molonlabetn

I see a PM9 in my future as well...

Gold Dot loads from Double-Tap. 147gr for the 9mms 230gr for the .45s In pistol calibers, FMJ ammo won't really penetrate construction barriers any better (meaning, to make enough difference to be effective), and snake-shot won't do anything past a few feet (like throwing sand in their face maybe)... if they are that close, I'm not wasting a shot on pissing them off. Pick something you're consistent with, and is reliable in your weapon. Most common JHP loads will get the job done just fine if you do your part. EDIT: Speaking of sand... has anyone ever heard of loading a shotgun shell with sand? I bet that would have an interesting effect, especially if you solidified it with some superglue or something it might act like a breaching round. Hmmm...

To have the same energy as a 9mm, your pickup would be going about 2 mph. To be equal to a .45, the semi would be going 1/2 mph, the civic would be going 2 1/2 mph to be equal to a .380acp... If you welded a .355" or .45" rod on the front of the vehicles and ran them into somebody, which would be most likely to harm them? Even at those speeds I doubt it would matter much, but my money would be on the lighter vehicle going faster, to be honest, to ensure penetration vs. just moving the whole person. Velocity is important in overcoming the elasticity of flesh.

The problem with the author's perspective is that he only sees the dead ones, and has little or no way to determine how quickly they were incapacitated. What I took from the discussion was: 1) Penetration is the very important. 2) Luck/Skill to hit a vital structure is equally important 3) The most commonly 'effective' pistol calibers impact between 1200-1400fps, are between .355 and .45" in diameter, retain all of their weight, but still deform to impart most or all of their energy into the target. 4) You may need to fire more than 5 times.

Gotta watch out for those rain-crazed zombies, yanno.

I guess it would make too much sense for them to simply repeal any reference to possessing a weapon where alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption, and simply make it illegal to consume or be under the influence of alcohol while in possession of a firearm.

You should look into 9x25 Dillon 9mm bullet at 1500-1800fps...

Yeah... But heaven forbid the original intent of any law be considered when interpreting it. That's what fries my bacon about the liberal mindset... laws are meant to be 'gotten around' and 'reinterpreted', not followed.

It would be nice if the requirment was a specific sign, available from the state, which property owners could post... at least then it would be consistent. Hmmm... even make them register for the sign, so then we could look up a database of all posted properties...

I wish that worked the other way... for instance, instead of taking the 2nd Amendment to recognize that people can have and bear arms, period, they feel the need to dictate who, how, when, where and why other people can exercise that. If other people can't take the law of the land simply for what it says, They had better be pretty damn specific about what they want from me, because I will ignore generalizations at every possible opportunity.

Add to that it occurred on 'Earth Day'... I wouldn't put it past the enviroweenies to lower themselves to the level of common terrorists. Wouldn't be the first time.

This is indeed the crux of the matter, regardless of what should be or should not be or is illegal... because too many 'real', un-reformed criminals or corrupt white-collar criminals cycle in and out of the system without ever being punished proportionately to their crimes... basically, the reward is worth the risk. Otherwise we wouldn't have so many repeat offenders. Then on the other side of the coin we have the 'casual' or 'unintentional' lawbreaker who may be labelled a felon arbitrarily without consideration for the actual damage (or lack thereof) caused by their crime. The differentiation is that those people who actually care about and depend on having a clean record and good reputation for their career or exercising rights as a non-criminal elemant of society are hurt by the administration and label of the punishment moreso than the actual sentance itself... whereas those people who have chosen to engage in a lifestyle of crime do not care about the implications of having that reputation or a criminal record because they generally don't plan on having a career, because society is going to take care of them no matter what (by taking from those who do care about their reputation and work hard to maintain it and be responsible). The mentality is the same whether it's selfishly thinking they deserve entitlements from the government or deserve the possessions you own when they break in your house and take them. This country needs to get back to the concept that one ONLY deserves the fruits of their own labor, whether that be reward for productivity or punishment for destroying someone else's... And the government's job is ONLY to oversee the latter and protect the former.

This is why we need to get all of that nasty oil out of the ground as quickly as possible.

Doing drugs is a sign of a personality malfunction (to some degree at least, whether that be minor or major)... and certainly selling drugs is a sign of a societal malfunction. There are of course people who don't do or sell drugs that don't have their crap together either, nor would I trust them with a firearm regardless... but the issue at hand is one of a few ways to indicate how a person handles themself, and I think it would be wrong to ignore that, or make it easy to recover. There is no 'reset' button on life... there are consequences, so deal with them. It is difficult to have a crime expunged, and it should be. If you have to jump through some hoops to regain things you threw away, then you're less likely to take them for granted again by doing something stupid. The issue of what is considered a crime, or a felony, and even what is illegal is a totally seperate issue (though a valid one). Even if I held the view that all drugs should be legal or at least not a felony (which I don't), but if I did, that doesn't change the law these people were punished under, and that has to be dealt with the way it is.

May she rest in peace... But, otherwise it's pretty wrong to cheapen flying the flag at half staff for the president's personal heroes.

Mine is on backorder...

I'd suggest any major brand of 00 buck. Federal had the tightest groups, in my experience, any of the plated buckshot will be very consistent.

In the picture they sent me, the front tires were on the line, entering the intersection... I didn't pay it on principle, if they want to make an issue of it they should do more than just send a request for money with a picture, as if it was blackmail. If they contact me about it I have no issue telling them that I received it, and that I'll pay it only if a judge makes me.

It is certainly true that the perception of 'imminent' may be different for some than others... I guess my point was that if I have the opportunity to avoid a threat becoming 'imminent', I will. Anything more than that, though, and I wouldn't hesitate to fire until the threat is gone.

Exactly... a huge amount of money was raised privately for Haiti. Imagine if more of us were less financially throttled by taxes to have given twice as much.

I want to wildcat the .45 GAP case into a necked down .22 caliber... call it the 'Glock Intermediate Magnum Pistol', or .22 GIMP for short.

This country needs to place a moratorium on aid to foreign countries until our own people are taken care of and the national debt is paid off. We can't legitimately help other countries while digging ourselves into oblivion. Imagine that... take the 20-30 billion per year doled out across the globe and slow down our spiral into insolvency.

This is only surprising to those who were fooling themselves, or don't care because it won't be them paying for it.

Someone can ask you to leave their property if they don't like what you say, too... or, to put it another way, you can ask someone to leave your property if they are saying things which you find offensive, disturbing, threatening, etc... The premise is that you have just as much right to reject what someone does or says, as they have to do it or say it... but when you're on your property, you have the final say... when you're in public, and you don't like something, you have the option to either disagree, challenge it, or leave... it just depends on what it's worth to you. For example: On my property, someone comes over and tells me they don't like I have a gun... If they don't like it they can leave, and if they don't shut up I'll rightfully aske them to do so. On someone else's property, I am there and they tell me they don't like I have a gun... If they dislike it enough they can ask me to leave and if I don't leave they can rightfully have me removed. In public, where we both have a right to be, and someone has a problem with me having a gun... well, that's their problem, not mine. They can argue with me if they want, even insult me, or they can walk away, but neither of us can force the other to do anything differently.

The US Military comes to mind...