The firearm thread

[Wolf]

A lot were 577 Snyder calibre, most double-barrel but a few were four barreled, I guess some tigers could take a bit of 'dissuading' eh?

I think that if I had a tiger crawling up the arse of an elephant towards me I'd need a lot more than 4 shots to "dissuade" it - I'd be lucky not to shoot the elephant and my travelling companions within the first 6 shots never mind hit the fucking tiger.

[Mr Merde]

In the 19th Century, large calibre revolver and single shot pistols ruled. The standard cavalry revolver for the US was .45.

By the end of the century this had been reduced to .38

In 1905 the US military were at war in the Phillipines and found that the .38 was not heavy enough to cope with the fanatical "Moro" fighters so the reverted back to the .45 calibre.

After another 70 years they reverted back to a smaller calibre in favour of larger capacity.

Elmer Keith pushed the development of the .44 Magnum pistol round. He over loaded the venerable .44 spl from 1906 (which originated as the .44 Russian in the 1870's). The .44 Magnum was considered the most powerful pistol calibre in the world and considered all that was needed for everything but the largest of game.

Keith and others worked with pistols in this calibre and were accurate up to ranges of 600 yards.

Now we have the 454 Casull and the .500 S & W.

What I am trying to point out here is that this movement from small calibre to large and back again has been going o for a very long time.



The original cartridge round was the .22 rimfire and developed by Messrs Smith and Wesson in the 1850's.

I have seen and handled a pistol in 2mm calibre. Not fired it though.

[Indiana_Jones]

-Indy

[jrandom]

USA Supreme Court rules for the first time ever on Second Amendment rights: link.

Summary: A narrow majority of SC judges think that the Second Amendment is not bound solely to the 'militia' concept. Shooters are happy because they can now own pistols in DC.

Wikipedia article on the case here.

[Mr Merde]

USA Supreme Court rules for the first time ever on Second Amendment rights: link.

Summary: A narrow majority of SC judges think that the Second Amendment is not bound solely to the 'militia' concept. Shooters are happy because they can now own pistols in DC.

Wikipedia article on the case here.

And if I remember correctly the 2nd Ammendmant was lifted almost verbatum from the English Bill of Rights from 1600 and something. A bill of rights that our political and justice system has its roots in.

[jrandom]

And if I remember correctly the 2nd Ammendmant was lifted almost verbatum from the English Bill of Rights from 1600 and something.

Wikipedia, as you'd expect, has an extensive Second Amendment article.

[Swoop]

A very interesting read.

[Mr Merde]

Wikipedia, as you'd expect, has an extensive Second Amendment article.

I did say remember, you have to allow that us old bastards may have been around at the time (or feel like we were) the original bill was drafted.

[Swoop]

Hey Scummy. Was that your letter in the latest NZ Guns magazine?

[scumdog]

Hey Scummy. Was that your letter in the latest NZ Guns magazine?

Coul be, could be.....

[Mr Merde]

Did any one see this program last night.

The snippet on the attempted shooting of a dog by armed police and the resulting report on such was of particular interest to myself.

Watched the video a couple of times and was shocked by the careless manner in which firearms were discharged and handled.

In one part of the video you can see the officer on the left of the sceen actually pointing his "Bushmaster" in the direction of other officers.

That many shots fired at ranges down to a few metres and not one hit on the target. One bullet #13, went through the corner of a house completely.

This whole article was of interest as I was reading the SSANZ report in the latest copy of "NZ Guns and Hunting" and they mentioned there that the firearm of choice for our police officers is tending more towards this rifle rather than the handgun.


I should mention that I am not "police bashing " here. I am expressing an opinion regarding training and use of firearms that if I were to be seen doing would more than likely cost me my firearms licence. After 40 years of firearms use I am very worried about the lessening of safety standards anywhere

This frightens me more than I care to think of.

Your thoughts and comments please.

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/video_popup_windows_skin/1885787

[scumdog]

Did any one see this program last night.

The snippet on the attempted shooting of a dog by armed police and the resulting report on such was of particular interest to myself.

Watched the video a couple of times and was shocked by the careless manner in which firearms were discharged and handled.

In one part of the video you can see the officer on the left of the sceen actually pointing his "Bushmaster" in the direction of other officers.

That many shots fired at ranges down to a few metres and not one hit on the target. One bullet #13, went through the corner of a house completely.

This whole article was of interest as I was reading the SSANZ report in the latest copy of "NZ Guns and Hunting" and they mentioned there that the firearm of choice for our police officers is tending more towards this rifle rather than the handgun.


I should mention that I am not "police bashing " here. I am expressing an opinion regarding training and use of firearms that if I were to be seen doing would more than likely cost me my firearms licence. After 40 years of firearms use I am very worried about the lessening of safety standards anywhere

This frightens me more than I care to think of.

Your thoughts and comments please.

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/video_popup_windows_skin/1885787

OK, MY take on the bushmaster vs Glock.

I'm for the Bushmaster because:
It has a manual safety, it is harder to wave aimlessly, it is easier to keep on target, and unless you're Rambo you aim it - the Glock tends to be pointed in the heat of the moment. (as per TV news).


The comment in NZG&H is very misleading (as was the one where I responded with my letter) because until the 60's Police used 303s - now there's a weapon that WILL punch through a house wall or two easily (and through three people too).

Then they went to 223 with the Sakos, then the Remmingtons and now the Bushmaster, major difference is the Bushmaster of course is semi-auto.

SSANZ is repidly loosing credibility in my eyes with it's nonsensical comments in NZG&H.

[Swoop]

Your thoughts and comments please.

Same rule as always... If a policeman points a gun at you stand very still!
Not because you are complying, but because he will have f*ck all chance of hitting you.
(Old joke, still running, with a few police colleagues that I shoot against.)

[Swoop]

Lee-Enfield Lives.

July 2, 2008: Indian police in Himachal Pradesh recently agreed to sell several hundred Lee-Enfield rifles, and thousands of rounds of World War II vintage ammunition, to police in Jharkhand. Himachal Pradesh (an Indian state just south of Kashmir) wants to buy more modern weapons. Jharkhand (in eastern India) is having problems with communist rebels, and the bolt action Lee-Enfields are adequate for arming local voluntary security units. Since many of these volunteers belong to tribes out in the countryside, they like having a fine, if elderly, hunting rifle like the Lee-Enfield.

The Lee-Enfield is one of the oldest, and still widely used, rifles on the planet. Over 17 million were manufactured between 1895 and the 1980s. While there are more AK-47s out there (over 20 million in private hands), these are looked down on by those who use their rifles for hunting, or killing with a minimum expenditure of ammunition. The 8.8 pound Lee-Enfield is a bolt-action rifle (with a ten round magazine) noted for its accuracy and sturdiness. The inaccurate AK-47 has a hard time hitting anything more than a hundred meters away, while the Lee-Enfield can drop an animal, or a man, at over 400 meters.

There are millions of Lee-Enfields still in use throughout India, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and even Iraq and other Persian Gulf nations. These are largely World War II leftovers. In the early half of the 20th century, the British gave out millions of these weapons to allies, or those being courted. Noting the accuracy of the Lee-Enfield (.303 caliber, or 7.7mm), the locals came to prize the rifle for hunting, and self-defense. There are still many gunsmiths throughout the region (and at least one factory in India) that will refurbish century old Lee-Enfields to "like new" condition. Ammunition is still manufactured, with the high quality stuff going for a dollar a round, and lesser quality for 25 cents a round. These rifles sell in the west for $500-1,000. Non-firing replicas can be had for a few hundred bucks, and for about twice that you can buy deactivated (cannot be fired) originals. So the Lee-Enfield will carry on well into the 21st century.

[Wolf]

Lee-Enfield Lives.

The venerable "Smelly". That was one of my learning weapons as a nipper. I have a friend who had a tidy little collection of them before he got rid of it - to me.

Only got one of them left now.

I've got to agree with the quote - I'll take a SMLE over an AK any day (though I'd probably prefer one of the "sporterised" or "cut-down" versions when trudging through the woods with a rifle).