JAB

Hornady's Critical Defense in standard pressure has very minimal muzzle flash from my Rossi 35102 and is not brutal on recoil, IMO. Of course, I'm not sure if the home reloader can get the same powder they use so that may not be of much help. I voiced such a concern to the owner of my LGS one day. Now, neither he nor I are lawyers and this is not a legal opinion but the gist of his response (which makes sense to me) was (not a direct quote): If you are in a situation where you shoot someone and the shooting is questionable, the last thing that is going to 'get' you would be whether you use reloads or factory loads. If you are really acting in self defense, what difference would it make? The shooting is either justified or it isn't. Besides, unless you tell them, how are they going to know you were using reloads? If you don't volunteer that information, what are the chances that anyone is even going to think to ask? I thought further on that and am now wondering, especially if you used components from the same company (say, a Hornady bullet with a reloaded Hornady case - you just work up a powder load you like) then how in the world would anyone know the difference without going to the extreme of pulling the bullet, testing the powder and so on? Are most lawyers - or even most LEOs - ammo experts to the point that they can tell by simply looking at a round that it is a reload? Are there signs that would give it away if using factory bullets (instead of bullets you have cast) with casings with the headstamp of the same company? How likely is it that anyone would notice even if you did use a Hornady bullet in a Remington casing, etc.? I haven't started reloading, yet, so these are intended as real questions, btw. Now, there are very few people whose reloaded ammo I would trust to be dependable for SD, but that is a different issue.

I personally would like to see at least open carry be legal in TN with no permit required. I also feel that if an 18 year old is going to be treated as an adult when it comes to law violations, etc. then an 18 year old should be treated as an adult in every aspect. That said, right or wrong, Tennessee law is Tennessee law - and current Tennessee law, until and unless someone gets it changed, is that residents must be 21 in order to legally obtain a TN carry permit. I am no lawyer but the spirit of this law would seem to indicate that in order for a TN resident to be able to carry in this state he or she must be 21. Acquiring a North Dakota permit in order to carry in Tennessee at the age of 18 would seem to me to simply be an attempt to do an end run around state law. I am sure it is not your intention to be 'sneaky' but such an idea does give an impression of 'sneakiness' and trying to do something that isn't entirely above-board and possibly not legal. I think the biggest benefit to having a nonresident carry permit from another state in addition to a legal carry permit from one's own state comes in if the 'other' state's permit is recognized and accepted by more states than one's home state's permit. I wouldn't want to take a chance on using another state's permit to 'get around' the laws of my own state.

If I were going to be interested in a Judge, the carbine is the one I would want.

I just bought a 925M a couple of weeks ago. Put a cheapo (but quite functional, I think) Simmons '22 Magnum' scope on it. Haven't had a chance to really set the scope, yet. I already had a Heritage convertible as well as an NAA mini chambered in .22 WMR so I figured I should have a rifle in that chambering, too.

Don't have a dog in this fight but all the, "Why would you want to carry at Bonnaroo," questions remind me a whole lot of the, "Why do you feel that you can't go out to eat without a gun strapped to your hip," questions the antis throw at us over the issue of restaurant carry. How many times have any of you been to a restaurant? How many times have you had to shoot your way out - or defend yourself with a firearm in the parking lot? For me, the number of such instances is exactly zero - but I still want to be able to carry when I go in to eat and have a glass of tea, regardless of what the guy at the table next to me is drinking. Why is it any more unreasonable to ask about carrying at Bonnaroo? Personally, I think that the question of whether or not one can carry at _______ is a valid one (insert 'Applebee's, Bonnaroo or the local Walmart into that blank - all the same, to me) quite apart from the fact that he will be making the drive from Michigan. Sure, if he can't legally carry then he can't - but I don't blame him one bit for asking.

Thanks for the answers, guys. Looks like it was as I suspected in my OP - partly they are higher because it costs a little more to manufacture them but mostly it is simply because people are willing to pay that price. Nothing wrong with that. Again, I'm talking mostly about factory production guns. Obviously, a custom gun of any type is going to be more expensive. It usually takes a revolver to get my juices going. To me, semiautos are tools. They have some advantages (capacity being the main one) over revolvers and I carry them, sometimes, but they don't inspire any great amount of feeling in me (nor, to be honest, do they inspire as much confidence as does a wheelgun.) That said, I recently fired a 1911-style pistol chambered in 9mm (was a S&W - don't know the model number, etc.) and was impressed with it's pointability. I just had a small dot of the type folks use to write prices on for yard sales up as an aiming reference (I use them to cover holes in paper targets to extend target life - are about the same size as dots sold for that purpose but cheaper) and ended up putting two holes in that little dot with the rest of the rounds hitting within 1/2 an inch of the perimeter (giving me probably a 1 inch group) at ten yards, offhand - and this was the first time I'd even held a 1911 style pistol. Honestly, I have to work pretty hard to do that with my own handguns with which I am familiar and have practiced. I'm not going to run right out and buy a 1911 - and I'm not paying a grand or even close for one - but I will be keeping them in the back of my mind. I might prefer a 9mm chambered one (I know - that's blasphemy to some) just because I already have 9mms, plus the ammo is cheaper so I could shoot it more.

This may be a dumb question but please forgive my ignorance. I really know very little specifically about 1911s and I'm just wondering why they seem to be so expensive. Heck, even the 'cheap' 1911s seem to be pretty expensive. For my example, I am going to use Taurus. The MSRP for the least expensive Taurus 1911 that is chambered in .45acp is $757. They list one of their 24/7 models chambered in .45acp for $475. Both are from the same company and both throw the same bullets downrange. The 1911 does not turn the .45 round into a photon torpedo any more than does the 24/7. So why does the 1911 cost roughly $300 more than the other .45? Taurus has a 1911 chambered in 9mm listed at $677 and a 24/7 in 9mm listed at an MSRP of $452 - still a difference of more than $200 for a pistol from the same company that would put the same 9mm holes in something. So what is the deal? I could understand an all metal gun costing a little more than a part-polymer one but that doesn't seem to explain it all. It isn't like the 1911 is some new, cutting edge design that still has to be priced high enough to pay for research and development. It's not like there isn't plenty of competition making 1911s to help keep prices down. These aren't 'boutique' guns - they are mass-produced Taurus pistols. Surely it doesn't cost that much more to build a 1911 - or does it? Is it just the mystique of the 1911 that allows every company who makes them to keep the prices up relative to other pistols in the same chambering? Is this just an example of pricing to what the market will bear as so many people want a 1911?

And it is this very thought that would make me at least consider taking the fight to them rather than letting them get us cornered, etc. I also agree with this statement.

One the one hand, from at least an SD standpoint, I at least partially suscribe to the idea that almost no one likes to leak. In other words, I think that the instances where an attacker would keep coming, at risk of further injury or death, after getting shot with anything - even a .22lr - are not going to be very common. That is why I sometimes feel comfortable carrying a NAA mini chambered for .22WMR as a BUG (well, more like as a 'get off me' gun.) I also view the smaller calibers as certainly 'better than nothing' for folks who can't handle a larger caliber due to limitations of strength, etc. On the other hand, I carry something in a larger caliber as primary. Sure, plenty of people are probably saved from attack simply by having a .22lr with them. Sure, the FN pistol apparently did a lot of damage in the aforementioned tragedy. Then, again, Samson supposedly killed a thousand Philistines with the jawbone of an ass but I'm not going to start carrying around a donkey's mandible for self defense.

IANAL and the local police might not intend to enforce this ordinance against an HCP holder but I see no exception made within the text of the ordinance. Might this not become a problem down the road if some police chief decides to enforce it against HCP holders? Sure, it might get thrown out in court but not before someone (or multiple someones) are arrested, harrassed, etc. This Kwik guy has really opened up a few cans of worms at a time when HCP holders don't need to be made out to look like a bunch of loose cannons any more than the media already does. Regardless of what the Constitution says and what we know our rights to be, we are the minority. We need to keep public opinion - I.E. voter opinion (which will, unfortunately, often sway politicians more than the Constitution) positive - or at least not actively opposed - with regard to our side as much as possible in order to see more favorable laws passed. Taking a stand on issues is one thing. Pushing buttons and tweaking noses just to show how 'smart' you are is quite another. Interestingly and I am sure as a result of old language from the time the ordinance first passed, the ordinance exempts "...any officer or policeman engaged in his official duties..." so I guess, technically, a policewoman engaging in her official duties would not be exempted from the statute. Not trying to go all women's lib here, just pointing out what the letter of the law or, in this case ordinance, says.

I routinely and purposefully choose one of my revolvers over one of my semiautos to be the 'bedside gun'. For years, my go to bedside handgun was a Colt Police Positive that was built in the late '70s. Currently, the bedside gun is the Taurus 66 I picked up earlier this month. I like revolvers for this purpose because if needed I will have been awakened rather suddenly and rudely from sleep and may have to shoot from a prone position with a less than optimal grip (if I have advanced warning, I'm going for the shotgun hidden just a few feet away, anyhow.) Revolvers don't care if you limp-wrist them. They don't care if you shoot them at odd angles. I don't have to worry about clearing jams with my hands shaking from nerves, in the dark, still half asleep at 3 in the morning. If the intruder is already at contact distance by the time I get a shot off, I don't have to worry about pressing the muzzle into his gut, etc. pushing the slide out of battery and preventing it from firing. If I can't get the job done with six shots, that should at least be enough to get me to the shotgun. Using revolvers is just simple and they just plain work (yeah, I know - if a revolver jams it can be impossible to fix without a competent gunsmith but that is a pretty unlikely 'if'.) If I wind up in a true shooting scenario, I'm sure adrenaline and nerves will kick into high gear in which case simple would be good. That is why I sometimes even choose to carry my .38 snubbie instead of a semiauto.

JAB writes, "Shotguns can fire many pellets from just a few shells and buckshot is a heck of a lot more substantial than fog." Tsun Tsu probably never heard of 00 Buck. As for to clear or not to clear, that is a tough call. I'm no Billy Badass and see the sensibility of not wanting to possibly face multiple attackers. On the other hand, simply by breaking into our home the intruders would be (in both a legal and moral sense) threatening me and mine with 'death or serious bodily injury'. I don't take too kindly to that idea. By the time the cops could arrive, they'd probably have what they wanted and be gone - with every chance that they would come back again at a later date - and would maybe plan to do more than steal from us the next time. Like I said, tough call.

I have made it a habit to check whatever Wally locations we pass when my wife and I go out or sometimes on the way home from work. As there is at least one Wally location in almost any direction we go from where we live, I hit them fairly often. 9mm supplies do seem to be returning. I was in the Turkey Creek Walmart last night (Monday night - 3/15/10) and they had a pretty good stock of Federal 9mm at $9.97 per box. Still had about twice as much .40 in the Federal, though. They had so much of the RWS 9mm stuff that they had it in two different places on the shelf. Kind of strange but they also had a big ol' stack of .357 Sig on the shelf. They didn't have any of the Win. Super X .22WMR 40 grain JHPs I was looking for, though. Last weekend, I was in the Lenoir City Wally and they had the 100 round packs of WWB 115 grain 9mm. Don't remember if they had any 50 round WWB 9mm packs or not but they did have a couple of 50 round packs of the Remington UMC in 9mm. They had some of the Federal stuff the week before. The Madisonville store also had some WWB 9mm a couple of weeks ago. I am okay on 9mm range fodder right now and didn't buy any. I like the Blazer Brass/Federal stuff better since it is a little cheaper than the WWB and works just as well in my Kel Tec P11. Pretty much anything works in my Ruger P95. Also, last week the LC store had some 550 and 333 round bulk packs of .22LR. I even managed to buy a 100 round value pack of the Remington UMC .380 JHPs there - the last one they had. Not Walmart but last Saturday the Bass Pro Shop/Outdoor World in Sevierville had some Remington Express 9mm +P JHPs and some premium +P 9mm Winchester SD ammo but no cheap range fodder. I did stop by the Chapman Highway Wally as that was the way we went to Sevierville and was surprised to see that they had Gold Dots in .38 Special +P and (iirc) .40. I've never seen Gold Dots in Walmart before - although I have seen the premium Winchester stuff in .40.

This may be true for people who only spend a few minutes a week on a school campus. However, as I mentioned, I work on a satellite campus of a private college. You specifically site "being able to keep a gun in one's vehicle while at work" as being a matter than needs tending to more than the ability to have a firearm in one's vehicle on school property. Does it not occur to you that there are people for whom going to work means being on school property? Under current state law, some version of the 'parking lot' bill would mean absolutely nothing to those of us who work for educational institutions. In fact, as it would in effect be saying that everyone except those who have the audacity to work for a school have the right to self defense when driving to and from work, passage of such a bill without changing the law with regard to school premises would be a bit of a slap in the face. That is because even if the state legislature changed state law to forbid employers from interfering with my legal ability to have a firearm in the confines of my property (my vehicle), that very same legislature would still be - hypocritically - leaving in place a law that interferes with that exact, same ability. I want to see carry in restaurants that serve alchohol legalized. However, I spend maybe 45 minutes to an hour at a time in a restaurant and even if said restaurant serves alchohol I can at least legally have my firearm in the vehicle. I spend 40 hours a week on the premises of a school - and can't even legally have my firearm in my vehicle to be available for the trip to and from work or anywhere else I must stop during that trip. Kind of makes having an HCP a moot point for the better part of my week. Yes, I could look for a job elsewhere - just as your wife could seek employment that wouldn't require her going to a State building every workday - but neither of us should be forced, by the law, to make that decision. The fact that we have gone through the process and met the requirements to obtain and maintain our HCP should be enough.

Can't say much about the Stoeger as I have never fired one. I do have a Ruger P95DC, though, and I really like it. It has never had a hiccup that was the fault of the pistol and the only time it didn't go 'bang' was on some ammo I got that came in white boxes with black lettering telling only the lot number and caliber - which I believe to have been intended for SMGs because of the 'red' around the primer and so probably had very hard primers. Even the few that didn't fire the first time fired on the second strike, though. As far as possible later carry, the P95 seems too bulky and heavy for carry, at first, but I have found that it actually carries pretty easily OWB in a leather belt slide holster and actually conceals pretty easily under a long shirt or thin jacket. I don't know that I'd want to try and conceal it under light summer clothing, though.

This is my one and only Colt. Nothing fancy or extremely valuable (monetary wise, although I bought it from a now deceased friend so it has sentimental value) - just a late '70s Police Positive .38 Special. It is pictured with a holster I made for it. I don't really carry it, much - I just thought that style of holster looked good with it. I put Pachmayr grips on it because the originals were too thin for my hands but I still have the original grips, too, in case I decide to put them back on. It could use a good polishing, I guess.

Another sticking point is that the current law mentions the vehicle being 'operated' by the adult. To some (and I sort of take this view), operated by means just that - the person must remain behind the wheel, effectively 'operating' the vehicle - in order to be protected by this law. In other words, the current law appears to say that leaving your firearm in the vehicle, even unloaded, and getting out of the vehicle is illegal. It is literally only intended to allow one to pick up/drop off passengers (students) without exiting the vehicle and without either taking the weapon from the vehicle on school grounds or leaving it unattended in a vehicle on school grounds. The new law did away with the unclear language and made it clear that the firearm could legally be left in the vehicle. I hate that this bill is effectively dead. I was almost more interested in seeing this become law even than restaurant carry. I work at a satellite campus for a private college so the current law means I am basically unable to legally have a firearm in my vehicle, much less carry, until I get home from work five days out of the week. To me, it is stupid that the state legislature has decided that a person who has passed background checks and taken the steps to get an HCP - and who they (the legislature) considers trustworthy to carry at Walmart, in a state park and in restaurants where alchohol is served (after all, the legislature passed that law once, already) is somehow a 'menace', because he or she wants to have his or her carry weapon in their vehicle, simply because they are on school grounds. It is also offensive that my safety and ability to be equipped for self defense is considered somehow less important simply because of where I work. What is the point of an HCP if I still can't be trusted - and still can't be legally armed the majority of the time? I spend a lot more time at work than I do in restaurants so, to me, this bill and the 'parking lot' bill (which would impact even more folks) are in some ways more important than restaurant carry and certainly at least equally important.

Heck, I'd be happy to do a one-inch group at fifteen yards. The only handgun I have tried at 100 yards is my Heritage with the .22WMR cylinder in place. I did that more as a lark than anything and was surprised when I was able to at least put shots on paper - and some were even on the target. Of course, it took probably 18 shots (and some luck) to get a handful on target - and my 'group' was more like one foot than one inch (and looked more like a pattern than a group.) Sad thing is that I was (an am) pretty happy about my results!

I have pretty much sworn off the RK shows. I don't want to pay admission for the 'priveledge' of being in a building with a bunch of overpriced guns, extremely overpriced ammo, even more overpriced non-gun junk and (as mentioned) beef jerky. The only firearms I have ever bought at a gunshow were at the one at the National Guard Armory in Maryville. It's one of the ones put on under the heading, "The Great American Gun and Knife Show", formerly "Smoky Mountain Gun and Knife Show." THey have shows in other places, too. The one in Maryville is really small but there is one dealer that has been there both times I have been who has at least reasonable prices. His items usually aren't anything 'collectible' or 'premium', mostly just old, used shooters - some of which might need a little TLC - which is what I look for at gunshows (if I want a new or like new gun, I'll just go to the LGS as he usually has better prices than gunshows, anyway.) Honestly, if that one dealer weren't there I'd probably swear off of that show, too. The first time I went, I bought a Winchester 190 from him for $79 + tax and background check. Maybe not a 'steal' but I wanted a .22 semiauto rifle and that is cheaper than I have seen one anywhere else. I fired a few times as I got it but it really needed a new inner mag tube assembly - and works perfectly with the new part. The last time that show was in town, I ended up buying my wife a Savage/Stevens break action single-shot 20 gauge (in basically a 'youth' model setup) and myself an old Sears bolt action 20 gauge (holds 2 in tube mag plus one in chamber) with an adjustable choke for $69 each + tax and background check. They both shoot great as is. Again, maybe not stellar prices but not bad - especially considering that most folks with single-shot shotguns for sale around here seem to think that the barrels are lined in gold and want more for their old beaters than some brand new ones go for.

As I don't drink while carrying, anyway, neither do I - especially if the trade-off is that a law-abiding HCP holder in the parking lot doesn't become a criminal simply by stepping across the threshold of a place that serves booze when that HCP holder is there to eat not imbibe. That is, as long as the useless 'carry where liquor is served but not where only beer is served' nonsense goes away.

Where did I say that the carbine has more recoil than pistols? If that is how you took my statement then I am sorry for having been unclear. It's just that there is a little recoil with the 995 - not much but more than I thought there would be - which surprised me the first time I shot it. Back to the subject of the OP, I am glad to hear that the 995 is holding its own in the shoot-off. I believe it to be a really good value firearm - as, I believe, are most of Hi-Points products. As for the new stock vs. the old stock, I honestly think that the skeletized buttstock on the new design is even uglier than the old one (to me, it looks like the cheap plastic grid left over when building a model car after snapping all of the model pieces out.) However, the forestock looks a lot better and I believe the forestock makes the new design more useful and functional, overall.

I LIKE it!

As much as I would like to say I wouldn't see it as a 'big deal', I am not sure I can truthfully say that. Now, if the setting were a more rural area (a country road, etc.) I would feel more 'relaxed' about it than if someone were, say, walking down Gay Street in downtown Knoxville with a rifle. Of course, the reason such a sight might cause me to be a bit 'tense' is that the laws against such have kept it from being commonplace. In other words, in our state - because carrying a long gun down the street is not very common - the first thing I would think of would be that the guy doesn't care if he gets in trouble because he IS planning on shooting someone/multiple someones. Maybe I shouldn't feel that way, but there it is. If, on the other hand, our state were more friendly to openly carrying long arms - meaning that doing so might be more commonplace - it probably wouldn't have the same effect. If such were the case, it probably wouldn't make me any more uncomfortable than someone openly carrying a handgun. Growing up (I was born in 1971 so it wasn't that long ago) it seemed like nearly every pickup truck you saw had a gun rack in the back window, usually equipped with a shotgun and a rifle or at least a shotgun - and not just during hunting season. I guess that would be legal with an HCP (or possibly without an HCP as long as the ammo is isolated from the firearm.) I don't think I would do that because of the increased risk of theft (not to mention having my truck window smashed in) but I do miss seeing those shotguns in the back windows of pickups. I always found such a sight to be more 'comforting' than 'threatening'.

Which, to me, makes the legislation useless. It is much easier to avoid the restaurants with bars and still eat out (and get good food at reasonable prices) than it is to eat out and avoid places that serve only beer. Heck, even Buddy's Barbecue serves beer in some locations. I'd much rather eat at a mom and pop Mexican (or Chinese or barbecue, etc.) restaurant than at TGI O'Applechili's. Besides, some places that just serve beer as a beverage choice with meals don't even advertise that they have beer so you may not know until you are already sitting down, looking at a menu and breaking the law. Hopefully the amendment that Ms. Goeser mentioned will fix that.

IANAL but to my mind all of this came about because Tennessee's definition of what makes a gun 'loaded' is asinine. Apparently, not only does 'loaded' mean having one in the chamber - or even in the weapon - but also if you have loaded mags in the same range bag as the empty firearm. You can even get in trouble for having an empty shotgun behind the seat of your truck with a box of shells next to it. Changing the law was presented largely as a way to supposedly to make it easier for hunters, etc. to have both ammo and gun in their vehicle and not have to go to great lengths to isolate the gun from the ammo just to avoid violating the law, especially when moving between hunting locations. What the heck this has to do with having an HCP I don't know as not all hunters have a HCP and not all HCP holders hunt. In other words, hunters without an HCP still must isolate ammo from the firearm in their vehicle. To me, the common sense thing to do would be to simply clarify that 'loaded' means having ammo in the tube mag, a loaded detachable mag that is in the mag well, etc. and doesn't mean having the weapon and ammo seperate in the same compartment of the vehicle. The 'side effect' of doing it the way they did is that those of us with HCPs can now legally have ammo in a long gun - as long as the chamber is empty - in our vehicles. I don't mind having that option, at all - it just doesn't really seem to have been the best, easiest or most intelligent way of changing the law if the real goal was to make things easier on legal hunters.