Lane

I found this type at an estate sale at random years ago (the one in the picture is what I own). I didn't really "need" it for anything at the time; but it served me very well over the years. I believe everyone else can point you in a more useful direction. On the other hand. And "eyeglass cleaning" ultrasonic will fit the bolt itself just fine. And a a good number of brass cases. You can buy that particular one in the picture for $23 on eBay right now. It's not very large inside though... Can't fit a bolt carrier fully. Attached the MSDS for the cleaner I use. It doesn't really say much at all. My understanding is that it's a surfactant that allows the water molecules to slip by each other better. The water is what does the hammering in an ultrasonic; so they can go faster and hit harder with better lube. BlitzCleanerConcentrate.pdf

I use almost pure water in mine. With a very "simple" soapy solution "made for ultrasonic cleaners". I'm not sure what one would use in an engine shop. Even pure water is fine for my current use. The "heat" in the water can't be above 212 anyway; that would be boiling. But it does get steamy... Quite warm to the touch. (Ok; maybe with cleaning solutions... But not by a LOT.)

This is how I use mine. Run it a LOT. For long periods of time; just keep setting the timer. The water gets really hot; you know it's working.... Hot water makes it work better anyway.

I'm really thinking about building an ultrasonic all of the sudden... I know they work. And I could verify that construction by taking apart the one I have here. I was just running it a few minutes ago. I've got some stainless steel sheet; but there might be a cheap off the shelf tank that might be better than trying to fab something for that. Stainless is all I've ever seen for that tank component though. Got a bunch of other mad scientist stuff to post about. Just holding off until it's actually infallible.

I already use one; but not for anything "dirty". I might "need" to obtain something new though... Actually; now that you made me think of that. I could actually make one. I have a bunch of those ultrasonic transducers. I could take apart the one I have to check; but I'm pretty sure they are simply glued to the stainless steel "case" that holds the water. Damnit! Pretty sure there is a pair of transducers; spaced out precisely to match the same wavelength so they work in tandem.

I was going to ask the same. "Which one did you use"? How large is the basket/internal capacity? Do you clean brass with it too?

While looking into a new project; I came across a reasonable solution for making non-corrosive priming compound; EPH 20. Sure enough; the same W. Marshall Thompson seems to be involved. There are a number of videos on rumble and youTube showing various parts of the process. None if it appears to be terribly difficult or dangerous (though I did read somewhere that it's not entirely out of the ordinary to set one off when seating reloaded centerfire primers). The list of ingredients can mostly be obtained easily. The one catch is synthesizing your own lead hypophosphite, from lead nitrate and sodium (or calcium) hypophosphite. The other ingredients are (more) lead nitrate, ground glass, and nitrocellulose. The primer is activated as a final step by dropping 50/50 distilled water and alcohol on the finished primer. It will take me a bit to obtain these chemicals and get started myself; but I've watched the videos linked from the website, and overall it seems simple enough if you have the equipment and some basic chemistry experience. https://www.aardvarkreloading.com/eph20.html The new project for me, in case you are wondering; is reloading .41 swiss rimfire. Finding a viable method for reloading rimfire brass with non-corrosive primers make it a lot more attractive; and I'm happy to practice again on .22lr before I get to that point (I never wanted to shoot the corrosive .22lr primers I made in a gun I still use and appreciate).

No they did not. They doubled down on the stupidity. In an extraordinary session following the Bruen decision, called under a Message of Necessity; NYS legislature drafted and passed more new laws which includes fully banning the sale of all body armor (where the old law only banned the sale of soft body armor) to anyone not in Law Enforcement or other similar class: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/S51001 Section 11 amends penal law section 270.20, replacing the former defined term "body vest" with a new definition of the term "body armor," which includes any product that is a personal protective body covering intended to protect against gunfire, and would include hard body armor. Regarding the gel blaster announcement from the NYPD... I found the relevant NYC administrative code § 10-131. Firearms: b. Air pistols and air rifles; selling or possessing. 1. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, offer to sell or have in such person's possession any air pistol or air rifle or similar instrument in which the propelling force is a spring or air, except that the sale of such instruments if accompanied by delivery to a point without the city, and possession for such purpose, shall not be unlawful if such per son shall have secured an annual license from the police commissioner of the city authorizing such sale and possession. That really does encompass the majority of children's toys. I haven't used one; but the reported range of a gel blaster is a mere 25 yards. A super soaker uses a propelling force of air. Most Nerf darts are also propelled by air. Purely spring propulsion is typically used in actual toys. I can't come up with even a weak BB gun that's not considered Spring-Air, which would run afoul with the air propelling force clause anyway. Australia went this route banning all sorts of toys. It is rather absurd to me... Who felt it was necessary to outlaw toys that would actually get kids to go outside and play?

I was going to let this one slide; but the Twitter comment section is just too juicy. And fret not; if you obtain a license, you can possess air guns in NYC (though, I'm not sure they actually issue those licenses). Without a rifled barrel; is that actually an air rifle? Under that same logic; aren't Nerf guns also illegal? And probably squirt guns too?

I didn't realize how much things changed over just a few months (yet again). I took a trip over to gunbroker after I posted; sure enough, the cheapest CCI 41s were $150 per 1,000 along with significant additional fees for shipping. How long before we hit the $0.20 per primer mark?

I paid $95 per 1,000 for CCI 41 back in November when I saw some in stock (but was stuck with a two box limit). All those options at TargetSportsUSA are $120 per 1,000 (plus you have to buy 5,000); but they do have a selection... And it says free shipping. They are in fact available if you want to pay.

$140 a box isn't out of the question BR-4 primers these days. I bought a box more than six months ago from Brownells, and they were $125 before Hazmat, and shipping. They also had a box limit of 1 for that product; so I couldn't buy any more to help spread the fees around.

This is what you have to go through to get a .gov TS Clearance. This is one bit that really surprised me.... What in the world are they going to be taking pictures of? Am I to expect to find police, sheriffs, or private investigators crawling around in the woods near my house? Do to need to do extra checks when I go outside to do ordinary target shooting at home since there might be humans trespassing on the land? This is a very curious admission by a county sheriff. I suppose I could see that being "useful" in some way if one lived in a city. But that kind of behavior absolutely doesn't fly in a secluded location. Should I expect that my vehicle will be followed regularly? Singled out for reasons during that 6 month window of application processing? Also; that 6 months "average" is absolutely not realistic in very many circumstances. During, and post-COVID; that time is known to have extended well over a year for many licensing agencies/processes. Some surpassed the two year mark even. That's a lot of tip-toeing around; and wondering who's in the deep woods around here... Here is the rest of that "statement" by the Albany County Sheriff; Craig Apple. And one more tid-bit from the same. https://www.news10.com/news/what-changes-are-coming-to-new-yorks-concealed-carry/ “You have to have great integrity. You are a good character. You’re certainly not a criminal or if you were it was some stupid thing you did 15 years ago. Many times judges won’t look past 10,” explains Sheriff Apple about some of the qualifications, “so again, the judge could look at those qualities and look at your character and say, ‘I would have given you this and restricted it but now I don’t think I’m gonna.”

I had been looking for this to better qualify my last post; but couldn't remember where I saw it (I've had a huge number of browser tabs open trying to get all the of the components to fully apply for a pistol permit now that I have the training class completed). It was on a ny.gov site actually. Here is the text (from the horses mouth) posted inline, with some emphasis that is my own. Link below the text in case you want to verify it, or see how it evolves later on (click on the Frequency Asked Questions section). What was the United States Supreme Court’s ruling about New York State’s “concealed carry” law? On June 23, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling struck down a more than 100 year old law that required an individual to demonstrate “proper cause” in order to be able to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm. According to the ruling, New York State’s existing law has been deemed unconstitutional because it gives too much discretion to the State and its licensing officers in determining “proper cause.” So, is New York’s law overturned? Can I carry a concealed weapon without a permit? Nothing in the Supreme Court decision allows anyone to immediately legally carry a concealed firearm in New York State without obtaining the currently-required permits or licenses. This also means you cannot legally carry a concealed firearm outside of your home in New York State if you only have a license to possess a gun in your home. What does this ruling mean for license or permit application processes? As of June 23, the application process to obtain a license or permit to carry a firearm in New York State is unchanged. Though it is ultimately State law that dictates how firearm licenses are issued, the State has designated the application processes to counties (or in some cases, cities). Those who want to change their permit status to get an “unrestricted conceal carry” permit must file an application with their designated local licensing authority. For example, in New York City, this would be the NYPD. What happens next? The U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the State of New York will be able to continue to require licenses for concealed firearms, so long as the license requirements clearly lay out who can carry, where they can (and cannot) carry, and the types of firearms residents might have access to. The State can also restrict the carrying of firearms in sensitive locations and otherwise restrict the manner of carrying firearms. What actions is New York State taking in response to this ruling? It is Governor Hochul’s top priority to ensure that New Yorkers are safe and kept out of danger. Governor Hochul’s Administration is working closely with the State legislature, county and local leaders, as well as legal experts, to ensure that the State enacts laws and create rules that conform with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision while also ensuring that the ability to access or use firearms is restricted and carefully regulated. How does New York State’s firearm licensing system currently work? What is likely to change? A firearm license is a State-regulated license, and nothing in the Bruen ruling suggests that the State does not have the authority to issue licenses or determine licensing requirements. In New York State, licenses are often issued by county licensing entities. It is possible that this process could change moving forward. Currently, an applicant must decide what type of license they would like to apply for. The most common types of firearm licenses are: (a) Carry concealed (b) Possess on Premises and (c) Possess/Carry During Employment. There is a possibility that these categories might change as a result of the Bruen ruling. At this time, the cost to obtain different licenses varies by county (or in some cases, city), as does the time it takes to obtain a license. At this time, the average processing time for license applications is six (6) months. Prior to June 23, 2022, in order to be eligible to have a firearms license, an individual in New York State must have demonstrated that they are: A New York State resident; at least 21 years old; have no prior felony or serious offense convictions; be of “good moral character,”; and have a legally recognized reason for wanting to possess or carry a firearm. As of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling, only the proper cause requirement to conceal carry is no longer applicable and ordinary citizens are deemed to have a self-defense basis for applying for a concealed carry permit. https://www.ny.gov/services/how-obtain-firearms-license

Went to a pistol safety class that is accepted by the county that I live in. The class itself is just a basic introduction to the laws, basic pistol safety, a visual tour of how to clear common jams, and some explanation about stance. There's really not much to it since you legally can't touch a pistol in the state of NY without first having a license (though some counties make you pay for a pistol in full BEFORE applying for a license; making the dealer hold it until the license is issued or denied). That too was a topic of discussion; "why in the world does NY issue pistol license to people who are likely to have zero experience with a pistol (unless they had experience from out of state, military, or illegally)?". Obviously the upcoming changes to the law were a part of the discussion; though very little is known about what will happen next. One thing that stood out to me; is that as of today, nothing has changed for the most part. The vast majority of NY counties have decided to wait on lower courts to address the Supreme Court ruling. More interesting still in my mind; NY maintains the being "of good moral character" requirement, as well as "concerning whom no good cause exists for the denial of the license" which to my mind are the exact same type of totally arbitrary and undefined requirements to obtain a pistol permit that NYSRPA v. Bruen struck down when invalidating the requirement of showing proper-cause above and beyond ordinary citizens to carry concealed. Only; these other parameters apply to the state issuing a permit in the first place, and not regarding concealed carry for self defense once one already has said permit. Essentially; NY appears to wish to remain may issue on the grounds that these other requirements are a necessity to obtain a pistol permit? Sure, they aren't denying for self defense because of the proper-cause not being established; they are denying the whole permit to buy or own a pistol in the first place instead. My assumption is that it will need to be fought in court separately in the future. I will still be pursuing this process to see how it works out for me. But there remains a number of things not addressed by the Supreme Court, that NY appears to be flaunting to deny any applicant the pistol permit in the first place. Of what value would a "good moral character" clause be in a shall issue permitting scheme? The guidance from Albany County appears to state they "think" they are allowed to remain "may issue" outside of the specific rejections under proper-cause that the Supreme Court struck down. Obviously it's still a bit early since the 2nd circuit hasn't changed anything yet; but that's what I'm seeing in terms of language and guidance by the counties so far. Here's a little quote from the Albany county sheriff; and this is well known to be the truth (they certainly will be calling your ex wife and asking her option; luckily I don't have one): During that time (it takes to process the application), law enforcement will go through nearly everything in a person’s history: from a credit check to speaking with friends and family. “We send investigators out. We do neighborhood checks. We take a few photos and put it in the background check. We talk to former spouses, former girlfriends, current girlfriends, current spouses, whatever the case may be.”

Still reading the full text of the court opinion; didn't want to skip a single word. It sure is juicy. Since before the decision was released; the powers that be have been planning behind the scenes ways to counter a loss in the Supreme Court. Sounds like they are planning to bring the state legislature back for an extraordinary session in July to drop even more gun legislation on us (like amending the failed body armor sales ban, but also whatever they can do the change the pistol permitting laws). “This decision isn’t just reckless, it’s reprehensible,” Hochul said. “It’s not what New Yorkers want. And we should have the right of determination of what we want to do in terms of our gun laws in our state.” ~~~~~ https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/23/new-york-hochul-supreme-court-gun-00041715 Don't have too many details yet; but what I did read there was a short list of ways to make it more arduous, time consuming, and expensive to obtain a pistol permit in NY (as if it wasn't already bad enough). Going have to have to disagree with Hochul here too; this IS what some New Yorker's want.... After exploding crime rates following the pandemic and bail reform; who else is here to protect state residents and their families?

We got a win with NYSRPA v. Bruen at least. Very interested to see what NYS does to counter it; and how long the new process will take to get a pistol permit. I personally just signed up for a safety class, and plan to apply for a pistol permit the moment new guidelines are implemented (whenever that is; certainly could be a while).

In some places votes can and do count. Not around these parts though. Some kind of accountability outside of those other systems seems useful for that reason. Getting a case up to the federal supreme court might take years; or simply be rejected when it arrives. The internal affairs of states are even more absurd than at the federal level; with almost no checks and balances when one party rules. NY is notoriously corrupt historically; modern history appears no different. The federal level isn't too much better off with a supreme court that continues to opine on party lines for the most part (seems to me that federal and state powers are relatively well separated in the law; but not so much in court opinions). Hard to believe one could ask for; and actually find an impartial judge these days. Not sure what to expect with NYSRPA v. Bruen though. I have an expectation regarding the supreme court; but in NYS wants to counter that immediately. Within hours is the language broadcast publicly. Then it's easily possible there's another 5 years or more before the courts even attempt to reconcile those state issues again. And presumably; in a very narrow ruling since that's what the supreme court likes to do. A little "oopsie" in legislation is set to make it a felony to posses a muzzle loading rifle in NY State; a mere 10 days from now. No recourse in sight. Need to ship them out of state to remain a law abiding citizen? Or turn them in? I'd rather destroy them; but that's neither here nor there.... A felony is no laughing matter.

What about potato cannons; or flare guns?

I have to watch this even a third time now... This really did make my day though.

What is an "extra check" for 18-21 year olds that want to buy a gun? What are they checking? Juvenile records? Your High School transcripts? Are they going to call your Mom first? It still sounds better than the rotten garbage NY just shoved through in the same vein. New York's idea of raising the age fully to 21 for semi-automatic rifles also came with a nice helping of "may issue". So that "extra check" for New Yorkers is actually at the whim of law enforcement, judges, etc.; (depending on county in NY). And you still have to be over 21 in the first place; so the "extra check" we got is only for "older adults". Washington state has been trying to one up NY and CA for a while. I'm not really sure who is ahead anymore. The coast of Washington state really is beautiful. The rest of the state too.

To be frank; I would certainly be laughing if this were another state. Unfortunately; it's just an embarrassment to live in the same state as some of these bill sponsors. I went to a few gun stores today, and overheard some of a phone conversations about "our future" here in NY. The employees were instructed not to give legal advice on the phone; but clearly things like muzzleloading rifles being banned, and how future licensing is going to work were popular concerns. I've also NEVER seen these stores so flush with guns.... Almost every rack was full; overflowing even. There were dozens of guns laying on the counters, and parts of the shop even blocked of with more stacks of new-in-box items. Demand is through the roof (not surprising). It's almost like the Dems want to sell more guns?? Even plate carriers were hanging up for sale which is unusual for these shops.... I had a conversation about this with one of the old timers that hunts on the mountain here. This man is in his 80s now (though he doesn't look like it). Despite being a member of a rod and gun club, and rather politically aware; he had absolutely no idea that the definition of a firearm in NY was changing. There was almost no local reporting on the majority of the bills that just passed. A lot like the SAFE Act; this got rammed through the legislature without much warning. Took the time to scrub through the NY state senate hearings (the nearly 9-1/2 hour session) and mark off the starting times for the most jarring discussions. While they are the same video, when you click play; each one starts at a different bill as annotated. In short; the public displays of ignorance from bill sponsors and supporters was off the charts. It's just so "strange" how representative from downstate (NYC area) are so uninformed, and yet act confident and steadfast in layering on the stupidity. I was impressed with a few of the Senators from western NY for grilling sponsors about real issues; but even confronted directly about problems, there was absolutely zero appetite to delay passage of the bills to fix said issues. For those that don't want to watch much legislative nonsense; I left one of my favorite bits as the first video location (part of the semi-automatic licensing discussion) Senator Thomas asking, "What is a 22"? S9456: Definition of firearm S9458: License for semi-automatic rifles S4116A: Microstamping S9407B: Body Armor This last video is regarding NYSRPA v. Bruen. Hochul plans to have a response within HOURS of the supreme court decision about New York residents potentially gaining the ability to obtain and carry pistols without the current arbitrary may issue licensing scheme. She is already on record saying she has no problem passing unconstitutional laws, simply to let them get fought out in court at a later date. If only there were some kind of system in place to punish lawmakers and elected officials who purposely author and sign bills they know to be unconstitutional. There's simply no accountability; and that's not just a NY state thing.

Apparently they "found out" about the loopholes already; and are hoping/planning to ban all types of body armor in the future (plates and plate carriers). If the current law bans "7 layers of fabric"; am I in jeopardy if I wear layers of winter clothing? Or seven T-shirts?

I wish it was only that law that was passed... And yes; you're still allowed to buy plates and plate carriers. Body armor in NY state is defined as having 7 or more layers of fabric. Neither plates, nor plate carriers qualify as body armor; even after they passed a new law (body armor was already illegal to wear during the commission of a crime). There was a package of 10 bills, all signed at the same time; and rammed through the state legislature. I took the time to watch the actual proceedings and it was disturbing to say the least. The whole video is almost 9-1/2 hours long. The relevant parts are during the middle of the Controversial Calendar. I had to scrub around to find them all. Below is a link to the Press Release, and relevant bill explanations pasted below that. The two that stuck out to me as the very worst are S.9456/A.10504 An act to amend the penal law, in relation to defining firearm and S.9458/A.10503 Bars Purchase of Semiautomatic Rifles by Anyone Under Age 21 by Requiring a License. The changes to definition of "firearm" now would outlaw muzzle loading rifles, flare guns, and even power nailers that use RAMSET and the like (since licenses will not be issued for anything in the new firearm category). Furthermore, State Senator Luis Sepúlveda who sponsored the bill said, "I am honored Governor Kathy Hochul has signed into law my bill S9456, which changes the definition of firearms to include "Ghost Guns". Ghost Guns are, unequivocally, a big component of the increasing gun violence that is plaguing our communities.." This bill never had anything to do with Ghost Guns... We already have other laws that cover both unfinished and unserialized frames and receivers. He doesn't even understand what the intent of the bill was; and that is even more clear during the debates on the bill. Requiring a license to purchase semi-automatics applies to everyone; it's not simply raising the age. It also requires the full process of the existing pistol permitting requirements. In short; time consuming and expensive process. That also means future semi-automatic rifle purchases will also become "may issue" in the state of NY. If the current pistol permitting timeline applies; those licenses may take more than a year to obtain depending on which county a resident applies from. https://www.nysenate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/brian-kavanagh/governor-hochul-signs-landmark-legislative-package-strengthen Raising the Age to Purchase Semiautomatic Rifles Legislation S.9458/A.10503 requires individuals to obtain a license prior to purchasing a semiautomatic rifle. Under preexisting New York State law, individuals must be 21 years or older to acquire a gun license. Banning Body Armor Legislation S.9407-B/A.10497 makes it illegal to purchase and sell body vests for anyone who is not engaged in an eligible profession. Eligible professions include law enforcement officers and other professions, which will be designated by the Department of State in consultation with other agencies. It also requires that all body vest sales are completed in-person. Strengthening the Red Flag Law Legislation S.9113-A/A.10502 expands who may file an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) petition to include health care practitioners who have examined an individual within the last six months. It amends the firearm licensing statute to ensure that mental health practitioners' reports on potentially harmful individuals are considered closely when determining whether to issue a firearm license. It also requires police and district attorneys to file ERPO petitions when they have acquired credible information that an individual is likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm—either to themselves or others. It requires State Police and the Municipal Police Training Council to create and disseminate policies and procedures to identify when an ERPO petition may be warranted. Microstamping Legislation S.4116-A/A.7926-A requires the Division of Criminal Justice Services to certify or decline to certify that microstamping-enabled pistols are technologically viable and if certified as viable, to establish programs and processes for the implementation of such technology; and establishes the crime of the unlawful sale of a non-microstamping-enabled firearm. Microstamping is an innovative ammunition-marking technique that marks bullets and cartridge cases with a unique fingerprint each time a firearm is discharged. This allows investigators to link bullets and casings recovered at crime scenes to a specific gun and potentially other crimes. Closing Loopholes Legislation S.9456/A.10504 expands the definition of a "firearm" to include any weapon not defined in the Penal Law that is designed or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by action of an explosive. This is intended to capture firearms that have been modified to be shot from an arm brace, which are evading our current definitions of firearms and rifles. Legislation S.9229-A/A.10428-A eliminates the grandfathering of large capacity ammunition feeding devices that were lawfully possessed prior to the enactment of the Safe Act or manufactured prior to 1994. Legislation S.89-B/A.6716-A creates the crimes of making a threat of mass harm and aggravated making a threat of mass harm. Enhancing Information Sharing Legislation S.4970-A/A.1023-A requires enhanced reporting by law enforcement to the state and federal gun databases. Agencies must report seized or recovered guns to the criminal gun clearinghouse; participate in the ATF's collective data sharing program; and enter the make, model, caliber, and serial number of the gun into the national crime information center. The law also requires gun dealers to enact uniform security and reporting standards. It prohibits those under 18 and not accompanied by a parent from entering certain locations of a gun dealer's premises and requires training for all employees on conducting firearm, rifle, and shotgun transfers, including identification of and response to illegal purchases. It also requires State Police to conduct inspections of gun dealers every three years. Improving Response and Reporting of Hateful and Threatening Social Media Content Legislation S.4511-A/A.7865-A requires social media networks in New York to provide a clear and concise policy regarding how they would respond to incidents of hateful conduct on their platform and maintain easily accessible mechanisms for reporting hateful conduct on those platforms Legislation S.9465/A.10501 creates a new Task Force on Social Media and Violent Extremism. Housed in the Office of the Attorney General, the Task Force will study and investigate the role of social media companies in promoting and facilitating violent extremism and domestic terrorism online. This robust set of new laws, designed to provide immediate enhanced protections and developed and approved in partnership with Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Speaker Carl Heastie, builds on two Executive Orders issued in the immediate wake of the Buffalo shooting.

It's a lot crazier than that actually. A GB is 1024 megabytes. So that's 204.8 of those 5 MB hard drives per GB. Multiplied times 32 to meet the size of storage in the 32 GB phone; and that is 6,553.6; might as well round up to the next full hard drive at 6,554. A semi trailer can hold 26 pallets. So that's 252.07 semi trucks with 26 hard drives in the trailer of each one. Or; I guess a decently long train.