BryanP

It shouldn't be a problem. Especially since you'll have it under cover somewhere locked inside, correct?

I wasn't aware of anyone who could legally use them.

I find it interesting that he was in some cases recording higher pressures in a rifle chambered for 5.56 than in one chambered for .223.

Not really. There are two overlapping laws, one Federal, one State. Both apply. You can violate a Federal law while not violating a State law and vice versa.

So, did the other dealers have a few choice words with the moron selling the jammers?

A little joke to lighten things up: Cell Phone Etiquette After a very busy day, Peggy settled down in her seat and closed her eyes as the train departed Manhattan for the 'burbs. As the train rolled out of the station, one last passenger jumped on the train and got the last seat — right next to Peggy. Naturally, he pulled out his cell phone and started talking in a loud voice. "Hi sweetheart, it's Eric! ... I'm on the train — yes, I know it's the six thirty and not the four thirty, but I had a long meeting ... No, honey, not with that floozie frrom the accounts office, with the boss. No sweetheart, you're the only one in my life — yes, I'm sure, cross my heart," etc., etc. It was nauseating. And no matter how much Peggy glared at him, cleared her throat, or otherwise tried to express her disapproval over his rudeness, he completely ignored her. Fifteen minutes later, she got an idea. She leaned in close to him and said in her most sensual, pouty voice aimed right at his phone: "Hey, Eric, sweetie! Turn off that stupid phone and come back to bed!" Eric doesn't use his cell phone in public any longer.

Here's a case of someone using one. And yes, quite illegal, and justifiably so. Yes, people with cell phones can be annoying, but you can't jam just one phone. You're also preventing someone in the same area from calling 911, for example. http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/investigations/Rider-Annoyed-by-Calls-Jams-Phones-on-Septa-Bus-140966733.html

When in doubt, either don't carry in to the establishment or find another place to do business.

I've accidentally downvoted a post. My solution was to search out two other posts by the same person and upvote them to fix my mistake.

That's quite a mind reading device you've got there.

You don't say? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_bombing http://en.wikipedia....ki/The_Troubles http://en.wikipedia....ront_of_Tripura http://en.wikipedia....lence_in_Orissa http://en.wikipedia...._Norway_attacks http://en.wikipedia...._Robert_Rudolph http://en.wikipedia....l_Jennings_Hill http://en.wikipedia....es_Charles_Kopp http://en.wikipedia...._murder_suspect http://en.wikipedia....i/Aum_Shinrikyo

Over the years I've known people who actually did things they "aren't supposed to talk about." I've also known people who like to make reference to the fact that they've done things they "aren't supposed to talk about." There is very little overlap between these two groups. For the most part, if they aren't supposed to talk about it they don't even make reference to it.

Best comment I've seen on this so far was in the comments at a blog I read:

The answer to your question is outlined at the linked article.

Thanks for linking that. I'll have to cue up some of his music on my ipod tomorrow. The man wrote some of the most depressing and most uplifting songs.

Yes, I know he wasn't carrying reloads. Good article anyway. The really short summary: the forensics folks will be using identical ammo to recreate the shot. With reloads this is effectively not possible and could negatively affect your defense if you're ever involved in a SD shooting incident. He goes into more detail and explains it better. http://grantcunningham.com/blog_files/2167be380c971d751694131258750ec5-1028.html

You summed up exactly why I don't go to that range anymore. I'd much rather be annoyed by highly enforced tight range rules at Stones River than have to worry about getting shot by an idiot at the Cheatham range.

Sea Biscuit is just another name for hard tack. http://www.marinersmuseum.org/sites/default/files/biscuit_recipe.pdf

Apparently that part didn't trickle down to the Muslim doctor who saved this heathen's dying ass.

Kinda pointless to argue with someone who can always come back with "I'm right because my invisible friend says so."

They're an expensive gun to manufacture and the demand is relatively low. That equals a high price.

No matter who you are, at some point Mitt has agreed with your position on the issues.

That was a very different case. Peairs should have been convicted, not acquitted. The case referenced in the OP, I don't see much similarity or any reason he would even be charged.

Did a little more digging, as that first link didn't sound like something the Elizabeth Moon I've read would advocate. Sure enough, here's her quote concerning people getting worked up over the story: "Good grief, did you think I was serious? They asked us all for wild ideas. Specified they needn’t be practical or even possible. They would choose one to be the 60 second wonder. I gave them several and figured the others would too–but they latched onto that one. Probably because it sounded so SFnal and shocking."