NastyNate

iTrader: (1)

The limits to what "the people" accept as lawful will continue to get pushed daily. I think colorado was a big win for the anti-gunners but the sheriffs there certainly won't let it go, which is great. We will see how this plays out for other pro gun states.
I think both sides, manly the extreme, forget one thing: it's about choice. Me forcing you to own a gun is the same as you forcing me not to own one. It should be a choice. I think both sides forget that a lot. And I think a lot of people forget that their living/traveling/security needs are not every other person's. Do I need an ar15 with all the 30rd pmags I have, where I live? Probably not. But one of the many things the USMC taught was to always overkill anything I do.

I love my AR15, I know it's capabilities from being a Marine Infantryman. That was my main reason for choosing it over the AK. Do I NEED to own one. Not necessarily but then, i don't really need my Daytona 675, or miata, or big *** tv, or a anything else beyond the basics. I own these things because I can.

Ryan_G

iTrader: (8)

I assume you live in California? How about starting the process of moving?

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

You're in Florida and have nothing to worry about at the state level unless you've got mental problems. I would however buy some receivers and grab 50 AR and AK mags if you don't already have them. AR mags are everywhere now for well under $15 shipped, and AK mags never really got too high. Ammo is another story.

AR15 stripped lowers are back under $100 shipped and AK receiver never really got much above $100, they were just nowhere to be found.

Gun confiscation is alive and well... it's coming to your door in one form or another: Gun Confiscation in America | Level-Headed.net

Unfortunately for the broke state of California, these new laws will end up costing the taxpayers there millions of dollars in litigation, quite a few jobs, a ton of tax revenue, and in no way make anybody safer. It might however accelerate a case before SCOTUS.

Join the NRA, donate to SAF, and identify a local grass-roots pro-gun organization you can support.

fooger03

iTrader: (2)

And with that act alone, you graduate from "civilian" to "citizen".

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

The next step is getting your CCW. Fortunately, FL is just about as friendly as it gets. As long as you've never been convicted of a felony, domestic violence, and aren't bat-**** crazy, you're good.

Here's a step-by-step:
Florida CCW Permit Application

You have to fill out an online form to have them mail you the package... takes a few days.

DO NOT have a buddy do your fingerprints. Call your local PD and make an appt with booking to have your fingerprints done electronically at the station (it's like $35). Then send in your package. I think it took about 2 weeks to get mine.

I'll also suggest a Glock 19 for your first gun. If you're a bit vertically challenged, then a Glock 26 (and get some bigger mags with pinky extenstions for night-stand duty).

Crimson Trace sells a couple different types of lasers. I like the Laserguard rather than the Lasergrip... total for gun, holsters, laser, extra mags, and a few hundred rounds is well under $1000.

And like I said, AR15 stripped lower receivers are $100... even if you don't feel like you want one now, it can't hurt to buy the receivers and then build the gun a few years down the road.

Here's a good deal on mags:
C Products Defense 30rd Aluminum Magazine - 10 Pack - AR-15 .223/5.56 - AR-15 - Rifle Magazines - Magazines - Accessories

Srsly, for $500, you can have 2 lowers, 20mags, and a couple hundred rounds... a bit of futureproofing.

Lastly... a good bright compact flashlight is a must for home defense with a firearm. Last thing you want to do is kill some stupid neighbor kid who got drunk and crawled in the wrong window in the complete dark.

shuiend

iTrader: (24)

I disagree with necessarily saying get a Glock as your first gun. What he should do is go to a range and rent several difference pistols and try them out. Note which ones you like, feel good in your hand, can shoot semi accurately. Then come back a bit later and try out those guns again and then purchase a gun based on having tried several.

My first pistol I purchased was a Glock 17. I sold it within 3 months of buying it. For me Glocks just do not feel right in my hands. I could should decently with it, but it just felt wrong.

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

H8R.

Splitime

iTrader: (24)

I tried a range of handguns... found I liked the M&P best... 2yrs later I don't own an M&P anymore.... just full metal guns. The thoughts I had about weight, balance etc... turned out wrong for me. I enjoy MUCH MUCH more shooting my 1911s and my CZ75 SPO1.

NastyNate

iTrader: (1)

YouTube: VIDEO: TheYankeeMarshal: Why Glocks Suck! (My Honest Opinion of Glock)

The title is a bit misleading but still a good take on glocks.

Fathom55

In every way imagineable.

Splitime

iTrader: (24)

Well the heavily amended Illinois Senate CCW bill 1189 passed with Constitutional majority of 45 yay votes. Another compromise, but I think its the last ditch hope before the legal 'Cliff' coming up. Now to see if the House passes it with Constitutional majority (needed btw due to overrulling home-rule pre-emption built into IL Constitution) and then gets past Quinn or requires an overrulling to ignore him.

psreynol

Ruger SR9 is awesome for noobs I think

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

You got it BABY!!! Supermajority in the Senate and House... Quinn can only hurt himself by voting against it, but you never know.

Illinois lawmakers approve concealed carry gun bill - chicagotribune.com

Assuming the Governor doesn't veto or cause some other legal bullshit to stop it, this thing is done. Now the dance to certify instructors to cover the 16hrs training required, setting up the online registration process, yadda yadda. I think we're still 6 months from seeing the first actual permit arrive in somebody's mailbox, but it's going to be awesome watching this process unfold. The other thing that's going to be awesome is to watch the number of not only CCW applications, but how many people will come out of the woodwork and get their FOIDs in order to get CCW.

Congrats to Split and all IL'ers

Splitime

iTrader: (24)

I'm reaching out to the folks I'm sure will be instructors, it looks like NRA certified will do the job. I intend to be in one of the first classes once they go live.

Loved how fast the second round went in the House. It was within my commute time home from work after posting.

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

I think every "anti" in the state saw the writing on the wall... Madigan Sr. was on board, and Madigan Jr. wasn't going to stir the pot... plus once they had a supermajority, the Governor was SOL. It waits to be seen what the downstate Dem's did/said/gaveup to the Chicago machine to play nice and throw home-rule away. I'm sure it'll be something underhanded and painful that affects the entire state.

I've read some theads at Illinoiscarry.com before going to bed last night and (yes, sounds lame) I was so excited that I couldn't get to sleep... got back up and watched the latest "Deadliest Catch" and "Alaska: The Last Frontier" that I had DVR'd... much more productive than sleep.

Ryan_G

iTrader: (8)

Indiana legalizes shooting cops ? RT USA

Very interesting... the implications are pretty huge. My question would be if the cop is allowed to return deadly force once you threaten his life or if he would still be accountable due to the initial illegal entry.

Fathom55

Regardless of the "spirit" of the law, I think we all know what happens if you fire on a police officer whether or not he's acting legally.

Ryan_G

iTrader: (8)

I understand that the cop will definitely return fire if he has the opportunity. Hell anyone would. My question is if the entry is determined to be illegal would the cop be tried for murder instead of it being justified just like a criminal would in the same situation? The homeowner would have been justified in using lethal force according to this law so technically the police officer has no grounds to return fire.

I imagine in practice nothing will really happen and the cop will get off nearly scott free but depending on how strong the facts of the case are a lawyer could charge the cop with felony murder.

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

"No-Knock-Warrants" are executed under the guise of officer and citizen safety. The police bust down a door and secure premesis/people before a bad guy can bring a gun into play.

The problem occurs when the police get the wrong house, and a citizen must decide (under what amounts to actual combat conditions) if it's actually the police, or bad guys pretending to be the police, or just plain old bad guys.

You need to read Barnes v. State of Indiana bak in 2011. The INDIANA SUPREME COURT ruled:
there is no right to use force or violence to prevent police from coming into your home, even if that entry is unlawful.

Which basically negates the 4th Amendment... and rightfully so pissed off the entire state of Indiana. The original ruling left no grey area... basically saying that any police officer for any reason he wants can enter your house at any time and if you interfere in any way, you can be arrested. Later, if you're still alive, and the entry was found to be illegal, then you can sue, and probably lose due to this law.

The whole "Indiana legalizes shooting of cops" is a bullshit quote, but this new legislation is in direct response to Barnes, which was clearly a terrible piece of legislation. But what the law actually does is force the police to go to the right house when conducting no-knock-warrants... which is a good thing. If the cops are executing a warrant on the correct house, the law doesn't apply to anybody inside, because the entry is legal. But if the cops hit the house next door, or on the wrong street, or in the wrong town, this law empowers law-abiding homeowners inside not to have to decide in the middle of the night if it's the cops (who they are not expecting) or a bad guy (who they are).

This new law is a good thing while at the same time being completely unnecessary, and was inevitable after the bullshit ruling in Barnes.

However... this law will eventually be tested in court. At some future point, the police will **** something up, come crashing into the wrong house due to some "clerical error", and there will be a shooting. And what we'll see is that the police will be cleared under a technicality (and if you're still alive) and you may/may not be charged with something.

Fathom55

I was thinking more along the lines of:
A cop breaks into your house, threatens you or your family (for whatever reason), you shoot him, he's dead.

You call...uhh...the cops? They show up, and you go to jail. Then they have full reign over your house. What do they do? They just loaded their colleague in a black bag into an ambulance. What do you think they do?

Then the DA comes at you with everything he/she has. **** the facts, right? What proof do you have that he didn't identify himself as a police officer? What proof do you have that he didn't hear a scream or a gunshot? Basically, you are guilty until proven innocent...which is something you can't prove. You're going to prison.

THAT'S the problem.

The extent of police power is insane. Here's a really unlikely scenario, but food for thought....

You're out for a walk with your wife one evening. A police officer walks up to you, grabs your wife, throws her on the ground, and starts beating her with a club or a flashlight. No one's around. What do you do? Do you call the police? She'll be dead by the time they arrive. If you have a CHL, do you shoot the police officer to save your wife? Most men say would say "yes". But then what? If the cop is dead, you go to jail. If the cop is alive, you go to jail and he makes up a story about resisting arrest, and your wife goes to jail too.

Sum it all up. There is no justice when it comes to confrontations with police.

Please don't take this as a "**** the po-lice" rant. I've met many LEO's who are extremely good people. I've met several who...aren't.