Whisper

Best of luck to you and your business. Our best hope for preserving RKBA lies in involving more people into the shooting sports and the study of self defense skills. Cheers, Whisper

This is not exactly what you asked, but let me throw it out there as an alternative: I've built three AR pistols. All of them just use a pistol buffer tube with no brace. They work perfectly well. The braces offer no benefit that I can identify, and they pose potential problems for owners because their legality relies on shifting and nebulous statements from a federal agency with a disgraceful history of trying to jam up honest citizens. Plus there's the additional risk of having uninformed law enforcement officers mistakenly perceive the weapon as an illegal SBR. I wonder how many bump stock owners would have said last month, "My bump stock is legal; I have a copy of the letter here to prove it." In my opinion, which is worth precisely what you paid for it, a cost-benefit analysis doesn't favor the AR pistol brace. Cheers, Whisper

Please point out the text in the directive that specifies this.

What Erik88 wrote. The directive says the stocks must be destroyed or turned in to the government. It doesn't give a third option for modifying the stocks in some way and then keeping them. Cheers, Whisper

Most likely a Spanish Civil War import. Not sure it actually brings much of a premium. I have a brother who collects Mosins and I will ask him. https://scwmosin.weebly.com/the-ldquomade-in-ussrurrsrdquo-stamp.html Cheers, Whisper

Oh, man. I was planning to buy another shotgun as my next new heater, but this Beretta is making me reconsider.

The directive says the stocks must be destroyed or turned over to the government. Even if the government plans to destroy the stocks, that is still a "use." When the government takes land from owners (one of the primary types of cases for which you usually see Fifth Amendment lawsuits), even if the government is going to turn the land over to a developer, that's still a "use." I expect the BATFE will try various lame arguments for not paying for the confiscated property, but claiming that destruction is not a "use" will not be one of their tactics.

In fact, the Fifth Amendment does say clearly and specifically that you must be paid a fair price. The actual wording is "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Banning bump stocks the way the administration did it is probably unconstitutional because it violates the Fifth Amendment, not the Second. The government can't legally steal personal property; if they take away something you own, they have to pay you for it.

Liars gonna lie.... The best thing that could come out of this would be if the NRA were to decide it would support candidates solely on the basis of their willingness to support RKBA, and with no regard for party affiliation. Tying the NRA to the Republican Party of today, which seems undecided on whether it wants to destroy the nation or just the party itself, is not a winning plan for the future.

I can't see how anyone who has ever read a law book would think this doesn't violate the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits theft of personal property by the government. I don't give two hoots in hell for bump stocks, but I look forward to the lawsuits over this foolish action. Remember when Trump was elected and people were predicting we'd get silencers removed from the NFA? Instead, an all-Republican administration goes for almost two years doing absolutely nothing to strengthen RKBA, but as they hand the House over to the Dems, they give us this.

Not much of a surprise here. Trump was a gun-banning Democrat before he decided it would be more advantageous to pretend to be a Republican. He sees a chance for personal advantage in banning bump stocks. If he perceives personal advantage in infringing on the RKBA in other ways, he will do it eagerly. But if it's clear more gun-grabbing will cost him, he won't. Our job is to make sure he understands that it will cost him big.

I've decided to start a serious search for a Beretta 1301, but as I look around, the Viper model appears to be consistently priced below the regular 1301 Tactical -- sometimes by several hundred dollars. From what I read, the Viper is a Lipsey's exclusive model, but other than having the ugly camo pattern, are there any differences between it and the regular 1301? I just can't figure out how they can add the camo job and sell it for less than a black version. I'd prefer a black one, but if I can save $300, I can live with the camo. Anyone know? Also, if you have a used one -- any color -- that needs a new home, please drop me a line. Thanks, Whisper

Look for some more reviews. The ones I am seeing are quite positive.

Over the years I've tried and broken most models of sight pushers, sometimes on the first use. Not because I'm that strong, but because most of the sight pushers are just junk that will work on some easy sights but are not about to budge something like sights on an M&P. I've never broken an MGW and have yet to find a pistol sight the MGW won't move. Nothing else is even close in quality or capability. Cheers, Whisper

Or by changing our leadership.

You are right that the $200 tax is a small drop in the bucket, but Omega is right that they will never give it up. This was never intended to provide a source of revenue -- it was intended only to harass gun owners. As long as it performs that function, the authoritarians will protect and preserve it. They don't care about the money. They care about the harassment.

I've noted, I believe on this very forum, that Trump was a gun-banning Democrat before he decided it would be advantageous to pretend to be a Republican. But he actually has no genuine party or political affiliation. He's singularly focused on self-advancement, to the exclusion of all else. This means that he gets some things right and some things wrong, but he doesn't do anything that stems from a coherent political philosophy.

Of course they don't. But it's important that they use this particular piece of legerdemain to eliminate bump stocks without legislation, so that they can use the same tactic for all semiautos in a future presidency.

I doubt that's the reason. They still have the Michonne-Rick baby (sorry, I don't recall his name) to deal with on set. Plus they had to figure out some way to explain Maggie's disappearance since Lauren Cohen got a job doing a network spy comedy. If it flops -- and the idea of a network spy comedy sounds thoroughly dreadful to me -- then Maggie can come back to TWD.

Great class. Tiffany and Aqil are both excellent instructors. I learned a lot and will train with them again. Cheers, Whisper

Regarding Frank Sinatra -- he was actually announced at one point as the star of the film, and there are even "Dirty Harry" movie posters listing Sinatra as the star.

It's on CBS two days before the election. It's designed to stir up anti-gun sentiment in voters. Any factual content will be accidental. Hope this helps, Whisper

I'm in. Hope to see others from TGO there. Cheers, Whisper

The last two episodes have been good, and this coming weekend's "farewell Rick" show will likely draw big viewership, but after that I'll be surprised if ratings don't continue their decline. The TV show and the comics will have diverged pretty far by that point and maybe that will create enough uncertainty about the TV show storyline to keep interest, but I am not optimistic.