I would like to exercise my 2nd...

**TheExtraPoint** · 07-10-2012, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

Then why not put that in your reply. You left it out because it went against your point that Obama was not anti-gun.

Thanks for telling me why I did or did not say something. I wasn't clear. In reality, I don't feel the need to respond to every element of an argument with self-evident failings like this one in particular.

MY argument was not that the President was pro-gun, because he isn't and I never even suggested that he was. My argument was that the President has done virtually nothing MEANINGFUL on gun control, which he hasn't.

Barely. AS Houston pointed out imported weapons would become very expensive, perhaps too expensive to buy. In order to bear arms, you have to first buy it... don't you?

Yes, you do, but as usual the connections you both want to draw are tenuous. The cost of guns has nothing to do with your right to have them. And moreover, what one person can't afford, another can. If you think that this treaty will price American gun clingers out of the market, you don't understand the treaty nor the market in the first place.

As long as you do so within the murky confines of American law, you will continue to be able to buy weapons to stockpile for Armageddon, the inevitable institution of Sharia, and/or dinner. Your 2nd amendment right to bear arms remains ENTIRELY unaffected by the potential signing of this treaty.

Now maybe Mitt will amend the constitution to guarantee the right to bear arms at a discount. That would get the base fired up...

**HoustonRaven** · 07-10-2012, 09:19 AM

Nothing like using the subjective term such as "meaningful" to keep tings nice and tidy in the debate box.

Life must be great when dealing in such vagaries.

**NCRAVEN** · 07-10-2012, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by TheExtraPoint

Yes, you do, but as usual the connections you both want to draw are tenuous. The cost of guns has nothing to do with your right to have them. And moreover, what one person can't afford, another can. If you think that this treaty will price American gun clingers out of the market, you don't understand the treaty nor the market in the first place.

THe cost of the gun has everything to do with the right to have it. If I can't afford it... how do I have it?

I get the point you're trying to make, but you not acknowledging pricing something so far out of what would be affordable is without a doubt.. backdoor gun control

Originally Posted by TheExtraPoint

As long as you do so within the murky confines of American law, you will continue to be able to buy weapons to stockpile for Armageddon, the inevitable institution of Sharia, and/or dinner. Your 2nd amendment right to bear arms remains ENTIRELY unaffected by the potential signing of this treaty.

Now maybe Mitt will amend the constitution to guarantee the right to bear arms at a discount. That would get the base fired up...

Lame. What is it about you Libs that can't come to a discussion without 2nd grade attempts to mock or ridicule? So petty...

**NCRAVEN** · 07-10-2012, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Nothing like using the subjective term such as "meaningful" to keep tings nice and tidy in the debate box.

Life must be great when dealing in such vagaries.

**NCRAVEN** · 07-27-2012, 02:16 PM

Looking to pickup a KAHR CW45, any thoughts?

**HoustonRaven** · 07-27-2012, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

Looking to pickup a KAHR CW45, any thoughts?

They have had spring issues which they corrected.

Why not just get a Glock? It's the same design and the weapon will be guaranteed for life.

**NCRAVEN** · 07-27-2012, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

They have had spring issues which they corrected.

Why not just get a Glock? It's the same design and the weapon will be guaranteed for life.

Price. A friend got the KAHR as part of a package and is selling it for $350 with two mags, it's barely a year old and hasn't even had enough rounds to be considered "broken in" (According to KAHR's recommendation).

Plus the lack of safety (other than the trigger) makes me hesitant on Glocks.

**HoustonRaven** · 07-27-2012, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

Price. A friend got the KAHR as part of a package and is selling it for $350 with two mags, it's barely a year old and hasn't even had enough rounds to be considered "broken in" (According to KAHR's recommendation).

Plus the lack of safety (other than the trigger) makes me hesitant on Glocks.

This weapon has no safety either, IIRC. In fact, I don't think it has a trigger safety either.

http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-CW45.asp

**NCRAVEN** · 07-27-2012, 03:54 PM

You know, I think you're right. I could swear I remember it having a safety, but I guess they think the DAO trigger takes care of that. Appears I'm wrong.

I think I may get it anyhow and have it be the next to the bed gun. As far as what other gun I want to get, I am totally confused.

I do like Glocks for their simplicity and reliability, I could get pass the safety I suppose, but I am not sure which Glock to go with.

I'd like a .45 but the Glock 36 seems to small...

**HoustonRaven** · 07-27-2012, 11:35 PM

Glock 30 is a tad larger in the frame and is a .45. I use it was a concealed weapon but it's a good every day weapon as well.

Unlike other Glocks, it has a break in period of about 500 rounds.

**NCRAVEN** · 07-29-2012, 07:58 AM

Glock 23 it is. the 36 and 30 grips are too short. I wanted a .45 but a .40 has enough power...

Thanks for the advice HR.

**HoustonRaven** · 07-29-2012, 08:19 AM

Anytime.

You picked a fine weapon and it will last decades as long as you take care of it.

**HoustonRaven** · 07-29-2012, 10:58 AM

Wicked, did you pick up the Beretta yet?

Mrs. HR is about to get her concealed carry license and I am very curious how you like it. That's one of the weapons I am looking to get for her.

**wickedsolo** · 07-30-2012, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Wicked, did you pick up the Beretta yet?

Mrs. HR is about to get her concealed carry license and I am very curious how you like it. That's one of the weapons I am looking to get for her.

I shot it, but I'm still weighing the options. I was able to find a place up here that carries the Beretta and the S&W I was looking at. I liked the Beretta a lot more. The S&W was nice, but the beretta was just a lot more comfortable...and lighter actually.

I'm finding that I can get the gun online for a lot cheaper than at a store. The same gun I shot I can get online for less than $400, but at the store I demo'ed it at I think the price tag was about $150 more.

**wickedsolo** · 07-30-2012, 07:15 AM

Speaking of the 2nd Amendment...

http://www.therightperspective.org/2...=Google+Reader

**HoustonRaven** · 07-30-2012, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

I'm finding that I can get the gun online for a lot cheaper than at a store. The same gun I shot I can get online for less than $400, but at the store I demo'ed it at I think the price tag was about $150 more.

Have you found a reputable Class III arms dealer in your area? They won't deliver the weapon to your house.

**wickedsolo** · 07-30-2012, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Have you found a reputable Class III arms dealer in your area? They won't deliver the weapon to your house.

Well, yea, the range I was at will accept deliveries for me, but I would imagine with the "delivery fee" they would charge it would probably be about the same price, no?

**NCRAVEN** · 07-30-2012, 12:30 PM

My local dealer charges $30. But they sell the Glock I am getting (this weekend) for $10 cheaper. One thing I wonder is do they charge tax on something I have delivered there??? The online store(s) doesn't, so it may be cheaper to go online depending on sales tax...

I would just call and ask them Wicked what they charge for a "handling fee"

**jonboy79** · 08-17-2012, 10:53 AM

Going monday to acquire one of my own(after my 7-10 day wait).

I will be buying a medium frame Glock.
The question now is, to HR and others...

Should I buy a larger calibre then the Glock 19 9mm?
I will open carry at work, with their permission and within the law, based on where I work. I buy gold for cash in PG county. I would liek a gun fit for this purpose(personal defense) but would also like for it to be affordable to train with. I am comfortable with the Glock 19 and have fired it successfully with relative ease in retargetting quickly on successive rounds. So the main question is whether I would be shortchanging myself from a stopping power/ammo capacity/affordability tradeoff perspective. I have not shot a larget calibre handgun and would before I purchased, but don't see it being a huge issue. i think that it would perhaps slow down or perhaps lessen my accuracy on repeated shots.
As a minor point, my wife has also shot the Glock 19 and enjoys range days. This isn't rally a concern as I can easily rent what she wants for $5 when we do so. But, should the gun make it back home I would be MUCH more comfortable with her firing said 9mm then a larger calibre.

So the basic question, is that 9mm is basically considered the minimum for self protection. Am I endangering myself by choosing said calibre over a larger one? I can and will test out .40 and .45 calibres to maintain safety and will literally "bite the bullet" on more expensive ammo if I would be significantly safer with the calibre assuming I can safely and comfortably operate it.