| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
#46
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 12:01:33 PM UTC-6, Keyser Söze wrote:
John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto .45 ACP. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ I used to have problems with the 'limbers' until I started doing morning stretch exercises... |
#46
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 11:35:31 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. Wayne, in my opinion, they're "custom shop" quality right out of the box. |
#46
On 2/28/2016 1:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto .45 ACP. Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html |
#46
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 4:51:35 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/28/2016 1:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto .45 ACP. Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html That sucks, Richard. |
#46
On 2/28/2016 5:55 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 4:51:35 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 1:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto .45 ACP. Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html That sucks, Richard. Yeah, a few years ago Kimber produced a limited number of their 1911 versions for Marine Corps vets who served in Iraq or Afghanistan. They put your name and tour dates on it or something like that. My buddy Rick (from the guitar shop) tried to order one for his son who was finishing up a tour in Afghanistan and was pretty bummed out to find out he couldn't get one shipped to MA, even through a FFL. FFL would lose his license. |
#46
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 5:42:29 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/28/2016 5:55 PM, Tim wrote: On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 4:51:35 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 1:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists....not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists....not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto ..45 ACP. Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html That sucks, Richard. Yeah, a few years ago Kimber produced a limited number of their 1911 versions for Marine Corps vets who served in Iraq or Afghanistan. They put your name and tour dates on it or something like that. My buddy Rick (from the guitar shop) tried to order one for his son who was finishing up a tour in Afghanistan and was pretty bummed out to find out he couldn't get one shipped to MA, even through a FFL. FFL would lose his license. Thats a shame. Rick is a good and honorable man. |
#46
On 2/28/2016 7:28 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 5:42:29 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 5:55 PM, Tim wrote: On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 4:51:35 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 1:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto .45 ACP. Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html That sucks, Richard. Yeah, a few years ago Kimber produced a limited number of their 1911 versions for Marine Corps vets who served in Iraq or Afghanistan. They put your name and tour dates on it or something like that. My buddy Rick (from the guitar shop) tried to order one for his son who was finishing up a tour in Afghanistan and was pretty bummed out to find out he couldn't get one shipped to MA, even through a FFL. FFL would lose his license. Thats a shame. Rick is a good and honorable man. He really is. He stopped by my house earlier this afternoon to pick up my grandson's guitar that needs some work. We've stayed in touch via e-mail but we hadn't seen each other for almost a year. Kind of friend that stays a friend even though you don't see each other regularly. He had stopped working on guitars for a while because he had moved and taken a "real" job. He's getting back into it again due to popular demand. He has quite a following of people who don't trust anyone else to work on their guitars. |
#46
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 6:39:19 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/28/2016 7:28 PM, Tim wrote: On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 5:42:29 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 5:55 PM, Tim wrote: On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 4:51:35 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 1:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers.. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists....not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers.. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists....not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. === I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45.. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto .45 ACP. Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html That sucks, Richard. Yeah, a few years ago Kimber produced a limited number of their 1911 versions for Marine Corps vets who served in Iraq or Afghanistan. They put your name and tour dates on it or something like that. My buddy Rick (from the guitar shop) tried to order one for his son who was finishing up a tour in Afghanistan and was pretty bummed out to find out he couldn't get one shipped to MA, even through a FFL. FFL would lose his license. Thats a shame. Rick is a good and honorable man. He really is. He stopped by my house earlier this afternoon to pick up my grandson's guitar that needs some work. We've stayed in touch via e-mail but we hadn't seen each other for almost a year. Kind of friend that stays a friend even though you don't see each other regularly. He had stopped working on guitars for a while because he had moved and taken a "real" job. He's getting back into it again due to popular demand. He has quite a following of people who don't trust anyone else to work on their guitars. Yes, I've talked with him since he's gotten a 'daytime job; he's doin' alright" Good to see he's still active in luthery... |
#46
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? |
#46
On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. |
#46
Tim wrote:
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 4:51:35 PM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 1:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: John H. wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:35:00 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 06:08:32 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be.There may havebeen some On Saturday, February 27, 2016 at 9:35:59 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: Tim wrote: On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote: John H. wrote: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote: I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment. The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40 cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a 9mm version for the same price. http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a sweet gun: http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U Comes in a .380 also. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack like that might be hard to control for me. Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round. Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality? I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four years ago. Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45: http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226, but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right? -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually unfounded. Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise... Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either. Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything. That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my question to John. Could be. There could have been some QC issues I wasn't aware of and maybe I got 3 good out of 4, But I'm simply saying that out of the Kimbers I've had, I had no reason to complain about them at all. == I put some rounds through a loaner Kimber once and thought it was a fine gun. It would be high up on my list if looking for a new 45. And if Krause owned one they'd be the best guns in the world. -- Nope. Lots of problems with limbers and I have no use for a semiauto .45 ACP. Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html That sucks, Richard. Definitely not New Hampshire r at least their motto. |
#46
7:31 PMMr. Luddite
- show quoted text - If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. --- Moving out of state can cure that... |
#46
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 20:31:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. Sort of flies in the face of claims that they only want "reasonable" gun laws. What makes a Kimber any worse than any other .45 pistol? |
#46
On 2/29/2016 1:21 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 20:31:54 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. Sort of flies in the face of claims that they only want "reasonable" gun laws. What makes a Kimber any worse than any other .45 pistol? They either don't pass the MA safety tests, meet the AG requirements or Kimber refuses to submit any to the state for compliance testing. |
#46
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 02:53:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Sort of flies in the face of claims that they only want "reasonable" gun laws. What makes a Kimber any worse than any other .45 pistol? They either don't pass the MA safety tests, meet the AG requirements or Kimber refuses to submit any to the state for compliance testing. === My guess is the latter. Kimber can already sell everything they make so why waste production assets on stupid states with stupid rules. |
#46
On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 9:10:44 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 02:53:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Sort of flies in the face of claims that they only want "reasonable" gun laws. What makes a Kimber any worse than any other .45 pistol? They either don't pass the MA safety tests, meet the AG requirements or Kimber refuses to submit any to the state for compliance testing. === My guess is the latter. Kimber can already sell everything they make so why waste production assets on stupid states with stupid rules. I was thinking the same thing. Kimber has high sales volume and I can't see them making a 'special' model to satisfy an angry state's resterictions just to sell a few. |
#46
|
#46
On 2/29/2016 10:17 AM, Tim wrote:
On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 9:10:44 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 02:53:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Sort of flies in the face of claims that they only want "reasonable" gun laws. What makes a Kimber any worse than any other .45 pistol? They either don't pass the MA safety tests, meet the AG requirements or Kimber refuses to submit any to the state for compliance testing. === My guess is the latter. Kimber can already sell everything they make so why waste production assets on stupid states with stupid rules. I was thinking the same thing. Kimber has high sales volume and I can't see them making a 'special' model to satisfy an angry state's resterictions just to sell a few. Good thing I am not a "gun nut", huh? :-) |
#46
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. It is about money or some missing "feature" on the gun itself? |
#46
On 2/29/2016 7:48 PM, Alex wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. It is about money or some missing "feature" on the gun itself? It's due to a complicated and convoluted set of laws in Massachusetts governed by two different agencies ... an independent testing lab and the Attorney General's office. Simply put (as simple as I can) here's the deal: The Massachusetts state legislation passed a law many years ago that requires any new handgun sold by an FFL in the state to be tested and approved by an independent testing lab. The guns are subjected to tests to ensure their safety, quality and other criteria that I don't know all the details of. Mostly it is safety. If the handgun meets the design criteria requirements and the various tests it is "approved" for sale. But the Attorney General's office also has something to say about it. This dates back to 1997 and a Massachusetts state AG by the name of Scott Harshbarger. Harshbarger was anti-gun and wanted to ban them in Massachusetts altogether. He couldn't without going through the legislative process and could not convince enough state legislators to ban guns so he initiated some subjective requirements that did not require a formal bill to be put into force. Basically, in addition to passing the safety/quality tests by the testing lab any new handgun sold in MA by an FFL must also have: 1. Child-safety features – 940 CMR 16.05(2), (4) 2. Load indicators and magazine safety disconnects for semi-automatic handguns – 940 CMR 16.05 (3), (4) 3. Tamper-resistant serial numbers 940 CMR 16.03 The AG's office has sole discretion as to whether a handgun meets these requirements. So, a gun can be approved by the testing lab but not approved by the AG's office. The result is that some handgun manufacturer's don't even bother to submit their products for testing and approval in MA. I can still buy a "non compliant" handgun from a private seller but only if the seller is also a MA resident *and* the gun has always been in MA since new. Problem is, no one can legally buy them to begin with because they would have had to originally been sold by an FFL and and FFL can't legally sell them. Guns manufactured before 1998 are grandfathered however they must also have always been in the state. For example, someone can sell or trade in a non-compliant handgun manufactured before 1998 to a FFL and he can sell it. But, you can't buy one that comes from outside MA privately or through a FFL ... legally. Clear as mud, right? |
#46
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 23:28:30 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/29/2016 7:48 PM, Alex wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. It is about money or some missing "feature" on the gun itself? It's due to a complicated and convoluted set of laws in Massachusetts governed by two different agencies ... an independent testing lab and the Attorney General's office. Simply put (as simple as I can) here's the deal: The Massachusetts state legislation passed a law many years ago that requires any new handgun sold by an FFL in the state to be tested and approved by an independent testing lab. The guns are subjected to tests to ensure their safety, quality and other criteria that I don't know all the details of. Mostly it is safety. If the handgun meets the design criteria requirements and the various tests it is "approved" for sale. But the Attorney General's office also has something to say about it. This dates back to 1997 and a Massachusetts state AG by the name of Scott Harshbarger. Harshbarger was anti-gun and wanted to ban them in Massachusetts altogether. He couldn't without going through the legislative process and could not convince enough state legislators to ban guns so he initiated some subjective requirements that did not require a formal bill to be put into force. Basically, in addition to passing the safety/quality tests by the testing lab any new handgun sold in MA by an FFL must also have: 1. Child-safety features – 940 CMR 16.05(2), (4) 2. Load indicators and magazine safety disconnects for semi-automatic handguns – 940 CMR 16.05 (3), (4) 3. Tamper-resistant serial numbers 940 CMR 16.03 The AG's office has sole discretion as to whether a handgun meets these requirements. So, a gun can be approved by the testing lab but not approved by the AG's office. The result is that some handgun manufacturer's don't even bother to submit their products for testing and approval in MA. I can still buy a "non compliant" handgun from a private seller but only if the seller is also a MA resident *and* the gun has always been in MA since new. Problem is, no one can legally buy them to begin with because they would have had to originally been sold by an FFL and and FFL can't legally sell them. Guns manufactured before 1998 are grandfathered however they must also have always been in the state. For example, someone can sell or trade in a non-compliant handgun manufactured before 1998 to a FFL and he can sell it. But, you can't buy one that comes from outside MA privately or through a FFL ... legally. Clear as mud, right? Give 'em an inch... -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! |
#46
On 3/1/2016 6:14 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 23:28:30 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/29/2016 7:48 PM, Alex wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. It is about money or some missing "feature" on the gun itself? It's due to a complicated and convoluted set of laws in Massachusetts governed by two different agencies ... an independent testing lab and the Attorney General's office. Simply put (as simple as I can) here's the deal: The Massachusetts state legislation passed a law many years ago that requires any new handgun sold by an FFL in the state to be tested and approved by an independent testing lab. The guns are subjected to tests to ensure their safety, quality and other criteria that I don't know all the details of. Mostly it is safety. If the handgun meets the design criteria requirements and the various tests it is "approved" for sale. But the Attorney General's office also has something to say about it. This dates back to 1997 and a Massachusetts state AG by the name of Scott Harshbarger. Harshbarger was anti-gun and wanted to ban them in Massachusetts altogether. He couldn't without going through the legislative process and could not convince enough state legislators to ban guns so he initiated some subjective requirements that did not require a formal bill to be put into force. Basically, in addition to passing the safety/quality tests by the testing lab any new handgun sold in MA by an FFL must also have: 1. Child-safety features – 940 CMR 16.05(2), (4) 2. Load indicators and magazine safety disconnects for semi-automatic handguns – 940 CMR 16.05 (3), (4) 3. Tamper-resistant serial numbers 940 CMR 16.03 The AG's office has sole discretion as to whether a handgun meets these requirements. So, a gun can be approved by the testing lab but not approved by the AG's office. The result is that some handgun manufacturer's don't even bother to submit their products for testing and approval in MA. I can still buy a "non compliant" handgun from a private seller but only if the seller is also a MA resident *and* the gun has always been in MA since new. Problem is, no one can legally buy them to begin with because they would have had to originally been sold by an FFL and and FFL can't legally sell them. Guns manufactured before 1998 are grandfathered however they must also have always been in the state. For example, someone can sell or trade in a non-compliant handgun manufactured before 1998 to a FFL and he can sell it. But, you can't buy one that comes from outside MA privately or through a FFL ... legally. Clear as mud, right? Give 'em an inch... There is current legislation pending that would remove the AG's involvement in the determination of what is compliant and what is not. |
#46
On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 9:20:00 AM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/29/2016 10:17 AM, Tim wrote: On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 9:10:44 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 02:53:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Sort of flies in the face of claims that they only want "reasonable" gun laws. What makes a Kimber any worse than any other .45 pistol? They either don't pass the MA safety tests, meet the AG requirements or Kimber refuses to submit any to the state for compliance testing. === My guess is the latter. Kimber can already sell everything they make so why waste production assets on stupid states with stupid rules. I was thinking the same thing. Kimber has high sales volume and I can't see them making a 'special' model to satisfy an angry state's resterictions just to sell a few. Good thing I am not a "gun nut", huh? :-) Yes Richard, that's wise. You should leave the gun nutting up to us professionals. LOL |
#46
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:14:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote:
On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 9:20:00 AM UTC-6, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/29/2016 10:17 AM, Tim wrote: On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 9:10:44 AM UTC-6, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 02:53:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Sort of flies in the face of claims that they only want "reasonable" gun laws. What makes a Kimber any worse than any other .45 pistol? They either don't pass the MA safety tests, meet the AG requirements or Kimber refuses to submit any to the state for compliance testing. === My guess is the latter. Kimber can already sell everything they make so why waste production assets on stupid states with stupid rules. I was thinking the same thing. Kimber has high sales volume and I can't see them making a 'special' model to satisfy an angry state's resterictions just to sell a few. Good thing I am not a "gun nut", huh? :-) Yes Richard, that's wise. You should leave the gun nutting up to us professionals. LOL Ah, I wondered why your cards show: "Tim Schnautz, PGN" Professional Gun Nut. Now I know. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! |
#46
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/29/2016 7:48 PM, Alex wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. It is about money or some missing "feature" on the gun itself? It's due to a complicated and convoluted set of laws in Massachusetts governed by two different agencies ... an independent testing lab and the Attorney General's office. Simply put (as simple as I can) here's the deal: The Massachusetts state legislation passed a law many years ago that requires any new handgun sold by an FFL in the state to be tested and approved by an independent testing lab. The guns are subjected to tests to ensure their safety, quality and other criteria that I don't know all the details of. Mostly it is safety. If the handgun meets the design criteria requirements and the various tests it is "approved" for sale. But the Attorney General's office also has something to say about it. This dates back to 1997 and a Massachusetts state AG by the name of Scott Harshbarger. Harshbarger was anti-gun and wanted to ban them in Massachusetts altogether. He couldn't without going through the legislative process and could not convince enough state legislators to ban guns so he initiated some subjective requirements that did not require a formal bill to be put into force. Basically, in addition to passing the safety/quality tests by the testing lab any new handgun sold in MA by an FFL must also have: 1. Child-safety features – 940 CMR 16.05(2), (4) 2. Load indicators and magazine safety disconnects for semi-automatic handguns – 940 CMR 16.05 (3), (4) 3. Tamper-resistant serial numbers 940 CMR 16.03 The AG's office has sole discretion as to whether a handgun meets these requirements. So, a gun can be approved by the testing lab but not approved by the AG's office. The result is that some handgun manufacturer's don't even bother to submit their products for testing and approval in MA. I can still buy a "non compliant" handgun from a private seller but only if the seller is also a MA resident *and* the gun has always been in MA since new. Problem is, no one can legally buy them to begin with because they would have had to originally been sold by an FFL and and FFL can't legally sell them. Guns manufactured before 1998 are grandfathered however they must also have always been in the state. For example, someone can sell or trade in a non-compliant handgun manufactured before 1998 to a FFL and he can sell it. But, you can't buy one that comes from outside MA privately or through a FFL ... legally. Clear as mud, right? Yup. What the hell is a tamper-resistant serial number? Only a criminal would "tamper" with one and only to hide a crime. They wouldn't care how they obscure it. A grinder, a weld, acid, etc. The problem is that once laws like this are enacted, they are nearly impossible to repeal. I don't agree with the NRA on a lot of things but I understand their philosophy as this illustrates. Give an inch and they will take a mile. |
#46
John H. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 23:28:30 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/29/2016 7:48 PM, Alex wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. It is about money or some missing "feature" on the gun itself? It's due to a complicated and convoluted set of laws in Massachusetts governed by two different agencies ... an independent testing lab and the Attorney General's office. Simply put (as simple as I can) here's the deal: The Massachusetts state legislation passed a law many years ago that requires any new handgun sold by an FFL in the state to be tested and approved by an independent testing lab. The guns are subjected to tests to ensure their safety, quality and other criteria that I don't know all the details of. Mostly it is safety. If the handgun meets the design criteria requirements and the various tests it is "approved" for sale. But the Attorney General's office also has something to say about it. This dates back to 1997 and a Massachusetts state AG by the name of Scott Harshbarger. Harshbarger was anti-gun and wanted to ban them in Massachusetts altogether. He couldn't without going through the legislative process and could not convince enough state legislators to ban guns so he initiated some subjective requirements that did not require a formal bill to be put into force. Basically, in addition to passing the safety/quality tests by the testing lab any new handgun sold in MA by an FFL must also have: 1. Child-safety features – 940 CMR 16.05(2), (4) 2. Load indicators and magazine safety disconnects for semi-automatic handguns – 940 CMR 16.05 (3), (4) 3. Tamper-resistant serial numbers 940 CMR 16.03 The AG's office has sole discretion as to whether a handgun meets these requirements. So, a gun can be approved by the testing lab but not approved by the AG's office. The result is that some handgun manufacturer's don't even bother to submit their products for testing and approval in MA. I can still buy a "non compliant" handgun from a private seller but only if the seller is also a MA resident *and* the gun has always been in MA since new. Problem is, no one can legally buy them to begin with because they would have had to originally been sold by an FFL and and FFL can't legally sell them. Guns manufactured before 1998 are grandfathered however they must also have always been in the state. For example, someone can sell or trade in a non-compliant handgun manufactured before 1998 to a FFL and he can sell it. But, you can't buy one that comes from outside MA privately or through a FFL ... legally. Clear as mud, right? Give 'em an inch... -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! I should have read ahead, John! |
#46
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/1/2016 6:14 AM, John H. wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 23:28:30 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/29/2016 7:48 PM, Alex wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/28/2016 7:49 PM, wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:51:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Kimber is a non-issue for me. I can't legally buy one even if I wanted one. *All* Kimber handguns are banned in Massachusetts. http://fsguns.com/fsg_information.html === What prevents you from buying elsewhere and bringing it back home? If I weren't such a law abiding citizen I could. :-) I can't do that legally in MA. If caught with it, there goes my gun permit and technically could be subject to fines or prosecution. Can't order one from out of state and have it shipped and transferred to my by a FFL either. All Kimbers are simply illegal to own here unless they were made before 1998 and only *if* they were always in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I know. It's crazy. But them's the rules here. It is about money or some missing "feature" on the gun itself? It's due to a complicated and convoluted set of laws in Massachusetts governed by two different agencies ... an independent testing lab and the Attorney General's office. Simply put (as simple as I can) here's the deal: The Massachusetts state legislation passed a law many years ago that requires any new handgun sold by an FFL in the state to be tested and approved by an independent testing lab. The guns are subjected to tests to ensure their safety, quality and other criteria that I don't know all the details of. Mostly it is safety. If the handgun meets the design criteria requirements and the various tests it is "approved" for sale. But the Attorney General's office also has something to say about it. This dates back to 1997 and a Massachusetts state AG by the name of Scott Harshbarger. Harshbarger was anti-gun and wanted to ban them in Massachusetts altogether. He couldn't without going through the legislative process and could not convince enough state legislators to ban guns so he initiated some subjective requirements that did not require a formal bill to be put into force. Basically, in addition to passing the safety/quality tests by the testing lab any new handgun sold in MA by an FFL must also have: 1. Child-safety features – 940 CMR 16.05(2), (4) 2. Load indicators and magazine safety disconnects for semi-automatic handguns – 940 CMR 16.05 (3), (4) 3. Tamper-resistant serial numbers 940 CMR 16.03 The AG's office has sole discretion as to whether a handgun meets these requirements. So, a gun can be approved by the testing lab but not approved by the AG's office. The result is that some handgun manufacturer's don't even bother to submit their products for testing and approval in MA. I can still buy a "non compliant" handgun from a private seller but only if the seller is also a MA resident *and* the gun has always been in MA since new. Problem is, no one can legally buy them to begin with because they would have had to originally been sold by an FFL and and FFL can't legally sell them. Guns manufactured before 1998 are grandfathered however they must also have always been in the state. For example, someone can sell or trade in a non-compliant handgun manufactured before 1998 to a FFL and he can sell it. But, you can't buy one that comes from outside MA privately or through a FFL ... legally. Clear as mud, right? Give 'em an inch... There is current legislation pending that would remove the AG's involvement in the determination of what is compliant and what is not. That won't automatically undo the "damage", right? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:51 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com