GlockSpock

  Warranties are useless in a scenario in which "you'd be throwing it in your waistband and owning it for the rest of your life, without support of any kind for the pistol?".

I'm thinking Glock or HK. HK's cost almost twice that of a Glock though. Surely there is a hardcore Glock guy here and a hardcore HK guy here that can show me all sorts of statistics and torture tests, right?

Well I am not so much talking about "reliability" but rather build quality. My P-01 probably has 600-800 rounds and has never failed me, not once. If I could afford to buy 50,000 rounds of ammo and then go fire round after round and note what failures occur when. I love my CZ, but for one it has an alloy frame and two it is possible that 75's have a slide stop weakness.   I suppose the main concern here is finding a pistol that will go a very high round count without requiring any replacement of parts.

This thread is to ask suggestions for the most durable/longest lasting 9mm handguns. What I mean by this, is what 9mm handguns typically go the longest without parts replacement of any kind? I have a feeling I know the general consensus: Glock. Please let me explain. I love CZ-75's. However, I've been doing a lot of reading about then recently, and there is rumored to be a problem with the slide stops breaking relatively quickly (as in, it is a disposable part). Now, as long as you have access to a replacement of slide stops, I'd consider this relatively a non-issue. However, I am asking what handgun would you buy if you knew you could never buy another part for it at all? What handgun would you buy if you'd be throwing it in your waistband and owning it for the rest of your life, without support of any kind for the pistol?   I'd like this pistol to have readily available magazines, holsters, (night) sights, etc. In other words, I'd like it to be a combat proven  "standard" pistol.   As much as I love my P-01, I guess a lot of this AWB stuff has me doubting it a little bit. One reason would be is that I have not taken it completely apart myself (it is much more complex that many firearms). I have my eyes on a CZ-75b stainless matte at a local shop for about $710 out the door. But the slide stop issue as well as how uncommon the CZ-75 is compared to other pistols in the US have me wondering if the pistol is a good choice for "long term ownership".

DOS attack?

Is that the correct URL? Because for me it is pulling up the generic Yahoo "expired domain" page you typically see when a domain expires.

Is it just me, or is their site more or less gone?   http://www.botachtactical.com/

I have a feeling that most people in America are willing to give up as much liberty as possible to obtain simply a piece of paper that reads "SECURITY".

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/barack-obama-to-announce-guns-task-force-85293.html    

I have never done this before, but someone here in Chattanooga surely will help you out.

If you are truly replacing the entire upper, usually you can just pop out the rear and front pins, take the new upper, and pop the pins back in. If you have what would be considered a stripped upper and are wanting to take all the "goodies" (barrel, forearm, etc) off the old upper and place them on your new stripped upper, then yes, you'll need a few minor tools.   Which is it?

Unless they quickly sold out of all their inventory of .223 and Pmag's within the last 3 days (which is possible) and are now paying $850 for the ammo and $55 for the Pmags. Also, there is a very fine line between price gouging and economic equilibrium.   Don't get me wrong. [Mainly] due to them dropping firearms from their catalog but also because of the outrageous "cheaper than dirt" pricing, I will not be giving them any future business.

I was actually looking at various CZ's on CTD this morning. I went to look at them again just 5 minutes ago, and it took me several glances before I realized that it wasn't me but the website. Look forward to the official claim, if there is one.

I will certainly be bringing "extra" stuff with me that day. It isn't that I am afraid of the end of the world that day, but rather aware that there many be many that think it is the end of the world that day, and do something stupid.

I don't disagree with what it says about notifying an adult if you see a gun. I have a story that I will attempt to keep as clear as possible. One time my brother and myself were at my Aunt's house. I was probably 12 or so at the time. My Aunt was watching me, my brother, and my 2nd cousin that day. My 2nd cousin was probably 6 at the time. Another one of the cousins was a reserve/volunteer police officer at the time, and often stayed with his mom (my aunt).  Well that day we we three (myself, brother, and 2nd cousin) were in their side room playing with some things. I noticed that there was a holstered gun on the desk. My 2nd cousin saw it and wanted to play with it. He thought it was a toy/unloaded because he had never really been around guns and his father never really taught him the basics of safety.    You'd better believe I told my aunt about it in a hurry! In my viewpoint, this is the sort of situation that this press release is talking about. Unfortunately, there are many students out there who are as alien to guns as aliens are to us! It could have been worded better, but then again I'm afraid that within a few decades "Tell an adult if you know someone has a gun" will turn into "Tell a police officer if you know someone who owns a gun". In its current form it doesn't bother me, it could save many students lives.    What I have a problem with are schools' "Zero Tolerance" policy for violence as stated above. We were told that if someone was beating on you, after (I believe) three hits you could defend yourself and you not be considered guilty. But that was a few years ago and I am sure it has changed for the worse.

'Tis the only bloody way to travel as kings and queens isn't it?

I got around to writing Corker and Alexander an email. Not the first time I've done so. I've done so before and received "we have your 2nd Amendment in mind" messages. I don't know if they are generic emails in general or personalized ones. I have however wondered what would happen if I sent an email asking each of the to ban all firearms such as those used in CT. I wonder if I would receive an appeasement reply to that one as well?

At the bottom of that page, it specifies that between May 20 and May 23, he arranged to purchase a Thompson sub-machine gun from an undercover agent. It also specifies that on May 23, ATF searched his house. I guess he took the bait and lost :rofl:

I joined GOA this morning. I plan on re-upping my NRA membership later this week (although I'm not sure the NRA has our back as much as they proclaim). I also plan on joining the TFA (just read about them thanks to TGO on another post).   I wrote an email to Fleischmann (3rd District) and plan on writing an email to Corker and Alexander later today. Fleischmann has a pretty good record supporting the 2nd Amendment. I don't expect an email to Corker or Alexander to help much, but I'll do it anyway.    I wish petitions like this were helpful, but consider this. There are many petitions on there right now asking for stronger gun control. Considering that those in charge already have a preconceived preference to the issue, who do you think they will "listen to"?   Although it would make me a "panic buyer", I've considered trotting down to the gun store and purchasing something today. I mean a firearm. I cannot have too many, and a flipside to the "panic buying" is that often record number of guns are sold in very short amounts of time. I am of the mindset of the more guns that are being sold, the better.    If politicians wanted to outlay wearing evil blue shirts completely, they would be much more cautious about doing so if 100 million Americans went out and bought blue shirts rather than sat at home and signed a few petitions that would go overlooked.

  So we should just skip the guns and ban all the me...oh wait.   :shake:

This is odd. From what I gather, he was just shooting into the air and into the ground. He knew that especially after CT, this would frighten many people and gather nationwide attention.    So I see three reasons why he'd do so:   1) He likes attention 2) He likes scaring people 3) He is a political activist "protesting" the "loose" gun control laws in the country.   What the hell would you all do in a situation like this? Assuming that you are concealing and just happen to be strolling through the parking lot and someone starts firing several magazines worth of rounds into the air and the ground, what could you do? I would certainly feel that my life and well as the lives of others around me were in danger. Would you stop the threat? Would you get your loved ones out of there instantly? Would you seek cover and keep an eye on him to see if he was going to start shooting people?   I don't think there is a right answer here. Assuming that all you know at the time is someone is shooting bullets into the air, what can you do?    1) Stop the threat          His family would get a lawyer and run right through you. It'd turn out he was only shooting blanks. Your life as you know it would be over with. At best,         you would be in financial ruin. At worst, you would spend some time behind bars.   2) Get your loved ones and yourself out of there instantly         Possibly the best choice. But then it would turn out that he thought he was Rambo and was shooting Russians. Many people would die that day, and then         you would have that on your conscious for the rest of your life. Your loved ones would live, but you would always feel that you didn't do enough.   3) Seek cover and keep an eye on him to see if he was going to start shooting people?         If you have loved ones with you, you would be putting them in additional danger. Have them stay with you and you are keeping this close to this nut. Have          them run away and it would turn out that there were multiple nuts and they ran right towards another one. If you wait until the guy starts shooting people,          that would be once again something you would feel that you could have prevented. If he doesn't start shooting people, then I guess you played the lottery          and found the one win-win situation for you.   In all seriousness, what would you do? I would certainly feel threatened by someone shooting into the air in such a manner. But legally, is there enough to go on simply by someone shooting into the air?

I have pondered about that very possibility. Some people believe next week is it for everything, and may become very hysterical. Some of those that truly and deeply believe such may do things that they normally would not do simply because they don't feel that they will be held accountable or because they don't feel they are loosing anything. I hope not, but I won't be surprised if a lot of unstable people show themselves over the next week or two.   EDIT: I was only ten back around Y2K, so I don't remember much. Were there many instances of people acting out of character and doing things most people wouldn't?

  In some parts of the country, maybe. In TN (or at least SE TN), I don't see a tragedy like this changing much of the opinions here. Sure, if someone is already antigun, they may be a little more strongly antigun right now. Personally, I am reminded of my duty to the country (constitutionally speaking) and my loved ones to carry. Perhaps take a little bit more time to conceal compared to most of the time.    Also, sometimes you have copycats.

  I think his main concern is that in his hypothetical situation even though he saved many peoples' lives by stopping the shooter he also let a bullet graze one of the teachers and fears that he will be sued and possibly incriminated for this fact. I think back to the movie "SWAT" in which the cocky SWAT officer stops the hostage tackers but also wounds one of the hostages. I think in the movie it was mentioned that even though he possibly saved the hostage's life, she was suing the city. Actually a very likely scenario I believe, to save many lives but be sued because you may make a mistake or aren't 100% proficient.

  According to Brady, they don't ban magazines at all. Or at least they don't give them any points for it:   http://www.bradycampaign.org/stategunlaws/scorecard/CT/   I believe roughly a year or two ago they tried, but I don't think it was actually passed.