Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Trvlngnrs

Classified
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    65

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Trvlngnrs

    Glock 22 into 9mm

    in Glock

    Posted

    I just bought a .40-9mm Lone Wolf conversion barrel for my G35 thru MidwayUSA.com. It was the cheapest place...I think it was about $105. I also did a Google search for Midway USA coupons, and found one for $10 off orders over $100.

    Haven't shot it yet.

    Trvlngnrs

    McCarthy Bill Would Ban Common Self-Defense Magazines

    in Firearms Law / Announcements

    Posted

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=6139

    Friday, January 21, 2011

    On Tuesday, Jan. 18, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 308, the "Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act." The bill would ban the manufacture and importation of new magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Unlike the magazine ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004, her new bill would also make it illegal for the tens of millions of Americans who already own these magazines to sell or otherwise transfer them, even through inheritance.

    In a letter to her colleagues, Rep. McCarthy claimed, "The only reason for the existence of these devices is to be able to shoot as many people as quickly as possible." Yet her bill would allow the continued acquisition and possession of these magazines by law enforcement officers, who carry firearms to defend themselves and the public. It would even allow these magazines to be transferred to law enforcement officers upon retirement, even though a retired officer's right to use firearms for self-defense is the same as any other private citizen's right.

    With H.R. 308, Rep. McCarthy is pursuing the agenda of banning guns and magazines that she brought to Washington 14 years ago. In 2003, 2005 and 2007, Rep. McCarthy introduced bills that, like H.R. 308, would have banned magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Those bills would also have banned all firearms that were subject to the federal "assault weapon" ban of 1994-2004 and all firearms made specifically to comply with the 1994 ban. They would also have banned all semi-automatic shotguns, commonly owned semi-automatic rifles that don't use detachable magazines of any size, and other commonly owned firearms.

    H.R. 308 would severely violate the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, especially arms that are commonly owned. Firearms designed to use magazines that hold more than 10 rounds are among the most commonly owned self-defense guns today.

    If you own magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, H.R. 308 would also put you at risk of prosecution. Because virtually no existing magazines bear any markings that show when they were made, H.R. 308 would require that magazines made after the ban be marked to distinguish them from pre-ban magazines. However, the bill's "grandfather clause" for possession of pre-ban magazines would only create an affirmative defense -- forcing defendants to prove that they possessed the magazines before the ban. This nearly impossible requirement is a major difference from the 1994 ban, which put the burden of proof on the government.

    Obviously, despite the burdens it would put on honest Americans, Rep. McCarthy's bill wouldn't stop a criminal from obtaining magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Tens of millions of Americans own countless tens of millions of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds; even Rep. McCarthy admits that confiscation of existing magazines would be impossible. Anything that common can be stolen or bought on the black market. And even if no magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds were available, a criminal could still use multiple smaller magazines, multiple firearms, more powerful handguns, or weapons other than firearms.

    Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative and urge him or her to strongly oppose H.R. 308! You can call your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121.

    How Important Is the "Same Sight Picture"

    in Miscellaneous BEginners

    Posted

    I'm thinking it's more important for the front sight to be similar than the rear, since it's blurred anyway. As long as the rear sight is black like my other guns, I don't think it will be a problem. It's amazing how the white U on the new-to-me G35's rear sight grabs my attention for an instant.

    Whew...I'm glad I figured that out! Now for the front sight.............. :unsure:

    Delapoint Problem?

    in Open Pistols

    Posted · Edited by Trvlngnrs

    OK, I can understand that, but the base of the triangle covers 3" at 10 yards when the triangle is supposed to cover 7.5" at 100 yards?

    What I'm trying to determine is to see if it would be worth it to make a fuss and try to exchange the triangle for the 3.5 moa dot.

    How Important Is the "Same Sight Picture"

    in Miscellaneous BEginners

    Posted

    My go-to gun is a G19 with Warren Tactical Sevigny Carry night sights.

    My wife's gun, which I also use, is a M&P 9 JG, with Warren Tactical Competition rear sight and a red fiber optic front sight.

    I just traded for a near new G35 with the stock Glock adjustable sights which I don't care for due to the large white U shaped outline on the rear. I'd like to get the adjustable Dawson rear/fiber optic front after reading all the good thing you guys say about them.

    Should I stick with the Warren Tactical's just to keep a similar sight picture? Is this a big deal or am I over analyzing it?

    Thanks,

    Trvlngnrs

    St George, UT

    Night Sights

    in Glock

    Posted · Edited by Trvlngnrs

    I have the Warren Tactical Sevigny Carry sights on my G19. I purchased the 2 lamp set with the green front and yellow rear.

    The rear lamp is not outlined in white, so it's not distracting during the day. Since the front lamp larger, it's also brighter than the rear. At night, just put the large green light on top of the fainter yellow light and you're good to go!

    Sevigny Carry Sight Set

    Delapoint Problem?

    in Open Pistols

    Posted

    Thanks CocoBolo. I understand what your saying, but I'm trying to figure out if it's normal to have such a large triangle. I live in a smaller town that doesn't have anything but basic gun stuff, so I can't go look at one myself. I purchased this one off the internet.

    I've called Leupold and they say the triangle is supposed to get bigger as it moves away from your eye. I'm thinking this is kind of crazy....but it's the only red dot sight I've owned so what do I know :wacko:

    Trvlngnrs

    What do I do first?

    in Miscellaneous BEginners

    Posted

    I went to a four day defensive handgun class at Front Sight in Nevada. It was a great learning experience for me. They have a booklet on dry firing you can purchase from their website. The booklet has lots of pictures. It walks you thru the grip, stance draw, holstering, etc.

    Later in the year, I took my wife to the 2 day Defensive handgun course. She went reluctantly, and came home excited.

    Front Sight training book.

    Delapoint Problem?

    in Open Pistols

    Posted

    I have a 7.5 moa triangle reticule Deltapoint milled into my M&P. I'm not sure if I have a problem or not. It seem that the triangle is greater than 7.5 moa.

    1) At 10 yards the triangle covers slightly more than 3". I determined this by making 1" marks on a white piece of paper with a black Sharpie then aiming at it from ten yards. If my math is correct, 3" @ 10 yards = 30" @ 100 yards = 30 moa.

    2) When aiming at an electrical outlet at three yards, the triangle covers an area from the top of the outlet (round part, not cover plate) to the ground plug. This is slightly less than 1". If my math is correct, 1" @ 3yards = 33" @ 100 yards = 33 moa.

    3) I also confirmed it by looking thru my brother's 7 MOA Trijicon RMR which is mounted on his Glock. The Trijicon 7 MOA is MUCH smaller than my 7.5 MOA delta. My triangle's base is actually wider than my front suppressor sight that is on my M&P.

    Can some of you Deltapoint owners describe the size of your reticule by aiming at something (credit card, 3x5 card...) at 5 or 10 yards and tell me the size of your triangle?

    I've attached a picture looking thru the sight. The picture has some magnification to it, so everything is on the larger size, but you'll general idea of what I'm talking about. The triangle in the picture looks malformed, but it isn't really.

    Thanks

    Trvlngnrs

    post-24839-061357500 1294715024_thumb.jp

×
×
  • Create New...