molonlabetn

The passengers have no more reason or legal obligation than the driver to volunteer that they are armed.

I had an M1S90 Tactical with Ghost-Ring N/S for a couple years... it was flawless and very user friendly. The only advantage my current FN SLP has over it is significantly lower recoil and slightly faster cycling, but he's offering you a good trade.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4443787

The most fair assumption would be that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, between extreme points of view. I have little doubt that the government is capable of having a 'contingency' involving similar measures... but I do doubt that this is an actual 'action plan' or within the realm of realistically being implemented.

Unless you want to load up with +p, the best way to tailor the performance to your pistol is to use lighter bullets in shorter barrelled pistols, and heavier bullets in longer barrelled pistols. The point is to ensure sufficient velocity for the JHP to expand properly. 230gr bullets seem to work well in 4"-5" pistols, 200gr in 3.5"-4.5", 185gr in 3"-4", and 165gr I suppose could provide decent expansion out of a derringer or something... but I think the point of that light of a bullet in a std-pressure .45 is to reduce recoil (that's how it's marketed by Federal, anyways), and the 165gr loads in other brands are generally +p, intended to penetrate very little for some strange reason. I'd suggest practicing with a load which is similar to your carry choice, in point-of-impact and recoil.

I will not own a pistol which will fire out of battery.

In the A-zone.

Property. And if I could help it, an obviously aggressive, advancing dog wouldn't get close enough to me to attack my dog...

c'mon now... don't make me separate you...

From what I've seen, they'll be $50-$100 more than the regular XD models...

Check here: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6408&highlight=Ruger+LCP And here: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7043&highlight=Range+Report

Sounds like a pretty fair trade to me, as long as it's not for carry... since the P226 is a much larger, heavier gun with the same capacity. It'll be easier to shoot & more accurate, most likely.

I see one of these in my future as well... And hopefully a redesigned SubCompact too, if they do that too.

I just dump it in the can, loose. But that's range ammo that is consumed regularly. The JHP stuff I keep for carry/HD/SHTF is sealed in heavy plastic 'blisters', the way it comes from Georgia-Arms.

Got to shoot it this past weekend, about 200rd. My observations: - This is a huge pistol... I mean really big. The grip is great though - The slide is really heavy, it's most of the weight of the gun... it cycles slowly but with authority. You really notice the front sight come back down when it returns to battery. It felt well-balanced though... reminiscent of a long-slide USP-45 (Expert?) I shot once. - Recoil is very mild, probably the tamest .45 I've ever fired, but doesn't return to POA quickly... this isn't a pistol that will shoot quickly. Double-taps are definitely a much slower pace than with the XD or 1911. - The sights are great, and the gun is very accurate, It was giving my wife's 1911 a run for it's money once I got used to the trigger. - The trigger is good in single-action... similar, I would say, to a Sig. The DA pull is long and heavy, but the takeup was smooth (and it got better after having some rounds through it). I'm definitely going to have to practice with the DA trigger transition... - E-mailed FN about having the decocker-only setup upgraded to one with a safety and decocker, I'd really like to be able to carry it cocked and locked (if I ever find occasion to carry such a big gun). No response yet. Out of the ~200rd which were fired, there were 3 failures, all failure-to-return-to-battery (cartridge had begun to feed, and was partially in the chamber but stopped). 2 of these happened when my wife was shooting it, and I think limp-wristing contributed, because the 3rd instance was when I was shooting it after that, and intentionally holding it loosely to see if that was the problem. The gun ran great as long as it was gripped moderately tight... I think this has alot to do with the gun breaking in (especially the TIGHT magazines), and the fact that the slide is most of the mass of the gun and does not use a very strong recoil spring (compared to other .45s, with much lighter slides), and significant relaxation of the grip would keep it from having sufficient force to completely strip a cartridge from the magazine. All 3 failures were in the first 50rd or so, but after it got hot and dirty, and I held it right, it ran like a champ.

I don't go into any encounter with fear or a preconceived notion that the LEO is out to 'get' me. Quite the contrary, I just want to be left alone. If I broke a traffic law, do your thing and we'll be on our way. To be perfectly fair, I've only been pulled over twice since I've had my permit, and neither time did my gun or my permit come up (once I didn't have my gun with me). But I'm not so naive that I think their JOB is not to use any excuse available to look for a reason to make an arrest... Do you think that LEOs are just out there passively hoping to get lucky and have evidence fall into their lap? However, it seems to me that it is LEOs who presume the worst about anyone whom they encounter even before there is evidence of criminal behavior... and while that's understandable from a precautionary standpoint, in terms of simply being aware, that doesn't give any credence to the overwhelming emphasis on using a simple traffic or equipment violation as a foot-in-the-door to a fishing expedition. So yes, I do think that the attitude which many LEOs present is one of imposing authority, before there is any evidence of wrongdoing. If there was not precedent for being asked to submit to a search, be detained, etc... good people would be alot more supportive of law-enforcement activities. There's nothing that private citizens can do to change that relationship, unless you think it's perfectly reasonable to expect Americans to abandon their desire for privacy, respect and freedom in the interest of convenience and ultimate authority of the government agencies to dictate their terms to us. Exactly! That is the difference.

It's amazing what exposure to reality can do. Good going Len!

This is exactly why the idea of having a 'permit' system is wrong... it gives credence to the ridiculous idea that someone with a gun should be assumed a criminal unless 'authorized'. Punisher, the mentality which you are outlining is exactly why such things become 'us vs. them'... by LEOs insisting on creating an issue over the simple presence of a firearm that is not their own, before even knowing that a crime is committed... as if we need their blessing to do so! As it is, the simple question "Do you have a permit?" would quickly determine whether any further action is called for, and the police are responsible for asking that question. The only time forceful reaction to the sight of a firearm is relevant is if you are being threatened with it, and that goes for everybody.

I think there's a company that you can get the spring through on www.gunaccessories.com I've seen it. Or, go here: http://www.gun-parts.com/ruger/ the plunger and spring are $3 and $2, respectively (their extractor is more expensive though, so be glad you got it for a buck and some change)

No prob... sorry I didn't think of the possibility of the spring and plunger being missing earlier, I just assumed they weren't Those parts are really cheap too, thankfully.

It goes in through the front of the bolt on top of the plunger and spring (A25-J and A25-J-1 in the schematic):

It's nice to see that a manufacturer is willing to update their design with the shooter in mind.

The type of LEO who would cause an issue over seeing a holstered firearm would be just as likely to cause the same issue in reaction to simply being told that there was one... I hear alot more stories resulting from the latter than the former, because pre-empting the officer's question about weapons doesn't consistently work, if the officer has an agenda to begin with (such as find a reason to take you to jail, which is undeniably their objective... else they wouldn't be confronting you).

Actually, in point of fact it would be the cop who was causing the delay just to prove that he/she has authority. I just want to be on my way without being forced to discuss my personal life... hence the decision to not volunteer said personal information. I'd prefer to leave opinion and individual perception out of the equation and only do what I am required to. But, as you say, it's your decision if to retain privacy or not. Just don't suggest that desiring my privacy is unacceptable or unreasonable.

Well of course there is, but is it a significant difference? It doesn't take much deduction to understand the intent of the question, if I have a gun which requires a permit, I'll show the permit. If I have a gun which does not require a permit, it is not relevant. There is no law which requires us to declare our weapons... only our permit.