tac airlifter

I think overall, that was some really excellent advice. But do you really think they deploy & go TDY as much as other SOF assets?

Has something changed? When I finished TUI in 2011 they used ACE to determine what military schooling equated to in the academic world; at the time I had been an IP in 2 aircraft that were unfortunately not evaluated by ACE, so no dice for me, but IIRC IP in every fighter & most heavies granted a few hours. That plus SOS IN RES should knock out at least one course.

You don't have any idea what you're talking about.

Again, frequency of exposure is irrelevant when the outcome is death. If I'm attacked only once in my life, but the attacker bashes my head with a crow bar and kills me, I'm going to wish I had the best tool available to prevent that outcome. If a police officer faces the same threat 30 times in his life, how is that an argument for him having better PDW's than me? He might need it more often than I do, but the tool we need is the same. Because the threat is the same. I guess my main confusion is with your last statement; I don't make a habit of arguing for things I'm actually against. Apparently you do; either that or I've convinced you of the rightness of my POV, which was faster & easier than I thought!

You are expert at twisting words to gain the apperance of winning an argument. The only cop to speak in this thread so far has 100% disagreed with your premise that he (as a now private citizen) should be limited in what he can carry while active LEO's should not. And your premise has actually changed and evolved in this debate.... you started by flat out saying cops don't face the same threat we do, which is what I have asserted all along. Fact: police face the same threat citizens do. Just becasue an LEO faces thugs daily, why is that justification to have a 30 round magazine but my unlikely encouter is not justification for a 30 round magazine? A single encouter = need for an unknown number of bullets, but more is better when misses outnumber hits. You and I are at a logical impasse. Please explain to me, in simple terms as I'm a simplton, what threat an LEO faces that justifies them having an M-4 with 30 rounds that is not a possible threat for me to face? And why should I be denied the best tool for the job of self defense? And yes the DC ban was ruled unconstitutional..... 30 years too late for a lot of victims though, as CH pointed out. i won't even touch the argument about the reasoning behind the second amendment. You say constitutional scholars disagree.... well i dont care what people who word fuck for a living think, the amendament plus copious letters and papers from the founding fathers themselves make this a very clear cut issue to me. There's no point in arguing that one as there's no way you can convice me otherwise, or me you, so why bother? But I think if you examine the logic I can get a sharp kid like you to understand that in the 1% chance someone kicks your door in tonight you'd feel better with an AR & 30 rounds than a bolt action rifle or 7 shot revolver.... and it's just as likely for that to happen to you as a cop, and far more likely for it to happen to either of you than the gov of NY.

So what more serious threat do police face than me, average joe citizen? Frequency is irrelevant WRT a need for standard capacity magazines or semi-automatic rifles; if they face 10 incidents of home invasion and I face one (as an example) we both need the same tool for the same task. And again I reiterate: thier weapons are for their personal defense, not the defense of others. An individual police officer can choose to use his weapon to defend others, and many brave ones do; but they have no duty to do so. Since they face the same threat (more often, again, is irrelevant), why should they be allowed better tools to defend themselves? And all this is tangential to the purpose of the second amendment, which is an armed populace as a last defense against tyranny. I suspect George Washington would barf on his knickers if he knew we're now debating the degree to which a citizen is allowed to defend themselves. Having lived in DC under the gun ban when crime was peaking in the 90's I can tell you first hand that gun bans have two certain effects: emboldening criminals (resulting in an overall increase in violent crime) and wasting time/resources from police who now arrest otherwise peacable citizens suspected of owning a weapon for self-defense. Oh, I guess there is always that third common theme WRT gun bans: somehow elected officials still need to be protected by armed cops.... which any way you slice it smacks of hypocisy. I wonder, whats more historically/statistically likely: the Gov of a state (or mayor of a major city) having his house broken into or being mugged on the street, or an average citizen having their home broken into & being mugged on the street? I guess we'll agree to disagree here.

Those were two excellent sounding wordy non-answers to my questions. And you are wrong if you think cops would protect me, they have absolutely no duty to do so, and the courts have been very clear that the public has no reasonable expectation of protection.

Yes, cops face the exact same threats civilians do (copy all beaver, but I don't have a better wording). Can you name me a threat police officers face that I don't have any chance of facing myself? The people they go after are in public.... You know, where I am. And unless you're clairvoyant you don't know the intentions of anyone around you. So tell me: why does the NYPD need an M4 with 30 rounds but I don't? Is it more likely for a civilian to be assaulted violently or a uniformed police officer? I know they aren't carrying those weapons for my safety since SCOTUS has held there is no duty for them to protect us. And yes, these laws were passed by people being actively guarded (in a statehouse) by armed men who were and are excluded from the provisions of it.... I don't know or care who has 24/7 coverage so dont make assumptions; fact is: all those officials felt a need to be guarded by armed men that day, and every day they meet. You know otherwise? Instead of calling hyperbole, why don't you prove me wrong? Or you can admit that your liberal buddies stood on the graves of children to pass freedom hating, crime encouraging legislation as soon as the political winds felt favorable, and you've been duped into supporting them in the past but have now seen the errors of your ways; I'm fine with either of those responses.

No, possession of a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds is going to be illegal; I think new Yorkers have a year to sell them out of state. 8-10 round mags still legal (granfathered in) but only allowed to have 7 bullets in them.... And all new manufactured or purchased mags must be 7 rounds or less. No discussion of keeping one in the chamber. I haven't read the exact wording, but the assumption right now is that cops will be exempt from these laws and the NYPD will still have assault weapons and 17 round mags for their Glocks; which is ridiculous since civilians face the same threat cops face. Even more ridiculous since the people who passed the law are all protected by body guards who aren't affected by the law. Truly a case of hypocritical elite shitting on our founding principals.

It's an HK; that's been the standard photo shoot for decades.

Bingo. Also of note, the Pak Taliban recently killed several workers administering vaccinations because of the leaked connection between that program and finding certain HVI's. Words have consequences, and secrets are supposed to stay secret.

You sure about that?

France isn't helping the rebels in this case. AQIM in northern Mali is a serious enemy; we'll see how successful this spring offensive is.

Are you talking about the lack of water or the floride issue with water which is why housing gives out free 5 gallon water drums to residents? ETA: not a Clovis resident, just got an earful from a buddies wife.

That helps a ton, thanks for the SA. I'm surprised the BX on Lackland doesn't sell weapons, the one on Eglin is actually pretty good and Im hoping they haven't been paying attention to the rising prices so I can score something decent when I go home next week; assuming the 7 SFG guys haven't bought it out yet. I'm kicking myself for passing on a few really cool .22's last time I was there. Thanks again for the rundown of KSAT area ranges, just looking to do some plinking with family.

M2, I'll be in San Antonio in the next few days. Can you recommend a good shooting range? Also curious if it's worth looking on base at Lackland or any of the bases to see if they seek decent guns in the BX. Thanks.

Beware: I bought a gun on gunbroker.com by calling the seller (had to get some questions answered first) and dealing with him directly. Was promised the gun, but then didn't hear back from seller with the address he wanted me to send money to. Looked online and noticed the seller had put the item back up (taken off after our deal) & relisted the item, which is now 800$ more than the original buy now price. I think this d bag is cashing in on the gun fear. I'll handle the complaint with gunbroker, but be wary. People with no ethics are cashing in.

Yea, I don't want to ignite the DI v piston thing, I already bought it; plus there are quality and shitty manufactures for either op system. Not a debate i care about. Just wanted to see if anyone had one for a while and issue _______ (insert whatever) presented itself. Thanks for the answer.

Maybe the same people who think banning the sale of pistol grips and flash hiders for semi-auto rifles will prevent school shootings?

So I kind of jumped on the "gun ban fear" bandwagon by throwing down for a LWRC M6A2; it's not cheap but I had been contemplating it for a while and after watching rifles increasing in price I just said fuck it. Anyone own one or any LWRC product? I've been a stalker on the LWRCI forums, but would appreciate info from here.

I have a USP 9 full size & Sig 226, so not .40 but still a comparison betwee full size offerings from each manufacturer. Both good weapons, so you won't have any QC issues but there are clear differences between the two and if I could only have one it would be the USP, no doubt. The HK has a much better trigger, it feels lighter and quicker. I found the HK factory sights superior to the night sights that came with my Sig, but have since bought trijicon sights for both, so no issues there. The slide release is harder to reach on the HK and awkaward to operate the first few times. I'm accustomed to it now, but it's a bit weird at first and an area where the Sig will feel more natural. I also bought my USP when HK was still doing that ridiculous proprietary rail on the bottom instead of standardizing it with pretty much everyone else in the industry, so attachments are more expensive. That said, if you buy a newer HK design like the P30L (which I'm looking at now, but haven't bought yet) the rails are standard. No issues with the Sig WRT rail interface. Both are easy to take down. Both point and balance well, although the clear winner in feel and draw is the HK to me. The things that put the USP over the Sig IMO are the trigger, the weight and balance, I like having a safety over just a decode like the Sig, the factory sights and I also much prefer the mag release. The USP literally shoots the mags out and gives a very audible click when they are fully inserted. The Sig is fine, but nothing special. Hope that comparison helps. Note that all things HK (like new mags) will be more expensive. Worth it in my book.

Looks pretty good.

It says "should not" not "can't."

Thanks for the SA. I wish I could have done weapons school, seems pretty cool.

What happens during ME? I know nothing about red flag/nellis/WIC, etc. Wish I did, but I don't.