MacGyver

+1 on the 47D. Best 1911 mag out there.

I'm locking this thread, as the few posters above I believe have said everything that needs to be said. In this state, property owners right to post their property is on equal footing with our ability to carry. Agree or disagree, it is the law. You can work to change it. You can quit patronizing businesses that do post and let them know why. You can choose to break the law, but recognize that you are doing exactly that. And, when you strap on a weapon, you individually represent all of us collectively.

They'll upgrade any of their rifles with a Norgon ambi mag release for $90. But yeah, you are paying Noveske prices.

How about a true left hand Noveske N4? Left Hand AR RIFLES - Precision AR Barrels by Noveske Rifleworks used for these Professional Grade ARs AR-15 for LeftHandRifles.com - Bedrock Industries, Inc.

That's pretty cool.

Wow, that's really nice. He'll be proud to have it. Feel free to add me to your Christmas list if you want.

Ballistic FTE is pretty good.

Gotcha. You might try a David Bullard Tuckable. You can adjust the cant pretty much however you want

You mean with the barrel pointing at the ceiling/your head? It seems like it would present three problems besides the muzzle pointing somewhere I wouldn't want it. First, retention might be an issue. A lot of modern holsters don't necessarily rely on gravity to hold the pistol in the holster, but certainly benefit from it. Flipping the gun over would mean you would need an active retention system that you could be absolutely certain would not fail. I would hate to have to go for my weapon only to find it had come out of the holster. Second, deployment would be an issue. You would have an unwieldy grip, and it would be all but impossible to get a good firing grip on the weapon before drawing. This would heighten the major issue with a design like this, in that on the draw, you would be covering your body with the muzzle for most of the time while you try to get it on target. Couple this with a poor firing grip from the start, and you are asking for a negligent discharge situation where you shoot yourself. I would look at another design. Maybe a shoulder holster? Or, let us know what situation you are faced with, and I'm sure that someone here has experience with it.

The best ammunition for avoiding over penetration is ammo with which you ensure that every round you fire hits what you're aiming at. Period. There are no magic bullets. Any round that is capable of stopping a bad guy is also capable of possibly going through multiple walls. Suddenly finding a bad guy in your house doesn't suddenly translate into a free fire zone. In fact, it may be the place where you want to be the surest of shot placement. Any modern round from .22 short on up is capable of killing through two or more sheets of drywall. The rules apply in your home as well. Knowing what's beyond your target is of utmost importance. Any round marketed otherwise is just pure marketing hype in my opinion.

Interesting idea. Anything that brings better information to the top is good as far as I'm concerned.

I vote Mod 0.

Savage between the two of those. I like the trigger on the Savage better.

For me personally, if I'm going to spend $1500 on a rifle in .308, there are a lot better platforms out there than a Kel-tec.

Shooting past 100 with .22LR is certainly doable. You just have to recognize the limitations of the caliber. In my experience, I can ring a gong all day at further distances, but I'm not going to group worth anything with the bulk pack ammo that I usually run. Also to be considered is that a lot of more inexpensive scopes sitting on 0 MOA bases may run out of elevation adjustment once you start walking targets out further. As an example, the 38 grain subsonic stuff that I'm shooting right now through a scope zeroed at 60m will hit within 1.5 inches anywhere from 0-75 meters, but will be -6.47 inches below zero at 100m, -54.02m inches at 200, and -155.64 at 300m. I definitely encourage the OP to have some fun and give it a whirl, just recognize that once you get out past 100 it's going to take knowing you weapon and working with it to get the results you want. Have fun though. I know I do.

The TSA is a great example of Security Theater, and an even better example of how truly ineffective a government jobs program can be. If only the airlines weren't completely dependent on government largesse with taxpayer money for their survival, they might step in and say enough. I'm frankly surprised people still put up with it.

So I was checking into the Lifetime Sportsman license the other day and noticed Tennessee is out of sync with some of our neighbors. I noticed that several states surrounding us have reciprocity agreements to allow lifetime sportman license holders in other states to enjoy the same benefits in their states. I like the fact that in Tennessee, permanent license fees are put into a trust and the pricipal is not touched, and so may go ahead and get one in Tennessee regardless. But, reciprocity would be a huge reason for me to spend the money on a license in Tennessee, as I spend significant money every year for licenses in Georgia and Florida. Anybody got any insight into this? I don't even know who you would call to ask right off the top of my head.

The 3-7x20 is probably sufficient for your needs on the .22LR. I personally like a little bigger objective lens, simply because it gathers more light and thus presents a brighter image to my eye. However, it should work fine for anything within 100 meters, and be adequate for testing the range of your ammunition and patience beyond.

Don't I know it! I was looking at a calculator the other day that I'm pretty sure could have launched a moon mission. I'm only 36 and almost had a "back in my day" moment.

I guess you're right. As an engineer, if I forget calculus or differntial equations, and then go build a bridge, it won't really surprise anyone when hundreds of people are killed in bridge collapse. I guess our government is the same, only we're the people getting killed in the bridge collapse.

I don't doubt that you're correct. With some notable exceptions, I think that they are mostly pretty driven and above average intelligence. That said, I would wager money that a majority of our 535 members of Congress couldn't list the first 10 amendments unaided.

That's where our opinions are different. I have no doubt that some of our politicians do in fact hold the Constitution in some contempt. I know that there are a few more, maybe a growing number, who think that somehow we have 'evolved'. That our Constitution was a great document to get us started, but we need something different now. Same thing with Capitalism. They think that it was necessary for a while, but now somehow we've evolved and need a more 'fair' socialist system. I don't think these represent the majority, though. Rather, I think the terrible position we find ourselves in today is often the result of career politicians who couldn't begin to tell you what was in the Constitution beyond the First Amendment - and they might mangle that. Unfortunately, we don't require our elected officials to pass an eighth grade civics test before they are sworn in. They take the oath, but it's simply a precursor to eating cake and drinking punch. They don't really understand what that oath means.

You guys should really take a moment to think about the implications of something like that. What happens when you are on the side of dissent? What happens when your law is voided and thus considered Unconstitutional on "vagueness"? I'm all for getting better bills out there, but jailing people with dissenting opinions isn't the way to do it. Our country was in a sense built on dissent. We're big enough to handle it. Take a bill like this "healthcare" bill making its way through the courts. Our forefathers gave us a system of checks and balances for that reason. Now we're going to see some of those checks play out. Don't neglect the fact, however that we as individuals are the linchpins in the process. If you think your elected official or all elected officials are that corrupt, work to get them out of there. Don't just vote for someone else and hope other people do the same. Hold their feet to the fire. Publicly. Make them earn the right to represent us, and then make sure that they continue to do so.

Hear, hear.

Judge Hudson touched on the lack of a severability clause in his comments. He didn't seem to think it was a problem, but I'm sure we'll see other litigation over it. Having the individual mandate ruling upheld by the SCOTUS would essentially kill the whole thing. If they can't require everyone to get in the pool, then the bill literally falls apart.