Don’t give up if a replacement firing pin is unavailable from your catalog suppliers. Instead, use these tips to solve the problem.

Here are all the items tested in Gun Tests magazine from 2011 back through 1999.

The group Media Matters for America hates NRA. Few organizations have more strongly proclaimed their disdain for our right to keep and bear arms and self-protection, says the NRA-ILA.

Lethal Force Institute’s Massad Ayoob gives a lesson on what to do if you are stopped with firearms in your vehicle. These essential tips will teach you how to safely interact with police when carrying a firearm while driving. (3:47).

Gun Reports - News

Courtesy, Gun Tests

The Ruger's Boot Grip provided plenty of usable grip area. In fact, Gun Tests shooters preferred it over the original grip because it allowed for the highest possible hold on the gun. The XS front sight was very easy to pick up in any light.

SHOT Video: Gun Tests Magazine Designates Ruger LCR-BGXS As 2011 “Best in Class Revolver”

(GunReports.com) -- Gun Tests Magazine has named the Ruger Lightweight Compact Revolver LCR-BGXS as the publication’s “Best in Class Revolver” for 2011.

The pistol joins a Kel-Tec PMR-30, an AR-style 300 Whisper from SSK Industries, a 12-gauge autoloading shotgun from Legacy Sports International, and a laser/light combo accessory from Crimson Trace as the magazine’s “Best in Class” 2011 honorees.

Every December, Gun Tests’ Editor Todd Woodard surveys the work of the magazine’s staff over the previous 12 months to select around 15 Guns of the Year (GOTY) choices. From those GOTY pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns, and accessories, the staff chooses the magazine’s “Best in Class” winners.

Gun Tests Publisher Timothy H. Cole said, “The ‘Best in Class’ winners show accuracy, reliability, tight fit and finish, are often handsome, and offer a lot of value for the dollar. Consumers can trust these awards because we don’t accept advertising, which allows us to choose guns solely on their own merits.”

The exact test model was the $575 Ruger Lightweight Compact Revolver LCR-BGXS with Hogue boot grip, originally reviewed in the March 2011 issue of Gun Tests.

Woodard said, “Two distinct features separated the LCR-BGXS from the other Ruger LCRs, and the code says it all: Boot Grip, XS sight. We found that the Boot Grip, though small in appearance, provided plenty of usable grip area. In fact, we grew to prefer it over the original grip because it allowed us to get the highest possible hold on the gun.”

Roger Eckstine, who wrote the March Gun Tests article, said, “From behind the grip, the front sight was a big ball. In both dim light and sunshine, we found the XS front sight very easy to pick up.”

For more information on Gun Tests magazine, log on to www.gun-tests.com.

Reader Comments

If I didn't already own so many snub revolvers from S&W, Colt, Taurus, and even Ruger, I'd likely trot right out and buy one. I do, however, recognize that there is a practical limit to how many of these little guys I should own.

Comment by: canovack | December 22, 2011

Colonel, I suppose that practical limit is connected somehow to how many you can hide 'off record' and 'off premises' - and remember the locations for - without leaving any documentation for Zombies to find.

Comment by: david b | December 22, 2011

David b, your powers of perception are amazing!

Comment by: canovack | December 22, 2011

Oh, I don't know sir. I just express what I'm thinking most of the time. It's just that I think it wise to have some arms that can't be found by anyone else - and most that can be found by one other person - but only a few by any ONE other person.

I suppose too, it's wiser to squirrel away handguns more than long guns. They're easier to hide, and with one of those and a little treachery a guy could acquire whatever the enemy is shooting fairly quickly. Which means lots of ammo (for the taking) for that particular weapon.

Comment by: david b | December 22, 2011

I should hasten to specify that I think of things like that in terms of drug gangs taking over small towns, or an army of UN guys coming in here someday on trumped up reasons, or the Zombie Apocalypse. I would never advocate hiding guns from our own government, as I... er, um, don't believe it would ever turn against its own citizens. But if it were to ever hypothetically do that, hidden weapons would serve the same purposes.

Comment by: david b | December 22, 2011

History is such a wonderful thing. It is the source of information that so many forget. I, as a soldier, when I was a soldier, would have refused any order to deliberately harm a citizen, let alone a veteran. Check me on this. On July 28, 1932, Soldiers and cavalrymen led by General Douglas MacArthur, assisted by majors Dwight Eisenhower and George Patton drove out WW I veterans who were protesting to get the war bonuses promised to them by the government. The cavalrymen were ordered to strike the veteran protesters with the flats of their swords, while the infantry troops tear gassed and burned out the protesters from their makeshift camps next to the Anacostia river. Being hit with the flat of a sword is like getting hit with the flat side of a piece of steel, which what a sword is. This was during the depression, when people were very needy. These WW I veterans were asking for the bonuses that were PROMISED to them by previous administrations, but had not yet been paid. Can we trust our government NOT to attack us, in our homes or otherwise...when our heroes of WW II led the attack on our veterans of WW I ??? As I said, check me on this.

Comment by: Muleman | December 22, 2011

Muleman, you seem to have your facts pretty well in hand. What I am about to say in no way excuses those who put down the Veterans' Bonus March. That said, however, the reason that the march was held to be illegal was because the bonuses promised those WWI vets were not due for payment for another six years, since they were due to mature 20 years after 1918.....which would have been 1938. Again, I hasten to add that MacArthur, Eisenhower, and Patton did not do themselves very proud in that bit of mischief.

Another thought that comes to mind regards the act of Posse Comitatus that today prohibits the use of US military forces in control of civilian uprisings. I am not certain of when Posse Comitatus came into being, but that too is academic, since I recall that during the Detroit riots of 1968, elements of the 101st Airborne Division were called in to put down the riots. If there is anyone who has a better handle on this subject, I invite your comments.

Comment by: canovack | December 22, 2011

If I'm not mistaken, Posse Comitatus has been negated by Bush era legislation. However, it would take me all night to find and prove that statement - and I won't spend that much effort on proving it - I'd rather spend the time studying my new optics.

Much of the damage done to our constitutional rights under Bush's administration was done piecemeal so that it's hard to eliminate it with one decision in Fed or Supreme courts. (By design, BTW, not by accident.) To find it, you'd have to look at the Patriot Act, the Pandemic Influenza Act, the Military Commissions Act and a long list of other legislation and amendments tacked onto unrelated legislation and budgets. Suffice to say they've gutted nearly all the Bill of Rights, so Posse Comitatus is pretty much on the list if not dead already.

In fact, the recent act passed by Congress that provides for using the military to pick up anyone even suspected of being a 'terrorist sympathizer' for indefinite interrogations pretty much did in Posse Comitatus - unless troops refuse such duty en masse. And just BTW, since you're a 'terrorist sympathizer', at that point interrogation includes 'harsh' treatment - meaning activities defined elsewhere as torture.

Comment by: david b | December 22, 2011

The armed forces have fired on and killed civilians several times, the Ludlow massacre in Colorado comes to mind plus in W. virginia,Idaho and Pennsylvania.

Comment by: cat killer | December 23, 2011

Canovack, you are correct in the details and the fact that the bonuses were not due for another 6 years. On June 15, 1932, the House did pass a bill authorizing early payment, however, a senate committee voted it down, 11-4. My point here is not that these veterans were wanting their bonuses early, during the depression, when they and their families were starving. My point is that the government has a history of attacking its people when the people don't fall into line and obey. Even our so-called heroes will not risk their careers when it comes to the 'Rights of the People'. All public officials, elected or appointed, take a similar oath, "To Protect and Defend the Constitution", yet how many times do you see them abusing and violating our rights? Trust in God. Watch out for ALL others.

Comment by: Muleman | December 23, 2011

It appears that we are all agreed that our government has taken considerable license in violation of the US Constitution, and that it appears quite stylish for our elected and appointed officials to violate their oath to protect and defend that Constitution. I have little advice or suggestion to remedy the situation, except for all of us to keep reminding our elected representatives of our concerns.....and vote in every election that comes along. When I say every election.....I mean that to some, local and state elections don't seem to matter as much as national elections, and nothing could be further from the truth. We shape and groom our future national leaders when we study them and elect them in local elections. Many of us can look back to some of our local political figures who went on to state and national prominence. It is up to us to groom them to our ideals before they ascend to that national arena.

Comment by: canovack | December 23, 2011

Again, Canovack, I agree. I was twice elected to the city council in my home town. I learned a lot about government and how it really works during those two terms. What people don't realize is that 80% of the services we receive on a day in and day out basis come from our local, county, and state governments. That's where 20% or less of the people elect those who govern. The value of our vote is greatest at the local level, yet too few of our people exercise that vote and that power.

Comment by: Muleman | December 23, 2011

Anytime our so called government attacks its own people, we people therefor should attack them. Since there are more citizens we would have the upper hand in mass. We the people was also by design and so was the 2nd amendment. The right to keep and bear arms was not and has not been taken lightly. We know we have many guns and ammo to support the acto of self defense. Any armed personnel attcking its own citzens would the end of this country as we know it

Comment by: Molon Labe | December 24, 2011

All these comments are from when this was posted in December. How did this story get recycled already???

Comment by: david b | February 16, 2012

Beats me, david b. When I opened it, I thought things looked a bit familiar, and I just figured somebody was thinking alot the way I do, until I read that it was my post.

Comment by: canovack | February 16, 2012