jkelly

Of course, it would be sexist to think base behavior is limited to one sex. Respectfully, jkelly

Ahhhhh, you're kidding right? Respectfully, jkelly

I'm confused, why is it you need to speak for her? I assume she is an adult. Why would you swear in front of your fiance? It only shows your lack of respect for her? If your fiance needs your help with an RO or RO(s), I'd suggest you speak with them privately. Respectfully, jdkelly

Liars are strange animals: Liars are usually good wordsmiths. They lie for their advantage. They rationalize their actions. When caught, their lie is never their fault. Remember who has lied to you, they will do it again. Respectfully, jkelly

glock 40 cal Welcome to the forum! I don't think we know that the LEO in question has realized his departments training is subpar. I didn't see anyone complaining about the LEO having a firearm. I would think the officer could get permission from his department to go unloaded for a few hours while surronded by some of the more law abiding people he knows(we get our back ground checked with some frequency). Respectfully, jkelly

Why was the Van parked on the highway? Why was the parked van being video taped? Respectfully, jkelly

Welcome to the Forum! I have three SL 560s, one each for my 1911s, CZ-75s and S&W 686s. I replaced my Uncle Mike's with the SL 560 when the rules changed and Uncle Mike's became "Verboten". My draws with the 560 were about 0.10 seconds FASTER then with the Uncle Mike's it replaced, go figure. Although it is faster then the Uncle Mike's [for me anyway] it is not as secure (again for me), so keep that in mind. You might still be able to get them at BRIANENOS.COM, for about $70.00 I think, or at Wilson Combat for $110-$120 with a slightly different name. Remember, just because the SL560 (belt slide model) may be legal for everyone you know or meet, it may not be legal for you. Welcome to the world of IDPA. I like your S&W1911SC, I almost bought one yesterday, but ended up with a S&W Model 29 3" instead. Kicks a bit. Respectfully, jkelly

Tito, I can understand why you might want to shoot IPSC instead of IDPA, it can be a lot of fun! Respectfully, jkelly

Tough poll on the rules: 65% Won't be following at least one of the new rules. 98% Won't follow the rules all the time. 2% Will be in full compliance. Now there's an interesting set of stats. Respectfully, jkelly

I think a: We make some allowances for rules we don't like. would have fit nicely between the 3rd and 4th selections. I don't think I've ever shot at club that didn't filter/alter IDPA's rules to some extent. I don't believe that those clubs would now embrace this years two Rule revisions if they didn't agree with them. Respectfully, jkelly

How could you know that? jkelly

I enjoy higher round count stages, with greater shooting difficulty (distance) and with less SO judgement calls. Respectfully, jkelly

I had wanted to shoot the IDPA Nationals either in 2005 or 2006 but now it wouldn't be worth the effort/cost to me. I would think that to "save face" that IDPA would need to have more revolver shooters at the Nationals this year then last. I would expect that to be a priority of the anti-moon clip crowd in IDPA. Good luck to those who shoot! Respectfully, jkelly

300lbGorilla, Thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed the humor in it. Respectfully, jkelly

Bills Audacious Decree Respectfully, jkelly

Cell phones are to much like a leash. If work didn't provide a cell phone I wouldn't have one! Respectfully, jkelly

Craig, Thank you for the apology, I'm looking forward to shooting with you again! I offer my apology to you also as I could have pointed out our error in a different way. I'll try to get to Hartford for the 4 June match. Respectfully, John Kelly

Mr. Buckland, At least I believe that it is Mr. Buckland. If you will reread my post you will see that I never said that the blind stage at the S&W 2005 WNs was dropped because an SO had an advantage. Therefore YOU are diseminating incorrect information, not I. What I said was: The "it" refered to in my above quote is referencing shooting a "blind" stage with prior knowledge. It (I) made no reference to the shooters status as an SO. It is my belief that the blind stage at the S&W WNs was dropped because someone had prior knowlege. That's what I was told at the time, by an SO (maybe you?). Am I incorrect in this? Respectfully, jkelly

Freeidaho, Again, you are mixing two seperate trains of thought. Prior knowledge of a "blind" stage is a tremendous advantage. If it wasn't such an advantage then the SOs wouldn't work so hard to keep the stage "FAIR" by keeping them blind. How well, or poorly, you manage your set up time does not alter that. Respectfully, jkelly

I see freeidaho's last post as encompassing two different trains of thought that have nothing to do with each other. However underappricated FI might feel, for the effort he puts toward the matches he works, that doesn't alter the fact that shooting a "blind" with prior knowledge is a tremendous advantage. If it wasn't an advantage, then they wouldn't drop compromised stages, as they did at the last S&W Winter Nationals. Respectfully, jkelly

Gabe, What kind of stages where they running up in Vermont? Respectfully, jkelly

Gee Jeeper, What did you do AZ the last time you lived there? Respectfully, jkelly

Must be all the extra weight of the bullet proof glass. My little 4WD Ranger went 95k with the factory brakes. I have 101K on my second set of tires (these were the replacement tires for the Firestones that came apart) so, at 128k miles, I haven't had to new buy tires yet (okay there was a $100 upgrade when I swapped out the Firestones tires). It will be interesting when the truck is inspected this month. Respectfully, jkelly

I think that there is a certain practicality involved with interpreting a poorly written or incompletely thought out rule. Using a "barney" is the most efficient and safe way to ensure that your gun is fully loaded. Retaining the "barney" mag is safer then diverting the SOs attention while handing it to them. For a 4 Stage match with 6 strings and 25 shooters this is 150 times that the SO's attention is diverted. I think that the mag limit rule is almost universally ignored (that is carrying a barney mag, not shooting extra mags) as I've never seen a club that would not allow a "barney" mag. So, in at least in this case, there is a point in ignoring the rule(s) we have. Respectfully, jkelly

I think the 1911 division is a great idea. The 1911 division may not include all 1911 style guns, but it does give most SS 1911 shooters more of a level playing field. It was introduced some eight months in advance rather then shoved down our throats retroactively. It doesn't hurt shooters that were following an existing set of rules by costing them (perhaps) hundreds of dollars in equipment. It doesn't put guns into divisions they can't compete in (although it does leave some in those divisions). This time I'm with the industry "HOMERs", although for different reasons! Respectfully, jkelly