Nice!
And I received just this week the SHIELD (made in UK) red dot, size 4 moa, RMSc , glass lens, from OpticsPlanet.com. Just a quick look at a Youtube install video, a dab of loctite on two screws and the red dot sight sits FLUSH atop the slide, zeroed in without adjustment just as if it...
I got a Glock 43x MOS at J&K Associates in Havre De Grace 4 days ago, they are still in stock according to website. 50$ less than what other internet sellers like Gun Broker and Palmetto are selling the earlier uncut slide versions... Also a Glock Blue Label dealer.
Mr. Eruby,
I don't take issue with your assessment- but I was happy he told the State Police to stop ***** footing around and start processing our applications. Otherwise they'd have stayed hidden behind the "our legal team is assessing the issue" stall until a court case smoked them out- and...
Because until this Supreme Court decision Maryland extended LEOSA - no strings attached- to those who retired from a MARYLAND law enforcement agency and/or a FEDERAL one. The rest of us, DC included, even though I lived in Maryland the whole time, had to provide/prove the: "good and substantial"...
Thank you!
LEOSA ?
Prior to the Supreme Court ruling Maryland required non-Maryland and non-Federal retired former law enforcement to provide the same "good and substantial" reason to carry that they do of civilians. They only extended the non-qualified courtesy to those retired from a...
I just came from part 1+2 for the MD wear and carry at "Cindy's Hot Shots" in Glen Burnie, MD. The class was taught by MD State approved trainer John Merson- price for day one (classroom) was $150 and Day two (range) was $200. I just looked. He has not jacked up the price and a few spots still...
I agree.
I just came from training at "Cindy's Hot Shots" with instructor John Merson. I left law enforcement after 30 years a few years ago. When I found out Maryland wanted me to apply for a license and prove "good & substantial" after carrying for 30 years on and off duty in DC- I started...
Good point.
Something about: "It's not about infringing it's about being responsible" rubbed me the wrong way. Rather in the manner of the: "good and substantial" verbiage. That too was cast as being responsible and reasonable despite abrogating peoples' right to carry a firearm for self-defense.
Thank you for posting that letter. It is refreshing to hear the powers that be explain the consequences of the recent Supreme Court decision by soberly laying out the legal ramifications WITHOUT the hysterical grand standing about "gun" violence and the pandering to anti 2A constituencies!