GENELEO

"Black" Walnut?

The shells should feed into the magazine easily. The Mesa Tactical receiver mounted shell carrier that they have for the M-1/M-2 will fit the M-3 if you have the receiver drilled and tapped. It costs about $25.00 if you can't do it yourself. Hope this helps.

It origonally came from an M1, and I had it installed on my M3 for awhile. They are interchangable.

P.M. sent.

Go ahead, it won't fit my shotgun.

I'm Interested, PM sent.

Check out the attached shortcut. http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=144798727

Here's another one, kind of pricey, but it is in stock. http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=136983598 I have a "very lightly" used one with a few extras. PM me if interested.

The M-3 and M-1 use the same butt stock, but the "washer / adapter" inside the butt stock, where it attaches to the rear of the receiver "may" be different, if it is, use the one from your original stock. The stock on my M-3, originally came from a M-1.

The pump function was designed for Law Enforcement Officers to have a dual purpose shotgun. It would give the officer the fire power of a semi-auto, and then offer them the use of the same shotgun to fire special purpose rounds such as gas, rubber projectiles, bean bags, etc. that did not have the energy to operate the semi-auto action, thus giving them the use of two shotguns in one. It was too expensive for most departments to buy, as you could buy 2 Remingtons, or Mossbergs for less than the price of one Benelli. Now you see the bright orange colored "Less Lethal" marked guns used for the special purpose rounds, with the old standby pumps still used, as a lot of departments still won't go to a semi-auto.

10-4, thanks.

Do you have a website for CMM? I googled CMM but there were no good results. Thanks.

E-Mail with pics sent.

On my M-3 the forward extension un-screws from the magazine tube. You are right though, it appears that here is a "follower" in both ends, on the barrel end, the short tube unscrews from the magazine tube (just forward of the front sling attachment), then the spring and all the internal parts can be removed. Hope this helps.

A firearm is not intended to "intimidate" someone into compliance. I have personally run into people who are either crazy enough or hopped up enough on drugs / alcohol that they are not afraid of guns. A firearm is not to be used to scare someone, it is to be used to defend your life, or the life of another. If you can scare them into compliance then it worked, if you can't then you have a serious "oh sh__" situation! More and more you are seeing thugs who aren't afraid to stand and shoot it out with well armed and trained police. A few months ago, a teenager, in N.E. Florida, shot it out, and lost, over a pair of jeans he had shoplifted. He wasn't scared by the gun, he chose to stand and fight. A few years ago, some of the prison systems started using a rifle with a laser attached, by simply placing the red dot on the inmates chest when the inmates started to riot, the inmates knew "first the red dot, then the red hole". Lasers tend to work, sometimes. Simply pointing a firearm works, sometimes. IMHO

Those are just "character" marks (kinda like a tattoo:cool:). They show the gun is being used, not just occupying space in the safe. If concerned with covering them up, if they are not too deep, about the only way to go is to have the barrel bead blasted, leaving a rough surface, then have it parkerized or matte blued, to match the receiver. Brownells carries a product that is kind of like a "body putty" for guns, it can be used to fill deep pits and scratchs, but I have never seen it used.

As far as a good .223 pistol, I have had good luck with the Keltec PLR-16. Feeds and functions with anything in223/5.56 family. It uses M-16 mags, same as my AR's, good, as a SBR, without the travel hassle, has a rail with a laser and a red dot, exceptional accuracy too. (With a good sling set-up you can shoot it almost as accurately as a rifle) Just my 2 cents.

Shhhhhhhh, NOBAMA may be listening!!!!!

Short stroking a pump is very real, even for officers that have spent a lot of time in training. We see it all the time in annul in-service training. In my experience there are two types of officers that have trouble, those that are trying to get as "fast" as possible, and those of small stature, (arms not long enough to physically actuate the pump action / slide), these are the officers who can benefit the most from a semi-auto, with the proper training. Police administrators though still shy away from the semi-auto, except for speacialized units (swat). They say it is for "reliability" but it really comes down to "budget". A Mossberg 500 / 590 series or Remington 870 is cheaper for the tax payers to supply the officers with than a M-4.

Second hand knowledge is fine, as long as it comes from Experience, not someone's "opinion", or conjecture, which in my experience is where most professed "knowledge" seems to come from. "Opening up the gas ports" that was the suggested remedy back on page one, remember? "I don't belive in "break-in", and I will not tolerate imperfection when it comes to reliability". "Break in" is necessary on any firearm that you are staking your life on!!!!! Every new firearm that is put into service whether in the military, or police use, will go to the range to be broken in, you discover the failures or flaws in manufacture on the range, not in combat, or on the street when your life depends on it. This is from personal experience, not second hand knowledge. Age has nothing to do with it, it is whether you have the ability to learn, and as seen from some of the "newbies" right from the academy, they allready know it all, and don't have the ability to learn anything else, even if it may save they're life. I don't own an M-4, I have an M-3, If the Marines use the M-4, then I feel it couldn't be beat, (this is second hand knowledge I feel confident believing) but I would like to save my pennys to buy one. Everyone has there own likes and dis-likes in weapons, and there own opinions, to which they are entitled. IMOHO.

Not "fickle temperments" the "target" guns were designed to shoot the light loads, the hunting guns were designed to shoot heavy loads.

Those 1100 owners who are whining about the 1100 not functioning on birdshot are not paying attention to the requirments for the proper ammo for the gun. The "target, skeet, or trap" models are intended to function on "target" (light) loads, otherwise they are intended to be used with standard loads. To get a "standard" 1100 to function with light loads, you have to open up the gas ports very slightly.

E-Mail sent.

It would be very interesting to see what happened when his conviction was appealed. Generally, the appeals court has more common sense than the jury/trial judge. IMHO.

Found one. Thanks.