Tommy, your made up M1B is just fantasy. None were ever produced. It is possible the military made models for some purpose, but no production. Here is a quote from Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Garand#Variants
"Most variants of the Garand, save the sniper variants, never saw active duty.[46] The sniper versions were modified to accept scope mounts, and two versions (the M1C, formerly M1E7, and the M1D, formerly M1E8) were produced, although not in significant quantities during World War II."
You seem to think all models, variants, must follow the alphabetical order. A-B-C-D-D-F-G-H-I-J, etc., etc. etc. Usually, sometimes, that is the way it works. But not always.
My name is spelled with two "L"s. Just so you know. I don't find my name very often. But occasionally it shows up. It is usually, almost always, with two "L"s. Rarely, rarely, rarely do I see it with only one "L".
>
> John with his intense skill at Google is telling us that what I shot as an M2 was referred by him as an M1 carbine. Now a gun that fires a totally different round, a pistol round in fact, is going to be called the same thing as a million unit production weapon for the entre war in Europe?
>
You used the term "M2" only when you talked about your Air Force rifle. You did not correctly state it was a M2 Carbine. You left off the most important part of the name. The Carbine. The M2 or M1 or M3 are simply the model numbers. Not the name of the rifle. Carbine is the name of the rifle. Just like the M1 Garand's name was the Garand. M1 was just the model number. Tommy, you have to, must, say the Carbine part of the name for people to know what you are talking about. As I correctly stated, when you say "M2", everyone automatically thinks of the Ma Deuce Browning Machine Gun in 50 caliber. Not the Carbine rifle. Kind of like if you said XLT for a Ford pickup truck. The XLT is just the model. But you really have to say which year and size the truck is. Not just say XLT. You're not a very intelligent person are you Tommy? Do you find it tiring to use your mind to think?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_carbine
The M2 Carbine came in .30 Carbine cartridge. 7.62x33mm. Please note the 30-06 is 7.62x63mm. The 308 Winchester is 7.62x51mm. The .30 Carbine round is a rifle round. Not a pistol round. Even though there have been a very very very small number of pistols to fire it. AutoMag made one. The company famous for making the 44 AutoMag that Clint Eastwood used in the movie. Tommy, please note that just because a few, very very very few, pistols are made for a caliber, does not make it a pistol round. There is one pistol made, or made past tense, that fired the 50 BMG. That does not make the 50 BMG a pistol round. Ha Ha.
Another example. The 45 Colt. Or 45 ACP for automatic used in Colt 1911 pistols. .45" bullet diameter. Pistol round. And a few rifles also fire it too. But the 45-70 Government is also .45" diameter. Its a 45 caliber. But its a rifle round. Big rifle round.
> Someone there tells us that a gun made is Italy with a different round is a Garand M1. Again, what sort of mind is that?
It was. Andy posted a link to it. Italy in 1952 made an M1 Garand to accept the shorter 7.62x51mm 308 Winchester round. They used M1 Garand parts and modified a few things. And they had a useful NATO rifle that accepted the 7.62x51mm cartridge being used by NATO. It was more or less an M1 Garand. But not an official made by and in the USA M1 Garand rifle. Kind of like you can buy a Ford 150 half ton pickup truck with a 3.3L V6, or a 2.7L V6, or a 5L V8 engine. And 5.5', 6.5', and 8' bed lengths. But no matter which options you choose, its still a Ford 150 truck. So the M1 Garand made in Italy in 308 Winchester caliber is still an M1 Garand.
But Tommy, the bullet chart I provided, clearly showed the 30-06 round is faster than the 308 round. Its a longer casing so has more gunpowder behind it to propel it faster. That is pretty simple science. I would think even you could understand that. But apparently not. I never mentioned accuracy. Is this another one of your attempts to change the subject and imagine what you wished people said?
For accuracy of bullets, cartridges, its a combination of speed, weight, and bullet shape. I do not know which bullet is considered the most accurate on earth. But its not the fastest, or slowest, or lightest, or heaviest. Or rounded or pointy est. Its some kind of combination of everything that makes it most accurate. They all help and hurt each other in accuracy. So you have to tweak everything to get it right for accuracy.
>
> According to FBI statistics files, more people are killed with hands, elbows and feet than with rifles. And yet Frank is shitting his pants over a rifle that has a heat shroud on it. More people are killed with knives and other sharp objects than with rifles, but because a couple of singular events that appear to be purposely staged to force gun control onto the American people you are being threatened with the lack of self defence. Staged? Why weren't the police allowed to enter as their training indicates? The BASIC training of a cop is to run toward gun fire. Why were they prevented?
>
We have already discussed that rifles are pretty far down the list of weapons used to kill people. Hands, fists, feet kill more than rifles. And shotguns too. But not pistols. Not sure where knives fit in the ordering. But Tommy boy, NO MASS KILLINGS, are carried out by hands and feet or knives. Its possible you could kill quite a few with a knife. Pretty quickly. But for some reason, basic logic, no one sets out to mass murder a bunch of people with a knife in their belt. They choose the easily obtainable and good killing rifle instead.
Tommy, did Fox News and Tucker call you up and tell you to say the killing of 19 little children and 2 teachers in Texas was staged? Is that the new Fox talking point? Staged!!!!!! By Democrats and liberals and Black Lives Matter!!!!!! Sounds good. Goes right along with mental health, guards stationed at every school, only one door into a school, video games, pop rock concerts, etc. Everything but the gun is to blame. Sounds good.
As for why didn't the Uvalde, Texas city police and school police force not going into the school while the murderer was killing kids? Good question. I expect we will have lots of speeches by Texas governor about how he is proud and ashamed and proud and ashamed and indifferent and likes and hates his police. Maybe he will say it was the fault of the Democratic governor over in Louisiana. Makes lots of sense. Maybe they were scared and decided to await for the arrival of the border patrol with machine guns and body armor and shields from 50 miles away. Makes sense. Easier to let someone else do your work than you doing it.
> Do you want to know what is causing gun crimes? Just listen to Dick Durban Gun Control Afficianado in Congress outlining why we should have gun control - In Chicago there was a rolling gun battle between two cars with an unknown number of occupants, 68 shots were fired with TWO of them .223 or from a rifle. They caught one of the perpetrators. The DA charged him with - A MISDEMEANOR! Chicago has the strongest gun control in the nation and they won't even enforce it.
>
https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/39/
Chicago is #28 out of the top 65 cities with greater than 100K population. 2019. Despite perceptions, Chicago isn't too bad, comparatively. Many are far worse. And no one talks about them at all.
Top ten were:
St. Louis, MO
Baltimore, MD
Birmingham, AL
Detroit, MI
Dayton, OH
Baton Rouge, LA
New Orleans, LA
Kansas City, MO
Memphis, TN
Cleveland, OH
Of the above list, only Michigan and Louisiana have Democrat governors. All the other murder capitals of the USA have Republican governors.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/16/upshot/murder-crime-trends-chicago.html
Another good article on murders in Chicago and New York. Not nearly as deadly as people think. Many other cities are far worse. But no one ever mentions them.
> Rolf I have hunted since being old enough to hold a gun on target. Guns are indeed dangerous - I think I said that I hunted deer with a .22 LR but looking in my old ammo supply, it was a .22 Magnum which is a slightly longer cartridge. EVERY game animal in the US including Grizzly bears and Bison have been killed with a .22, The Magnum is simply a little more accurate because it has less drop at 100 yards.We hunted dear from a "blind" which is a stand which would overlook game trails. It had to be far enough away from the trails that the prey can't smell you or be overly disturbed by the sound of your breathing. Humans are very noisy creatures.
>
> I have no idea of the gunlaws in Germany these days but being directly adjacent to Russia it would pay to adopt laws like Swithzerland that has never been invaded for a reason.
Switzerland has never been invaded because geographically it is pretty sealed off. The Alps kind of go in the center and south of the country. All the way over to the French side from the Austrian/Italian side. The Dolomites are to the south in Italy. And even southern Germany around Munich, or south of Munich, is mountainous. Disney's Neuschwanstein castle is located down there. Its impossible to get an army into Switzerland. And there really isn't much in Switzerland for an invading army or country to want either. It has some farmland in the north central part. So over a few years you could get money from that. There are no navigable rivers in Switzerland. So no benefit to trade. Its mostly mountains. You could open up mining operations I guess. And the new touristy skiing phenomenon is very recent. So that was not a money maker long ago. Switzerland is prosperous today. But its due to the people and government. Not anything a conquering army could plunder. So why waste money, men, time invading it for no gain?