Furtopia | Family Friendly Furry Forum and IRC Chat!
not-so-furry discussion => general non-furry discussion => Topic started by: Metalhead_Mockingbird on September 21, 2011, 08:35:03 pm
-
(http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/8/25/4ec09e5a-c88d-4be0-82a7-840566c44736.jpg)
More or less the thread for discussing everything military or firearms as the title states.
Also, to start off the conversation, what's everyones' opinions on the taticool'd kind of firearms? IE: Tapco'd SKS, or the famed Mosin Nagant SBR with a polymer stock, reddot, and M4 LE stock.
-
I disregard my own post here. Have a nice day.
-
I'm saving up for a Glock 17 that I've been lusting over for years. Just something about the blocky 80's look (at least to me) rubs my happy spot just right :3
That, and i'm also a huge fan of luger fire arms. They're built like tanks!
rifle wise, i like the M4\AR-15 models. they're a little generic, but still look cool as hell. Especially the modded versions.
-
I'm saving up for a Glock 17 that I've been lusting over for years. Just something about the blocky 80's look (at least to me) rubs my happy spot just right :3
I- I mean, my father owned one for a while, and was my first handgun. It also the one that gave me my flinch that I have, and those were normal factory loads, no Self Defence +P/+P+ loads. It was nice, but you can't shoot lead out of it. Due to the Hexogonal rifling that will throw a round out sideways(I kid you not), and its a bit fussy with reloads. We learned that with the Glock 26 he owned for a short while. Also, get a Gen 4 Glock, on that one, you don't really have the ergonomics of a brick- literally. Plus, you have the dual spring, which reportedly mitigated some of the recoil. Its come cool beans, yo.
luger fire arms.
Yeah, they're pre- JAMJAMJAMJAMJAMJAM.
Well, the Luger handgun was a jam machine, almost as much as the famed M1915 Chauchat, which I'll explain if some want me to. But the catch was the angle of the grip on the handgun was at such an angle, that it was 1, REALLY comfortable, and 2, REALLY accurate. Other than the Jam problem, the Luger was a fantastic handgun. 8)
-
I've used guns, but never owned them. I tend to live in pretty restrictive places, where to own guns you either need a lot of land or to be a member of a club. And even then they have no functional use - if someone tried to murder me and I shot his brains out the backside of his head I'd likely be arrested.
Having said that, if the chance ever arose, I'd be interested in some older historic ones mostly. A mosin-nagant rifle would be nice, and one of those nagant m1895 revolvers. Modern ones... meh. I have no use for assault rifles or anything like that, and I'm not mad about the style so I wouldn't really get into those if I could. Bolt actions are fun to shoot just for the reloading, though...
-
1945 Mtk4 Lee Enflield sniper, ir's in perfect in every way.
-
If I were in charge of the military, most heavy weapons would be legal for militia. It is not that I am pro-arming the masses with weapons made for killing all in its path. Its just the military would always have a better gun. I would upgrade the XM-25 to be pump action and hold a 10 shot clip. I would replace the say with something lighter, but made for light armor penetration... It should also be using a clip of some kind, not a box. With the H.U.L.C.K. I would start placing armor plating on that thing and start mounting Heavy Machine guns on those guys. and ect...
If I could have a house hold protection weapon, it would be the AA-12. It is an automatic shotgun (win win) and it is more of a defensive/close quarters weapon compared to rifles, uzis, and other assault weapons.
-
Also, to start off the conversation, what's everyones' opinions on the taticool'd kind of firearms? IE: Tapco'd SKS, or the famed Mosin Nagant SBR with a polymer stock, reddot, and M4 LE stock.
My opinion, in a non-nutshell, via the wise words of Ivan. (http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt71/Pittsburghistan/WordsofIvan1.png) (lot of swearing)
But in all seriousness, I don't really like accessories mounted on guns if they go beyond a grip/sight/etc. Though that might be due to the fact that I've seen more M-series guns nearly buried in mounted stuff than I can remember.
-
If I could have a house hold protection weapon, it would be the AA-12. It is an automatic shotgun (win win) and it is more of a defensive/close quarters weapon compared to rifles, uzis, and other assault weapons.
Supposing I ever live in a place it matters, I think a Saiga (similar thing - basically an AK turned shotgun) and a pistol would be good. Apparently the Saiga is popular in Russia because their gun laws allow you to own a shotgun for self defence for X amount of years, and if you don't break any laws you can upgrade to something else. However, they don't distinguish things like a TOZ-34 from the Saiga, so naturally people gravitate toward the one capable of semi automatic fire (I believe they can also be made automatic but that may not be legal).
-
I have an SKS :)
It had no bearing on me picking my furry name. :D
-
Also, to start off the conversation, what's everyones' opinions on the taticool'd kind of firearms? IE: Tapco'd SKS, or the famed Mosin Nagant SBR with a polymer stock, reddot, and M4 LE stock.
My opinion, in a non-nutshell, via the wise words of Ivan. (http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt71/Pittsburghistan/WordsofIvan1.png) (lot of swearing)
But in all seriousness, I don't really like accessories mounted on guns if they go beyond a grip/sight/etc. Though that might be due to the fact that I've seen more M-series guns nearly buried in mounted stuff than I can remember.
Ah, yes. Ivan. Making threads so much better with three parts Vodka and one part Cosmoline.
Same here. I mean, I'll go for a foregrip, or an EOTech/Aimpoint sight or ACOG(TA-31), and thats' it. I've seen guys on the range with a flashlight, DD Rail system, Grip-Pods, Flashlight, fake AN/PEQ-2 Box, and and an EOTech. It looks cool, but they'res no purpose but other than making you look like an butt.
I would upgrade the XM-25 to be pump action and hold a 10 shot clip.
That's more or less a downgrade to the XM-25. The fact that its' Semi-automatic mitigates most of the recoil associated with the 25mm round. Plus, I don't see how a clip would be an upgrade. I think people would much prefer magazines.
If I were in charge of the military, most heavy weapons would be legal for militia.
I am more thank okay with this. Cheap M2HB here I come!
If I could have a house hold protection weapon, it would be the AA-12. It is an automatic shotgun (win win) and it is more of a defensive/close quarters weapon compared to rifles, uzis, and other assault weapons.
Problem with that. The AA-12 is still a prototype, and there are better shotguns that will feed most types of ammunition, like a Benelli M4 Super 90, or a Mossberg M590A1 if you want a pump. Most people don't use AR's or sub-guns for home defense. Why? Over-penetration. I don't want my 5.56x45mm rounds going through the perp and going through the wall into the neighbor's yard. Also, loluzi.
-
I'm not much of a gun buff, but I do like making things go "Bang!" 8) Actually, today I'm taking a concealed carry class with my dad and my brother. I have yet to make a final decision on a carry weapon, but I'm leaning toward an LC9. Once I have my primary taken care of, I'll be looking for something fun to take out to the range. Maybe a 357 like my dad's S&W.
-
I'm not much of a gun buff, but I do like making things go "Bang!" 8) Actually, today I'm taking a concealed carry class with my dad and my brother. I have yet to make a final decision on a carry weapon, but I'm leaning toward an LC9. Once I have my primary taken care of, I'll be looking for something fun to take out to the range. Maybe a 357 like my dad's S&W.
LC9, eh? Its a pretty nice gun, but the smaller sub-sub compact 9mm's like that have quite a bite.
And one can never go wrong with a Smith and Wesson revolver. Heck, you can't go wrong with anything S&W. M&P Series(Great weapons, never really heard anything bad about them, and the US Army is having a competition where they might be selecting it to replace the M9A1 Handgun. I think its in .45 ACP, too.), their 1911's are awesome, too. Don't get their Sigmas if you ever are looking at them. I've heard lots of bad things about them.
-
I have an SKS :)
The first gun I bought was an SKS, great gun, and this year I got my self an AKM-47 and a PSL, I hope too get an AK-74 next year...
-
^just to be pedantic: it's either AKM (M being an abbreviation for the Russian word for "Modernized") or AK-47.
-
Lol this just came to mind. Is anyone else the type of person that will throw a fit when the word magazine is replaced with clip?
There have been times when I'd just go off on a person because they said clip instead of magazine. :D The magazine in the part that holds the rounds in the gun, and the clip is the piece of metal used to load the magazine in some guns. For example, the M1 had an internal magazine that you couldn't slide out. Because of that, you'd have to load the rounds in through the top. This could be a very slow process, so there was a clip, which actually looked like a clip, that held the bullets so you could load all of em at once.
Srry to people that don't care. Just a little pet peeve of mine :P
-
I might mention it if I was bored. Incidentally, can you load the M1 without the clip? Never used one but I seem to recall with them the clip actually stays in there and gets spat out once you fire the last shot or something, so I've never been entirely certain if you could use it properly without one.
-
I'm a military veteran. They have their uses and are good tools to me. Not much else. Though I do have a couple shot guns that have sentimental meaning to them (one a gift when I was little from my Great Uncle, and the other left to me in a will from my Grandfather). I don't care about the technical specs of a gun - as long as it works as intended then fine.
-
Lol this just came to mind. Is anyone else the type of person that will throw a fit when the word magazine is replaced with clip?
I more or less fit in this category.
-
Lol this just came to mind. Is anyone else the type of person that will throw a fit when the word magazine is replaced with clip?
I more or less fit in this category.
This. I won't flip out at the person, but it will irk me and I'll likely make it known.
-
Another Vet. here. I too am of the opinion that guns are just tools. Like any tool, knowing how to use it matters most. What's the point of a vertical mill if you only know how to use a hacksaw?
Sure, technical specs. like caliber, bullet grain and type, and action style can make a difference in the capabilities of the weapon, but what matters more is how well you know how to use it. For instance, I know how to use iron sights, and use them very well. I was never trained on optical sights, however, so I won't touch 'em.
There is a whole lot more to combat than what your weapon can do.
-
Another Vet. here. I too am of the opinion that guns are just tools. Like any tool, knowing how to use it matters most. What's the point of a vertical mill if you only know how to use a hacksaw?
Because tools are cool beans X3
But in all seriousness, you do make a valid point.
-
I might mention it if I was bored. Incidentally, can you load the M1 without the clip? Never used one but I seem to recall with them the clip actually stays in there and gets spat out once you fire the last shot or something, so I've never been entirely certain if you could use it properly without one.
You could possibly use it, but it would be extremely hard to mash a 30-06 round into the chamber.
-
There's a thing known as "M1 thumb"...
-
Got lots of guns, and love them all.
Not a fan of tacticool junk either. I dont understand the point in getting a nice, reliable, accureate AR-15 carbine and then hanging so much cheap plastic junk on it that it weighs as much as a garand.
-
Not a fan of tacticool junk either. I dont understand the point in getting a nice, reliable, accureate AR-15 carbine and then hanging so much cheap plastic junk on it that it weighs as much as a garand.
I know what you mean, I don't like all that junk on my guns, the only thing I did too my new AKM-47 was too put new wood on it...
-
(http://www.deviantart.com/download/99838655/Barret_50cal__Sniper_Rifle_by_lucariofan666.jpg)
(http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/M107/M107_1.jpg)
my favorite weapon is the barret 50 caliber sniper rifle :D
OPERATION
The cycle of operation for the M107 Rifle is broken down into eight basic steps (more than one step may occur at the same time).
Feeding: The force of the mainspring pushes the bolt forward toward the barrel extension, stripping a cartridge from the magazine and loading it into the chamber (by hand when first loading, by semiautomatic action afterwards).
Chambering: The bolt forces the round fully into the firing chamber, and the extractor snaps over the case rim. Blockages (dirt or debris) can prevent full chambering, as can dirty, bent, dented, or otherwise faulty ammunition.
Locking: During chambering the bolt enters the barrel extension, and the bolt latch engages the bolt latch trip (inside top of the upper receiver, just behind barrel extension). The bolt latch is then depressed, allowing the bolt to retract into the bolt carrier. The bolt, in turn, rotates due to the cam slot and is locked when its three locking lugs rotate into place in the barrel extension, closing the firing chamber.
Firing: Pulling the trigger pivots it on the trigger housing pin and presses on the transfer bar, causing the bar to rise. The transfer bar engages the sear (housed in the bolt carrier), forcing it upward and out of engagement with the firing pin extension. The firing pin extension, under spring power, forces the firing pin forward to strike the primer of the cartridge.
Unlocking: When the cartridge is fired, gas pressure exerts a thrust on the bolt face via the case head. The bolt carrier carries the bolt and barrel extension to the rear until the accelerator, protruding beneath the bolt carrier, contacts a shoulder in the trigger housing area. The accelerator is then pivoted up, causing the accelerator rod to be pushed out of the bolt carrier. As it protrudes from the front of the bolt carrier, it separates the bolt carrier from the barrel extension. Because of the cam slot in the side of the bolt, the bolt rotates as it is pulled and unlocks from the barrel extension.
Cocking: As the bolt recoils to the rear, the cocking lever "rides" the transfer bar back and down, causing it to disconnect from the trigger. The transfer bar is then held down in this position by the disconnector and is not released until pressure is released from the trigger. After disconnection, the cocking lever swings on its pin and overrides the transfer bar. The other end of the cocking lever protrudes into the bolt carrier and into the firing pin extension. As the cocking lever pivots, it withdraws the firing pin and compresses the firing pin extension spring. The firing pin extension then catches the sear.
Extraction: As the bolt locking lugs rotate away from the barrel extension, the bolt withdraws from the barrel and the bolt latch locks the bolt in its extended position. The extractor, located on the bolt face and hooked over the rim of the fired case, pulls the case from the firing chamber.
Ejection: As soon as the fired case has been extracted and has cleared the rear of the barrel extension, it is expelled from the rifle by the spring-powered ejector.
WARNING: The bolt does NOT automatically remain to the rear when the rifle or magazine is empty.
This weapon is an awsome rifle!
from what ive heard from my uncle who was in the army,this weapon cna punch through tank armor :O
-
The M107 can't pierce through tank armor, at all, MAYBE some 50's Soviet truck or your average Tali'Tard technical. An M107 MIGHT be able to disable something like a BMP series APC if you tag its treads. But through a tank? No, by friend. You need a much larger caliber, like 30mm plus to get through a tank. (See also; M2 Bradley taking out a Iraqi T-72) on today's battlefield.
You might want to remove the info sheet and two pictures, though. I'm sure most of us know what the M107 is.
-
my favorite weapon is the barret 50 caliber sniper rifle :D
See also: Awesome, but Impractical. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AwesomeButImpractical)
Seriously though, unless you're trying to get through very heavy cover, the most you'd need to take out personnel is 7.62x51 NATO/7.62x54r, if that. Especially considering how some 5.56 weapons have ranges not unlike those higher-caliber rifles. Example, glorious HK G36, effective range of 800 meters and a 3x optical sight with 2, 4, 6, and 8 hundred meter hash marks to boot.
-
The M1 Garand may be single-loaded to fire, but normally an 8-round en-bloc clip is required to sustain semi-automatic fire. Match shooters may use special 2-round clips. Five-rounders are also available--A must if one wishes to hunt with the M1 in some states.
The SKS is a fun and affordable rifle to own and shoot. Perhaps the cheapest centerfire ammo in a .30 cal rifle. Lots of aftermarket accessories to trick one out. I took a beat-up Chinese SKS and modified it to resemble a Dragunov sniper rifle. Prices for an SKS have jumped above $300 now.
-
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-cracks-stop-vertical-landings-on-some-f-35bs-365059/ (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-cracks-stop-vertical-landings-on-some-f-35bs-365059/)
This here proved why I hate the F-35 so much, along with various other things about it.
-
These kinds of things are found in high-performance air craft all the time, but especially during development. It's simply impossible to calculate everything accurately enough to anticipate them. They will continue to discover cracks and the like in airframe components (albeit a lot less frequently) throughout the lifetime of the airframe.
I will agree with you though, the VTOL part fo the F/A-35 is just a terrible idea.
-
ive got an old bazooka from desert storm sittin on a shelf in my room(grandpa was in there).......saving up for ammo(gotta love ebay)
what i really want is a ar-15 modified to get maximum range
-
These kinds of things are found in high-performance air craft all the time, but especially during development. It's simply impossible to calculate everything accurately enough to anticipate them. They will continue to discover cracks and the like in airframe components (albeit a lot less frequently) throughout the lifetime of the airframe.
I will agree with you though, the VTOL part fo the F/A-35 is just a terrible idea.
Eh, not when the aircraft has gone under a >360 Billion dollar development stage. When I pay that much money for something, I imagine it to be the best thing ever existed in that time period. With the F-35? Ha. All it is is just beauocracy. Sure, airframes need to be replaced, which was why the F-22 entered into service, to replace the F-15. If one really needs to replace airframes, I'd do differing ones, just based around the same platform. Kinda how the M1 Abrams and its variants are set up. Same thing, just different models doing different things, but based around the same idea. Not one thing doing everything. A tank can't transport troops, and lay bridges. So, an air-superiority fighter should not engage ground targets. One same airframe idea, just specialized. Easier logistical footprint, and the benefits of a specialized platform.
Moving on, I recently found this video, and it provided some nice-near-future warfare for offensive operations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2eWjFOlKyI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2eWjFOlKyI)
-
Makes me wonder a little bit about why we're still developing air-superiority fighters. I mean, a big problem of the F-22s was that the speed, the capabilities, and the stealth of it are unnecessary. For god's sake, the forces we fight nowadays don't even have an air force to speak of, much less one that provides a serious threat to ours.
So, an air-superiority fighter should not engage ground targets.
'Specially when we got the good ol' A-10 for that stuff.
-
So, an air-superiority fighter should not engage ground targets.
I disagree with this. In this time of shrinking defense budgets and no other major superpowers to contend with, Our military can't afford a separate plane for air superiority, and another one for Close air support, and another one for Interdiction, etc., etc. We need "multi-mission" capable aircraft that can go wherever and do whatever we need. Case in point: The F-16 Falcon. Granted, it's an old aircraft design from the 70's, but it's proven it's worth time after time, and has been bought and used by so many countries. It can handle just about any mission given to it. The only version that was never built and which I would have liked to have seen used was the F-16XL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16XL
.......and other varients: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-16_Fighting_Falcon_variants
.
And the F-15 has this new varient which is trying to get developed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F-15SE_Silent_Eagle
-
Makes me wonder a little bit about why we're still developing air-superiority fighters. I mean, a big problem of the F-22s was that the speed, the capabilities, and the stealth of it are unnecessary. For god's sake, the forces we fight nowadays don't even have an air force to speak of, much less one that provides a serious threat to ours.
Well, there is threat from other nations. Now, are we ever going to go conventional with China? Probably not within 50 years, unless China decides to economically kill itself, sever all ties with the US, and decide to invade. That's never going to happen, unless sparked by NK or something. But thats all paranoia or something. Though, if the more... structured nations in the Geo-political sphere of the Middle east, like Iran decides to go too far, we would have a viable enemy airforce to go against. Not just some only-numbers really terrible com-bloc airforce we saw in Desert Storm one. Personally, I think we ought to go for having the high-tech stuff, but in few numbers. Stuff just to have. But have low-key COIN, or COunter INsugency aircraft to fight guys like the Taliban. Stuff like the Embraer Super Toucano to do the light work, and low-key conflicts.
'Specially when we got the good ol' A-10 for that stuff.
BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT
vrrrrrt.
So, an air-superiority fighter should not engage ground targets.
I disagree with this. In this time of shrinking defense budgets and no other major superpowers to contend with, Our military can't afford a separate plane for air superiority, and another one for Close air support, and another one for Interdiction, etc., etc. We need "multi-mission" capable aircraft that can go wherever and do whatever we need. Case in point: The F-16 Falcon. Granted, it's an old aircraft design from the 70's, but it's proven it's worth time after time, and has been bought and used by so many countries. It can handle just about any mission given to it. The only version that was never built and which I would have liked to have seen used was the F-16XL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16XL
.......and other varients: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-16_Fighting_Falcon_variants
.
And the F-15 has this new varient which is trying to get developed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F-15SE_Silent_Eagle
Its not what I meant. I mean a similar airframe to do most tasks. What the problem is with Multirole aircraft is that they only do everything so well. Don't get me wrong, I like the F-16 and F-15, but they don't do CAS work anywhere near as good as the A-10. I've been to Ft. Leoardwood, where they've done A-10 runs. I've watched them live fire irl. They're quiet as all get out. The F-16's that were also there? Not so much. Hell, when my Father was a Coastie, he got the A-10s at his base. He was working on his H-3 for some matience, and all he heard was its whine as it went overhead. Never heard it coming. But what I had suggested, was that a similar airframe be developed, but have it be specialized. So, benefits of smaller logistical footprint, and, the added benifits of a single-role aircraft. Am I saying retire the F-15/F-16? No. Not until we can do that what I had mentioned. We don't need it, but it would be nice to do after we cancel the dammed F-35.
I'm not too keen on the F-16XL. I never have on the delta-wing concept, despite what Europe is doing. (lolcanards), however, the F-15SE is a very nice stop-gap 4++ Generation fighter. And its exportable, too!
-
All this talk about multi-functional aircraft and nobody brings up the F/A-18. What a sad, sad world this has become. The jet even had both an "A" and an "F" in it's model for pete's sake! It might not be the fastest of the fighters, but until the F-22 came along there was no Allied jet that could out-maneuver it, not to mention it's specifically designed to both protect air-superiority as well as attack targets on the ground. True, it won't top the A-10 in it's ground strike ability nor does it have the speed or radar range of the Eagle, but for a jet the does both jobs it's a bird to be reckoned with.
One of the big down falls of the A-10 is that it's slow. When your a grunt pinned down by enemy fire, those ten minutes longer you have to wait for a sluggish Wart-hog to show up might be life or death. And the F-15 might get there faster than a Hornet by a couple minutes, but almost all of it's stores are devoted to missile storage and it doesn't have the targeting systems that the Hornet has. If it can't hit the target, what's the point?
The F-16 is ok, but it's size gives limited range (because of fuel) as well as a very limited payload.
People may claim that we no longer need manned aircraft to maintain air superiority, but China and Russia continue to develop fighter aircraft for that purpose. We would be foolish to not do the same. As for UAV's, there's this handy things called "jamming" that I'm surprised hasn't rendered ours useless yet.
-
All this talk about multi-functional aircraft and nobody brings up the F/A-18. What a sad, sad world this has become. The jet even had both an "A" and an "F" in it's model for pete's sake! It might not be the fastest of the fighters, but until the F-22 came along there was no Allied jet that could out-maneuver it, not to mention it's specifically designed to both protect air-superiority as well as attack targets on the ground. True, it won't top the A-10 in it's ground strike ability nor does it have the speed or radar range of the Eagle, but for a jet the does both jobs it's a bird to be reckoned with.
You do drive a very good point about the Hornet- I actually quite like the aircraft, just most of the airframes are ancient- they've got alot of hours on them, and its a pretty formidable fighter, and bomb truck.
Out of nowhere, here comes Lockheed Martin with its 6th Generation fighter concept picture. (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/01/picture-lockheed-reveals-conce.html) I personally like it- reminds me of the YF-23, the stealthier of the two ideas put up in the ATF fighter program.
-
Just picked up the Sig Sauer P6 that I had on layaway since May. Former W. German BGS sidearm. Came with holster and spare mag. Now if only my backorder for additional mags would materialize on the doorstep.
Gander Mountain recently had the Hotbox target on sale, so used up my gift card to buy it and some other supplies. The Hotbox is somewhat like a sniper's cube. You hit it and it repositions as the bullet passes through. Handles .22 through .50 caliber.
-
guns are silly a knife dusint need ammo and a hammer dusint need sharponing
i hav a one hadid carpindrs hamer rite next to me rite now and its never
let me down espeshly in computer repar :o
blue skreen of deth >!!wam!!<
computer starts rite up :D
-
i'm going to try and get a .357 revolver, an m1 carbine, and a simi auto shot gun. these are my favorite guns that i can actually get unlike the thompson. if they were legal i would buy one in a heart beat, but alas if you have one the government will take it, distroy it, and you wont even get compensation. :(
-
The M1 is nice rifle. If you manage to get your paws on one, you won't be sorry. As for shot-guns, I prefer pump action. There's just something so satisfying about that "SHLACK-SHLACK" sound. ;)
-
Easter festivities :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dtqzx9ZMZpM&list=UUapc4qHNYSyAYi8UcIVHsxw&index=1&feature=plpp_video
Tasmania Style.
paws
-
i'm going to try and get a .357 revolver, an m1 carbine, and a simi auto shot gun. these are my favorite guns that i can actually get unlike the thompson. if they were legal i would buy one in a heart beat, but alas if you have one the government will take it, distroy it, and you wont even get compensation. :(
Thompsons are not legal too own, I own one A 1927A by Auto Ordnance for $990.22, I got back in February...
-
seriously i thought they were illegal. tv lies i saw some documetery on weaponry and it said the the tompson was illegal. thanks for clearing that up :) i appreciat it
-
Finally got my OWN pistol so I can stop having to borrow my dad's stuff all the time. For home/personal protection, I have been wanting and trying to find for years here a gun I trusted my life to in the Navy. The Beretta M9.
My brand new Italian Beretta M9:
(http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd376/86thundercat/Weapons/beretta-m9-italia.jpg)
LOVE LOVE LOVE this gun. It gets the job done, and just FEELS right. Good to have one of these in my hands again; and this time I have a brand new one. :3 I got this one for free too since it was a long-belated gift (IOU from a couple Christmases ago) from my dad who went with me today to get it. Getting my concealed weapons license soon.
Anyone else like the M9?
-
seriously i thought they were illegal. tv lies i saw some documetery on weaponry and it said the the tompson was illegal. thanks for clearing that up :) i appreciat it
,
Your welcome and don't believe every thing you see apon tv...
-
Largely depends where you are I think, even inside America. I've known some people (I think one guy lived mostly in Alaska) who could buy all sorts of guns fairly easily (as far as laws go anyway), and others who would need to get a special permit for automatic weapons (I think it was either from a sheriff or something similar). Although, they said that all this really required was basically having a meeting with the guy and discussing it with him, and that would get you the permit easier than submitting it some other way (I assume by mail) where they had no idea who you were besides maybe a background check.
Probably the easiest thing is to find someone who owns that kind of weapon in your area, like at a firing range or gun club type thing, and ask what they had to do. Since there might be a better way than what is legally required, like for instance talking it over with the guy who later sees your application for a permit (incidentally, I think the guy who told me that lived in one of the Carolinas, although I didn't ask if that was where he was when he had to get a permit).
-
Once the Iron Curtain fell, I collected as much E. German military and paramilitary items as budget and space permitted. The 4 semesters of high school German were put to good use here. First a VOPO helmet, that was overpriced IMHO. Then Uniforms and insignia of all service branches, police units, Combat Groups of the Working Class, MfS, and youth organizations.
Firearms and ammo were limited to Makarov, and T74 pistols. There was a bolt-action scope-sighted sniper rifle in 5.45 x 39mm--imported in limited numbers. Early VOPO units were equipped with Polish-made M44 Mosin Nagant carbines (I have one). SKS rifles never showed up on the market. East German 9mm Makarov ammo likewise. Tons of 7.62 x 39 ball, training, and blank was imported as was 7.62 x 54R. (Then Clinton declared the steel-core stuff to be AP and then banned importation. The Greens then had the ammo broken down into scrap and fertillizer--at great expense.)
Much of that stuff is no longer available, but it can be found if you know where to look.
Thanks to furry fandom, I can showcase a uniform or two at cons by doing so as a German Shepherd Dog.
-
i have an m1 carbine. i loves it! :D. its light, packs a pretty good punch, and the ammo is fairly cheap. :)
-
Wow. I've almost forgotten about this thread. x_x
Not much has happened in the way of firearms for me since I last posted, however, that being said, I've taken a recent acclimation so to speak to competition shooting, shooting my range's USPSA/IPSC and IDPA matches. Actually I was finally able to get a good run (And not a bad match at that.) during one of the stages from the IDPA recorded, so I might be able to post that up here pending me getting the video from my fathers' camera. And speaking of competition shooting, I was able to get an M&P9 PRO from a local dealer at a pretty decent price. 'Shoots like a champ, a much better gun than I am a shooter. Heh.
-
Bought 4 Romanian pioneer 3 pellet rifles from a Shotgun News ad. Delivered by the USPS. Cherry-picked one for myself and sold off the others. Single-weiner break-barrel action, wood stocks, and uses common .177 cal pellets. Sights adjust, but these came already sighted in and sight picture is like the SKS. Ordered two more.
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/8212246/ (http://www.furaffinity.net/view/8212246/)
Finally obtained a Crosman M4-177 BB/pellet rifle. Spent the afternoon at the gun club range sighting it in. One pump isn't enough to move the pellet down the barrel btw. Not a store in the area carries the power clips for Crosman repeaters, so ordered some online.
Also ordered a Polish Predom Lucznik air pistol, with case, holster, and cleaning rod. Similar to one seen in James Bond's Dr. No. Shoots .177 cal pellets and darts. Said to be functional and 90% of original finish. A birthday present to myself.
-
my uncle came by the other day and gave me his rilfes and pistols.....hes moving to Massachusetts and his apartment doesn't allow weapons........more for me!
lets see....i got 2 98 mausers,a charter arms under cover model in 38 special,and a Taurus 24/7 compact in 40 s&w.........yay me!!
i only really care about the one mauser,so my dad got the rest.......but it has a broken magazine spring...i gots to fix