TMF

I read the story yesterday and it seemed that it was from a nearby property. Who knows how it will play out but it certainly shows a lack of responsibility on the part of whoever the shooter was. The school can't mitigate that risk other than putting up a protective barrier. Of course, after this incident I doubt it will happen again.

I would agree with you but I keep hearing random statistics that claim the US is the supplier (90 percent from one news story I read). I think a grenade launcher and ammo for said launcher disproves that theory. You don't come by stuff like that at a gun show. EDIT: In regards to the statistic above, about 67 percent of statistics are made up right on the spot.

Sure thing. You're awesome. Hopefully someday I can bask in your awesomeness and get some great unsolicited advice on how I can strive to be as great as you. I see how my outlook on going somewhere and having a good time but being put off by those who take it too seriously was wrong of me. I intend to conform to your way of thought. I will immediately go out and buy some shotgun shell caddies because my SAW pouch containing my shells adds valuable seconds to my reload time. While I'm at it I'll be sure to grab some hard mag pouches for my belt because putting a 30 rounder in my back pocket doesn't guarantee positive muscle memory if I happen to shoot more than 30 rounds on a 12 round stage. I guess while I'm doing that I should get an optic with magnification instead of using my red dot sight, that way I can better engage those targets past 100m. I also should get earpro on a lanyard so I can just tie it to the back of my ball cap so I don't have to dig through my pockets and risk dropping them on the range, thus causing me to have to waste 25 cents in earpro occassionally. I could go on but these are a snipit of what I'm talking about; no reasonable person can tell me that's not obnoxious. I never suggested not being receptive to advice; there were plenty of guys I took advice from when I asked in normal conversation. I don't need it imposed upon me against my will. The fact that you seem so bugged by my advice and continue to take offense suggest that you fall into this category. You are the reason people like me don't want to participate in something that should be fun. So, I'll tell you what I never told those folks: Mind your own business; if I want advice I'll ask for it. I don't care if you can outshoot me, I really don't. If you really need validation then here it is again: You are just so awesome that you have developed a gravitational pull that causes people of equal or lesser awesomeness to orbit around you.

Having inside knowledge, in your opinion would the average investigator raise an eyebrow that someone involved in an SD shooting had an attorney on call for just such an occasion? I'm just thinking that making prior arrangements would suggest premeditation, intent or being predisposed to use deadly force.

Mexico says captured cartel leader had arsenal - Yahoo! News I posted here because I know this is going to turn into a gun runner topic. With that in mind, these guys also had grenade launchers and grenades (I'm assuming projectiles). Is that stuff being run from our borders or from elsewhere? It kinda takes away the argument that lax US gun laws makes us the sole supplier of arms to the Cartels.

I think it's as important to be cooperative as it is to seek legal advice. There is a right way to tell an LEO that you wish to seek counsel before making any official statement. I think being standoffish with an LEO invites suspicion and could create problems later down the road. Maybe it won't get you convicted but you still might find yourself in a court room or worse (losing in the court of public opinion). My wife got me watching Investigation Discovery a lot and I've seen quite a few cases where the investigating officers went hard after someone because of their uncooperative behavior causing reasonable suspicion to turn the investigation in their direction. In the end the innocent guy walks away, but only after months or years of legal trouble. I'd rather it be wrapped up as quick as possible. As I talked about in another post, my uncle was involved in a SD shooting in the '90s and the investigating officers cleared him real quick. He was as cooperative as he could be. I'll have to ask if he talked to a lawyer before giving a statement, but I don't think that's the route he took. It was later that the DA tried to go after him with some BS charge which took almost a year to kill, but had it not been for that his troubles were pretty much over in a matter of weeks.

8K rifle: Thereabouts. Between a 3k rifle, 2Kish optic and then all the extra stuff thrown on it, yeah. Maybe more around 6K but all that little stuff adds up. I don't think having a sponsor is a prerequisite for being a d-bag, however, it doesn't mean there aren't some. My comment regarding sponsored guys or guys wearing sponsor jerseys is referring to how that may make someone who is just getting started feel a little uncomfortable or out of place. Believe it or not there are d-bags in the shooting community. These are the ones that can't stop self-fellating themselves in order to one up the other d-bags around them or try to make someone new to the sport feel like a total idiot. Ask me how I know. The first time I picked up an M4 wasn't at a competition, believe me. However, some d-bag (who is aware this is my first competition) is constantly up my a$$ trying to give me his sage advice on which way to store my mags (as if I'm a moron) or what kit I need to buy in order to reload faster (as if I haven't discovered the internet or haven't noticed all the guys walking around with wizzbang speed loaders and magpul gear on their belt). This guidance isn't being handed out because he genuinely cares, he is just self-fellating; making himself feel like he's just that good that everyone needs his advice. Really what I'm thinking the whole time is that I want to tell him to pound sand, but instead I make lots of trips to the bathroom or find ways to break contact instead of telling him to go find something shiny to play with... I really don't care what you did to your pistol to make it not hang up so much out of the holster, I really don't. These are the guys I can't stand. They exist. They are the ones that make normal people not want to go back; ask me how I know. Now, being new to this I figured I'd paint a picture to ease concerns of the OP since I can relate to his question since a few months ago I was in the same boat. If my advice to the OP in some way offends you it is either because you fall into this category or you have such thin skin that something as innocuous as this gets your panties in a bunch. Either way, it was directed at the OP, not you, so if you want to throw a hissy fit keep it to yourself.

It mentions in the article that an official at the company admitted to the similarities being acknowledged at some point in design. They probably thought no one would notice or it wouldn't be turned into such a big deal.

My first experience at the boardwalk not too long ago blew me away. I haven't seen anything like that ever.

The Flips you were talking to were either lying or they were the luckiest folks in both theaters. I can tell you with great certainty that they don't make that now.

Some one posted here before "play stupid games, win stupid prizes." Looks like they both won. I tend to avoid most conflict now that I carry most of the time, but there was a time that I was hotheaded. Getting the crap kicked outa me for it was always a possibility, but if during that confrontation I was shot a couple I'm pretty sure all my subsequent actions would be a blur of fury. I'm not saying he was justified; he shoulda been smarter, but I don't know if I could throw stones here.

I still use a nail. I have a sight tool from my Brownell's kit, but old habits, ya know?

He promised change, right? There you go!

Well everything within reason. The level of distraction when someone is attempting to read or type a message is much different than reaching over and changing the station. Hell, I don't even need to take my eyes off the road to change the station. The facts are what they are. Plus I've seen this myself on the road. It's pretty self evident that this is a problem.

Read the studies I posted. Do a google search. Results suggest being 4 times more likely to be involved in a wreck than an impaired driver. 23 times more likely than a non-impaired driver. That is pretty darn significant.

Just to be clear I'm not trying to bash BW. I don't personally know Prince, but from what I understand I don't believe he's a bad guy. I know a few guys who worked out there who are locked on and I've used their facilities, however, the traffic circle incident wasn't the only one and I ran into a bunch down in Baghdad a long time ago who acted like a bunch of jackholes. I guess this is par for the course with the rifle-toting side of the contracting industry though; a lot of tough guys who think they're mercenaries. TC and Aegis had their issues as well being a little too quick on the trigger. I have very strong opinions regarding trigger happy folks who equate their toughness to how many people they can shoot. Very strong opinions. So when I see a company get burned down because of it I have a hard time feeling bad and feel as if the company should be enforcing standards to prevent such events. At a minimum whoever the team leader happens to be should police his guys up, but I know if I was in such a situation I would have no issues squaring that guy away on my own.

I don't advocate more laws, just stiffer penalties. It's clear after several studies that texting while driving is more dangerous than drunk driving. The penalty should reflect that as it does with DUIs, but I guess my opinions on DUI penalties are pretty harsh too.

Perhaps but that is a different argument. In fact, the TEMA/FEMA things is way off the OP as well so I'm abandoning the topic. If we want to open another thread about how FEMA sucks and is undermining the Constitution then I'm all about it. I'm still in question as to the validity of a federal agency inquiring about food storage facilities. From what I've read it's a second hand account and the agency in question has yet to be identified.

Well I think that opens up a whole new argument that involves lots of politics. For as it is right now, the military and other government agencies wouldn't be able to function in their current capacity without the aid of privatized security. It would be too much of a strain on personnel. I can promise you though, it IS cost effective. By not making these capabilities organic they don't have to worry about wasting money on them when they don't need them. I think it's less of an issue now with Iraq being done with, and there isn't quite the footprint in Afghanistan in regards to private security as there was in Iraq. There are less large bases and a lot of NATO presence to pick up the "ash and trash" jobs since their countries prohibit them from being involved in offensive operations.

No you didn't say that, but your argument centers around the belief that laws do nothing to prevent behavior so it is reasonable for me to assume that laws against murder do not prevent them at all.

So should there be no law against murder since people are going to do it anyway?

I'm still trying to figure out how the existance of a government run disaster relief organization is somehow in contradiction to liberty. That's like saying that there should be no Fire Department, because "they shouldn't have left the stove on" or "they should've invested in a smoke detector... guess they're gonna have to burn for it."

Yep. There are plenty of compact 1911 style .45s out there that are around $400 and shoot every time you pull the trigger. I fired A RIA compact and it worked fine, except a little hammer bite. Rock Island Armory 1911 GI Pistol .45 ACP 4in 8rd Parkerized for sale - 54176 - Tombstone Tactical Rock Island Mid-Size 1911 Pistol - www.MidwestHuntersOutlet.com

This is how I feel about violent crime with a deadly weapon (firearms included) and illegal possession of a weapon (like felons). If the penalties were so severe then the gangbangers might think twice about picking up a handgun. Instead they might get a year tacked on to a sentence or they don't even bother filing additional charges.

Yes. There are lots of people walking around because it's against the law to kill them or cause them serious injury. Some of us who are a little more morally flexible than others need laws to abide by. I've seen what a consequence free environment looks like. It ain't pretty. Just because someone has the capacity to break laws doesn't mean they will if they understand the consequences of it. I'm an example of that I believe. Of course people will still do it, but it will come with a penalty which will probably keep them from doing it again. Go to any military base for example. No one talks on the phone while driving. No one. You'll see cars pulled off the side of the road so they can take a phone call or make one. The reason is that they're driving privilages are REVOKED as a penalty. Here is an example of people modifying their behavior to prevent being punished by the law. Not to turn this into a "for the children" plea, but I have kids. I was almost hit head on a few months back from some stupid chick in her SUV who was texting away. My two year old was in the car. I swerved and honked my horn to which she overcorrected and nearly crashed into a light pole. I wanted to turn around so I could chew her a new one. This stuff is dangerous and people are getting killed so the morons of the world can't wait a few minutes to send a text. Next time you're on the interstate start looking around at the other motorists. You would be shocked how many you'll see texting away and not looking at the road. It needs to stop.