RobertNashville

Yeah...their prices are high but the price for the mags I'm looking are always pretty high. I just bought some Glock magas from Glockmister a couple of weeks ago for a very fair price; unfortunately, Glockmister doesn't carry the mags I'm actually looking for. ;)

I'm just wondering if anyone here has ever ordered from this site and/or what their experience was like?   I'm looking for some specific magazines and they have some of what I'm looking for that I haven't found in stock anywhere else; their prices are high but that's not my primary concern.   Any info you might have would be welcome!  :)   http://gunmagwarehouse.com/  

There is a difference between someone saying something and someone saying something with actual evidence to back them up...I mean no offense but unless there is some actual citations of real actions being taken; all this is just one step above a rumor.   I'm not saying Obama wouldn't/won't try to do what is being suggested but I don't get excited over rumors and if I did, what exactly can be done about it?

It's a reasonable theory...whether it's true or not is probably impossible to say. Even if gun sales are slowing down I think it would be impossible to isolate the specific reason(s). I too agree, I"m certainly not going to plunk down $$$ to buy a gun if I can't buy ammo for it.

Yuup...you "rescue" a dog or cat from a shelter; it's usually YOU who actually gets rescued. My cat of 21 years passed away in January of 2006. That March I rescued a Main Coon from our local shelter - we figured he was about 5 or 6 years old at that point. While I was waiting for the shelter to get everything ready they came back to me and told me I couldn't adopt him because he was positive for feline aids. I argued with them for a while and went home with him that night. Almost six years to the day in March of 2012 I lost him to cancer; pretty normal for a cat with aids but by God, he had a damn good life for the six years he was with me. I've got another Main Coon now...he's the king of the house but my hound dog is the queen. ;)

In case anyone might be interested, here is part of an email I received today from the owner of a range I often use in Columbus Ohio. :)  

I suppose the "panic buying" is understandable but I wonder; is anyone here panicked??? I don't feel panicked...should I??? Knowing exactly what Obama wanted I was concerned after he won re-election. I was really concerned after Sandy Hook as I had no doubt that he would use it to push his agenda. Even so, I didn't panic...not sure why...perhaps because while there are thinks I want to buy I didn't feel as if I HAD to go out and buy it RIGHT NOW! Now that his agenda had such a difficult time in the senate and given that any bill would have even less chance in the house i see even less reason to be in panic mode. Now...if six months or a year from now I still can't find, in bulk, the ammo I want or a firearm I really want to have or the magazines I want then maybe I'll start to panic bur for now...I'm not going to worry about it.

This is something of a tangent question but this thread has prompted me to think of it... Assume that one or more LEO's forcefully enter a home very early morning. Further assume that this home happens to be the WRONG home that they are entering (this has happened at least once just a copule of miles from where I live since I moved to Tennessee). The homeowner, only knowing that someone is kicking in his door, shoots and in the process, is killed by LEOs (this also happened as part of the same incident I mentioned). If, however, the homeowner had killed one of more of the LEOs and was still alive himself, would he be guilty of murder/manslaughter/some other, similar crime? Did the LEOs violate the law or do they always get a free pass? Is whether or not they (LEOs) yell "Police Department" is that enough to give LEOs a free pass?

The more I listen to the news, to other people, see what is happening in our society...the overwhelming complexity of modern society...the moral decay we can see and the large problems this country face I am coming to the conclusion that there are just not enough people in our country today to make the idea of limited government, decentralized power and personal liberty workable today. At one time, we were told that government was not the answer to our problems but that government WAS the problem. The government does have a long track record of f****ng up just about everything it tries to do yet I haven't seen much better results form individuals either of late. I would submit that for a representative democracy to work...to be sustained, you have to have not just a large but almost an overwhelming majority of people who are WILLING to do the right thing...act with integrity (even when no on is watching)...who have a sense of personal honor...love of family...love of community. I'm not sure we have that any more, at least not in sufficient quantities. I'm just about to conclude that there is simply nothing I can do to change anything...that voting is meaningless and a waste of time. That my best course of action is to try and be as comfortable as possible until I check out and assume room temperature. Am I just being too pessimistic in my old age? Is it still possible to turn things around? What to you think?

Sounds like then, you don't have any examples of where the strategy you propose has worked and with a lack of examples of success to point to all we have is a theory. Failure of a current policy does not equal an endorsement of the one you propose. In any case...there is nothing you or I can do about it.

Absolutely. God created dogs so that we would have an example of unconditional love...he created cats so that we would never think too highly of ourselves. :)

Great theory but I join with SWJewellTN and ask...where exactly has doing it that way worked for us recently?

Well....we've talked about everything else in this thread except what I actually intended to discuss...we might as well discuss modern warfare tactics now. ;) I'm certainly not a trained military strategist but it seems obvious to me that you cannot use the same tactics against a dispersed, loosely associated group of people who look identical to and often hide within the rest of the population and generally don't gather together into identifiable formations...who fight through stealth and cowardly acts of terror or meet inside of caves in a hillside...against such an enemy, you can't use the same tactics that you would use against a uniformed military with an actual command and control structure and who wage war in a traditional way. Moreover, while I haven't been to Afghanistan, I've been to enough middle-eastern countries to know that denying them what we consider to be basic needs like electricity, etc. doesn't really get you very far as a lot of the "basics" are unavailable for extended periods of time as a normal situation. In hindsight, I'd say we would probably have been better off to have done NOTHING except to pursue Bin Laden and his cronies on a person by person basis...in other words, a more subtle but no less ruthless pursuit of the people responsible for attacking us. However, given our anger at the time of the 9/11 attacks, I'm not sure that the people would have been happy with such a course of action and had I been president at the time I might well have taken the same course as Bush.

One prayer I pray quite often is "Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog already thinks I am".

Actually, the ability to post bail is up to the judge I believe...no one is automatically entitled to bail...entitled to a hearing for bail to be set or denied, but not to getting bail.   And yes, if you have the assets and/or the cash to post for bail you can post them as your bond - the court (municipal, county, state, etc) keeps the cash or goes after the assets if you fail to appear; that's the way it usually works.  All a bail bondsman does is post cash on your behalf and he gets interest on the money he loaned you for your bail.

You know...if all the people who complain about the ban on newly manufactured machine guns not being available to the public would get active and do something about it then maybe that portion of the 1986 act would be amended/repealed and then people could stop bitching about in on the internet. ;)

Seriously???   To which I added... You saw nothing about self-governance in there? Whatever.

Some folks have a really selective memory about things; especially the 1986 act.       Yeah...what as shame that act passed...a lot of what we take for granted today was ILLEGAL until 1986.   Yeah...no new machine guns...that's a shame too...it's a shame that Democrats sneaked it in...it's a shame that that amendment was what it took to get the bill passed...a bill that every pro-gun group at the time wanted passed WITH the machine gun ban.   It's a real shame...I mean...no one had ever had to compromise to get something passed before. Well...nothing except for the Constitution but I'm sure that was it until 1986.   It would be cool to own a fully automatic firearm but I don't know that I'd buy one even if they were currently available to buy new from the factory...I DO know I buy most of my ammo and I've bought many firearms over the internet not to mention getting rid of some of the other #### that ATF was doing...I'd love to have my cake and eat it too but sometimes you have to settle for cake alone...oh darn.

Did I say it was "minor"?  I think the angst about Reagan and the Marine barracks is misplaced. No U.S. soldier losing his life is minor and if you really thought I meant otherwise then I need to do a better job of explaining myself

This thread wasn't, well, at lest is wasn't intended to be about any "all hail attitude"...I didn't start it to talk about Reagan...I stared it to talk about whether we've still have or have lost the capacity for self-governance. I should have chosen a better title for the thread, that was my fault.  However, people obviously either didn't read the quote or didn't care or never got past the name "Reagan" as they immediately decided to start insulting/pileing on about the Marine barracks in Lebanon or the fact that he once divorced or that he, in their opinion, wasn't a good actor.   Come to think of it...maybe all this angst about Reagan sort of answers the question of whether we've lost the capacity for self-governance...we obviously have.  :surrender:

Insult and denigrate all you want...have a nice day.  :rofl:

  I doubt you are waiting for anything or that anything that could be said would matter to you.   You made your opinion about Reagan known with your first post in this thread...you can't even use Reagan's name without finding a way to do so insultingly (even his political enemies of the time were kinder than that).   And as I mentioned earlier, I'm divorced and you've made it quite clear what a low opinion you have of people who are divorced so nothing I could say would matter to you anyway.

The press is beyond disappointed that the bombers weren't white, redneck southerners and if they had been that AND Tea Party members the press would have been almost unable to write about it because of all the orgasms of pleasure they would be having.   Since these thugs are actually not white, redneck southerners who are Tea Party members all they can do now is try to paint them as "misguided boys", "domestic terrorists", etc...after all, they can't let facts get in the way of their Lord and Savior's (Obama's) plans to give the press the communist utopia they've always wanted. ;)

"One Second After" followed by "Lights Out" are my two favorites.   Been reading and thoroughly enjoying the "Holding Their Own" series by Joe Nobody...this one is a really good series!   I've been reading and enjoying the :Path of Survival" series by David Mauldin.   I read "the Pulse"...didn't care much for it; not bad but definitely an also-ran. Of course, "Lights Out" was so good almost anything he wrote next stood a good chance of not measuring up to that standard.   While waiting for one of the series to publish the next installment, I recently started "TEOTWAWKI: Beacons' Story" by David Craig which so far has been a good read.

I thought we were talking mostly abut Lebanon and Reagan???   You are making some assumptions here I think - it might be easy to see a rocket launcher on top of a house; other "terrorist targets" may not be quite so obvious that would necessitate others in the area doing something/move.   We have a different viewpoint on this and mine isn't changing.  I spent time in Lebanon as a civilian...I have people I count as friends who live there still....I'm never going to support killing them just because they happen to be unlucky enough to be there.