info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK Variant'
124 views
Skip to first unread message
raykeller
Jun 15, 2017, 7:43:26 PM6/15/17
to
http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
Variant'
Several media outlets - most notably, CNN - have forwarded erroneous
information about the firearm reportedly used in the Wednesday mass shooting
in Alexandria, Virginia that targeted Republican members of Congress.
A Wednesday article on CNN.com pointed out that "traces are still being done
on the two firearms recovered at the scene - an SKS rifle 7.62 (which is a
Chinese-made AK variant) and a 9 mm pistol, a law enforcement source tells
CNN."
During the 11 pm Eastern hour on Wednesday night, correspondent Jessica
Schneider used similar language during an on-air report (see video above):
"A law enforcement source says two weapons were recovered at the scene - a
SKS rifle, a Chinese-made AK variant that investigators believe was used in
the shooting; and a nine millimeter pistol."
A Wednesday article from the Chicago Tribune noted that the deceased gunman,
James Hodgkinson, "had purchased at least three guns, all from a local gun
dealer, and had a permit to carry a concealed weapon, a source said. Among
those three guns was an SKS assault rifle, the source said."
Trump-supporting website Breitbart referenced Tribune's reporting in a
Wednesday write-up, including the "SKS assault rifle" phrase.
It should be pointed out, however, that the SKS is neither a "AK variant,"
nor is it an "assault rifle." The semi-automatic firearm, which was
originally issued by the Soviet Union, actually predates the world-famous
AK-47 (which is a select-fire assault rifle). It was among the first weapons
to adopt the 7.62x39mm round, which was later used by the AK.
The SKS was also not classified as an "assault weapon" under the now-expired
1994 Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. Nearly
twenty years later, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein didn't include the
firearm in her list of "assault weapons" that would be banned under a gun
control bill she proposed in 2013.
CNN and all the other news outlets that used the "AK variant" and "assault
weapon" terms in their reporting on Wednesday should issue corrections.
de chucka
Jun 15, 2017, 7:57:11 PM6/15/17
to
On 16/06/2017 9:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
> http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
> Variant'
True it is the Russian predecessor to it
> http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
> Variant'
Wayne
Jun 15, 2017, 7:59:50 PM6/15/17
to
de chucka
Jun 15, 2017, 7:59:59 PM6/15/17
to
On 16/06/2017 9:57 AM, de chucka wrote:
> On 16/06/2017 9:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
>> http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
>>
>> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
>> Variant'
>
> True it is the Russian predecessor to it
I'll add that if he was using a SKS no wonder he fired so many shots and
> On 16/06/2017 9:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
>> http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
>>
>> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
>> Variant'
>
> True it is the Russian predecessor to it
hit so few. I thought he was just a lousy shot but now know the reason
de chucka
Jun 15, 2017, 8:09:38 PM6/15/17
to
de chucka
Jun 15, 2017, 8:24:35 PM6/15/17
to
On 16/06/2017 10:14 AM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> the modern rifle.
>
> In the same sense that the Chinese fire cracker is the predecessor of
> the atom bomb.
>
> I hope you are trolling and not that ignorant of the facts.
If stating the facts is trolling then yes I am. The AK-47 replaced the
SKS as the standard issue Russian weapon in the 50's
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:57:04 +1000, de chucka wrote:
>> On 16/06/2017 9:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
>
> <http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/>
>>> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
>>> Variant'
>
> But they both look scary as hell to a snowflake reporter.
>> On 16/06/2017 9:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
>
> <http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/>
>>> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
>>> Variant'
>
>
>
>> True it is the Russian predecessor to it
>
> In the same sense that the muzzle loaded musket is the predecessor of
>
>> True it is the Russian predecessor to it
>
> the modern rifle.
>
> In the same sense that the Chinese fire cracker is the predecessor of
> the atom bomb.
>
> I hope you are trolling and not that ignorant of the facts.
If stating the facts is trolling then yes I am. The AK-47 replaced the
SKS as the standard issue Russian weapon in the 50's
Jim Wilkins
Jun 15, 2017, 8:27:01 PM6/15/17
to
"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message
news:ok86kctulaa5uk0r3...@4ax.com...
news:ok86kctulaa5uk0r3...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:57:04 +1000, de chucka wrote:
>>On 16/06/2017 9:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
>
> <http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/>
>>> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not
>>> An 'AK
>>> Variant'
>
>
> <http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/>
>>> The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not
>>> An 'AK
>>> Variant'
>
> But they both look scary as hell to a snowflake reporter.
>
>
>
>
>>True it is the Russian predecessor to it
>
>
> In the same sense that the muzzle loaded musket is the predecessor
> of
> the modern rifle.
>
> In the same sense that the Chinese fire cracker is the predecessor
> of
> the atom bomb.
>
> I hope you are trolling and not that ignorant of the facts.
>
We should do likewise and call all news media "Tabloids".
> of
> the modern rifle.
>
> In the same sense that the Chinese fire cracker is the predecessor
> of
> the atom bomb.
>
> I hope you are trolling and not that ignorant of the facts.
>
de chucka
Jun 15, 2017, 8:29:44 PM6/15/17
to
>
>
max headroom
Jun 15, 2017, 9:47:26 PM6/15/17
to
In news:ELOdnehuGIrkgt7E...@westnet.com.au, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com> typed:
I found the SKS to be fairly accurate out to 300 yards or so. Surely further than from the third
base line to the second baseman.
base line to the second baseman.
de chucka
Jun 15, 2017, 9:54:41 PM6/15/17
to
Mr. B1ack
Jun 15, 2017, 9:55:42 PM6/15/17
to
On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:43:18 -0700, "raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:
>http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
>The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
>Variant'
Well, the "K" is for "Kalashnikov" .... but in most ways
the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
The smallish integral magazine of the SKS was made
that way on purpose - to discourage soldiers from
wasting precious ammo. You see a similar scheme
on the FN-49, which was widely sold to 2nd-world
governments. In Russia anyway, after the war ammo
became plentiful so the AK was built to spray it in
volume (if not with great accuracy). Some SKS's are
modified to take AK magazines however.
Russian-made SKS's are nice carbines - short,
light, reasonably accurate, easy to maneuver in
tight quarters, reliable. They owe their overall
concept to both NAZI "assault weapons". The
US M-1 carbine was the result of similar thinking.
They fill a battlefield niche - not too small, not
too big.
The "high-power" rifles of the time have
great range, but also considerable weight and
bulk and the cartridges are twice as large
and expensive. It is not so unusual for one or
two guys in a squad (usually the biggest ones)
to carry a high-powered rifle in order to deal
with shielded or distant foes. For most soldiers
however "battle" is usually at pretty close range
and you don't need or want a 1000-meter gun.
The SKS is of "conventional design" - a lot of
lathe and mill work on big bits of steel. The AK
was instead designed as an "economy rifle",
the receiver made of stamped sheet metal,
the internal parts rather few and crude. It was
made to be exported to Marxist revolutionaries
worldwide. It's cheapness and very simple
robust design made it a global success. It's
something an illterate recruit could be taught
to use in an hour, one who'd probably never
do a lick of maintenence on it either. The SKS
needs more care - better suited for professional
soldiers.
In any case, neither weapon should ever be
allowed into the hands of pin-headed leftists.
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:
>http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
>The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An 'AK
>Variant'
the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
The smallish integral magazine of the SKS was made
that way on purpose - to discourage soldiers from
wasting precious ammo. You see a similar scheme
on the FN-49, which was widely sold to 2nd-world
governments. In Russia anyway, after the war ammo
became plentiful so the AK was built to spray it in
volume (if not with great accuracy). Some SKS's are
modified to take AK magazines however.
Russian-made SKS's are nice carbines - short,
light, reasonably accurate, easy to maneuver in
tight quarters, reliable. They owe their overall
concept to both NAZI "assault weapons". The
US M-1 carbine was the result of similar thinking.
They fill a battlefield niche - not too small, not
too big.
The "high-power" rifles of the time have
great range, but also considerable weight and
bulk and the cartridges are twice as large
and expensive. It is not so unusual for one or
two guys in a squad (usually the biggest ones)
to carry a high-powered rifle in order to deal
with shielded or distant foes. For most soldiers
however "battle" is usually at pretty close range
and you don't need or want a 1000-meter gun.
The SKS is of "conventional design" - a lot of
lathe and mill work on big bits of steel. The AK
was instead designed as an "economy rifle",
the receiver made of stamped sheet metal,
the internal parts rather few and crude. It was
made to be exported to Marxist revolutionaries
worldwide. It's cheapness and very simple
robust design made it a global success. It's
something an illterate recruit could be taught
to use in an hour, one who'd probably never
do a lick of maintenence on it either. The SKS
needs more care - better suited for professional
soldiers.
In any case, neither weapon should ever be
allowed into the hands of pin-headed leftists.
Jim Wilkins
Jun 15, 2017, 10:32:20 PM6/15/17
to
"Mr. B1ack" <now...@nada.net> wrote in message
news:7sc6kch5nq1cq1fj7...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:43:18 -0700, "raykeller"
> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
> wrote:
>
>>http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
>>The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An
>>'AK
>>Variant'
>
> Well, the "K" is for "Kalashnikov" .... but in most ways
> the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
> around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
>
S for self-loading (=semiautomatic), K for Karabin, S for designer
> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
> wrote:
>
>>http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-sks-rifle-reportedly-used-in-virginia-mass-shooting-is-not-an-ak-variant/
>>The SKS Rifle, Reportedly Used in Virginia Mass Shooting, Is Not An
>>'AK
>>Variant'
>
> Well, the "K" is for "Kalashnikov" .... but in most ways
> the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
> around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
>
Simonov.
Self-loading happens to start with S in Russian too, samozaryadniy.
A Karabin/carbine is a shorter rifle for troops who have their hands
full like cavalry or artillery or skiers, and better suited than a
full length rifle for confined short-range trench or house-to-house
fighting. They may fire a weaker, more controllable cartridge. Some
guns come in both versions
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/12/jeremy-s/carbine-vs-rifle-defined/
-jsw
Terry Coombs
Jun 16, 2017, 12:38:46 AM6/16/17
to
sights . Other rifles I've had were more suited to long-range work .
--
Snag
rbowman
Jun 16, 2017, 12:42:47 AM6/16/17
to
On 06/15/2017 07:55 PM, Mr. B1ack wrote:
> Well, the "K" is for "Kalashnikov" .... but in most ways
> the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
> around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
You'd see a lot more Garand DNA in an AK than Siminov.
> Well, the "K" is for "Kalashnikov" .... but in most ways
> the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
> around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
Mr. B1ack
Jun 16, 2017, 1:20:23 AM6/16/17
to
On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 19:58:15 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 21:55:34 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
>> Well, the "K" is for "Kalashnikov" .... but in most ways
>> the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
>> around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
>
>AK stands for Avtomat Kalashnikova. Kalashnikov's Automatic.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK47
>
>SKS-45, is an initialism for Samozaryadnyj Karabin sistemy Simonova,
>1945 = Self-loading Carbine of (the) Simonov system,
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS
My apologies for slighting komrade Simonova ...
But the AK *is* an intellectual descendent.
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 21:55:34 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
>> Well, the "K" is for "Kalashnikov" .... but in most ways
>> the 'AK' is a variant of the SKS, not the other way
>> around. The AK is a five or six year newer design.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK47
>
>SKS-45, is an initialism for Samozaryadnyj Karabin sistemy Simonova,
>1945 = Self-loading Carbine of (the) Simonov system,
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS
My apologies for slighting komrade Simonova ...
But the AK *is* an intellectual descendent.
Jim Wilkins
Jun 16, 2017, 6:42:09 AM6/16/17
to
"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:eqh5u4...@mid.individual.net...
They all borrowed from pre-WW1 John Browning designs.
http://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php?topic=56990.10;wap2
news:eqh5u4...@mid.individual.net...
http://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php?topic=56990.10;wap2
Gunner Asch
Jun 17, 2017, 12:33:00 PM6/17/17
to
On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:43:18 -0700, "raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:
>
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:
>
>The SKS was also not classified as an "assault weapon" under the now-expired
>1994 Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. Nearly
>twenty years later, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein didn't include the
>firearm in her list of "assault weapons" that would be banned under a gun
>control bill she proposed in 2013.
Despite it carrying an "evil bayonet"!!
>1994 Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. Nearly
>twenty years later, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein didn't include the
>firearm in her list of "assault weapons" that would be banned under a gun
>control bill she proposed in 2013.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Gunner Asch
Jun 17, 2017, 12:34:23 PM6/17/17
to
is a 6-9" group at 300 yrds. More than accurate enough to take a deer
or a scalp.
de chucka
Jun 17, 2017, 8:17:27 PM6/17/17
to
On 18/06/2017 2:33 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:43:18 -0700, "raykeller"
> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The SKS was also not classified as an "assault weapon" under the now-expired
>> 1994 Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. Nearly
>> twenty years later, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein didn't include the
>> firearm in her list of "assault weapons" that would be banned under a gun
>> control bill she proposed in 2013.
>
> Despite it carrying an "evil bayonet"!!
It can but normally doesn't. Actually my Type 56 couldn't
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:43:18 -0700, "raykeller"
> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The SKS was also not classified as an "assault weapon" under the now-expired
>> 1994 Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. Nearly
>> twenty years later, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein didn't include the
>> firearm in her list of "assault weapons" that would be banned under a gun
>> control bill she proposed in 2013.
>
> Despite it carrying an "evil bayonet"!!
max headroom
Jun 17, 2017, 9:04:27 PM6/17/17
to
In news:NfadnZvS-vYSW9jE...@westnet.com.au, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com> typed:
Do you still have it?
de chucka
Jun 17, 2017, 9:15:08 PM6/17/17
to
considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
max headroom
Jun 17, 2017, 9:30:36 PM6/17/17
to
Gunner Asch
Jun 17, 2017, 9:47:21 PM6/17/17
to
spike or blade. Chicom rifles made for import occasionally came
without.
But the basic stock standard SKS included a bayonet.
max headroom
Jun 17, 2017, 11:43:56 PM6/17/17
to
In news:eqmbkc9qtbo2fppkm...@4ax.com, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> typed:
> Ah...Normally standard SKS rifles came with a bayonet mounted. Either
> spike or blade. Chicom rifles made for import occasionally came
> without.
> But the basic stock standard SKS included a bayonet.
All I met wore blades.
> Ah...Normally standard SKS rifles came with a bayonet mounted. Either
> spike or blade. Chicom rifles made for import occasionally came
> without.
> But the basic stock standard SKS included a bayonet.
Wiley E. Coyote
Jun 18, 2017, 12:33:41 AM6/18/17
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:eqmbkc9qtbo2fppkm...@4ax.com:
Every one I ever saw going back to the early nineties had the bayonet or
the attachment point.
--
It's time for the students to step up their game and kill people like
Coulter.
Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> April 25, 2017
news:eqmbkc9qtbo2fppkm...@4ax.com:
the attachment point.
--
It's time for the students to step up their game and kill people like
Coulter.
Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> April 25, 2017
de chucka
Jun 18, 2017, 1:15:56 AM6/18/17
to
max headroom
Jun 18, 2017, 1:49:23 AM6/18/17
to
In news:XvidncKMRsgekdvE...@westnet.com.au, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com> typed:
If it was crap, a buyer would have to be stupider than you.
I find that hard to believe.
I find that hard to believe.
Gunner Asch
Jun 18, 2017, 4:50:10 AM6/18/17
to
Each and everyone of them had a bayonet. Mostly blade, a couple had
spikes
Didnt make much difference if they were Chinese or Russian
https://goo.gl/photos/VRN7Mp7eNhWXDEQj8
https://goo.gl/photos/ka7b6teBjkuNpuKw8
Today..they are 5 times as expensive, including a spam can of ammo
Klaus Schadenfreude
Jun 18, 2017, 8:18:36 AM6/18/17
to
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 11:15:02 +1000, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>>> It can but normally doesn't. Actually my Type 56 couldn't
>>
>> Do you still have it?
>
>Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
You don't eradicate pigs, you harvest them.
Stupid Australian.
wrote:
>>> It can but normally doesn't. Actually my Type 56 couldn't
>>
>> Do you still have it?
>
>Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
Stupid Australian.
gvrvFW⚛← Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ╬ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ →⚛rlrJVJ
Jun 18, 2017, 8:58:38 AM6/18/17
to
>
> Stupid Australian.
Australians have no use for pigs, you silly Klausie.
Aussies are mainly kangaroo eaters, and they export all their lamb chops
to America so they can buy the latest models of cellphones from China.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_meat#/media/File:Kangaroo_meat_supermarket.JPG>
Klaus Schadenfreude
Jun 18, 2017, 9:09:49 AM6/18/17
to
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 08:58:36 -0400, gvrvFW?? ?????? ? ??????? ??rlrJVJ
<swI...@aKHcKT.com> wrote:
>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote on 6/18/2017 8:18 AM:
>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 11:15:02 +1000, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> It can but normally doesn't. Actually my Type 56 couldn't
>>>>
>>>> Do you still have it?
>>>
>>> Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>>> considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
>>
>> You don't eradicate pigs, you harvest them.
<swI...@aKHcKT.com> wrote:
>Klaus Schadenfreude wrote on 6/18/2017 8:18 AM:
>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 11:15:02 +1000, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> It can but normally doesn't. Actually my Type 56 couldn't
>>>>
>>>> Do you still have it?
>>>
>>> Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>>> considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
>>
>> You don't eradicate pigs, you harvest them.
>> Stupid Australian.
>
>Australians have no use for pigs, you silly Klausie.
Of course normal Australians have a use for pigs, you ignorant 'tard.
>
>Australians have no use for pigs, you silly Klausie.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/25/australian-butcher-apologises-for-advertising-bacon-by-saying-tw/
Wiley E. Coyote
Jun 18, 2017, 10:47:23 AM6/18/17
to
"max headroom" <maximus...@gmx.com> wrote in
news:oi5425$ld$1...@dont-email.me:
Ouch. That will leave a mark.
news:oi5425$ld$1...@dont-email.me:
rbowman
Jun 18, 2017, 12:37:23 PM6/18/17
to
On 06/18/2017 02:50 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> I bought nearly a dozen of them. $75 each with a 440rd can of ammo.
I remember a gun show in Phoenix in '88 just before California dreamed
> I bought nearly a dozen of them. $75 each with a 440rd can of ammo.
up its assault rifle ban. There were dealers with pallets of SKS's that
were selling them as fast as they could. iirc, they were going for
around $100. a little more for chrome lined barrels or thumbhole stocks.
I kick myself for not buying one but at the time my lifestyle made long
guns impractical.
!Jones
Jun 18, 2017, 2:45:31 PM6/18/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:39:31 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>I remember a gun show in Phoenix in '88 just before California dreamed
>up its assault rifle ban. There were dealers with pallets of SKS's that
>were selling them as fast as they could. iirc, they were going for
>around $100. a little more for chrome lined barrels or thumbhole stocks.
>I kick myself for not buying one but at the time my lifestyle made long
>guns impractical.
Please correct me if I'm wrong; however, as I understand the
California law (which isn't deeply), the SKS would *not* be an
"assault weapon" because it lacks an easily ejectable magazine.
I lugged a bolt action SKS home from Vietnam one trip. I made up a
story about how I jumped out of a tree, stabbed an enemy soldier, and
captured it... and sold it for a hundred bucks (that was a lot of
money in the '60s).
Jones
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:39:31 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>I remember a gun show in Phoenix in '88 just before California dreamed
>up its assault rifle ban. There were dealers with pallets of SKS's that
>were selling them as fast as they could. iirc, they were going for
>around $100. a little more for chrome lined barrels or thumbhole stocks.
>I kick myself for not buying one but at the time my lifestyle made long
>guns impractical.
California law (which isn't deeply), the SKS would *not* be an
"assault weapon" because it lacks an easily ejectable magazine.
I lugged a bolt action SKS home from Vietnam one trip. I made up a
story about how I jumped out of a tree, stabbed an enemy soldier, and
captured it... and sold it for a hundred bucks (that was a lot of
money in the '60s).
Jones
Gunner Asch
Jun 18, 2017, 3:55:21 PM6/18/17
to
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:39:31 -0600, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
wrote:
Here in the West....the SKS replaced the 3030 in most rear windows of
pickup trucks.
Now that gun racks in the rear windows are in many
cases..banned...they are behind the rear seat or laying on the seat.
wrote:
pickup trucks.
Now that gun racks in the rear windows are in many
cases..banned...they are behind the rear seat or laying on the seat.
rbowman
Jun 18, 2017, 4:26:13 PM6/18/17
to
On 06/18/2017 12:45 PM, !Jones wrote:
> x-no-idiots: yes
>
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:39:31 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
> <bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> I remember a gun show in Phoenix in '88 just before California dreamed
>> up its assault rifle ban. There were dealers with pallets of SKS's that
>> were selling them as fast as they could. iirc, they were going for
>> around $100. a little more for chrome lined barrels or thumbhole stocks.
>> I kick myself for not buying one but at the time my lifestyle made long
>> guns impractical.
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong; however, as I understand the
> California law (which isn't deeply), the SKS would *not* be an
> "assault weapon" because it lacks an easily ejectable magazine.
I'm definitely not a California lawyer either. I'm not sure if a thumb
> x-no-idiots: yes
>
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:39:31 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
> <bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> I remember a gun show in Phoenix in '88 just before California dreamed
>> up its assault rifle ban. There were dealers with pallets of SKS's that
>> were selling them as fast as they could. iirc, they were going for
>> around $100. a little more for chrome lined barrels or thumbhole stocks.
>> I kick myself for not buying one but at the time my lifestyle made long
>> guns impractical.
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong; however, as I understand the
> California law (which isn't deeply), the SKS would *not* be an
> "assault weapon" because it lacks an easily ejectable magazine.
hole stock would make an SKS evil under the 1989 law. Detachable
magazines were iffy. I think the state flipped on that and they had to
be surrendered in 2000. CA is weird. A Yugoslavian SKS with a grenade
launcher is banned. Of course, without a supply of Yugoslavian grenades
the adapter is just a strange looking flash suppressor.
It didn't really matter. Are you familiar with the term FUD? In the best
Pelosi fashion nobody knew what exactly was going to be in the bill or
how it would be interpreted so the time to buy an SKS was NOW.
The election of Clinton and Obama had the same effect. I was shooting a
lot of .22LR and before Obama got in office CCI Blazer 550 packs were
stacked up on pallets at Sportsman's Warehouse for $19.99 a pop. After
he was elected all you could find was high priced specialty ammo like
Eley Match at $10 for 50 rounds.
> I lugged a bolt action SKS home from Vietnam one trip. I made up a
> story about how I jumped out of a tree, stabbed an enemy soldier, and
> captured it... and sold it for a hundred bucks (that was a lot of
> money in the '60s).
broken action SKS that could no longer cycle.
Gunner Asch
Jun 18, 2017, 4:32:25 PM6/18/17
to
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:45:30 -0500, !Jones <︰on...@fubahor.com> wrote:
>x-no-idiots: yes
>
>On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:39:31 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
><bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>>I remember a gun show in Phoenix in '88 just before California dreamed
>>up its assault rifle ban. There were dealers with pallets of SKS's that
>>were selling them as fast as they could. iirc, they were going for
>>around $100. a little more for chrome lined barrels or thumbhole stocks.
>>I kick myself for not buying one but at the time my lifestyle made long
>>guns impractical.
>
>Please correct me if I'm wrong; however, as I understand the
>California law (which isn't deeply), the SKS would *not* be an
>"assault weapon" because it lacks an easily ejectable magazine.
They are still not an "assault rifle" here in California.
>x-no-idiots: yes
>
>On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:39:31 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
><bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>>I remember a gun show in Phoenix in '88 just before California dreamed
>>up its assault rifle ban. There were dealers with pallets of SKS's that
>>were selling them as fast as they could. iirc, they were going for
>>around $100. a little more for chrome lined barrels or thumbhole stocks.
>>I kick myself for not buying one but at the time my lifestyle made long
>>guns impractical.
>
>Please correct me if I'm wrong; however, as I understand the
>California law (which isn't deeply), the SKS would *not* be an
>"assault weapon" because it lacks an easily ejectable magazine.
>
>I lugged a bolt action SKS home from Vietnam one trip. I made up a
>story about how I jumped out of a tree, stabbed an enemy soldier, and
>captured it... and sold it for a hundred bucks (that was a lot of
>money in the '60s).
>
>Jones
No such thing as a "bolt action SKS"
>I lugged a bolt action SKS home from Vietnam one trip. I made up a
>story about how I jumped out of a tree, stabbed an enemy soldier, and
>captured it... and sold it for a hundred bucks (that was a lot of
>money in the '60s).
>
>Jones
This is an SKS:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/SKS_-_Ryssland_-_AM.045810.jpg/1200px-SKS_-_Ryssland_-_AM.045810.jpg
This is a bolt action Mosin Nagant...alll variants found in Vietnam
http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/2001.jpg
This is a Lebel rifle..a French Leftover often found in Vietnam as
well
http://candrsenal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Lebel-m27-comparison.png
By the late 1960s..there were far fewer Lebels found in
combat..because ammo for it was becoming scarce..while the Mosin
Negant and SKS (and later AK 47) ammo was supported by Russia and
China
7.62x39 ammo fired in the SKS AND AK-47
http://1696252748.rsc.cdn77.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/004_110.JPG
7.62x54 ammo fired in the Mosin Negant..compared to the 7.62x39
http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad120/Swagman00/CIMG1692.jpg
8mm Lebel ammo for the French rifles
https://www.libertytreecollectors.com/productcart/pc/catalog/FrenchHotchkissAmmo.4.JPG
While it appears somewhat equivelent to the 7.62x54R...its not....not
interchangeable nor will either round fit in the other rifle.
de chucka
Jun 18, 2017, 4:33:18 PM6/18/17
to
de chucka
Jun 18, 2017, 4:35:37 PM6/18/17
to
>
> Stupid Australian.
>
!Jones
Jun 18, 2017, 4:43:48 PM6/18/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
$100 was worth a lot more than $100 in '68.
A bolt action SKS was pretty common... unless it had a bayonet... or a
folding stock. You could bring 'em home, but it was a big hassle to
do so. They discouraged it by making you clear it with intel and
ordinance... and probably the chaplin to boot. Invarably, you'd be
getting on the airplane and something wasn't signed or wasn't dated or
was the wrong version of the form or... I got a few of the forms
signed, then just broke it down and stuck it in my bag. All they'd
have done was confiscate it, but they didn't find it.
As I recall, they were a 7.62mm bore but the chamber was slightly
longer, thus, you could shoot a NATO round... sort of. Actually, I
never shot it... I just jumped out of the tree and stabbed the enemy
soldier.
Jones
A bolt action SKS was pretty common... unless it had a bayonet... or a
folding stock. You could bring 'em home, but it was a big hassle to
do so. They discouraged it by making you clear it with intel and
ordinance... and probably the chaplin to boot. Invarably, you'd be
getting on the airplane and something wasn't signed or wasn't dated or
was the wrong version of the form or... I got a few of the forms
signed, then just broke it down and stuck it in my bag. All they'd
have done was confiscate it, but they didn't find it.
As I recall, they were a 7.62mm bore but the chamber was slightly
longer, thus, you could shoot a NATO round... sort of. Actually, I
never shot it... I just jumped out of the tree and stabbed the enemy
soldier.
Jones
Jim Wilkins
Jun 18, 2017, 4:57:51 PM6/18/17
to
"!Jones" <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
news:vnodkc1a3m9nlqlmk...@4ax.com...
Then it was a Mosin-Nagant model 1891 variant, not an SKS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant
news:vnodkc1a3m9nlqlmk...@4ax.com...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant
cdcPdA⚛← Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ╬ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ →⚛rhhcGz
Jun 18, 2017, 5:12:13 PM6/18/17
to
A civilized society would prefer the use of euphemisms like "neutralize"
which is more soothing to the auditory orifice of the intelligentsia.
Along that line of thought, you'd say you "harvest" a pig if you use it
for meat; you'd "neutralize" a pig if you don't want to eat it.
max headroom
Jun 18, 2017, 6:10:49 PM6/18/17
to
In news:L0C1B.24609$gb1....@fx14.iad, cdcPdA?‹ Mighty + Wannabe ›?rhhcGz <Ikk...@TrDkQA.com> typed:
> for meat;...
Around weak-stomached city boys; otherwise we'd say "slaughter."
> ... you'd "neutralize" a pig if you don't want to eat it.
Around weak-stomached city boys; otherwise we'd say "kill."
And you eradicate a scourge such as feral boars.
Around weak-stomached city boys; otherwise we'd say "slaughter."
> ... you'd "neutralize" a pig if you don't want to eat it.
Around weak-stomached city boys; otherwise we'd say "kill."
And you eradicate a scourge such as feral boars.
Gunner Asch
Jun 18, 2017, 6:52:33 PM6/18/17
to
slip down into the chamber and away from the firing pin. The "Nato"
round is rimless..the MN round has a rim. Could get it to fire if you
pointed it straight up I suppose...shrug
Red Prepper
Jun 18, 2017, 7:01:03 PM6/18/17
to
Gunner Asch
Jun 18, 2017, 7:03:47 PM6/18/17
to
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:52:31 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>"!Jones" <︰on...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
Oh..for the clueless..the "Nato" round is called the 7.62x 51....the
civilian version is called the .308. They will interchange in bolt
action rifles..in semiautomatic rifles....kinda sorta.
wrote:
>>"!Jones" <︰on...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
civilian version is called the .308. They will interchange in bolt
action rifles..in semiautomatic rifles....kinda sorta.
Klaus Schadenfreude
Jun 18, 2017, 7:24:27 PM6/18/17
to
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 06:35:27 +1000, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com>
>> Stupid Australian.
See above
wrote:
>On 18/06/2017 10:18 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 11:15:02 +1000, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> It can but normally doesn't. Actually my Type 56 couldn't
>>>>
>>>> Do you still have it?
>>>
>>> Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>>> considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
>>
>> You don't eradicate pigs, you harvest them.
>
>Feral pigs do a lot of damage so we try to eradicate them
See above.
>On 18/06/2017 10:18 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 11:15:02 +1000, de chucka <Dech...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> It can but normally doesn't. Actually my Type 56 couldn't
>>>>
>>>> Do you still have it?
>>>
>>> Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>>> considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
>>
>> You don't eradicate pigs, you harvest them.
>
>Feral pigs do a lot of damage so we try to eradicate them
>> Stupid Australian.
See above
Wiley E. Coyote
Jun 18, 2017, 8:12:35 PM6/18/17
to
!Jones <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote in
news:k4idkcdf5ifufov87...@4ax.com:
A bolt action SKS?
Are you fucking stupid?
news:k4idkcdf5ifufov87...@4ax.com:
Are you fucking stupid?
Mr. B1ack
Jun 18, 2017, 11:01:27 PM6/18/17
to
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 16:03:33 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
Mil cartridges tend to be heavily crimped and have
a waterproofing shellac applied too - raising the
chamber pressure. Don't use them in an old
Brand-X POS rifle you bought at the flea market.
More robust actions - perhaps 7.62 NATO is one
of the smallest chamberings offered for the series -
should be OK. If it'll take a .338 Mag then it's not
gonna pop from the NATO cartridge.
I see the Army is now getting serious about dumping
the 5.56mm - going to something in the 6-6.5mm
range instead for a little more range and punch.
a waterproofing shellac applied too - raising the
chamber pressure. Don't use them in an old
Brand-X POS rifle you bought at the flea market.
More robust actions - perhaps 7.62 NATO is one
of the smallest chamberings offered for the series -
should be OK. If it'll take a .338 Mag then it's not
gonna pop from the NATO cartridge.
I see the Army is now getting serious about dumping
the 5.56mm - going to something in the 6-6.5mm
range instead for a little more range and punch.
rbowman
Jun 18, 2017, 11:07:11 PM6/18/17
to
On 06/18/2017 02:43 PM, !Jones wrote:
> A bolt action SKS was pretty common...
afaik Mrs. Simonov's little boy never designed a bolt action rifle in
his life.
> A bolt action SKS was pretty common...
afaik Mrs. Simonov's little boy never designed a bolt action rifle in
his life.
rbowman
Jun 18, 2017, 11:11:45 PM6/18/17
to
On 06/18/2017 03:12 PM, cdcPdA⚛← Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ╬ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ →⚛rhhcGz
wrote:
wrote:
>
> Along that line of thought, you'd say you "harvest" a pig if you use it
> for meat; you'd "neutralize" a pig if you don't want to eat it.
And here I thought neutralize was when you turned a shoat into a barrow.
> Along that line of thought, you'd say you "harvest" a pig if you use it
> for meat; you'd "neutralize" a pig if you don't want to eat it.
rbowman
Jun 18, 2017, 11:13:50 PM6/18/17
to
On 06/18/2017 02:43 PM, !Jones wrote:
> x-no-idiots: yes
>
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 14:28:21 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
> <bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> A bolt action SKS would be worth a lot more than $100 :) Unless it was a
>> broken action SKS that could no longer cycle.
> $100 was worth a lot more than $100 in '68.
A bolt action SKS would be extremely rare. I suppose you might maybe be
>
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 14:28:21 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
> <bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> A bolt action SKS would be worth a lot more than $100 :) Unless it was a
>> broken action SKS that could no longer cycle.
> $100 was worth a lot more than $100 in '68.
able to kluge one up if you had a lot of time on you hands.
!Jones
Jun 18, 2017, 11:40:22 PM6/18/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 21:09:21 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>afaik Mrs. Simonov's little boy never designed a bolt action rifle in
>his life.
Take it up with someone who cares. We called 'em an SKS, so that's
what they were. Back in those days, I summoned fire from the sky,
so... if I said it was an SKS, it was an SKS.
Jones
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 21:09:21 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>afaik Mrs. Simonov's little boy never designed a bolt action rifle in
>his life.
what they were. Back in those days, I summoned fire from the sky,
so... if I said it was an SKS, it was an SKS.
Jones
!Jones
Jun 18, 2017, 11:41:20 PM6/18/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 21:15:59 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>A bolt action SKS would be extremely rare. I suppose you might maybe be
>able to kluge one up if you had a lot of time on you hands.
I wasn't interested in arguing about what it was.
Jones
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 21:15:59 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>A bolt action SKS would be extremely rare. I suppose you might maybe be
>able to kluge one up if you had a lot of time on you hands.
Jones
max headroom
Jun 19, 2017, 12:48:49 AM6/19/17
to
In news:4uhekcdo8rl99gfui...@4ax.com, !Jones <︰on...@fubahor.com> typed:
> x-idiots: jones
Facts don't interest Jones.
> x-idiots: jones
Zinger
Jun 19, 2017, 1:33:15 AM6/19/17
to
>
--
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to
the security of a free State, the right of the people
to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed
Just Wondering
Jun 19, 2017, 4:12:14 AM6/19/17
to
On 6/18/2017 3:12 PM, cdcPdA⚛← Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ╬ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ →⚛rhhcGz wrote:
certainly would not prefer it.
> de chucka wrote:
>> On 18/06/2017 10:18 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On 18/06/2017 10:18 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 11:15:02 +1000, de chucka wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>>>> considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
>>>
>>> You don't eradicate pigs, you harvest them.
>>
>> Feral pigs do a lot of damage so we try to eradicate them
>
> "Eradicate" is such a harsh and offensive word.
> A civilized society would prefer the use of euphemisms like "neutralize"
> which is more soothing to the auditory orifice of the intelligentsia.
>
A truly civilized society might tolerate political correctness but it
>>>
>>>> Hell no it was crap, obviously I got a dud one. Not surprising
>>>> considering what I paid for it but it was OK for pig eradication
>>>
>>> You don't eradicate pigs, you harvest them.
>>
>> Feral pigs do a lot of damage so we try to eradicate them
>
> "Eradicate" is such a harsh and offensive word.
> A civilized society would prefer the use of euphemisms like "neutralize"
> which is more soothing to the auditory orifice of the intelligentsia.
>
certainly would not prefer it.
Len
Jun 19, 2017, 5:40:05 AM6/19/17
to
In article <kphekc5etsfa1j231...@4ax.com>
!Jones <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote:
>
> x-no-idiots: !Jones
You summoned that from your ass, so lets call it what it is,
bullshit.
!Jones <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote:
>
> x-no-idiots: !Jones
bullshit.
Jim Wilkins
Jun 19, 2017, 7:15:33 AM6/19/17
to
"Mr. B1ack" <now...@nada.net> wrote in message
news:a1fekctpuvl7o9iu4...@4ax.com...
The question of what's best has been kicked around since smokeless
powder was introduced in the late 1880's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1895_Lee_Navy
"the wounds produced by small-caliber bullets will frequently not be
sufficient to put the wounded out of action and their shock will not
stop the onset of excited men at short range".
There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
(5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
-jsw
news:a1fekctpuvl7o9iu4...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 16:03:33 -0700, Gunner Asch
> <gunne...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:52:31 -0700, Gunner Asch
>><gunne...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 16:58:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
>>><murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"!Jones" <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
> <gunne...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:52:31 -0700, Gunner Asch
>><gunne...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 16:58:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
>>><murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
powder was introduced in the late 1880's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1895_Lee_Navy
"the wounds produced by small-caliber bullets will frequently not be
sufficient to put the wounded out of action and their shock will not
stop the onset of excited men at short range".
There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
(5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
-jsw
Jim Wilkins
Jun 19, 2017, 7:25:36 AM6/19/17
to
"!Jones" <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
news:kphekc5etsfa1j231...@4ax.com...
They cling remarkably stubbornly to the few words they know.
!Jones
Jun 19, 2017, 8:04:58 AM6/19/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 00:33:17 -0500, in talk.politics.guns Zinger
<Zin...@badSoSad.com> wrote:
>And that was right after you shotgunned a whole sole of hash!
Yup.
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 00:33:17 -0500, in talk.politics.guns Zinger
<Zin...@badSoSad.com> wrote:
>And that was right after you shotgunned a whole sole of hash!
!Jones
Jun 19, 2017, 8:10:40 AM6/19/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 07:25:48 -0400, in talk.politics.guns "Jim
Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The infantry operates on the KISS principle, Keep It Simple, Stupid.
>They cling remarkably stubbornly to the few words they know.
Agree. Another point is that a person who watches Star Trek will have
a richer vocabulary in which to discuss Enterprise weaponry (i.e.:
phaser Vs. proton torpedo); the rest of us don't care.
Jones
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 07:25:48 -0400, in talk.politics.guns "Jim
Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The infantry operates on the KISS principle, Keep It Simple, Stupid.
>They cling remarkably stubbornly to the few words they know.
a richer vocabulary in which to discuss Enterprise weaponry (i.e.:
phaser Vs. proton torpedo); the rest of us don't care.
Jones
Jim Wilkins
Jun 19, 2017, 9:21:08 AM6/19/17
to
"!Jones" <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
news:3kffkc1qucrdi3qcj...@4ax.com...
don't know its correct name. I saw one of these in a neighbor's truck
but couldn't find one for myself until I learned that it's a "San
Angelo bar".
https://www.amazon.com/Temper-72-Inch-Pencil-Point-Angelo/dp/B00004S1WX
I had to work to adapt my college-boy speech to Army practice. I
accompanied some friends into Mannheim and asked a local girl for
directions. She questioned why I was pronouncing the city name
properly in German but not English. I hadn't realized that I was
talking Army to the guys.
-jsw
rbowman
Jun 19, 2017, 11:29:37 AM6/19/17
to
On 06/19/2017 05:15 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
> (5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
> The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
> lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
> numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
> long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
Horses for courses. Unfortunately the military tends to be fighting the
> There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
> (5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
> The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
> lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
> numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
> long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
last war and will send troops armed with M4's up against Afghans armed
with old battle rifles that can reach out and touch someone.
rbowman
Jun 19, 2017, 11:38:47 AM6/19/17
to
On 06/19/2017 07:21 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> These days it can be hard to buy something, especially on line, if you
> don't know its correct name. I saw one of these in a neighbor's truck
> but couldn't find one for myself until I learned that it's a "San
> Angelo bar".
> https://www.amazon.com/Temper-72-Inch-Pencil-Point-Angelo/dp/B00004S1WX
Looks like a bull prick to me :)
> These days it can be hard to buy something, especially on line, if you
> don't know its correct name. I saw one of these in a neighbor's truck
> but couldn't find one for myself until I learned that it's a "San
> Angelo bar".
> https://www.amazon.com/Temper-72-Inch-Pencil-Point-Angelo/dp/B00004S1WX
Jim Wilkins
Jun 19, 2017, 1:39:46 PM6/19/17
to
"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:eqq8ut...@mid.individual.net...
http://taskandpurpose.com/love-m240-goes-way-way-back/
"I don’t pretend to be the greatest shot who ever lived, but when you
can hit a man at 1,000 meters with the first six-to-nine round burst,
it is a sign of quality."
news:eqq8ut...@mid.individual.net...
"I don’t pretend to be the greatest shot who ever lived, but when you
can hit a man at 1,000 meters with the first six-to-nine round burst,
it is a sign of quality."
!Jones
Jun 19, 2017, 4:48:41 PM6/19/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 09:21:16 -0400, in talk.politics.guns "Jim
Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>These days it can be hard to buy something, especially on line, if you
>don't know its correct name. I saw one of these in a neighbor's truck
>but couldn't find one for myself until I learned that it's a "San
>Angelo bar".
In database, that's known as SORC (the "something on a Ritz Cracker"
problem).
Jones
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 09:21:16 -0400, in talk.politics.guns "Jim
Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>These days it can be hard to buy something, especially on line, if you
>don't know its correct name. I saw one of these in a neighbor's truck
>but couldn't find one for myself until I learned that it's a "San
>Angelo bar".
problem).
Jones
rbowman
Jun 19, 2017, 11:31:08 PM6/19/17
to
On 06/19/2017 11:39 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> http://taskandpurpose.com/love-m240-goes-way-way-back/
> "I don’t pretend to be the greatest shot who ever lived, but when you
> can hit a man at 1,000 meters with the first six-to-nine round burst,
> it is a sign of quality."
I liked Gunny Hathcock's explanation for one of his kills. He had jury
> http://taskandpurpose.com/love-m240-goes-way-way-back/
> "I don’t pretend to be the greatest shot who ever lived, but when you
> can hit a man at 1,000 meters with the first six-to-nine round burst,
> it is a sign of quality."
rigged a scope onto a .50 and was trying to sight it in by looking for
the dust and debris thrown up out about 1000 meters. Suddenly Luke the
Gook pops up like a whack-a-mole just where the last round impacted. No
brainer, stroke that trigger.
There's a 1000 yard range down the road and I think the current record
is a 10 shot group in under 7". Bench rest with very specialized rifles,
of course. I forget if the current flavor of choice is 6 or 6.5 mm.
They're not your Ruger American of the shelf.
PaxPerPoten
Jun 20, 2017, 1:09:45 AM6/20/17
to
.45 caliber, Or maybe a 12 gauge trench sweeper. For Range and stopping
power the tried and true 30-06 does well. .303 and .308 aren't too bad
either. I do have a soft spot for the .50 Barrette/Stoner/whatever. But
to haul that big bastard around can't be fun. I had a .475 Weatherbee
that was the cats meow, but it was a bolt and was not gentle. If it
didn't hit them, the sound, scared them to death. ;-p
>
>
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
edhun...@gmail.com
Jun 20, 2017, 1:31:29 AM6/20/17
to
On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:09:45 AM UTC-4, PaxPerPoten wrote:
> On 6/19/2017 10:31 AM, rbowman wrote:
> > On 06/19/2017 05:15 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> >> There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
> >> (5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
> >> The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
> >> lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
> >> numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
> >> long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
> >
> > Horses for courses. Unfortunately the military tends to be fighting the
> > last war and will send troops armed with M4's up against Afghans armed
> > with old battle rifles that can reach out and touch someone.
>
> I agree. Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1
> .45 caliber...
> On 6/19/2017 10:31 AM, rbowman wrote:
> > On 06/19/2017 05:15 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> >> There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
> >> (5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
> >> The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
> >> lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
> >> numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
> >> long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
> >
> > Horses for courses. Unfortunately the military tends to be fighting the
> > last war and will send troops armed with M4's up against Afghans armed
> > with old battle rifles that can reach out and touch someone.
>
> I agree. Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1
<sob> And just a few months ago, you called the .45 ACP a "wimp."
>, Or maybe a 12 gauge trench sweeper. For Range and stopping
> power the tried and true 30-06 does well. .303 and .308 aren't too bad
> either. I do have a soft spot for the .50 Barrette/Stoner/whatever.
> But
> to haul that big bastard around can't be fun. I had a .475 Weatherbee
> that was the cats meow, but it was a bolt and was not gentle. If it
> didn't hit them, the sound, scared them to death. ;-p
--
Ed Huntress
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 4:37:56 AM6/20/17
to
On 6/19/2017 11:09 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>
> Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1 .45 caliber.
>
That must be why the U.S. Military has sdelected the 1911A1 .45ACP as
its standard issue sidearm. Oh, wait, that would be the Sig Sauer M17
(variant of P320) 9mm, and before that the Beretta M9 (variant of
Beretta 92FS) 9mm. The .45 fell out of favor as the preferred sidearm
over 30 years ago, and there is no sign of a comeback.
The best handgun and cartridge for stopping a bad guy has long been
unresolved and remains a matter of debate. But there is this:
http://chuckhawks.com/handgun_stopping_power.htm
"Back in the 1960's, big bore fans asserted that .45 ACP 230 grain ball
ammo would achieve 95% one shot stops. Subsequent research has shown
that 230grain FMJ .45 ACP loads actually provide about 60-64% one shot
stops and several smaller calibers using expanding bullets are more
effective stoppers. The most effective of all self-defense handgun
cartridges, as this is written, is the medium bore .357 Magnum shooting
a 125 grain JHP bullet, which provides 93-97% stops. These numbers are
supported by a huge data base and several different researchers, working
independently, have discovered essentially the same thing."
>
> Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1 .45 caliber.
>
That must be why the U.S. Military has sdelected the 1911A1 .45ACP as
its standard issue sidearm. Oh, wait, that would be the Sig Sauer M17
(variant of P320) 9mm, and before that the Beretta M9 (variant of
Beretta 92FS) 9mm. The .45 fell out of favor as the preferred sidearm
over 30 years ago, and there is no sign of a comeback.
The best handgun and cartridge for stopping a bad guy has long been
unresolved and remains a matter of debate. But there is this:
http://chuckhawks.com/handgun_stopping_power.htm
"Back in the 1960's, big bore fans asserted that .45 ACP 230 grain ball
ammo would achieve 95% one shot stops. Subsequent research has shown
that 230grain FMJ .45 ACP loads actually provide about 60-64% one shot
stops and several smaller calibers using expanding bullets are more
effective stoppers. The most effective of all self-defense handgun
cartridges, as this is written, is the medium bore .357 Magnum shooting
a 125 grain JHP bullet, which provides 93-97% stops. These numbers are
supported by a huge data base and several different researchers, working
independently, have discovered essentially the same thing."
PaxPerPoten
Jun 20, 2017, 6:23:28 AM6/20/17
to
As for all the military handguns...They come and go and yet the favored
weapon of Veterans is still the .45 look alike 1911A1's. Soldiers don't
have any choice. Civilians do!
I suppose a real Bad ass could carry a Desert Eagle .50 or equivalent.
There are a couple of pretty nice .410 shot pistols that hold up to 8
double 8 bucks per round.
PaxPerPoten
Jun 20, 2017, 6:35:05 AM6/20/17
to
with the soft ball lead that is required. The Walker 44-70 does a Hell
of a job also...but could blow up in a cross cylinder explosion in your
hand. For a rifle the old Sharps .70 Caliber Buffalo gun could tear an
arm or two off. The big slow bullet is the most damaging. The civil war
proved that. Along with the massive infection caused by Black powder
residue.
Jim Wilkins
Jun 20, 2017, 6:37:46 AM6/20/17
to
<edhun...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:40d4bdfe-a53a-46c9...@googlegroups.com...
More proof he's just a poser.
news:40d4bdfe-a53a-46c9...@googlegroups.com...
edhun...@gmail.com
Jun 20, 2017, 7:42:17 AM6/20/17
to
It's becoming hilarious. He's a bigger phony than Gunner, if that's possible.
I guess I won't get to ask him what he was shooting with his imaginary "Weatherbee."
--
Ed Huntress
Jim Wilkins
Jun 20, 2017, 7:45:22 AM6/20/17
to
"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:C952B.35574$wG1....@fx37.iad...
But the military can't use expanding bullets, only hardball. Switching
to 9mm was a political compromise, a trade for forcing .223 on NATO.
The M1911A1 also had a high rate of accidental discharges among the
typically poorly trained users, I had ZERO training before being
issued one and had to learn their handling and cleaning procedures by
asking around. There were sand barrels at all the barracks entrances
to point them into when unloading and dropping the hammer. That's not
so easy with cold, numb hands or gloves.
It's an experts' weapon:
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20120824.aspx?comments=Y
-jsw
news:C952B.35574$wG1....@fx37.iad...
to 9mm was a political compromise, a trade for forcing .223 on NATO.
The M1911A1 also had a high rate of accidental discharges among the
typically poorly trained users, I had ZERO training before being
issued one and had to learn their handling and cleaning procedures by
asking around. There were sand barrels at all the barracks entrances
to point them into when unloading and dropping the hammer. That's not
so easy with cold, numb hands or gloves.
It's an experts' weapon:
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20120824.aspx?comments=Y
-jsw
Jim Wilkins
Jun 20, 2017, 8:22:25 AM6/20/17
to
"PaxPerPoten" <P...@USA.org> wrote in message
news:oiathq$1jh$1...@dont-email.me...
your confused memory of reading about them The "Navy" caliber was 36.
.45 is the bullet diameter, -70 the standard infantry powder charge
weight. The charge varied from 55 grains for the lighter cavalry
carbines to 125 grains in custom buffalo rifles.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/buffalo_cartridges.htm
news:oiathq$1jh$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> You want real knock down power..Use a Black Powder .44-40 or .32-?
> Navy with the soft ball lead that is required. The Walker 44-70 does
> a Hell of a job also...but could blow up in a cross cylinder
> explosion in your hand. For a rifle the old Sharps .70 Caliber
> Buffalo gun could tear an arm or two off. The big slow bullet is the
> most damaging. The civil war proved that. Along with the massive
> infection caused by Black powder residue.
Have you actually fired these guns? You appear to be regurgitating
> You want real knock down power..Use a Black Powder .44-40 or .32-?
> Navy with the soft ball lead that is required. The Walker 44-70 does
> a Hell of a job also...but could blow up in a cross cylinder
> explosion in your hand. For a rifle the old Sharps .70 Caliber
> Buffalo gun could tear an arm or two off. The big slow bullet is the
> most damaging. The civil war proved that. Along with the massive
> infection caused by Black powder residue.
your confused memory of reading about them The "Navy" caliber was 36.
.45 is the bullet diameter, -70 the standard infantry powder charge
weight. The charge varied from 55 grains for the lighter cavalry
carbines to 125 grains in custom buffalo rifles.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/buffalo_cartridges.htm
rbowman
Jun 20, 2017, 1:02:15 PM6/20/17
to
On 06/20/2017 04:35 AM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
> For a rifle the old Sharps .70 Caliber Buffalo gun could tear an arm or
> two off.
Yeah, except it was the 'Big .50'. A .50-90 would gt the job done. If
> For a rifle the old Sharps .70 Caliber Buffalo gun could tear an arm or
> two off.
you've got $1500 and some time, these guys will fix you up:
http://csharpsarms.com/catalog-detail/34/Model-1875-Sporting-Rifle.html
Hopalong Hirschowitz
Jun 20, 2017, 1:04:53 PM6/20/17
to
On 6/19/2017 10:09 PM, PaxPerPoten lied:
bullshitting about.
Meanwhile, you have conceded that you were lying about "Wilmer" [sic] MN
being administered under sharia law, and also you were lying about it
having a "Muslim" government. 100% of the Willmar MN city council are
native-born Americans of European origin and are not Muslims.
You're just a fucking lying asshole, every time.
> On 6/19/2017 10:31 AM, rbowman wrote:
>> On 06/19/2017 05:15 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
>>> There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
>>> (5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
>>> The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
>>> lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
>>> numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
>>> long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
>>
>> Horses for courses. Unfortunately the military tends to be fighting
>> the last war and will send troops armed with M4's up against Afghans
>> armed with old battle rifles that can reach out and touch someone.
>
> I agree. Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1
> .45 caliber, Or maybe a
You've never been in combat and you don't know what the fuck you're
>> On 06/19/2017 05:15 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
>>> There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from .223
>>> (5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common choices.
>>> The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting, with
>>> lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
>>> numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and heavier
>>> long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.
>>
>> Horses for courses. Unfortunately the military tends to be fighting
>> the last war and will send troops armed with M4's up against Afghans
>> armed with old battle rifles that can reach out and touch someone.
>
> I agree. Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1
> .45 caliber, Or maybe a
bullshitting about.
Meanwhile, you have conceded that you were lying about "Wilmer" [sic] MN
being administered under sharia law, and also you were lying about it
having a "Muslim" government. 100% of the Willmar MN city council are
native-born Americans of European origin and are not Muslims.
You're just a fucking lying asshole, every time.
Hopalong Hirschowitz
Jun 20, 2017, 1:05:44 PM6/20/17
to
rbowman
Jun 20, 2017, 1:08:01 PM6/20/17
to
the target the eruption of dirt and small rocks is satisfying. The guy
down the road with the bufflers might get pissed if I shot one though.
edhun...@gmail.com
Jun 20, 2017, 2:15:31 PM6/20/17
to
I have to wonder about Pox's exposure to guns. Where I grew up, any of my 12-year-old friends would have known that most of what he says about guns is bullshit. For example, Weatherby never made a .475. Neither did Weatherbee. d8-). "Hard-hitting" .32 Navy Colt Revolvers (which didn't exist, either) would have been a dead giveaway.
If he's going to bullshit about something, guns are a bad subject choice with this crowd. Some of the people here forgot more than he'll ever learn -- when they were 14 years old.
--
Ed Huntress
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 4:10:21 PM6/20/17
to
> Soldiers don't have any choice. Civilians do!
>
Jim Wilkins
Jun 20, 2017, 4:11:14 PM6/20/17
to
"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:eqt33e...@mid.individual.net...
European army (Spain) until we had belatedly switched from the
Trapdoor to the Krag.
The British Army suffered a massacre that dwarfed Custer's when they
attacked the Zulu empire with a comparable single-shot rifle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Isandlwana
-jsw
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 4:17:27 PM6/20/17
to
ability to fire without flinching, to get back on target quickly for
followup shots, and to have many rounds available in a magazine, are all
important factors. All of those factors are in opposition to wielding
the biggest baddest gun you can carry. Modern hollow point ammo can
expand to .65" or bigger, making a bigger hole than any large caliber
ball ammo. And there aren't many .45 cal. handguns with 15-18 round
magazines.
Jim Wilkins
Jun 20, 2017, 4:24:32 PM6/20/17
to
news:Kif2B.51216$OD2....@fx44.iad...
The .45ACP was intended for military belt holsters. Browning had
already introduced a concealable semiauto for civilians:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_M1900
already introduced a concealable semiauto for civilians:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_M1900
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 4:30:43 PM6/20/17
to
The 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets did ban
expanding bullets. However, the USA did not sign it.
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/States.xsp?xp_viewStates=XPages_NORMStatesParties&xp_treatySelected=170
> Switching to 9mm was a political compromise,
>
> a trade for forcing .223 on NATO.
>
I don't know enough history to agree or disagree about any such tradeoff.
Jim Wilkins
Jun 20, 2017, 4:42:12 PM6/20/17
to
"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RBf2B.31017$Jz4....@fx21.iad...
"The United States is not a party to the Hague Declaration, but has
acted consistent with it."
"In 1980 I had responsibility for conducting the legal review for new
military weapons and ammunition required by the Department of Defense
to ensure compliance with our treaty obligations..... My examination
of the MatchKing determined that notwithstanding Sierra's
characterization of it as a "hollow point," it was not a hollow point
in the sense of the prohibition contained in the 1899 Hague
Declaration."
-jsw
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 4:47:18 PM6/20/17
to
the gun used to assassinate Archduke Ferdinand, lighting the fuse that
set off World War I. Which may all be interesting, but has little to do
with resolving the place the model 1911 has in the hearts of gun users.
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 5:10:46 PM6/20/17
to
On 6/20/2017 2:32 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> and 9mm requires the legendary double tap,
>
Neither of those assumptions is necessarily true.
> My 19+1Glock is really 10 stops. Not much better than my 1911's 7+1 = eight stops.
>
The answer to that was in my first post which you clipped:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 14:17:24 -0600, Just Wondering wrote:
>
>> Raw knockdown power is only one factor in handgun selection. The
>> ability to fire without flinching, to get back on target quickly for
>> followup shots, and to have many rounds available in a magazine, are all
>> important factors.
> ...
>
>> Raw knockdown power is only one factor in handgun selection. The
>> ability to fire without flinching, to get back on target quickly for
>> followup shots, and to have many rounds available in a magazine, are all
>> important factors.
>> And there aren't many .45 cal. handguns with 15-18 round magazines.
>
> This is something I've pondered. If .45 is truly a one-shot stopper
>
> and 9mm requires the legendary double tap,
>
Neither of those assumptions is necessarily true.
> My 19+1Glock is really 10 stops. Not much better than my 1911's 7+1 = eight stops.
>
The answer to that was in my first post which you clipped:
http://chuckhawks.com/handgun_stopping_power.htm
"Back in the 1960's, big bore fans asserted that .45 ACP 230 grain ball
ammo would achieve 95% one shot stops. Subsequent research has shown
that 230grain FMJ .45 ACP loads actually provide about 60-64% one shot
stops and several smaller calibers using expanding bullets are more
effective stoppers. The most effective of all self-defense handgun
cartridges, as this is written, is the medium bore .357 Magnum shooting
a 125 grain JHP bullet, which provides 93-97% stops. These numbers are
supported by a huge data base and several different researchers, working
independently, have discovered essentially the same thing."
I suggest you take a look at the terminal ballistics of Federal HST ammo.
"Back in the 1960's, big bore fans asserted that .45 ACP 230 grain ball
ammo would achieve 95% one shot stops. Subsequent research has shown
that 230grain FMJ .45 ACP loads actually provide about 60-64% one shot
stops and several smaller calibers using expanding bullets are more
effective stoppers. The most effective of all self-defense handgun
cartridges, as this is written, is the medium bore .357 Magnum shooting
a 125 grain JHP bullet, which provides 93-97% stops. These numbers are
supported by a huge data base and several different researchers, working
independently, have discovered essentially the same thing."
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 5:14:02 PM6/20/17
to
Hague Declaration. But the USA did not sign it and is not
legally bound by it.
Jim Wilkins
Jun 20, 2017, 5:58:01 PM6/20/17
to
"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:teg2B.23034$xk.1...@fx39.iad...
for the military.
I followed that study when it came out. I don't recall Marshall and
Sanow mentioning that .44 Mag hunting bullets were designed to reach
the vitals of large heavy-boned animals and expand more gradually,
after they would have exited a human.
-jsw
Scout
Jun 20, 2017, 6:15:17 PM6/20/17
to
about hollow points is a moot factor.
I would just note that while the brass selected the 9mm for the ordinary
soldier, Special forces have demanded and gotten the .45 for their missions.
The experts in SHTF selected the .45 when using FMJ, enough said.
Now if you want to discuss the best caliber with hollow points, then you
need to set the conditions by which on determines 'best'..
Among factors to consider:
Weight
# of rounds
Probably of a clogged hollow point (which then acts like a FMJ)
First shot factors
Recovery time for subsequent shots
Capacity limits
Grip size considerations
Pistol size
Concealability
Shooter skill
Shooter strength
muzzle flash in low light conditions
muzzle flip
etc
etc
etc
All I can say, is bottom line....better the mouse gun you had with you than
the elephant gun you left home in the drawer.
If you don't have it with you when you need it because it was too big,
heavy, etc then it's theoretical power is a moot point.
Scout
Jun 20, 2017, 6:30:52 PM6/20/17
to
news:ppf2B.7378$on3....@fx26.iad...
All true, but if your first shot drops them in their tracks.....follow up
shoots become moot.
I will simply note the whole issue if a multivariable equation and people
need to decide the advantage/cost tradeoffs.
I personally have a fondness for the .380 polymer micro pistols, because I
know I will almost certainly carry it and thus have it when I need it.
Of course, I load the hottest most effective round I can find for it, but
I'm not the sort of person who will carry around a 3-4 pound gun unless
social/location factors are such it's much more likely I might need it.
For myself, my basic motto is better the mouse gun you have with you than
the hand cannon you left at home.
Of course, mode and method of carry including clothing, factor into the
tradeoff point of what you will carry vs leaving it at home.
So, when asked for advice, I go with a reasonable cartridge in the smallest
lightest platform, knowing they are more likely to carry it all the time. As
they gain experience and comfort then they can decide if they are willing to
trade off weight/size for effectiveness but continue to carry it all the
time.
Even then, I suggest they see if they can borrow a rig to try for several
days to see if it's really what they are willing to carry. Surprising how
many decide that cool gun with the popular performance, ends up sitting in
the drawer while they switch back to the smaller, lighter rig.
]
Now, if there is something like the King trials or something else that might
result in riot or other social upheaval, then I probably would carry the
hand cannon with extra ammo, and deal with the issues of weight, size, and
bulk. But that's just me.
Remember, you have to decide what you will carry, and under what conditions
you will do so. Then carry what you are willing to deal with for those
conditions. If you end up leaving it at home, then what it could have done
is a moot issue, if the SHTF at that time.
shoots become moot.
I will simply note the whole issue if a multivariable equation and people
need to decide the advantage/cost tradeoffs.
I personally have a fondness for the .380 polymer micro pistols, because I
know I will almost certainly carry it and thus have it when I need it.
Of course, I load the hottest most effective round I can find for it, but
I'm not the sort of person who will carry around a 3-4 pound gun unless
social/location factors are such it's much more likely I might need it.
For myself, my basic motto is better the mouse gun you have with you than
the hand cannon you left at home.
Of course, mode and method of carry including clothing, factor into the
tradeoff point of what you will carry vs leaving it at home.
So, when asked for advice, I go with a reasonable cartridge in the smallest
lightest platform, knowing they are more likely to carry it all the time. As
they gain experience and comfort then they can decide if they are willing to
trade off weight/size for effectiveness but continue to carry it all the
time.
Even then, I suggest they see if they can borrow a rig to try for several
days to see if it's really what they are willing to carry. Surprising how
many decide that cool gun with the popular performance, ends up sitting in
the drawer while they switch back to the smaller, lighter rig.
]
Now, if there is something like the King trials or something else that might
result in riot or other social upheaval, then I probably would carry the
hand cannon with extra ammo, and deal with the issues of weight, size, and
bulk. But that's just me.
Remember, you have to decide what you will carry, and under what conditions
you will do so. Then carry what you are willing to deal with for those
conditions. If you end up leaving it at home, then what it could have done
is a moot issue, if the SHTF at that time.
Scout
Jun 20, 2017, 6:44:39 PM6/20/17
to
"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message
news:k81jkcliumum7tiqe...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 14:17:24 -0600, Just Wondering wrote:
>
>
>>Raw knockdown power is only one factor in handgun selection. The
>>ability to fire without flinching, to get back on target quickly for
>>followup shots, and to have many rounds available in a magazine, are all
>>important factors.
> ...
>>ability to fire without flinching, to get back on target quickly for
>>followup shots, and to have many rounds available in a magazine, are all
>>important factors.
>>And there aren't many .45 cal. handguns with 15-18 round magazines.
>
>
> This is something I've pondered. If .45 is truly a one-shot stopper
> and 9mm requires the legendary double tap, my 19+1Glock is really 10
> stops. Not much better than my 1911's 7+1 = eight stops.
True, but it also gives you a bit of advantage of simply forcing your
opponent to keep their heads down, and interfering with their actions.
(see covering fire).
Besides, if you have a extra capacity magazine, and they misjudge when
you're going to reload......surprise sucker, my gun wasn't empty.
So ammo capacity has a certain advantage, but it increases bulk and usually
increases weight. Given that twenty 9mm weigh more than eight .45 rounds.
9mm about 2/5 of an ounce each (100 rounds @ 2.63 pounds)
.45 ACP at about 3/4 of an ounce each (100 rounds @ 4.69 pounds)
20 - 9mm = 0.526 pounds
8 - .45 ACP = 0.3752 pounds
Of course, this is may be offset somewhat by the pistol weights given that
the .45 is more likely to weigh more than the 9mm (YMMV)
Final point, two 9mm on target will typically be more effective overall that
one .45 on the same target. Again YMMV
Scout
Jun 20, 2017, 6:50:36 PM6/20/17
to
news:RBf2B.31017$Jz4....@fx21.iad...
True, but in the normal course of things the US complies with it closely. A
few exceptions are hollow points put in pilots survival pistols given the
notion the gun is more likely to be used on game than to attack enemy
soldiers. However, the hollow point sniper bullet was carefully tested to
insure that the hollow point had no or an insignificant impact on the bullet
upsetting on target. IOW, the hollow point was a feature of the
manufacturing process that produced the bullet with high accuracy and
doesn't expand on impact.
So, for all practical purposes, the US militia abides by the Hague
convention.
few exceptions are hollow points put in pilots survival pistols given the
notion the gun is more likely to be used on game than to attack enemy
soldiers. However, the hollow point sniper bullet was carefully tested to
insure that the hollow point had no or an insignificant impact on the bullet
upsetting on target. IOW, the hollow point was a feature of the
manufacturing process that produced the bullet with high accuracy and
doesn't expand on impact.
So, for all practical purposes, the US militia abides by the Hague
convention.
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 7:34:55 PM6/20/17
to
https://sofrep.com/73676/big-story-armys-modular-handgun-ammo-hollow-points/
(Jan. 30, 2017)
The Army has long reserved the right to use hollow points “where it saw
a need.” Specified Army commands, Military Police, and Special Mission
Units, have been issued hollow points in the past. With XM-17 pistol,
the Army has quietly expanded use of hollow point ammunition to regular
troops.
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 8:09:23 PM6/20/17
to
On 6/20/2017 4:30 PM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ppf2B.7378$on3....@fx26.iad...
>> On 6/20/2017 4:35 AM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>> On 6/20/2017 5:23 AM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2017 3:37 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>> On 6/19/2017 11:09 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1 .45
>>>>>> caliber.
>>>>>>
>>>>> That must be why the U.S. Military has selected the 1911A1 .45ACP
>
>
> "Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ppf2B.7378$on3....@fx26.iad...
>> On 6/20/2017 4:35 AM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>> On 6/20/2017 5:23 AM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2017 3:37 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>> On 6/19/2017 11:09 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a 1911A1 .45
>>>>>> caliber.
>>>>>>
better then a 1911A1 .45 caliber." Pax followed that up with "the
favored weapon of Veterans is still the .45 look alike 1911A1's." The
first statement is highly debated and in my opinion wrong, and the
second is an unsupported opinion, whose accuracy I doubt but I am
willing to be persuaded otherwise.
> I will simply note the whole issue is a multivariable equation and
> people need to decide the advantage/cost tradeoffs.
>
That depend on what "the whole issue" is. If the issue is what should a
>
person carry for defense, you're absolutely right. If the issue is the
accuracy of Pax's statements, a 1911A1 is clearly superior to a .380
micro carry in beating a close charging enemy down.
> I personally have a fondness for the .380 polymer micro pistols, because
> I know I will almost certainly carry it and thus have it when I need it.
>
Ruger LC9s. (Not the original LC9, its trigger is crap.) It's still
small and light enough to be a carry-anywhere pocket pistol, but gives
the power of 7+1 9mm rounds.
I would note that law enforcement critters used to use .38 special
revolvers, then the trend went toward 9mm, then .40S&W for better
stopping power. With recent improvements in hollow point defensive
rounds, some of those critters are going back to 9mm. Those using 1911s
are a distinct minority.
models available. Ain't capitalism grand?
Just Wondering
Jun 20, 2017, 8:12:10 PM6/20/17
to
Gunner Asch
Jun 20, 2017, 8:56:12 PM6/20/17
to
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:01:20 -0400, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:
>>>
>>Oh..for the clueless..the "Nato" round is called the 7.62x 51....the
>>civilian version is called the .308. They will interchange in bolt
>>action rifles..in semiautomatic rifles....kinda sorta.
>
>
> Mil cartridges tend to be heavily crimped and have
> a waterproofing shellac applied too - raising the
> chamber pressure. Don't use them in an old
> Brand-X POS rifle you bought at the flea market.
Actually..the NATO rounds are loaded to LOWER pressures than are
Commercial 308 ammo. You can shoot all the military stuff you want in
bolt actions, single shots and even commercial sporting semi
automatics.
Going the other way..shooting commercial 308 ammo in military semi
automatics..will beat the shit out of the military arm.
>
> More robust actions - perhaps 7.62 NATO is one
> of the smallest chamberings offered for the series -
> should be OK. If it'll take a .338 Mag then it's not
> gonna pop from the NATO cartridge.
>
> I see the Army is now getting serious about dumping
> the 5.56mm - going to something in the 6-6.5mm
> range instead for a little more range and punch.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
wrote:
>>>
>>Oh..for the clueless..the "Nato" round is called the 7.62x 51....the
>>civilian version is called the .308. They will interchange in bolt
>>action rifles..in semiautomatic rifles....kinda sorta.
>
>
> Mil cartridges tend to be heavily crimped and have
> a waterproofing shellac applied too - raising the
> chamber pressure. Don't use them in an old
> Brand-X POS rifle you bought at the flea market.
Actually..the NATO rounds are loaded to LOWER pressures than are
Commercial 308 ammo. You can shoot all the military stuff you want in
bolt actions, single shots and even commercial sporting semi
automatics.
Going the other way..shooting commercial 308 ammo in military semi
automatics..will beat the shit out of the military arm.
>
> More robust actions - perhaps 7.62 NATO is one
> of the smallest chamberings offered for the series -
> should be OK. If it'll take a .338 Mag then it's not
> gonna pop from the NATO cartridge.
>
> I see the Army is now getting serious about dumping
> the 5.56mm - going to something in the 6-6.5mm
> range instead for a little more range and punch.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages