Kelemvor

Bump for price drop.

bump for price drop

I have 12 boxes (240rds) of Tula .308Win 150gr steel case for sale. Asking $110 for the lot. *SOLD* I’ve run a lot of this through my AR10 and it’s fine, but I need to make room for some match grade ammo. Face to face sales only. I’m located in Nashville.

Bump for price drop.

Bump for price drop.

For sale is my CMMG M4LEP 5.56x45 NATO AR-15 carbine with quad rail handguard. Round count is <1000. Everything is OEM except for the magpul trigger guard and rubber cover on the milspec stock. The gun runs clean, cool, and flawlessly and has been my go-to rifle for years. I am selling to fund another gun project. Comes with original box. No bites. I don't wanna get rid of it that bad.

That's right. Get this one first and you'll save yourself a lot of money.

I'd really like to shoot a RAMI. I got pretty excited when I saw they had a RAMI BD last year. I love the CZ 75, it feels like it was made for my hand.

I'm not angry, I just don't believe it. It just seems like the short sight radius and imprecise nature of the sights would make it nearly impossible to do unless you had the gun in a vise, which, even in that case it would be impressive for the pistol to be able to shoot that accurately. I'll have to get my buddy to bring his next time we shoot and I'll try this junk out. It's still a stupid looking gun.

I forgot to add, when they ask you about your worst quality or whatever, don't blow too much smoke up their ass and say the typical "I just work too hard." Give them something that is a legitimate bad quality (nothing too bad like "I'm addicted to meth and I have $20000 in gambling debt") and explain how you are taking steps to make it better. A good example might be, "I am not as organized as I would like to be. However, I have been using a planner/calendar/etc. recently in an attempt to correct this. It seems to be helping a lot."

I recently interviewed with them for an engineering position. I didn't get the job because I don't want to move (they informed me during the interview that they really want someone who is willing to relocate), but I do remember some of the questions. I don't know if this is only for college recruitment, but in my case, they asked a bunch of questions about specific instances where I: had a disagreement with a team member, had a disagreement with a superior, had to change my approach to a project to succeed, and some of the other bullcrap questions that every interviewer asks. This is a pretty good thing to look at for those types of questions: Interview Questions: Job Interview Questions and Answers

If you can shoot hand size groups at 100 yards with irons on a pistol, you shouldn't be paying for guns, the manufacturers should be throwing them at you. Anyway, the FiveSeven is a novel idea and has some cool features, but I think it's mostly hype. It is entirely too large for CC. The armor piercing capabilities are virtually a moot point because the wound characteristics even before passing through armor are meager at best. The extra capacity is not that special, when compared to double-stack 9mm pistols, as you already can get 15-18ish rounds with better concealability. The ammo is expensive, difficult to find, and limited in variety. It's all plastic (yeah, whatever glock guys). It's ugly. It stanks. I would recommend a CZ 75. I've never shot a gun that felt better in my hand probably the closest thing was my buddy's HK P30. If you want something that shoots armor piercing lightning bolts that can actually be carried, look into the CZ 52. Here's some stuff about it: The CZ 52: CZ 52 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The 7.62x25mm Tokarev: 7.62x25mm Tokarev - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia No, I don't work for CZ.

I was pretty neutral on Obama until this crap and the jacked up budget he released. He's trying to get the moderates with this stuff, but all he's really done is sign his name to my sh*t list.

Walden's in Manchester is 300yds. Pretty decent place.

Looks like the ol' Constitution is going to keep being a doormat for a bit longer, thanks to our lovely representatives in the House. We'll see if the Senate has a grain of sense. Patriot Act extension fails in the House by seven votes House Republicans suffered an embarrassing setback Tuesday when they fell seven votes short of extending provisions of the Patriot Act, a vote that served as the first small uprising of the party's tea-party bloc. The bill to reauthorize key parts of the counter-terrorism surveillance law, which expire at the end of the month, required a super-majority to pass under special rules reserved for non-controversial measures. But it fell short of the required two-thirds after 26 Republicans bucked their leadership, eight of them freshman lawmakers elected in November's midterm elections. With most Democrats opposing the extension, the final tally was 277 members in favor of extension, and 148 opposed. The Republicans who control the House made plans to bring the measure back for a quick vote later this month under normal rules, requiring only a simple majority for passage. They blamed House Democrats for the bill's downfall, noting that they provided the lion's share of votes against a bill that President Obama supports. The vote was the latest signal, though, that on certain matters House leaders could face a sizable resistance to compromise from within their own ranks, both from the 87 GOP freshmen and from conservative veterans who have been emboldened by the newcomers. Earlier Tuesday, House Republicans pulled a bill to extend assistance to workers who lose jobs due to competition from imports. Conservatives had complained that the bill would put the federal government too squarely into the private economy. And leaders of the Appropriations Committee heard complaints Tuesday from fellow Republicans on the panel that their bill to slash at least $32 billion in fiscal year 2011 spending was insufficient. The Patriot Act measure would have extended through the end of the year three provisions that are set to expire Feb. 28. One authorizes the FBI to use roving wiretaps on surveillance targets; the second allows the government to access "any tangible items," such as library records, in the course of surveillance; and the third allows for the surveillance of targets who are not connected to an identified terrorist group. Democrats hailed the day's events under a press release from Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's office asking a simple question: "Disarray?" Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio), who has presented an occasionally lonely opposition to the Patriot Act, said that Tuesday's vote demonstrated that he now had company from more than two dozen Republicans who support the Bill of Rights. "The Patriot Act represents the undermining of civil liberties," Kucinich said after the vote. Republicans "brought [the bill] forward not knowing the votes." House leaders rejected that analysis. "Democrats in Congress voted to deny their own administration's request for key weapons in the war on terror," said Erica Elliott, spokeswoman for Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). A large majority of the freshman Republicans did support the extension of the law, which the last GOP president, George W. Bush, staunchly supported. Even some who wavered eventually decided to support the bill. Rep. Steve Southerland (R-Fla.), a freshman who voted yes, said the measure is "going to need some examination going forward, so all I did today is just, hey, instead of making a wrong decision, we're just going to do a little more due diligence to make the very right decision to both protect our security as well as protect the civil liberties of the American people." "This is just a temporary extension, so the Judiciary Committee can dive a little deeper into the details," said Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a second-term lawmaker closely aligned with tea party activists. "That seemed fair. I don't want to let it expire without giving it full contemplation." Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), who sponsored the extension, told reporters after the vote that opposition had little to do with the particular provisions being considered Tuesday and more to do with other counter-terrorism tools that have received scrutiny. "People didn't understand it," he said. "A lot of the complaints that we heard were about sections [of the law] not in this bill." The White House said in a statement Tuesday that it "does not object" to extending the three Patriot Act provisions until December. However, it added, the administration "would strongly prefer" an extension until December 2013, noting that the longer timeline "provides the necessary certainty and predictability" that law enforcement agencies require while at the same time ensuring that Congress can continue to review the law's effectiveness. The Senate is considering three competing timelines, in addition to the House legislation. Among them are proposals that would permanently extend the three provisions or extend them through 2013.