molonlabetn

All that an ideology is, is a collection of ideas... if one can't realize that this country has an abundance of collective criminal mentality grafted into it's social makeup, they are blind. It is part of certain aspects of the culture to be a thug. call it what you will, but by definition that certainly fits an ideology... Where was the oversight in the Ruby Ridge case, or Waco? Sure, there was damage control in hindsight, though... If only there was someone who could provide an argument otherwise, instead of bowing to ad-hominem attacks...

The data just isn't there... But I would encourage you to look at the pistols which were entered and either failed or passed gov't/military trials. The winners are Sig, H&K and Beretta Glock was a notable 'non-winner', in all but the FBI trials. I'll leave you to do your own research, there's plenty posted on this site and others.

No square edges Light DAO/SAO trigger, ~6lb Tilting locking block action (a-la Beretta 92) Striker-fired, no manual safety XS Sights ~12+1 10mm Auto Polymer frame Stainless slide, barrel and hardware

to get an accurate rate of AD/ND, one would have to document every time all guns were handled while loaded and compare that to the number of AD/NDs. It's simply not possible to turn into a science... all discussion along this line is speculation with regard to the observed trends.

So, there's no ideological difference between a government authorized agent coming to a house and forcibly removing/killing people, and an independently motivated criminal coming to a house and forcibly removing/killing people? In one instance the purpose is sanctioned by the state, in the other it is a crime. I am saying that it is significant (as related to this thread) that the agents of this government have too much leeway with regard to the force they can use to impose the laws of the state, and that is the only similarity I am suggesting to the SS.

Stuff like that makes me forget worrying about why he's still in office... I'm more interested in why they aren't in jail.

Low velocity rounds such as the 9mm shouldn't really be much of a concern... but most break-in regimen consist pretty simply of frequent cleaning, and allowing the barrel to cool between shots.

A few years ago I lived in Antioch (clue #1), in a second story apartment right next door to a handful of thug types who, to put it delicately, were in the exotic pharmaceuticals business. Nice enough folks for the most part... they left me alone, just eyeballed me as I would squeeze between them coming up the stairs. They had regular visitors at all times of the day and night... and many of them were so high or low that they naturally got the wrong door. Made for a few tense exchanges at times, yelling through the door and them pounding on it.

H&K, because they hate us, and we suck.

An exception for hunting during hunting season is the only one I am aware of... other than that, the only way you'll legally be able to carry is if you are picking up or dropping off passengers and do not handle or remove the firearm from the vehicle. It's not legal to carry while hiking/camping in state parks.

Just ask yourself if the agents in any of these events were doing their job, or acting of their own volition. There is the similarity.

The simple fact that the agents of the FBI/BATFE and the German state were both following lawful orders at the behest of authority originally given by the people is not in any way likening the motives or attitude of the US government with those of the Nazis. That is a false assumption and has nothing whatsoever to do with this topic. Arguing that simply lumps the entire emotional issue of the Holocaust into a comparison which is way out of proportion, when the original point was only that the Ruby Ridge and Waco were both injustices perpetrated by agents who had no respect for innocent life, in the context of upholding the law. That is certainly a tragedy. This isn't about whether or not which of those laws or governments is more evil or killed more people, because that's pretty obvious. As with any execution of tyranny, the people performing those acts believed that they are doing the right thing at the time... That is a common theme which should be equally opposed, since any government is only what the people allow themselves to be under. It should be noted that I have not at any time pointed accusations, insults or extreme comparisons of other posters because I disagree with the notion that the murder of the Weavers or Davidians was somehow less wrong than the murder of the Jews, or any other state sanctioned assault on their people. I'd appreciate it if we could have discussions without ridiculing other posters just because they disagree, that is a sign that one has lost objectivity.

The FNP-45 looks like it will be a winner... I am looking forward to handling one.

So, you think that this law prevents people who don't care about the law to begin with, from carrying a pistol into state parks? You are mistaken, sir. There are already plenty of laws which prescribe punishment for people like that (carrying while under the influence, for instance)... forcing people who respect the law to be defenseless from those who do not is pathetic, especially if that is based on an opinion and not evidence that people who have gone to the trouble of complying with the state in order to get a carry permit will be more irresponsible with their weapons because of their location. This bill isn't about determining 'need' for us, it is to allow us to provide for our own needs, in accordance with state policy... Not because humans need any official permission to defend ourselves, but because good people desire to do the right thing with regard to the law. If the state would come up with a list of where I do and don't need to protect myself, please, I would be more than happy to only go where I am sure to never be at risk... can you or anyone else assure me that I will never have to look out for myself and family on state property?

Germany was also a democratic society, and enough people supported the Nuremberg Laws to make them law... Hitler didn't just pull the Holocaust out of his arse. Even if an actual majority didn't want it to happen, as it so often occurs in this country, the vocal minority influenced their will upon everyone else by twisting reality and backroom deals. Either way, the required due process was followed to initiate it. Fact of the matter is, what was done, was done as if it was for the good of the country, as prescribed by law... in both cases. And in both cases the bounds of the law were overstepped (the argument is not about 'by how much'). Hem and haw all you wish, but those are the facts... yet again, in response to the original assertion that these two events had nothing in common.

Yes, the application is of course different... but that does not change the fact that both of these are examples of state-sanctioned oppression, which was the original point that has since become a philosophy debate because that simple fact seemed unacceptable. Again, both were committed as enforcement of law. That is a fact. The subjective part of the equation is that some people hold one or the other to be more or less wrong (or not wrong at all)... that part is just opinion which in no way minimizes the tragedy and loss of life in both events.

The disposition for a biased authority to oppress a minority whom they disagree with, and pass laws against in order to legitimize the oppression, is just as evident now as it was then... only the names, motive and specific manner of oppression have changed. I'm sorry if comparing the mechanism for one tyranny to another offends you, but in reality there is no threshold for the number of lives which must be affected before injustice has occurred, or before one should seek to end it. The motives in both cases are the same, manipulation and control of the society, to conform it into what the government deems to be appropriate. On one hand is religion, and on the other hand is the configuration of a weapon. It's easy to feel more strongly about one vs. the other, especially when one has already come to its conclusion with great loss of life... but if allowed to continue along the path of increased restriction on property, the end of the current oppression will be equally tragic.

It is no longer the policy of the German government to exile/exterminate 'non-aryan' residents, however it is still the policy of the FBI/BATFE/SWAT/etc to use paramilitary tactics and force to remove residents who do not align with the policies of this government... both are precisely the fulfillment of the applicable laws and their intended effects. The point is not that the BATFE's dealings are anywhere near as horrendous and inhumane as those of the Nazis, but they are both certainly a revocation of rights by force when opposed, prescribed in laws dictated by the society. The difference is that the policies of the BATFE have not yet been questioned and/or halted. If another Weaver compound existed, or several of them, the response would be the same.

There simply aren't as many Weaver/Davidian-esque folks here to have been killed as there were Jews/Gypsies/etc in Nazi Germany, but there was a clear pattern of treatment for those situations. Folks who wish to bear arms which the government deems inappropriate are certainly harassed legally and socially, on a regular basis! I'm sure that Germans would consider their country's brief few years of ethnic and religious oppression to be an 'isolated incident', relatively. Certainly neither is justified by the laws, but they were certainly both carried out under them, with prejudice for the ideas of those involved. Both are examples of grossly mis-applied laws by folks who have no regard for life... the comparative scale of the events are certainly different, but that's about it.

Did you install a new trigger bar, as well? I did the Springer Precision job to my XD-9 Tactical, trigger-bar and everything, and I couldn't be happier with it. Mine's about 4lb, as well.

The point was that both groups were wrongfully dealt-with brutally for being in violation of the laws of the land... not somehow different because one was about religion or armament.

I'm not saying they were based on similar principles, at all.. but the truth remains that they were both policies of the state.

The Nuremberg laws were the 'Federal Laws' of the land which the Nazi's were upholding through their inhuman methods... certainly to them were just as viable as the Federal laws which the Weavers and Davidians were slaughtered over.

If the state considered that badges were more appropriate than a card, as a permit to carry... they would have issued me one. If quick identification is an issue, by all means carry your permit card in a manner which you can retrieve quickly... but don't go and lose all of your credibility after a shooting by misleading the responders initially that you are law-enforcement (which is of course what they will think if they see a guy waving a badge).

My renewal took just 6 weeks... I guess it's the luck of the draw, depending on who's desk your papers cross.