TexasCHLforum.com

Mine are simply referred to by their names, The Colt, the Shorty, the Backpack Gun, and Frankengun. Anybody that knows me, knows exactly which one I'm referring to.

When entering California, would it be best to get a rental car at the border with native (California) plates to not attract attention to yourself? I bet the police almost know if you got TX plates, you have a gun. Just a thought, I have no plans to go there anytime soon.

LDB415 wrote:Every time one of us says "assault style rifle" or "high capacity magazine" we play into the hands of the left. Justify it if you want. Go with it if you want. Fact is a 30 rd magazine for an AR is the "standard" capacity for the gun. It was the standard when it was developed. It has a greater capacity than the magazine for a 10/22 or whatever but it isn't "high capacity". It's the original standard for the gun. A standard capacity magazine.

I accept that the. 30 end mag has become the standard, but it is my understanding that they were originally designed and issues with 20 end mags.

Personally I prefer the 20 rounders, but that is irrelevant.

I refuse to use the term "modern sporting rifle".

It's an AR or an M4, but calling it a MSR, aint gonna happen coming out of my lips or computer.

Yeah, I'm a cussed, won't go pc curmudgeon to satisfy...even our own Pro-gun folk, if it means I have to be wishy-washy pc bullied.

Even if I want to call it an assault rifle and that chaps some, tough. You're not the boss of me.

Oh, my AR's came with a bayonet lug, should I remove it so as not to offend the professional "I'm offended class"?

Nope, would be prudent and of course you know: Get off my lawn!

Nothing wrong with calling it an AR. That's what it is. The point is it is NOT an assault rifle unless you paid the fees etc. and got the full auto sear in which case it's arguable. And the point isn't "satisfying" anyone. The only ones who need "satisfying" won't be satisfied until we are completely disarmed. The point is to stop doing STUPID things like saying "assault rifle" and "high capacity magazine" when those are verbal weapons of the anti-gun crowd. We don't need to be helping them by playing along with their lies.

LDB415 wrote:Every time one of us says "assault style rifle" or "high capacity magazine" we play into the hands of the left. Justify it if you want. Go with it if you want. Fact is a 30 rd magazine for an AR is the "standard" capacity for the gun. It was the standard when it was developed. It has a greater capacity than the magazine for a 10/22 or whatever but it isn't "high capacity". It's the original standard for the gun. A standard capacity magazine.

Actually, I thought the original design was first released with only 20 round mags. There might be a few folks around here that were issued on of those and would remember if that is correct or not.

The standard US military magazine for the M-16 was originally 20 rounds, but that doesn't really mean much. The military has a long history of hamstringing the troops to save a buck. Research why the cavalry was using single shot rifles at Little Big Horn while the Indians had repeaters.

Robert McNamara and his "Whiz Kids" were trying to do everything on the cheap. The 20 round mags were probably seen as a way to keep ammunition costs down. Pretty much all the problems with the original M-16s were them trying to cut corners... Not chrome lining the chamber & bores, not issuing cleaning kits, etc.

Today, which is the only measure that matters, 30 round magazines are the standard. Pretty much anything you can name had lower standards 40 - 50 years ago, if it existed at all.

Pawpaw wrote: Today, which is the only measure that matters, 30 round magazines are the standard. Pretty much anything you can name had lower standards 40 - 50 years ago, if it existed at all.

20 rnd Mags were considered huge back then The M16 was garbage back in its early days but, I don't remember the magazines being much of an issue. , I'm not sure the 30rnd is an improvement, at least for non military combat situations. Darn things are just too big and get in the way. 15 and 20 seem ideal, but that is just me, YMMV.

I actually have several 40 round PMAGs for my M4. I do have mostly 30 rounders and agree that both are long, but all of them have performed flawlessly. I've never tried any larger magazines for it yet.

Liberty wrote:I'm not sure the 30rnd is an improvement, at least for non military combat situations. Darn things are just too big and get in the way. 15 and 20 seem ideal, but that is just me, YMMV.

I agree with you, but only for shooting from a bench. I pretty much always use a 20 round mag for that. In any other situation, I'll take the extra 10 rounds, please.

jason812 wrote:Mine are simply referred to by their names, The Colt, the Shorty, the Backpack Gun, and Frankengun. Anybody that knows me, knows exactly which one I'm referring to.

When entering California, would it be best to get a rental car at the border with native (California) plates to not attract attention to yourself? I bet the police almost know if you got TX plates, you have a gun. Just a thought, I have no plans to go there anytime soon.

I've been driving from Ft. Worth to California for years to visit my daughter who has lived all over the state. I've been to San Diego to Sacramento and have never been stopped by either CHP or city officers. Just because you have Texas plates is not a reason for a stop. Just obey traffic laws and you're fine.

I've carried, while in the vehicle, all over the state. However, while walking around San Francisco or Los Angeles: never! I did not wish to be a guest in their crossbar motel on a weapons charge.

kw5kw wrote:

jason812 wrote:Mine are simply referred to by their names, The Colt, the Shorty, the Backpack Gun, and Frankengun. Anybody that knows me, knows exactly which one I'm referring to.

When entering California, would it be best to get a rental car at the border with native (California) plates to not attract attention to yourself? I bet the police almost know if you got TX plates, you have a gun. Just a thought, I have no plans to go there anytime soon.

I've been driving from Ft. Worth to California for years to visit my daughter who has lived all over the state. I've been to San Diego to Sacramento and have never been stopped by either CHP or city officers. Just because you have Texas plates is not a reason for a stop. Just obey traffic laws and you're fine.

I've carried, while in the vehicle, all over the state. However, while walking around San Francisco or Los Angeles: never! I did not wish to be a guest in their crossbar motel on a weapons charge.

How did you legally carry in California? Are you LEO? The last time I drove into California was when I was transferred to an Air Force Base there and we were stopped at the state line for a plant and who knows what inspection. I don't know what they do now. I had lived in Los Angeles in the 60's when going to college. My experience with law enforcement then was that they had their training given by The Gestapo.

I was in CA over the holidays. I usually bring several guns to go shooting while there. This time I just used my families guns and ammo. We shot 10 different calibers/gauges and had over 15 guns on the tailgate of the trucks. With the heightened ammo/gun issues, I just didn’t want to take a chance of any misunderstanding of bringing out of state gear. The range we shoot at is open, free, no range officers (call your own cease fire) over 500yards, and had 2 State Park officers/Fish and game/Rangers??, and a couple of county sheriffs watching about 150 people have a great time. (It was the busiest day I have ever seen there) They did not harass anyone, just had a presence and scanned the group with big glasses. Although when they showed up about 15 cars left. I think if they wanted to they could have found several illegal arms in groups near us, but they didn’t cause a stir.

On a more ontopic item - I heard the clerk in the local walmart say that someone forgot to file an application and they could not sell ammo until they cleared some stuff with the DOJ there. Luckily we got out ammo on the 30th before the new year.

Overall it is not great there, but I still have more free public land to shoot on than I do in Texas. So I buy here, shoot there. I just have to watch and be sure I dont give reason to come chat with me.

Pawpaw wrote:

Liberty wrote:I'm not sure the 30rnd is an improvement, at least for non military combat situations. Darn things are just too big and get in the way. 15 and 20 seem ideal, but that is just me, YMMV.

I agree with you, but only for shooting from a bench. I pretty much always use a 20 round mag for that. In any other situation, I'll take the extra 10 rounds, please.

It's like they say, unless your swimming, there's no such thing as too much ammunition. I would prefer to have a couple extra mags. At the same time though, I find it a huge stretch to imagine a situation where an AR would be my choice for a defensive weapon, and needing more than a handful of rounds. A siege maybe?

At any rate, I don't want to make a case for the banners and common sensers. I'm just talking about my personal preferences.

In California they creates an ingredient that’s contradicting the Americans ways such as pouring a lot of illegals immigrants, keeping people being stoned while doping with marijuana for sure they should regulate ammunition because they knew that when these two ingredients once will be blend a lot of life (good people) will be wasted.

Elms wrote:In California they creates an ingredient that’s contradicting the Americans ways such as pouring a lot of illegals immigrants, keeping people being stoned while doping with marijuana for sure they should regulate ammunition because they knew that when these two ingredients once will be blend a lot of life (good people) will be wasted.

The wasted people are no big loss if we shut off the "free money" tap.