Carlos

Have not found that particular campaign promise. BUT, the next administration's plan to tax certain businesses out of existence (whether gun making or power generation) is plausible in light of the following (with link & audio): "Let me sort of describe my overall policy.What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted." link: http://newsbusters.org/node/25829?q=blogs/...t-coal-industry

Thanks for the detailed report Denise! This is off to a very good start it appears. I could NOT be more impressed or optimistic. -the right people were involved (industry, MDs, Benning(AMU?) and apparently MIL/LEO 3 gun already running within NRA's competition department). -the approach was apparently an open minded, flexible approach - which is appropriate when dealing with established, profitable, successful shoots Keep up the good work.

Yes as far as I can tell. They already have "limited" 3gun for military/leo.

This thread brings up an important topic for discussion. As such, please keep it civil so it does not get locked. Couple of thoughts for discussion: 1) Seems that the NRA will simply create YET ANOTHER version of 3gun/multigun, in addition to USPSA & IPSC 3gun, as well as all the other "outlaw" 3gun shoots - each with its own particular set of rules. Those rules have proven contentious around here lately. 2) Two large issues (that I can see anyway) currently separating USPSA 3gun from all the other shoots are: a) What rules define safe gun handling? and Scoring method? There seems to be little agreement here. I will not touch on scoring (anyone else care to?) but, From what I can tell, one big issue is mixed-weapon stages and transitions. An outlaw match I shoot locally often requires "transitions" involving re-holstering on the clock in some stages. Other stages allow letting the rifle drop & swing by a single point sling with only the safety (hopefully) engaged, while switching to handgun (all on the clock). USPSA rules would never permit this. If NRA writes its own rules, I would imagine that they would be at least as restrictive (I see them as safe) as the USPSA rules - plus minimum trigger pull weights are likely. To that end, we will still have just as many outlaw shoots, plus USPSA, plus now NRA rules. I'd rather see more uniformity between all the shoots. Still, the NRA has the power to draw MANY more gun owners into the sport of 3gun/multigun. Moreover, our own Larry Houck has paved the way with a successful season of NRA Military Personal and leo 3gun run by NRA. So that is a hopeful sign. Thoughts?

Odd that Az is running a multi billion dollar deficit and we need cameras for 'safety', isn't it? Never mind that about 10% of the people in Maricopa county are 'undocumented' illegals and nothing is being done, Governor Janet spends her time getting 'safety' cameras set up all over the state. Just another source of revenue for the state. Anyone know how I might be able to register my car & get new plates in Mexico? I am not above paying a few extra pesos to the right hombre down there - if you catch my drift.

Congrats A62335! Assembling your own lower is a satisfying accomplishment. You can, and should rightfuly be, very proud of your new rifle. If you have time, let us know how it shoots. Everyone: a big benefit of assembling your lower from parts is that you save 10% by not having to pay the federal "excise tax" on complete guns. Now, before anyone asks: "Isn't that tax evasion?" - the answer is no. Its no more tax evasion than mail-ordering a laptop from out of state and not having to pay your state's sales tax. And before you ask: "but isn't that tax supposed to support hunters and fisherman? -so shouldn't we want to pay it?" -the answer is: yes the tax was supposed to go to support hunting and fishing but no, it does not support them since our leaders in D.C. long ago subverted the tax and use it now for whatever they wish. USMC: Les Baer still sells raw forgings with only the mag well cut out - probably by EDM (though they might have a broach). Quality work.

Having dumped all my "rant" into the last big thread on this, I am fresh out of "rant," at the moment, sorry.

Wise advice. Value of things, to me at least, is: -anything imported. Buy now what you want right now. -anything you can't make or buy later. To me, that is: LEAD based primers, powder, rifled barrels (especially imported ones) and reliable magazines over 10 rounds. -title II firearms such as supressors, particularly via the trust/corp route.

I think I found it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Gustav_recoilless_rifle Looks like the new ones are made of carbon fiber w. steel liner, aluminum, and plastic for a new weight of only 8.5 KG; even some of our US G.I.s use these things, according to above.

What exactly IS that thing? 84MM recoiless maybe? Are there any re-wat D.D.s in the US? Looks fun.

Hi Jack - that is also the way I see things. I do not want to stray close to the line separating our forum from politics, but: -there was a recent announcement that the new administration is planning to take immediate action on a number of issues by using executive orders and directing new agency heads to act within their administrative powers. Under the GCA 1968, all imports of firearms into the USA are prohibited. There is an "exceptions" clause - and that clause contains the "sporting purposes" importability test. Defining what "sporting purposes" means is up the administration alone, and they can act without congress' input. In fact, I believe Alex Wakal (see above) knows this from personal experience since they suddenly decided that one of his shotguns was "not sporting enough" and demanded he register it like a machinegun (a d.d. actually). Different issue actually, since it was US made, but you get the idea. I am simpy putting this information out there in the hopes that we at least see what could happen to some of the imported equipment we use in our "non-sport" and maybe plan accordingly. Regards, d. PS is this report 10 years old? -appears so. Is it suddenly relevant again? -also appears so. Are the "conclusions" of this study not the basis of the new/proposed AWB? I thought the President Elect cited this during one of his responses to Gun Control?

Located this RE: import bans on popular SPORTING rifles for - frankly, our sport: LINK to government's ban on all imported guns - except the ones excepted "We received some comments urging us to find "practical shooting" is a sport for the purposes of section 925(d)(3).48 Further, we received information showing that practical shooting is gaining in popularity in the United States and is governed by an organization that has sponsored national events since 1989. It also has an international organization. While some may consider practical shooting a sport, by its very nature it is closer to police/combat-style competition and is not comparable to the more traditional types of sports, such as hunting and organized competitive target shooting. Therefore, we are not convinced that practical shooting does, in fact, constitute a sporting purpose under section 925(d)(3).49 However, even if we were to assume for the sake of argument that practical shooting is a sport for the purposes of the statute, we still would have to decide whether a firearm that could be used in practical shooting meets the sporting purposes test. In other words, it still would need to be determined whether the firearm is of a type that is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to practical shooting and other sporting purposes.50 Moreover, the legislative history makes clear that the use of a military weapon in a practical shooting competition would not make that weapon 48 Practical shooting involves moving, identifying, and engaging multiple targets and delivering a num ber of shots rapidly. In doing this, practical shooting participants test their defensive skills as they encounter props, including walls and barricades, with full or partial targets, "no-shoots," steel reaction targets, movers, and others to challenge them. 49 As noted earlier, ATF has taken the position that police/combat-style competitions do not constitute a “sporting purpose.” This position was upheld in Gilbert Equipment Co., 709 F. Supp. at 1077. 50 Our findings on the use and suitability of the LCMM rifles in practical shooting competitions are contained in the “Suitability for Sporting Purposes” section of this report. 18 sporting: “if a military weapon is used in a special sporting event, it does not become a sporting weapon. It is a military weapon used in a special sporting event.”51 While none of the LCMM rifles are military weapons, they still retain the military feature of the ability to accept a large capacity military magazine." Sadly, it looks like any imported gun we might like to use in our sport could go away on a whim and at the stroke of a pen.

I just bought 3 of the KBI Korean made Glock 19 (9mm) mags for $11 each in sealed packages. They are very good quality. There is a review and fotos in the Glock section of the site www.ar15.com

. Hell, may be some Russian was having a bad day or drinking to much vodka... all I know is the batch I had sucked.. one was missing an anvil too. Awesome. That one just made my day!

Leave USPSA out of this one! You can support all you want off the mag in USPSA Tactical and Limited. The concept is "freestyle". I should go on a rant about rules standardization at this point but I will control myself. I would like to hear JJ's input though. - uh, I kinda thought I WAS leaving USPSA out of this one (please take another look at my post). No confusion on my part here; the rule being discussed is purely part of an out-law, one-off 3gun shoot that makes up its own rules as it sees fit. As much as I believe it will never happen, I DO wish that more 3gun shoots would get together and agree on a UNIFORM set of rules - even if they (understandably) choose not to adopt USPSA rules.

2 round burst? Must be the IPSC/USPSA model Thanks for the pics!

OP: noticed you are in the VA/MD section. Around here in general, we don't hold up shoots to pick up brass & don't expect other squad members to scoop your brass for you; if you want it, you will be welcome to go pick it up yourself AFTER the match tear down. I know that there are different local customs or practices in other parts of the country. But around here, time is in short supply & most local shoots are generally considered "lost brass" in order to keep things moving along. Just something to consider in making your decision. Regards, D.

There really is no need to clean off the OneShot; Brian's video shows the application of it, and he rightly states that its OK to leave it on the cases, and it might even aid in feeding. Before I got the video, I would also sometimes tumble loade rounds in the tumbler - which, contrary to popular reloading manual myth, is a safe practice (and I use Federal primers no less). But, that is not an option with hollow points and its not needed.

Ridiculous! Anyone that thinks this should be banned needs to take a long hard look at the latest basic training that our military has adopted - which specifically teaches soldiers to use the magazine as a rest (there is an Army Times article around here someplace on this internet). I realize USPSA does not have to mirror military doctrine (and I doubt its USPSA's intention to ban magazine rests). But all these so-called "tactical" or outlaw 3gun matches? If they ban magazine rests, then they are more like unrealistic games than the USPSA they seek to avoid.

I use the same 4.8 charge for .45 to make Major with a 200 gr LSWC, and that is a nice load. I now use only Solo1000 for what I relaod: 9mm, .40 and .45, and that is nice. I load it in .45 ACP revolver, 40 Major and 9mm minor - which is also what I like about it: one powder to rule them all. Seems like Solo 1000 is N320s replacement for me at least.

Thanks for the link Al! I remember that thread now. Any thoughts on whether the cracks you experienced were related to the very high slide velocity that the 75 design is known for? Regards, d. ps OP: you might take a look at one of the two specialized CZ forums (Angus has his own section on one of them) to see if anyone has done a CZ in .357.

It would indeed be an awesome load - for shooting bowling pins. Expect stout recoil. If it hits 1200, that would be a 176 Power Factor. And there it is, right on line for everyone to see: - a published 9mm Major load. Must be safe, if its published in this litigious age. I don't doubt that your Glock 34's longer barrel will produce that velocity. I'd use the heaviest recoil spring available. BTW, I have shot Major 124s from a stock Glock 17. The Glock can take it. d.

I would expect the .40 S&W (especially if running some of the hot ammo available for this cartridge) to be really hard on a CZ-75, frankly. This is a Major caliber cartridge, and thus way beyond the power level of what the gun was originally designed to handle. Though it would be cool if replacing one inexpensive part could cure the problem. Any input from anyone out there who's put a lot of Major loaded .40 ammo through a CZ-75 pattern gun, either with the stock slide stop or the EGW replacement? Actually, I have: I owned 2 CZ-75 Standard IPSC pistols, both in .40 cal from the factory. I sold one, the other is going full speed, and I have never broken a single slide stop in one (all ammo was major). Moreover, Johny has been shooting one a lot longer than I have, and he has not experienced the slide-stop breakage problems that seemed to plague the old 175 to 180 - power factor P9s. Here is Johny's site: StrictlyIPSC.com Of course, although our guns are CZ-75s (see photo above it says CZ 75 right on the slide), they are much newer than the old P9s of the early 90s, and they are made by CZ in the Czech Republic (not Italy), and the frames they have are "intermediate" instead of the old small framed P9s. These are circa 1997 guns; newer ones are called "Tactical Sports" by CZ. However, .40 cal 75s (by several makers) have been around for years BEFORE the IPSC/TS of 1997. The 40 cal CZs don't break slide stops like the did way back when. My Jericho 941F (aka baby desert eagle) is still on its first slide stop too - and its a small frame that was cast by Tanfoglio and finished in Isreal. It was one of the first in the country and it was designed for the 41AE - which was a hot for-runner of the .40. I can understand why you'd assume slide stops would break when you wrote: " This is a Major caliber cartridge, and thus way beyond the power level of what the gun was originally designed to handle." But my experience with all my 75s from different makers, plus the experience of many others here, proves that 75s don't break slide stops like they used to. And where its a problem (can't imagine where that might be with the lower PFs), EGW makes an inexpensive fix. Regards, d.

As you said, you will be starting with a 40, so there should not be any issues with durability. Even if so, the inexpensive EGW hardened slide stop will cure the problem. Don't know, however, of a maker of .357Sig barrels. Maybe call Bar Sto? As long as you are OK with the capacity disadvantage in Open, or shooting Minor in Limited, the Sig would be viable and cheap in light of the free once-fired Sig brass you get.

Current EPA (as of 11/14/08) is proposing to restrict commercial lead smelters and others who emit lead into the atmosphere. Don't expect the next EPA to be especially "lead friendly." Why would that matter to us? -all our primers are lead-based. There are alternative, lead free primers - but they only last about 5 years before some start going dead. The longer you own them, the more of them that will go dead. And they cost more. Choose wisely.