crashgordan

nice piece of kit. GLWS!!!!! Wish i was the new owner.

WOW. pretty rare and excellent kit. GLWS!

nice.

need this in my life. . work does not allow for trips to Nash. GLWS

nice. in chatt. get down that way ever?

nice. mos def interested. in chatt. and can show HCP and residency. alas... in chatt. if we can make the planets align, shoot me a pm. may be up that way

so is this a build? or a was this a complete factory rifle?

post an asking price. you may get some interest.

nice. GLWS

can you advise year actual year manufactured. thanks.

lovin' this. fer shure

valid point. There's a lot of factors at play on this topic. Here's what I know based on pretty extensive reading and study and training on this topic. and of course, i enjoy learning so, anyone with additional light on this topic, please weigh in. Critical review is encouraged. Law Enforcement agencies have to defend themselves legally in police involved shootings regularly. Their selection of duty ammunition is generally considered safe enough by the governing agency to be carried in the public and for the public good as well as safe enough to discharge in an attempt to stop the threat while in the presence of non threats (bystanders/innocent victims/overpenetration of threats/walls/etc.). This argument has been successfully used in the defense of both law enforcement and civilian cases. 'If it's considered safe enough for law enforcement to carry and deploy in public, and is legally available to the civilian, it can be considered a safe choice'. Additionally, choosing SD ammo for any other reason than to "stop the threat" is increasing the risk of criminal prosecution. Choosing ammo that effectively stops the threat is the goal, not "kill the threat". If death happens to be the result of engaging and stopping the threat, than that's another potential legal issue, but easier to defend if the defense can prove you didn't intent to kill, but you intended to "stop the threat". another consideration: While cool/sexy/scary names helps sell guns and ammo to the civilian market, it doesn't help you in court. Carrying a scary sounding firearm "Python/Death Dealer/Viper/ManStopper" etc, loaded with ultra scary sounding ammo like "Black Talon/Devastator/etc." can get you painted as a crazed killer who was looking for a fight, by a skilled prosecutor working in a low tolerance/pro gun control court system. Defensible logic is carrying the most clinical/benign sounding platform possible (model 19/p320/etc) with a safe load that is reliable and effective at stopping the threat. Additionally, being able to prove that you have minimally trained with that platform and ammunition combination at least once to confirm POA and function, may be important. A good prosecutors job is to get a conviction, even if minor, and painting you as an irresponsible gun owner for not training with or confirming POA and Function can cast doubt in a jury's mind as to your other good qualities. There's a lot of nuanced traps and pitfalls to be found in the SD world when entering the legal system... just like cocking the hammer on a revolver before shooting a bad guy can land you in prison with a "pre meditated" conviction, regardless of how much he needed to be stopped. While it makes little sense in the heat of the moment and was irrelevant to the outcome regarding "stopping the threat", it mattered a lot to the civilian who cocked the hammer. Of course,I welcome any and all intelligent discourse on this topic. it's important and should be thoughtfully considered.

reliable function in. your carry platform is critical. beyond that, I choose what local/state/federal law enforcement uses. strips away one more thing an aggressive prosecutor may try to use against you in a justified self defense case. HST are a solid choice for me.

@DocHawk PM sent

pm