The Guns and Ammo Thread

[DammitBoy]

You say unbelievable- remarkable for someone with your imagination. You will note that I didn't say that you would use a gun to settle a dispute over something as stupid as the merits of a mini-M-14, only that such stupid people exist that could escalate such a fight. But then, you did prove your capacity to insult people, or get angry, over something on a computer forum with someone you will probably never know, over something as simple as opinion over a mini-M-14. Its not hard to imagine someone going a few steps further, with a bit of alcohol, in closer proximity, etc.

I'm not responsible for your vivid imagination. I'm only responsible for what I do in reality. Maybe you spend too much time on the internet and playing crpg's? In reality, I've never commited a crime period, or I wouldn't be allowed to own firearms. Your argument is silly. Getting angry or pissed does not equal shooting someone. Now you want to add alcohol into the equation. I've been drunk, and angry - still never shot anybody.

Maybe we should make anger and alcohol illegal?

You're white, which indicates that if you kill someone it will probably be someone you know and because you're pissed off. So drama is born out by the statistics.

If I kill someone, it will be for a justifiable reason. Like breaking into my home, trying to jack my truck, or threatening the lives of my family. Pissed off will have nothing to do with it - your bias is clearly showing and it skews your ability to think rationally. If being pissed was all I needed to shoot somebody it would have happened decades ago.

As for the criteria that you need to satisfy to own a gun- doesn't that depend on the state? Some states are more restrictive than others. Is that fair? Perhaps some states are more prone to gun violence than others? Some states value gun ownership more and others seek to limit guns in order to protect their citizens- don't democracies have the right to decide that?

Yes, states that are more restrictive and infringe upon lawful possesion of firearms have more crime and more gun violence. States that trust their law abiding citizens to own and carry firearms are much safer. You can look that up if you like, try the FBI crime lab statistics. Limiting ownership does not protect anybody in the U.S. except criminals.

I am not sure if I agree with an unlimited right to weapons as you would suggest. Tanks, cannons, fighter aircraft, etc- I am not really keen on allowing the rich to build private armies.

Strawman much? Who said anything about private armies? By the way, the rich can hire private armies if they feel like it - there is no law against people hiring security forces.

I don't care if you agree with me, the founding fathers agree with me and that's plenty good enough. Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry, as well as others, stated in the federalist papers that the reason for the 2nd amendment was to insure that the common citizen had access to every means of war that a standing military would have.

You argue that anyone who is not a criminal or mentally incompetent has the right to own a gun. Yet, in my state, Virginia, a person who was mentally incompetent managed to get hold of guns and managed to shoot up a bunch of kids and teachers doing nothing but trying to get an education.

Yeah, the judge and the state fucked up pretty good on that one, I think they have tightened those regulations. Not that doing so will stop bad things from happening. Shit happens.

Maybe you can ask for a law making it illegal for bad things to happen?

My point is that people who may have the right to own guns do not have the right to take away someone else's right to breath. I think we agree on that.

Wrong. I have the right to execute someone trespassing in my home. I have the right to defend myself my property and my family. I have the right to end your life when you threaten mine.

I would think this is an issue for the gun owners to think about. If you want to protect your right to own guns, than you have to recognize that not everyone will be as responsible as you. That the more people killed by irresponsible (yet legal) gun owners will lead, inevitably, to demands that your rights are restricted.

Yes, the world is full of bleating sheep demanding that the world be made safe for them at any costs.

Gun owners think about how these weak tools are threatening our rights all the time. Irresponsible people get punished for their behavior, that's how the system works.

Responsible people should not be held accountable for criminal or careless individual acts.

Your hypothesis indicates we should stop everyone from driving because some folks drink and drive. We should have a pile of regulations and laws regarding kiddie pools, because some people let their child play in one unattended.

We have a crapload of laws concerning drunk driving, do these laws stop drunk driving? Laws only affect those who abide by them.

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

ps - Bal-Sagoth, that's a great looking Colt. Have you been able to find much .223 in your area?

I'm hoping to find a decent brick of .223 that isn't way overpriced at the gun show next weekend.

Decent amount. The place I had the Colt shipped to had a pretty nice stock of Federal 5.56 55 grain XM193.

... the thing that excited me the most is not being able to legally buy alcohol but being able to conceal carry a handgun.

Yeah, those two should never go together. Ever.

Oh no I disagree, they go great together.

The only thing still beating me up right now is trying to decide between 9mm,40, or 45. Leaning towards 9mm at the moment just because of how cheap it is to shoot.

 

[welsh]

Dammit Boy- you continue to misunderstand the point. Its not that you would necessarily go homicidal because you'd let your anger/rage get in the way of good judgment- but rather, that people do.

Again, look at the crime stats. Leaving out Black males in lower income urban environments (who have the highest homicide rates with guns), in white communities the gun violence is usually people you know and often its women victims, male victimizers. Fair enough, sometimes its a woman who shoots a guy (as Tennessee Titan's Quarterback ended up).

These are folks who shot someone because they were pissed off.

But even if we look at urban poor blacks, one of the reasons given for the guns involve was that "it got stolen from someone's house" which is bullshit- usually the gun was bought or given to the person who committed the homicide.

So I don't really see what a measure like, keep your gun in a safe, is such a hassle.
(1) it helps keep your guy from getting stolen and used for a crime.
(2) it keeps someone inside your house from using a gun against you
(3) it limits the "it got stolen' argument those who own guns make when their pistols or shotguns are used in a crime.
(4) Keeps kids from playing with their parents guns (unless parents gave them the combos).
(5) In those cases where someone is so pissed off that they want to kill their wife, girlfriend, neighbor, or whatever, placing the gun in a safe gives them a moment at least to consider their actions before going homicidal.

A perfect measure? No. But might it reduce the number of homicides without really infringing on your right to your gun- not really.

Than take for instance the problem of assault guns being shipped over the border to Mexico in exchange for drugs. The same thing happens between New York and Virginia- New York cocaine/crack dealers ship drugs into Virginia and buy cheap guns here and sell them back in the street in New York. Gun dealers make a financial killing as the guns are used to perpetuate street violence that lets innocent people get killed. Surely, something should be done about that. Shouldn't gun manufacturers and traders take responsibility for where their guns end up so that peaceful citizens get them but drug dealing gangs don't?

In response to your posts-
Hopefully you will never commit a crime. Ideally, you shouldn't. Can you? Of course.

Do you have the capacity to kill someone under the right circumstances? I think so. You suggest it yourself. Are you capable of being so pissed off that you lose your cool and kill someone- maybe. Hopefully you never have to find out.

Personally, I think everyone has the capacity to kill someone. Human beings are omnivores, hunters, and its in our genetic code. Whether you kill someone as a Marine out of duty for your country, or a girlfriend because she breaks your heart- you probably have that capacity to kill.

Is it legal? Sometimes. But legality is a matter of socially constructed law, not human impulse. You said it yourself- you get pissed off a lot, get drunk a lot- could you take out your anger through violence? Sure. Men have been doing that for centuries.

Will you? I don't have a crystal ball. I hope not.

You argue that if you did a shooting, it would be justifiable. However most times that the person argues that the shooting was justifiable and legal, the person still ends up going to jail. Justifiable is a very narrow determination.

Jacking your truck- for instance, isn't justifiable in some states. And while you are frequently allowed to use force to defend your home from a break in, executions aren't allowed. Likewise, you don't have the right to murder a man if he rapes your wife, although you have the right to violently defend her if you catch the man in the act of raping your wife.

Take for instance- if you are threatening my life example. But we have also seen that people, with the legal right to own guns- have used guns when people threatened their "way of life". So if you were black and in a car with a white girl, you could be shot- because you threatened someone's "way of life."

Your correlation between gun shootings and lax gun control is a bit shaky. First, the causality is kind of crap. Even in southern states with easy gun laws, you have regions were gun violence is high- New Orleans, Atlanta - largely because of other demographic issues. Atlanta is more dangerous than New York- check it out. So you can turn it around and ask, if the gun laws were stronger, would there be less gun violence in those places? Its the Chicken & Egg/ Correlation doesn't equal causation problem.

Does gun control reduce crime- actually, its been found that tougher gun control makes gun violence more difficult and expensive among gangs. More expensive guns make them harder to get. Heavier penalties on, say, automatic weapons, keeps smart criminals from using automatic weapons. Criminals are not fools either.

You'll note that thus far I have not used strawmen nor have been rude to you. I suggest you do likewise. Otherwise, it starts to look like trolling. Seriously, if you can't be civil in your discussions, than don't discuss.

And actually there are rules against private armies- or at least significant restrictions- in most countries. Why? Because mercenaries tend to shoot up civilians when they have nothing else to do. Mercenaries are merely guns for hire. Our history guns-for-hire isn't a really good one. See Johnson County War for an example of what happens when the rich hire guns. Alternatively, think of when Mexico hired scalp hunters to kill off Indians, and the scalp hunters turned on the Mexicans.

Don't get me wrong- I am find with irresponsible people getting punished. But the problem is when the person gets killed, they have no more rights at all. They're just dead. After-the-fact punishment isn't good enough. What was needed was before-the-fact protection.

Total protection? No. I agree that there should be a right to own a gun. An unlimited right? No. No rights are unlimited.

Should we restrict who gets a gun- sure. The insane? People with a criminal past? And what of those who become criminal? Or who become insane? With the insane, there's not a lot you can do except take away their guns. But the criminal? You could deter them with higher punishments perhaps.

 

[DammitBoy]

I think you just like to read your own posts a wee bit too much. I'm not interested in arguing the same points over and over with someone who clearly has a bias and a lack of clues on the topic.

Let's just agree that I'm right and you're wrong and then those of us who own and enjoy guns can go back to posting on topic.

As for trolling, it's obvious you are baiting me into a conversation I didn't want to pursue in the first place. Obviously we will never come to a consensus on this topic, so what's your point in pursuing it?

Go start a thread about gun laws and see if I follow you there.

 

[Violator]

I do not own any guns but am a fan of weapons and weapon systems, and I hope that someday I'll be a proud owner of several R-36M Voyevoda missiles

 

[Werwolf]

semi-auto shotgun

and pneumatic rifle

 

[welsh]

@ Werwolf- Nice shotgun. What are you hunting for?

@ Dammit boy- You are so weak.

 

[Werwolf]

@ Werwolf- Nice shotgun. What are you hunting for?

I dunno what to hunt. Tried on small animals like musquash, but it cause big fur damage and overpowered. Probably for ducks it will be ok. Also it must be regulated each time cartrige type and weather changing. I think classic double-barrel better

 

[Member of Khans]

If you'd forgive a lil' bit of backbench moderating, but welsh and DammitBoy, could you please quit the bullshit? Or maybe just shift completely to the "Guns, guns, guns" thread. Because in the beginning, only one was pissing me of, now it's both of you. Seriously.

semi-auto shotgun
[...]
and pneumatic rifle
[...]

Is that due to your gun laws? A german-russian hunting pal of mine ones told me, that smoothbore guns aren't regulated in Russia, while it's hard to impossible to legally buy a riffle. He thinks it's a soviet leftover. Is that so?

Would kinda make sense, since it was the same in former GDR: While "good socialist citizens" could acquire shotguns for sports and hunting, the party clique was afraid someone could turn a rifle into a sniper weapon and trying a shot at one of them.
So, no rifles > .22 lr for civilians. Which is kinda ironic, because they had Combat Groups of the Working Class and promoted military training for everyone. Meh, high-class illogical double-standard real-socialistic bullshit, like most of this country.

I dunno what to hunt. Tried on small animals like musquash, but it cause big fur damage and overpowered.

Wait, fur damage? You are actually USING musquash fur? Here we just kill them for pest control. Hell, if you are doing the official course for a FISHING LICENSE, the Environmental Agency guy tells you to kill every single musquash you can reach. And that in a country where even talking about hunting is sometimes considered politically incorrect. For most people over here they are just "big rats".

Probably for ducks it will be ok.

Every shotgun calibre is okay for ducks ^^ Just use the right load and shot, and everything's fine.

Also it must be regulated each time cartrige type and weather changing. I think classic double-barrel better

Yeah, I also dig double-barrel. 'specially over/under types. Less moving parts is always neat, when it comes to shotguns.
That being said, pump-actions aren't bad either. You'll have to invest a few bucks, though. Doesn't have to be a Mosberg, just don't get cheap crap. Czechs make good weapons, couldn't possibly go wrong with anything Czech.

 

[Werwolf]

hard to impossible to legally buy a riffle. He thinks it's a soviet leftover. Is that so?

Yes, to buy a rifle you should be an owner of shotgun for 5 years before that.
It is not so hard to buy shotgun, even you're not hunter. Short firearms are restricted.
Also, bows and airgun hunting also restricted (probably because it dangerous for hunter himself).

You are actually USING musquash fur?

It can be used for shapka-ushanka
Also, I just tested it.

This rifle name MP-153, got for ~$290
12g double-barrels about $150 here (used but good)

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

So yeah, went to the gunstore today and handled a few handguns to try and get a feel for which one felt "right". Completely sold on the XDM so far. It was actually the comments of a few on this forum that originally got me interested in that particular firearm.
Going to try and get a chance to shoot it before I make the purchase (not long at all now) but I am pretty sure that is the one I am going for.

Just trying to decide at this point if I want it in 9mm or .40 S&W.

 

[SuAside]

DirtyDreamDesigner has an XD, ask him if you have any questions.

as for the calibre... depends what you want to do with it. my thoughts on it:
general use: .40S&W is ridiculously expensive for a cal that basically doesn't do anything a heavily loaded 9mm can't do.
self-defense: .40S&W is more powerful, but 9mm likely allows better follow-up shots for an untrained person. watch out for overpenetration with FMJ though.
sport: practiacal shooting sport leagues often put .40S&W and 9x19mm in different leagues (well, depending on loads actually, but talking standard loads here).

personally i prefer 9x19mm. more common, more practical, still plenty powerful.

 

[Member of Khans]

While I basically agree with SuAside (especially when it comes to sports and recreational shooting), I have to wonder whether what is true for Europe also applies to the US. The .40 S&W is a famous service round among law enforcement in America, right? So, it is pretty common. Is it really that more expensive compared the 9 mm Para?

Also, a Fallout fan should of course prefer the .40, because this way he is going to have a friggin' 10 mm Pistol

 

[SuAside]

While I basically agree with SuAside (especially when it comes to sports and recreational shooting), I have to wonder whether what is true for Europe also applies to the US. The .40 S&W is a famous service round among law enforcement in America, right? So, it is pretty common. Is it really that more expensive compared the 9 mm Para?

with a quick check: 250 rounds of Federal American Eagle (never shot the brand, so don't take this as an endorsement):
9mm: 78$
.40S&W: 115$

Also, a Fallout fan should of course prefer the .40, because this way he is going to have a friggin' 10 mm Pistol

if that's a motivation, at least get a 10mm Auto pistol, like the Colt Delta Elite...

.40S&W is called .40 Short & Weak by 10mm Auto enthousiasts.

 

[cronicler]

Sometimes, gunmodifications makes me very sad for the sake of humanity.

 

[Member of Khans]

Well... Okay, I don't like Hello Kitty (talk about overhyped vogue!) but I've nothing against pink.

Because you don't have to be death-serious all the time. Not very "tacticool", but a pink rifle for plinking or as a piece of sports equipment? Why not.

ESPECIALLY if you are

a) a girl
b) a homosexual man

playing with classical manly toys and dig a bit of self-mockery.

One of my hunting instructors (a gun safety and weapon laws expert) is openly gay, and one year on April 1st, he got a pink USP Holster from his class.

And as long as it isn't a glaucoma-inducing bright neon pink, I'm not going to complain. In fact, I thought about a Glock in a civil-defensish tone of bright orange.


EDIT: Oh, and I DON'T want to mess with a girl (or man, for that matter) who utilizes such a rifle; the image being photoshoped or not

 

[SuAside]

what makes me very sad though, is the FUCKED UP AR15 which was modified to meet californian laws...

what a fucking wasted pistolgrip...

 

[Guest]

Deleted

 

[Member of Khans]

Now I live in germany where guns are illegal and crime victims dead.
[...]
First they don't allow you to own guns and then they won't even try to get the guy who killed you.

Er.

Steyr Scout .308 Win
Izmash "Dragunov" Tigr, .308 Win (guess what, an evil semi-auto!)
Mauser K 98k, 8 x 57 I.S.
Voere Target rifle .22 l.r.
Benelli over/under shotgun 12 Gauge
HK USP P8 9mm Para
Springfield M1911 A1 .45 ACP

I'm living in Germany. Those are my guns.
Please don't talk shit.

...

Also, there is a gun politics thread here, which is called "guns, guns, guns". And yes, you're right, our gun laws pretty much are a pain in the ass.

 

[SuAside]

that indeed sounds like a load of bullshit J.P.
if you were serious, you need to get informed better.

Germany does have a bunch of annoying laws like mag restrictions etc, but if you do the right paperwork you can get pretty much any semi you want?

Member of Khans, that Voere of yours from which factory is it? the old (closed down) or the newer one?