Gun Talk

[Guest ATC]

Anyone have an H&K or enough experience with it to offer an opinion?

I am looking at picking up either the USP Compact in .45 or the P2000 in .40.

Appreciate in insite you have.

I have a H&K USP .45 (fullsize, not compact) and I love it. The size difference between the fullsize and compact was not enough where I felt the compact would be much more concealable. I have zero experience with the P2000. You should also look at the new H&K .45 - it is pretty much a USP, but better.

https://www.hk-usa.com/le_hk45_general.html

I am very happy with my USP, but if I were in the market now, I would pick up an HK .45

[Guest Fogo]

Wondering if anyone can confirm, or dispel, a rumor I heard.

Was talking to some buddies and mentioned I was going to be down in the Hurlburt/Eglin area for part of December, and they said Eglin now sells firearms at the BX? Anyone know anything about this? If so, just hunting gear? or handguns too?

If true, I find myself chuckling at the thought of how the AF handles such a transaction since you aren't allowed to have any on base. Must make it real difficult to leave the BX and take it home.

[isshinwhat]

Wondering if anyone can confirm, or dispel, a rumor I heard.

Was talking to some buddies and mentioned I was going to be down in the Hurlburt/Eglin area for part of December, and they said Eglin now sells firearms at the BX? Anyone know anything about this? If so, just hunting gear? or handguns too?

If true, I find myself chuckling at the thought of how the AF handles such a transaction since you aren't allowed to have any on base. Must make it real difficult to leave the BX and take it home.

They were selling them about 18 months ago when I was there because I looked at pistol.

[afthunderchief16]

Anyone have an H&K or enough experience with it to offer an opinion?

I am looking at picking up either the USP Compact in .45 or the P2000 in .40.

Appreciate in insite you have.

I got the .40 USP Compact a few years back and absolutely love it. Sure is is a little bit pricey compared to an XD or even a Sig or Glock but I have been very satisfied with it since I have had it. It conceals nicely and fits my hand extremely well and even can be shot by my wife pretty easily.

The only negative thing that I have had with it is that it gets a little picky with the ammo that I have put through it, I wouldn't recommend getting re-loads from the gunshow to take to the range.

Let me know if you have any other questions about it

[BigFreddie]

Anyone have an H&K or enough experience with it to offer an opinion?

I am looking at picking up either the USP Compact in .45 or the P2000 in .40.

Appreciate in insite you have.

Look at the newer guns - the HK45 and HK45C. I took a pistol class from one of the top trainers in the US - he is also one of the most sought after 1911 gunsmiths in the world. When asked about the new HK45s he said it would be his top pick in a .45 caliber handgun to take in harms way. He said the Smith and Wesson M&P 45 would be a close second.

I all reality - get your hands on them. I sold an HK USP 45 a few years ago because it was too big for my hand. Handguns need to fit right to work to their potential. This has always been a complaint of mine about Glocks - they feel horrible in the hand. I am sold on the current concept of multiple backstraps to adjust the grip to your hand.

About the 9mm vs .40 vs .45 debate... Modern bullets negate some of the advantage that the .45 had before. If I were only permitted to use FMJ or ball ammo my choice would be the .45. As I've said before, the 9mm might expand while the .45 won't get any smaller. Here is an expert's thoughts on this subject: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887 - it seems that the heaviest loads for the round perform the best...

As for the Springfield Scout - I would go with that model over the SOCOM for the reasons mentioned. It also seems that the further from the original design people go the more trouble the rifles have... Stock up on mags now (www.44mag.com) and find some ammo for it.

For the guy wanting a simple, reliable, cheap defense gun, he'd be hard pressed to beat a Glock, especially through their LE/Military program. Here are the forms I collected a while back for the program - attached at the bottom. Hard to beat a $400 NIB Glock...

BF

I_O_Form_2005_2.doc

military_ltr.doc

Edited December 1, 2008 by BigFreddie

[Guest soflguy]

Anyone have an H&K or enough experience with it to offer an opinion?

For the guy wanting a simple, reliable, cheap defense gun, he'd be hard pressed to beat a Glock, especially through their LE/Military program. Here are the forms I collected a while back for the program - attached at the bottom. Hard to beat a $400 NIB Glock...

BF

Just bought 2 glocks with LEO discount yesterday. A 19 for 399 with 2 extra mags and a 22C w/ night sights for 484 w/ 2 extra mags. All I needed was Driver License, orders and mil ID. I bought the 22 because it's chambered for .357 sig which is a good round and I can replace the barrel and shoot .40 which I like that option. It's not a real popular load, but is a really good one.

.357 Sig Wiki

Edit to include 2008 Glock LE prices/schiesse.

Glock_mil_discount.pdf

Edited December 1, 2008 by soflguy

[Guest Fogo]

Awesome info on the Glock military deals. Am I reading it right that you can just send copies of your ID/orders, etc, and have it shipped to a local FFL?

Anyone know of any other companies offering such deals?

[BigFreddie]

Awesome info on the Glock military deals. Am I reading it right that you can just send copies of your ID/orders, etc, and have it shipped to a local FFL?

Anyone know of any other companies offering such deals?

I've seen a few others but the discounts aren't as big and not as easy to get either. S&W does one and I think Sig does as well.

You can either find the LE distributor in your area and buy off their shelves or have it shipped to your local FFL.

And thanks for the updated letter!

BF

Edited December 1, 2008 by BigFreddie

[Guest Fogo]

Sig also offering a $100 discount (although if you're like me; it'll take a lot more than that before you'll pay that price.)

https://www.sigsauer.com/Products/MFG.aspx

Seems a bit simplier. Buy the gun, send in the rebate form.

[Guest AceTomatoCo]

Sig also offering a $100 discount (although if you're like me; it'll take a lot more than that before you'll pay that price.)

I can understand your point from the cost of a new Sig but some things are worth the price especially when it comes to reliability.

Edited December 1, 2008 by AceTomatoCo

[M2]

Maybe, but I would put my XD up against a Sig any day of the week!

Cheers! M2

[Guest AceTomatoCo]

Maybe, but I would put my XD up against a Sig any day of the week!

Cheers! M2

No argument here just saying there is a reason some things cost more.

I.E. Mig-21's vs F-22's - yeah bit of a stretch but you know what I mean.

[M2]

Good article...there are links in the original article that didn't copy over. Click on the article title to go to the web site...

Cheers! M2

The Life-and-Death Cost of Gun Control

By John R. Lott, Jr.

Author/Senior Research Scholar, University of Maryland

Banning guns is in the news. India practically bans guns, but that didn’t stop the horrific Muslim terrorist attacks this last week. A football player concerned for his safety violates New York City’s tough gun control regulations by carrying a concealed handgun, and people call for everything from banning NFL players from carrying guns to demanding that the athlete serve many years in jail.

When police can’t promise to protect law-abiding citizens such Plaxico Burress or the victims in India, why don’t we allow people the right to protect themselves?

Where is the sympathy or debate in either case over letting people defend themselves? Given that the terrorists smuggled their machine guns in with them, would anyone argue that India’s extremely strict gun licensing and artificially high prices for guns helped prevent the terrorist attacks? In fact, the reverse is more likely the case.

Would Plaxico Burress, the New York Giant’s receiver who was arrested yesterday, really have been safer just trusting the police to protect him?

Terrorism

In India, victims watched as armed police cowered and didn’t fire back at the terrorists. A photographer at the scene described his frustration: “There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything. At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, ‘Shoot them, they’re sitting ducks!’ but they just didn’t shoot back.”

Meanwhile, according to the hotel company’s chairman, P.R.S. Oberoi, security at “the hotel had metal detectors, but none of its security personnel carried weapons because of the difficulties in obtaining gun permits from the Indian government.”

India has extremely strict gun control laws, but who did it succeed in disarming?

The terrorist attack showed how difficult it is to disarm serious terrorists. Strict licensing rules meant that it was the victims who obeyed the regulations, not the terrorists.

Academic research has continually found that police are the single most important factor in reducing crime, but police can’t always be depended on to be quick enough.

The attack also illustrates what Israelis learned decades ago. — Putting more soldiers or police on the street didn’t stop terrorist’s machine gun attacks. Terrorists would either wait for the armed soldiers or police to leave the area or kill them first. Likewise, in India, the Muslim terrorists’ first targets were those in uniform (whether police or security guards).

Terrorists only stopped using machine guns to attack Israelis once citizens were allowed to carry concealed handguns. In large public gatherings, a significant number of citizens will be able to shoot at terrorists during an attack — and the terrorists don’t know who has them.

With mass shootings becoming more difficult, terrorists were forced to switch to a less effective strategy: bombs. Bombings are more difficult for armed citizens to stop because they can’t respond after the bomb blows up.

Still, even though handguns can only kill would-be bombers before they set off their bombs, during waves of terror attacks, Israel’s national police chief will call on all citizens who are allowed to carry guns to make sure they carry their firearms at all times, and Israelis have many examples where citizens with concealed handguns have saved lives.

In their warped minds, both terrorists and the murderers are kamikaze-like killers, who value maximizing the carnage. Even if the killers expect to die anyway, letting victims have guns at the scene can help deter these crimes in the first place by reducing their expected return.

Do Football Players Need Self-Defense?

Physically huge NFL players admitting they feel threatened by crime? This hardly fits their tough, macho image. Our concern is supposed to be for women walking alone at night. Who can have sympathy for a professional football player such as Plaxico Burress who is 6 feet 5 inches and weighs 232 lbs.?

Burress, who has no previous criminal record, now faces between three and a half to 15 years for illegally carrying a concealed handgun with him in Manhattan, if convicted. He was arrested Monday and was released on $100,000 bail. — Burress had had a concealed handgun permit in the state of Florida for the last five years, but he forgot to renew it in May this year.

While the massive size and strength of NFL players might make them seem like unlikely potential crime victims, their wealth and high public profile nonetheless make them particularly attractive targets for violent criminals. While “only” two players were murdered last year, that means a murder rate of 118 per 100,000 people, compared to 5.9 per 100,000 for the rest of the population. In other words, the rate for NFL players was 20 times higher than the average for the rest of the country. This is even higher than the most at risk segment of the population -– young black males between 18 and 24. It is even higher than the risk faced by police officers.

Last year, the Washington Redskins’ Sean Taylor was killed during a robbery at his house. The Denver Broncos’ defensive back Darrent Williams was killed outside a nightclub.

As Tampa Bay Buccaneers cornerback Ronde Barber noted, “We are targets, we need to be aware of that everywhere we go.” Yet, the news coverage doesn’t engender much sympathy for Plaxico Burress.

So, what do many NFL players do when they realize that their physical strength does not give them enough protection from violent crime? The same thing that many other would-be victims do — they get guns. Well over 50 percent of NFL players are estimated to own guns, somewhat higher than the 45 percent of American adults who own guns.

Not everyone approves. Mike Ditka, the Hall of Fame tight end and former Chicago Bears football coach, advocates banning NFL players from owning guns. Ditka said, “I don’t understand the league, why can anybody have a gun? I will have a policy, no guns, any NFL players we find out, period, you’re suspended.” AOL Sports writer Michael Smith also supports the ban and says, “If you carry a gun around, you’re more likely to hurt yourself than protect yourself.”

It would be great if the police were always there to rescue would-be victims, but as the police themselves understand, they virtually always arrive on the scene after the crime has already occurred. Fortunately, just as criminals are deterred by higher arrest rates or longer prison sentences, the fact that potential victims own guns deters some attackers. The Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey, which covers almost 30 years, also shows that having a gun is consistently by far the safest course of action for victims.

Over the last three or four years, numerous professional players can attest to the benefits of owning guns. For example, Corey Fuller, the 5-foot, 10-inch, 210-pound defensive back for the Baltimore Ravens, was confronted by two armed robbers outside his Tallahassee house. One robber chased Fuller into his house where his wife and children were sleeping, but Fuller was able to grab a gun and fire at the attackers, who then ran away.

T.J. Slaughter, a 6-foot, 233-pound linebacker, was arrested for allegedly pointing a gun at motorists who pulled up next to him on the highway. Slaughter denied that he had pointed the gun at the motorists and claimed that they had threatened him. No charges were filed, though, possibly following Dikta’s rule, the Jacksonville Jaguars still cut Slaughter the next day. Jacksonville claimed Slaughter was performing poorly.

Professional athletes’ physical strength hardly makes them immune to crime. Take a couple additional examples.

– The Oakland Raiders’ Javon Walker (height: 6-3, weight: 215 lbs.) was robbed and beaten this past June while visiting Las Vegas. He was hospitalized with a concussion and facial injuries.

– The Houston Texans’ Dunta Robinson (height: 5-10, weight: 184 lbs.) was robbed by two men in his home a year ago. The robbers bound him with duct tape and stole jewelry.

Unfortunately all of the nation’s four leading pro-sports leagues — the National Football League, the National Basketball Association, the National Hockey League and Major League Baseball — trivialize the athletes’ concerns over safety. The NFL’s official advice: “In some circumstances, such as for sport or protection, you may legally possess a firearm or other weapon. However, we strongly recommend that you not do so.” The league advocates passive behavior when confronted by a criminal.

Fred Taylor (height: 6-1, weight: 228) a running back with the Jacksonville Jaguars made the point clear: “League officials tell us we need to take measures to protect ourselves. But the NFL says we can’t have guns in the facility –even in the parking lot. Crooks know this. They can just sit back and wait for us to drive off, knowing we won’t have anything in our vehicle from point A to point B.”

Even professional athletes are not supermen. T.J. Slaughter expresses no regrets for having a gun despite running afoul of political correctness and being cut by the Jaguars. He says, “I believe legally owning a gun is the right thing to do. It offers me protection. I think one day it could save my life.” It seems a lesson that many who are not quite as strong can also learn from.

Toys R Us

The media can’t be blamed for some of the left out information and misimpressions about guns. For example, the news coverage over the weekend about a shooting at a Toys R Us in Palm Desert, California gave the wrong impression about guns. It seemed the perfect fit –- two couples squabbling over who would get a toy resulting in a deadly shoot out. Surely this demonstrated the dangers of letting people have guns for self defense.

But political correctness made it difficult for local authorities to even admit a simple and important fact — the two couples were members of rival gangs. As Palm Desert city councilman Bob Spiegel told The L.A. Times, there were apparently “two rival groups shopping at the store.” Even stories that mentioned the gangs often left the mention until the end.

Unfortunately, commentators at places such as the Huffington Post confuse letting gang members and law-abiding citizens carry guns. As one remarked: “does anybody still think concealed weapons laws are a good idea?” But in contrast to gang members, data for states like Florida or Texas indicate that concealed handgun permit holders lose their permits for any gun-related violation at hundredths or thousandths of one percent and even then usually for very trivial, non-threatening violations.

Conclusion

When police can’t promise to protect law-abiding citizens such Plaxico Burress or the victims in India, why don’t we allow people the right to protect themselves? Unfortunately, bans do more to encourage crime than prevent it.

John Lott is the author of Freedomnomics and a senior research scholar at the University of Maryland.

[Guest Fogo]

Read that Panthers WR got robbed at gunpoint outside his home just the other day. The criminals know these guys are under scrutiny and may not be armed. Un-armed, highly paid athlete, who probably has jewelry and cash on them? Yeah... that sure isn't a target.

Why can't these people understand that criminals don't follow the law. That's why they are called criminals! India has strict gun laws; yet mass killing with weapons takes place. Chicago, IL has a handgun ban: Yet people are being murdered with handguns. But how? I thought they were illegal?

Now... I will say that I think Plaxico is an idiot. Who knows what the whole story is. But at the end of the day; not only did he shoot himself, but his license wasn't current so he shouldn't have had to carry it. It's a shame those guys feel the need to be protected; but when unable to have his gun, could he really not afford some security for the night?

[JarheadBoom]

I thought NY did not have reciprocity (along with CA, NJ, and most of the Northeast). So even if Burress's Florida CC permit was up-to-date, he wouldn't have been legal to carry anyway... yes?

*** EDIT ***

Even if Burress's Florida-issued concealed-carry permit was up-to-date, he would NOT be legal to carry concealed in NY state or NYC. Here's a nice map showing states with CC reciprocity agreements with Florida:

Go here and click the state your CC permit is issued by. A map similar to the pic above will open in a new window - follow the pretty colors. Red is bad.

Edited December 3, 2008 by JarheadBoom

[Guest ATC]

I thought NY did not have reciprocity (along with CA, NJ, and most of the Northeast). So even if Burress's Florida CC permit was up-to-date, he wouldn't have been legal to carry anyway... yes?

Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont all have reasonable gun laws - farrther south is where it is a problem.

[Guest Johann]

Maybe, but I would put my XD up against a Sig any day of the week!

Cheers! M2

And I'd put my Glock up against either one.

[M2]

And I'd put my Glock up against either one.

I've never seen an XD do this...

I used to be a big fan of Glocks, during their time they were probably the best polymer semi-auto handguns out there; but since the XDs were launched and Glocks started having problems with non-factory ammo thanks to problems with chamber support on some of their pistols, it was easy to become a Springfield convert.

I applaud Glock for having a military discount program, and the chances of a kB are slim if you stick with factory ammo; but the truth is that a vast number of XD owners are former Glock owners, and you wold be hard-pressed to find any of them that would want to go bacl to the Austrian-made pistol. It is not that they are bad guns, it is just that there are better options out there, and why settle for second best?

Cheers! M2

[USMCAirWinger]

Anyone have an H&K or enough experience with it to offer an opinion?

I am looking at picking up either the USP Compact in .45 or the P2000 in .40.

Appreciate in insite you have.

I have a USPc 40. If you want carry concealed take a look at a P2000SK. If I had to do it again that would be my number one choice.

I recommend you go to a range that rents all the guns you are looking at and try them out. Ergonomics wise, the USPc and P2000 are similar. However, a HK and Glock grip are quite different.

[Guest AceTomatoCo]

Thanks to everyone with advise on the H&K, after much debate I ended up with an XD-M, was hard to pass up 16+1 in .40 cal. Plus now it makes my collection of XD's complete.

Oh well, maybe next time for the Germans.

[brickhistory]

I think as a citizenry as a whole we are a little different than the Europeans (and I include the Aussies philosophically) who have a longer history of more authoritarian government with a much more socially stratified society. They have a centuries-long history of bending knee. We do not. (No, that's not all inclusive and greatly simplifying the differences).

As our roots come from a mass of dissidents/immigrants, I think we are ok for a generation or two.

However, as we become more urban, more 'civilized,' more pussified, then this could happen.

The constant assualt (no pun intended) on the 2d Amendment by the very liberal (who I contend are more similar to Western Europeans) left in America could eventually make this a reality. Oddly, the GWOT reaction on bigger government for security is also helping this cause. As, thus far, that's been a right of the aisle responsibility, things could get ugly.

But not in my lifetime.

[Guest rapier01]

We're a little different from the Brits, Australians, and Canadians. The 2nd Amendment is enshrined in our constitution- its a fundamental right in this country. In the other former British colonies and indeed Britain itself it's not a right to bear arms, but a privilege.

[Steve Davies]

In this country, the Labour government does whatever it wants, whenever it wants. The people can go whistle.

We went to war in 2003 despite more than half the population saying we shouldn't; we banned hand guns because of one incident, but gun crime is on the increase because the criminals don't care about the law (duh!); contrary to most peoples' wishes, they passed a law to allow pubs to stay open 24-hours and now alcohol-related violent crime has increased (did someone say 'duh!'?); the list goes on...

[M2]

Hell, the Brits and Aussies need to bring those guns over here and sell them! Maybe that'll drive down the panic prices we've been seeing since last month's election!

If they don't want 'em, I'll buy 'em!

Cheers! M2

[bfargin]

I like to think I would fight to keep this right. It's scary to think that we might have to actually fight our own government to keep our firearms. I have some friends in Oz who ended up giving up their guns because they didn't want to physically fight (kill or be killed) to keep the right and now regret it.

But, if they passed an outright ban in the USA, could you shoot the local police officer (who is your neighbor or friend) when he/she comes to confiscate it? Again, I'd like to think I could, and defend the constitution and our God given right but that would be tough to do if it came down to it. I'm afraid too many would just turn them in like they did in OZ and England instead of fight.