molonlabetn

Probably spend the winter getting my house ready to sell in the spring, move a bunch of stuff into storage, spend some time to get a decent engine finally built for the Camaro & get its interior the way I want it, and that's about it... aside from perhaps going shooting on occasion.

I wish money were no option... I wouldn't have even asked I am only considering an AR/M16 since I could get a .22lr conversion kit or upper for it and enjoy shooting somewhat cheaply. Thought about an MP5 for a bit... but they are more expensive and less versatile. At this point, the urge to keep my eye on the F/A prize is winning out... Maybe time to sell a few more organs instead of give up on that. I think I'd regret saving this much and not going thru with it... I imagine it's easier to find a buyer for a Transferable MG than it is to find a buyer for a used SBR, too? If I ever did want to sell it...

I hope he's wrong... but if he isn't, there will be U.N. Peacekeeping troops on the ground here by the time his term was supposed to be up, to quell any uprisings. It's far-fetched, so I'm not counting on it. Still, it's better to prepare for the worst.

I'm itching to jump on the NFA bandwagon now... have been for awhile, actually. I'm not sure if I should keep saving up for a transferrable M16, or go ahead and 'settle' for a suppressed SBR (for about 1/10 the cost). It would be many months before I could afford the MG, probably late spring or summer next year. On the other side of the coin, though, either way I suppose I'm looking at a few month wait on the ATF... Thoughts? Would it really be worth it to make an investment in a full-auto? I can't see myself really using it that much (but when I did, it would be SO COOL)... I'd really just like another rifle before the end of the year. I haven't bought anything in forever, trying to budget for this; but I'm starting to think that I could get alot more equipment, training and ammo for the money... the only difference being the rate-of-fire... I guess I just need a new toy sooner than later, it's pretty boring around here yanno.

The only place where the S/N of the gun and your name are associated is on the 4473 form when you make the purchase... the dealer keeps that form as a record of the transfer, and background check on you, but niether the state nor ATF keep a 'registry' of whay you own, and there is no way to 'register' a gun which you buy privately (though I'm sure there are shops of ill-repute who would gladly take your money and 'transfer' you your own gun).

I love everyone in all branches of the military ...that doesn't make me a slut, does it? THANKS TO ALL WHO HAVE SERVED!!!

I renewed mine in January this year... in person, and I had my new one back in 5-6 weeks as I recall.

The Glock and XD have striker firing-mechanisms, and really can't be compared to a 1911 functionally... but in operation, all three are effectively single-action, since none of them can discharge the weapon when the firing mechanism is at rest. They all do this in different ways though. Feel-wise... the XD and Glock have quite a bit of takeup intially, and then have a shorter reset, whereas the 1911's trigger is more-or-less a very short-travel button (instead of a lever). The 1911 will always win when it comes to crispness and lack of pre-travel & over-travel. The XD and Glock's triggers can be improved significantly with aftermarket parts, but because the XD's mechanism is simpler (since it doesn't have to draw back the striker at all) it can be tuned to be very very close to that of a 1911, with minimal travel. Stock for stock though, you won't beat a 1911 trigger.

The first step is not going to be taking what you have... it will be making sure you can't get any more, and cant use the ones you have. If that happens, after exhausting all legitimate means of preventing it, whether or not they can take your guns is up to you... If you give them up, they won't have to take them. If they come at you with full force, they can overpower you and take them. If you manage to evade their attempts to subdue you, as a gun owner, it's up to you to decide what to do with the tools of freedom you have become a fugitive to keep. All I know is... if one waits for the knock to come at the door before they act, it's too late. So, 'can' they?... Yes, if we let it get to that point. Right now, however, there are no provisions for such a direct confiscation, so there is still time to avert, delay or prepare for it.

I'm not sure if a bullet to the base of the skull from behind is exactly within the realm of self-defense either... But it is certainly true that the only one-shot-stop is one which disables a critical portion of the central nervous system... anything else is due to the shock reaction of being shot, or a delayed collapse due to blood loss or loss of mobility from structural damage. Either way, a 9mm is certainly sufficient to cause any of those types of wounds.

Its funny how threads deteriorate even when certain ex-members are merely mentioned... they don't even have to be here. Hilarious...

It matters more to me that we send billions of dollars to countries who hate us no matter what, than it does for some snake-in-the grass to become president and make every enemy of the U.S. jump for joy.

My dogs were barking like crazy all night... I think they could sense the forces of evil decending on the world.

I'm walkin' a little funny this morning... wonder what that's all about?

9mm is a great round... with a good projectile it will penetrate to an effective depth, and carries enough energy to create quite a bit of damage. Sure, there are more powerful choices, but when it comes down to a choice of a bit more power vs. a bit more controllability and magazine capacity, it has more advantages than disadvantages. My next carry gun (I currently carry a 9mm SubCompact XD) will most likely also be a 9mm... I'm eyeing something along the lines of a USP Compact 9mm.

Now I just have to figure out how to make less, so I'll have more take-home pay... Maybe I'd be better off by waiting for defense funding to get cut off so I get laid off, thereby having more time to father illegitimate children, and just quit paying my bills so that Obama will hold me tightly to his tittie with nothing ever-more to worry about...? Sounds like a plan... Oh, and all-ya'll better keep working so that this wealth-spreading thing can work out for me.

This is probably the only good thing that happened tonight... but, it is certainly INCREDIBLE progress. Good to know that the efforts many of us made, helped make a difference! Thank you to everyone who voted!!!

Talk about 'dynamic entry'... Anybody know where I can get some cordite-scented candles?

Yeah... but it's not mandatory, unfortunately. "Here's your shot, and now here's your welfare check"

Which guy was it? It could have been for any number of reasons including spamming unauthorized advertisements, trolling, violating the Code of Conduct frequently or agregiously, etc... He might have his own forum now, so it's possible you could hear it from him too...

I'm not too worried about this one... or even the one next year... 2010 will have my rectum puckered, however.

No doubt you fine folks put up with alot of trash. Thank you indeed for being willing to do it!

I think the only kind of free, universal health care which should be provided are taxpayer funded vasectomies, tubal ligation, and birth control for those below the poverty line. Plus, remove the benefit of tax refunds and payouts based on the number of children one has, for households who pay no net taxes to begin with (essentially, one's overall tax liability cannot be negative). Between those two things (which would probably balance out, cost-wise), there'd be alot fewer kids being brought up to leech off of the government (and still hate us because they want more, which is really what it comes down to).

This is an awesome site, an incredible idea in the first place, and I have no doubt it will continue to surpass all expectations thanks foremost to all of you who contribute to it.

Nobody here is trying to belittle your profession... that's not even close to the point. What we are discussing is the inherent right of any person to have the means to defend themselves, anywhere they have the right to be, or have been invited to be. As far as the current law is concerned, it is wrong for any of us to be subject to the array of inconsistent restrictions which we are presented with. But the fact remains that those restrictions are very similar, if not identical, when we have assumed our personal lives. When you are on the job, however, of course the fact you are carrying shouldn't be a concern anywhere you are authorized to be. You have a job to do at that point. Absent that, however, there's no distinction.