Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

26
What should people do? Let their politicians know that they'll pay for such stupid bans at the ballot box in 2022 if they go forward with it...and then actually act on it come voting time.

I was all for Montana's nullification of the Commerce Clause's overreach by Eric "Fast 'N' Furious" Holder's DoJ in 2009, signed by Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D-MT). Seven other states followed suit. Naturally, ol' Fast 'N' Furious got scared and sued in court. Sadly, the SCOTUS found against Montana, et. al.

This time, though, there are more than just seven states doing this. FedGov better get the message and back off of such bans.

As for what gun should you buy? You should buy the gun that you like and thus will actually take to the range and practice with.
"San Francisco Liberal With A Gun"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/ (reloading instruction)
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/ (podcast)
---------------------------------------
A true Liberal must back the Second Amendment 100%!

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

28
Northern wrote:Back to the original topic. I think it’s wise to act now to secure your ability to have potentially banned guns in the future. That said, I’m not planning to go wild because I already have most of what I want.

One factor in buying now is that availability is generally low. The lowers that I would want are not in stock. My sense is that there will be waves of availability before any federal ban occurs because it will be a relatively long process. So bookmark pages, get on waitlists, etc. now.
But prices will be exorbitant during those "waves of availability" prior to a ban once the legislative process looks like is is getting traction. High-end stripped lower prices already are out of control, with FFLs holding all of their stock for auctions.

Those not concerned with the strength and durability of a lower could skip worrying about  6061-T6 versus 7075-T6 and focus on what is available with the desired features.

I would get enough to cover any future builds plus one to designate for an NFA build, because the latter requires marring the lower.

Then the problem becomes what to do about uppers now that Democrats are have a taste for trying to ban parts--which will include trying to close what will be listed in their talking points as the upper receiver loophole or simply the firearm parts loophole. So I would shop for uppers right after the lowers have been acquired.

Because trigger group contains the word trigger, trigger groups could end up restricted even before BCGs and barrels.

AK-pattern parts kits are ripe for banning, and any centerfire semi-automatic intermediate carbine bans are going to include things that are neither intermediate nor carbines, such as PFKs and other DMR-like AK variants. So it might be a good idea to buy now.



sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

29
All 3 of my semi rifles are on Feinstein's list...and two of them are 9mm PCCs. I don't think I know of a single "mass shooting" that involved a PCC, not in 9mm.
While I'm willing to consider all firearms "Weapons of War", not just the dreaded ARs, I'm not sure where PCCs fit in as battlefield arms.

This is an incredible stupid thing to be spending political capital on at this time. Especially when there's no way in HELL Joe Manchin, Jon Tester, or, probably either Bernie or Angus King will go for ANYTHING but UBCs and POSSIBLY a very well-written Red Flag law.
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

30
I have quite a few ARs and semi auto, PCCs, that I have accumulated over time. I like ARs Becuase they are customizable & fun to shoot. 9mm PCCs used to be economical to shoot with out reloading- that’s why I like those.

But honestly, I like my .357 lever gun better. Ive always been partial to guns with a historical flavor. (Yes I know .357 didn’t exist in the 1800s) I’m thinking about a spencer rifle reproduction, and a .45 colt lever gun. No reason other than I like them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

32
I have quite a few ARs and semi auto, PCCs, that I have accumulated over time. I like ARs Becuase they are customizable & fun to shoot. 9mm PCCs used to be economical to shoot with out reloading- that’s why I like those.

But honestly, I like my .357 lever gun better. Ive always been partial to guns with a historical flavor. (Yes I know .357 didn’t exist in the 1800s) I’m thinking about a spencer rifle reproduction, and a .45 colt lever gun. No reason other than I like them.
I like all my guns. Since acquiring guns in NJ is not easy and requires effort, the upside (for me) is that I try to learn everything I can before buying one, and, of course, trying them, if I can, or something similar if I cannot. And I have a reason (or rationalization :) ) for every gun I've bought. The only one I don't enjoy shooting is the new Taurus 692 Tracker---but that's only because I haven't had a chance to shoot, therefore I don't know if I'll enjoy it!

But the one I like shooting, best, the one that's the most fun, is the .357/.38 Marlin 1894.
Llew wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 9:40 am My own answer seems to be, "Get the one you actually want, even if it costs more than the one you don't want." Which is probably in the chapter titled "Duh."

So... anyone want to sell a levergun in .357 mag? :wink:
Good luck with that! Just don't expect a bargain! (try GunBroker.com).
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

33
I have the AK under folder as the only one the might be affected. Thinking of ordering a couple of 10 magazine for the AK. Don't have or want an AR. I do have the Ruger Ranch Mini-14 and I have two 10 round Magazine ordered and being shipped to me. These are just in case the law doesn't like my 20 rounders. All my other guns should be okay except my Sig 227 45 acp if I use the extended Magazine. My Mini14 semiautomatic does the same function as the AR with greater reliability and is fully legal in all 50 states. Even California did a carve out in their law for the Ruger Ranch Mini-14.

If the law limits the magazine capacity there will be a lot of pissed off Glock owners I know.

The idea for banning the "Assault Rifle" is stupid in the first place. We all know that is based on a fallacy. The AR-15 is not the same as the M4 Carbine. The AR can look like it and in semiautomatic select for the M4 they function the same. But the AR does have the Full Auto select fire burst round that the M4 has. When someone takes an AR15 and modifies it to look like a M4 it is like putting lipstick on a pig. It doesn't make it any better and pisses off the pig or in the case of the AR more people. If the M4 was duck it would quack like a duck, But the AR 15 may look like a duck but it only clucks like a chicken. My Mini14 Looks like chicken and clucks like a chicken.

I do foresee the law changing to outlaw the wrist brace for the AR pistol. It would become like my Mossberg Shockwave. Mossberg makes it very clear not to modify the stock in anyway to add a brace or lengthen it because you are then making a short barrel shotgun and requires registration and a Tax Stamp.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer-Kissinger
Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired.-Swift

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

34
YankeeTarheel wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 8:44 am All 3 of my semi rifles are on Feinstein's list...and two of them are 9mm PCCs. I don't think I know of a single "mass shooting" that involved a PCC, not in 9mm.
While I'm willing to consider all firearms "Weapons of War", not just the dreaded ARs, I'm not sure where PCCs fit in as battlefield arms.

This is an incredible stupid thing to be spending political capital on at this time. Especially when there's no way in HELL Joe Manchin, Jon Tester, or, probably either Bernie or Angus King will go for ANYTHING but UBCs and POSSIBLY a very well-written Red Flag law.
Need a like button..I think those are inevitable..they seem to work in CO. I think a weapon specific or ammo type ban is not gonna happen.

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

35
F4FEver wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 8:45 am
YankeeTarheel wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 8:44 am All 3 of my semi rifles are on Feinstein's list...and two of them are 9mm PCCs. I don't think I know of a single "mass shooting" that involved a PCC, not in 9mm.
While I'm willing to consider all firearms "Weapons of War", not just the dreaded ARs, I'm not sure where PCCs fit in as battlefield arms.

This is an incredible stupid thing to be spending political capital on at this time. Especially when there's no way in HELL Joe Manchin, Jon Tester, or, probably either Bernie or Angus King will go for ANYTHING but UBCs and POSSIBLY a very well-written Red Flag law.
Need a like button..I think those are inevitable..they seem to work in CO. I think a weapon specific or ammo type ban is not gonna happen.
I suspect if it's a Red Flag law that The Former Guy, SSean Hannity, and TucKKKer CarlSSon loudly hate, it's probably got a shot at being a good one. :lol:
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

36
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but prices are already through the roof, check anyplace that actually has anything good to sell.
ARs and AKs are 60-80 year old technology, there are much better choices and they stand an even greater chance of being banned. If Scary Black Rifles are 'grandfathered' you may benefit enormously if you were to ever sell, we've been through this before and Dems got thumped the next election cycle. If SBRs are confiscated, you're screwed and the election cycle will be like nothing any of us have seen.
I: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED
II: NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY
III: KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET
IV: BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET AND WHAT'S BEHIND IT

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

37
TrueTexan wrote:I have the AK under folder as the only one the might be affected. Thinking of ordering a couple of 10 magazine for the AK. Don't have or want an AR. I do have the Ruger Ranch Mini-14 and I have two 10 round Magazine ordered and being shipped to me. These are just in case the law doesn't like my 20 rounders. All my other guns should be okay except my Sig 227 45 acp if I use the extended Magazine. My Mini14 semiautomatic does the same function as the AR with greater reliability and is fully legal in all 50 states. Even California did a carve out in their law for the Ruger Ranch Mini-14.

If the law limits the magazine capacity there will be a lot of pissed off Glock owners I know.

The idea for banning the "Assault Rifle" is stupid in the first place. We all know that is based on a fallacy. The AR-15 is not the same as the M4 Carbine. The AR can look like it and in semiautomatic select for the M4 they function the same. But the AR does have the Full Auto select fire burst round that the M4 has. When someone takes an AR15 and modifies it to look like a M4 it is like putting lipstick on a pig. It doesn't make it any better and pisses off the pig or in the case of the AR more people. If the M4 was duck it would quack like a duck, But the AR 15 may look like a duck but it only clucks like a chicken. My Mini14 Looks like chicken and clucks like a chicken.

I do foresee the law changing to outlaw the wrist brace for the AR pistol. It would become like my Mossberg Shockwave. Mossberg makes it very clear not to modify the stock in anyway to add a brace or lengthen it because you are then making a short barrel shotgun and requires registration and a Tax Stamp.
Not spending a cent on 10-rounders right now because they're probably not going to be banned. They still will be available once Democrats have banned standard-capacity magazines. I have always kept a few 10-rounders for prone/bench shooting but am not wasting money on more right now.
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

39
We didn't have a choice in NJ...you had 6 months after the law was signed to pin them, surrender them, "dispose" of them (selling was supposedly not allowed but how would they prove it), or legally store them. I chose the last. But this June will be 3 years since the law passed the Fed courts haven't been sympathetic to the plaintiffs. We HAD a 15 round limit already.
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

41
Stiff wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:22 pm You know, if I ever move to NJ I may rent a storage space in Stroudsburg, PA and keep my guns there.
There are ways to legally get your guns to NJ as long as they are NJ-Compliant. But you may want to keep your HCMs in PA!
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

42
YankeeTarheel wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 7:56 pm
Stiff wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:22 pm You know, if I ever move to NJ I may rent a storage space in Stroudsburg, PA and keep my guns there.
There are ways to legally get your guns to NJ as long as they are NJ-Compliant. But you may want to keep your HCMs in PA!
I either store my evil black rifle and AR pistol in PA, or sell them. I’m gonna do the same with my G19, because sticking a 10-round mag in it hurts my soul. If the move is confirmed, I’d prolly get a Springfield SOCOM M1A and a G48.
Glad that federal government is boring again.

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

43
Stiff wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:24 pm
YankeeTarheel wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 7:56 pm
Stiff wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:22 pm You know, if I ever move to NJ I may rent a storage space in Stroudsburg, PA and keep my guns there.
There are ways to legally get your guns to NJ as long as they are NJ-Compliant. But you may want to keep your HCMs in PA!
I either store my evil black rifle and AR pistol in PA, or sell them. I’m gonna do the same with my G19, because sticking a 10-round mag in it hurts my soul. If the move is confirmed, I’d prolly get a Springfield SOCOM M1A and a G48.
I don't think AR pistols are legal. But ARs, with a 16" barrel or more can be made compliant.

Why such a purist about a G-19? They are certainly good guns, but they are Glocks--the Ford or Chevy of guns. (ironic that I once swore I'd NEVER own a Chevrolet again--now we have two and our son has one and they are great! My Silverado is maybe my all-time favorite 4 wheel vehicle, even more than my 335i clam shell!)

I have 10 round mags for my P320, VP9, Sub2K & Cx4 (both use 92fs mags) and for my AR-10. It's just a box mag. Either the SCOTUS will expand Heller to "Standard Mags" or end all mag limits--sooner or later.
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

44
YankeeTarheel wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 11:01 pm
Stiff wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:24 pm
I either store my evil black rifle and AR pistol in PA, or sell them. I’m gonna do the same with my G19, because sticking a 10-round mag in it hurts my soul. If the move is confirmed, I’d prolly get a Springfield SOCOM M1A and a G48.
I don't think AR pistols are legal. But ARs, with a 16" barrel or more can be made compliant.

Why such a purist about a G-19? They are certainly good guns, but they are Glocks--the Ford or Chevy of guns. (ironic that I once swore I'd NEVER own a Chevrolet again--now we have two and our son has one and they are great! My Silverado is maybe my all-time favorite 4 wheel vehicle, even more than my 335i clam shell!)

I have 10 round mags for my P320, VP9, Sub2K & Cx4 (both use 92fs mags) and for my AR-10. It's just a box mag. Either the SCOTUS will expand Heller to "Standard Mags" or end all mag limits--sooner or later.
Purely psychological on my part. I’d hate to be reminded that I live in a non-free state every time I see the non standard capacity mag and the compliant AR, because I had the standard configuration for years. I’d rather start fresh with guns that come from the factory as 10-rounders. Just my way to lessen the pain I guess. In several years I may change my mind, or not.
Glad that federal government is boring again.

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

45
I do think eventually I might build a bolt action rifle. Perhaps buy miscellaneous build components and get reloading supplies as they become available again. I’ll keep busy and perhaps be more active in opposition to the legislation by the anti types.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

46
Stiff wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 6:17 am
YankeeTarheel wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 11:01 pm
Stiff wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:24 pm
I either store my evil black rifle and AR pistol in PA, or sell them. I’m gonna do the same with my G19, because sticking a 10-round mag in it hurts my soul. If the move is confirmed, I’d prolly get a Springfield SOCOM M1A and a G48.
I don't think AR pistols are legal. But ARs, with a 16" barrel or more can be made compliant.

Why such a purist about a G-19? They are certainly good guns, but they are Glocks--the Ford or Chevy of guns. (ironic that I once swore I'd NEVER own a Chevrolet again--now we have two and our son has one and they are great! My Silverado is maybe my all-time favorite 4 wheel vehicle, even more than my 335i clam shell!)

I have 10 round mags for my P320, VP9, Sub2K & Cx4 (both use 92fs mags) and for my AR-10. It's just a box mag. Either the SCOTUS will expand Heller to "Standard Mags" or end all mag limits--sooner or later.
Purely psychological on my part. I’d hate to be reminded that I live in a non-free state every time I see the non standard capacity mag and the compliant AR, because I had the standard configuration for years. I’d rather start fresh with guns that come from the factory as 10-rounders. Just my way to lessen the pain I guess. In several years I may change my mind, or not.
I found how Beretta made their 92fs 10 round mags exactly the same length as the 15 rounders, with the "10" indicator hole in EXACTLY the same spot as the "15" indicator hole.

No blocks, no extended base plate...had me stumped. Then I saw what they did. There are two V-shaped indentations on either side of the mag that make it a single-stack instead of a double stack! VERY clever!
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

47
sikacz wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:32 am
keenanmj85 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:18 am
sikacz wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:54 am
sig230 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:41 am Can a State nullify Federal Laws? Wasn't that tested back in the 1860s and found false?
Doesn’t stop them from making laws though. It’ll be interesting to see if the SCOTUS decides to hear a case if it comes up.
The whole thing is pretty foggy. The way the legislation is written it says that it would prohibit local law enforcement from enforcing federal firearms legislation. Not unlike selective marijuana enforcement on the state-level, but at the end of the day the feds can still (and have) come in and done it themselves, sometimes with less than stellar results.
Sure seems like it. I can see the logic of saying to the feds that we’re not going to waste resources on a law that is not easily enforced and mandated by the feds. It says, you made the law, you enforce it. It can have strange results.
The Feds won't go looking but if a crime is committed and a banned weapon is involved then they will move in on that in addition to the other charges be they state or local.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer-Kissinger
Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired.-Swift

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

48
TrueTexan wrote: Sun Apr 18, 2021 6:24 pm
sikacz wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:32 am
keenanmj85 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:18 am
sikacz wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:54 am
Doesn’t stop them from making laws though. It’ll be interesting to see if the SCOTUS decides to hear a case if it comes up.
The whole thing is pretty foggy. The way the legislation is written it says that it would prohibit local law enforcement from enforcing federal firearms legislation. Not unlike selective marijuana enforcement on the state-level, but at the end of the day the feds can still (and have) come in and done it themselves, sometimes with less than stellar results.
Sure seems like it. I can see the logic of saying to the feds that we’re not going to waste resources on a law that is not easily enforced and mandated by the feds. It says, you made the law, you enforce it. It can have strange results.
The Feds won't go looking but if a crime is committed and a banned weapon is involved then they will move in on that in addition to the other charges be they state or local.
I am AMAZED at the number of times I'm up in this uncontrolled range in a National Forest around here and hear what sure sounds like somebody with a bump stock.
Stupid in public..a great way to lose ALL your guns.

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

49
F4FEver wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:15 am
TrueTexan wrote: Sun Apr 18, 2021 6:24 pm
sikacz wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:32 am
keenanmj85 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:18 am

The whole thing is pretty foggy. The way the legislation is written it says that it would prohibit local law enforcement from enforcing federal firearms legislation. Not unlike selective marijuana enforcement on the state-level, but at the end of the day the feds can still (and have) come in and done it themselves, sometimes with less than stellar results.
Sure seems like it. I can see the logic of saying to the feds that we’re not going to waste resources on a law that is not easily enforced and mandated by the feds. It says, you made the law, you enforce it. It can have strange results.
The Feds won't go looking but if a crime is committed and a banned weapon is involved then they will move in on that in addition to the other charges be they state or local.
I am AMAZED at the number of times I'm up in this uncontrolled range in a National Forest around here and hear what sure sounds like somebody with a bump stock.
Stupid in public..a great way to lose ALL your guns.
How do you know it’s not a rubber band or a belt loop? It’s pretty easy physics to mimic.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: A "What If" Question about rifle choices

50
sikacz wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:48 am
F4FEver wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:15 am
TrueTexan wrote: Sun Apr 18, 2021 6:24 pm
sikacz wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:32 am
Sure seems like it. I can see the logic of saying to the feds that we’re not going to waste resources on a law that is not easily enforced and mandated by the feds. It says, you made the law, you enforce it. It can have strange results.
The Feds won't go looking but if a crime is committed and a banned weapon is involved then they will move in on that in addition to the other charges be they state or local.
I am AMAZED at the number of times I'm up in this uncontrolled range in a National Forest around here and hear what sure sounds like somebody with a bump stock.
Stupid in public..a great way to lose ALL your guns.
How do you know it’s not a rubber band or a belt loop? It’s pretty easy physics to mimic.
I don't but not smart to attract attention, IMHO..tough enough to keep that area open as it is. Boulder County and the commissioners would love to shut it down. They already did shut an area down in Left Hand Canyon..

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron