JAB

I actually like those shows, generally speaking.  Actually, there is one vendor who usually attends them whose selection I generally like.  He has a regular business (Hearthstone Guns, I think it is called) but a lot of what he brings to the show is 'lower tier' stuff.  Some things he brings need work, some have purely cosmetic issues while some are just not 'high end' guns.  Not bad guns, necessarily, but not high dollar stuff, either.  I can deal with something not being high dollar.  At these shows, on different occasions, I have bought from him:   An old Sears bolt action 20 gauge with adjustable choke for $89 An old Stevens single shot 20 gauge for $79 A Winchester 190 .22 semiauto rifle for $79 A Titan .25 (because my first handgun was a Titan .25 and it 'disappeared' from my mom's house a few years back) for $79 An H&R 9 shot .22 revolver for $99   Being that I already have all the guns I 'need', I like to find inexpensive guns mostly for fun or to fill some personal niche I have in mind.  Every, single gun I have bought from him worked as it was when purchased.  I did end up ordering a new inner tube mag assembly for the Winchester 190.  I can't imagine getting anywhere near those kinds of prices on ANY solid, working gun at the overblown, overpriced beef jerky shows at the Expo Center/Chilhowee.   Now, if that vendor isn't there then I agree that it isn't worth going.

  Am I the only one who wants to know what the heck kind of car this guy was driving?  I didn't see that stated in the article.

I wonder if these are the same type of Tennessee road maps that are available free at rest areas.  I picked up a couple of maps a rest area a few months back when I stopped to use the restroom during a trip to Nashville.

Looks great.   I am not sure I'd be comfortable with a gun that has to be 'cocked and locked'.  I have also decided that, fight it or not, I am more of a 'revolver guy' than a semi-auto guy and have pretty much decided to mostly stick with revolvers for future purchases.   That said, I keep coming back to wanting a 1911 just because they can be made to look so good and can be customized to be one's 'own'.  I once read a comment along the lines that the 1911 is the Barbie of the gun world because you can 'dress' and accessorize it pretty much any way you want.  Pictures of nice looking 1911 pistols such as yours do not help me resist them any better.

  So why is it bad for someone to tell you how to manage your property but okay for an employer to tell me what I can or can't store inside the confines of MY private property - my vehicle?  After all, my vehicle remains MY private property no matter where it happens to be parked.  The idea that an employer's property rights should be 'protected' from something that really doesn't impact his/her rights by allowing said employer to take actions that do interfere with MY private property rights kind of seems like a conflicting statement, to me.   In other words, the employer has the right to tell me that I can or can't park my car on his/her property - and that is as far as it goes.  He/She does not have the right to interfere with my right to store an otherwise legal item inside the confines of MY private property nor should he/she be legally allowed to do so as a requirement for employment nor for any, other reason.  Ever.  Period.

My first thought was that Milton had torched the walkers at the pit.  Upon thinking about it further, though, I am not so sure.  For one thing, Milton still believes that the 'biters' have something of their old selves still preserved inside and that they can possibly be saved.  To his mind, they are still largely sick people.  I have a hard time imagining him pouring gasoline on them and setting them on fire.   Another point that goes against Milton being the one is that no one is allowed outside the walls after dark.  Milton having been out after dark would be noticed.  Further, I have never seen anything to indicate that Milton has ready, easy access to a vehicle or to gasoline, etc.   Because of those factors, I am actually thinking that it was Martinez who torched the walkers.  As he is basically the governor's 'lieutenant' in charge of guarding the wall, he could have arranged to slip out/in with no one noticing.  He is also one of the people that is sometimes shown driving so he would also have ready access to a vehicle and gasoline.   Martinez will do what he has to do but at the same time I think his 'talk' with Daryl at the meeting made him realize that even people who aren't with his group are still people.  I think it also made him realize how much lying/manipulation the Governor has been doing.  Martinez also said something along the lines that the walkers/biters took his wife and kids.  He hates walkers because of that and I could easily see him torching them without hesitation.  Also, now that he knows that the people in the prison aren't the militant threat that the Governor has wanted them to believe - and that there are children in the prison - he might have a problem with feeding them to the walkers, especially if that is what happened to his own kids.   There is also the matter of the Governor's continued instability and increasing paranoia.  Martinez has largely replaced Merle as the Governor's 'right hand man'.  Martinez also saw what happened to Merle and has to know that things didn't go down exactly as the Governor said.  He has to be wondering how long it will be before the Governor's paranoia turns on him (Martinez), as well.  I get the feeling that Martinez is still human enough to not want to sic biters on little kids but is also ruthless and conniving enough to use this conflict as an opportunity to rid himself and Woodbury of their increasingly unbalanced and dangerous leader.   I haven't read that far in the comics but have seen comments to the effect that - in the comics - the Governor's own people turn on him.  Maybe they are setting things up for something like that, here.  It would make for an interesting 'surprise' twist if, when things come to a head, Martinez kills the Governor, assumes leadership of Woodbury and tells Rick et al that he is giving them one chance to leave the prison and keep moving - and that if he sees them again he will kill them all.

  Well, I can't say for sure what is 'typical' but of the three side by side doubles that I have fired, all three of them automatically engage the safety when the breech is opened/closed.  I think that is to replace the more or less inherent safety in having external hammers that can remain 'uncocked' until needed.  I can't remember for sure if the over/under 10 gauge my BIL has automatically engages the safety or not (maybe touching off a couple of shots from that thing causes short term memory loss) but I am thinking that it does.   The auto-engaging safety can cause me to say, "Doh!" when I forget to disengage the safety before pulling a trigger but, given the nature of the beast, I am kind of glad it does that.

Why are they going on about all the snow?  My step grandfather - who was Infantry in the Korean War (field artillery in WWII) - said it got so cold there that their rifles would freeze.  He said that he and his fellow troops would sometimes have to lean the butt of their rifles on the ground and stomp/kick the charging handle to open the chamber.  Heck, at one point during WWII he was in Czechoslovakia.  I asked if it was colder there or in Korea and he said Korea, no question.  The way he talked, the weather in Czechoslovakia was like a day at the beach compared to the weather in Korea.  I imagine they have a lot more snow than we have.

bentonbjones, that is a nice looking shotgun.  Looks like a coach gun, to me.  Either way, I'd be happy to own it.     I like the exposed hammer doubles, myself, although currently my only double (inherited from my grandfather) is an internal hammer (aka: "hammerless") type.  Just in the interests of curiosity, though, I checked the 'Net and if what I have found is correct, the first 'hammerless' doubles that didn't require an external cocking lever - meaning they pretty much looked like those made, today - were made in the 1870s so still not really all that 'modern' a concept.   That said, when that internal hammer model first came to me, I had trouble with parts of the internal cocking mechanism having become a little 'loose' and not cocking the hammer for the right side barrel.  I have jury-rigged a fix that I hope will hold, especially since I probably won't shoot it all that much, but such potential problems are one reason I'd like to also have an external hammer model.

  Young?  Man, I'm 41.  I kinda don't believe I should have to join the military and go to a foreign country in order to exercise my right to keep and bear arms.  I am also old enough to remember when pretty much every "good ol' boy" drove a pickup truck that had a gun rack in the rear window.  That rack generally held at least a shotgun and, often, a rifle.  Those long guns were present year 'round, not just during hunting season and, no, hunting season isn't different because the Second Amendment is not about hunting.  It was not a big deal and no one freaked out nor were they portrayed as 'armed mobs' by most folks because, back then, people weren't drinking the pussification Kool-Aid.  Some of us might like to still be able to do that without being harassed and without anyone freaking out.  It isn't our fault that the general populace has their heads up their collective asses.  I also don't think that most of us are talking about walking down the sidewalk, either alone or in groups, while carrying an AR, etc.

Looks like the world's most dangerous stapler!  Pretty cool.

  It is funny how people forget how Reagan wanted to spend BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars on the so-called 'Star Wars' defense plan - even though no one knew whether or not they could actually make it work.   Likewise, they forget how his administration oversaw an amnesty program for illegal aliens, claiming that it would be a 'one time' thing that would help solve the illegal immigration problem.  Yeah, we see how that worked out.   Sure, the USSR crumbled but - as Communism doesn't really make any money - that was going to happen sooner or later, anyhow.  I have to wonder how much money was unnecessarily spent on his watch just to speed up the inevitable.   Then there was his conduct during the whole Iran-Contra mess.  When he claimed he couldn't remember if he was involved or not, I remember one of his comments being, "Do you remember what you were doing on [such and such day at such and such time.]  I just wish someone had responded, "No, sir, not specifically but I am pretty sure I wasn't taking part in a deal to sell arms to Iran."   Finally, as Jonnin said, Reagan is largely responsible for the draconian gun laws that are in place in California - gun laws that threaten to bleed over into the rest of the country.  He also supported the so-called Brady bill.  He even used the dreaded 'Saturday Night Special' term in his written support for that bill.   http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opinion/why-i-m-for-the-brady-bill.html   Sure, he had his good points.  I believe that the air assault on Libya was one of the best military decisions that a POTUS has been party to in years.  In fact, I think that such strikes should have been the blueprint for Iraq and Afghanistan rather than being so involved in a ground war.  Of course, not being a military person my opinion on that doesn't count for much.   But, hey, the man could surely make a good speech.

  Yeah but on Revolution they have to have a lot of water to stay so sparkling clean.  Seriously, they walk around after an EOTWAWKI event constantly looking like they just stepped out of the shower.

  Well, on that one I have to say that if I had about twenty seconds before the CDC was going to explode, supposedly vaporizing the building and maybe taking a radius of a couple of city blocks with it, I'd run right past any number of things and head straight for the vehicle I already had the keys for.    That was also early on in the show.  I'd almost be willing to be that third season Rick et. al. would at least grab a couple of rifles.

  I love my NAA in .22WMR.  For me, if I carry a BUG then it is something I will carry on my weak side.  For that reason, I want something I can control when firing weak hand only, possibly from an awkward position.  That and the fact that it holds five rounds in a smaller package than many two-shot WMR Derringer-types make it a great BUG, to my mind.  I don't often carry it as a primary but since Speer started making Gold Dot SD ammo in WMR, I keep it loaded with that and certainly do not feel unarmed on the occasions when the NAA is all I have.   Beyond that, yeah, it is hard for me to justify to myself buying a two-shooter that either has the drawbacks that OhShoot mentioned about his Cobra or, as with the Bond arms guns, is a high quality piece that is bigger and weighs more than my J-Frame or my P3AT.  Not to mention the Bonds tend to cost more than a J-frame or a P3AT, too.  Thing is, though, I keep trying to justify it to myself because, dangit, I just plain want one!

I am really sorry to hear that.

  Or at least maybe there won't be as much reason over the next, couple of months for 'flippers' to clean out the shelves at Walmart thinking they can triple their money at the next gun show.

I like the grips idea, too.  Ever seen purpleheart wood?  It is an 'exotic' hardwood that is naturally purple or 'purple-ish'.  Some examples tend toward a darker 'purple' color while others tend toward a more reddish/purple tone.  I think a set of those would look great on a 642 - especially if they were made from a piece of purpleheart that tended toward the darker end of its color range.  Heck, I'd carry that, myself.   Purpleheart wood is pretty hard.  I know because I made a cane for my mom with a purpleheart handle (mom is also a big fan of purple.)  The handle was my variation on the 'derby' style and I had made myself a cane with the same type of handle only my handle was made of cherry.  Even though cherry is plenty hard, it almost seemed 'soft' and was extremely easy to work compared with the purpleheart.   I have seen pictures of a few sets of handgun grips made from purpleheart.  This is a pretty good pic of what the wood looks like:   http://www.powerswoodsource.com/images/woods/Purple_Heart.jpg   This is on the Marschal grips site.  Look at the Bersa Thunder grips (not a revolver but will give an idea of what purpleheart grips look like) that are pictured in the third full row from the bottom, middle and right side pics.  Those seem to be made from a piece that tended more toward the 'reddish-purple' end of its coloring and almost look like a pinkish-purple.   http://www.marschalgrips.com/bersa/bersa.html

  I seem to recall some Walkers eating a dead dog in one of the initial episodes.  Our first introduction to Daryl is when he showed up to finish off the Walker that was eating the deer he had shot with his crossbow (the others had cut the head off but hadn't destroyed the brain.)  Then there was the Walker in the woods that Daryl and Rick cut open to see if it had eaten Sophia because they could tell it had recently fed (meat in its teeth) but it turned out it had eaten a ground hog.  So it looks like animals can't contract the disease but Walkers will eat pretty much any flesh they can get ahold of, excepting other Walkers.

  Well, there are some preppers, at least.  I remember Tyreese telling the prison group that his group surivived the initial outbreak because there was a guy in his neighborhood who was one of those crazy end of the world prepper types.  Had a bunker and everything - except it turned out he wasn't so crazy, after all.   Seems to me that prepper should have kept his mouth shut as, since he isn't with the group, he must not have made it.  Maybe if he hadn't allowed his neighbors to come in and use up his stuff, he'd still be alive and based out of his bunker.

  I agree that this part didn't bother me.  The whole point, in fact, was that had it been any other walker Duane would have shot it and would not have been turned.  Morgan said that Duane had a pistol and that he hesitated because the walker was (or had been) his mom.  That made sense, to me.

All in all, I thought last night's episode was one of the best in a while.  There were a couple of points (most of which have already been mentioned) that bothered me, though - and I think I have resolved a couple of them for myself.   1.  The whole, "I know about those guns because I signed the permits," thing.  He wasn't talking about carry permits (I think that Georgia does still have local Sheriffs grant carry permits.)  Instead, he was talking about permits to own the guns and keep them in their place of business.  I am pretty sure that, like Tennessee, there is no such permit and none required.   How I resolved it for myself:  I seem to recall Kirkman stating - maybe on one of the Talking Dead segments - that this show takes place in a reality where there have never been zombie movies, books, etc.  That is why no one calls them 'zombies'.  That being the case, I guess that this alternate reality Georgia could have contracted some of the diseased gun laws that one would expect to find in Illinois, New Jersey, New York, etc.   2.  Carl dropped the picture close to the door and the zombies were right on top of it yet Michonne just walked right in and got it:   How I resolved it for myself:  Michonne told Carl to stay right there, right by the door.  In fact, Carl leaned against the outside of the door.  Therefore, all the zombies were paying attention to him (basically, he acted as bait) while Michonne slipped in, used her sword to reach in and drag the picture out, and slipped back out.  Pretty shaky explanation but its the best I've got.   3.  The hiker had survived for a year or so, already.  Not only had he survived but he actually looked relatively clean, healthy and well fed.  Then he just happened to pick the day Rick et al. encountered him to get killed.  Not only that but he got killed on a highway where it would have been difficult for slow moving walkers to have just slipped up on him.   How I resolved it for myself:  Judging by his clean, fed and relatively well rested appearance, I don't think the hiker had been on his own or on the road for very long.  I think he had been part of a group and/or at the very least had been in a settled location until just recently.  Maybe his location was overrun and (if he had a group with him) the rest of his group was killed.  Maybe he was hiding out solo and finally ran out of food so had to move. He certainly didn't have sense enough not to run around yelling (best way to attract zombies) which further makes me believe he has been 'sheltered' from the undead up to this point.   Whatever the case, I agree that he came across as someone who would be more a liability than a help.     My favorite dialogue exchange of the night (maybe slightly paraphrased):   Rick:  So we're eating his food?   Michonne: The mat said, "Welcome."

Pretty cool.  Not to be 'that guy' but he actually used two tools.  Technically, the cement block he rubbed the can on would count as a 'tool' as would the knife.  Just saying.   As for the wine bottle, I prefer the time-tested redneck solution - just push the cork all the way down into the bottle.  Of course, you can't re-use the cork if you do that.

Maybe while some folks are trying to buy semi-auto handguns with standard ('high') capacity magazines in anticipation of some kind of 'ban' others are looking to buy revolvers so that they know their guns will still be legal after the same, feared ban?  Or maybe it is just kind of the same reason that ammo for the normally less popular calibers like .22 WMR, .25acp and .32acp is a bit hard to find - because people are in a buying frenzy.

Well, there went the reason I was considering going!  I have never had the pleasure of buying from him in the past but I was going to ask about some bullets for reloading.