Sharpshooter

Hope you all have had a happy and safe Thanksgiving!

Sorry for the delay. Also, sorry for the poor quality of the pics. I'm not a good photographer. I appreciate any input you may have. Thanks!

Okay, I'm a relative newbie with the black rifle. I've used them a bit, a long time ago, but never had to monkey with repairing or adjusting them significantly. So here's my issue: I bought a new DPMS MOE model. Sighting in, it was shooting to the right by about 6 or 8 inches at around 50 yards. I cranked the rear sight (Magpul BUIS) all the way to the left and got it to hit about 1 or 2 inches to the right, still at 50 yards. So I took some masking tape, put a couple of pieces on the handguard at front and rear, set my combination square to give me a line near the center of the handguard, then marked it off on both left and right sides, front and back. Then I laid a straightedge on the marks and took some pics. As far as I can see, the front sight is way off to the right. If this was a bolt gun, I'd just drift the sight over and get it lined up. But I don't want to screw up this rifle before I've had a chance to really get to know it. So, any help you guys could offer would be most welcome. Pics below. I know the pics don't show the rear pieces of tape, but trust me, the straightedge is aligned properly.

I watched the video and I thought there was too much time between the push down and the shot fired. And I thought about it, for a couple of days. Then I realized that I was bringing my training into the scenario, the training that says "keep your f'ing cool, no matter what," and I thought again: that man on the ground may not have had the same kind of training I've had ... he may be like so many I had to deal with, the ones who were scared to death for a long time after they were assaulted. If that was the case, then he probably was in fear for his life. Hard to know, without being inside his head.

I agree with this, as long as we remember that you have to be ready, willing, and able to effectively USE that gun if necessary. Simply carrying it and showing it is not a guarantee of effectiveness. I know you didn't say that it was, I just think it's something that needs to be said.

God knows I loves me some vertical takeoffs. Ain't nothin' like watching an F4 Phantom hit the end of a 10,000 foot runway and just set on its ass. The ground shakes and that fucker goes straight up until its not only out of sight, you can't even hear it any more. But this film is spliced. The plane takes off then banks left. The landing gear is retracted. Then, in the next shot, the landing gear is still down. Is this the same aircraft, at the same time? Not sure, and the perspective from the camera makes it impossible to tell what's going on.

I've always loved watching the idiots with 4-wheel drive on their first(?) snow-covered road. They're all, "Watch this suckers, I can go and you can't!" Then they try to turn or stop. That's when they figure out that the laws of physics don't give a tinker's damn how much money they spent on their fancy trucks. Just because you can go doesn't mean you can whoa. The only downfall was having to write the accident report.

Outstanding!

I thought 98Z5V had a good point: read the article all the way through. So I did. I even went one better and read the Yale article all the way through. Here's what I came up with: The Politico article was written by Jon Stokes, Editor Emeritus at Ars Technica ezine. He suggests a federally issued license for possession of all semi-automatic firearms. Patterned after the NFA requirements, he believes any possessor should then be allowed to own/possess NFA items (machine guns, suppressors, etc.). That's all there is to it. The rest is explanations why this would be a good idea. Let's compare that to the article written by Egon D. Cohen & Kristina M. Johnson, contributors to Yale Law & Policy Review. They suggest a federally issued Restricted Firearms License for possession/ownership of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns plus all handguns. Patterned after the NFA requirements for the owner, then extended by requiring individual weapons to be licensed. The rest is explanations why this would be a good idea. And that's all there is to that. The differences? The Cohen & Johnson approach includes licensing individual weapons. The similarities? Each suggests a federal license for possessors/owners. My analysis is that these are functionally identical. Each creates a national registry of gun owners (no, not all gun owners, but certainly a large number of us). In my opinion, that's your first step down the rabbit hole to complete confiscation. Am I being paranoid? Am I being paranoid enough? Both articles were matters of opinion, not codified into bills. Each was preaching to the choir (both Politico and Yale are distinctly left-leaning organizations), so it's not surprising to me that the articles have so much in common. What does surprise me is hearing us debate which is better, and with such vehemence. So, which one to back? I choose None Of The Above. I'm still living in a country bound by laws. I may not like all of them, but I'm pretty happy with the overall system, and that system says you can't change the law except by votes in the legislature. Even then, those laws are subject to review by the courts. It's been a bumpy road but, so far, it's still the best one I've seen. When I see a law proposed in the legislature, or an opportunity to voice my opinion to the legislators, then I'll get fired up and do what I can. In the meantime, I'm only here for the beer!

Okay, so another newbie dumba$$ question. I've got a DPMS G2 .308 but I don't have the time or money to run magazine after magazine through it. My normal routine is to run 4 or 5 rounds, trying to get it sighted in (at 40 yards, I've got the Magpul BUIS all the way to the left and it's still grouping a couple of inches away from center), then giving up in disgust and breaking it down for cleaning. So, if I'm doing it this slowly, does it really need to run wet? If so, just for my understanding, why? What makes these things so different from my 1911s, my Browning Sweet 16s, my Remington 1100s, etc.? You get the idea. None of them needed to be soaked in oil to run. Why does this one need it? (Not that I'm arguing ... just wondering.)

What he said!

Sensible.

Not as bad as having someone who doesn't ever practice. When I was on the force (small town PD), we instituted required qualifications and had one guy show up with ammo so old it was glued to the cylinder, green gunk all over. I'd like to think those days are gone, but people are still people so I'm sure it still happens.

+1

Well, crap! I went to comment and found the comment period was closed. Seems it's a 30-day period, which began on 12/26/2017. If someone hears about some other viable way to comment, please post it.