1gewehr

You make a lot of valid points. But what he is wanting to do is make a decision now. And right now, 6.5Grendel is the most versatile cartridge you can put on a standard AR platform. Add in the factory ammo from both Wolf and Hornaday, and it looks like a cartridge that is finally getting good support from the manufacturers. Sure, .308 is more powerful and certainly ammo is available in every store. But you cannot fire a .308 in a standard AR-15 platform. and the .308-size lowers are considerably larger, heavier, and more expensive.

These incidents are getting a lot of attention. That's good!!! The proliferation of cell phone cameras and small video recorders can only help keep police, politicians, and others honest. Remember, nobody in a public place has any expectation of privacy. Not even police or politicians!

I have yet to see where a cast versus milled versus forged lower made any difference in accuracy or reliability. I have a .50 upper on a cheap cast EA lower that has been perfectly happy and accurate for about ten years and 700rds now. As long as the lower is made to spec, it will be fine. I have heard that the plastic/polymer lowers may have problems with the front hinge pin area. Use good mil-spec parts for the internals (Fire control, bolt carrier, bolt, etc) and you will never regret it. Unless you are going to compete in long-range shooting, a chromed bore is a good thing. I would stick with 1/9 twist unless you plan to shoot bullets heavier than about 67gr. The military 1/7 twist will overstabilize bullets lighter than 65gr and has been known to cause bullet disintegration with light varmint bullets. The Army went with 1/7 twist in order to get improved penetration at long range. It has proven to be detrimental to combat performance with the standard 62gr, though. I also stick with 20" barrels as the little 5.56mm needs every bit of speed in order to get optimum performance. I have not found that a 20" barrel hurts the handling except in very tight quarters. The M4 barrel profile has little to offer anyone who does not have a 40mm grenade launcher to mount on it. It is too light in front of the chamber where extra metal would help cooling and accuracy, and too heavy at the muzzle where it just adds weight (unless you have a 40mm grenade launcher). If you want a light handy carbine, get a standard 16" barrel, not the M4 profile. It will be lighter, more accurate, and handle better. I am not an optics fan considering how many high-quality scopes I have broken. But, they are getting better and more durable. So I would recommend a flat-top upper with fold-down backup iron sights. Keep in mind that no folding sights will be as accurate or durable as the normal A2 fixed upper sights. I also like the handguards with the double heat shield. Keeping sight mirage down on a hot day is a good thing! The rest is purely up to you. I believe in the KISS principle, and don't clutter up and weigh down my rifles with gadgets. Others like them. That's why I like a free market. Everyone gets pretty much what they want.

Nobody has ever complained that the 6.5G lacks accuracy! I have a 20" upper from J&T that gets about 1moa with the cheap Wolf soft points, and a hair better with the Wolf 120gr MPT. I haven't even tried shooting the expensive ammo yet. The biggest complaint I have heard has been about expense and availability of ammo. Well, I have seen that AIM and others have plenty of the Wolf Gold reloadable cartridges in stock at about $13/box. And Wolf has announced that they will be bringing in a bunch of even less expensive steel-cased ammo by the end of the year. If you want really nice ammo, Hornaday has their excellent 123gr A-max load for about $22/box. Barrels and bolts or complete uppers are available from several manufacturers at reasonable prices. The biggest problem was availability of magazines. C-Products made excellent 6.5G magazines, but are under new management and the 6.5G mags are backordered. AR-Stoner now makes mags that are getting good reviews, though. As long as your hunting doesn't include animals much larger than deer, you will probably never need anything more powerful than the 6.5G. And while you say you won't be shooting past 400 yards, it's nice to know that the rifle and ammo are capable of much more!

Run up to berm, spray rounds wildly until magazine is empty, retreat to cover to reload. Repeat until done. I saw a bunch of rounds impacting the top of the berm. Lots more were fired WAY too high! Doesn't anyone AIM anymore?!

Interesting so far. I'm kind of wondering where they found all of those automatic weapons in the notoriously anti-gun state of Massachusetts. There are an awful lot of M4's and AK varieties. It was kind of nice to see an M1 Garand and Mosin Nagant, though. So far, neither the human nor alien actions make any tactical or strategic sense. DoooH! Did I just expect Hollywood to make sense?!?!?!? Silly me!

Many older cartridges have a variety of names. The cartridge you are referring to is the .380 Automatic Colt Pistol in the US. Most US publications shorten that to '.380acp' or just '.380'. But in Britain, a '.380' refers to the British service pistol cartridge used in WWII. In the US, that cartridge is called the .38S&W. The name '9mm Court is French for 9mm short. In Italian it's 9mm Corto. Most of Europe refers to the .380acp as the 9mm Browning Short as it was introduced over there in the FN Browning model 1910 and model 1922 pistols. If you REALLY want to have fun with names, try to find ALL of the different names for what we normally call 9mm Luger. I'll start: 9x19mm 9mm Parabellum (sometimes shortened to '9mmPara') 9mm NATO 9mm Grande Puissance (short version is 'GP') 9mm Browning (how's that for causing confusion!) So, if there is a 9mm Browning Short, is there a 9mm Browning Long? First person to post the most common weapon chambered for it, and what the cartridge is called in that country wins a genuine 2-second smile of admiration. No cheating with an internet search!

British Medical Journal and Centers for Disease Control? Hardly objective sources when it comes to firearms. Both are notorious for anti-gun 'studies' that prove to be full of bovine patties.

I once had a custom Enfield in .416 Rigby. I didn't fire it much as the ammo was $4/round in those days. but it was pretty accurate, and didn't recoil as badly as I feared. It was butter-slick to operate, and I kept it in the hope of one day going on a hunt worthy of the rifle. I sold it to someone who actually WAS going to Africa to hunt. He used to get a Cape Buffalo and a lion. That's the closest I'll probably ever get to such a hunt! Here is an excellent primer on cartridges for dangerous game: Rifles for Dangerous Game

I've got an older Gemtech Outback that I am having upgraded. Gemtech has excellent customer service and is known for the excellence of their products. The main reason I went with the Outback originally was because I knew that the company stood behind it and would take care of me no matter what happened. I use it on my P22 with Remington Standard velocity target ammo. From the P22 barrel, that ammo is subsonic, very accurate and consistent, reliable, and less expensive than the 'subsonic' ammo.

I saw a chain fire once at a CW reenactment. Only blanks, but still an eye-opening experience. No damage to the Colt Navy replica, and nobody was hurt. Chambers were sealed with a greased felt wad, so the consensus was that a spark went under the other caps. When you fire a round, the cap splits and spits sparks. I use a tiny dab of crisco on the outside of the nipple to prevent this. Crisco is good for your holster! Preserves the leather and keeps it nice and soft!

I've got a Rossi in .357. It needed a little break-in before it would function smoothly. It does not like the short 148gr .38Spl target loads. The short rounds do not feed well. Aside from that, it's a nice little carbine. With heavy .357 loads, it's probably good to use on deer at short range. Light .38 reloads are cheap plinking ammo. The Marlin is still a superior rifle. The quality and design are better, and the action is really smooth and slick. If you can spring for the Marlin, you won't regret it.

No matter how you look at it, $3/box means you get to shoot 50% more ammo. I buy components in bulk when they show up on sale. I'd say my cost for reloading 9mm is closer to $5/box with bought bullets, powder, primers, and including new polishing media and compound every 5000rds. Buying 1 pound of powder, a single box of primers, and a couple of hundred bullets at a time is expensive. You really get to save when you buy powder in 8lb jugs, 5000 primers to the case, and 2000bullets in a case. You are correct that the savings get better with larger calibers! Mostly because the brass you are re-using is a proportionally larger expense of the factory ammo. Most rifle ammo gives really great savings.

File your 5320.20 for a permanent change of address and you'll be good to go. When you want to buy additional NFA items, you'll find that TN is a 'must sign' state for Form 4s. Send it to the county sheriff, and they 'must sign' unless they have knowledge that they should not. All NFA items are legal to own in TN with no additional requirements above the Federal ones.

If the frame is brass, do NOT use the load above. Use a very light load with the .44 brass frames, as they will shoot loose in short order otherwise. Even the steel frame Colt copies will shoot loose with heavy loads. If you want to play with compressed loads, get one of the steel, solid frame Remington copies. Black powder is a lot of fun. With a bit of practice, you can get amazingly accurate with those old smoke-poles. If you cast your own bullets, thye can be very inexpensive to shoot as well.

Of course, one could argue that a jury composed of non-firearms owners would not be our peers!

NO. You are reacting emotionally to an argument that has not been stated. The point that has been made is that it is NUTS for the person who shot your father to get out of prison at all! If someone is safe to live among the law-abiding, then they should be able to defend themselves and their family. If they are not, then we should not be releasing them. Releasing violent murderers, rapists, etc is NUTS!!

I've been using the Harbor Freight electronic muffs for the past five years. They are cheap enough to have a couple sets around. While the name-brand ones are undeniable nicer, for $30 it's hard to beat these. Especially if you use a discount coupon (20% off in American Rifleman) and get them for less!

A long time ago in a state other than TN, a Person I Know Very Well (PIKVW) was shooting at a public outdoor range. About two positions down, there was a rather loud and obnoxious group that included a couple of women that should not have been wearing such skimpy clothing to the range. The PIKVW had an FN FAL that would eject brass very precisely. As it so happened, after the ninth or ninetieth time of having these folks call 'Cease Fire' so they could put a couple more cans twenty feet out as targets every time they fired ten rounds, the PIKVW (as well as everyone else there) became exceedingly annoyed. The PIKVW took his FAL out, and started shooting into the berm 100 yards away. With his buddy calling range corrections, the PIKVW was able to adjust his fire and lob a nice, hot .308 brass case directly from the ejection port of the FAL down the excessively exposed cleavage of one of these women. If you think a little, bitty 9mm case is hot, imagine the heat retained by a nice, heavy .308 case. Everyone at the range that day was well entertained by the ensuing dance. It was probably the most exercise that woman had had in the past thirty years. Naturally, the PIKVW apologized profusely (after he stopped giggling) and put away the FAL. But, alas, the damage was done. Another person attempted the same feat from the position next door with his CETME. And he didn't even get on target before the group with those women decided they had been at the range long enough. BTW, I do not recommend that those with a CETME try this trick. Normally, the CETME ejects a bit to the front and about 30 feet right. In order to get the brass to fall behind the firing line, you have to shoot at a target one or two positions to the right, which is bad manners. With it's adjustable gas, the FAL can be tuned to eject within a range of about 20 degrees in front or behind the firing line. By leaning the rifle to the left, you can get the loft necessary to drop the brass into a buck (or other container). I have seen an MP5 that ejected perfectly for this trick. But you have to take off the port buffer. And most MP5 owners don't like to ding their receivers. The purpose of this story is to show that women should avoid wearing a top which would allow brass to get into the cleavage. Crew-neck t-shirts work well. I would like to point out that intentionally pelting someone with hot brass is considered to be very rude. It should be reserved for only the most annoying people.

This is an interesting discussion. I'm seeing a lot of great points. To add my $.02, I do not see it a Constitutional issue at all. It's a contractual issue. If person 'A' wants to receive some of the taxpayers' money, they have a contractual obligation to stay off illegal drugs. In order for person 'A' to certify himself as eligible to receive this money, he must agree to drug testing. If they flunk a drug test, they are no longer eligible to receive our money. Pretty simple. I cannot let this flawed analogy stand. By passing tax exemptions, Congress declares that it favors some individuals over others. So they do not have the same 'fair share'. That is true of every exemption. Sure, I get a tax break for having a mortgage. Should I resent it that others get a huge deduction for having a bunch of children? Second, It is not a straight transfer of funds no matter how you look at it. There is no such thing as a 'fair share' of taxes. There should be, as that is what the Constitution originally required. Article 1, section 9 states "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken". In other words, if Congress taxes citizens directly, it would have to be equal for EVERY person. That is why an income tax was un-Constitutional until the 16th Amendment was passed. Now Congress can exempt some people from paying the tax, and favor others at teh expense of a smaler percentage of the population. According to your analogy, the bottom 49% of income earners are the worst free-loaders as they pay no income tax, and in many cases receive extra money. Is that fair?

And how many people do you know that would be willing to leave the boat with all of the MG42s and artillery firing at them?

Nope, this is an outgrowth of the '60's mostly. Previous to the '68 GCA, some states banned felons from owning firearms, but most believed that if you weren't dangerous enough to be in jail, then you were safe to have a gun. Of course, that was before we started filling the jails with non-violent criminals. You may have heard the phrase "pay his debt to society'. Americans used to believe that crime was ALL property crime. As such, you could 'pay your debt' for almost anything short of murder. And once that debt was paid, you could make a fresh start. Now, of course, we are much smarter and know that once you have committed any felony such as buying some marijuana or bringing a toilet down from Canada that doesn't meet the EPA standards, you are permanently going to be too dangerous to be allowed to mix with normal folks. Therefore, you should be permanently branded as a 'felon', lose basic Constitutional rights, and have to tell the world you are a felon every time you apply for a job, open a bank account, or fill out a loan application or pretty much do anything. Is there any wonder that recidivism rates are much higher now than they were 50 years ago? Then, someone had a chance at a fresh start. Now, that person might as well be branded with a huge red 'F' on each cheek. And since all felons are too dangerous to mix with normal people, we have a much larger percentage of our population in jail, in spite of a lower violent crime rate. I'd like someone to logically explain how that makes any sense?

Ive been riding for over 30 years. The best advice I was ever given was "ride like everyone else is trying to kill you". I had one relatively bad accident where a woman crossed a four-lane road in front of me turned left suddenly. With nowhere else to go, I went off-roading. The bike and I slid across 50 yards of sandy and rocky soil before stopping. Fortunately, it was winter and I was wearing heavy riding gauntlets, heavy jeans, long johns, and an army field jacket with liner and sweater. I ended up with rash on arms and legs, but no serious injuries. All my clothes were shredded! My gloves and helmet were in bad shape. I had a Lexan face shield that was rubbed mostly away by ground contact. If I had been going 65 instead of 60, I probably would have been hurt badly. That incident taught me to ALWAYS wear the gear!!! Don't buy cheap helmets or gloves. I'll second the riding class. In fact, I'll say that taking it every 5-10 years is probably a good idea. You get complacent with more experience. I took it for the second time about 5 years ago and it woke me up to bad habits I had fallen into. It's probably the cheapest insurance you can get. Riding is undeniably more dangerous than driving a car. I imagine THAT is part of the joy of riding. You know that you are further on the edge and need to stay vigilant and skillful in order to survive. I used to commute in to downtown Nashville daily on my bike. Every ride was an adventure!

Laws for locking up guns are stupid and reckless. Studies have shown that criminals take advantage of those laws to burglarize and assault citizens. While incidents like this are sad, they are never entirely preventable. Anyone who has had inquisitive small children knows they can get into almost anything. The key is trying to keep your loaded firearms inaccessible until they have grown up enough to get safety lessons. In my case, my father used his Army .45 to blow up some melons when I was about four. I knew it was kept in his top dresser drawer, but I couldn't get to it until I was about 4. But after that demonstration, I stayed away from it until I was old enough to be taught to handle it at 14. I taught my son the same lesson, and it is simple and effective. If you properly teach older children, they will keep the younger ones away from dangerous objects.

Paul Ryan is a very intelligent man. He has shown that he is not afraid to stand for what he believes. I am also convinced that he is honestly trying to work for the benefit of the country. That does not make him a good Presidential candidate. It's a good start. But there is a good reason why we rarely elect someone straight from the House into the Presidency. Being President requires leadership, management, and executive experience. When we elect Presidents without this experience, it shows up almost immediately. Obama has show this to us almost daily with his constant waffling and trying to avoid responsibility for tough decisions. It's one reason most President come from having been governor of a state. They have had to make tough, unpopular decisions and been in the position of having to make people do things they don't like. That's not to say that Paul Ryan could NOT do those things. But I will find it difficult to support someone for President until they can show that they CAN.