0zzy
Member
Better and lighter trigger makes sure I don't hit the bus full of nuns and school kids behind the BG
I'm thinking just the opposite, if you need a hair trigger to successfully defend yourself, perhaps more trigger time in training is required.
self defense gun that is hard to shoot.I am always surprised when I read that people want a self defense gun that is hard to shoot. Way I figure it, they either have not had enough training or are afraid they can't keep their finger off the trigger or both.
If I pull my gun, I am ready to kill. Not wing, not scare, kill if need to.
If I put my finger on the trigger than i AM going to kill. There is no reason for my finger to be on the trigger if not then.
If I am going to kill, then I want the best possible advantage to get me and loved ones out of the situation (that I pray never comes up) alive and unharmed.
If that means smoothing out my gun action, I am doing it and have done it.
The last thing on my mind is worry about a jury. That saying "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" may be a way overused cliche, but happens to be very sound words to live by - literally. I am trained, I have practiced, practiced, and practiced some more, and I am not going to rely on this mystical adrenaline rush. I am going to rely on drilled instinct and a smooth, 5 pound (or so) crisp clean trigger.
My opinion is if you feel you need a heavy trigger because you don't think you will be able to keep from pulling it, then perhaps training is needed.
If experience has taught us all anything, then it is that very very few people change their minds. I am not trying to do so. I, like southcoast points out, just expressing a different opinion, which is what all of this really is, opinions.
Doc
It seems to me that this thread has just about ran it's course. The reason I started it was that there have been so many recent postings about botched "upgrade" events by folks who would be better off with a stock gun.
The other reason is that any modification will take a gun off the applicable state roster, California is the one I know about but three are other states with similar test and certification requirements. If you modify a weapon in those states you are instantly the owner of an illegal weapon.
I should also say that the tests, the California roster tests for example, include drop tests, firing reliability tests, and other tests which help insure the weapon is reliable as well as safe.
It's clear that there are many postings where someone says he modified his gun and then un-modified it because it failed to fire consistently. I won't argue for or against modifying a pistol but simply hope that everyone who posts something like "I just bought an SDxxx and already have the XXXX modification kit on order" would do that knowing the possible consequences.
FYI- The California folks will see that the SD9VE and SD40VE will fall off the CA roster on 1/1/2017. I have no doubt that S&W will renew their registration. There is a way to do a selection on the CA roster so you can. for example, only see guns that have fallen off the roster and a lot of familiar and classic guns have been removed.
It seems to me that this thread has just about ran it's course. The reason I started it was that there have been so many recent postings about botched "upgrade" events by folks who would be better off with a stock gun.
Your original post was about" supposed legal issues not botched work
The other reason is that any modification will take a gun off the applicable state roster, California is the one I know about but three are other states with similar test and certification requirements. If you modify a weapon in those states you are instantly the owner of an illegal weapon.
I don't know what other states you are referring to but that's simply not true for California (as a whole)
[It's a control scheme nothing morequote]I should also say that the tests, the California roster tests for example, include drop tests, firing reliability tests, and other tests which help insure the weapon is reliable as well as safe.
.It's clear that there are many postings where someone says he modified his gun and then un-modified it because it failed to fire consistently. I won't argue for or against modifying a pistol but simply hope that everyone who posts something like "I just bought an SDxxx and already have the XXXX modification kit on order" would do that knowing the possible consequences
As long as they are real consequences they are worrying about and not wives tales and fear mongering
FYI- The California folks will see that the SD9VE and SD40VE will fall off the CA roster on 1/1/2017. I have no doubt that S&W will renew their registration. There is a way to do a selection on the CA roster so you can. for example, only see guns that have fallen off the roster and a lot of familiar and classic guns have been removed.
More evidence that their roster is a scam a meaningless
Your original post was about" supposed legal issues not botched work
More evidence that their roster is a scam a meaningless
WSR - Apparently you don't live in California and have not read their gun laws. Others have and it's been discussed on this forum in the past, along with such things as magazine capacity limitations in other states.
If you want to contribute to this thread, please do, but it would be more effective if you contribute in a constructive manner and stop nit-picking. We are all trying to help fellow gun owners, and everyone (well, almost everyone) seems to contribute in a positive manner. We are here to help, not argue.
Your postings would be more effective if you worked on your logic, sentence structure and punctuation. (That is intended to be a constructive comment and I hope you take it that way.)
Finally, the two lines in the quote box were written by you, not by me. I think there is a problem with editing.
Just MHO but I think all gun manufactures should stop shiping any guns to Comifornia.
WSR - Apparently you don't live in California and have not read their gun laws. Others have and it's been discussed on this forum in the past, along with such things as magazine capacity limitations in other states.
I dont have to live there to know your statement is wrong
there is no CA law making modifying a gun illegal
The IA has say so on if mods are OK or not for your carry guns listed on the permit.
Some will not let you put even a light or laser on it, night sights as the only acceptable mod
Some are more realistic and will allow more, even trigger work as long as its safe
If you want to contribute to this thread, please do, but it would be more effective if you contribute in a constructive manner and stop nit-picking. We are all trying to help fellow gun owners, and everyone (well, almost everyone) seems to contribute in a positive manner. We are here to help, not argue.
What are you talking about nit picking? Pointing out wrong or misleading information is not nit picking it is constructive
Refer to post #22 that is about as constructive as a post can get...the truth
Your postings would be more effective if you worked on your logic, sentence structure and punctuation. (That is intended to be a constructive comment and I hope you take it that way.)
Its a forum, most people post in a conversational manner and from phones or tablets , its not a term paper.
If it is meant as constructive please point out the post that you have trouble understanding because of grammar errors and I will be happy to clarify.
Where did my logic fail??
Finally, the two lines in the quote box were written by you, not by me. I think there is a problem with editing.
....
Its a forum, most people post in a conversational manner and from phones or tablets , its not a term paper.
If it is meant as constructive please point out the post that you have trouble understanding because of grammar errors and I will be happy to clarify.
Where did my logic fail??
....
I can't find anything in your post that I can adequately and properly address. Your post is very informative, of something, not sure just what that something is.
I'll help you out
There are two direct questions referencing your prior passive-aggressive post...start with them
My post are informative in that they are correcting the internet wives tales you are regurgitating without any research into the validity of them
You profess intimate knowledge of California gun laws. Having returned to Oklahoma after living in California since 1954, I must have misread the applicable statutes. What is your opinion of the ultimate outcome of the microstamping case? Will the state win, or will manufacturers prevail?
You seem to have a hard time staying on track once you are called on one of your statements. I have idea about nor do I care about micro stamping in CA and it has nothing to do with what we were talking about
I profess to being able to read so please cite me the law/statutes that backs up your statement below
The other reason is that any modification will take a gun off the applicable state roster, California is the one I know about but three are other states with similar test and certification requirements. If you modify a weapon in those states you are instantly the owner of an illegal weapon.
Finally, I'm sure the California folks will be very happy to know that they can freely modify their guns. I didn't know that. Thanks for the clarification.
You obviously have a comprehension problem, point out where I said anything about "freely"
I'll help you out
There are two direct questions referencing your prior passive-aggressive post...start with them
My post are informative in that they are correcting the internet wives tales you are regurgitating without any research into the validity of them
You seem to have a hard time staying on track once you are called on one of your statements. I have idea about nor do I care about micro stamping in CA and it has nothing to do with what we were talking about
I profess to being able to read so please cite me the law/statutes that backs up your statement below
You obviously have a comprehension problem, point out where I said anything about "freely"
I think that once more the quote attributed to me is what you have written.
You overwhelm me with facts. I cannot find any error in any of your comments. Thanks for correcting my obvious omissions and errors.
I do have one question. You say in an earlier post: "The IA has say so on if mods are OK or not for your carry guns listed on the permit." Is the "IA" a state or federal agency?
==================
To the folks reading this whole thing, sorry it got so far off track. If nothing else it should be an entertaining read.
I think that once more the quote attributed to me is what you have written.
You overwhelm me with facts. I cannot find any error in any of your comments. Thanks for correcting my obvious omissions and errors.
I do have one question. You say in an earlier post: "The IA has say so on if mods are OK or not for your carry guns listed on the permit." Is the "IA" a state or federal agency?
==================
To the folks reading this whole thing, sorry it got so far off track. If nothing else it should be an entertaining read.
Every thing I quoted is yours
Its county or local
If you could find error you would point them out
More misdirection and still unable to backup your statements
Did your forget those statutes?
Who wrote the quoted items in the box in item 36? I didn't write them, I believe you did.
since you quoted post #35 [my post] it would be common sense that I did, they are MY responses to your post which are conveniently in little boxes that say "quote" at the top left corner. Its not rocket science
On another subject, I still don't know what "IA" stands for.
Then you should have asked... "Issuing Authority"
I find your range of knowledge overwhelming and defer to you on all issues.
LOL
About those Statutes?????
I can at least back up my statements you on the other hand seem incapable of making even a token attempt
We have enough problems with firearm and SD issues in this country, we need truth and facts not gun owners spreading misinformation and wives tales