YAGT: OMG I love guns

[marvdmartian]

The instructors want you to pass the tests. Trust me. Many of those I've seen taking the tests when I head to the range are first time shooters lately. I haven't seen anyone not pass.

The only person I saw fail, when I took my class (end of December, last year) was a lady who was VERY nervous handling her pistol. She had a jam, did the right thing and called it out, then turned her pistol sideways to rack the slide.... right at all the other shooters who were to her left, in line!

That was an automatic fail, since she violated range safety rules that had been very carefully explained, both in the classroom beforehand, and again when we got to the range.

I spoke with her, afterwards, and told her she needed to become more comfortable with safe handling of her pistol, then come back and take the class again (she only had to pass the range portion, as she had tested out okay in the written exam). Most dumb mistakes made with handling are due to not being familiar with your firearm, and the safe handling rules for ALL firearms.

 

[RampantAndroid]

my garand came with a new stock, dunno who made it. but everything works just fine and it looks beautiful.

Maybe they do some extra work then; all I know is that the boyds stocks they buy out of the box are garbage. Garand stocks were never mass manufactured and used as is; they often had custom fitting done. Look up threads on boyds stocks if you're curious. Also, the stock boyds finish I found to be lacking.

This:
https://www.dupagetrading.com/dupag...s-for-sale/m1-stock2012-09-21-03-07-48-detail

vs this:
http://dgrguns.com/2103 full.jpg

(Also note how the boyds/dupage stock sticks out WAY past the metal. They are making the stocks too thick. Dean sands them down to WWII specs.)

 

[Merad]

They only increase prices if they have customers willing to pay those prices. People stop paying those prices and they'll drop. I can promise you that. I'm doing my part. Either the price drops and I buy one, or they don't. If they don't and I don't get one for the price I want it is no big deal to me.

From what I've heard basic beater Mosins are going for $200+ at gun shows and people are paying. So like I said... don't hold your breath.

 

[boomhower]

From what I've heard basic beater Mosins are going for $200+ at gun shows and people are paying. So like I said... don't hold your breath.

Some people are stupid. Wait and the prices will come down. Just look at AR prices. Already they are falling. Within a year give or take they will be back to normale. Those that paid $2500 for a $1k AR will be kicking themselves, again. (granted my buddy paid $1800 for a 6920 and swears he doesn't regret it)

 

[HumblePie]

From what I've heard basic beater Mosins are going for $200+ at gun shows and people are paying. So like I said... don't hold your breath.

Why? I can get them for cheaper than that now. Buds guns shop and many online retailers have them for $130-$150 for halfway decent ones. just check out slickguns and you can see for yourself.

 

[velillen]

From what I've heard basic beater Mosins are going for $200+ at gun shows and people are paying. So like I said... don't hold your breath.

Or just be smart and get your C&R license and order them online.

One for $132 bucks shipped
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=411540201

Or get a Hex for $164 shipped
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/411553240


Even besides the guns getting a C&R can save you money. The ATF gets 30 bucks but you save money when you register as a "dealer" on sites like midwayusa and brownells. Though midway people say the coupons (30 off 300, ect) are better deals.


Though i will say gone are the days of sub 100 mosins IMO. Like the sks's the stock is going to eventually get slimmer and slimmer yielding higher prices on what is left. That and the demand recently has been pretty dang high on them so i doubt retailers are going to drop prices to much. I know Cabelas near me got 20 mosin's in (just plain a crate pretty much) and they were gone in a matter of hours. But that is just my opinion and i'd feel fine paying ~150 for one at this point

Why? I can get them for cheaper than that now. Buds guns shop and many online retailers have them for $130-$150 for halfway decent ones. just check out slickguns and you can see for yourself.

Beat me to it But only really save money if you have a C&R or are in good with a FFL. All the ones near me would still want 25 buck transfer on it plus the sales tax (wa state thing). Still cheaper but not as much if you have ot pay a transfer

 

[Merad]

Why?

You said:

They only increase prices if they have customers willing to pay those prices.

People are showing that they're willing to pay.

 

[HumblePie]

You said:



People are showing that they're willing to pay.

They WERE willing to pay those prices when the gun ban bill was still in heavy discussion on capitol hill. Not so much. I am already seeing many stores around here that have AR15 still on the shelves now for days at a time. Before those would have been sold as soon as the store opened the moment they came in and got logged into NICS. Now people aren't willing anymore to pay $200 more for that AR15 than what it was going for pre-panic. I am already seeing this now. As time passes and inventories build up again without people paying the inflated prices, they'll go back down.

 

[irishScott]

They WERE willing to pay those prices when the gun ban bill was still in heavy discussion on capitol hill. Not so much. I am already seeing many stores around here that have AR15 still on the shelves now for days at a time. Before those would have been sold as soon as the store opened the moment they came in and got logged into NICS. Now people aren't willing anymore to pay $200 more for that AR15 than what it was going for pre-panic. I am already seeing this now. As time passes and inventories build up again without people paying the inflated prices, they'll go back down.

Even online prices have dropped more than I'd thought they would. This basic Stag Arms has a "buy it now" of $1000.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=335092556

Still a little overpriced, but this same rifle would have been going for at least $1500 as little as 3 weeks ago.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Well, some preliminary reports have come out about the proposed CT gun laws...

- Widened definition of what an assault weapon is, supposedly including 100 new types of firearms. Currently, a firearm is considered an assault weapon if it meets several different criteria, such as the ability for rifles to accept detachable magazines, and include at least two of the following features: pistol grip, flash hider, bayonet lug, folding / collapsible stock, and perhaps others that I am forgetting. A rumor that I read on website said that they may change it to only one of those features, meaning any AR-15s would be classified as assault weapons due to the pistol grip. Maybe adding a bullet button like in CA will classify it as a regular sporting rifle?
- Ability to register existing "assault weapons" to maintain ownership.
- Limit on magazine capacity to 10 rounds, ability to register "high-capacity" magazines (one website said something about registered magazines only being able to be loaded to 10+ rounds at the individual's home or a shooting range).
- Universal background checks for all firearm sales (currently there are no background checks for private party sales IIRC, at least for long guns).
- "Dangerous Weapon Offender" registry - no idea what this is, maybe just a list of people who have been caught with a banned weapon?
- Ammunition eligibility certificate - found for the sound of it, you have to take a firearms safety course and have a background check / be fingerprinted to buy ammunition.
- Grants for school safety improvements.
- Possibly bans for anyone that has been committed to a mental health institution.

Overall, my feelings are mixed. We (here in CT) all knew that SOMETHING was going to happen, and I agree that SOMETHING needs to be done to help keep tragedies like this from happening, though I'm not sure any laws are really going to make a difference.

I'm glad they're at least offering up registries the firearms / magazines that they want to ban, so that owners can opt to keep their possessions, but I'm a bit nervous about what registering will actually mean. If it means that I just can't sell or transfer an AR-15 to anyone, it doesn't affect me at all, as I had no plans to. If it means that I'll go on some list and be considered a dangerous person or something, then I have an issue with it.

We'll see what happens I guess.

 

[NutBucket]

Eh, it'll probably be like CA when our assault weapons ban went into law. Many people chose to register and many chose not to. Chances are you won't be able to transfer it at all. In CA, if you have a banned weapon it will be "destroyed" upon your death. Can't will it to an heir, etc. Many people felt the registry was the first step towards confiscation. That's for you to decide I guess. I've heard some people registered their weapons to their kids.

 

[clamum]

Well, some preliminary reports have come out about the proposed CT gun laws...

- Widened definition of what an assault weapon is, supposedly including 100 new types of firearms. Currently, a firearm is considered an assault weapon if it meets several different criteria, such as the ability for rifles to accept detachable magazines, and include at least two of the following features: pistol grip, flash hider, bayonet lug, folding / collapsible stock, and perhaps others that I am forgetting. A rumor that I read on website said that they may change it to only one of those features, meaning any AR-15s would be classified as assault weapons due to the pistol grip. Maybe adding a bullet button like in CA will classify it as a regular sporting rifle?
- Ability to register existing "assault weapons" to maintain ownership.
- Limit on magazine capacity to 10 rounds, ability to register "high-capacity" magazines (one website said something about registered magazines only being able to be loaded to 10+ rounds at the individual's home or a shooting range).
- Universal background checks for all firearm sales (currently there are no background checks for private party sales IIRC, at least for long guns).
- "Dangerous Weapon Offender" registry - no idea what this is, maybe just a list of people who have been caught with a banned weapon?
- Ammunition eligibility certificate - found for the sound of it, you have to take a firearms safety course and have a background check / be fingerprinted to buy ammunition.
- Grants for school safety improvements.
- Possibly bans for anyone that has been committed to a mental health institution.

Overall, my feelings are mixed. We (here in CT) all knew that SOMETHING was going to happen, and I agree that SOMETHING needs to be done to help keep tragedies like this from happening, though I'm not sure any laws are really going to make a difference.

I'm glad they're at least offering up registries the firearms / magazines that they want to ban, so that owners can opt to keep their possessions, but I'm a bit nervous about what registering will actually mean. If it means that I just can't sell or transfer an AR-15 to anyone, it doesn't affect me at all, as I had no plans to. If it means that I'll go on some list and be considered a dangerous person or something, then I have an issue with it.

We'll see what happens I guess.

What, whaaaaat? How the fuck does that make any sense? LOL. :awe::hmm:

 

[z1ggy]

What, whaaaaat? How the fuck does that make any sense? LOL. :awe::hmm:

Seriously, that's what I said. Mags don't have serial numbers on them like a firearm does right?? Even if it did, what are they going to do, force us to march down to the police station, register our mags...Then....When we go to the range, "check" our mags in and out? It's laughable when you think of the processes it would entail to enforce all of this BS.

The only way I see any "gun control" type of stuff working, is something futuristic and extreme-something like, a small chip inside everybody's finger/hand that allows only the corresponding firearm to be fired by said person. Something like that would have avoided Newtown at least, which is like the poster child for gun control laws now. Even stuff something like that, probably wouldn't stop all gang violence, or from just crazy people like James Holmes from shooting others.

All these new laws, just hurt the law abiding people who purchase firearms for sporting, or for home defense.

 

[CurseTheSky]

What, whaaaaat? How the fuck does that make any sense? LOL. :awe::hmm:

No idea. Again, I feel like it's a better solution than just an out-right ban on "high-capacity" magazines, but I have no idea how they're planning to implement it. Tracking a gun by serial number seems easy enough, because there are a lot of state / federal laws surrounding who can legally manufacture and own them. Magazines, on the other hand, can be made by any average Joe, as far as I know.

Everything I currently carry is 10 rounds or less anyway, but I'd prefer not to have to worry about whether or not the magazine I want to order will result in a felony.

 

[marvdmartian]

Connecticut's law is a "feel good now, look we did something, like you wanted us to" type of law.

No way they're going to spend the money to have checkpoints on the state lines, checking vehicles for contraband magazines or ammunition coming into the state!

Almost as ridiculous as Colorado, with their new 15-round limit to magazines. By the way, Colorado is surrounded by no less that EIGHT other states, NONE of which have that limit!
"When did you buy that 30-round magazine, sir?"
"Right before the law went into effect." :whiste:

 

[CurseTheSky]

Connecticut's law is a "feel good now, look we did something, like you wanted us to" type of law.

No way they're going to spend the money to have checkpoints on the state lines, checking vehicles for contraband magazines or ammunition coming into the state!

Almost as ridiculous as Colorado, with their new 15-round limit to magazines. By the way, Colorado is surrounded by no less that EIGHT other states, NONE of which have that limit!
"When did you buy that 30-round magazine, sir?"
"Right before the law went into effect." :whiste:

The only thing I could see working is a permit or something similar that allows you to own high-capacity magazines. If you have the permit, you can own any of them, and if you don't, you can't. If they try to do it on a per-magazine basis it's going to be a nightmare.

 

[HumblePie]

Even online prices have dropped more than I'd thought they would. This basic Stag Arms has a "buy it now" of $1000.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=335092556

Still a little overpriced, but this same rifle would have been going for at least $1500 as little as 3 weeks ago.

I know several stores right now that have had this exact firearm in stock for over a week now for $900 + tax. Just saying...

 

[pontifex]

Maybe they do some extra work then; all I know is that the boyds stocks they buy out of the box are garbage. Garand stocks were never mass manufactured and used as is; they often had custom fitting done. Look up threads on boyds stocks if you're curious. Also, the stock boyds finish I found to be lacking.

This:
https://www.dupagetrading.com/dupag...s-for-sale/m1-stock2012-09-21-03-07-48-detail

vs this:
http://dgrguns.com/2103 full.jpg

(Also note how the boyds/dupage stock sticks out WAY past the metal. They are making the stocks too thick. Dean sands them down to WWII specs.)

i've never seen or handled a boyd's stock for any rifle, but I usually hear good things about them. mostly is stocks for the 10/22.

 

[pontifex]

Some people are stupid. Wait and the prices will come down. Just look at AR prices. Already they are falling. Within a year give or take they will be back to normale. Those that paid $2500 for a $1k AR will be kicking themselves, again. (granted my buddy paid $1800 for a 6920 and swears he doesn't regret it)

there's a guy on a gun forum i belong to who is trying to sell a used mini 14 for $1000. he then made a post complaining about people trying to lowball him. lol

 

[pontifex]

Why? I can get them for cheaper than that now. Buds guns shop and many online retailers have them for $130-$150 for halfway decent ones. just check out slickguns and you can see for yourself.

probably because they don't want to deal with the online transfer? get it much sooner? after shipping and transfer fees, it might be $200 anyway.

 

[exdeath]

Just picked up some more Bulgarian circle 10 AK waffle mags and some DSA FAL metric mags for my future RFB :awe:

 

[x-alki]

Well, some preliminary reports have come out about the proposed CT gun laws...

- Widened definition of what an assault weapon is, supposedly including 100 new types of firearms. Currently, a firearm is considered an assault weapon if it meets several different criteria, such as the ability for rifles to accept detachable magazines, and include at least two of the following features: pistol grip, flash hider, bayonet lug, folding / collapsible stock, and perhaps others that I am forgetting. A rumor that I read on website said that they may change it to only one of those features, meaning any AR-15s would be classified as assault weapons due to the pistol grip. Maybe adding a bullet button like in CA will classify it as a regular sporting rifle?
- Ability to register existing "assault weapons" to maintain ownership.
- Limit on magazine capacity to 10 rounds, ability to register "high-capacity" magazines (one website said something about registered magazines only being able to be loaded to 10+ rounds at the individual's home or a shooting range).
- Universal background checks for all firearm sales (currently there are no background checks for private party sales IIRC, at least for long guns).
- "Dangerous Weapon Offender" registry - no idea what this is, maybe just a list of people who have been caught with a banned weapon?
- Ammunition eligibility certificate - found for the sound of it, you have to take a firearms safety course and have a background check / be fingerprinted to buy ammunition.
- Grants for school safety improvements.
- Possibly bans for anyone that has been committed to a mental health institution.

Overall, my feelings are mixed. We (here in CT) all knew that SOMETHING was going to happen, and I agree that SOMETHING needs to be done to help keep tragedies like this from happening, though I'm not sure any laws are really going to make a difference.

I'm glad they're at least offering up registries the firearms / magazines that they want to ban, so that owners can opt to keep their possessions, but I'm a bit nervous about what registering will actually mean. If it means that I just can't sell or transfer an AR-15 to anyone, it doesn't affect me at all, as I had no plans to. If it means that I'll go on some list and be considered a dangerous person or something, then I have an issue with it.

We'll see what happens I guess.

None of that is going to keep bad shit from happening. I'll tell you what registering will lead to, confiscation. Bad guys will still have guns, you won't.

 

[jpeyton]

Overall, my feelings are mixed.

That's probably why you're getting some batshit insane laws in CT.

Your feelings shouldn't be mixed. You should be outraged at all of that nonsense. Just because some criminal broke the law doesn't mean you need to give up any of your rights.

This is why it's so vitally important for all firearms owners to oppose ANY and ALL new firearms legislation. There really can't be any compromise with the gun control crowd, because their ultimate goal is two things: bans and confiscation.

 

[velillen]

That's probably why you're getting some batshit insane laws in CT.

Your feelings shouldn't be mixed. You should be outraged at all of that nonsense. Just because some criminal broke the law doesn't mean you need to give up any of your rights.

This is why it's so vitally important for all firearms owners to oppose ANY and ALL new firearms legislation. There really can't be any compromise with the gun control crowd, because their ultimate goal is two things: bans and confiscation.

There are some things i wont object to gun law wise. The biggest being the common sense ones like harsher punishments for traffickers and straw purchases. Things that i doubt many people would object really.

I will say i would support a PROPER and well laid out "background check" bill. But what i have in mind would never see the house or senate as it would actually take people who know guns to hammer it all out. But here are some things I would be ok with (again only if done properly)

-Requiring background checks on all gun purchases/transfers (with exceptions)
-Those who have CPL/CCW/CHL/ whatever your state calls it are exempt when buying. Show your CPL to the seller and thats it. No records or anything needed.
-Between family members theres nothing. Just give your son his sweet ruger 10/22 for his bday
- POSSIBLY allow special groups who require background checks (the Washington Arms Collectors in WA state as an example) for membership to be allowed no background check sales (since membership did it already) but allow the memberships to work in place of CPL's, ect.

-Open the NICS to the public. Have it be free otherwise its pointless. Allow a seller to call in and ask and get a simple yes or no answer. If no the buyer would have to call to see why.

-With this i also would want a change to NICS. No more having to record gun serial numbers. Simply ask long gun or pistol or other (for NFA items). Thats all you really should have to tell the NICS person. Well besides the obvious DOB, address, name of buyer.

-FFL's would probably still have to use the current setup for ATF purposes to track gun inventory. But something else oculd be in place for that i suppose. That owul dbe for someone else to hammer out.





Although that isnt perfect, something along those lines with nothing hidden in the bill is something i could support. And wouldnt change anything for me. I already only sell to WAC members/CPL holders.

But thats just my opinion and i know there will still be plenty who would oppose it totally still.

 

[NutBucket]

Honestly I don't see what the big deal is about background checks and serial numbers. I mean, if a crime is committed we should be able to figure out the source of the gun. How else do can you identify straw purchases, trafficking, etc?

Also, the whole reason you can't open NICS to the public for a quick yes/no is that there are too many easy ways to falsify one's identity. That's why for CA you submit a thumbprint, proof of residency, etc. They want to make sure you are who you say you are. That's common sense to me.

And doesn't the Sandy Hook thing work against your position of zero restrictions for inter-family transfers?

Finally just to be clear, I am not anti-gun at all. I don't support any sort of weapons ban and magazine capacity limits are pointless.