by private individuals. If we all have mini-ammo depots at the end of this, it's not necessarily a bad thing, as it will cushion is the next time around.

I didn't know that. Very useful, as I assume it opens the door for buy back purchases

I'm in SF on business right now. Saw a pic of Feinstein at a restaurant last night. It's such a a beautiful city. Sad.

If you want to get yourself a trip to sing sing, bring that 20oz soda in a styrofoam cup

I've been having the exact same concern. My son is now in kindergarten, so I have to find the fine line between risking having him expelled for making an L shape out of a lego and having him feel like we're closet lepers. What I've settled on is, I put the burden on others. I tell him that most people don't understand guns and how to use them safely, like we do. All they know is what they see on TV, so they're scared of them. It's worked pretty well so far. As far as disclosure to neighbors, I've had one ask my wife about them, and once she was assured they're unloaded in a 700 pound safe, there were no problems. I don't volunteer information, but sometimes I'll talk to a neighbor about hunting and then non-defensively work into the conversation that I do keep my guns locked, and no one knows the combo but me. Then I offer them some venison. Even in my ultra-liberal town, I've never felt ostracized or feared. Given the media, I can actually understand the concern. Uneducated people might think we all leave loaded guns lying around, so I think it's a good opportunity at education to let them know about our obsession with safety. I don't leave any gun paraphernalia around, because i don't want lead around the house. I NEVER wear anything that says NRA, because rightly or wrongly, that's just asking for trouble. I will wear my ANJRPC hat and a molon labe shirt. I like the latter, because it's kind of like a secret handshake. I'll sometimes get the knowing nod from a stranger, which is nice. This raises a deeper cultural issue for me. Do I take the easy road and let my kids absorb the prevailing values and be happy? In my dark moments, I kind of envy the sheeple who live in their complacent, ovine, bubble. Or do I pass on the old ways and values, knowing that it will put my kids in an unpopular minority. I do the latter, and without a doubt, by the time my son is 12, he'll be able to live indefinitely in the woods with just a knife and a gun. And he'll be a free American. Sadly, that's a heavy burdent to bear and gets heavier every day.

It's ridiculously expensive to move a safe. Even after shopping around, I paid about $500 on two different occasions. And both times, they acted like they were doing me favor. The last guy scratched my floor when he spun the safe around, insisting that it had rubber feet. He still hasn't paid to get it fixed.

Exactly. There's a lot of due process to the involuntary commitment process. Not anyone (marriage counselor???) can do it, and it requires a court order, which can be appealed. As someone else pointed out, there is a duty to report a patient who poses a threat to himself or others. The decision is made independent of the availability of an inpatient bed. If needed ,the patient will be kept in a general hospital bed until a psych bed opens up. It's absolutely true that since the deinstitutionalization push in the 80s, it's very, very hard to find a bed in an inpatient unit. If our rulers truly cared about public safety, the single most effective thing would be to pass a bill funding more construction. But that would cost money. And wouldn't look as cool as holding an AR over one's head and screaming: "I'm protecting you from this!" We've been betrayed, folks. But we all knew that.

Can you confirm this? There was one really good comment: "I ran into a hooker in the parking lot. I paid for her, not to use her, but to make sure no one else could"

When I read this, I momentarily thought it was a snide commentary on "evil features." Not scopes, but barrel shrouds, for sure. Sorry, didn't mean to derail. When I bought what seemed at the time like a behemoth of a safe, I heeded the advice to get the largest safe possible, even if it seemed impossible to fill it. Now it's seeming pretty small, and I'm in the same situation as you. What about buying a cheap stack on for "deep storage." For example, if you have an attic with pull down steps, you could put some of your less used guns up there. It's unlikely to be found in a burglary. Although now that I've posted this, maybe it will.

Exactly. We're seeing a lot of this. I think both RI and CT have bills to limit magazine size to 1. WA had the bill allowing the police to show up, announced, once a year for a warrantless search which led to a general, nationwide backlash against the sponsors. Here's an article (posted elsewhere) on the bill and the backlash. Even the sponsors are denying knowing what they sponsored. Yes, you heard me right. http://newmediajournal.us/indx.php/item/8429 Here is some of the most bizarre political spewing I've ever seen: "I spoke to two of the sponsors. One, Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, a lawyer who typically is hyper-attuned to civil-liberties issues, said he did not know the bill authorized police searches because he had not read it closely before signing on. "I made a mistake," Kline said. "I frankly should have vetted this more closely." That lawmakers sponsor bills they haven't read is common. Still, it's disappointing on one of this political magnitude. Not counting a long table, it's only an eight-page bill. The prime sponsor, Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, also condemned the search provision in his own bill, after I asked him about it. He said Palmer is right that it's probably unconstitutional. "I have to admit that shouldn't be in there," Murray said. He said he came to realize that an assault-weapons ban has little chance of passing this year anyway. So he put in this bill more as "a general statement, as a guiding light of where we need to go." Without sweating all the details. Read that last paragraph and re-read it: "a guiding light of where we need to go." Scared yet? I applaud these bills, because they give the antis just enough rope to hang themselves. They are so intoxicated with glee about this "political goldmine" that they're prematurely playing their end game, and showing our "paranoia" to have been valid all along. This is catching the attention of lots of people, gun owners and otherwise.

That's a great phrase: "police loophole." It takes a page out of our opponents' play book and uses language to shape perception. And it's factually accurate. Perfect.

If there's any silver lining to this, it's this: if Cryan's bill requiring background check for ammo purchases goes to the floor, he current situation will certainly wake up the fudds and result in a massive backlash. Imagine going through this for a day of sporting clays. I can't believe the situation has devolved to where I'm grasping at these kinds of straws...

Here's my letter to them. Let them know how you feel at [email protected] To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to express my disappointment in your decision to continue investing in a state that has shown such contempt for our second amendment rights. While it may seem like a good business decision in the short run, I can assure you it will be a poor decision in the long run. By collaborating with the Cuomo regime, you embolden him to continue his anti-gun agenda and embolden other state to follow his lead. Today, you will be unable to sell your R15s and R25s in NY. Tomorrow it will be your 750s, and it will be in other states as well. In the mean time, you have lost a large chunk of your customer base. My next shotgun will be made by Benelli. Sincerely,

On the contrary, if you've used a gun in a shooting, you'd be foolish to keep it. I would guess most "smart" criminals throw them in the ocean. I actually saw a guy throw some suspicious metal items into the ocean while on a party boat. This program is excellent. It allows criminals to destroy evidence and gives them cash in hand to buy a replacement clean gun. Throwing murder weapons in the ocean gets expensive.

Do you have to physically go there to fill out paperwork or can you do it by mail. My FFL is one hour away, so this truly sucks to make two trips. This whole anti-gun situation is approaching an inflection point of intolerability. I feel like we're on the brink of intolerability.

Exactly. As much as I want to support my LGS, it's far from my home, and I don't want to make two trips out there to satisfy some venal politician. I'd rather drive a bit longer and do it in one trip. This is real cause for worry for the LGS's, especially when the supply situation corrects, and people can choose where to buy. I will write to NJSP and attorney general

I wouldn't buy it from them if it was $59

Thank you all for the advice! I actually read her some of the funnier ones and got a good laugh. It helped, because humor is a good antidote to fear, and it's good for her to see the kinds of people she'll be around. She isn't anti and has no problem with my long guns. She actually encourages me to hunt, because she loves venison. It's just an irrational aversion to handguns specifically. I called GFH today, but unfortunately, they don't have a women only class. I'm going to sign her up for the women only class at Firearms Guild. Irishpete's wife: Thank you very much for the offer. Let's see how she does with the intro class. If she's open to further experiences, I'll definitely introduce you.

I didn't stop at republicans. I sent to everyone. Even Democrats realize they aren't going to be too popular when township budgets get strained by this nonsense.

Yes. I think he has to put an ORD sticker on.

If Frank says the word, I'll apply, denial box or not.

It might be a good idea to remind anyone who will listen that this will become the new normal if we have to reapply for our Fid within tel years and then again every five years thereadter

Well if she even half believes that, it's probably a good idea to send her a similar letter explaining just how stupid this bill is. I also question the constitutionality of its effect on interstate commerce.

OK, It's getting close to the time when Sweeney will be making some important decisions, so time to start letting him hear from us. Here's what I've written regarding A3772. I've addressed a couple of the other ones in the "pending legislation" forum, but I'm not allowed to start a thread on this bill there, so I'll post here. Dear Mr. Sweeney, I am writing to express my opposition to bill A3772, which would require a new design for firearm purchase ID cards (FPIC.) The bill would require that all current holders reapply for the new card within two years of passage and then reapply every five years thereafter. Under the current law, the card is valid unless a holder becomes ineligible, in which case it must be surrendered. Even if it is illegally kept, the card number is flagged, so that if it is used in an attempted purchase, the card will not match a valid card at the time of the point of sale instant background check, and the purchaser will be arrested. For the same reason, a counterfeit card is useless, since the name and number will not match a valid card in the database. Using someone else’s card also doesn’t work, as a matching photo ID must be presented with the card. I am unaware of any case in which a counterfeit card has been used. The current system works perfectly. Police departments across the state are heavily strained in keeping up with just the initial applications and are usually unable to process applications within the statutorily mandated 30 day time frame. Under the current bill, a "renewal" has all the requirements of a full application. With approximately 1 million FPIC holders in the state, the constant reapplications will be a logistical and financial nightmare, both for police departments and individual FPIC holders. This bill is more about burnishing the anti-violence credentials of the sponsors than about improving public safety. This is inadequate reason to burden a million lawful gun owners. If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please feel free to email me at xxx or call xxx