btq96r

A case could be made that the transmission rate within restaurants and bars is a result of the reduced capacity. I agree Metro needs their whatever slapped for trying to close-hold information relevant to the public; they should have just released it after the verification processes and explained the restrictions will stay in place until we feel people in proximity to each other like happens in restaurants and especially bars won't serve as a transmission vector.

I know a few...mostly suburban moms who don't want the risk of having a firearm in the home, and aren't comfortable handling guns. They aren't against guns, just not something they don't see as a need or want. 51.6% sounds about right.

I'm not worried about mass political unrest. We'll see some events, but I'm not thinking it'll be widespread or anything too bad on the whole. Locally, sure, there's chance, but I really don't see a likely threat in my area. I say this as someone who living right next to the Germantown area of Nashville is in place that looks mighty tempting for the kind of things you see on the news. I've got my weapons, ammo, bugout bag, & blowout kit ready come what may. While it's I guess somewhat attached to the political situation, I'm actually more worried about what economic conditions bring about. There are still a lot of people out of work, and desperate people do desperate things.

A PPK has always been on the wish list if I'm ever cash flow flush enough to justify the purchase. Hopefully you leave some for the rest of us, @Grayfox54 That's a beautiful collection, though.

Glad to see it was simple upkeep and not all the posting in General Politics running the hamster off it's wheel.

Good looking kid...surely takes after the mother in that regard. Congrats to you and the growing family!

Yup. By my unofficial sense, almost 3/4ths of people with a mask are wearing them correctly.

Armor is like a gun, some is better than none, but it's not the be all end all tool. I've always been indifferent to it for civilian use (though I surely want it commercially available for anyone who wants it). Bullets just don't bounce off of those things like they would Superman...it's just to protect vital organs from a shot that would kill. If you're going into a situation where you're wearing body armor, you should hopefully have good medical support and expedient transport to a facility that can handle trauma. If you feel the need to protect vital organs, your extremities and lower body (especially if you've got a plate carrier that doesn't go below the naval) are still at risk, and without someone to deal with that trauma right away, along with a care team at an ER equivalent, you can take a turn for the worst fast. Now, for those taking the streets...they're probably thinking about protection from less than lethal rounds, which means some cheap stuff would serve the purpose.

I grieve with thee, Doug. You gave her a good, safe home, and love. Be as proud of that as grateful for the love she gave you in return, for it was earned.

The week before sales start teasers from the book are starting to hit. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-act-of-heresy-nras-former-no-2-calls-for-gun-control/ar-BB18FoXo?li=BBnbfcL The National Rifle Association’s former second-in-command is breaking with the group’s orthodoxy and calling for universal background checks and so-called red flag laws in a new book assailing the organization as more focused on money and internal intrigue than the Second Amendment, while thwarting constructive dialogue on gun violence. Look like he's trying to get on the NY AG's good side, maybe hoping to get out of the line of fire as it were. While this book promises to be a lot of insider baseball and stuff we probably already suspected in broad strokes, it will fill in some of the details. This quote from the article stuck out... Much of the book centers on Mr. LaPierre, who Mr. Powell says “couldn’t run an organization on a fiscally sound basis to save his life,” Those are exactly the types who do all they can to work for orgs where other people's money is in abundant supply, and their fiscal prudence isn't part of the annual evalulation.

Fair points, and even in my hypocrisy I agree personal responsibility has fallen by the wayside. But the examples you gave have direct relationships to each other. COVID-19 is an independent variable transmitting. Obesity and hypertension can absolutely lead to heart attacks in a natural progression if left unchecked or after so long- but they can't lead to COVID-19. While I'm sure there are some who died while having COVID-19 with it not exacerbating the underlining condition enough to make a difference, I'm thinking there are a lot more people who would be alive today- even if not for long and/or in bad shape- had COVID-19 never gotten out of the lab or wet market.

Not surprising that many who've died had underlining conditions...plenty of American's do. Just using myself, I'm hypertensive and overweight. The devil is in the details, though. My blood pressure is kept well in norms with proper medication and physician visits every six months, and while I've got a belly to show how well fed I am, I can also walk three miles in an hour without keeling over for breath, and then go about my day after a shower. If I get sick from COVID and kick the bucket, neither of those conditions will have killed me, the COVID did because without it, I was living an ordinary life with proper medical treatment and exercise. But I'm a-okay not having to prove that point.

"The norm" is interpretative, but as long as the principal of gun ownership still exists, we'll make it through. Trying to let history be my guide here. I just keep thinking back to 1968...it was a bad year that brought on some very different, and even bad times for gun rights in retrospect, but not a fatal transition away from guns being in citizens hands. I do understand how the volatility of everything going on at once can paint a bleak picture, however.

Gun cycles tend to have very high peaks, and very low valleys, but there is a cycle if you can pick it out afford to be patient with your purchases. This too shall pass, but I get the nerves given all things happening at once. Really anything other than equipping yourself with the core three (pistol, rifle, shotgun) and enough SD ammo are luxuries you can wait for a good price point to present itself on. While I would love to have a nice PDW, it's not something I feel that I need before I keep funding my way to a down payment on a home, so I don't have one. For your standard AR shooter, get ten mags (aluminum or polymer) and you'll be set for 10 years if you don't abuse them. It's ammo I'm way more worried about long term. David pointed out some very good macroeconomic conditions in play, and those are things to keep a watch on. Since it's very much an expendable item, price can move like, well, precious metals on a financial market (irony), so you really need to understand the dollar cost average of how much you shoot, and learn when to buy even though your inventory tells you otherwise to keep it from rising if you're on a budget. That's not to say I endorse panic buying, I certainly don't. But I tend to look at my ammo like an emergency fund. While you try to shoot from an expendable pile you rotate around, you need to keep a certain level, and anything more isn't a bad thing if you worry about the future. On the flip side, times like these should reinforce how ammo is for a serious purpose first and foremost, so while piling up brass at the range is fun, it could come with a cost.

I've been adding 2x PMags to every order from PSA or Primary Arms since 2014. But a new trigger, get two mags...rifle case, add two mags...ect. While some may say there's no such thing as enough, I'm not worried about my own supply in the least. All these people buying mags in California before the court order goes into effect (which isn't simultaneous with the ruling) are running the risk of having their sales records subpoenaed by the state.

Doh! Yes, that's what I meant. So edited in my post.

I think the time is right for GOA to try and put the NRA out of business by saying in a campaign, "give us your membership dollars, and as we reach the NRA's membership levels, we'll wield that power more responsibly both politically and fiscally". Clearly the NRA didn't prioritize the money they raised to be effective as a gun rights organization, they needed it to fund cronyism and lifestyle perks. I very much believe under the right leadership with built in oversight and transparency from the beginning, GOA can reach the same level of political clout the NRA uses as their only legit defense. From there, they money will come in from the industry, and they can fund the safety and range standard programs the non-legislative wing of the NRA does pretty well (I admit to not know if/how GOA may already try to do this). Yes, it will be a public and brutal fight as the NRA will not go gentle into that good night. But for the next few generations of gun rights, I'm willing to trade some short term disharmony to have the group politicians actually do business with hold values a better aligned to the core of gun ownership is supposed to be about (hint: it ain't hunting and sports).

They very much punch above their weight. A good part of that is they tend to be very strategic with regards to the cases they take on.

Like @TGO David said, no...but if you're thinking of this as a potential carry gun at any point, it can't hurt to shoot it until you're confident.

Hoping for the best for your grandmother and all the other residents/staff there.

Show them some material from one of the good orgs out there (GOA, SAF come to mind), and see if they'll amend their rules to allow one of those to suffice.

https://twitter.com/igorvolsky/status/1291537690635239425?s=19 The guy writing the tweets in the thread I linked above is not an ally of gun owners, but he's basically parsing the juicy details of the lawsuit. The avarice of WLP and friends is just amazing.

That's a bit out past intended use to say the irons failed.

How would irons fail?

Both sides of Congress love letting the government agencies have a wide operating latitude. It lets them rail for or against their administrative moves, all while sidestepping the burden of actual oversight and responsibility, because that's hard, plus it cuts into time better spent fundraising or developing relationships that will land someone a sweet lobbying job after they retire from the legislature.