Graham Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 Shooting a glock underwater? Without the special compensator PROPERLY installed, you might as well just chop your hand off with a meat cleaver... Nowhere near as messy as letting the exploding gun do it for ya You don't need any special compensator to shoot Glocks underwater. What you DO need is the P/N 3073 'Spring Cups, Amphibious'. Graham, (Glock Armorer since 1996).
captain america Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 Shooting a glock underwater? Without the special compensator PROPERLY installed, you might as well just chop your hand off with a meat cleaver... Nowhere near as messy as letting the exploding gun do it for ya You don't need any special compensator to shoot Glocks underwater. What you DO need is the P/N 3073 'Spring Cups, Amphibious'. Graham, (Glock Armorer since 1996). ...Yes, that's it! The little bits that allow the firing pin to maintain sufficient velocity to detonate the primers underwater... Or something along those lines. Personally, i can't think of any instances where any civilian would even WANT to fire their gun underwater (if I want to play with a gun in the bathtub, I just use a waterpistol )
Chowser Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 I have a set of the maritime cups that i bought just to have some, but i would never do it or even try, my partner is going on vacation later this summer and wanted me to modify his old Glock 17 and purchase him some ammo with waterproof primers so he can take it diving with him. what he plans on running into underwater, i don't know, but i told him i wouldn't do it, but i was curious to know if anyone knew anyone that has ever did this.
JsARCLIGHT Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 I myself never quite understood the reasoning behind discharging a weapon out of or into water. Water, being a fluid (dur-hey), has some nasty properties to it that will cause that round fired underwater to be unstable. Sure it will fire (provided the right instances are met with the weapon and ammo) but the trajectory will be erratic and let's not forget that lovely WHAM of the powder discharging. Has anyone ever been underwater when a firecracker went off underwater? Let's just say there is a reason the fish die. Plus a bullet fired underwater that exits the surface of the water might become even more unstable in flight due to the shift from one element to another. Also a nasty trick of nature, the "distortion effect" that bodies under and above water suffer from. If you happened to be underwater aiming up out of the water at a precise target, it's position would not necessarily be where you are aiming and vice versa for shooting into water... even though shooting into water can be quite dangerous. Water can bounce a bullet just like concrete if the angle is right. The only people I can picture ever even remotely needing a weapon that can fire while submerged are the SEALs... and most of the time they are taught to surface before firing due to most of the reasons above. I think a weapon that fires underwater is more a case of the manufacturer thinking it up, making it happen and touting a feature rather than it being an actual benneficial and useable thing. After all, how many firefights occur in the deep end of the pool?
Noriko Takaya Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 Well, I am one broke mo fo right about now. Following on the heels of my purchasing a Springfield Armory M1A rifle back in May I had to go and find something else those guys had released that made me say "Charge it!" It seems that Springfield Armory has started to sell brand new M1 Garand rifles. Yep, that's right. Brand new. I've been wanting one for a while, but was not willing to fork over the money for a refurbished rifle. So when they came out with the new one I was all over it. Got the rifle chambered in 30.06. As a little bonus to the rifle, they threw in a US Army field manual to compliment the already explicitly detailed instruction manual they print. There is also a rather lengthy guide on zeroing in the rifle as well as a booklet on how not to "slam-fire" an M1. And I got five stripper clips too, which I thought they would have only supplied one. Over all, this is a really beautiful looking rifle (the wood stock alone is outstanding), and I'm really glad I bought it. I can't wait to take the thing out to the range and shoot it. It will definitely be a treat to see what a real infantry weapon from the old days is like. So with that said, are there any other Garand fans out there? Share some stories or some tips on how to not end up getting M1 thumb when loading ammo into this thing. By the way, here is an image of the Army manual:
Graham Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 Just want to add, never fire a Glock in a swimming pool or a small bay with your head underwater. The sound waves reflecting off the sides of the pool will f*ck up your ears. Firing it in the open sea with your head underwater is tolerable as the soundwaves are mostly travelling away from you. And as JsARCLIGHT pointed out, water is a very effective medium for stopping bullets, so expect range and practical accuracy to be greatly reduced if firing underwater, we are talking 10 meters or less. And no, I've never personally fired a Glock underwater, but the guy who tought me the Glock Instructors course had, as had my previous boss during a diving trip in the Philippines. Graham
bsu legato Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 So with that said, are there any other Garand fans out there? Piiiiiing!!!! (that's my little impression of the clip ejecting) My M1 has to be my absolute prize posession. I rate it even higher than my Mustang and my Animeigo DVDs. Those new Springfield M1s are indeed nice, but for the price they're asking I'd have just gone to the CMP and bought an original. Now and then they get some really nice ex-Danish rifles that have typically been arsenal refinished. But there's certainly nothing wrong with a brand new M1. I've heard some people complain that Springfield is using cast receivers instead of forging them, as was done on the originals, but I can't see it really becomming a problem. Metalurgy has come a fair way since 1936. Share some stories or some tips on how to not end up getting M1 thumb when loading ammo into this thing. I can't say I have any real stories, at least any that are interesting. But I will say that my M1 is incredibly accurate, moreso than my Kar98 (mainly because of the sights). One thing you will notice is that any M1 at the range will attract spectators like flies. Everybody always wants to see one of them "in action." Put 8 shots onto the 200 yd gong, followed by that famous piiiing, and you'll probably get a round of applause. As for M1 thumb? I'd say that it's actually exaggerated. All you have to do is make sure you hold the bolt back with the heel of your hand, while pressing the clip firmly into the action until it clicks. Get your thumb outta there and let the bolt fly home. It's that simple. What you may actually find is that your bolt may not completely close on the first round. Those clips hold the ammo pretty tight, actually. All you do then is either pull the bolt back and try again, or give the op handle a bit of a slap forward like you're closing a bolt action. Since your rifle is brand new, you might not have that problem. Mine is 50 years old, but last I checked the recoil spring measured right on spec, lengthwise.
Noriko Takaya Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 Well, I got a sling for my M1 and some extra clips and ammo to go along with it. Tomorrow I am going to borrow a digital camera and snap a few pictures of my new pride and joy. I'll post them in the thread when I can get them ready. Just the anticipation of hearing the 'ping!' is already giving me a woody. I can't wait until Saturday. As for the sling, I was lucky enough to find one at a place called The Fulton Armory. You guys may have heard of them as they are big into M1's, M14's, and AR15's. I couldn't believe they were right here in Maryland, so I drove over to their shop in Savage during my lunch break and snagged one. The sling I have is of the cloth variety in olive drab, and is a reproduction of the one used during WWII. I have no complaints though. I should have picked up two extras for my other rifles.
bsu legato Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 I was lucky enough to find one at a place called The Fulton Armory. You guys may have heard of them as they are big into M1's, M14's, and AR15's. I've heard of 'em, but the @$&*%'s won't ship anything to Canada. I'm just going to get a surplus web sling from Numrich, or maybe a repro-1907 leather sling from Uncle Mikes.
Warmaker Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 So with that said, are there any other Garand fans out there? I don't have a Garand but have fired it several times in the past year. My friend owned a Garand and we went out to the sticks, along with all of our weapons... including the Garand owner's arsenal (he was big into weapons and safety... his father was an old, retired Korean War Marine). Anyways, the Garand is an absolute joy and I rate it very highly even though I'm quite aware of some faults like the en-bloc clip's limitations in combat. One other problem with the M1 Garand: 30.06 ammunition gets very expensive with this semi-automatic beauty. Thanks to the Marines, I consider myself a decent marksman. Using the M16A2's iron sights I can reliably hit targets up to 500yds. With the M1 hitting stuff at 800 is almost unfair, even with wind adjustments. We don't need no steankin' optics! Again, the M1 is an absolute joy and I want one now. pliiiiiinnnngggg!
1st Border Red Devil Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 Heh....I hope you guys avoid M-1 Thumb! I decided to go with the Enfield as my choice over the M-1...though the Garand is a nice rifle.
bsu legato Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 I decided to go with the Enfield as my choice over the M-1 Well, the best solution is to simply get both rifles.
Opus Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 I decided to go with the Enfield as my choice over the M-1 Well, the best solution is to simply get both rifles. Or you could be like me and own multiples of each. The great thing about M1s is the different companies that made them during the war. I have one from International Harvester and one from Springfield and you can really tell the difference. I wouldn't worry too much about Garand thumb. You're going to get it eventually so think of it as busting your cherry, You're not a man until you've lost a thubnail to to the Garand.
bsu legato Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 Or you could be like me and own multiples of each. The great thing about M1s is the different companies that made them during the war. I have one from International Harvester and one from Springfield and you can really tell the difference. Oh, only to have that kind of coin. I've seen guys on different firearms boards who discuss their collections of M1's and it just scares me. Just off the top of my head... Springfield Winchester International Harvester Harrington & Richardson Breda Beretta ...and I'm sure I'm forgetting somebody. But it's still easier than collecting M1 carbines. Name a manufacturer who didn't produce a Carbine at one point.
Opus Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 Or you could be like me and own multiples of each. The great thing about M1s is the different companies that made them during the war. I have one from International Harvester and one from Springfield and you can really tell the difference. Oh, only to have that kind of coin. I've seen guys on different firearms boards who discuss their collections of M1's and it just scares me. Just off the top of my head... Springfield Winchester International Harvester Harrington & Richardson Breda Beretta ...and I'm sure I'm forgetting somebody. But it's still easier than collecting M1 carbines. Name a manufacturer who didn't produce a Carbine at one point. I was just lucky to be in the right place at the right time. I got the IH from my pop for my 18th B-day and I got the SF in about 1995 when a local sporting goods store had a bunch of Garands and Lee-Enfield MkIVs for about $90 a pop. The increadible thing was they were unissued still in the original box with a cartrige belt and 10 clips. I wish I could have bought them all but stupid VA law says only 1 gun a month and they didn't last that long. I wouldn't be surprised if the prices on Enfields started going up. It's getting harder and harder to get one that's safe to shoot.
Noriko Takaya Posted July 10, 2004 Posted July 10, 2004 Thanks to the Marines, I consider myself a decent marksman. Using the M16A2's iron sights I can reliably hit targets up to 500yds. With the M1 hitting stuff at 800 is almost unfair, even with wind adjustments. We don't need no steankin' optics! Again, the M1 is an absolute joy and I want one now. pliiiiiinnnngggg! Semper Fi, you old jarhead! As an old 0311 stationed at Pendleton in the 80's, my best rifle range score was 241 out of 250. I don't know if the Corps still uses the same scoring or not. Man, I miss those days... As for the M-1, I am going to shoot it tomorrow to get it zeroed in. Ammo really won't be an issue for me. I'm all ready to jam my thumb in the bolt.
JsARCLIGHT Posted July 10, 2004 Posted July 10, 2004 Wow, go away for a week and wham, tons of traffic on the weapons banter thread. Oh well, I got some extra loot on my trip and I'm all set to buy my Springfield M1A1 this week. Need to wait until some other issues are cleared up first with my insurance company before I know exactly how much I'll have to spend on it. Springer here I come!
Noriko Takaya Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 Well, I did not get to shoot my M-1 today because of family issues. But I did manage to take a few pictures of it to show you guys. They are not the greatest, but you can tell how nice the rifle looks. I'll try to get some more taken when I am at the range. Possibly tomorrow.
bsu legato Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 Very nice! And it even has the WW2-style milled trigger guard!
bsu legato Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Ok, I apologize in advance for this nearly political post, but I think its of the utmost importance for any and all shooters to be aware of this stuff. Ted Kennedy & his Democrat buddies want to ban all your rifles. All of them, not just the eeeevil black rifles like JsARC's AR15. It's of the utmost importance for any and all shooters to be aware of this attack on our sport. That said.... EN GARDE - Ammunition Legislation ISSUE 438 - July/August 2004 Prepared by Charles Murray (send email) ...The fourth amendment (amendment no. SA 2619 to S.1805) was offered by Sen. Edward "Ted" Kennedy (D-MA). The proposal would have expanded the definition of "armor piercing ammunition" to include rifle ammunition capable of penetrating body armor (see "Hunting Ammunition Redefined as Armor Piercing Ammunition" below). Sen. Kennedy claimed that he did not intend to prohibit common rifle ammunition, though Sen. Craig pointed out that the amendment most assuredly would. Although Sen. Kennedy again invoked the term "cop-killer bullets" in his Senate debate, the amendment failed 34-63. The critical importance of this proposal is that the roll call vote provided very important information to ammunition consumers and gun owners. The 34 supporters included Sen. John Kerry (D-MA.). This is the same Sen. Kerry who claims to be a hunter and is almost certain to be the Democrat Presidential Nominee. The Neal Knox Report in Shotgun News (4/10/04 and 5/1/04) has provided the most vocal concern regarding the Kennedy amendment and Kerry’s support for it. Knox’s 5/1/04 article closes: "Immediately after voting to ban those popular rifle rounds, Sen. Kerry, whose 20-year gun rights record exactly matches Sen. Kennedy’s, closed the debate against S.1805 by declaring: ‘I believe in the right to bear arms as it has been interpreted.’ So do Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein and Sarah Brady. "There’s no question how President Kerry’s judges would interpret the Second Amendment: The same way he votes. "And despite his Iowa pheasant hunting press conference and his pious claims to support hunters and hunting, his vote to ban deer hunting ammo tells us where he really stands." To receive Neal Knox’s bi-monthly newsletter, send a contribution in any amount to The Firearms Coalition, P.O. Box 3313, Manassas, VA 20108. For current news, visit www.NealKnox.com. You can read the latest Neal Knox Report at www.ShotgunNews.com. Senators, from left, Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, John Kerry and Edward Kennedy celebrating the 3/02/04 vote in favor of reenactment of the Clinton Gun Ban. This amendment later died when S.1805 was defeated. Are you registered to vote? Are you supporting state and national gun rights organizations? Do you value your cartridge collection? Hunting Ammunition Redefined as Armor Piercing Ammunition Nearly every center-fire rifle cartridge is capable of penetrating soft body armor. According to Lester Shubin, the head of the Justice Department design team that developed Kevlar cloth body armor, they never intended to design armor for everyday wear which would stop everything. "We only wanted to stop the greatest threat – the handgun the officer was carrying." The first vest, later called Level 1, was six layers of Kevlar, capable of stopping the .38 special. DOJ developed the far-bulkier Level 2 for the .357 Magnum and the 9mm. Level 2A is more comfortable but less protective. (Neal Knox Report, 5/1/04) According to a letter from the Fraternal Order of Police opposing Kennedy’s amendment, only one officer has been killed by penetration of his vest by a handgun bullet. In that single case, the body armor was defective. (See "Body Armor Degradation" below.) The F.O.P. is the largest law enforcement labor organization in the United States, with more than 310,000 members. When Sen. Kennedy was addressing the Senate in support of his amendment, he referred to a report that 17 law enforcement officers were killed while wearing body armor by armor piercing bullets. En Garde found this statistic in Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted 1998 by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program (www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/98killed.pdf). Table 11 is titled "Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed by Firearms that Penetrated Vest." These data cover the 10 years from 1989 – 1998. All 17 were shot with rifles. The deaths are tabulated by year and by "size of firearm" (UCR’s nomenclature). The totals are: .223 Caliber: 5 .30 Caliber*: 4 .30-06 Caliber: 1 .30-30 Caliber: 2 7.62x39 Millimeter 5 [* Believed to be .308 Winchester] These are the evil "cop-killer bullets" that Sen. Kennedy would define as "armor piercing ammunition." The best part for Sen. Kennedy is that banning these commonly used cartridges would be just the start. His amendment would give the Attorney General the authority to promulgate standards for testing projectiles against body armor that meets minimum (Level 1) standards for the protection of law enforcement officers. Many types of common handgun ammunition could be banned in addition to all rifle ammunition. (See Senate Congressional Record for 2/26/04, page S1695 for the proposed amendment.) Sen. Kennedy’s venomous and befuddled speeches to support his amendment are priceless (Senate Congressional Record, pages S1947 and S1973). Here is my favorite part: "Some of these bullets can travel as far as a mile. Some of them have incendiary tips with electronic scopes." [if anybody has a duplicate of a bullet having an incendiary tip with electronic scope, I need one for my collection.] Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy The FBI report gives other revealing data. In the same 10-year period, 682 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed (480 with handguns, 112 with rifles, 34 with shotguns, 12 with knives, 11 with bombs, 6 with personal weapons, and 27 other). Of the 626 slain with firearms, 57 were slain with their own weapon, 270 were slain while wearing body armor, and 21 were slain with their own weapon while wearing body armor. Of the 626 slain with firearms, 299 (48%) had head wounds, 280 (45%) upper torso wounds, and 47 (7%) below waist wounds. Of the 270 slain while wearing body armor, 153 (57%) had head wounds, 96 (36%) upper torso wounds, and 21 (8%) below waist wounds. Of the 96 shot in the upper torso while wearing body armor, the point of entry was 23 (24%) entered between side panels of vest, 17 (18%) entered through armhole or shoulder area of vest, 32 (33%) entered above vest (front or back of neck, collarbone area), 7 (7%) entered below vest (abdominal or lower back area), and 17 (18%) penetrated the vest. These 17 victims are 15% of the 112 killed with rifles and 2.5% of the 682 law enforcement officers that were feloniously killed during the 10-year period. Body Armor Degradation On 9/8/03, Second Chance Body Armor, Inc. announced that it would begin an immediate program to upgrade or replace its Zylon®-based Ultima® and Ultimax® protective vests. A series of in-service vest tests performed by Second Chance indicated the Zylon®-based vests wear out sooner than expected and that there is a potential officer safety issue. For this and subsequent press releases, go to http://www.secondchance.com/news.asp. A Fraternal Order of Police Press Release (11/17/03) said "The F.O.P. has learned that Toyobo Co., LTD of Japan, the company that produces Zylon®, has acknowledged that their product may experience a 20% loss of strength over a two-year period, well before the five-year warranty on the body armor itself. Many manufacturers of soft body armor use Zylon® in their vests, making our concerns about such vests a life-and-death issue for every law enforcement officer in the nation." On 11/18/03, the Justice Department announced an intensive review of the reliability of police body armor. U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft said vests have saved an estimated 2,700 officers’ lives over the past 30 years. The initiative announced by Ashcroft includes assistance for state and local law enforcement agencies in replacing any defective equipment. The DOJ created a Body Armor Safety Initiative web site on 3/7/04 (https://vests.ojp.gov/basi/justnet.html). Another good web site for body armor news is http://www.policeone.com/policeone/fronten...fm?object=Zylon. The National Institute of Justice hosted the Body Armor Safety Summit on 3/11/04. Their press release and status report may be found at http://vests.ojp.gov/docs/ArmorReportWithPress.pdf. Toyobo has issued information in several press releases defending their product (http://www.toyobo.co.jp/e/seihin/kc/pbo/menu/fra_menu_en.htm). Test results found the tensile modulus for the fiber remained constant for 600 days. The tensile strength experiences degradation, and those reports were sent years ago to body armor manufacturers so they could properly develop the vest design, "including weave pattern, the number and sequence of plies, the number and placement of stitches, the amount of Zylon® used, and the vest’s covering material." Toyobo pointed out that they only manufacture the fiber, and it is up to the individual body armor manufacturers to produce a suitable vest. Toyobo claimed only Second Chance has reported problems. Several lawsuits have been filed, and some states have started investigations into the vests. About 30 companies produce and sell vests containing Zylon®.
JsARCLIGHT Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 When there are no more guns peope will kill each other with knives... when there are no more knives I will not be able to cut up my chicken dinner... when I can't cut up my chicken dinner I will eat it with my hands... when I eat with my hands I will become feral... when I become feral I will poo in the back yard and wear a loincloth... society collapses, cities burn and a new dark age rolls in. There will always be the people in the world that are afraid of you and what you can do with a device. They cannot trust you with a weapon so they deem it necessary to remove that weapon from your hands. What happens if the pendulum swings back the other way? What if I don't trust those gun grabbing fools with their SUVs and cell phones? SUVs have been proven by many different sources to be polluting, dangerous monstrosities. More people are killed each day in America by and in SUVs than people are killed by "assault weapons". In 2003 alone 2,353 (est.) people were killed in sport utility vehicle related accidents on the roads of america. On the flip side of the coin 35,000(once again est.) people were killed with firearms in 2003... but alas only 3.5 to 4% of those murders by firearm were done with a rifle (while a whopping 55 to 60% were comitted with totally legal, common over the counter handguns). So basic math tells us that about 4% of those murders is a nice rounded number of about 1,400 people. Hmmmm... 2,300 killed by SUV's and 1,400 killed by rifles... Can I take those SUVs away from them then? I have proof they are deadly and a hazzard to living things? What? It doesn't work that way? Oh. So if the SUV was painted black and had a bayonet then we could ban them? Oh Ok then. (JsARCLIGHT backs out of the thread before he really starts getting political)
bsu legato Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 This is nothing but yet another back-door attack on Black Rifles. I love how, with the exception of the 30-30, all the calibers listed as "evil cop-killers" are all used in modern semi-autos. Ok, the 30-06 isn't used in any "modern" military weapons, but there was that footage from Haiti that showed those rebels using M1 Garands, so that must have scared somebody. And what's more laughable is that there are purely civilian calibres that would be far more effective against body armor than the ones listed. Anything a .223 will do, a .220 Swift will do 10 times better. A 7.62x39 may penetrate, but so will a 6.5 Swedish.
phoenix01 Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Cimarron Uberti 1898 Artillery .45LC cal 5-1/2 inch barrel in charcoal blue Awesome! I used to have a pic of that very gun (borrowed from Cimarron's web page) as my desktop. But is that charcoal blue really as fragile as they say? Yes to a point
Warmaker Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Mr.Kerry, eh? heheheh. He was never going to get my vote so this is just another reason for me not to.
phoenix01 Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Well I personally own the following:Favorite - Del Tin Armi Antiche 12th century Oakeshott Type X arming sword with curved crossguard and brazil nut pommel (replica) Del Tin Armi Antiche 10th century Oakeshott Type XI arming sword with straight cruciform crossguard and wheel pommel (replica) Windlass Steelcrafts 13th century Oakeshott Type XIIa great sword with curved crossguard and wheel pommel (replica) Taurus PT-99 9mm Parabellum in stainless with three pre ban 15-round magazines Cimarron Uberti 1898 Artillery .45LC cal 5-1/2 inch barrel in charcoal blue Taylor's Uberti 1863 Cattleman .45LC cal 5-1/2 inch barrel in modern blue Winchester 94 carbine .45LC cal 10 round capacity tubular magazine 15-lb hand crossbow What I really want is an Angus Trim Model MS-2103 Leaf-bladed sword with Christian Fletcher "elven hilt" modification. And a HK USC. To add to my collection, I am making my own chainmail hauberk. Right now it's mid thigh length and all I have left is the left sleeve to make. I've been working on it since 28 December 2003 and I need to have it finished by 5 September 2004 for my renaissance wedding. Also I have a Sugar loaf style great heaume or helm and a heater style shield. I'll post pics when it's done.
Opus Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 I really don't know what guys like Kennedy think they will achieve with gun bans other than securing thier own political positions. Look at the UK they bash each others heads in with bricks. Are they going to outlaw bricks too? What gets me is that 99% of the guns used in murders are illegally obtained anyway therefore these laws wont do crap except make the average joe an easier target.
bsu legato Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 (edited) Look at the UK they bash each others heads in with bricks. Are they going to outlaw bricks too? Part of Australia recently banned swords. I shite you not. Edited July 16, 2004 by bsu legato
dr_vandermeer Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Look at the UK they bash each others heads in with bricks. Are they going to outlaw bricks too? Part of Australia recently banned swords. I shite you not. Steak knives are the next to go.
phoenix01 Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 What about laws to forbid civilian ownership of candlesticks, ropes, and pipes? They can kill people too (especially if you are playing Clue.)
bsu legato Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Look at the UK they bash each others heads in with bricks. Are they going to outlaw bricks too? Part of Australia recently banned swords. I shite you not. Steak knives are the next to go. Hey, don't joke about it. The UN has made it no secret that they have an agenda to disarm the world's civilian population. How my owning firearms in any way relates to some rebels fighting a civil war somewhere in Africa, I'll never know, but the UN ultimately makes no distinction between the two. You guys in the US are fairly immune to such stupid UN treaties (although you have your own Democrats trying to acomplish the same thing) but here in the People's Kommunist Republic Of Kanada our gov't is working hand-in-hand with the UN to make the world a happier place.
phoenix01 Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Oh, don't get us in the USA wrong. We are taking this seriously. Very seriously. Unfortunately, the issue has been shoved to the back burner in light of Iraq, prison scandals, and the economy. I live in Anti-gun Fanaticland aka Maryland, so I know all about it. I am still angry about Glendening and Curran taking the Second Amendment away from the citizens of Maryland, but again unfortunately Erlich hasn't done squat to fix it. I laugh because I am so angry about it that if I didn't I'd be on terminal meltdown.
VF19 Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 Oh, don't get us in the USA wrong. We are taking this seriously.Very seriously. Unfortunately, the issue has been shoved to the back burner in light of Iraq, prison scandals, and the economy. I live in Anti-gun Fanaticland aka Maryland, so I know all about it. I am still angry about Glendening and Curran taking the Second Amendment away from the citizens of Maryland, but again unfortunately Erlich hasn't done squat to fix it. I laugh because I am so angry about it that if I didn't I'd be on terminal meltdown. No no no, we live in the PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF MARYLAND! where you can't even legally own a nerf gun.
That NOS Guy Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 At least it's not the People's Republic of Mass, God that place is scary. At least Maryland hasn't banned all smoking indoors outside of the home. For once I'm glad the great commonealth of Pennsylvania has a very, very large Republican contingent outside of the urban areas.
Noriko Takaya Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 You know, one only has to read the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 to see what total gun control can do to a country and its people. I can see that happening to us if we as concerned US citizens do nothing to stop it. If you'd like to read anything on this, there are many sites out there. Here's one for example: Hitler and Guns. I don't like getting political either on this site, because it usually leads to flame wars and other crap because everyones' views are different, but gun control is something I am vehemently against, and I have tried over the years to persuade people why they should fight for their second amendment rights. If you have not realized, most people are for gun control because they do not understand firearms or are afraid of them. Then there's the "We have to protect the children crowd". A responsible adult firearm owner with children would show his child what a firearm could do and how to treat them with respect. Most of the kids dying because of loaded firearms are due to irresponsible adults leaving them unattended in places where kids can get them. I could go on and on, but this thread is for the enjoyment of guns and other weapons and we should leave it at just that. I just hope that the moderators understand that things like this will occur and will have patience with us when we need to blow off steam. And how does the old saying go? Oh yeah, "The only way they are going to get my guns is if they pry them from my cold, dead fingers." By the way, I am going to go out to the range tomorrow. Throwing some lead downrange will help me clear my head now and blow off some steam. I think I will dig out the old "black rifle" with my 10 30-round magazines which I got in Florida and are illegal to buy, but legal to own, in the Peoples' Republic of Maryland. I
JsARCLIGHT Posted July 16, 2004 Posted July 16, 2004 I think for our own sakes we should 86 the politio talk in this thread. Yes, we are all peeved about the gun grabbers but by constantly mulling them here and dropping names and politically heated replies we may get our beloved thread locked or deleted. Back to the talk of guns and let's just leave the political angles to heated bashing while buying ammo in our local gun stores.
Recommended Posts