Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: BPD Knows Me Well

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    Greetings everyone,

    I was referred by a good friend of mine from Eagle. Thank you DS and I hope you and your family aredoing well.

    About 5 days a week people can see me walking about 4 miles down the greenbelt starting from willow lane park. If you see my red truck parked in the shade with militia stickers on it, know that I am out promoting the cause.

    I carry a 9mm Ruger P95DC openly holstered. I sometimes get looks and a few questions and the BPD has become accustomed to me and just waives as they bike on by. I have several purposes for doing so. I want to remind Idaho of who we are; a freedom loving open carry state. I also want people to become accustomed to seeing an armed individual walking around town and be encouraged to do so themselves if they are so inclined.

    In 1 year I plan to stage the First Muster for the Idaho Citizens' Constitutional Militia not here in Boise, but probably close by. PR will be the biggest challenge, that is, getting people to understand, and even feel comforted that, a group of law abiding, gun carrying Idahoans is organizing as exclusive advocates for the PEOPLE of Idaho. I have a tough task to accomplish, but I realize that opencarry.org is a vital ally in this regard.

    Anyway, just wanted to say hi to everyone.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    259

    Post imported post

    Very nice to see you onboard for the cause and welcome to the forum!

    I used to carry a P89DC, but it was just ridiculously heavy. Switched to a Glock 19.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    I've had my Ruger for years and never got another handgun. Why? Because I can find no other gun that's blissfully bereft of safety devices. I say there is nothing safe about a gun that doesn't fire exactly when you need it to. It seems a handgun can no longer be acquired without these dangerous "safeties". S&W is one of the most flagrant offenders, designing their guns with multiple safety devices as if they want to make sure their product is unable to fire. And good luck finding a gunsmith willing to disable those safeties for you. Trigger safeties, grip safeties, key locks, trigger blocks....they're likely to get somebody killed!

    Until gun manufacturers relearn the KISS concept, I'll stick with my Ruger.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , Nevada, USA
    Posts
    343

    Post imported post

    Rugers the only gun's berift of Safety devices?

    Have you ever picked up a Glock?

    Your finger is your only manual safety on it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Moses Lake, Washington, USA
    Posts
    172

    Post imported post

    Pffft. Same with a HK USP, if you get the right variant.

    Variant 3, 4, or 7. :P
    Yes they do have a slide safety in the magwell though. Just turn it off and throw out the key.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    The trigger safety, that little lever in the middle of the trigger, is yet another mechanical device on the Glock that could fail at the worst possible time.

    In the Army I was a 13 Mike, operator/driver for the multiple launch rocket system, a tracked vehicle that could launch up to 12 rockets, 6 per pod. It was very expensive, had lots of moving parts, and nearly half of them broke down during every FTX. It was embarrasing.

    At the time, my unit was field testing the HIMARS. In fact, we were the only battery in the U.S. Army to have these experimental launchers at the time. It was a single pod (six rockets) mounted on a Hemmit chassis (4 axel truck). It was much simpler, could be flown into a forward area and complete a fire mission in minutes, and most importantly, didn't break down so easily because it had fewer parts.

    I like my Ruger for the same reason I like the HIMARS. And the Ruger, unlike the Glock, is truly bereft of any type of "safety". (oops, did I just start a war?)

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Eagle, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    Eh, I'm a HUGE Ruger fun, but I'll have to agree with the others here...there are other safe choices out there. How bout that trasfer bar in your Ruger? An added safety feature doesn't always imply making the gun more likely to fail..in fact, it may keep your manhood in tact.

    I like the basic principle of fewer parts, the better, but at the same time it is equally important to me that my gun DOESN'T go off when I don't want it to as it is for it to fire when I want it to.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    259

    Post imported post

    Have you ever picked up a Glock? The trigger safety has no interference with the operation of the gun and functions independently of the trigger and firing mechanism. You could knock out the pin and remove the trigger safety if you wanted to and the gun would still fire.

    We're talking about handguns here, not missile systems.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    Ok, so we establish that the Glock does have a "safety" feature, but now I'm confused. The trigger functions without that little lever? What's it for then? My original point is still intact. Ruger doesn't have any "safeties" to disable. It's simplicity is a feature that appeals to me. I may end up getting a Glock someday because they (and Taurus)make some of the best choices for concealed carry. My fat Ruger doesn't conceal all that well. But all guns have their weaknesses. Another area in which Rugerbeats Glock?....Rugers shoot reloads just fine.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    259

    Post imported post

    idahomilitia wrote:
    Ok, so we establish that the Glock does have a "safety" feature, but now I'm confused. The trigger functions without that little lever? What's it for then? My original point is still intact. Ruger doesn't have any "safeties" to disable. It's simplicity is a feature that appeals to me. I may end up getting a Glock someday because they (and Taurus)make some of the best choices for concealed carry. My fat Ruger doesn't conceal all that well. But all guns have their weaknesses. Another area in which Rugerbeats Glock?....Rugers shoot reloads just fine.
    It is there to prevent snags in the trigger from firing the gun. Likewise it also does not have enough mass to fire the gun if dropped. Similarly if the hammer is back on my Ruger and I drop it, I am willing to bet that at a certain distance the mass of the trigger is enough to fire the weapon.

    Ruger may not have safeties to manually disable, nor to Glocks. Having said that, in a true combat situation you won't have time to manually clock the hammer. Meaning between two shots, your trigger is going to go from 16lbs to 2lbs WITHIN ONE SHOT. Chances are you are so in the moment you forget about this and instead shoot low.

    No one said you can't shoot reloads through a Glock, it is only against the manufacturer's recommendations as part of their liability, CYA. Nothing is stopping you from shooting reloads in a Glock so I don't see what your problem is. The only problem comes from when people use LEAD CAST bullets, the polygonal barrel builds up with lead fouling and causes dangerously high pressures, and THAT is why they fail.

    Whoever is telling you this stuff is very misinformed.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    Brian, I can see you're a huge Glock fan.

    If you want to talk about combat situations, Ruger was awarded a contract for 5000 to be shipped overseas.

    http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...-Industry.html

    Glocks notoriously have a low tolerance for reloads. I've not only read this, but I experienced it firsthand. I shot several precision reloads from a personal friend of mine in Wyoming who has reloaded for decades and knows his stuff. There was nothing wrong with these fmj rounds as reloads go, but about every 5th round caused a malfunction. The only time my Ruger jammed is when I was new at reloading and not seating the bullet correctly. Since I became better, it shoots reloads just fine.

    Everything else you said is correct. Ruger has a long and difficult DA trigger pull that is sure queer the aim on your firstshot if you don't first cock the hammer. As far as dropping it on a hard surface? I'll try to remember not to do this because I'm sure you're right.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    259

    Post imported post

    idahomilitia wrote:
    Brian, I can see you're a huge Glock fan.

    If you want to talk about combat situations, Ruger was awarded a contract for 5000 to be shipped overseas.

    http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...-Industry.html

    Glocks notoriously have a low tolerance for reloads. I've not only read this, but I experienced it firsthand. I shot several precision reloads from a personal friend of mine in Wyoming who has reloaded for decades and knows his stuff. There was nothing wrong with these fmj rounds as reloads go, but about every 5th round caused a malfunction. The only time my Ruger jammed is when I was new at reloading and not seating the bullet correctly. Since I became better, it shoots reloads just fine.

    Everything else you said is correct. Ruger has a long and difficult DA trigger pull that is sure queer the aim on your firstshot if you don't first cock the hammer. As far as dropping it on a hard surface? I'll try to remember not to do this because I'm sure you're right.
    Well surely that is nothing when you compare the 105 countries and thousands of agencies who have adopted Glock.


    Any number of things could have caused these malfunctions, but were they FTF or FTE? Because each would have their own issues in relation to the round being fired. That being said, there is no arguing that any reload will increase the chance of a jam in any firearm, including the only time my 19 has ever jammed.

    Regardless, I have never seen any firearm jam every five rounds, regardless of the type of ammunition being used, and I very strongly suspect that this is attributed to an improper grip on the Glock's light polymer frame resulting in "limp wristing". As a result the recoil causes the spent brass to slide down the breech face and jam in an FTF before the round can be ejected.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    For the record,I think the Glock is a superb gun. I just have my preferrences is all.

    CPT James Ambrose



  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    idahomilitia wrote:
    I've had my Ruger for years and never got another handgun. Why? Because I can find no other gun that's blissfully bereft of safety devices. I say there is nothing safe about a gun that doesn't fire exactly when you need it to. It seems a handgun can no longer be acquired without these dangerous "safeties". S&W is one of the most flagrant offenders, designing their guns with multiple safety devices as if they want to make sure their product is unable to fire. And good luck finding a gunsmith willing to disable those safeties for you. Trigger safeties, grip safeties, key locks, trigger blocks....they're likely to get somebody killed!

    Until gun manufacturers relearn the KISS concept, I'll stick with my Ruger.
    I hate to be the first one to mention this ( ). But there's a strangely reliable yet ruggedly-good-looking type of gun known as a revolver. They come in different calibers and barrel lengths, but they have one thing in common: they don't have safeties. They come highly recommended by people such as John Wayne and others ("others" being defined as anybody who owns one). You may click the link below to see a sample of these remarkable firearms.

    http://www.rossiusa.com/products/pro...ils.cfm?id=141

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    As I said, all guns have their drawbacks.

    Revolvers either have to be cocked or have a long DA pull

    Revolvers are difficult to conceal because of their shape

    Revolvers carry less ammunition, and reloading in a hot zone, even with a speedloader, is more difficult.

    But revolvers do have the best record for fewest malfunctions, and as an added bonus, brass recovery is much easier too.



  16. #16
    Guest

    Post imported post

    First, Welcome Mr. OP.

    Second, I had my P95DC till I sold it Friday. No problems with it whatsoever. If it was in a holster, There was NO worrys about it going off by accident. Its the best gun Ive had to date, and I was sorry to see it go.

    But the Wife said I had to sell one before I get new one. Funny thing is the new gun is her new Kahr P9.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Another gun with NO safeties. Like, None!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    Another good thing about Glocks is that they are more accessory friendly than my Ruger. But that's the way most autoloaders are now. My next gun may be a Glock or something like it, but never a Kahr...I've had enough of handguns with fat slides, and the Kahr is boxy looking, and I admit my infatuation with sexy looking guns.

    I also think caliber is important, that is, to match what available in abundance. ICCM members are urged to get a rifle that chambers .223/5.56 and a pistol that chambers 9mm because that's what our military uses, so surplus ammo is easy to come by. If things really go down the tubes, you're going to find yourself running out of .357 SIG very quickly!

    But you're right about the Ruger...it's reliability is legendary and it's affordable so that poorer people can afford to defend themselves. I'm not sure what I'll get for my next gun, but I feel like defying the Borg.

    "Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated into the Glock collective."

    We'll see.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    caldwell, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    im not into the doom and gloom, I dont think Idahoans have anything to worry about.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ID/NC, , USA
    Posts
    31

    Post imported post

    I am from Idaho and am currently an active duty US Marine. I agree 5.56 and 9mm are decent rounds, and the military does use them. The problem with using the same rounds as the military is in SHTF scenarios, they may not be as easy to come by as you think. Military ammo dumps are almost exclusively located near large military bases. The Idaho guard, reserve units, Mtn. Home, and the site are the only places military ammo is stored in Id (that I am aware of). If a large scale scenario hits and the military needs more ammo, they are going to aquire all the ammo they can from local sourses. Now where are you going to get yours from?

    I suggest having some 5.56 and 9mm weapons in your unit, as well as other common rounds. A few 7.62 rifles for increased firepower, a few .300 ultra mags for long range, .40 and .45 for pistols, ect. Idaho civilians have a good supply of ammunition, and gun stores are not hard to come by. Non-military calibers will most likely be far easier to come by in the long run.

    Idahomilitia, on a side note I will be contacting you in a while regarding the militia.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Boise, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    USMC,

    Thank you for your response. That's some wise counsel coming from someone with experience. On my website I make suggestions in regard to caliber but leave it to members to choose their own battle rifle and sidearm in the best tradition of the militia; minutemen bring their own guns. The reason I suggest a common caliber such as 5.56 NATO is because I will be marshalling a reserve deposit of ammunition and the more calibers I have, the more expensive that can get. I've been paying attention to the markets. Because of the war, 5.56 and 7.62 are harder to come by and therefore more expensive. I hope the fighting stops soon and the market becomes flooded with surplus ammo sold dirt cheap. That will be my opportunity to stock up.

    Rem .223 has always been way overpriced as 5.56 FMJ performs suberbly and feeds better because of the more rounded tip. I found the soft tip 55 grain by ultramax works great as well for this purpose. I admit my prejudice against the AK47, I don't believe it to be accurate over long distances and it's harder to carry large quantities of ammo. I will likely always be a 5.56 fan, the only exception is that I hate the M249 SAW which, I believe, replaced a superior MG. The M-60 firing the 7.62x45 is a very intimidating gun that can pelt targets at 500 meters, the SAW is like a mosquito sting in comparison and lacks the intimidation factor. If you get the chance, check out the M-60E4 which can fire 15k rounds between barrel changes. I hope the military sees the wisdom of adopting this MG again.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7cJa6JKS8I

    CPT James Ambrose

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •