TMF

I don't need to be a football star to understand why a team sucks so bad. I also am sick of all the whining coming from the Michigan auto industry that blames everyone but their own crooked ways.

My wife's foreign car comes with a 10 year 100,000 mi bumper to bumper. My truck had a defective cable housing break twice at 7,000 and 24,000 miles. They wouldn't replace it the second time because my warranty was no longer valid since I had the vehicle for 40 months. I explained that this was a defective item that was recently replaced. They explained that since there wasn't a recall there was nothing they could do. I explained that not only will I never buy a vehicle from them again, I would tell everyone in my family and all my coworkers not to buy their brand again. Since I'm likely to buy a few more trucks before I die, I figure they are losing around 120K in sales from me over a lifetime. I've talked at least half a dozen people out of buying their products so far. I hope all that lost revenue was worth the 300 bucks it cost me to fix their defective cabling bracket. It would have been 10 bucks in parts and 15 minutes in labor on their end. This is why these companies (this was Chrysler) deserve to fail. If you won't stand behind your product why on earth would I come back and buy more. Madness. When my dodge finally craps out I'm getting a Toyota. The auto manufacturers of Michigan can suck start a dillon for all I care.

Bahahahahaha!!

It wouldn't be impossible to challenge the two party system with viable candidates if people started caring at the beginning of a term rather than waiting until 1 year before an election when the two parties are already choosing our future leader for us. Even if we never get a third party candidate in there (which obviously ain't gonna happen) we should still show our power to the two parties to let them know we don't approve of where we're headed. Simply re-elect no one. Once incumbents realize that they're going to be fired at the end of their terms if certain criteria isn't met maybe they'll start focusing on what's important. Sounds great in theory, but Americans are too divided over silly issues to focus on the important stuff. It's a simple concept, fire everyone.

Haha, no offense intended at all. I was saying that if I had to suggest/teach someone that had never handled a pistol before it'd be a Glock. Of course, my Glock is collecting dust again now that I roll 8+1 in my 1911. I can't get the first round out of my Glock as quickly as my 1911.

That's why I think they are great guns for first timers. The grip angle is actually quite ergonomic as it makes the slide more parallel to your forearm, which, in theory, should aid in easier sight alignment and recoil management. The rest of us have just been using more perpendicular grip angles our whole lives and have a hard time adjusting.

Thanks for the well thought out reviews guys. I can see how there would be concern for hitting that trigger while drawing, especially with a little adrenaline sprinkled on top. I think I'll still give it a try, and if I'm not comfortable with it I'm only out 40 bucks and someone gets a freebee on the pay it forward thread. Either style holster looks to require a lot of practice to get it right.

This kept me from Glocks for the longest time. After using one through a shooting course for a few weeks I drank the Kool-Aid. They are great guns once you get used to the grip angle in terms of acquiring sight picture. It wasn't easy at first... had to put a lot of rounds in the first couple days to get the muscle memory. It messes me up when I shoot a 1911 now of course. My sight alignment/sight picture is based on muscle memory, so in theory I should be able to present my pistol with my eyes closed, then open them up and have good sight alignment. After shooting a Glock for a couple weeks straight I could no longer do this with my 1911 without doing a few dry runs first. Now that I'm back in 1911 mode, I'm sure I can't pick up my Glock and do the same without a little practice first.

I've built two uppers with that gas block. Works great and fits under the rail just fine.

My "American" truck was made in Mexico. My wife's "foreign" car I bought her was made in Alabama. I have only owned "American" automobiles up until now. Between my wife and I we have owned 5 vehicles manufactured by US based auto companies. That trend ended a few years ago. I will never buy another GM or Chrysler vehicle in my life. I'd buy a Ford if they weren't so pricey, but family comes first. As much as I would like to support American based companies, if they aren't competitive then I am not going to buy it and find it silly that folks will still try to guilt their fellow Americans into buying into such lunacy. Every employee of GM is responsible for that company bottoming out; from the ground floor all the way to the top. They've allowed the unions to make manufacturing so fiscally inefficient that they can't compete with foreign companies even though many manufacture right here in the US. Kinda funny how many of these plants are in the south and don't have the union influence of the "motor" state. My heart doesn't bleed for those people. They all took part in creating a situation that is hopeless. What is crazy is that Michiganders still chose to blame "fat cat" CEOs and Republicans for their own doing. They will continue to swallow the Democrat BS right to hell, and for that they deserve exactly what they get, which is going to be an entire state that looks like Detroit. Eff 'em.

The people of Scranton deserve the politicians that they get. Surely no one saw this coming in 2001, but I doubt that their city government adjusted appropriately to the crisis. I feel bad for the city workers. It really isn't their fault, unless of course they've had a union draining the cities finances through its employees. Overall, it is the fault of the community. They get to vote. They vote in Republicrat career politicians that only serve their own needs for power instead of serving the people. Their city will suffer greatly as the experienced employees jump ship and move elsewhere creating a vacuum to be filled by increasingly incompetent stooges. Look north to Detroit... that's where we're all headed.

Gas tube doesn't matter. I've seen the high speed gas tubes that cost a butt ton. I don't get it, it just transports gas from one end to the other. Get the cheapest one there is. If you have to replace it (which you won't) you'd be out a whole 5 bucks. Charging handles are different. Just a regular cheapo charging handle will do the job, but the more expensive ones (like gasbuster) have such a smoother pull for immediate action (slap, rack, pull). If it doesn't matter to you just get a YHM standard charging handle. It's cheap and it will work. What gas block are you trying to get? Are you planning on getting a barrel with a standard AR front sight post gas block? If so, just buy the barrel with the sight already pinned on it. If you're looking for a low-pro gas block on the cheap go to YHM once again. They are inexpensive and work great. Plus, nearly every AR vender on the internet has YHM stuff. If one is out just go to the other.

Can't you find a Spikes upper for around the same price? I built one a few months back and don't remember paying more than 110 with shipping, and that was with the FA and dust cover.

Probably. Everything a politician does serves some political angle. I'm certain that the method of wiping his a$$ is the result of a focus group study. Politicians aren't people; they are like a tube of Play Dough... whoever owns them gets to mold them as they see fit. I've read her resume. She is certainly qualified for the job. However, I'm not so naive to believe that there wasn't a political purpose behind hiring her.

Sure thing. Out of town for the moment but will be picking it up when I get back.

This letter refers to derringer pistols being utilized within a holster whilst firing. I would think that if this particular set up was illegal according to the ATF the several dozen companies that sell them would know. I'll take my chances.

If doing business with an entity based in a Muslim country under Sharia restrictions, or a company that adheres to Sharia requirements in regard to financing I guess. I'm not big on my Sharia financial knowledge, but I know usury isn't cool so they must have the lowest rates around!

Who is bringing religious law into a courtroom? When/where did this happen?

I got the same gift when I was 17 (for graduating) and still have it. I don't think there are any legal issues other than you can be held accountable if he does something stupid or hurts himself.

Based on her previous profession, understanding Sharia compliant finance is a necessity. She worked in Abu Dhabi, UAE as a corporate lawyer. As far as I know, in the UAE the only court that falls under Sharia is family court (divorces, custody, alimony). I'm not certain that all businesses there have to be Sharia finance compliant by law, but many of those corporations are involved with other nations within the Gulf region that are. Sharia law is nothing more than describing Biblical laws. Remember how much stuff there is in the Old Testament regarding financial guidance by God in repect to loans and such? Well, much is the same in the Quran. The only difference is some countries still abide by it, while places like the US made very clear the separation between church and state, even though there are close similarities between some of our laws and those outlined in the Old Testament. This has no bearing on her current job.

Absolutely. I think the Whiskey Rebellion is a milestone in our post-Revolution history in regard to validating our government's authority while showing that the political process is the way. The mindset at the time was "if I don't like the gov I'll pick up a gun and fight." In reality, that is not how it's supposed to work here. If you don't like the government, vote 'em out. If your neighbor votes 'em in, tough titties. Washington handled that situation like the true leader that he was, not only leading troops to squash the rebellion, but also understanding the mindset of his countrymen and not going after them. Everyone went back to their homes without incident and the couple dozen insurgents that were actually arrested were later pardoned. What was the long term result of this? Well, an up and coming political party exploited the discontent of the people and began to take power, which eventually led to the repealing of the tax that cause the whole mess in the first place. That is how it's supposed to work. Once that political party got a little to grabby, BAM... in comes another one to knock 'em down a few pegs. The rest, as they say, is history. This model seems to work just fine. It ain't perfect, but it works and I like it. Good point to bring up. See, an insurgency doesn't thrive off the the folks that are willing to pick up arms and fight. You can have an effective insurgency with very limited participation. You can also have a very ineffective insurgency with a vast participation. It boils down to support; both idealistic and material. If the population supports an insurgency then the government will have a nearly impossible time trying to fight it. The only way to combat an insurgency is to win the support of the people, and to demonize the insurgents. Using the recent example of Iraq, despite how the news would portray it, there was very limited involvement in regard to the general population. Even with an environment with huuuuge unemployment numbers. Why? Well, the simplist answer is people don't like to die young. Hope that the future might get better is enough to keep most people from making a potentially fatal decision. Conversely, the same reason folks commit suicide; a lack of hope. This can bargained with tools such as money and indoctrination, which both use their own version of "hope" to tempt people into taking up arms. Then, of course, you have the very small minority of fighters that are the true believers; the ones that have probably suffered some loss or personal tragedy that has pushed them over the edge where their only hope is to create destruction... or they're just a born mental case. So how did such a small number of folks keep us engaged for so long? No matter how awful we think the war was, we certainly gave a lot more than what we got. It wasn't as if we were losing by attrition or anything. We just couldn't put the nail in the coffin, so to speak. The trick was winning over the people, which is something we didn't have. You can't find out who the bad guys are or where they are without human intelligence. All the fancy schmancy gadgets in the world won't do you any good without the key element of human interaction. There are huge limiting factors there if you don't have the support of the people; money only goes so far. So reconcile with the local leaders.. the pillars of the community who not only have access to all the inside information, but can also influence the opinions of their people. At the same time turn the table on the insurgents. Highlight their atrocities against the people in every manner of the media you can. The attitudes of the Iraqis towards the Sunni insurgent groups changed so drastically and suddenly that many of those groups were left with little choice... quit or face embarassing defeat. So what did the US and Iraqi government do? Well we tried to bring them into the fold by legitimizing those groups and giving them a stake in the overall security, thus allowing them not to lose face and participate in the Democratic process. Many of those groups took the easy road. The ones that didn't kinda just withered into obscurity, not really able to make much of stink anymore. People wanted no part of it. So the point being, without the support of the general population an insurgency can't be successful or survive for very long. Even in a country that experienced regular revolutions and coups like Bolivia, the leftist movement couldn't make any significant progress because the people didn't support it... and that's with the involvement of Che Guevara and the fame he brought to the fight. Exactly. Folks aren't going to support anything that threatens their way of life. Right now, despite our economy, things are still good enough. People aren't going to support any movement which will destabilize all the comforts they currently enjoy. No support from the people, no insurgency. I think secession would be handled today in much the same manner it was handled before. Furthermore, I believe that our armed forces would stay true to their duty and fight against any state that seceded. Besides that, the state would turn third world practically overnight, which would lose the support of the populous and, ultimately, those that do the fighting. Kinda like the Civil War, but on a much more advanced timeline. Our politicians couldn't lead their way out of a wet paper bag. They are weak minded puppets compared to those that founded this country. However, if such a scenario occurred, the leader would be swiftly defeated militarily at the great cost of human life and suffering of the populous he represents. He would be remembered in history as the anti-Christ. I don't have much of an imagination, but the line I draw for armed revolt is somewhere around an illegitimate coup of some sort or foreign troops on our soil to exert control for what ever reason. I don't see this happening any time soon; probably not in my life time. Much would have to change economically, socially and globally for that to happen. If Obama gets re-elected in November he will continue to erode our rights. Anyone sitting in that chair will; Obama just does it more efficiently. If that's the case then we'll have another four years of the pendulum swinging to the left, which will most assuredly result in it swinging back to the right in 2016. I don't like waiting that long, but that's the country we live in and that's the country I love. Oh yeah.... WOLVERINES!!!

Yeah, I dig that holster too. All the ones of similar design looked far too bulky. My main purpose was to have something that broke up the outline of the pistol but wouldn't be so bulky in the pocket. That looks to be the smallest one that I've seen. I think I'm sold on the LCP anyhow and will just get both holsters. Thanks for the link.

Do you use any chemicals to strip it? I've used rust removal chemical to strip down old Beretta mags before and they came out nice and shiney, especially after a little aluminum polish. I haven't had the guts to try it out on a frame. I guess I'll test it out on a Keltec P11, since I don't care what it looks like.

If things were ever bad enough that required an armed insurgency our military would implode, if not outright rebel. Nevermind that our combat arms personnel are overwhelmingly to the right, there are a significant percentage of officers that have had 4 years of Constitution beaten into their heads. Generally speaking, the most competent of these officers are the ones that excel in career branches which would be critical for waging war or counter-insurgency: Infantry, Strategic Planning, Intelligence, Special Operations Forces... you get the idea. The ash and trash officers that occupy seats that would otherwise be filled by trained monkeys would not be able to pick up the pieces and run our military effectively. Now lets factor in the backbone of our Armed Forces and the Servicemen they lead. Anyone that has ever served in a combat arms unit knows full well that these guys would not stand for illegal orders and wouldn't support a tyrannical government. Of course, tyranny is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Critics (in their own time) have classified probably every one of our Presidents at one time or another of being tyrannical... well, except for maybe Harrison. I've heard it of Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr. and now Obama. What some define as tyrannical others would define as the political process. The pendulum will swing one direction until it reaches a critical point before swinging back the other way. It is the story of time. Our pendulum can be easily controlled by our right to vote. Sometimes it has to go far before people will vote accordingly, but such is the way our Nation was designed. There was one particular clause though; an Amendment which sought to ensure that if we lost control of the pendulum through our right to vote we could swiftly take our government back by possessing the proper tools to do so. I'm not convinced we're at that point or anywhere near it. The Civil War was probably the closest we ever came, but even then the problem could have been resolved politically over time rather than taking up arms. Now, at a time where the lines aren't as easily drawn I don't see an environment that supports such a method of reigning our government in. No matter how bad it seems right now, we are still in control. If you don't like the direction we're headed then just blame your fellow Americans that are setting us upon that path. Our politicians can't help but be crooked and self serving... like children they don't know any better. In my head I can picture a scenario where I would fight, but we aren't anywhere near there and I don't think we'll reach it in my lifetime.

I take part in revolution everytime I go to the polls. The guns will stay silent until I start to see blue helmets or zombies... or zombies in blue helmets.