scoutfsu

If it's a G27 then that recoil spring was bought last August-ish.....I generally replace my recoil springs every 5k. That one definitely doesn't have anywhere close to that amount. I picked up some gen2 G19's a little while back and replaced their springs just to get an accurate idea of when the next replacement window should be. Your plan to replace the other small parts is good. It's usually a good idea to keep things like that on hand.

[quote name='Daniel' timestamp='1354771363' post='855615'] It has been more than some"one." I agree with Pole a few posts up. I have seen the video and besides the neutral bit which really doesnt matter in the end as the other two vehicles were mobility kills from the start his actions at the time werent the problem. It was the after the fact #### talking dead guys. [/quote] They were definitely in the killzone of a rehearsed ambush. Putting the lead car in neutral was fail one IMO. IIRC from the report, what was really scathing was the AAR/report saying that Yeager broke contact by himself without the element establishing some sort of fire superiority. He then positioned himself in such a manner that he was unable to effectively render supporting fires for his element (proned out on the median). He self admittedly had no idea where the contact was coming from and didn't do anything to address this. The other team members had to identify the distance, direction, and descriptions. Again, IMO - it's not that he ####ed up. That happens. Its the stuff that happened after the fact that damned him in many eyes. I don't MMQB guys in combat. I understand that things go sideways, sometimes in the worst way. But we need to be brutally self honest in the AAR's.....not passing the buck onto dead men. But Yeager will continue to be Yeager

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1354767003' post='855589'] I've read the official published report on the "incident" James mentioned, and the only people who seem to have a problem with James weren't there, don't know him and haven't trained with him. [/quote] People have been in similar situations and that gives them the background to criticize Yeager for his screwup. You don't have to be in that exact situation to criticize his actions....or lack of actions. I think what really offends people about him is his absolute refusal to accept responsibility for "getting off the X." And if you remember right, people that were there didn't have nice things to say either. What he does is feed off the negative reputation and twist it to suit whatever he's talking about at the moment. I will give him his props that he's a sneaky good business man, if that's the style you like

[quote name='Troutburger' timestamp='1354759117' post='855509'] Yeah that sucks! They gonna cut you a discount? [/quote] DD, for sure that is annoying but it's about 2 minutes of minor effort to pour them back into the boxes. You're definitely correct in that they should've shipped it with a little bit more TLC. Good thing the box didn't rip.

[quote name='razorback2003' timestamp='1354652854' post='854868'] I believe as God is being pushed out of our country and drugs filling the needs of people's hearts instead, you will see all people get more and more evil. [/quote] Just curious but do you find it odd that some of the worst things are perpetrated by people proclaiming it done for god?

Lol someone is desperately searching wikipedia right now...... Having sat through some really neat briefings recently, Mark is correct in his statement. The statistics more than bear him out. eta: the topic that a lot of the headline whores really avoid is black on black violence.

since we're deleting posts now

Dolomite, Specifically on the F1, pg 3 under definitions -i- "the term make, and the various derivatives of such word, shall include manufacturing, putting together.....or otherwise producing a firearm. It looks to me like the ATF considers the word to be the one and the same. What am I missing here?

A Form 1 is a Form 1. Building is another word for manufacturing. You "manufacture" your SBR when you "build" it on your F1. That's why you engrave your information. YOU (or your trust) are the manufacturer. On a F4, you are transferring.....which is why you don't engrave anything.

What? Manufacturing and building your own suppressor is the same thing. A form 1 is manufacturing......that's what you do when you "build" a suppressor or an SBR

The federal gov't has already threatened action on anyone who tries that. TN is not the only state to try something like this. TN may not care, but the Federal Gov't surely does. And they are the ones who will ultimately try you and stick you in prison. Make no mistake about that.

[quote name='AK Guy' timestamp='1354210706' post='852469'] If it's like most, that knurled retainer will need to be loosened and then the rail spins off the barrel nut adapter. [/quote] It is. Think of it like a Larue rail. Same mounting mechanism.

Cool. Old school short FF RAS. All you should have to do is vise it and turn. I bet there's a ton of loctite on there though. Heat with a torch if you have to. A strap wrench is probably a good bet too. I believe they had a specific wrench but don't remember 100%

What type of KAC rail? There are several.....are you sure it's one of their URX's? Picture?

Only if you're an innocent grandmother or a [b]UF( [/b][b] )[/b][b] [/b]student

TMF, Because people like the OP have all sorts of grudges for all sorts of reasons. Bank on the fact that because it was a WalMart, people will feel like they're sticking it to big business too. Look at the people in this thread that are lamenting this criminal.....even though in the commission of a criminal act he initiated, then escalated to battery.....things went wrong. As a result of his direct, criminal actions - things spun out of control and he ended up dead. And people want to hang the police reject private security rambo out to dry.

Extreme sarcasm. Just like my post under that stupid f'ing picture of the Nazi. Check out my other posts in this thread. They're a bit more informative and conversational. But some things, like that quote and picture, deserve to be ridiculed. ETA: And my edited response wasn't meant to sound snippy. Sometimes threads get so long, a lot of what was said is forgotten or people don't read everything.

[quote name='rebeldrummer' timestamp='1354115693' post='851889'] why the broad stroke, stereotype response? are you holding a grudge? wearing your emotions on your sleeve and carrying a chip on your shoulder is NOT the way to live my friend. [/quote] Tell the OP that. I didn't come up with those words. eta: maybe this thread is getting so long that people forget a lot of what was originally said. Or maybe not reading the entire thread. IDK.

That's because they're not wannabe's. They're police reject private security Rambos

Man, that sure is a neat uniform.

[quote name='K191145' timestamp='1353980866' post='851090'] Well i'm glad you cleared that up, so the next time I catch some thief breaking into my tool shed i'll just shoot him in the back, much easier that way. He started the situation anyway. [/quote] Good deal guy. I recommend putting them through the medulla oblongotta region to ensure a complete separation of the CNS. Less twitching that way.

I'm talking about people thinking it's ok to let a thief be a thief because it's not on their property or it's a corporations property. The corporation doesn't think its worth the risk because the legal system has been so corrupted that anyone and everyone can be sued over nothing. If they wouldn't face frivolous lawsuits, then maybe they would be a bit more stringent about keeping their rightful goods in their store and not watching them walkout. Stealing pennies? Those pennies add up and they are someone's pennies. Rambo wannabe? Police reject private security? renta-a-cop? cop wannabe? Sounds like a lot of people here are carrying baggage. You talk about risk/reward? Here's one for you - [b]if you risk breaking the law, you risk consequences[/b]. Also under the "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" doctrine. This thief's death is [b]directly [/b]attributable to [b][i]his [/i][/b]decision to break the law. If he did not decide it was ok to steal merchandise, he would still be alive. He decided he was above the law and things spun up from there. Hoping that the thief's family sues Walmart for millions . I hope Walmart sues them for the thief's bad decision. He is the one that kicked this whole thing off. Everything that happened is a direct result of the decision he made. People think it is ok to stand there and watch a criminal flaunt the law. Remember that when someone decides to come into your house or place of business and walk out with your stuff.

Some embarrassing commentary in here and revealing of people's morals and ethics. And people wonder why criminals think they can do what ever they want with little to no repercussions.