notsosureshot

You could look at furniture in the Jacobean style, to match the age of the house. That period ran to about 1625 but would look pretty authentic even if your house is slightly older. It just so happens that Jacobean furniture, carving aside, was simple in construction and style. There are tons of examples of such period furniture on the web. Auction houses, antique sites, that sort of thing. Have fun

Bleeh, if you'd read my previous post you'd know I have several friends whom I am concerned about. I know many members of the forces, outside the few I mentioned and mostly they ARE like you say, which is why I am so upset at the general attitude displayed here. Service men and women are most often selfless people and would never ask for anything to be done to benefit specifically them whatsoever. They have no pansy *** "workers union", they can't really go on strike, they have no say in anything really. This is not the NHS where they can simply strike because they wanted a 1% pay increase. That is a right that our armed forces do NOT have! This is all the more reason why they need recognition, support and understanding of what they go through, by the public at large. Most people don't have a clue what can happen to these young people when they serve. Sure, it's fair to say that not all of them have horrific experiences, but many do and the last thing they need is external civilian pressure to repay money they may not have when they have done their duty. The money is utterly irrelevent in this scenario. Why on earth would we place additional stress on people who, through serving their country, are already under untold stress which most people cannot begin to imagine. If you really want to cover all bases, give them the option. Don't enforce it legally, that would just be utterly shameful to put these guys under such pressure. If anyone challenges what I am saying in this post. How many of you would donate to Help for Heroes? That charity would not need to exist if the government provided sufficient funding for our serving and ex servicemen/women to resettle properly. It is a national shame that the charity is forced to exist at all! If the inept government takes this money back and forces people into debt to do so, then the burden will fall to charities. Many service men and women really have no option. They get paid absolutely nothing in relative terms, for what they do. Many cannot make ends meet. This isn't a question of pride Bleeh, it's a question of necessity for many young men and women. You can be the most humble soldier in the world, but if you come home to nothing, or circumstances force you to have nothing, you need help. The government putting them into a potential debt scenario is stupid beyong imagining. We have not even touched on the fact that there is already a significant problem with homelessness amongst ex-servicemen/women and you guys want to recalculate their pay which they already spent, probably on their families (nothing else to spend it on really) ? Really..... No, they wont ask for a leg up. But for the sake of all thats holy, does that mean we should ignore them?

Are you actually serious in your post fenboy? No different to any other walk of life? No different to overpaying benefits to civilians? Do you know any people who have served in the forces at all, let alone in actual combat where their life is on the line? For combat troops, there is an enormous glaring difference sir. Their priority is living to see another day, not whether or not they checked their payslip. This is a very sad post in my eyes as you clearly have little to no understanding on what on earth these people go through in serving our country, a country which includes both you and I. I would urge you to reconsider. I just cannot believe someone could honestly believe there is no difference. :( What the hell has happened to our country? I am really at a loss to understand some of the comments here.

What if they already sent it home to their families without realising? What are they supposed to do if it was spent paying the bills? Checking finances is the last thing on your mind if you're deployed.

After reading the replies I feel sick. Our soliders are vastly underpaid as it is. Considering what they do on a daily basis, I would imagine the last thing on their minds is a cosy night by the computer with Quicken trying to work out their savings plan. I doubt many operational troops look at their bank account from one month to the next. Put it into context. Our army is small, many individuals have rendered front line service recently, they are away from their children, families. Are they really to be expected to return to a forward operating base following a dangerous patrol mission and fiddle about with their finances to check what was received from where? Moreover, who the hell do they ask if they are deployed or on a base somewhere, since their CO seems to know nothing about it. They might be in the middle of a desert for a year. Not to mention they cannot just simply go see the CO or even admin staff when they feel like it. They must follow protocol to the letter. The amount of young people in the armed forces having suffered serious trauma is grossly underestimated and many are incapable of looking after themselves physically, let alone financially. It's so easy to sit at our computers and give opinions about whether or not they should give "overpaid" monies back. Do those of you who think so not realise, that many combat troops suffer from PTSD to such an extent that they cannot even function well in normal society, nevermind their finances. Just because such people don't always make it into the statistics, doesn't mean they don't exist. It is a real and current problem. Yes, the MOD provides help, but it can take many years for it to have any effect, that is if the person chooses to take the help offered, they dont have to and for most, it is a very difficult choice. Therapy, almost emasculating them in the view of some. I know 5 men who have served on the front line proper, at extreme risk to life and limb. All have been present for specific, known battles. Not a single one of them has a happy life at the moment, as they have confided amongst our friend group. All of them ended their tour(s) with operation Herrick 9 in April 2009. Two of them have since been divorced, one isn't comfortable spending time with his own children and feels like life is pointless and the other two have taken to placing themselves in what normal people would consider extremely dangerous situations, on a regular basis. The list of reasons goes on. The point is, unless you know how it feels to be in such a situation, or at the very least, have a close friend with direct experience of being shot at or seeing your friends being blown to pieces, then suggesting our members of our forces should know of their finances as well as we do, is abhorrent. They have their own humanity to preserve, money is meaningless when you're watching severed legs flying through the air and simultaneously being shot at from various angles. Even after a battle, there are numerous horrific images which haunt you. I have seen the pictures and wish I had not. What part of that do you not get when you're proposing they pay back trivial amounts of money? This isn't the A-Team where you just go home and carry on, they have to live with their experiences until they die. It doesn't matter how much you hate the enemy, indeed many of the soldiers I know dont hate anyone, but seeing a dead young person in a grotesque posture, is highly traumatic, and something you will never get out of your mind. Considering all the money we pay to benefit claimants, some of whom are simply spongers who have no desire to do anything except be professional scoungers, can we not allow these young men and woman, who elected to serve in defence of the tax payers of this country, to keep these piffling amounts. It is a tiny amount in the great scheme of things. Amounting for example, to just 10% of what we provide to India in aid each year. India have a space exploration programme for goodness sake and can't feed their own people. Don't dare to lump serving members of our forces into the same sentence as civilian benefit claimants under any circumstances. Our army, navy and airforce personnel often risk all, for our collective benefit and receive very little in return. They will NEVER be rich yet they may very well, die trying. Benefit claimants are asking for a hand out and in many cases it is justified, but they are certainly not risking life and limb on a sometimes daily basis, as many of our armed forces personnel have been ordered to do, and probably have ample time to sit and go through their personal finances. Yes, these men and women elect to join the services, but without them we would be defenseless. If you think differently, go yourself, do a tour on the front line and then spout off about how easy it was to manage your finances at the same time, assuming you don't get shot or blown up.

I'll stick a fiver on it right now. The outcome of the next election will be a coalition between Labour and the SNP. If the electorate allows that, then they deserve the consequences. I love Scotland, I'm half Scottish and identify with it. I believe in independence if it's what the people who live there want. But doing it that way with Labour/SNP, by undermining the UK parliament, would be a disgrace. Of course, many people would want to take firm action, except, it's illegal to do anything of meaning, aside from waving signs whilst being escorted by the police away from areas of significance. Another thing we can blame the entire electorate for allowing. Our right to protest is utterly meaningless. The government carry on regardless, their jobs are on the line. We have no real voice, no way to force change, no way to tackle governent head on, yet they supposedly serve us. The faux democracy we have now is a joke, it has had too much external influence for too long. FPTP is past its sell by date. Basically, it's all our fault, our combined fault, for being so bloody ambivalent over the years. We are now lemmings. The electorate allowed the lazy and the ill intentioned to take over to such an extent that they are now capable of swinging a vote, entirely based on the party that will provide them with the most "free" money. They do not care about the future of the country, or indeed, in many cases even understand what a political party represents outside of the sphere of their particular area of self interest. Many of such voters do not even care what a party represents, since they are so self absorbed. You reap what you sow. For me, the worst part about it is that nothing can be done if a government that has no mandate (i.e. would lose in percentage vote terms) actually makes it into power through some screwed up behind the scenes deal. It is a disgrace across the board and we call ourselves an advanced democracy. What an utter joke. As for UKIP. I think they pander to specific issues in order to gain votes, yet their actual politics are all over the place. Of course, myself, and almost everyone in the country, is in agreement with at least one of their policies, but they do not really represent an electable alternative at present, they are just not organised enough and flip flop around too much. That said, all of the political parties we have, would sell their own mother for a vote. Promises made, broken. It's a familiar story. They are never held accountable because, again, it's illegal for the electorate to really tackle them on it, in terms of if they lied to us, they are out, by our own hand. We can't do that unless we want to break the law. Fundamental changes are needed to the way this country is run. The system is old, it is corrupt, it is not representative of the population. We all know it. The endless scandals in the daily papers provides yet more evidence, if needed. There are some good politicans around, but they tend to be men or women who have lived a life, before embarking on a political career. At least they have the experience to speak on issues relevant to the people. Having the above opinion leaves me in a position of really not wanting to vote for anyone. I will, but I will vote for the party that serves my overall ideals. Rather than just my personal ones.

That is a bike I always wanted to own since I was a youngster, that, and the RGV250. Also had a thing for the RVF400, but I think I'm a bit old for any of those now. Can we see?

All great bikes. Heres my current steed. 2014 1200 GS TE. Last bike was an all black FZ1 with plenty of carbon. I actually regret selling it but it was a bike for hooning around and so aggressive as a naked. Bit like the S1000R. :DDD Since this photo I've added some alu panniers, a new gear lever and some engine bars. Typical GS accessories. In all honesty, I'd never have seen myself riding a GS but one test ride and I was sold. I'm a better and faster rider on the GS than I was on the FZ1. I have no idea why. A pic of my FZ1, I loved it so much I had to include it. They really are lookers, in my opinion and 150 or so bhp...eeek.

Thats an example of what I meant by my earlier post. Backhanders aside, the local mayor will often have you believe that his signed permission is all that is needed. In reality, in many cases it isn't and this is why a lot of people have fallen foul of national planning regulations, even when they thought they had all the right paperwork and official permission. Most certainly a case of caveat emptor!

I don't buy from auction very often, but I think I must really be out of touch. Purchased 5 items at auction this week. Collected yesterday but this morning I receive an email "special offer" giving me the chance to have my items delivered. The price? A mere £150 + VAT per item. So a total of £900 in delivery charges. It's a "special" offer, alright. I only paid £650 all in for the items combined.... I had to laugh. I'm sure someone would find it useful, if they just purchased a couple of Warhols, though.

Here ya go mate, it's all on their web site. http://www.nppc.co.uk/

I knew the calibre you were speaking of, but wasnt aware that armour piercing rounds, or even steel tipped, were ever sold, even as surplus, to civilians in the USA. Perhaps I mixed up two different things. 5.7mm popped into my head because there was a major argument taking place in the states where the anti gun lobby were trying to get it banned outright for being "armour piercing". In reality, in standard form it isn't, and the armour piercing variations of that calibre (steel core) are not available to the public in general, anyway. I thought they might be trying to do the same thing to standard surplus FMJ 5.56, which would be plain weird. Sorry for the mix up.

FWIW, I used Dulux to paint the new nursery at home last November. Wanted white. Painting over a yellowed white using matt emulsion Dulux Once, it took 5 coats in total and was incredibly patchy on application, despite using a quality roller and researching/applying my estimation of a proper technique. Reading around at the time, I found Dulux really was not very well regarded and I can understand why! The next job I do, I'll use Johnsons trade paint. The consumer stuff I think, is mostly junk, no matter which brand you pick.

It was a beautiful day and I'm so jealous. If Sunday is the same I'm rolling out the GS and giving her a blast. That is, if I still fit into my leather. Been over indulging of late... What Aprillia do you have? Presumably not the ******* love child of a Triumph 955 and RSV? PS. Just occurred to me. Won't it be nice not to have to worry about our tax disc being stolen this year...?!

I don't think that the problems with Spanish property, particularly new developments, have been resolved. From my limited understanding, the issues revolve around, to use british terms, the granting of planning permission by local councils, which are then later revoked by the government department responsible for land classification who, sometimes many years later, determine that there was no right to build. I have seen proven cases where individuals have constructed a home, having had all the correct paperwork, only to have the decision of the local council overturned and their house demolished or, in other cases, they have been refused permission to connect to utilities. This has also been an issue on larger multi-home developments also and is not limited to self-builders. Several property developers, architects and council officials have been implicated also. For this reason, unless purchasing an existing and older residential property, I would not personally consider Spain a viable option.

I'm absolutely no pro, but I'd agree with this 100%. These are fantastic carts and the only reason I stopped using them is because I moved to a semi-auto and they did not cycle properly. For an O/U on skeet, you cant really go far wrong with Hull Comp X 21's.

Out of interest, what rounds are you guys speaking of? Is this a similar kerfuffle that resulted in multiple failed petitions to government over 5.7mm or an entirely different theory?

Can you give further details? Why would steel shot be harmful as opposed to lead?

Surely the last thing the BASC would need would be a retired politician. Whether you agree with them or not, the increasing support for UKIP has demonstrated one thing. Significant numbers of people have been shown to be pretty tired of typical UK party politics and a lot of UKIP's support is from "salt of the earth" type voters, many of whom are open to common sense arguments, being tired of all the PC nonsense that floats around just to win votes. BASC needs to remain politically impartial to address the needs of it's diverse membership. Surely, if arguments for the presence of hunting, shooting and country sports are, in the main, based on conservation, then the need exists to use reasoning which will cross the political divide and appeal to all. By the very nature of conservation, being a global issue, it should. There are other ways to lobby parliament for change, it does not require sleeping with the enemy. I firmly believe, the vast majority of the British population would be fully supportive of hunting and the shooting sports, if only they understood how things are done, why they are done and that it presents no more risk to them than a game of cricket at the local ground. I'd even include vegetarians and vegans (whom I respect) in this, since they consume cereal crop, which would be depleted if pest control was not undertaken. Yet, they often either refuse to acknowledge the need, or simply do not have access to the information and are ill informed. Why are they not informed and thus, against us? Nobody, no matter what their political views, can exist solely on manufactured foods. Introduce any form of political influence and it becomes a race for votes in some form, not objective discussion. Nobody, and I repeat nobody, employed in politics, who takes any kind of salary over and above the "living wage", can claim to have any interest in the general populous whatsoever. One only has to glance inside an active Students Union to see that. Passionate young people, paid little or nothing, to advocate for their fellow student. Sure, maybe some of them fancy a politicians salary, but many of them do it because they believe in a cause and not for financial reward. The problem is, that politics has become a choice of career, and prospective candidates have had their expectations of earning potential raised accordingly. Impartiality is now impossible when speaking in terms of elected officials in the current system. It is a form of corruption in all but name. Many people scoff at Russia and the former countries of the USSR, but at least, in most cases, they acknowledge it. Anyone who has spent time there will know what I mean by this. If it was up to me, members of parliament would receive a salary in the form of a benefit payment, never to exceed the national average wage. That would sort out the wheat from the chaff. There ARE people who would view it as a civic duty and also have the people skills to be effective, but they do not have the financial backing to ever be elected under the present system. Will a fair parliament happen in our lifetime? Will it eckers like. Since MP's would effectively have to vote themsleves out of a high paying job. Would you do that? In a nutshell, that is what I believe is wrong with our system of government and if BASC appoints an ex-MP to it's council, then it can kiss goodbye to ever having any meaningful relevance to its broad membership, ever again. PS. Im generalising a bit in places, but fundamentally, I hope the point I'm trying to make, comes across.

Now THAT is a Christmas present. Must have been a superb experience, certainly looks to be. Great pics, great write up.

I only got our first little dog a year ago, almost to this day, but even now, i can understand how you feel. Having previously only had cats, the strength of bond attainable with a dog is hard to describe. Solace can be found in the fact that the little pup had 16 lovely years with a loving owner. For our furry friends, this is a long and fulfilling life. I'm looking at my little lad whilst i type this and all i can say is, i know that when his time is up, I will have given him the best life he could ever have had. What more can anyone really do for their furry brothers and sisters. Best wishes.

My first question would be, how big is the company and what type is it, private, public, partnership or charity? I'd also ask your position relative to the management, your length of tenure and whether or not you'd consider the company to be traditionally operated, or more contemporary. Might sound daft, but before giving any comments, it's worth fully understanding the context and audience.

By the way, I just thought of this option for you. You'd need to check if you are eligible, though. Not to mention waiting times and so on. Since Obama, people have been going crazy for this stuff so it might be a bit of a drawn out process. Still, I'd say well worth it. http://thecmp.org/ A brilliant way to source and own an M1 garand and let's face it, who would not want to own a legendary rifle! MODS: This should not constitute advertising. The above is a US government scheme designed to encourage firearms ownership with proper training. It is a non-profit scheme, not a commercial venture. I am not affiliated with the CMP.

If you are using your pistol for CCW then I wouldn't bring cost into it too much. Thats a bit like buying a motorcycle helmet on a budget. How much do you value yourself? Use what feels right, what you are confident with and something that will do the job you are asking it to do. Shoot the same model before you buy it. Sounds silly, but many people, me included, have in the past fallen into this trap! Kimber are not really all that expensive. Compare to Wilson Combat for example. But you really do get what you pay for, believe me. For CCW, I would find a hard time arguing against a .38spc (revolver of course) with shotshells. A common thing amongst my friend group is to chamber 2 shotshells and 4 JHP in the remaining. The first is often rock salt rather than shot. Theory being, in a panic situation, you might not be as accurate as you are down the range and painful distraction might be enough. We queried this with several experts on the course, a couple of times over the years, and there was no real argument against it. A 1911 full frame is too large for most people as a CCW though although there are various compact versions available from a variety of sources. Remember, revolvers very very rarely jam, making them ideal for CCW. Alternatively, again for CCW in a more compact form, Bersa .380 auto's are competitively priced. Shot one a lot and liked it, simple to operate, also very easy to maintain. Would be ideal for the glove box depending on your local state laws. Hope this is not sounding too "walt" for the UK audience..... Anyway, it's basically what works for you. That said, if you're only talking about range work, you'll find it hard to beat a quality 1911 for fun, accuracy and cost of running. Try not to gravitate towards Colt immediately, take a look around at other brands. But don't look at Wilsons because as soon as you do, you'll buy one and your wife will get mad and stuff.....lol Vintage 1911's are lovely and I cut my teeth on that very thing. Cheap as chips and you feel like you're touching a piece of history. PS. Just as a side note because they are common and affordable. Taurus automatic's are gump (revolvers are decent though) and I wish I'd listened to the advice I was given. I had a Taurus automatic, PT24/7 in 45, standard frame, it had an issue with feed first time out, literally after 20 rounds. Obviously since I don't live in the US, it took an age to sort out. Luckily someone helped me do this. When I returned it went straight to a dealer to be sold.

What a great way to utterly ruin a fine service pistol...lol. No offence to the gunsmith, I'm sure the engineering is spot on. I spat my tea out at the price. Then again, I guess if you really must have a semi-auto LBR, something based on a Sig would be as good as anything. Interesting comments about pricing of firearms between the US and UK. It's not only about import taxes, beaurocracy and exchange rate fluctuations, there's a lot of profiteering going on as well. If you're in business, you charge what the market will stand at any given time. But yes, makes me feel queezy too.