Start stocking up now. I just picked up some glock 17 mags at Midwayusa and you guessed it, 2 mag limit due to high demand...

The exemption of .22LR is the most interesting thing. .22LR is the least expensive and most practical caliber for everything EXCEPT putting a man down with one shot from any distance.

The list of the usual anti-gunners is the same as in 1994. Frank, Barbara, Chucky, Die-Anne. The worst of the recent ones are the RINO grrls from Maine.

CTD has a special on new factory Glock 9mm 33-round "happy sticks" for your G17/19/26/34 with threaded barrel, suppressor, and sbr stock. G18's are hard to come by in the 'States.

Cheers.

Based on what I've seen it do to small game, a .22 LR hollow-point bullet, out of a rifle, to the head of a person, will drop him in his tracks.

1 is none,
40 is a good idea

I saw this last night and I've got one order in already for pmags (CTD). I'll buy GI aluminum ones in a day or so. One place I bought pmags from last month sold all their stock out at the $12 price point and they seem to be out of GI 30 rounders that were $13. They still have 40 rounders.

I should probably pick up some glock magazines, 33 rounders especially.

Quote:

You mean in the same way that Corvettes are more dangerous?

No. Only in the fact these weapons can be more easily concealed by neer-do-wells. The larger 'scary' weapons always get the publicity - its the small ones that get used the most. Put a high cap mag on it and more people might notice you are carrying.

A weapon is only as dangerous as its owner. Guns don't kill people - gun grabbers do.

A law passed limiting the MINIMUM size of magazines would make more sense. Let's see you hide it now ;-) Absolutely perfect for home defense too!

Why buy highcap mags when you can print them?

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011/....

Print your own lower as well as long as your an outlaw... wouldn't expect it to last long but hey, print another..

This is what I was talking about. Keltec PLR-16 firing 100 rounds in 8 seconds. Weapon is easily bump fired.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/601UQyLWAl0

Good thing this is not a 'cheap' disposable weapon.

I stumbled upon this, on government - Coercion is your single purpose, your only weapon and your only form of control. A government IS a monopoly of the “legitimate” use of aggressive coercion; a monopoly over the initiation of force IS a government. Hear it straight from the horse’s mouth. When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

The rest is here - http://sailboatdiaries.com/wordpress/201....

I bought lots of mags in 2009, shortly after The One got elected.
For my AR(s), I have plenty. Well over a hundred USGI, MagPul, and Tango Down Arc mags. I have a few of the new Surefire 60 round quad stack mags, as an experiment.
For my pistols, I also have a bunch for my various handguns that take 10+ round magazines.

someone on TF posted this a while back, thought it might be appropriate.

Uh, yeah.

Quote:

Oh, and if you do own a gun the sponsors to which you should direct an appropriate response are:

Hrm... I hope this sentence isn't misinterpreted by the wrong people...

Oh fersure! It certainly isn't right and proper to do anything except make the world's biggest peanut butter cup to show your displeasure to those who wish to invent new reasons to kill you.

Why that would be crazy!

Who's buying the peanut butter?

I'm not saying I support a ban on magazines, certainly not this deceitful attempt to glue it to another bill. Also I couldn't support anywhere CLOSE to a 10 round limit, especially for rifles many of which have stock mags over 10.. prohibiting transfer of any stock mags would be way into infringement territory IMO. My issue is that I can't come up with much of a "dual use" defense for something like a 70rd rifle mag. If this issue grows legs and they come back with an honest attempt, the propaganda war may be won or lost depending on where conservatives choose to dig in their heels.

Morla wrote:

Quote:

propaganda war may be won or lost depending on where conservatives choose to dig in their heels

There aren't any conservatives.

Duel use?

Who cares. The answer to these questions of why and for what purpose and why do you need is always the same.

Because **** stick that's why. Go concern yourself with what you choose to spend your own money on and don't worry about me.

If I want to build a frikken Fort out of 100 rnd drums because I think it's funny, we'll your legal recourse is zero. No you can sit there and just STFU.

Although if you pee and **** yourself, we'll that would be hilarious too

What part of "shall not be infringed" didn't you understand?

MOST people don't understand the true nature of the 2nd amendment - it has NOTHING to do with hunting, it has EVERYTHING to do with the ability of the PEOPLE to oppose and depose a tyrannical government, wish people would wake the **** up.

So long as the 2nd Amendment stands we will never need it.

The day it falls....

When/if that day comes... things change - materially. I married into a Jewish family - SMART people, doctors, lawyers, Ivy League colleges and advanced degree's all around - nothing less than a Masters degree in my wife's family but they ALL fail to connect gun control with genocide - no matter how many empirical examples I provide - normalcy bias is STRONG with these people... very frustrating but ****'em if they want a repeat of 1938-45 so be it... MY family will not roll over and shuffle into the gas chamber...

Quote:

What part of "shall not be infringed" didn't you understand?

IMO a fascist government and a well-armed crook are the same thing, ergo self defense and protection from tyranny are the same thing.

Lines are already drawn though, the gun control people can easily and successfully paint the GOP as hypocrites if they say 100 round barrel mags are an inalienable right but silencers and full auto settings are not. Many decades of silence on the full-auto ban and laws against silencers has left the GOP in a position of little credibility if they abandon the self defense justification..

I think what is MUCH more important than what specific options we have for our guns is where and when we can carry them. One of the biggest roadblocks to public safety is that in practice open carry gets you in trouble in many places. We need to make it clear, on a federal level, that just walking around with a gun is not something the police can get involved with. This would scare a lot of people at first but we really need to get used to regular people being armed.. Then maybe people will even start taking down their "no guns allowed" signs.

(I was going to comment that here in Ohio there are prohibitive restrictions on driving a car while concealed carrying, but I see now those were lifted.. I should look into renewing mine now, as the vehicle thing was why I let it lapse. It was a real pain. That and back then I didn't understand what little legal force those "no guns" signs actually held.)

Quote:

What part of "shall not be infringed" didn't you understand?

Imho , Jefferson's phrase "well regulated militia' is another that's under appreciated. About 1760 it acquired a botanical meaning:

Quote:

Regulation: the ability of an early embryo to continue normal development after its structure has been somehow damaged or altered.

ie , in our then embryonic country
re-organize some parts for an ad-hoc mission
as in round up the boys and go put a stop to something.

This is germane.



Found here: http://primordialslack.com/?p=2475

Quote:

I think what is MUCH more important than what specific options we have for our guns is where and when we can carry them. One of the biggest roadblocks to public safety is that in practice open carry gets you in trouble in many places. We need to make it clear, on a federal level, that just walking around with a gun is not something the police can get involved with. This would scare a lot of people at first but we really need to get used to regular people being armed.. Then maybe people will even start taking down their "no guns allowed" signs.

I think this part of your discussion almost gets you over the fence, because I agree that we should focus effort into pushing back against no-carry laws.

And in 1994 I had your viewpoint: "Meh, who cares? I don't own any high capacity magazines and I'm not interested in a black rifle".

Bottom line is that features don't make a gun more or less lethal. Grandpa's 12 gauge pump gun is a capable of gruesome results. As soon as pistol grips, bayonet lugs and evil flash hiders become outlawed the next whack job mass murderer will grab that bird gun and go to work.

Then where will the next law be pointed? And with gun owners willing to roll over on black rifles who will be left to stand up for that pump gun? Or the single shot rifle? Or the bow?

I could produce more demand for body bags with the front of an F250 than I could with my entire gun collection. I don't because I'm not insane.