I've had Europeans jump on me online over some factual statements and statistics about gun control (as sold) being a lie having no bearing on overall crime rates, and the nature of the tactics employed with a purposeful agenda to restrict the rights of only the otherwise law abiding. People get so emotional over it. There's no need for that. Keep your nonsense over there, please.
I just got a thing in the mail from my friendly overlords in office that Massachusetts ruled bump stocks and trigger cranks illegal. It goes on to say that it's not legal to possess in my house with a mouse, on a box with a fox.... etc.
This is wonderful news. How you say?
Well I actually don't have one of those toys. They don't know that. All they know is I jumped through all of the hoops to be a LEGAL firearm owner.
It just tickles me that anyone would think this would affect anything at all.
They have no idea how much of anything there is out there or who owns what.
Here's an idea: They should pass a law that makes it illegal to murder someone. That will totally fix it.
They're the government. It's for your own good. Such a proactive measure that will no doubt save countless lives should get all involved re-elected for furthering such "common sense safety measures" going forward.
My "firearm" build got a minor upgrade by the way of a swap from a PWS FSC muzzle device to the their Triad. It's a combination flash hider, compensator, and blast diverter. The FSC was a flash hider/brake/comp. It works well, but is a bit blasty on such short barrels. It'll be going on my 16" rifle, eventually. 20180125_085905 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr 20180125_085842 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr
The SO and I just spent our Christmas and Birthday funds;
She got the Glock Model 22:
I decided to get a Browning Buckmaster practical:
I went for the browning since I intend to fire a lot of rounds and the 22LR ammo is a lot more affordable than the .40. I need lots of practice to get back to my former marksmanship level. The Browning just felt right and when I test fired one at the range I was pretty amazed at just how well it did feel.
My brother took us out to the range last year where he brought several of his handguns. The SO was amazed at how accurate she was with the Model 22 and Model 21. She felt the Model 22 was a better fit for her.
Smells like corruption to me. Who got greased to let Sig off the hook for the full test and evaluation scheme?
Corruption or incompetence?
That was a strange situation.
The ejecting live rounds sounds iffy. Training issue? Basepads coming off when dropped? Rounds inadvertently releasing from the feed lips?
The doesn't work well with "regular bullets" is a bit implausible. Military ammo is at +P specs and should theoretically feed best. Most feed issues I encounter with casual shooters are people having trouble hand racking the first round in. If it is indeed only 75% reliable with ball ammo that'd be wholly unacceptable. These guns were in civilian hands for some time before military trials/issue, and I've never heard of issues with ball ammunition, the commercial stuff being a bit softer than the military stuff.
This stuff tends to get a bit political and misinformation and disinformation is very typical after such large scale procurements, especially when there's opposing factions in play. The media at large loves to sensationalize such things as well.
The firing when dropped (at any angle) is completely unacceptable for a modern firearm. That was factual and completely ridiculous. What a scandal.
Only big negative I see is going deaf after first shot inside the house.
Compare contrast versus a .45 +P suppressed?
Everything unsuppressed is too loud indoors. A suppressed subsonic round is always quite tolerable, however, there is no comparison between rifle and pistol rounds for defensive uses.
I may suppress my 9mm carbine just for kicks, but I'd still rather suffer some temporary hearing loss and potential minor long term damage over not using the best tool. It's possible to get a suppressor that works for both, but I'd rather not have the bulk.
The decision to go with a relatively new design over one proven over decades of military and police use seems questionable.
I'm no Glock fan, but between the two, the Glock seems the obvious choice.
The idea that an armorer is going to swap grip frames out for different users seems laughable, and is likely what one would receive when such a request is made. Until deployed, the guns tend to get passed around like a cheap...well you know...
Our M9's were good. So few were issued them, and live firing training was minimal, so aside from cosmetics they were in good shape. We also had the factory mags, as well.
I had one M16A2 that was junk. On my last qualification I barely qual'd despite being consistently among the top few shooters every other time. At my original unit, my armorer always gave me a good rifle, as I took a personal pride in it. At the other, I believe it was either malicious intent or simply a matter of poor unit level repair that I was given a clearly unsat weapon. What a POS.
I've owned and enjoyed a Beretta 92S since 1978. It just feels right to me, and has endured many rounds through it. It's had a trigger job performed, and BOMAR sights installed by a Beretta gunsmith, and with Pachmayr grips fills out the hand, well, handily.
That's not too far off the mark. "I just want to stop them, I don't want to kill anyone," is a sentiment that is often heard from a prospective new gun buyer. Whether they survive or not is between them and their maker.