molonlabetn

I was really impressed by the SAO P220 I fired last year... Best of both worlds in my opinion.

Silencers are legal for any firearm as long as you submit a Form 4 and $200 for a tax-stamp, and wait for approval.

Yeah, it's pretty hard to fail an ASE.

I'll be right there with ya' after my lobotomy.

I'm very interested to hear how well the M&P functions with a suppressor hanging off the barrel... they seem to have a weak battery lockup as it is, a stronger recoil spring might be in order.

Now somebody needs to develop a threaded compensator for the M&P...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said. Considering that most modern DA autos have the same passive safeties internally, it is essentially the same thing. The useage of an external safety on a single-action hammer gun is a traditional response moreso than a functional necessity.

It's partially because of that 'No Child Allowed Ahead' program. The whole system is dumbed down.

I am sure about one thing, though... whatever I get, I want to put it through a class like that to wring it out! I still have utmost faith in my XD, don't get me wrong, it ate everything I fed it, and it digested alot of mud... The striker retaining pin was cracked for several hundred rounds, and the gun still kept trucking along. My interest in looking at other guns is more of a desire to find something that requires even less maintenance. Reliability has never been a problem.

Revolvers are good range and utility guns. Once you accept their limitations, you can work around them and realize their advantages. And the same the other way around, in terms of autos... they are just different tools. One is a crecent wrench, and the other is a socket & ratchet. I must admit that I really like shooting revolvers... I just don't have the funds to collect as many as I'd like. So, I've got to prioritize buying pistols which make more practical sense for my needs... and so I have mostly autos.

My take on the matter is, the XD will outshoot an M&P or a Glock any day of the week, in my experience... but when it comes to ergonomics, the M&P rules, and since the 9mm guns I've shot don't seem to have the same strange recoil characteristics which turned me off of the .357sig version, I'd try one of those. The Glock is simply the most basic form of the three... and while perfectly adequete, is truly a mixture of the lowest qualities of the other 2 (or, to put it better, since Glock was around first, the XD and M&P have improved upon the best characteristics of the Glock). That doesn't mean that I won't give a Glock a committed try at some point... the only reason I haven't so far is because every other pistol on the planet fits my hand better. So, I'd be more inclined to get an M&P 9, and have it sent off to Dan Burwell, if I decide to replace my XD.

Glock is one platform which I have never owned and lived with... even though I've shot a bunch. I've got enough respect for them that maybe I'll pick one up. I'm kinda getting tired of replacing the striker roll-pins in the XDs... even though it doesn't hamper the function. Of course... a Glock could just as easily have some common trouble area too, like a loose front sight or bad slide-release spring that would put it out of action.

Only difference is, we weren't paying them to breed before...

I had one and loved it... problem was finding a holster (this was when they first came out). I'd buy another one. I like them better than the new Sig P250.

Sweet. I come to the site and I see myself. Gotta dig that.

If a round will chamber, and go fully into battery, you should be fine. The main concern is if the barrel hood is slightly oversize, and prevents complete lockup.

Stuck in the right spot, I have no doubt that it could drop a bear in it's tracks. (but why the hell would I want to get that close?!)

Depends on whether you want lower recoil (faster follow-up shots) and the ability to carry more ammo (because it's lighter and more compact), or if you want increased barrier penetration... The argument is the same as 5.56 NATO vs. 7.62x39. Personally, the 7.62x39 seems to be a nearly ideal mid-range multi-purpose round as long as you can use some kind of expanding bullet. The 154gr soft-point Wolf seem to be excellent performers. In terms of the guns, they are identical except for what they are chambered for.

It's along the same lines as Extreme Shock, Glaser and Magsafe... pretty worthless except maybe at contact distances.

Too many to list.

Did anybody else picture Rambo using one of these as soon as they saw it?

That is wicked.

Father's Day was probably already a very confusing time for this family.

I need to get a new computer... my desktop and laptop both are on their last legs, and I'd love to be able to utilize more of the media functionality available nowadays. Been considering getting an HD Media Center PC, and just ditching all of the other computers, DVD players and TVs... problem is, then I'll probably be limited to Windows Vista.

I learned to shoot with both eyes open (shotgun & pistol)... I can't bring myself to close one eye, and I doubt that I would under stress. I can shoot rifles with un-magnified optics or open sights well... but have never been much of a long-range rifle shooter because the practicality of concentrating so much on closing one eye and thinking about each shot just doesn't do it for me, knowing that I'll never be presented with an urgent need for such a shot. Being able to make hits on a man-sized target out to several hundred yards with both eyes open using a magnified optic is acceptable to me... I guess the issue is that measuring group-size in minute-of-angle has simply never intrigued me as useful (for myself). Maybe I should try deer hunting or something, to broaden my horizons...