Gun nuts only

[7cylon7captain of 1,000]

No it should not be shoot to stop. It should be shoot to kill. You are missing the point of your own story. If you don' t kill the perp in the initial contact but in doing so the perp is not a threat anymore then your right to continue to use deadly force may be called into question. The idea is the shoot the perp dead all in one event. In the case you presented the event happened and was over and the store clerk then goes away and gets another gun? why? to finish him off? If the perp was still trying to rob or kill him with a gun then getting the other gun and shooting the perp is justified however, if the perp gave up and the gun was not by him and he was "clearly" not a threat anymore then going back over and shooting him could be the wrong action to take.

I think you can see the difference. But never shoot just to stop unless you are a sniper expert in shooting.

The other case to go against your case above is a guy put 12 bullets into a perp and at the trial or at the scene he was asked why you put 12 bullets into the perp? The answer was I ran out of bullets. In this case, he was not convicted of any crime. The shooting with 12 bullets might be excessive since maybe after the 6th bullet the perp was dead. Since this type of shooting happened all in one event it is reasonable that he was just protecting himself and in the heat of the moment who really counts how many bullets you have shot? Now, if this guy shot the perp and he was still alive after 12 bullets, if he then went lets say back into his house and got a reload of 12 more bullets and which takes lets say 5 minutes and then comes back out to the perp who does not have access to a weapon or the weapon he had is clearly seen on the ground away from him. (this is no guarantee that the perp does not have a second weapon) then if you were to shoot him after 5 min of reloading then you could be called in for murder charges.

I think we can see the difference in these instances of what is reasonable action taken to protect ones life. Unfortunately we have a lot of morons out here who do not know the difference.

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

No it should not be shoot to stop. It should be shoot to kill. You are missing the point of your own story. If you don' t kill the perp in the initial contact but in doing so the perp is not a threat anymore then your right to continue to use deadly force may be called into question. The idea is the shoot the perp dead all in one event. In the case you presented the event happened and was over and the store clerk then goes away and gets another gun? why? to finish him off? If the perp was still trying to rob or kill him with a gun then getting the other gun and shooting the perp is justified however, if the perp gave up and the gun was not by him and he was "clearly" not a threat anymore then going back over and shooting him could be the wrong action to take.

I think you can see the difference. But never shoot just to stop unless you are a sniper expert in shooting.

The other case to go against your case above is a guy put 12 bullets into a perp and at the trial or at the scene he was asked why you put 12 bullets into the perp? The answer was I ran out of bullets. In this case, he was not convicted of any crime. The shooting with 12 bullets might be excessive since maybe after the 6th bullet the perp was dead. Since this type of shooting happened all in one event it is reasonable that he was just protecting himself and in the heat of the moment who really counts how many bullets you have shot? Now, if this guy shot the perp and he was still alive after 12 bullets, if he then went lets say back into his house and got a reload of 12 more bullets and which takes lets say 5 minutes and then comes back out to the perp who does not have access to a weapon or the weapon he had is clearly seen on the ground away from him. (this is no guarantee that the perp does not have a second weapon) then if you were to shoot him after 5 min of reloading then you could be called in for murder charges.

I think we can see the difference in these instances of what is reasonable action taken to protect ones life. Unfortunately we have a lot of morons out here who do not know the difference.

I think you missed what I was trying to convey. I have no desire to harm anyone, let alone kill anybody. I feel a responsibility to protect my family from threats and so I arm myself and train to meet potential threats. If presented with a threat against myself, or an innocent 3rd party, my priority is to protect the innocent from the threat. I will use deadly force to do so, but not with the intent to kill. I will keep pulling that trigger until the threat is stopped or I am out of ammo. I understand that there are times when a threat may appear to be over only to return. I am not saying shoot once and then re-holster your weapon. What I am saying is that once the threat is clearly over, you are no longer justified legally or morally in using deadly force.

As far as shooting to kill in the first instance I feel the same way: The object is to stop the threat, not kill. Depending on the scenario that could be a shot to the head, or to the hip. If someone was running at me with a knife and I had the presence of mind to do so, I would much rather shoot him in the pelvic bone. He would be physically unable to continue running with a shattered pelvis. If I shot "to kill" in the same instance I would be trying to make a difficult head shot on a moving target, or to shoot for vitals in the thoracic cavity which could take 30-45 seconds to drop blood pressure enough to end the threat even with a perfect mortally wounding shot.

Granted, in most scenarios properly addressing the threat carries a high probability of mortality. I am just trying to dispel the persistent erring concept that it's better to kill than wound (not promoting leg shots or "taking out a knee"). Shoot center mass. It's the biggest target with vital organs without which a baddy cannot fight for long. Once the threat is CLEARLY over, stop shooting.

[jonesdecaptain of 1,000]

I think you missed what I was trying to convey. I have no desire to harm anyone, let alone kill anybody. I feel a responsibility to protect my family from threats and so I arm myself and train to meet potential threats. If presented with a threat against myself, or an innocent 3rd party, my priority is to protect the innocent from the threat. I will use deadly force to do so, but not with the intent to kill. I will keep pulling that trigger until the threat is stopped or I am out of ammo. I understand that there are times when a threat may appear to be over only to return. I am not saying shoot once and then re-holster your weapon. What I am saying is that once the threat is clearly over, you are no longer justified legally or morally in using deadly force.

As far as shooting to kill in the first instance I feel the same way: The object is to stop the threat, not kill. Depending on the scenario that could be a shot to the head, or to the hip. If someone was running at me with a knife and I had the presence of mind to do so, I would much rather shoot him in the pelvic bone. He would be physically unable to continue running with a shattered pelvis. If I shot "to kill" in the same instance I would be trying to make a difficult head shot on a moving target, or to shoot for vitals in the thoracic cavity which could take 30-45 seconds to drop blood pressure enough to end the threat even with a perfect mortally wounding shot.

Granted, in most scenarios properly addressing the threat carries a high probability of mortality. I am just trying to dispel the persistent erring concept that it's better to kill than wound (not promoting leg shots or "taking out a knee"). Shoot center mass. It's the biggest target with vital organs without which a baddy cannot fight for long. Once the threat is CLEARLY over, stop shooting.

If all you had to worry about was the gun battle, then this would be true. However, if you defend yourself with violence and you are not someone special (and by that I mean someone special in the eyes of police, govt prosecuting attorneys, judges, state governors, or POTUS) then you have a legal battle coming as well.

There are decision you may make during a fight, and definitely after a fight, that should be based on this. A good book on the topic is "After You Shoot":

http://www.gunlaws.com/AYS.htm

One example of advice: Just like with any potential criminal liability situation the main point is don't talk to the police or anyone affiliated with them, including 911 operators. In other words, don't call 911... immediately after the shooting call a lawyer and have the lawyer call 911. If you insist on doing it yourself, then use phrase things so that you admit nothing, like "someone has been shot at ..." instead of "I shot someone at ...".

One of the more controversial pieces of advice is to shoot to kill. A person who is injured and survives can testify against you in court, and can lie, and may succeed in lying enough to get you in trouble even if they also get in trouble. Breaking and entering is a much lighter charge than assault with a deadly weapon, for example. To clarify the advice is not to shoot to kill at anyone who enters your home or business or whatever, but if there is a clear threat of force and you must defend yourself with lethal force, legally because of the way the US legal system works it's better to shoot to kill than just shoot to stop.

There are examples of this sort of thing fairly frequently. One recent case I heard of that I don't think has been ruled on yet is a case where a man claimed that another man entered his house and molested his child, and the man of the house caught him in the act and shot him dead. This is a horrible story and if true is not something that any of us would want to experience or wish on someone else. However, the fact is what the police and attorneys have to go in is one man who is alive, one man who is dead, and a young child. In other words, the man who is alive can make up whatever story he wants and unless there is REALLY clear contradictory evidence, that will become the official story.

The tough part legally is that people try to use such circumstances to literally get away with murder, so police and prosecutors are very wary of every story they hear (unless you are someone special, as mentioned above). This means you have to be REALLY REALLY careful how you handle both the fight and what comes after the fight as police arrive and interview you and others, as your weapon is taken as evidence (it always will be... that weapon is basically gone as far as you are concerned), as you are almost certainly restrained and taken into custody, and so on.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

I was told by a lawyer to call 911 and simply whisper I've had a break in, there may be more than one! Then put the live phone down and say nothing more over the phone, DO NOT SAY "I" shot the intruder! (I'm hiding--- Let the police discover him dead!

Guaranteed, I will stop the intruder!

As far as them taking my weapon, It's the main reason I have more than one! It's also the reason I have a HighPoint .45, less than $200 bucks--- It's a very large and heavy weapon, Fine for my large hands and frame, but it shoots just fine, is very accurate! However it's strictly a home D weapon, my CC weapon is much smaller! I accurized the HighPoint, better trigger pull, etc!

Bob

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

Teaser for the next project I'm working on.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

A years supply for your AK? How about this one;

http://www.theshootist.net/2009/03/dod- ... itary.html

Hope everybody who reloads has plenty of brass---

Bob

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

General Cosgrove was interviewed on the radio recently. Read his reply to the lady who interviewed him concerning guns and children.

Regardless of how you feel about gun laws you gotta love this! This is one of the best comeback lines of all time.

It is a portion of an ABC radio interview between a female broadcaster and General Cosgrove who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop visiting his military Headquarters:****

FEMALE Reporter: So, General Cosgrove, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?

GENERAL COSGROVE: We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery and shooting.

FEMALE Reporter: Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?

GENERAL COSGROVE: I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle range.

FEMALE Reporter: Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?

GENERAL COSGROVE: I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.

FEMALE Reporter: But you're equipping them to become violent killers.

GENERAL COSGROVE: Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?

The radiocast went silent for 46 seconds and when it returned, the interview was over.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/17/who-d ... d-to-shoot

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

I mentioned before that my oldest purchased a Ruger AR. Our gunsmith just finished a trigger job, what a sweet rifle. We fired around a hundred reloads through it just to make sure they worked fine in his rifle, didn't have a single jam or misfire, the reloads cycled perfectly! We fired 55 grain Hornady Z-Max (zombie killers) loaded with 25 grains of 844 I obtained from Widners, along with Wolf primers. The Wolf primers loaded just fine and shot just fine, the load is at about 3100 fps, really smacked the target. At 174 yards we kept the rounds on a paper plate with open apature sights, shooting off hand, not bad for an old man! Gonna fit a small lower power scope!

The Wolf primers cost $16 a thousand and I bought a bunch along with powder. They have a $26 dollar hazmat fee and shipping, but the price remains way under primers I've bought elsewhere.

844 military powder is H335 from Hornady, you use the same numbers! $89 for 8 lbs. from Widners.

Bob

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

I mentioned before that my oldest purchased a Ruger AR. Our gunsmith just finished a trigger job, what a sweet rifle. We fired around a hundred reloads through it just to make sure they worked fine in his rifle, didn't have a single jam or misfire, the reloads cycled perfectly! We fired 55 grain Hornady Z-Max (zombie killers) loaded with 25 grains of 844 I obtained from Widners, along with Wolf primers. The Wolf primers loaded just fine and shot just fine, the load is at about 3100 fps, really smacked the target. At 174 yards we kept the rounds on a paper plate with open apature sights, shooting off hand, not bad for an old man! Gonna fit a small lower power scope!

The Wolf primers cost $16 a thousand and I bought a bunch along with powder. They have a $26 dollar hazmat fee and shipping, but the price remains way under primers I've bought elsewhere.

844 military powder is H335 from Hornady, you use the same numbers! $89 for 8 lbs. from Widners.

Bob

Where are you buying your primers locally? I get them from $29.99 (Federal) to $31.99 (Remington match). I'll have to check out that powder. That is a bit better than I have found. I am in love with Hodgdon's new CFE223, though. Just bought 10 lbs @ $19/lb, and I still have about 9 lbs of Benchmark to use.

I took last week off work to help out with the new baby and was able to get another 1500 or so loads done. I am starting to feel like I have some ammo on hand again, but it's not going to last. I'm shooting 2 IPSC matches this weekend plus more bunny blasting Saturday night. Life is good.

[gkearneycaptain of 100]

General Cosgrove was interviewed on the radio recently. Read his reply to the lady who interviewed him concerning guns and children.

Regardless of how you feel about gun laws you gotta love this! This is one of the best comeback lines of all time.

It is a portion of an ABC radio interview between a female broadcaster and General Cosgrove who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop visiting his military Headquarters:****

FEMALE Reporter: So, General Cosgrove, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?

GENERAL COSGROVE: We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery and shooting.

FEMALE Reporter: Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?

GENERAL COSGROVE: I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle range.

FEMALE Reporter: Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?

GENERAL COSGROVE: I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.

FEMALE Reporter: But you're equipping them to become violent killers.

GENERAL COSGROVE: Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?

The radiocast went silent for 46 seconds and when it returned, the interview was over.

It's an entertaing story, only trouble is its not true. General Peter John Cosgrove AC, MC (born 28 July 1947) is a retired Australian Army officer. He never gave such an interview. The first clue is the reference to boy scouts. In Australia scout are called scouts and they are coed. ABC has years trying to put this story down it just seems to take on a life all it's own.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

I've been getting my primers at Cabellas, my sons drive by there every day, they pick them up for me. But so far, the Wolf primers are working just fine, and for $16 a thousand + hazmat + shipping----You have to purchase several boxes of primers and/or powder to make it cost effective, but the end price works for me, and they're delivered right to my door!

You have to be right on top of Widners, when they get those primers, and the powder in they go fast!

Bob

[r0ck$74r15captain of 10]

Teaser for the next project I'm working on.

Is that the .300 Blackout? If so, where did you get the barrel to convert your AR and how much was it?

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

Is that the .300 Blackout? If so, where did you get the barrel to convert your AR and how much was it?

Yes, sir. 300 BLK indeed! I picked an entire upper up from 300blktalk.com classifieds. It's a Spikes receiver, Wilson Combat 16" bbl and Troy hand guard. Ran me just over $500 shipped.

I am waiting on my AAC SDN-6 can to get transferred to my FFL up here, then I can start the 5+ month wait for my tax stamp.

The lower I have it on is already registered as an SBR, so I'll probably end up doing another 9" bbl upper for it and the suppressor.

I have run about 200 rds through it so far, mostly the 110 gr vmax bullets over 20.0 grs of H110. They demolish rabbits, and I was able to drill a 18" plate from 287 yds over and over with no magnification and a red dot scope. So far I am really happy with the new round and can't wait to fire it suppressed!

ETA:

[r0ck$74r15captain of 10]

I am super jealous. I can't wait till I'm done with school and get a real job and can afford more stuff like that. I saved for close to a year to get my RRA Operator 2 Tactical. I love that firearm so much. I'll eventually get to playing with the .300 BLK for sure though.

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

I am super jealous. I can't wait till I'm done with school and get a real job and can afford more stuff like that. I saved for close to a year to get my RRA Operator 2 Tactical. I love that firearm so much. I'll eventually get to playing with the .300 BLK for sure though.

I really like the operators. I can see why you would love it. You are welcome to come out with me once I get my can in (still forever away).

[Fairmindedcaptain of 1,000]

I'd be interested to hear more about the 300, since this thread is the first I've seen of it (I guess that just shows how ignorant I am about guns). How does it differ from a .308 or .303, pros and cons? Also is ammunition harder to come by for it? (I'm assuming it's not a NATO standard round).

[jonesdecaptain of 1,000]

I'd be interested to hear more about the 300, since this thread is the first I've seen of it (I guess that just shows how ignorant I am about guns). How does it differ from a .308 or .303, pros and cons? Also is ammunition harder to come by for it? (I'm assuming it's not a NATO standard round).

Wikipedia usually has pretty good articles on round ballistics and such. It looks like the 300 BLK is a larger and slower bullet with similar muzzle energy to the .223. It is kind of like a slightly slower 7.62x39 (AK) round in that the bullet is a similar weight (around 125 grain) but goes slower (2200 versus 2400fps) and so has slightly less muzzle energy (1360 versus 1530 ft-lb). Here are some pages for comparison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_AAC_Bl ... %9735mm%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9739mm

It's interesting, but because it is more common and has similar bullet size and ballistics I'd go with the AK round... and with the differences in design I'd go with the AK rifle too...

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

I'd be interested to hear more about the 300, since this thread is the first I've seen of it (I guess that just shows how ignorant I am about guns). How does it differ from a .308 or .303, pros and cons? Also is ammunition harder to come by for it? (I'm assuming it's not a NATO standard round).

Wikipedia usually has pretty good articles on round ballistics and such. It looks like the 300 BLK is a larger and slower bullet with similar muzzle energy to the .223. It is kind of like a slightly slower 7.62x39 (AK) round in that the bullet is a similar weight (around 125 grain) but goes slower (2200 versus 2400fps) and so has slightly less muzzle energy (1360 versus 1530 ft-lb). Here are some pages for comparison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_AAC_Bl ... %9735mm%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9739mm

It's interesting, but because it is more common and has similar bullet size and ballistics I'd go with the AK round... and with the differences in design I'd go with the AK rifle too...

Yes, it's very comparable with the 7.62x39 with a little less muzzle energy and a little more energy down range possible with better bullets. If you like the AK, there wouldn't be a place for this. I have several AKs as well as a few ARs. I like the AR platform WAY more than the AK. Trying to run the stouter AK round in an AR presents several problems that are solved in the 300 BLK. It uses the standard STANAG magazines of the AR with full capacity, uses the same bolt and bolt carrier group and everything else that I already have multiples of. You can literally just swap to a 300 barrel and you're good to go.

The biggest reason I got into this cartridge is because I am getting a suppressor. I will be able to shoot bullets ranging from 208 grains to about 245 grains subsonically, and they will cycle the AR action for glorious semi-auto-subsonic-AR goodness. You can't do that with the AK.

[Fairmindedcaptain of 1,000]

Thanks for the links. It looks like they were trying to get all of the benefits of the M4 platform with a higher caliber. From what I got out of reading on it it looks like it was the baby bear caliber...small enough that it can be noise and flash suppressed, big enough to pack a punch, and in the more usual high calibers the M4 platform starts running into technical problems.

I'm guessing ammunition wise you're still going to find .308 and AK-47 rounds a lot easier.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

As a family we like to keep things simple, especially with guns. We're pretty much Ruger fans, but we'll look hard at other guns, most often just looking hard--- I have three guns that are not Rugers, two .45 pistols and my Winchester shotgun. I've been looking hard at a Springfield XD 9mm, don't know why-- perhaps the 19 rd mag-- Also considering purchasing 4.5 in threaded barrels for my .45, so when AHBL I can fit a suppressor. But not until then----.45's 30-06, .223, .22, and 12 gauges are our choices. Easiest to get brass and shells for reloading.

But I have friends who like messing with every new caliber, I find it unnecessary! I'm going on 71 years, do I need another gun??

Bob

[jonesdecaptain of 1,000]

Even without suppression (or with improvised suppression) the subsonic thing would be pretty darn useful in an asymmetric conflict. That is definitely cool. I wonder about the trade-off in less common ammo, especially for "emergency" situations which is mostly what I have firearms for (other than recreational shooting and skill-building of course).

From the bit I've read various sources seem to agree that you only need a small amount of suppression (including shooting through a pillow or heavy coat strapped tightly to the barrel), especially with a bullet like the AK that is slower in the first place, to make it more difficult for opponents to identify your location when you only shoot once. If you have to shoot many times, a suppressor and a sub-sonic round will give you a much better chance but still no guarantee of concealing your location.

On this topic I've been drooling (unrealistically) over the Kriss Vector, preferably the SBR model in spite of legal hurdles, but they have "pistol" and carbine models as well for those of us who don't want to register our toys. It uses the super-common 45 ACP which won't have nearly the range of 300 BLK, but if you're going subsonic with that then you're not taking advantage of the potential range and penetration of that round versus a handgun round anyway.

The main point of it is that Kriss has done some interesting stuff to make repeated shots more accurate. All parts that move with recoil move in-line with the center of mass of the gun so that there is almost no barrel rise after a shot. This means you can double tap without wandering up or over-compensating and jerking down and/or to the side on the second (and other subsequent) shots.

These even use Glock 21 mags. If I get a Vector I might have to replace my 1911 with a Glock 21... Sharing mags and rounds between a side-arm and a small rifle would be a pretty darn cool setup.

[Fairmindedcaptain of 1,000]

Darn straight. Anywhere you can get compatibility makes for much more convenience and long-term performance. Just looking at all the different ammunition types, cleaning materials, replacement parts, magazines and accessories, etc, makes trying to work with more than one or two calibers seem like a huge pain, especially if you're on a tight budget.

Edit: took a look at the Kriss Vector, and I can see where you're coming from. I'm a fan of the .45 caliber, and that design is pretty amazing.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

If you already have a AR variant, you can purchase a .45 acp upper for your AR, it'd be far cheaper that the Kriss Vector. Years ago I had a Marlin .45 acp called a camp gun, I traded it, been kicking myself since.

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

Thanks for the links. It looks like they were trying to get all of the benefits of the M4 platform with a higher caliber. From what I got out of reading on it it looks like it was the baby bear caliber...small enough that it can be noise and flash suppressed, big enough to pack a punch, and in the more usual high calibers the M4 platform starts running into technical problems.

I'm guessing ammunition wise you're still going to find .308 and AK-47 rounds a lot easier.

Sounds about right. Ammo isn't a concern for me. I have thousands of .223 cases that can easily be converted to 300 BLK. After converting the brass it's as simple as choosing a .308" projectile for it. Also, it is a factory made round, now. I expect it to increase in popularity over the next few years, and ammo won't be hard to find. I picked up some 300 BLK Remington UMC ammo at Sportsman's Warehouse in Midvale not too long ago.

[one4freedomcaptain of 100]

But I have friends who like messing with every new caliber, I find it unnecessary! I'm going on 71 years, do I need another gun??

How's that Model T treating you?

All cartridges were new at some point. Don't limit yourself to old technology.

[Fairmindedcaptain of 1,000]

Thanks for the links. It looks like they were trying to get all of the benefits of the M4 platform with a higher caliber. From what I got out of reading on it it looks like it was the baby bear caliber...small enough that it can be noise and flash suppressed, big enough to pack a punch, and in the more usual high calibers the M4 platform starts running into technical problems.

I'm guessing ammunition wise you're still going to find .308 and AK-47 rounds a lot easier.

Sounds about right. Ammo isn't a concern for me. I have thousands of .223 cases that can easily be converted to 300 BLK. After converting the brass it's as simple as choosing a .308" projectile for it. Also, it is a factory made round, now. I expect it to increase in popularity over the next few years, and ammo won't be hard to find. I picked up some 300 BLK Remington UMC ammo at Sportsman's Warehouse in Midvale not too long ago.

Yeah, I was reading some discussions where people were talking about converting .223 to 300 BLK. I'm glad it's possible, and simple enough to be feasible. I guess there's a chance 300 BLK will even eclipse some of the more standard rounds in popularity due to its versatility and design advantages. There was some speculation about whether the M16 would be phased out in favor of it.

Not planning on getting one myself, though, even if it gets more common. Couldn't afford it for one thing, and I'm not into reloading so I couldn't convert the brass anyway.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

But I have friends who like messing with every new caliber, I find it unnecessary! I'm going on 71 years, do I need another gun??

How's that Model T treating you?

All cartridges were new at some point. Don't limit yourself to old technology.

Lol, That old model T is runnin just fine! I'd rather mess with new loads than new cartridges. Mainly because I have so much empty brass in stock for everything I own. The .300 BLK looks like a waste of time to me, just shove a 110 grain hollow point into a 30-30 case---

I harvested a lot of deer with that 110 grain bullet, both in my Savage single shot 30-30 and my .270 Ruger, all neck shots! And, there are so many barrel and mag adaptions for the common 1911 that I'd never live long enough to try them all. What I've got is fine, haven't failed me yet!

However, I started this thread for people exactly like you, keep up the good work!

Bob

[r0ck$74r15captain of 10]

I am super jealous. I can't wait till I'm done with school and get a real job and can afford more stuff like that. I saved for close to a year to get my RRA Operator 2 Tactical. I love that firearm so much. I'll eventually get to playing with the .300 BLK for sure though.

I really like the operators. I can see why you would love it. You are welcome to come out with me once I get my can in (still forever away).

That'd be great, thank you. I want to try it out really bad. PM me when you get it in and go out.