HeloDude

I'm confused...you were passed over and then offered continuation to only then later separate on your own and now you're upset that you didn't get any form of separation pay? The Air Force said they wanted to keep you, so if you don't want to stay in past your commitment, then you don't get anything. Maybe I'm missing something...that is unless your gripe is with how the 2011 VSP process was ran in which case I'll concur that it was totally messed up.

If this is what you're looking for, aimsurplus has it with newer furniture and a cheaper price. https://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=F1CAKPAP&name=Zastava+N PAP+M70+7.62x39+AK+Rifle&groupid=11 I think it all comes down to why you want an AK and why you think this one would be a good choice (not saying it's a bad choice). If you just want to get your first AK, want it to be in 7.62, and want the 'traditional' look (wood furniture, etc), then this rifle will be fine I'm sure. Don't get me wrong...there's something very cool about the traditional look of an AK, especially for your first one, and they're fun to shoot. Aim also has one with the folding stock for $499 here. But if you're interested in an AK that is dare I say, more 'functional'?, then I think there are better options out there. The wood furniture looks cool, but the ones with polymer furniture is better for running an AK. So it really all comes down to what you want, what you want it for, and what you want to spend. Oh and here's another century arms side folder for $430 from jgsales.com and it's on a milled receiver. https://www.jgsales.com/product_info.php/p/vz2008-sporter-7-62x39-w-side-folding-stock-milled-receiver,-by-cai-backordered-/products_id/3281?osCsid=c23ad1d02e40cb5ea974e94b7bfef4d6

Anybody heard/read about this new 'Tac-Con 3MR Trigger' (drop-in trigger) for the AR? It's peaked my interest and it seems like it's making a lot of noise (no pun intended) at the beginning of Shot Show. It doesn't look overly impressive in the video below, but some of the gun guys I follow are saying how awesome it is from shooting it today at Show Show. Thoughts? https://tacfirecon.com/tacfireconshop/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=51

Damn it! That should have been an up vote for Duck!

I've been to Grey's and they definitely have nice stuff...and it's all at a very 'nice' <caugh caugh> price. Lets just say that I know someone who personally knows these guys and I was told that they market to wealthy people in Destin. I'm assuming that goes for their online sales as well. As for spending $1K on an AK--do you want a 47 or a 74? I'm personally a bigger fan of the 74. Like M2 said, it's hard to go wrong with an Arsenal...their other company (called the FIME Group) are built on the Russian Saiga stamped receivers which are quality. If you want to shell out a few hundred more, look into a Krebs as they make some of the best. I think the best value AK are the Waffen Werks AK-74's. You can get one as cheap as $600 on classicfirearms.com and then buy some nicer furniture to your liking. Or just pay a little more and get one of their nicer ones.

Healthcare 'should' be as cheap (or as expensive) as the market dictates. Before Obamacare, nothing was forcing anybody to carry insurance and folks could just pay medical expenses out of pocket...in fact a lot of people did this very thing. I have a hard time believing that pure insurance was the problem as they just offer a service that someone either choses to buy or not buy. It was (and continues to be) the government regulation that was the problem. In a free society, there will always be inequality.

Please explain further... (just want to make sure I'm following you correctly)

Senators from VA that originally voted for pension cuts: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00281 ...if the issue was this important to offer an amendment 3 weeks later, then they should have fixed it the first time, or voted no.

Dale was a great guy and a great FE. He wasn't afraid to stand up and say what needed to be said. And his sense of humor put a smile on everyone's face. He and the others will surely be missed.

I agree...the law forcing ER's to take in people who can't afford care was a bad idea from the get go (hence the economic argument for Obamacare). Thank you very much Ronnie. Whatever happened to charity coming voluntarily from charities?

This and he also signed a 'DREAM Act' yesterday to benefit illegals in NJ. If I want to vote for a liberal, I'll just vote for Hillary instead...which means in 2016 if he's the nominee then I'll vote Libertarian like I did in 2012. We have the best politicians money can buy!

Thank you for your service and making the ultimate sacrifice. We will miss all of you.

Glad you think so--wish more and more people would agree. We have people on this anonymous board who won't even answer tough questions. Not sure what you mean by 'western society' (checked out France lately?), but I agree otherwise. And this is where you lost me. Like Vertigo said, if there's no protection of challenging unConstitutional laws, then you further the threat and act of tyranny. Rosa Parks 'broke the law' by refusing to sit in the back of the bus--so you supported the punishing of her for doing so? Or do you just believe we should rely on the judiciary?...the same judiciary structure that supported the internment of American citizens of Japanese descent? Where do you personally draw the line? I'm not asking when/where 'you' will personally take a stand, but what is the line for you when it comes to others defying unConstitutional laws and taking a stand? So standing up to unConstitutional laws is equated to 'falling on your to prove a point'? You make it sound like there's no real and true benefit to taking a stand against a government not following their own law of the land. For the record, I'm not calling you, the guy down the street, myself, etc a bad person for not standing up for things such as Rosa Parks or Snowden did (and yes, I'm using their names together)...but when you outright support their punishment then you're nearly just as guilty. We're not all made the same, as we all have different lives, different levels of courage, but we should all have an idea of when we're all ready to stand up and take a stand, even if that means a potential negative consequence for doing so.

I wonder if he would have went to Sen Paul, Sen Wyden (a Dem, who believe it or not, cares about this as well), Rep Massie, or Rep Amash...if that would have turned out better with getting essentially the same result? Then again, when a few Sen's or Rep's in Congress start making these types of claims, the establishment of both parties start calling them 'whackos' and conspiracy theorists. Snowden releasing the information the way he did gave little doubt to what the NSA is actually doing. So I'm part of the camp that believes the ends did justify the means. And Snowden is paying a price for it...

My compliments to her surgeon.

I think I read in the recent PSDM that if you were commissioned after Jul 2012 (?) then you are not eligible, which would affect most UPT studs I would imagine? Good question on the late rated part...my guess is that unless you have something in your record (UIF, etc) that you'll be fine.

Maybe since then they have 'fixed the glitch', so it'll just work itself out naturally.

Maybe I'm being naive for thinking this...but this time I have a feeling that they won't pull the whole 'turned down for VSP but still subject to the RIF' deal. During the RIF a few years ago, there wasn't a published matrix showing AFSC's and year groups that were affected (at least I never saw one?). Though I'm sure AFPC will always screw up even their own processes, this time they have shown their cards with the matrix. Last time the VSP was 'open to anyone' and then we saw what happened that time, and this time they're telling fighter, helo, and RPA guys to not even bother because they're not affected. It will be even more obvious this time around if AFPC pulls their bait and switch bullshit...and I'll try to give Gen Welsh more credit than Swartz. I'm usually much more of a pesimist (more like a reaslist) but I'd be willing to bet that if you're turned down for VSP, you won't even be subject to the RIF. We'll find out here in a few months.

Haha...no. But you keep supporting a dude's claim that he is something he is not, and then challenge me when I call him out. The dude originally asked if he could where a camera, and people told him what the reg says...if he chooses to violate the regs, then it's on him if he gets caught. Either way, he deserves to hear what the regs are and to also be given the advice that acting like you're a pilot before you even get to UPT is not a smart mentality to have. So you tell me--where am I going wrong?

Yeah, I don't think you were being sarcastic, but whatever helps you sleep better at night. Those dudes in the link I attached didn't think they would get caught either. But hey, it's not my career, so whatever. Pretty confident the kid doesn't have a FM-8 if he is in UPT, at least not one saying he is a pilot, though I have heard non-pilots call themselves drivers, and I don't care either way as they're good dudes and important crew members. If he wants to tell us that he's a prior 130 NAV or enlisted crew member, then I'll hear the argument. His remarks though don't support that idea. Are you a poser as well? Do you know Joe1234?

Doesn't work so well when you can't get to it or when you're incapacitated. Here's an interesting read for you... https://www.torch.aetc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-120305-102.pdf

Post #57 in the Force Shaping Thread:

Here's the problem: Though I stand by my earlier remarks that the Snowden release is good because it has people discussing the issue, allowing more people to see the truth and have less trust in their government, etc...I will concede to Serious that more than likely not much will be done to significantly change how the federal government does their business. Obama said he would have the most 'transparent' administration ever, so if this is what constitutes transparent, then I think we're in serious trouble. Many on the left (as shown via NYT) is applauding what Snowden did and therefore (I'm assuming) wants these practices to stop. Yet Obama and the Dems will not stop it, and the GOP, especially the establishment types (Rep King, Sen McCain types,) will not vote to stop it either--hence we get the same Patriot Act BS. The only somewhat legitimate candidate for one of the two party's nomination in 2016 that I could see reducing the NSA scope (at least on the domestic side) to a degree is Rand Paul, as I don't see Hillary or Christie changing much of how things are done in DC. And if I were a betting man, I would say that Christie will get the GOP nomination, and unless things go horribly for the economy and/or Obamacare, that Hillary will win in 2016. So my prognosis: Expect more of the same with only small changes. This is why I am voting more and more Libertarian...on the big issues the two parties are pretty close to being the same.

Lame and weak...I interpret your response as you being afraid to answer the question. I've had shitty commanders do a better job in dodging questions. Too bad we would have never had known if it wasn't for Snowden. The NSA Director flat out lied to the Senate when they asked him if this was going on. You're far too trusting when it comes to your government.

Nothing has been changed? Are you unaware that people are now discussing the issue where not much was being discussed before the leak? Is this not going to be an issue in the upcoming 2014 and 2016 election? Has there not been Congressional hearing on the issue? That's not what I asked you. You either didn't read what I wrote or you're dodging the question...so what you say: Do you believe it's always criminal to take actions to support and defend The Constitution...even if the actions go against standing law? I'll also raise you with another question: Do you believe what the NSA is doing (as from what we know from Snowden) to be Constitutional?