Stumbled across a nice Remington 721 from 1952 in .270 at the FFL today and snapped it up. Has a 2.75x scope and a decent, if slightly heavy trigger. Looks well-used but cared for.
I’m not much of a .270 fan, so why?
Here’s why:
Being more than 50 years old, once in my hands it’s legal to transfer twixt consenting adult Cali residents without any paperwork –at least until January 1, 2014, when even that loophole gets plugged.
I’m no straw purchaser; just like the idea of owning rifles with some flexibility built in.
– Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Paperless? You got it from an FFL and it’s PAPERLESS? Does.Not.Compute. I suspect that new Kali transfer law will make the paper trail a forever thing, as it is now in WA.
Consider rebarreling the rifle to .308. 270 is very (old) Elmer Fudd, and the ammo, based on a 30-06 hull IIRC, is never going to be widely available, even if sanity does return to the ammo supply, something that can’t be taken for granted.
Paperless “downstream from me” for anybody I might transfer it to this year. I’m thinking Christmas, and recalling Christmas 2012, when the Obama panic caused more than a few family and friends to ask me how they might obtain a paperless rifle.
I have my fair share of boating accidents. 🙂
And yeah, rebarreling’s an option, but first I wanna see how the existing one shoots!
Yeah, guns get lost from boats. When I was in the Marine Patrol, I took a few of those reports, but they were all scatterguns. My Dad lost a rifle once by getting back to his Jeep, and while he was removing all his hunting gear, he put the rifle on the soft top of the Jeep to keep it out of the dirt, then forgot it and drove off. He stopped after a mile or so on the dirt road, and retraced his route, but several vehicles had passed him in the other direction and even though he looked for several hours and again the next day, he never found the Browning BAR in 30-06. He reported it to the State Police, but it never turned up. Insurance covered it and he got a new one.