Oh Shoot

  Not sure what that meant.   The Taurus will fire in double action the first shot if you carry it with hammer down, yes?   - OS

Thanks for the detailed answer. I would have asked just in PM, but figure anything any of us are willing to share here may be instructive (and hopefully interesting too :)) for the part of the TGO community interested in such matters.     Yeah, and the one that really floored me was the response you apparently got from Kenneth Melson, the guy who wrote the actual official ruling on ATF site (and not just some letter to an individual) regarding the pistol-rifle-pistol and possessive construction issues -- who then told you stuff that directly contradicted his own whole treatise, and of course the Supreme Court decision it paraphrased.   Still wonder if y'all might have been talking at cross purposes or misunderstanding each other or something though, as seems he'd have to be tripping on something to do that. Or maybe he's just gotten senile since 2011, who knows!   - OS

  Good Lord. Biggest hissy fit since the "we want to eat road kill" bill.  Except that this one actually has ramifications. My Tennessee, sometimes I can only sigh.   - OS

  Nope. Only that the homeowner basically lured him in and lay in wait. And announced that plan to others beforehand too.  Then shot the unarmed perp 4 times. In his garage.   Basically, was about what you and I always say - that the Castle Doctrine gives you the default presumption of being in immediate fear of your life. But circumstances can negate that presumption, if it can be clearly shown that it was not reasonable that you had that immediate fear.    In short, as you say, it's still not a "free fire" zone. I always put it, "you can't execute someone", even if they are committing a property crime inside your home.   - OS

  I knew the PT92 allowed that, but didn't think about the location as being the determiner. But yeah, thinking about it, I guess would be simpler to make a trigger block mechanism from the lower location.   - OS

Pretty cool, first I've heard of it. If street is around $70, will be about twice that of next cheapest effective thing I know, the Volquartsen Target Hammer. But might be twice as good too, will be most interested in reviews. - OS

  Thanks, never heard of anyone doing that cept someone who had inherited an unstamped MC or something.   One thing though. It costs 2 bills to transfer existing NFA lower to your trust, and 2 bills to register a new one to trust also, right? If so, why spend the purchase money on a new one and toss the already registered one?   Even if you've already got another lower to put into trust, that still leaves you one less no-strings non-NFA one laying around you've already bought. Maybe I don't really grok the details fully, though.     - OS

  I've heard that a lot through the years. But why does it matter one way or the other?   - OS

  Yeah, Islam is about 500 year younger than Christianity.    Most of Christendom's greatest slaughters in the Old World were over by 1300, those the various pesky Inquisitions lingered -- then the decimation in New World continued into the 1600's, so Islam is about where militant Christianity was then.   And while it is not accurate to say it was primarily Christianity itself that slaughtered our own North American Native American populations, it was certainly carried out primarily by Christians within our "Christian Nation", and Christianity as a body certainly didn't rally against it.   And that only ended a little over 200 years ago, once we ran out of enough Indian "insurgents" to mount forces against -- and one of the justifications was that hey, after all, they were all just heathens anyway, eh?   - OS

  I guess I'd just print out their FAQs and keep a dated notarized copy somewhere safe and do what it says.   The gray area even in the FAQs and all letters I have seen is the "retention of parts" to make a NFA firearm, Which goes back to the SBR to pistol question.   Like, what parts? Any short barrel? Any stock? Etc. If so, there's no way with what you own that you could ever "remove" the lower from NFA purview regardless of what you tell the ATF. I suppose you'd have to sell/give it away or destroy it.   Is there actually a provision for "turning it in" to ATF?   - OS

  274 AD, winter solstice fell on December 25, an important time for the pagans, and pagan Emperor Aurelian proclaimed the date official "birth of the sun" festival day. Then in 320 a Pope also decided the date was when Christ was born. Then in 325 Emperor Constantine made Dec. 25 official state holiday of Christ's birth, thus giving both the pagans and the  Christians the same special festival date, was less disruptive of the workaday biz of the empire to have everyone goofing off on same day. :)   - OS

Likely would have been convicted or some form of homicide here too.   - OS

  Gordon, not meaning to debate but seems clear that no notification is required, only "recommended". Simple reconfiguration and no retention of certain components removes it from purview.   "Q: Does the installation of a barrel over 16 inches in length (SBR) or 18 inches in length (SBS) remove the firearm from the purview of the NFA? If so, is this considered a permanent change?     Installation of a barrel greater than 16 inches in length (SBR) or 18 inches in length (SBS) will remove the firearm from the purview of the NFA provided the registrant does not maintain control over the parts necessary to reconfigure the firearm as a SBR or SBS."   Q: May I transfer the receiver of a short-barrel rifle or shotgun to an FFL or to an individual as I would any GCA firearm?     Yes. A weapon that does not meet the definition of a NFA “firearm” is not subject to the NFA and a possessor or transferor needn’t comply with NFA requirements. The firearm is considered a GCA firearm and may be transferred under the provisions of that law.   Q: Is it necessary to send notification to ATF and receive acknowledgement that the SBR or SBS has been removed from the purview of the NFA before it may be sold as a GCA firearm?     There is no requirement for the possessor of a registered NFA firearm to notify ATF that the firearm has been removed from the purview of the NFA. However, ATF recommends the possessor notify the NFA Branch of such changes in writing so that the possessor is not mistakenly identified as the owner if the firearm is later used in a crime. If, at the time of transfer, the firearm does not meet the definition of a SBR, it should be transferred without filing the NFA transfer application and without payment of the transfer tax.   Q: Who is responsible for notifying the NFA Branch when I transfer the GCA firearm to a FFL or another individual?     There is no requirement that the transferor or transferee of a GCA firearm notify the NFA branch of a transfer or that either party determine whether the firearm was previously registered under the NFA. There is no also no requirement for the registrant or possessor of a NFA firearm to notify ATF of the removal of features that caused the firearm to be subject to the NFA; however, ATF recommends the owner notify the NFA Branch in writing if a firearm is permanently removed from the NFA.   excerpted from:   https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/national-firearms-act-short-barreled-rifles-shotguns.html#removal-from-nfa   I knew all that, but still leaves question of legality of going from SBR rifle to Title 1 (GCA they call it) pistol.     - OS

Speaking of gun ruling minutiae, here's one for ya that's never been settled by ATF to my knowledge. You could add it to your litany of questions to see what undocumented disinformation you might get by phone. :)   So you have an SBR. It's of course clear you can put the SBR into non-NFA configuration (like with 16" barrel, or stripped to receiver) and sell/transfer it as normal Title 1 firearm, no longer under NFA purview.   However, what if you started with a Title 1 pistol and SBR'd it? Could you return it to normal Title 1 pistol configuration?    If so, how? Simply remove the stock and declare it a pistol? Or does it stay a SBR that you are simply using without a stock? There is also the "if you retain the parts to make the NFA firearm" clause. Well, does that mean if you retain ANY stock? Or just the one that was on the SBR when it was registered? Or how about the short barrel, does it have to be the same one, or any other short barrel? Or does that even matter since the barrels and stocks are not uniquely identified like the receiver? Etc.   Some argue that "once an SBR, always a rifle", as you have "made" an SBR, which is a new firearm, not a modified one, as is going from Title 1 pistol to Title 1 rifle, or back. Others argue the opposite, that because of the "first a pistol" thing, the NFA stamp means nothing as far as returning to pistol.   Surely since so many now make SBRs starting with pistols, ATF has been asked this by now, but apparently has evaded the question altogether. Not one of their NFA FAQs address it directly, so everyone just opines around the subject using the ones that are there that speak to other areas of the NFA. Never seen a letter about it either, and they're quite good at ferreting all those out on arfcom if they exist.   - OS

  Ya keep hearing that, but seems they might have to work that out with NATO?   - OS

  Not according to John Spencer as of 7/11, at least as applied to normal firearms.   Q: "How does one accurately measure the overall length of a weapon?   A: To determine the overall length of a weapon:   - remove non-permanently attached muzzle device, if applicable - extend or fold out the shoulder stock to its extreme length, if applicable" etc   If there's a more recent directive, I've not seen it. I thought this was generally pretty well acknowledged and had always been thus.  But I don't know about SBR form, maybe it has different rules. Or doesn't really matter. After all, it's still an SBR regardless of OAL long as it has a short barrel.   - OS

  I resemble that, dammit.

Methinks it would look okay in all black. And I have a feeling the thinner grips might well allow me to shoot the thang better.   - OS

  Btw, got the Sportsman's Guide VISA card long ago, only use it there. Gives you another 2.5% off final total.   - OS

  Yeah, well, he is a lot younger than Fidel at only 83, so I get how you could think that. ;)   - OS

  Oh, I like most of Rogen's stuff quite a bit, one of the few who can give me actual laugh-out-loud stuff.I imagine it will sneak into distribution at some point and of course wind up on tube.  I see most all movies a year or more on cable after the fact anyway, but that's not the point.   - OS

Both Cruz and Rubio have denounced the deal.   - OS

Yup. So now the Hollywood distribution machine has knuckled under, almost certainly to North Korea. And it's a frigging comedy for c'sakes.   I guess that all it will take in the future are threats about most any form of entertainment to get it nixed for public consumption. Talk about a slippery slope for our way of life, wow.   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/17/amc-regal-drop-the-interview_n_6342948.html   http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/source-top-five-theater-circuits-758843   - OS

  Guess you mean Raul, the current prez?  He is Fidel's brother.   - OS

  Seeing 141 total deaths now, not counting the instigators. Likely as some die in hospital ongoing perhaps.   - OS