Yet Another Gun Thread
09-16-2011, 05:43 AM
#523
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
The only failures I have had in the four Keltec P32's I have purchased:
1) Gave the gun to someone with hands like a catchers mitt. Not sure why it had a FTE but he did it 3 times in a row and then handed it back to me. Must have been limp wristing it or something.
2) Had a bad round that we didn't see. Every time we put it in the gun it would fail to load. Would eject it, throw it back in the box and pick it back up 5 minutes later. Took the gun apart 3 times trying to fix it before we realized the round was all **** up. Threw it on the ground and continued blasting. I've put 1100 rounds through my Keltec P32 CCW and have had ZERO problems. It was a used gun when I bought it. Not sure how many the PO put through it. I carry it every day (pocket lint, hardly ever clean it, etc) and trust the gun with my wife's life.
1) Gave the gun to someone with hands like a catchers mitt. Not sure why it had a FTE but he did it 3 times in a row and then handed it back to me. Must have been limp wristing it or something.
2) Had a bad round that we didn't see. Every time we put it in the gun it would fail to load. Would eject it, throw it back in the box and pick it back up 5 minutes later. Took the gun apart 3 times trying to fix it before we realized the round was all **** up. Threw it on the ground and continued blasting. I've put 1100 rounds through my Keltec P32 CCW and have had ZERO problems. It was a used gun when I bought it. Not sure how many the PO put through it. I carry it every day (pocket lint, hardly ever clean it, etc) and trust the gun with my wife's life.
Local gunsmith made a "wallet" just like that for his little bond arms .45 colt.. "Bitch gimme your wallet!" "ooookay..." lul Guy is crazy. Carries that in his back pocket, glock19 iwb and a sig in his sock..
Reply
0
0
09-16-2011, 08:33 AM
#524
Buy it for $100. I'll let you make a 20% profit when you sell it to me the same day. I purchased all of mine used but never bought a gun by itself (always with several boxes of ammo, holsters, etc). I'm pretty sure my cost may averaged around $175 for each but that is a guess.
There is a guy down the road who killed a BG with a P32 in a wallet like that. Too many things wrong with that wallet for me but it did at least work once in his case and that may have saved some innocent lives.
There is a guy down the road who killed a BG with a P32 in a wallet like that. Too many things wrong with that wallet for me but it did at least work once in his case and that may have saved some innocent lives.
Reply
0
0
09-16-2011, 09:27 AM
#525
I was never attracted to the Kel Tec products before, but am warming up to them. I'm pretty much gonna buy whatever Sub 2000 I can find and then just shop for the matching pistol.
Local shop where I picked up my wife's pink thing had hex receiver, number-matching Mosin Nagants for $140. It makes absolutely no sense at all since I've got long range covered by the 30-06...but I'm drawn to the damn "bill and a half piece of history."
Local shop where I picked up my wife's pink thing had hex receiver, number-matching Mosin Nagants for $140. It makes absolutely no sense at all since I've got long range covered by the 30-06...but I'm drawn to the damn "bill and a half piece of history."
Reply
0
0
09-16-2011, 02:20 PM
#526
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
Hell for 100 I would've carried the damn thing. Missed opportunity, it sold pretty quickly.
When I first encountered KelTec my impression was a company that manufactured toys. Not in the kids toys sense, but adult toys. Look at their current lineup, its just... Fun.. In actual practice I believe they make some pretty quality firearms for the budget minded shooter. The Sub2000 for example is available in .40S&W or 9x19 and folds in half. Folded up size is 16" long, you could throw that in your camping pack FFS!! Folded neatly in your backpack is a 30" long carbine which you could take some good sized game down with.
How about magazines?
The 9mm SUB-2000 can be configured in the following magazine types: GLK17, GLK19, S&W59, BERETTA92, SIG226.
The .40 SUB-2000 can be configured in the following magazine types: GLK22, GLK23, BERETTA96, S&W4006, SIG226.
So if you carry a 9mm 226 it uses the exact same magazine which you've already a collection of. If you carry a Glock19 and happen to have some 30 round magazines laying around the Sub2k can be configured to accept those!
The problem with Keltec is they employ like 2 people and only make like 10 guns a year. That makes their stuff a little hard to come by, which is the issue I'm having getting my hands on a Sub2000.... Not a single ******* place here in town has one in stock.
On to the Mosin Nagant.. Luckly a $140.00 91/30 isn't a collectors item. Honestly though a MN Rifle isn't something I'd really consider ever to be collectors item. Open the bolt, depress the trigger and slide the bolt out the rear of the breech. Look down the barrel and see if the rifling is well defined. Overall condition of the rifle is legit? Its worth buying. One thing I've learned from almost 2000 rounds down range in my MN, it goes bang EVERY time. There is no complicated mechanism to fire, cycle rounds, or load. One word on the action. When my rifle is cold the action is smooth as glass, even though it IS sloppy. Fire 3 rounds and it gets pretty tight. Ammo isn't cheap as it used to be, but still costs me less to fire than .223 through my AR15, and I have just as much fun. (Hell I enjoy poking holes in paper @ 100 meters with .22lr through an AR same as .223 @ 300 meters..)
When I first encountered KelTec my impression was a company that manufactured toys. Not in the kids toys sense, but adult toys. Look at their current lineup, its just... Fun.. In actual practice I believe they make some pretty quality firearms for the budget minded shooter. The Sub2000 for example is available in .40S&W or 9x19 and folds in half. Folded up size is 16" long, you could throw that in your camping pack FFS!! Folded neatly in your backpack is a 30" long carbine which you could take some good sized game down with.
How about magazines?
The 9mm SUB-2000 can be configured in the following magazine types: GLK17, GLK19, S&W59, BERETTA92, SIG226.
The .40 SUB-2000 can be configured in the following magazine types: GLK22, GLK23, BERETTA96, S&W4006, SIG226.
So if you carry a 9mm 226 it uses the exact same magazine which you've already a collection of. If you carry a Glock19 and happen to have some 30 round magazines laying around the Sub2k can be configured to accept those!
The problem with Keltec is they employ like 2 people and only make like 10 guns a year. That makes their stuff a little hard to come by, which is the issue I'm having getting my hands on a Sub2000.... Not a single ******* place here in town has one in stock.
On to the Mosin Nagant.. Luckly a $140.00 91/30 isn't a collectors item. Honestly though a MN Rifle isn't something I'd really consider ever to be collectors item. Open the bolt, depress the trigger and slide the bolt out the rear of the breech. Look down the barrel and see if the rifling is well defined. Overall condition of the rifle is legit? Its worth buying. One thing I've learned from almost 2000 rounds down range in my MN, it goes bang EVERY time. There is no complicated mechanism to fire, cycle rounds, or load. One word on the action. When my rifle is cold the action is smooth as glass, even though it IS sloppy. Fire 3 rounds and it gets pretty tight. Ammo isn't cheap as it used to be, but still costs me less to fire than .223 through my AR15, and I have just as much fun. (Hell I enjoy poking holes in paper @ 100 meters with .22lr through an AR same as .223 @ 300 meters..)
Reply
0
0
09-16-2011, 05:03 PM
#528
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
I called 30 shops in KCMO area today and located 3 that had a .40s&w Sub2000 and one had just sold their last 9mm. ****.
RK Show in 2 weeks and there's typically 4 dealers with them. Don't give more than $350 for one, they retail for $349 here.
RK Show in 2 weeks and there's typically 4 dealers with them. Don't give more than $350 for one, they retail for $349 here.
Reply
0
0
09-16-2011, 08:22 PM
#531
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
They're called AK Flats and after a little metal manipulation you get this:
Which is an AK receiver, the main 'body' of an AK-47 rifle.
In raw flat form they're worth $20.00. After 2 bends they're worth $100.00 and contain a headache because the BATF says they're "firearms" and paperwork must follow.
Which is an AK receiver, the main 'body' of an AK-47 rifle.
In raw flat form they're worth $20.00. After 2 bends they're worth $100.00 and contain a headache because the BATF says they're "firearms" and paperwork must follow.
Reply
0
0
09-17-2011, 05:37 AM
#532
House Crime Subcommittee Holds Hearing on National Right-to-Carry Bill
Friday, September 16, 2011
On Tuesday, Sept. 13, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held a hearing on H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.
The bill, introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and cosponsored by more than 240 of their colleagues, would enable millions of permit holders to exercise their right to self-defense while traveling outside their home states.
Subcommittee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) opened the hearing by saying the legislation is needed because state laws on right to carry reciprocity are "confusing, vary widely and can subject otherwise law-abiding citizens to frivolous prosecution." He also argued that permit holders' fundamental Second Amendment rights were at stake, noting that "this legislation recognizes that the right to bear arms does not stop at the state line."
Testifying in support of the bill were Prof. Joyce Lee Malcolm of the George Mason University School of Law and Prof. David Kopel of the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.
Prof. Malcolm, an expert on the rise and fall of the right to keep and bear arms in Great Britain, noted that while America has seen crime fall as "shall issue" permit laws became the norm, Britain has systematically wiped out gun ownership for self-defense since 1920 -- culminating in the 1997 handgun ban -- with opposite results. As Prof. Malcolm noted in her written testimony, "English men and women have suffered from a doubling of gun crime in the last decade while in London alone gun crime doubled in 2010 over the previous year."
Prof. Malcolm responded strongly when challenged by Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) about crime and gun ownership, testifying that "more firearms has not increased violent crime. We've had more firearms over the last few years, millions more, and crime, violent crime has been going down."
Prof. Kopel's testimony focused on the constitutional aspects of the bill. While many anti-gun lawmakers who've long pushed national gun bans, national bans on private gun sales, national waiting periods and other federal restrictions have suddenly become born-again advocates of "states' rights" to oppose this bill, Prof. Kopel pointed out that several provisions of the Constitution give Congress the authority to enact interstate carry.
First, Article IV protects the "Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States," which the Supreme Court has interpreted to include a right to travel freely throughout the country. As the court said in the 1989 case of Saenz v. Roe, that includes the "right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second State."
Next, section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to enforce the provisions of that amendment. Not only does the history of the amendment show that it was also intended to protect a right to travel, but the Supreme Court held last year in McDonald v. City of Chicago that the 14th Amendment also protects the right to keep and bear arms against state infringement. "Bear" clearly means "carry," though several courts are currently considering how far that right goes.
Finally, Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce -- which includes the power to remove state barriers to free interstate travel. (This was the basis for the civil rights laws of the 1960s that ended racial discrimination by places of public accommodation such as motels.) H.R. 822 also applies only to guns that have been shipped or transported in interstate commerce, which has been the basis for most federal gun control laws since the 1960s; here, however, the power would be used to advance gun owners' rights rather than to restrict them.
Opposing the bill was Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, who previously was the police chief in Washington, D.C. While Ramsey admitted that permit holders aren't the problem, he also made clear that he strongly opposes the right to carry firearms, even for retired police officers.
Ramsey repeatedly claimed the bill didn't include enough restrictions on permit holders -- but when pressed, admitted that there was no level of regulation that would make the bill acceptable to him. "Personally, I don't like it . . ." was his response when asked if he supported right to carry laws.
Commissioner Ramsey's responses demonstrated that his opposition to the bill was based on a basic opposition to civilian firearms -- unsurprising for a man who spent the majority of his law enforcement career in Chicago and Washington D.C., where guns were banned. Ramsey repeated many of the exaggerated claims made by opponents of right to carry for the past quarter century, even as he admitted that permit holders are "not the problem." He made clear that he fundamentally doubts law-abiding Americans' ability to defend themselves in a legal and appropriate manner.
One congressional questioner seemed to have no understanding of the provisions of the bill, or the issues being discussed. To open his questioning, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) stated "this is the most insane bill" he had ever seen. But in a demonstration of his fundamental lack of understanding of the bill, Rep. Conyers asked the three witnesses "How many know that almost 300 African-American youth between the age of 15 and 24 are injured or killed by gunfire each week?"
When Prof. Malcolm attempted to explain that the statistic, regardless of its accuracy, had no bearing on the issue of right to carry reciprocity, Rep. Conyers cut her off, demanding a "yes" or "no." When allowed to continue, Prof. Malcolm explained that the majority of the people involved in violence have criminal records or are part of gangs, a fact Rep. Conyers similarly brushed aside.
Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) has long championed this important legislation and is joined by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) as the primary sponsors of H.R. 822. This hearing was an important step forward for this legislation that now has more than enough support for passage. Please contact your member of Congress and urge him or her to support the earliest possible consideration of H.R. 822 this year.
H.R. 822: Responding to the Naysayers
Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, H.R. 822 is now being attacked by a few self-proclaimed "gun rights" supporters with no active lobbying presence in any legislature, whose real agendas have little to do with promoting the interests of gun owners. Here are the facts about a few of their claims:
Myth: H.R. 822 would involve the federal bureaucracy in setting standards for carry permits, resulting in "need" requirements, higher fees, waiting periods, national gun owner registration, or worse.
Fact: H.R. 822 doesn't require -- or even authorize -- any such action by any federal agency. In fact, since it would amend the Gun Control Act, it would fall under a limitation within that law that authorizes "only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out" the GCA's provisions. No federal rules or regulations would be needed to implement H.R. 822, which simply overrides certain state laws.
Myth: H.R. 822 would destroy permitless carry systems such as those in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.
Fact: H.R. 822 would have absolutely no effect on how the permitless carry states' laws work within those states. For residents of Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming, where permits are not required but remain available under state law, H.R. 822 would make those permits valid in all states that issue permits to their own residents. Residents of Vermont, where no permits are issued or required, could obtain nonresident permits from other states to enjoy the benefits of H.R. 822.
Myth: If H.R. 822 moved through the legislative process, it would be subject to anti-gun amendments.
Truth: By this logic, neither the NRA nor any other pro-gun group should ever promote any pro-gun reform legislation. But inaction isn't an option for those of us who want to make positive changes for gun owners. Instead, we know that by careful vote counting and use of legislative procedure, anti-gun amendments can be avoided or defeated.
Friday, September 16, 2011
On Tuesday, Sept. 13, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held a hearing on H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.
The bill, introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and cosponsored by more than 240 of their colleagues, would enable millions of permit holders to exercise their right to self-defense while traveling outside their home states.
Subcommittee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) opened the hearing by saying the legislation is needed because state laws on right to carry reciprocity are "confusing, vary widely and can subject otherwise law-abiding citizens to frivolous prosecution." He also argued that permit holders' fundamental Second Amendment rights were at stake, noting that "this legislation recognizes that the right to bear arms does not stop at the state line."
Testifying in support of the bill were Prof. Joyce Lee Malcolm of the George Mason University School of Law and Prof. David Kopel of the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.
Prof. Malcolm, an expert on the rise and fall of the right to keep and bear arms in Great Britain, noted that while America has seen crime fall as "shall issue" permit laws became the norm, Britain has systematically wiped out gun ownership for self-defense since 1920 -- culminating in the 1997 handgun ban -- with opposite results. As Prof. Malcolm noted in her written testimony, "English men and women have suffered from a doubling of gun crime in the last decade while in London alone gun crime doubled in 2010 over the previous year."
Prof. Malcolm responded strongly when challenged by Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) about crime and gun ownership, testifying that "more firearms has not increased violent crime. We've had more firearms over the last few years, millions more, and crime, violent crime has been going down."
Prof. Kopel's testimony focused on the constitutional aspects of the bill. While many anti-gun lawmakers who've long pushed national gun bans, national bans on private gun sales, national waiting periods and other federal restrictions have suddenly become born-again advocates of "states' rights" to oppose this bill, Prof. Kopel pointed out that several provisions of the Constitution give Congress the authority to enact interstate carry.
First, Article IV protects the "Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States," which the Supreme Court has interpreted to include a right to travel freely throughout the country. As the court said in the 1989 case of Saenz v. Roe, that includes the "right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second State."
Next, section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to enforce the provisions of that amendment. Not only does the history of the amendment show that it was also intended to protect a right to travel, but the Supreme Court held last year in McDonald v. City of Chicago that the 14th Amendment also protects the right to keep and bear arms against state infringement. "Bear" clearly means "carry," though several courts are currently considering how far that right goes.
Finally, Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce -- which includes the power to remove state barriers to free interstate travel. (This was the basis for the civil rights laws of the 1960s that ended racial discrimination by places of public accommodation such as motels.) H.R. 822 also applies only to guns that have been shipped or transported in interstate commerce, which has been the basis for most federal gun control laws since the 1960s; here, however, the power would be used to advance gun owners' rights rather than to restrict them.
Opposing the bill was Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, who previously was the police chief in Washington, D.C. While Ramsey admitted that permit holders aren't the problem, he also made clear that he strongly opposes the right to carry firearms, even for retired police officers.
Ramsey repeatedly claimed the bill didn't include enough restrictions on permit holders -- but when pressed, admitted that there was no level of regulation that would make the bill acceptable to him. "Personally, I don't like it . . ." was his response when asked if he supported right to carry laws.
Commissioner Ramsey's responses demonstrated that his opposition to the bill was based on a basic opposition to civilian firearms -- unsurprising for a man who spent the majority of his law enforcement career in Chicago and Washington D.C., where guns were banned. Ramsey repeated many of the exaggerated claims made by opponents of right to carry for the past quarter century, even as he admitted that permit holders are "not the problem." He made clear that he fundamentally doubts law-abiding Americans' ability to defend themselves in a legal and appropriate manner.
One congressional questioner seemed to have no understanding of the provisions of the bill, or the issues being discussed. To open his questioning, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) stated "this is the most insane bill" he had ever seen. But in a demonstration of his fundamental lack of understanding of the bill, Rep. Conyers asked the three witnesses "How many know that almost 300 African-American youth between the age of 15 and 24 are injured or killed by gunfire each week?"
When Prof. Malcolm attempted to explain that the statistic, regardless of its accuracy, had no bearing on the issue of right to carry reciprocity, Rep. Conyers cut her off, demanding a "yes" or "no." When allowed to continue, Prof. Malcolm explained that the majority of the people involved in violence have criminal records or are part of gangs, a fact Rep. Conyers similarly brushed aside.
Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) has long championed this important legislation and is joined by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) as the primary sponsors of H.R. 822. This hearing was an important step forward for this legislation that now has more than enough support for passage. Please contact your member of Congress and urge him or her to support the earliest possible consideration of H.R. 822 this year.
H.R. 822: Responding to the Naysayers
Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, H.R. 822 is now being attacked by a few self-proclaimed "gun rights" supporters with no active lobbying presence in any legislature, whose real agendas have little to do with promoting the interests of gun owners. Here are the facts about a few of their claims:
Myth: H.R. 822 would involve the federal bureaucracy in setting standards for carry permits, resulting in "need" requirements, higher fees, waiting periods, national gun owner registration, or worse.
Fact: H.R. 822 doesn't require -- or even authorize -- any such action by any federal agency. In fact, since it would amend the Gun Control Act, it would fall under a limitation within that law that authorizes "only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out" the GCA's provisions. No federal rules or regulations would be needed to implement H.R. 822, which simply overrides certain state laws.
Myth: H.R. 822 would destroy permitless carry systems such as those in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.
Fact: H.R. 822 would have absolutely no effect on how the permitless carry states' laws work within those states. For residents of Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming, where permits are not required but remain available under state law, H.R. 822 would make those permits valid in all states that issue permits to their own residents. Residents of Vermont, where no permits are issued or required, could obtain nonresident permits from other states to enjoy the benefits of H.R. 822.
Myth: If H.R. 822 moved through the legislative process, it would be subject to anti-gun amendments.
Truth: By this logic, neither the NRA nor any other pro-gun group should ever promote any pro-gun reform legislation. But inaction isn't an option for those of us who want to make positive changes for gun owners. Instead, we know that by careful vote counting and use of legislative procedure, anti-gun amendments can be avoided or defeated.
Reply
0
0
09-17-2011, 05:57 AM
#533
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
Nice.
I had a good feeling that was going to pass and I hope it does. That would be a very large step forward for us but would have immediately no affect on me for the most part. Only state I frequent outside of Kansas is Missouri and their carry laws are much more relaxed than Kansas. If you're a Missouri resident you can carry concealed in your car without any sort of permit under the castle doctrine.
Would make it nice when vacationing or traveling in general not to worry about the states with stupid ******* laws such as Il, Ohio, Ca, etc..
I had a good feeling that was going to pass and I hope it does. That would be a very large step forward for us but would have immediately no affect on me for the most part. Only state I frequent outside of Kansas is Missouri and their carry laws are much more relaxed than Kansas. If you're a Missouri resident you can carry concealed in your car without any sort of permit under the castle doctrine.
Would make it nice when vacationing or traveling in general not to worry about the states with stupid ******* laws such as Il, Ohio, Ca, etc..
Reply
0
0
09-17-2011, 06:04 AM
#534
Our laws in SC are pretty simple (in layman's terms):
Unlicensed:
Carry in your glovebox or center console anywhere but school grounds. Carry in your home or motel room.
Licensed:
Carry in or around your person or in your glovebox / center console on school grounds. Can't carry in a Fed building (i.e. post office). Can't carry in a church or someone's house unless they give you permission. Can't carry anywhere there is a "no carry" sign. Sign has to be larger than 9 x 12 (I think). Any place that has a sign the size of standard copy paper is ok because the sign is too small.
Unlicensed:
Carry in your glovebox or center console anywhere but school grounds. Carry in your home or motel room.
Licensed:
Carry in or around your person or in your glovebox / center console on school grounds. Can't carry in a Fed building (i.e. post office). Can't carry in a church or someone's house unless they give you permission. Can't carry anywhere there is a "no carry" sign. Sign has to be larger than 9 x 12 (I think). Any place that has a sign the size of standard copy paper is ok because the sign is too small.
Reply
0
0
09-17-2011, 02:45 PM
#536
Am getting ready to purchase a few firearms... have been doing homework for a couple months. I've bought the last few issues of about a dozen magazines and have been reading The Firing Line forums.
Am looking at a few different guns:
CCW: S&W Bodygaurd .380
Full Size Semi: Glock 9mm (for compatibility with following)
Carbine: KelTec Sub-2000
HD 12ga: H&R/Maverick/Escort... standard $250 5/6+1
Also doing homework on a .223 AR, but so far all I'm left with is confusion with them. I don't intend to turn guns into a hobby, but feel I should have a few and be more than "familiar" with them. I've been around guns my whole life growing up and now in the military, but haven't owned any in a long time. Also, growing up in Cali, I had no idea how big CCW is in the rest of the country... makes me think I'm the only guy walking around not armed.
Question is... what are your favorite gun forums?
Am looking at a few different guns:
CCW: S&W Bodygaurd .380
Full Size Semi: Glock 9mm (for compatibility with following)
Carbine: KelTec Sub-2000
HD 12ga: H&R/Maverick/Escort... standard $250 5/6+1
Also doing homework on a .223 AR, but so far all I'm left with is confusion with them. I don't intend to turn guns into a hobby, but feel I should have a few and be more than "familiar" with them. I've been around guns my whole life growing up and now in the military, but haven't owned any in a long time. Also, growing up in Cali, I had no idea how big CCW is in the rest of the country... makes me think I'm the only guy walking around not armed.
Question is... what are your favorite gun forums?
Reply
0
0
09-17-2011, 04:20 PM
#537
http://boards.4chan.org/k/
But as far as blogs go, the only one I can stomach is:
http://www.weaponsrelated.com/
It hasn't been updated in a long time but the guy still posts on /k/ so I'm guessing he just needs ideas. His Beginner's Guide to Firearm Forums is a good read. The writer's approach to everything is very practical and he's actually got a lot of positive ideas as opposed to many of these zombie invasion, SHTF, WROL retards that have turned most firearms forums into festering *** lesions.
Honestly, I wouldn't even bother reading/posting on most gun forums because it's beyond frustrating having to deal with people debate Magpul vs. VLTOR, etc.
But as far as blogs go, the only one I can stomach is:
http://www.weaponsrelated.com/
It hasn't been updated in a long time but the guy still posts on /k/ so I'm guessing he just needs ideas. His Beginner's Guide to Firearm Forums is a good read. The writer's approach to everything is very practical and he's actually got a lot of positive ideas as opposed to many of these zombie invasion, SHTF, WROL retards that have turned most firearms forums into festering *** lesions.
Honestly, I wouldn't even bother reading/posting on most gun forums because it's beyond frustrating having to deal with people debate Magpul vs. VLTOR, etc.
Reply
0
0
09-17-2011, 08:10 PM
#539
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
I cruise the classified ads of random weapons boards, otherwise don't read or post on any.
Reply
0
0
