mav

Yep, it was so close that I was a little excited over how well he was doing.

On the following thread, http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/45676-did-you-take-to-the-polls-today/ someone was down voting all those who voted for Paul and up voting everyone who voted for Santorum. I just checked the thread again, and it has changed. Either a moderator took care of it, or someone up voted all of those who voted for Paul to reset to zero. I really don't like that crap. It is very childish.

I voted for Paul. No shame on my part. So the jerk who is down-voting everybody on the other thread who voted for Paul, can -1 me on this one too.

I voted this evening for Paul. (edit) By the way, who the heck is doing the -1 on all the Paul voters? Very mature of you.

I read the following article while I was at lunch today, and I was stunned by the gross imbecility. Seriously, WTF? http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/mccain-calls-u-led-airstrikes-syria-203424110.html Apparently, John "Big-Nuts Rambo" McCain is back at it. He is now suggesting that we should bomb Syria. Wow, just wow. Lets see, my first question. How the hell do you plan on playing for it? We are broke. Once the airstrikes are over, do you plan to send in ground troops? Once those troops are present, do suggest they should stay 50 years like you suggested of those in Afghanistan? Are these the same type of "allies" we have in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, etc...? I once heard a phrase, "with friends like these, who needs enemies." Hmm, I wonder how someone came up with that one. Ya know, I respect McCain's military service to this country. It is without question that his service is something he should be proud of and admired for. However, his record as politician, especially in the realms of foreign policy the last decade, has really went off the deep end. The notion of preemptively bombing and/or invading all of the countries is just crazy. Hell, I don't even know how many we are in now. While I usually try to be more eloquent in my criticism of a politician and/or their viewpoint, I cannot in this case. In short, f*** McCain, Assad, and f*** Syria. If Israel wants to bomb Syria, Iran, or whoever else back into the stone age, God bless them. Have at it. For us, I think we to keep our noses out of it.

We are only two days away from the primary. I just wanted to comment on something I saw as I was shopping this afternoon. I was out near Hamilton Place Mall and I noticed a bunch of people waving their Ron Paul 2012, Against NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), Mainstream Media Lies, etc... signs on Gunbarrel Rd. While there are some Paul supporters who are just plain ol' bat s**t crazy, I really admire their conviction and their faithfulness towards their candidate. I have yet to see any individuals standing on the side of the road waving Santorum, Gingrich, or Romney signs. It made me smile. While it is pretty clear that Paul win not win the nomination (I am still voting for him on Tuesday), he and his supporters have done an absolutely fabulous job of waking a lot of people up to some scary facts. I believe their message will carry on to future elections. I only hope that Romney will not be stupid and alienate Paul supporters. He will desperately need them if he hopes to defeat Obama in November. I also hope that Paul die-hards will be a little more pragmatic once the primaries and caucuses are over. While Romney is certainly no prize, he is way better than what we have now, and I believe he will be better than GWB. I don't see Romney as adventurous as Bush in terms of foreign policy.

My $0.02. If you have the money and want the gun, get it. I alternate between my NHC T3 and Talon 2011. Will I ever have the skill to really test the limits of my 1911s? Absolutely not. Were they practical purchases? Nope, but I still wanted them. My take on pretty much anything is that you worked for your money, and how you choose to spend it is up to you. Therefore, if you see something you want, whether it is a gun, car, house, boat, etc..., and can afford it without going into any kind of debt, buy it and enjoy it. You only live once.

Call me a sucker, but I have been approached several times at a gas station, etc... I usually always give them something. I have no idea whether it is legitmiate or not, probably not, but I can't help myself. I think that is one of the reasons people do this, because they know that eventually someone is going to give them something.

That guy is scary nuts. You shoot the bad guy and go back to sleep for an hour or two. We go through a couple of million pounds of HF 49% a year, and it is one of the last chemicals I would choose in trying to dissolve a corpse. I would assume that in attempting to dissolve a corpse, time would be of paramount importance. Therefore, you would want to use a fairly strong concentration of acid or base. If someone tried using HF 49% to dissolve a corpse, the fumes would be unbearable and highly corrosive. You would smoke up your entire house in a matter of minutes. HF 70%, forget about it. I would probably use sodium hydroxide 50% (even better would be making your own solution from the beads since it will get extremely hot, 170 - 190 F). It is very cheap, highly corrosive, and would do a fantastic job of saponifying (making soap) fats and oils present in the body, and you wouldn't have the noxious and highly corrosive fumes. Although, I would bet the stench would be horrendous. I don't know what it would do to the bones, outside of making them very brittle. It seems to me that fire, although highly visible, would be the better choice in disposing of a body.

I'm actually warming up a little bit towards Mitt. Paul is still my first choice, and that is who I will be voting for come Tuesday. However, Mitt seems so much better than Santorum, and Newt doesn't really stand a chance. I think Coulter may be right about Mitt, and Levin and others are wrong about Santorum. I hope I am right, and I certainly hope Mitt doesn't choose someone like Christie as his running mate. I do not like Christie, and I think that would be a really bad ticket. I wouldn't mind seeing a Romney/Demint ticket.

I don't know where he gets it, but I know a lot of people agree with his view. Funny thing is I agree with a lot of his social conservative views, but the difference is I do not want to use the government to force or promote those views. I will vote for Santorum if he wins (which I don't think he will), but I really wouldn't like it.

I'm not all that computer savvy, but I run the NoScript addon. It does a pretty good job of blocking a lot of the bs.

Ya know, that is very well said. All of the foreign policy adventurism is what really scares me about Santorum. He is a true believer and a moral busybody. He seems to not have a problem with sticking his (our) nose in everybody else's business, and he makes statements like he would wouldn't cut a penny from defense spending. That is one scary guy.

I ran across this article today in the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation about Newt's comments on Afghanistan. Thank goodness someone else besides Paul is starting to talk some sense. It is way past time to get the hell out. http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/gingrich-sees-impossible-task-1364582.html I may try to go see him tomorrow in Dalton if things aren't too hectic.

Raising taxes is definitely not the solution, unless you want to broaden the tax base, which I am for. I read an article the other day from the Heritage Foundation, which showed that the percentage of citizens who do not pay federal income taxes has increased from 14.8% in 1984 to 49.5% in 2009. In theory, I am against any tax increases, but to have a disproportionate percentage of individuals who pay nothing quite frankly sucks. We have too many people getting a free ride on the backs of others. As you rightly point out, cuts in federal (and state) spending is what is required. I also believe that some of those cuts can come from the defense department without weakening our national defense. As I wrote in a previous post on another topic, the government will eventually be forced to cut spending because the debt will be too large and nobody will loan us any money because we will have no way to pay it back. (edit) - http://blog.heritage.org/2012/02/19/chart-of-the-week-nearly-half-of-all-americans-dont-pay-income-taxes/

Well... at least it isn't another Kardashian show.

I never had any dealings with this person, so I really can't comment on his words and/or actions. As far as him wanting to join a militia or something similiar to overthrow the government, oh well. I really don't pay attention to these people. The forums are full of people who lose brain cells with every bowel movement. I hope of some you aren't serious when you state we are a constitutional republic. Technically we still are, but I don't know anyone who believes that anymore. Although I disagree with him on several points, I think Mark Levin has it right when says that we have dissolved our constitutional republic and have become a soft tyranny. There is really no way to argue differently when you look at recent congressional history and you can run a Google search and find case after case of congressmen and women stating that most of what they do is outside of the constitution, they don't care what the consitition says, the constitution no longer matters, etc... As far as removing our current government by force and installing a new form of government, the founders believed it is within our right to do so to protect our political liberty. If you go back and read the constitutional debates, our founders believed that a tyrannical government was the primary evil they had to guard against. The Antifederalists argued for a Bill of Rights to include the right to bear arms, which in the view of both Federalists and Antifederalists, was the ultimate check and balance against a tyrannical government. The 2nd ammendment really has nothing to do with an individual's ability to carry a firearm on their person, nor does it have anything to do with hunting. Personally, I do not advocate armed revolution. I think a lot that do are either anarchists or totally misguided. I do not think it is necessary because, like it or not, the government will eventually have no choice but to shrink due to the overwhelming debt. We have already hit a debt to GDP ratio of >100%, and there is no sign that it is going to slow down in the near future. Considering that almost 50% of individuals do not pay any federal income tax, the socialist's approach of taxing the so-called "rich" even further will not work. As most people know, it will more than likely shrink the economy, which will not solve the problem. Eventually nobody is going to loan us any more money because there is no way we can pay it back. Once that occurs, the government has two choices. It can either take a hard tyrannical approach to try and maintain it's power or shrink. The whole Alex Jonesy hard tyrannical approach more than likely won't happen. The people will not stand for it. More than likely, the government will be forced to shrink, and a lot of people that have their lives subsidized by the government will be cut off. We will have massive protests, a bunch of civil disobedience, and a spike in overall crime, and that will probabaly be the extent of it. Call me a misguided optimist, but I am still not ready to right off the country yet. As evidenced from the 2010 election, more people have awakened to the fact that we are in deep s**t, fiscally speaking. The 2012 results will be a good indication if people are serious about changing direction, or if they want to keep driving closer to the cliff. Either way, the government is going to shrink, and will do so without armed revolution.

I own both a Model 41 and Mark III. I would choose the Mark III. It is quite a bit cheaper and extremely accurate.

I took my new gun to the range of Friday. I only had time to shoot a hundred rounds through it. There isn't a whole lot to say. I didn't have any problems, and the gun is way more accurate than me. As far as what I will do with the gun, there is no way for me to tell if it is better than my Wilsons or Nighthawks. I am as equally accurate with all of them, and I haven't had any problems with any of my 1911s. The biggest advantage on the Professional is cost, especially since it comes with 6 mags and both Wilson and Nighthawk have really increased their prices over the last year. Therefore, if you don't mind waiting, I would recommend the SA Professional as an equally good alternative to some of the other custom shops. I doubt I will ever get rid of this gun mainly due to the difficultly in acquiring one. While it is a very nice 1911, it still has not surpassed my NHC Talon FLX 2011. I know many of you think 9mm in 1911 platform is sacrilege, but having 17 + 1 rd of 9mm in a 1911/2011 platform is my ideal gun. I will take shot placement and speed and accuracy of follow up shots any day over the supposed stopping power of 45 acp.

After carrying my new Hinderer for a while, it has become my new favorite knife. While I still love my CR Professional Soldier, the XM-24 has become my favorite. The thing is just a tank. Here is my XM-24 with my favorite handguns. When I received my Steel Flame accessories, they had some really bad heat marks, which was quite surprising. I would have expected a little more polish to them. However, the problem was easily remedied with a little bit of polish and a Dremel tool.

I would recommend Troy Stetina's series. http://www.stetina.com/ I have went through all of his books. They are all very good. I also have Petrucci's Rock Discipline. It is good as well.

Whoever corrected that, thanks

Can any of the moderators add the word "up" to my thread title? "I just picked up" Geeze, I need to learn to type in the worst way. http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/45110-springfield-fans-i-just-picked-my-new-soon-to-be-edc/ Thank you.

In September of 2010 a fellow forum member gave me an article detailing the tests conducted by the FBI during their handgun contract for their Swat and Hostage Rescue Teams. I was thoroughly impressed. I had never seen such demanding requirements placed on a handgun. Several big name 1911 shops (Les Baer, Wilson, Kimber, Colt, and a few others) competed for the contract, and all of them failed to meet the requirements. I was shocked that Wilson was not able to meet the accuracy test. Only Springfield and Matt Gish of Proguns (he used to be with Les Baer) were able to pass all of the requirements. Springfield won the contract because they were the only manufacturer that passed all of the FBI's tests, they could meet the production capacity of 500 handguns each year, and provide a 50,000 round warranty. After doing some research and following the recommendation of a fellow TGOer, I ordered my gun on 9-16-10 from my favorite local dealer, Shooter's Depot. I was told that it would take between 8 - 15 months to receive the gun. I initially thought that was just B.S. and expected to have my gun 6 months later. As you can see, I was wrong. It has taken me almost 18 months to get this gun. Even though it has taken so long, I am glad I ordered it when I did. I have heard that wait times now are 2 years plus. Being the owner of several Wilson and Nighthawk Customs, which I love, I can say that this Springfield is just super sweet. While it is not an inexpensive handgun, it is cheaper than a lot of Wilsons, NHC, and EBs. That is definitely a plus. I am amazed at how smooth the gun is, and everything is incredibly tight. I can't wait to take it to the range to see what it will do. Anyway, here are some pics of my new Springfield Professional. Sorry for the cell phone pics, but that is the only camera I own. What can I say? I will buy nice guns and knives, but I am too cheap to buy a decent camera. Priorities.

Yep. Rather unfortunate.