Roman

I really need to buy a new gun...

Recommended Posts

Im curious what will happen here in ohio if, and its a HUGE if, they pass an assault weapons ban and make it a felony for possession of an "assault" rifle. The piece of legislation is written by your typical ignorant cock bags who know nothing about guns, but I can see anywhere, where it mentions grandfathering and so on. You certainly cant just suddenly make millions of legal owners felons. What the fcuk will that prove?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a Sig 227 (double stack 45) currently that I sure as fcuk will be keeping. This itch is definitely more of one just because it's cool and different. In the fcuking loud and blowing fire category I also have a huge want for an S&W 460. :eusa_dance:

 

The 460 definitely fits the loud and blowing fire category well. Haven't shot one but it is definitely on the WANT list. My dad has a 2 S&W 500s, one short barrel and one long. Only shot the short, but after 5 rounds my wrist was definitely not interested in any more. It is so much fun, but since I have zero plans to hunt a Grizzly, it is purely a "I have everything else so why not" gun.

 

Speaking of Sigs, I do actually like a couple of the 1911s they put out. Hell I carry a sub compact Sig P238, but I don't really look at that as a 1911, just an easily concealed .380.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, gun control should no more be discussed in the United States as a solution than restrictions on any of the other rights we cherish. The guns are not the problem here, because the gun technology being used has been around far longer than the mass shootings have been, which means that something else is at hand.

 

The only form of gun control that might make a difference would be a complete, 100% ban on all semiautomatic weapons that take detachable magazines. The thing is, without total confiscation (which is not doable here), it would take decades to a lifetime for the tens to hundreds of millions of such firearms in circulation to begin to truly decline, and by then, we probably will have solved the problem by other means, thus negating the banning of the firearms in the first place.

 

But also, such a ban would constitute a very blatant violation and infringement on people's right to keep and bear arms. And you do not violate rights in the name of security. My reasoning, on the surface, is that the right to keep and bear arms is as sacrosanct and sacred as any of the other rights we cherish and so protect. But to delve more into detail, let's suppose that instead of mass shootings having become more frequent, we instead were having frequent equivalents of the Boston bombing. A bombing here, a bombing there, a truck massacre here, a truck massacre there, 20 killed here, 30 killed there, 60 killed, etc...and let's say that the common denominator in all of these attacks was Muslim terrorists. Let us also remember that three of the recent mass shootings have in fact been Muslim terrorists (Fort Hood, San Bernardino, Orlando nightclub).

 

Does anybody really think the media would start saying, "Look, the common denominator in all of these attacks is Muslims. We really need to start looking into restrictions on Muslim privacy, due process, and interaction with law enforcement. And also on free speech. People should not be allowed to hold something like a Muslim cartoon contest. And it shouldn't be that a police officer or F.B.I. agent can knock on a Muslim's door and be told, "No" in response to a request to ask some questions. lt shouldn't be that nothing can be done if people suspect a Muslim or Muslims of doing something related to terrorism. We need to really consider a law whereby such people could be temporarily detained against their will until things are figured out."

 

Then you have certain states:

 

"If the Congress is going to continue to bow to the whims of the ACLU and refuse to pass sensible Terrorism Safety legislation, then WE the states, will enact our own laws." So we then see laws banning speech mocking of Muslims and allowing violations of privacy, due process, and right to remain silent passing in various states.

 

Now, as I've said, does anyone really even think the media or anyone would be talking in this way if repeated terrorist attacks were occurring? And even if some of the states or a locality tried any such laws, the courts would smack them down faster than you can blink an eye. After 9/11, in which we had 3,000 people killed, to the extent that anything was done (Patriot Act, wiretapping, waterboarding, enhanced interrogation techniques, CIA black sites, Guantanamo Bay, No Fly Lists, etc...) the Bush administration was lambasted. Bush was called the works, "fascist," "Hitler," "Nazi," etc...I am sure if he had talked about a temporary Muslim ban as Trump has, he'd have gotten heavy criticism too. This is because of how much Americans value our freedoms.

 

So why are gun rights different? Why is it that in the face of an increase in mass shootings (three recent ones of which have been terrorists), that all-of-a-sudden, gun rights are supposed to be so expendable? And especially when we know that the mass shootings can't be due to the guns as the guns have been around for far longer than the mass shootings. Many say, "Why is it that we are the only country in the civilized world where this happens!?" Well for one, we aren't, we just have been the one suffering them more as of late, but two, they historically haven't happened much in our own country, despite the guns having been just as available. Only in recent times have the mass shootings increased for some reason.

 

Going back to my original assertion, this is why I say that gun control should never be a topic of discussion. It should no more be a topic of discussion then restrictions of the right to free speech, privacy, religion, right to remain silent, due process, and so forth, violations of which ALL could be justified in the name of "security." You cannot violate people's rights of any kind, including guns, because someone is abusing the rights. The right to keep and bear arms should be considered as sacred as any of the other rights cherished in the Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for these kids from the school, they are idiots who are being used as tools by the Gun Control Complex. They literally have no idea what they are talking about. It is sad what happened to them, but it does not give them a right to demand violation of others' rights or to accuse others who resist their crusade as having blood on their hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMO, gun control should no more be discussed in the United States as a solution than restrictions on any of the other rights we cherish. The guns are not the problem here, because the gun technology being used has been around far longer than the mass shootings have been, which means that something else is at hand.

 

The only form of gun control that might make a difference would be a complete, 100% ban on all semiautomatic weapons that take detachable magazines. The thing is, without total confiscation (which is not doable here), it would take decades to a lifetime for the tens to hundreds of millions of such firearms in circulation to begin to truly decline, and by then, we probably will have solved the problem by other means, thus negating the banning of the firearms in the first place.

 

But also, such a ban would constitute a very blatant violation and infringement on people's right to keep and bear arms. And you do not violate rights in the name of security. My reasoning, on the surface, is that the right to keep and bear arms is as sacrosanct and sacred as any of the other rights we cherish and so protect. But to delve more into detail, let's suppose that instead of mass shootings having become more frequent, we instead were having frequent equivalents of the Boston bombing. A bombing here, a bombing there, a truck massacre here, a truck massacre there, 20 killed here, 30 killed there, 60 killed, etc...and let's say that the common denominator in all of these attacks was Muslim terrorists. Let us also remember that three of the recent mass shootings have in fact been Muslim terrorists (Fort Hood, San Bernardino, Orlando nightclub).

 

Does anybody really think the media would start saying, "Look, the common denominator in all of these attacks is Muslims. We really need to start looking into restrictions on Muslim privacy, due process, and interaction with law enforcement. And also on free speech. People should not be allowed to hold something like a Muslim cartoon contest. And it shouldn't be that a police officer or F.B.I. agent can knock on a Muslim's door and be told, "No" in response to a request to ask some questions. lt shouldn't be that nothing can be done if people suspect a Muslim or Muslims of doing something related to terrorism. We need to really consider a law whereby such people could be temporarily detained against their will until things are figured out."

 

Then you have certain states:

 

"If the Congress is going to continue to bow to the whims of the ACLU and refuse to pass sensible Terrorism Safety legislation, then WE the states, will enact our own laws." So we then see laws banning speech mocking of Muslims and allowing violations of privacy, due process, and right to remain silent passing in various states.

 

Now, as I've said, does anyone really even think the media or anyone would be talking in this way if repeated terrorist attacks were occurring? And even if some of the states or a locality tried any such laws, the courts would smack them down faster than you can blink an eye. After 9/11, in which we had 3,000 people killed, to the extent that anything was done (Patriot Act, wiretapping, waterboarding, enhanced interrogation techniques, CIA black sites, Guantanamo Bay, No Fly Lists, etc...) the Bush administration was lambasted. Bush was called the works, "fascist," "Hitler," "Nazi," etc...I am sure if he had talked about a temporary Muslim ban as Trump has, he'd have gotten heavy criticism too. This is because of how much Americans value our freedoms.

 

So why are gun rights different? Why is it that in the face of an increase in mass shootings (three recent ones of which have been terrorists), that all-of-a-sudden, gun rights are supposed to be so expendable? And especially when we know that the mass shootings can't be due to the guns as the guns have been around for far longer than the mass shootings. Many say, "Why is it that we are the only country in the civilized world where this happens!?" Well for one, we aren't, we just have been the one suffering them more as of late, but two, they historically haven't happened much in our own country, despite the guns having been just as available. Only in recent times have the mass shootings increased for some reason.

 

Going back to my original assertion, this is why I say that gun control should never be a topic of discussion. It should no more be a topic of discussion then restrictions of the right to free speech, privacy, religion, right to remain silent, due process, and so forth, violations of which ALL could be justified in the name of "security." You cannot violate people's rights of any kind, including guns, because someone is abusing the rights. The right to keep and bear arms should be considered as sacred as any of the other rights cherished in the Constitution.

 

 

Wheels. This is the best thing you have ever posted. 100% serious.

 

Well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Back to the topic, anyone own a Springfield TRP or Professional? Not a huge fan of 1911s in general but always wanted a Pro.... for no damn good justifiable reason. :icon_mrgreen:

 

Any feedback? Better/worse than any other custom 1911 in that price range?

 

CDNN has a couple S&W 1911s on sale. A Proseries $400 off and a Tactical E Series $400 off. Never bought from them, but I have seen some good deals on guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting article on the cultural side of the equation: http://www.iflscience.com/policy/switzerla...-shootings/all/

Good read. Gotta stop pointing at other countries and say the US should or shouldn't do this or that. As I mentioned before this issue is so multi dimensional and has so many factors involved that there are no simple fixes. The US has a different demographic among its people, different culture (cultureS actually throughout the country), different economic standing (for both the country and its people), probably more gang activity (think War on Drugs and its consequences), probably more money in its politics regarding guns (someone's manufacturing these things and making money off of them, right?!), different history and exposure to war at their front door and view of guns as a result, different healthcare system (think mental health and access to treatment in highly socialized vs capitalist countries), and likely (and I say likely because I have not been to Switzerland...no interest in cows TBH) they have an altogether different attitude towards guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CDNN has a couple S&W 1911s on sale. A Proseries $400 off and a Tactical E Series $400 off. Never bought from them, but I have seen some good deals on guns.

 

I've purchased several weapons from them. Never had an issue with the transactions or the shipping.

 

CDNN is GTG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've purchased several weapons from them. Never had an issue with the transactions or the shipping.

 

CDNN is GTG

Same. Also like GunBuyer.com out of FL and Lanbo's Armory out of wherever. Good prices and service!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good read. Gotta stop pointing at other countries and say the US should or shouldn't do this or that. As I mentioned before this issue is so multi dimensional and has so many factors involved that there are no simple fixes. The US has a different demographic among its people, different culture (cultureS actually throughout the country), different economic standing (for both the country and its people), probably more gang activity (think War on Drugs and its consequences), probably more money in its politics regarding guns (someone's manufacturing these things and making money off of them, right?!), different history and exposure to war at their front door and view of guns as a result, different healthcare system (think mental health and access to treatment in highly socialized vs capitalist countries), and likely (and I say likely because I have not been to Switzerland...no interest in cows TBH) they have an altogether different attitude towards guns.

 

Believe it or not, gun manufacturing in the United States is actually a very tiny industry overall. It's only about $12-$15 billion a year. That is just a fraction of the revenues of individual companies in other industries. It's just a fraction of the profits of some of those companies even. The 800 pound (or 363 kilograms for you non-Americans :) ) gorilla in American politics is the National Rifle Association. According to the gun-ban proponents, it is a powerful industrial lobbying group for the heartless gun manufacturers, but the reality is that it is just a grassroots civil rights organization, America's oldest. That is why it is so influential.

 

Regarding mental health, one problem was that due to changes in the civil rights laws starting around the late 1970s to early 1980s, it was made extremely difficult to commit someone. It's to protect people who are fine from being wrongly committed against their will, but the problem is that it leads to a whole lot of legitimately mentally ill people out there who should be in a facility receiving treatment who are not. But yes, it is a very complex problem.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Believe it or not, gun manufacturing in the United States is actually a very tiny industry overall. It's only about $12-$15 billion a year. That is just a fraction of the revenues of individual companies in other industries. It's just a fraction of the profits of some of those companies even.

 

Doesn't smell right. I'll do research on this, should be fun.

 

Regarding mental health, one problem was that due to changes in the civil rights laws starting around the late 1970s to early 1980s, it was made extremely difficult to commit someone. It's to protect people who are fine from being wrongly committed against their will, but the problem is that it leads to a whole lot of legitimately mentally ill people out there who should be in a facility receiving treatment who are not. But yes, it is a very complex problem.

 

If your understanding of mental health issues is centered around wards and committing people in them, you have a very narrow view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think your numbers are way off Wheels

 

https://shootingindustry.com/u-s-firearms-i...try-today-2016/

 

Don't confuse the overall firearms industry with firearms manufacturing. Firearms manufacturing is smaller. I had read previously it about $12-$15 billion, but now according to IBISWorld, it is about $17 billion, so I suppose it has increased some since: LINK

 

That said, even if you consider the total firearms industry as a whole, it is still peanuts in comparison to the size of other industries and still smaller than the individual companies in other industries. Look at the quarterly sales numbers of some of the gun companies for example: they are in the hundreds of millions, which would mean maybe close to a billion in revenue for the one year, and those are the largest gun manufacturers. By contrast, Amazon, as ONE company, had sales of $177.87 billion in 2017. Johnson & Johnson (the medical/pharmaceuticals company) had 2017 revenues of $76.5 billion. Lockheed-Martin, the defense contractor, had revenues of $51.5 billion in 2017. Bank of America made $87.35 billion in 2017.

 

Those are lobbies. Serious financial muscle. The defense, oil and gas, banking and financial, pharmaceutical, retail, etc...lobbies absolutely dwarf the gun manufacturing industry and the gun industry overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If your understanding of mental health issues is centered around wards and committing people in them, you have a very narrow view.

 

That is why I said one of the problems is that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.fieldandstream.com/baddest-guns-shot-show-2017

Every year at SHOT Show we see news guns that offer a level of wickedness or a cool factor never before seen. For 2017, the list of contenders in this category was so long that we are going to stick to the seven we actually put hands on. Some we didn't want to let go of; others we were almost afraid to touch. Here they are.

 

 

well i hoe it helps check this out have a nice day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about getting into competition rimfire pistol shooting and looking at the Ruger Mk IV. Any words of advice or other recommendations? My eyes aren't what they used to be and I'm staying under $1k for initial equipment buy-in. Also want to stay with iron sights...no optics for the foreseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thinking about getting into competition rimfire pistol shooting and looking at the Ruger Mk IV. Any words of advice or other recommendations? My eyes aren't what they used to be and I'm staying under $1k for initial equipment buy-in. Also want to stay with iron sights...no optics for the foreseeable future.

 

If you haven't pulled the trigger yet, consider a Browning Buck Mark as an option...A bit lower price point and more accurate than most shooters. Get a Camper or Field Target model with the threaded bbl, then add a can for suppressed fun!

 

 

http://www.browning.com/products/firearms/...production.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remniscing with some friends last night about how as young kids we'd roam the neighborhood and surrounding woods armed with Crosman 760's and Daisy BB guns. These were simpler times, the early 70's. Imagine if kids tried that today?

It's unfortunate how people and society have evolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...