JAB

I don't own anything in .223 and don't shoot my SKS all that much (although I still feel for y'all that do.)  I am thinking that maybe I need to buy a metric crap ton of 12 gauge buckshot shells before some doofus at the BATFE decide that, because buckshot allows a shotgun to fire multiple projectiles with a single trigger pull, it effectively turns a single shot 12 gauge into a 'machine gun' and means that a pump shotgun is a weapon of mass destruction.

  As 1989 was the year I graduated High School and such things were all out of my price range at the time, I don't remember what the price was during that period.  As for new or used, however, he did say that the gun was at the local Walmart.  I do remember when Wally World sold handguns and don't remember them taking trades or selling used guns so it was probably new.

So you have to dial 615 even if your area code is 615?  How stupid.

I don't own an AR or, in fact, anything in .223.  I might one day buy something chambered for the round but it is just as likely that I never will.  That said, I still hope there is enough opposition by the people who can actually stop this nonsense to keep it from passing.  The reason is, I think this is a 'tip of the iceberg' sort of test issue to see how much push back there is against banning a commonly used ammo type.   Didn't the late and not lamented Ted Kennedy try to get at least some 30-30 ammo banned because it apparently 'could' defeat some levels of body armor (maybe there had been one instance where a 30-30 had actually done so?)  Honestly, isn't any rifle cartridge going to be able to defeat at least the lower levels of soft armor?  If the Bureau of Arrogance, Tyranny, Fearmongering and Encroachment quietly banned one type of commonly used ammo what would stop them from banning others - like the venerable and usually 'non-threatening' 30-30?

I don't have much perceived use for a tactical pen as I have no training in strike/nerve/pressure points or the like.  Also, the only pen I see me paying $100 for would be one of those pen guns (if they didn't require all the nanny paperwork and other BS.)  I know that some folks have to fly a lot or who spend a lot of time in airports where a tactical pen is just about the only, potential self defense tool that can be kept on one's person and I can see that.  In my case, though, the last time I flew was in 1996.  To tell the truth, I don't even carry a 'normal' pen on any kind of a regular basis as I don't use one all that much.  Still, I find the tactical pens interesting and think about them from time to time.  This thread inspired me to hop on Amazon and see what might be out there.  In so doing, I came across this Gerber one that pops572 and nightrunner might both find interesting as it has both push-button operation and a glass breaker (the glass breaker is located on the writing end, beside the actual pen tip.).  Heck, I could almost get the itch to pick up one of these, myself, if I caught it on sale.  As it is, they are already well under $100:   http://www.amazon.com/Gerber-31-001880-Impromptu-Tactical-Black/dp/B00B0BD3W0/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1425406348&sr=8-4&keywords=surefire+pen   Heck, I kind of like the knurled look of this one and it costs just about the same as a normal, decent quality pen such as a Cross, etc..  Looks like it has a sort of glass breaker cap end that screws off to reveal a hidden handcuff key - not something I am likely to ever use but it appeals to my 'gadget nerd' sensibilities.  Says it is compatible with regular and Fischer Space Pen refills so it should be capable of writing as well as anything else with a good ink cartridge installed.   http://www.amazon.com/UZI-TACPEN6-GM-Defender-Aircraft-Aluminum-Tactical/dp/B0080JEQOY/ref=pd_cp_hi_0   The Uzi name is a little cheesy but no big deal.  I figure that a solid metal pen/striking instrument is a solid metal pen/striking instrument.  This isn't a knife that needs to be capable of holding an edge nor is it a more complex machine such as a firearm, etc. nor yet an electronic device such as a flashlight (although a tactical pen that actually writes and has a built-in penlight would make my inner gadget nerd happy.)  It's kind of a ball peen hammer simple concept and, as someone not really familiar with such things, I have to wonder in this case how much more value one could get for $100 or more versus something that fits the same concept/niche and costs less than $20 (not a rhetorical question - I would really like to know.)

  And there are links to flaking-off teflon and Alzheimer's.  Maybe that was the real danger everyone was afraid of - not the effects of being shot but the enhanced chance of getting Alzheimer's later (being facetious, of course.)          I believe that the latest update/generation of ammo that stemmed from Black Talons is also the same ammo that is sold on the civilian market under the PDX1 brand name.

Our power was off for about three days and then on and off for part of another day.  Where I now live is next to my mom's house which our family moved into a little over 30 years ago.  Back then our power went off every time a squirrel peed on the power line (seriously, if it rained our power would be out for at least a couple of hours.)  It wasn't unusual then for our power to be off for a week or so at a time during snow, ice, etc.  We had a wood heater back then but my parents later got central heat and got rid of the wood heater.  Mom is a fan of kerosene heaters but I have trouble trusting them.  She also has a plethora of kerosene (oil) lanterns - some of which she inherited from her grandmother - for plenty of light.   Well, when our power was out this time I had plenty of drinking water on hand, plenty of shelf stable (canned, etc.) food and the like.  I also have a boatload of battery operated lights (not just flashlights but also work/small area lights and even a couple of battery operated LED light bars that I have mounted to the ceiling in my living room that are bright enough to read by) as well as a couple of rechargeable nightlight/emergency light type flashlights that I keep plugged in.  Unlike those times when I was a kid where entertainment during a long term power outage meant straining our eyes to read a book by the light of a kerosene lamp, I could read e books on my tablet or phone and even get on the Internet as long as the batteries held up (and could recharge them with a car charger in a vehicle.)  Truthfully, with my truck in 4WD - as long as I went in the middle of the day when things weren't frozen quite as solid - I could get in and out most of the time to get things I wanted.  The power outage exposed a major hole in my preparations, however - heat.  I do keep plenty of blankets and throws on hand so neither I nor my dog would have likely frozen to death but it wouldn't have been all that comfortable, either.  Luckily, my mom (who, as I said, is a fan of kerosene heaters) had a spare kerosene heater I was able to borrow and I was able to get to town to buy kerosene.   I have been meaning to buy one of those Heater Buddy type propane heaters but hadn't done so, yet.  I still plan to buy one but will probably keep a small kerosene heater and some kerosene on hand, too, for one big reason - you can cook on a kerosene heater but I don't think you could on those propane heaters because of the way they are made.  I will probably get one of those two-burner propane camp stoves but the kerosene heater lets you use heat that is being generated, anyhow, for a double purpose.  With the power out, between my mom and myself, we had (at different times) bacon, fried hamburger to make Manwich and cooked pretty much anything we wanted in an iron skillet on top of the kerosene heater.  I bought some pre-packaged blueberry pancakes and heated those for breakfast one morning and even grilled some Reuben sandwiches for dinner.  I am still not necessarily a huge 'fan' of kerosene heaters but will probably always have one on hand after that experience.   Funny thing is, I have an old generator I got when my grandfather passed away but it needs a fuel hose replaced.  I also don't know that I'd want to run it night and day nor am I sure I'd want to keep that much gas onhand for it so a non-electric heat source (and possible cooking option) would still come in handy.

  This.  Heck, I bought used and went with a 4 inch GP-100 (traded a four inch Taurus 66 .357 which was a good gun but just not a Ruger.)  Every gun owner should have a .357, I believe.   I would also suggest a single action revolver of some sort.  Even an inexpensive Heritage Rough Rider (I have one with both the .22LR cylinder and .22 Magnum cylinder) is a lot of fun.  My other single action is a Ruger Super Blackhawk in .44 Magnum and I have to say that wouldn't be a bad choice, either.  Part of me kind of wants a single action in .45, eventually, just because it is the grandaddy round.  Of course if it were just going to be a range toy you could combine the first, two suggestions and get a single action in .357.    Finally, I think I'd have to toss in a CZ (actually vz) 82 for consideration.  It is chambered in 9mm Makarov and was built by the Czechs as (in their opinion) a better alternative to the Russian Makarov design.  Ballistics are similar to .380 and the polygonal rifling helps them to be nice and accurate.  They are all metal and so a little weighty but fairly compact.  I carry mine in a belt slide holster, sometimes loaded with Hornady Critical Defense in 9mm Mak.  They aren't quite as common as they were a couple of years ago and prices have gone up a little but they are still relatively inexpensive (I got mine for $190 a couple of years back and I think they are more like $240 or so, now.)  Besides, everyone should own at least one 'Commie' handgun.

    Continuing the discussion, all in fun:   Reloading is an issue both ways.  How many spare mags are you going to carry for your pistol?  Probably about as many speedloaders or speedstrips as could be carried for a revolver.  Once those run out, the revolver is faster to reload with loose rounds and eliminates concerns that come from magazine problems.  If I am in a situation where I need 30 or 40 rounds from a handgun to shoot my way out then I am probably not going to make it, anyhow - either in a "Walking Dead" situation or a more 'real world' scenario.   If you have to travel - and especially if you are depending on being able to scavenge - you are probably toast either way.  At least I don't see me going all Rambo and living off the countryside.  I believe that food and water would become an issue long before running out of the ammo you could carry with you and, again, everything that can be scavenged probably will be scavenged pretty quickly.  I have seen estimates by folks with more knowledge in the area than I which predict that, if our supply chain were cut off, it would take about two days before grocery stores would be completely empty.  Even in a temporary situation, those same estimates say it would take two weeks or more for supplies to return to normal even after the event ended.  That all comes down to the JIT (Just In Time) supply philosophy that our modern suppliers and industries use.  Now, if one were willing to turn to marauding and kill others for the stuff they have scavenged then that person might last a little longer, assuming that one of their intended victims didn't kill them, first.   That Glock might be 100% reliable in an of itself but it can - and likely will - jam at some point due to an ammo issue (say, a dud round.)  Revolvers can have ammo issues, too, but the solution there is simply to pull the trigger again.   I concede the suppressor point IF one has suppressors on hand when the excrement impacts the rotary cooling device.  I, however, don't have any suppressors.  I don't have much use of one at the moment and don't really want to go through the expense and red tape of getting one.  Further, I doubt that a suppressor or threaded barrel would be something that a person could scavenge or just pick up after the apocalypse starts.  Again, guys who have them will probably want to keep them and would likely have some rather ballistic arguments against taking theirs.  Also, I have little knowledge of suppressors but don't they have a limited lifespan as in they cease to work effectively after so many rounds go through them?  Not sure how easy it would be to repair/replace them during an apocalypse.   To my knowledge, the only revolver that can truly be suppressed is the Nagant revolver (because the cylinder cams forward and seals the cylinder gap.)  I have one and if it was all I had I would use it but it wouldn't be my first choice, suppressor or not.   I am not hating on semiautos nor do I think they are useless.  I have a couple of semiautos that I carry, sometimes.  I simply don't think that revolvers are as obsolete as some folks do nor do I believe that semiautos are superior to revolvers in all situations any more than revolvers are superior to semiautos in all situations.

  I disagree because:   A.  I shoot revolvers better than semiautos   B.  I think that 'battlefield pickup' of ammo in a TEOTWAWKI situation is a bunch of nonsense.  The stores will be stripped and stockpiles will be guarded by other guys with guns who don't want you taking their stuff.  The Internet won't be working so what is available 'online' in normal circumstances won't matter - just what you can get at Walmart, Academy or the LGS.  Those supplies will go fast and there is a good chance people will be shooting each other over them.  What you have onhand is what you can count on so the idea is to have plenty of ammo for your gun and/or the supplies and ability to reload. That being the case, if a person wants to go with a .357 revolver then they should simply make sure they have plenty of .357 (and/or .38) ammo on hand.  The problem with counting on being able to find 'common ammo' is that it is the same 'common ammo' that everyone else is looking for.  Case in point, at the onset of the current ammo craze 9mm was among the first ammo type to disappear.  Also, .40 was hit or miss.  It would be the same in an 'apocalyptic' situation - those 'common calibers' that everyone touts as the best choice because they are so common might actually turn out to be a bad choice precisely because they are so common.  It is kind of like happened with rifle ammo - .'common' ammo like 223 and 7.62X39 became scarce for a little while but less common (although not 'niche') ammo like 30-30 was pretty much always available.  The difference would be that there would not be any new manufacture of ammo forthcoming to alleviate the shortage.  Once all that 'common ammo' was grabbed up it would be gone, period.  I imagine that someone like you, who casts and reloads, would be able to maintain ammo for whatever the heck he wants.   C.  Yes, any revolver can jam (however unlikely) but I believe that every semiauto will jam.  Even if it is just an ammo problem, a jam with a walker breathing down your neck is still a jam.  I imagine tap/rack/bang is a lot easier to pull off smoothly in drills than it would be in such a situation.  Further, if it came down to it, I'd a lot rather be faced with bashing a walker's head in with Rick's Python than with a plastic fantastic semiauto.   D.  As Negan points out in the comics, using firearms on the undead is, generally speaking, a waste.  For smaller groups, things like crowbars, baseball bats, etc. work better.  As he puts it (paraphrasing from memory), "Just because we don't use guns doesn't mean we don't have any.  We just save them for the living."   E.  As a continuation of point D. in a "Walking Dead" world gunfire just brings more walkers so, again, if there are few enough to take out with a ball bat, etc. then that would be the way to go.  If there is a horde, you aren't going to shoot your way out and the best bet is to hide, get away or get to a position where they can't get you.   F.  In such a situation, generally speaking, the choice of handgun shouldn't be of utmost importance, anyhow, because it should really only be serving as an ace in the hole to get you out of trouble and to back up the rifle/carbine/shotgun you are carrying.

I have seen that video posted on various forums, before but always get a kick out of seeing it, again.     [sarcasm] Not to mention that in this day and age if that story ran on the local news he would have various authorities and government agencies coming down on him for a list of charges, including:   1.  "Shooting" across a public roadway 2.  Manufacturing and carrying unlicensed AOWs 3.  Hunting/killing wildlife for which there is no open season (the Japanese beetles) 4.  Littering a public roadway (with the Pepsi cans, even though he probably picked them up when he was done.) 5.  Hunting (again, the Japanese beetles) with solid, non-expanding ammo 6.  Not getting an ammo stamp or paying ammo tax on those rocks [/sarcasm]

I have a feeling that the guy in the video had little or no prior experience with guns. He was trusting the guy filming or a third party and they were more interested in "punking" him so they could laugh at him than in making sure he had a safe, positive experience. I know people like that who will lie and tell someone that a heavy thumper shotgun, etc. doesn't kick just so they can laugh at the 'victim's' reaction. I personally don't find such asshattery funny in the least. To me, that seems like a good way to turn a person who was open to learning about guns into a person who has no interest in firearms. But maybe my funny bone is just not working right.

(Emphasis mine) I respectfully disagree - depending on a person's build, etc. This is a pic from a couple of years ago that I did just to show how much it is really possible to (casually) conceal under nothing but an unbuttoned shirt. And this is what I had on me in that picture: Notice that, among other things, there was a 4 inch Taurus 66 .357 Magnum (the gun I traded for my GP100.) It was pretty well hidden by just that shirt and that was in nothing but an inexpensive Fobus. I think that with a good holster that holds the gun 'high and tight' then casual concealment would be very doable with a 4 inch GP100. It might not be the thing to carry to a formal dinner, wedding, funeral or the like but just out and about at places like Walmart, a casual restaurant and similar locations it would be just as 'doable' as any, other full-sized gun.

I think it might be a lot of fun to watch someone else do that.

I'm glad you started this thread, SW.  My situation is similar, especially right now.  I am 'only' 43 and am 5' 11" and weigh 260.  Yes, I am overweight but I am also a 'big guy'.  I also have recurring problems with cardiomyopathy (weak heart function) and other chronic health issues.  Also, I am currently undergoing chemotherapy for colon cancer and the chemo causes some neuropathy, especially cold neuropathy.  In fact, sometimes my hands gets so numb and/or achy or even lock up to the point that I wonder how effectively I'd be able to use a handgun if the need arose, especially one with any, real recoil.  Also, as part of the whole cancer ordeal, I had to have part of my colon removed and currently have a (hopefully reversible) colostomy.  In other words, my guts are currently hacked up and I have a large (now healed) surgical scar.  To me, it would not be too great a stretch to think that one good, solid punch in the gut - which wouldn't necessarily be all that serious a threat to some folks - could tear things loose in there.  That would certainly constitute a risk of death or serious, bodily injury for me.  Further, the effects of chemo as well as cardiomyopathy mean that I'm not going to be running all that fast or far.  I would certainly attempt to extract myself from a situation to the best of my ability but I am not willing to risk dying just because some asshat thinks he has something to prove.

  I saw a Rossi lever in stainless with wood at the LGS, once.  Dang, that was one pretty rifle.  All my levers are blue and I like the look but there was just something about that stainless that looked great.

Wow, nice finds.   The first guns I owned as a teenager were single barrel shotguns but the gun I mostly learned to shoot rifles with was my dad's Marlin (actually, Glenfield) lever 30-30.  I loved shooting it (partly because of the Lucas McCain vibe - I liked watching the old Rifleman reruns.)  To this day, I prefer levers to any, other type of rifle.  I inherited that Glenfield from dad and have since bought myself a Marlin in .44Mag and a Henry in .22LR.  I'd kind of like to have a lever in .357, too.  If I came across another 30-30 at the right price I just might pick it up just to have a 30-30 lever rifle that had no sentimental value.   Also, I have what is probably the 'descendant' of that .22 Mag.  Mine is a 925M (I'm guessing yours is a 25M.)  When I bought it (at Sportsman's Warehouse in Chattanooga) I went ahead and picked up an inexpensive Simmons .22 Mag scope for it and had the guys there install and laser zero it for me.  That package is more accurate than I am.

I have a 4 inch GP100 and see no reason for ever owning a 6 inch in .357.  Just for me, if I were going to go with a barrel that long it would be in a 'heavier' cartridge like .44 Magnum.  I figure if I am going to own a big revolver then it had might as well be a BIG revolver (and, in fact, I do own a 7.5 inch Super Blackhawk in .44 Mag.)  I also like having a longer (6.5) inch barrel on my Heritage because, according to velocity results I have seen in various places, a barrel of that length or similar allows a .22 Mag to reach velocities from a handgun comparable to a .22LR fired from a rifle.  Neither of those are 'carry in public' guns, though.  I think that carrying the 4 inch would be very doable, depending on where you are going, etc. and in fact plan to make a leather pancake style holster that will ride sort of high on my belt with a forward cant to carry the 4 inch GP100 in, some, once my current medical issues that pretty much prevent belt carry are behind me. 

Get better!

  At the risk of pulling a threadjack, I have to say that for some reason, your post made me think of the schtick that was on many (every?) episode of Captain Kangaroo in one form or another:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7H9jbrzrbA

Frank Hamer. the former Texas Ranger who was eventually put in charge of the manhunt for Bonnie and Clyde and the rest of the Barrow gang (and who was eventually successful in leading a team that brought their crime spree to an end) carried a single action revolver.  Of course, he also apparently carried a .38 Super semiauto pistol as 'backup'.

  And now some other company can try to make money coming up with solutions to problems that this will create.

  The insurgents/terrorists already do something like that except much lower tech.  A buddy of mine who is in EOD was telling me about a Dragunov rifle that he was shown when he was 'in country.'  The opposing forces had 'abandoned' it while retreating - or wanted our folks to think that they had.  In actuality, they had completely blocked the barrel (in a manner that was not immediately visible) and then drilled a small hole into the chamber from in front of the trigger - again, in a manner that might be overlooked unless someone looked really close.  Obviously, the intent was that anyone who actually touched off a round in that thing would lose a finger at best and possibly a hand, an eye or even be killed.

Sounds like a really bad idea.  I think that if someone needs to be shot then they need to be shot, not hit with a ping pong ball and a firearm should never be seen as both a 'lethal force' option and a 'less lethal' option in the same package.  This isn't Star Trek where they can set their phasers on stun.  I foresee several potentially bad outcomes:   1.  Causing a mindset in officers where they begin thinking of a regular duty gun loaded with regular duty ammo as a 'non-lethal' or 'less lethal' option, causing them to draw their firearm when doing so might not really be warranted, at all.   2.  Causing a mindset whereby an officer, out of a desire not to use deadly force, opts for the 'ping pong' ball when he should really just shoot someone's a** - and the officer ends up getting hurt or killed in the process.   3.  Causing incidents whereby the officer intends to use the less lethal option but either doesn't attach the device properly or, in the heat of the moment, forgets to attach it and ends up improperly and unintentionally using deadly force.  IMO, any 'less lethal' option needs to be an entirely separate device.   4.  Instead of alleviating the problem of public outcry when deadly force is used I think this would actually make the situation worse.  Just like some people now say, "Why didn't they just shoot him in the leg instead of killing him," if an officer made a judgement call that deadly force is required then the family and friends of the 'little angel who loved everybody and wouldn't hurt nobody' (and anyone else looking for a BS excuse to loot someone else's business or destroy someone else's property) would be saying, "Why didn't they just hit him with one of those ping pong balls?  They didn't have to kill him!"   This idea also breaks one of the basic rules of firearm safety - never point a firearm at something you aren't willing to destroy (or kill.)  To me, that rule is clear, concise and makes sense while this attachment simply confuses the situation.  If there is room on the officer's belt to carry this attachment in a pouch then there should be room for something that is completely separate and self-contained.  If there really is a place for something like this, how about something like one of those single-shot 12 gauge flare pistols built to handle a 12 gauge 'rubber slug' load and colored florescent green?  They could call it 'The Noisy Cricket".  Just a thought.

If you are going with a 4 inch barrel, as others have said, why not go with the GP 100 instead? The SP 101 is a five shot while the GP 100 is a six shot. The five shot, of course, is a little less thick at the cylinder but if you are going with a four inch barrel I don't think the cylinder thickness is going to make much difference in the ability to conceal it. If it were mainly for concealed carry then the SP would have an edge but then you'd probably also want a shorter barrel. MSRP on the two is essentially the same and both are available in a 4.2 inch barrel with adjustable sights.. The only advantage I see that the four inch SP 101 might have over the GP 100 - depending on usage and preference - is that the 4 inch SP with adjustable rear sights has a fiber optic front sight while the GP is (strangely, I think) only available with a ramp front sight. Personally, for all around use I'm not sure how much I'd like the fiber optic front sight, especially if I were going to carry it, sometimes (just because the fiber optic front sight looks pretty big and the ramp front seems sleeker for a carry gun.) I have a four inch GP 100 and it is a great gun. I don't see me ever willingly parting with it. I would like to have a SP 101 to go with it but the SP would be a snubbie. I have fired a snubbie SP and liked it. The owner even let me carry it on a couple of occasions to try it out. I have to say that even though it fit in my front pocket I'd probably go with belt carry if I carried one. Even in a five shot, snubbie format that SP was pretty danged heavy and a lot more noticeable in my pocket than my S&W 642. I had a six shot Taurus 66 (the newer Taurus 66 revolvers are seven shot) that I traded for the GP100. It is my understanding that the Taurus 66 was pretty much a clone of the S&W. I can tell you that my 6 shot GP 100 is just a little 'beefier' - especially along the top of the barrel - than the 66. I occasionally (rarely) carried the 66 so I had a Fobus paddle holster for it and the Ruger will not fit it. According to Ruger's website, the 4.2 inch GP 100 is 9.50 inches in OAL while the 4 inch SP 101 is 9.12 inches in OAL so the length isn't much different. The SP weighs about 10 ounces less than the GP (29.5 oz for the SP and 40 oz for the GP.) Have you ever seen some of the older Ruger revolvers - the Speed 6 or the Security 6? I almost bought one, once (and probably should have.) I don't remember if it was a Speed or a Security but it had a 4 inch barrel. Ruger hasn't made them in several years but they are known as good guns and aren't quite as 'beefy' as the GP 100.