I got to handle a Tavor in the army, though only Givati was issued them at the time.
It seemed OK. I didn't love that you can't adjust the length of pull though. I prefer a much shorter length of pull when I'm wearing lots of clothing and armor versus just my vest and a shirt.
Hordini wrote: With proper training, as long as you have a modern firearm and a holster that completely covers the trigger, condition one is the way to go as far as I'm concerned. Israeli carry just gives you more opportunity to make a mistake in a situation where you can't afford to make mistakes.
I used to do it this way, but ran into a situation with a pitbull that chrged Rusty and I as we stepped out the front door. AFter that I did cocked/locked for two weeks until I became comfortable.
Now I'm fine with a good stiff holster in DAO only (different pistol now).
Not a huge revolver fan, but a 4" barrel makes me happy, and I'm swimming in .38 and .357 currently.
boom
Most accurate centerfires I've ever shot have ALL been revolvers.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Breotan wrote: I carry "condition one", but that's because I use a revolver and there really isn't much of a choice unless you leave a bullet out of the cylinder.
Cowboy style. I actually did that with a model 29 for a good while.
I got to play with a Tavor in Kuwait while I waited to go up into Iraq. It was an Indian officer's. I liked it a lot. Better than the AUG. Reliable and accurate.
The Missouri Right to Bear Arms, Amendment 5 was on the August 5, 2014 primary election ballot in Missouri as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved.
The measure established the unalienable right of citizens to keep and bear arms, ammunition and accessories associated with the normal functioning of such arms, for the purpose of defense of one’s person, family, home and property. Additionally, it removed the exception to the former constitutional right to bear arms that explicitly stated it could not be used to justify the wearing of concealed weapons.[1] The amendment allowed the state to limit the possession of arms by convicted felons and those adjudged as mentally ill. Previously, citizens had the right to bear arms in defense of home, person and property, but the right was not considered “unalienable.”
The terms "unalienable" and "strict scrutiny" in the proposed constitutional changes were both important changes from the point of view of the courts and provided the highest level of legal protection for gun rights in court cases. Inalienable rights are not transferable and impossible to take away.[2] Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review regarding the constitutionality of a law. In order for a law to pass strict scrutiny, it must be passed to further a compelling governmental interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal. This level of scrutiny must be applied to any laws regarding gun rights or control in the state going forward following Amendment 5's approved.[3]
Proponents of Amendment 5 supported requiring these higher standards of review on gun control laws. They also cited the need for the explicit protection of ammunition and firearm accessories. Opponents, however, were concerned that the amendment would make it harder to enact any regulation of guns and violent criminals. Some additionally argued that Amendment 5 was an attempt to circumvent federal law via nullification.
Here's the actual ballot:
The official ballot title and fair ballot language read as follows:[7]
“ Official Ballot Title:
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to include a declaration that the right to keep and bear arms is a unalienable right and that the state government is obligated to uphold that right?
State and local governmental entities should have no direct costs or savings from this proposal. However, the proposal’s passage will likely lead to increased litigation and criminal justice related costs. The total potential costs are unknown, but could be significant.
Fair Ballot Language:
A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to expand the right to keep and bear arms to include ammunition and related accessories for such arms. This amendment also removes the language that states the right to keep and bear arms does not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. This amendment does not prevent the legislature from limiting the rights of certain felons and certain individuals adjudicated as having a mental disorder.
A "no"; [sic] vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution regarding arms, ammunition, and accessories for such arms.
If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.
Which passed by 61% to 39%!!!!
So... now here's the point of this post:
Missouri has stronger gun rights than Texas now... so... Frazzled? SUCK IT!!!!!!! *
* just to be sure, I'm yanking Frazz's chain here.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: I got to handle a Tavor in the army, though only Givati was issued them at the time.
It seemed OK. I didn't love that you can't adjust the length of pull though. I prefer a much shorter length of pull when I'm wearing lots of clothing and armor versus just my vest and a shirt.
that is my big grip about bull pups too, cant adjust the LOP on the stock, so they never seem to fit right going from full BA to just a shirt or vest.
I also find them hard to use while prone or various lying on the ground positions, where as m16's you can just use the mag for a mono pod, or twist the gun to the side and hug the dirt.
on bullpups when they are twisted to the side because the mag is back there it tends to "checken wing" my arm and screw up those awkward shots even more.
there is also the fact that if that chamber explodes, its riiiight by your face
love them for bench shooting though, I just wish they could make a bulpup rifle somewhat like the p90, so that the mag is nice and flat on top and in front still.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: I hope I'm not breaking any tenets to this thread by this... but, I have a very good reason:
The Missouri Right to Bear Arms, Amendment 5 was on the August 5, 2014 primary election ballot in Missouri as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved.
The measure established the unalienable right of citizens to keep and bear arms, ammunition and accessories associated with the normal functioning of such arms, for the purpose of defense of one’s person, family, home and property. Additionally, it removed the exception to the former constitutional right to bear arms that explicitly stated it could not be used to justify the wearing of concealed weapons.[1] The amendment allowed the state to limit the possession of arms by convicted felons and those adjudged as mentally ill. Previously, citizens had the right to bear arms in defense of home, person and property, but the right was not considered “unalienable.”
The terms "unalienable" and "strict scrutiny" in the proposed constitutional changes were both important changes from the point of view of the courts and provided the highest level of legal protection for gun rights in court cases. Inalienable rights are not transferable and impossible to take away.[2] Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review regarding the constitutionality of a law. In order for a law to pass strict scrutiny, it must be passed to further a compelling governmental interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal. This level of scrutiny must be applied to any laws regarding gun rights or control in the state going forward following Amendment 5's approved.[3]
Proponents of Amendment 5 supported requiring these higher standards of review on gun control laws. They also cited the need for the explicit protection of ammunition and firearm accessories. Opponents, however, were concerned that the amendment would make it harder to enact any regulation of guns and violent criminals. Some additionally argued that Amendment 5 was an attempt to circumvent federal law via nullification.
Here's the actual ballot:
The official ballot title and fair ballot language read as follows:[7]
“ Official Ballot Title:
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to include a declaration that the right to keep and bear arms is a unalienable right and that the state government is obligated to uphold that right?
State and local governmental entities should have no direct costs or savings from this proposal. However, the proposal’s passage will likely lead to increased litigation and criminal justice related costs. The total potential costs are unknown, but could be significant.
Fair Ballot Language:
A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to expand the right to keep and bear arms to include ammunition and related accessories for such arms. This amendment also removes the language that states the right to keep and bear arms does not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. This amendment does not prevent the legislature from limiting the rights of certain felons and certain individuals adjudicated as having a mental disorder.
A "no"; [sic] vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution regarding arms, ammunition, and accessories for such arms.
If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.
Which passed by 61% to 39%!!!!
So... now here's the point of this post:
Missouri has stronger gun rights than Texas now... so... Frazzled? SUCK IT!!!!!!! *
* just to be sure, I'm yanking Frazz's chain here.
dear god... that is some complicated wording... took me a few reads to figure out which way to vote for pro gun rights.
GO ILLINOIS! show those fanny bandits in texas how its done!
(dear texans, please dont ban me from queso I is just joking)
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I hate to be the "noob" here... but wtf is "condition 1" and "condition 3" (after 10 years in the army, I know Amber, Red, and Red Direct)
If I recall, Condition 1 means you just pull the trigger and it goes bang.
The conditions are different for every weapon, because belt feds and revolvers and double actions are all different one way or another but in short.
Condition 1 - Magazine inserted, round in chamber, hammer back (if applicable) and safety on. aka Locked and Cocker
Condition 2 - Ammunition/magazine inserted, round in chamber, hammer down. This is the normal carry condition for revolvers and double action semi automatic.
Condition 3 - Magazine/ammunition inserted, chamber empty, safety on (aka Israeli carry, if you have a modern non-DA semi auto carry there's a good chance this is your normal weapons condition for carry)
Condition 4 - No magazine/ammunition inserted, chamber empty, weapon on safe.
Condition 4 is common slang for clearing your weapon.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I hate to be the "noob" here... but wtf is "condition 1" and "condition 3" (after 10 years in the army, I know Amber, Red, and Red Direct)
If I recall, Condition 1 means you just pull the trigger and it goes bang.
its condo (condition zero) thats the bang switch only safety, ie no safeties.
cond1 is cocked and locked, safety on (which is what they loved about the 1911 because when out of your hand, it has an enabled safetey, and as soon as you grip it, you disengage that safety, so could go from cond1 to condo really fast.
2 is locked with no cock and only applies to things like 1911's with external hammers or maybe a double action pistol
3 is israli carry IIRC (IE loaded mag, no round in chamber, no cock or lock)
Respectfully, If you're going to post stuff like this, when people start posting gun-control stories and so on in this thread, no one will have any right to complain it's off-topic, since we've now expanded the discussion.
I think it might be best for everyone here if we try and keep this thread divorced from gun politics. God knows there's no shortage of places here to discuss them. It's worked pretty well as a thread that's strictly about guns you own, what you do with them, and guns you might want to own and why. Just my 2 cents.
Respectfully, If you're going to post stuff like this, when people start posting gun-control stories and so on in this thread, no one will have any right to complain it's off-topic, since we've now expanded the discussion.
I think it might be best for everyone here if we try and keep this thread divorced from gun politics. God knows there's no shortage of places here to discuss them. It's worked pretty well as a thread that's strictly about guns you own, what you do with them, and guns you might want to own and why. Just my 2 cents.
Fair enough... just wanted to yank Fraz's chain.
I do have a valid question is this thread:
What's the best way to have a "readied" shotgun for defense in the house?
My SKB is just sitting in my gun case locked, cleaned and unloaded.
I keep my shotgun empty with the firing pin forward, I keep the bolt closed but it's a simple yank to rack it back and throw a shell in for an emergency.
Respectfully, If you're going to post stuff like this, when people start posting gun-control stories and so on in this thread, no one will have any right to complain it's off-topic, since we've now expanded the discussion.
I think it might be best for everyone here if we try and keep this thread divorced from gun politics. God knows there's no shortage of places here to discuss them. It's worked pretty well as a thread that's strictly about guns you own, what you do with them, and guns you might want to own and why. Just my 2 cents.
Fair enough... just wanted to yank Fraz's chain.
I do have a valid question is this thread:
What's the best way to have a "readied" shotgun for defense in the house?
My SKB is just sitting in my gun case locked, cleaned and unloaded.
Respectfully, If you're going to post stuff like this, when people start posting gun-control stories and so on in this thread, no one will have any right to complain it's off-topic, since we've now expanded the discussion.
I think it might be best for everyone here if we try and keep this thread divorced from gun politics. God knows there's no shortage of places here to discuss them. It's worked pretty well as a thread that's strictly about guns you own, what you do with them, and guns you might want to own and why. Just my 2 cents.
Fair enough... just wanted to yank Fraz's chain.
I do have a valid question is this thread:
What's the best way to have a "readied" shotgun for defense in the house?
My SKB is just sitting in my gun case locked, cleaned and unloaded.
Ouze wrote: Where you think they can't reach. You should probably get a safe, IMO.
Yeah... been researching for gun safe for some time now.
The shells are in a locked firebox on the top shelf. But, as anyone knows, kids can get into anything, locked or not... so, gun safe is on the agenda soon.
Ok I would suggest lock the shells up. Your kids CAN get to it. 8 year olds are flying monkeys that occasionally wear both shoes on the right feet. Lets assume there's only a .1% chance I'm right. Do you want to risk .1%?
What you can do is get you a cheap $30 touchpad safe. Put some shells in there.
In the Alamo (the master bathroom) we have a safe with - among other things - a box of buckshot for the shotgun under the bed. Now we also have a Beretta in that one, and and a Model 29 in one right by the bed, so the shotgun is not the first reaction one.
I like that new shot lock though.
Now at the Houston house I just have a fully loaded and Wingmaster with one in the pipe. Only me and Rusty go there though so the threat identification and worry about kids issue is moot.
Id recommend for a home defense gun to have it in a biometric or combination safe,
that way, kids cannot steal the keys, only you or people you tell the code to can get to it,
and its faster to open as you dont have to look for keys.
I cant store them up here like this, but if it was legal, I would have mag fed stuff in the safe with the mag inserted but no chambered round (so it wont cook off in a fire) for shotties, same thing, rounds in the mag, none in the chamber,
rack and you are good to go.
as it is, I have to have everything locked, unloaded, and the mags/ammo in a separate safe. super safe, but totally worthless for defense unless they take 5+ minutes to get in.
I only have a storage locker with a key lock right now, but I don't have kids and a I move a fair bit. Once I get somewhere permanent I'll invest in a full sized safe, though the way things are going I'm going to need a second locker soon >.>;
I used to carry Condition 3 when out and about, but then I realized, sometimes you may not get the time to rack the slide should you need to use the weapon. I started carrying Condition One with my 1911, as it's design readily lends itself to this stance. What with the slide safety and a thumb break holster, I didnt worry as much.
Jump three years later, I transitioned to carrying Glock. I started off with Condition 3, until a refresher course reminded me why I didnt want to carry Condition 3. My holster covers the trigger very well, so my chance of a ND is very slim.
Here's some info straight from Jeff Cooper (the "father" of modern handgun technique):
Condition Four: Chamber empty, no magazine, hammer down.
Condition Three: Chamber empty, full magazine in place, hammer down.
Condition Two: A round chambered, full magazine in place, hammer down.
Condition One: A round chambered, full magazine in place, hammer cocked, safety on.
Condition Zero: A round chambered, full magazine in place, hammer cocked, safety off.
Some of these configurations are safer than others (for instance, a single action pistol without a firing pin safety such as a transfer bar system should never be carried in Condition 2), while others are quicker to fire the gun (Condition 1). In the interest of consistent training, most agencies that issue the 1911 specify the condition in which it is to be carried as a matter of local doctrine.
This firearm condition system can also be used to refer to other firearm actions, particularly when illustrating the differences between carry modes considered to be safe for various actions. For example, DA/SA is designed to be carried in Condition 2, which is not safe for 1911s without firing pin safeties.
Most Important of Jeff Coopers ideas is his color code called
Combat Mindset—The Cooper Color Code
The most important means of surviving a lethal confrontation, according to Cooper, is neither the weapon nor the martial skills. The primary tool is the combat mindset, set forth in his book, Principles of Personal Defense.[5] In the chapter on awareness, Cooper presents an adaptation of the Marine Corps system to differentiate states of readiness:
The color code, as originally introduced by Jeff Cooper, had nothing to do with tactical situations or alertness levels, but rather with one's state of mind. As taught by Cooper, it relates to the degree of peril you are willing to do something about and which allows you to move from one level of mindset to another to enable you to properly handle a given situation. Cooper did not claim to have invented anything in particular with the color code, but he was apparently the first to use it as an indication of mental state.[6]
White: Unaware and unprepared. If attacked in Condition White, the only thing that may save you is the inadequacy or ineptitude of your attacker. When confronted by something nasty, your reaction will probably be "Oh my God! This can't be happening to me."
Yellow: Relaxed alert. No specific threat situation. Your mindset is that "today could be the day I may have to defend myself". You are simply aware that the world is a potentially unfriendly place and that you are prepared to defend yourself, if necessary. You use your eyes and ears, and realize that "I may have to shoot today". You don't have to be armed in this state, but if you are armed you should be in Condition Yellow. You should always be in Yellow whenever you are in unfamiliar surroundings or among people you don't know. You can remain in Yellow for long periods, as long as you are able to "Watch your six." (In aviation 12 o'clock refers to the direction in front of the aircraft's nose. Six o'clock is the blind spot behind the pilot.) In Yellow, you are "taking in" surrounding information in a relaxed but alert manner, like a continuous 360 degree radar sweep. As Cooper put it, "I might have to shoot."
Orange: Specific alert. Something is not quite right and has your attention. Your radar has picked up a specific alert. You shift your primary focus to determine if there is a threat (but you do not drop your six). Your mindset shifts to "I may have to shoot that person today", focusing on the specific target which has caused the escalation in alert status. In Condition Orange, you set a mental trigger: "If that person does "X", I will need to stop them". Your pistol usually remains holstered in this state. Staying in Orange can be a bit of a mental strain, but you can stay in it for as long as you need to. If the threat proves to be nothing, you shift back to Condition Yellow.
Red: Condition Red is fight. Your mental trigger (established back in Condition Orange) has been tripped. "If 'X' happens I will shoot that person".
The USMC uses condition Black, although it was not originally part of Cooper's Color Code. Condition Black: Catastrophic breakdown of mental and physical performance. Usually over 175 heartbeats per minute, increased heart rate becomes counter productive. May have stopped thinking correctly. This can happen when going from Condition White or Yellow immediately to Condition Red.
In short, the Color Code helps you "think" in a fight. As the level of danger increases, your willingness to take certain actions increases. If you ever do go to Condition Red, the decision to use lethal force has already been made (your "mental trigger" has been tripped).
The following are some of Cooper's additional comments on the subject.
Considering the principles of personal defense, we have long since come up with the Color Code. This has met with surprising success in debriefings throughout the world. The Color Code, as we preach it, runs white, yellow, orange, and red, and is a means of setting one’s mind into the proper condition when exercising lethal violence, and is not as easy as I had thought at first. There is a problem in that some students insist upon confusing the appropriate color with the amount of danger evident in the situation. As I have long taught, you are not in any color state because of the specific amount of danger you may be in, but rather in a mental state which enables you to take a difficult psychological step. Now, however, the government has gone into this and is handing out color codes nationwide based upon the apparent nature of a peril. It has always been difficult to teach the Gunsite Color Code, and now it is more so. We cannot say that the government’s ideas about colors are wrong, but that they are different from what we have long taught here. The problem is this: your combat mind-set is not dictated by the amount of danger to which you are exposed at the time. Your combat mind-set is properly dictated by the state of mind you think appropriate to the situation. You may be in deadly danger at all times, regardless of what the Defense Department tells you. The color code which influences you does depend upon the willingness you have to jump a psychological barrier against taking irrevocable action. That decision is less hard to make since the jihadis have already made it.
He further simplified things in Vol. 13 #7 of his Commentaries.
"In White you are unprepared and unready to take lethal action. If you are attacked in White you will probably die unless your adversary is totally inept.In Yellow you bring yourself to the understanding that your life may be in danger and that you may have to do something about it.In Orange you have determined upon a specific adversary and are prepared to take action which may result in his death, but you are not in a lethal mode.In Red you are in a lethal mode and will shoot if circumstances warrant."[7]
I cant store them up here like this, but if it was legal, I would have mag fed stuff in the safe with the mag inserted but no chambered round (so it wont cook off in a fire) for shotties, same thing, rounds in the mag, none in the chamber,
Not sure how a round 'cooking off' in the chamber (which is designed to have rounds go off in it) would be bad as opposed to the rounds in the inserted magazine cooking off. And if the round in the chamber could cook off, so could the ones in the magazine.
I cant store them up here like this, but if it was legal, I would have mag fed stuff in the safe with the mag inserted but no chambered round (so it wont cook off in a fire) for shotties, same thing, rounds in the mag, none in the chamber,
Not sure how a round 'cooking off' in the chamber (which is designed to have rounds go off in it) would be bad as opposed to the rounds in the inserted magazine cooking off. And if the round in the chamber could cook off, so could the ones in the magazine.
General Knowledge for those who are not overly familiar
If one suspect a a round capable of "cooking off" keep the barrel down range
Either a jam while barrel is hot
or
"Click, no bang"
or when in "doubt"
I cant store them up here like this, but if it was legal, I would have mag fed stuff in the safe with the mag inserted but no chambered round (so it wont cook off in a fire) for shotties, same thing, rounds in the mag, none in the chamber,
Not sure how a round 'cooking off' in the chamber (which is designed to have rounds go off in it) would be bad as opposed to the rounds in the inserted magazine cooking off. And if the round in the chamber could cook off, so could the ones in the magazine.
if you have a mag loaded, with a round chambered, and its in a fire, it will shoot and cycle another round possibly. also, a bullet is desinged to be shot from the barrel as you say, which is why a round cooking off in the chamber is HORRIBLE as its shooting the projectile at high speeds out the barrel, as opposed to loose/in the mag where it just pops open harmlessly.
its the difference between the fire basically pulling the trigger, shooting a round, or more, and those rounds having the same effect as bullets normally fired from the gun,
and the ammo just popping open harmlessly in the fire
Ouze wrote: Where you think they can't reach. You should probably get a safe, IMO.
Yeah... been researching for gun safe for some time now.
The shells are in a locked firebox on the top shelf. But, as anyone knows, kids can get into anything, locked or not... so, gun safe is on the agenda soon.
8 and 10 are also prime ages to be working on firearm safety, so that they'll know even if it's unlocked, out or whatever, not to mess with it. And if they have friends over, your kids will know to keep the friends away from areas where the firearms are at, or to lock them up before it's an issue
Ouze wrote: Where you think they can't reach. You should probably get a safe, IMO.
Yeah... been researching for gun safe for some time now.
The shells are in a locked firebox on the top shelf. But, as anyone knows, kids can get into anything, locked or not... so, gun safe is on the agenda soon.
8 and 10 are also prime ages to be working on firearm safety, so that they'll know even if it's unlocked, out or whatever, not to mess with it. And if they have friends over, your kids will know to keep the friends away from areas where the firearms are at, or to lock them up before it's an issue
Oh yeah... I gave them that. I plan on some more as well...
My fiancie's brother is a St. Louis County police officer and we're planning a whole firearm safety session soon. (plus, he haz all da gunz)
So I've been working on some design notes for a fully functioning (and by functioning I mean useable, not just actually fires) gun blade. First I've identified the ideal place style as the Celtic Falcata, this is a single edged, machete like combat weapon that is short and designed to be wielded with a single hand.
As you can see here the blade in this type of sword curves after a certain point, this drop, while providing a brutal and efficent slashing weapon, also clears the barrel of any potential weapon mounted along the spine of the blade. The real issue as I see it is keeping both weapons comfortably functional within their own rights from a care and maintenance stand point. A revolver based gun blade I see as being impractical, welding or merging the barrel of the firearm with the blade itself would A. impact accuracy by placing pressure on the barrel and B. make a barrel change a nightmare.
I then considering semi-automatic firearms. With the technical consideration that a longer barrel is likely better in this application and that the receiver of the pistol is going to have to be married to the frame, most likely via welding, I think the logical choice is a long slide 1911 in .45 ACP, To retain ease of take down and accessability, "rails" and a slightly fuller on the back of the blade, as well as a groove to let the barrel bushing turn will be required, but they shouldn't affect performance or the bladed part of the weapon. If there's a fouling concern, a small metal insert could be made to bolt in covering the bushing fuller (I'd use small screws here, like pistol sight small)
Attachment of the blade to the reciever is a bit of a bug bear as it needs to be both functional, and look attractive, there isn't much "play" in a 1911 receiver, so except for a small on through the trigger guard, bolts aren't an option, which leaves some very careful and tricky welding. I'm not sure that will be enough to stand up to regular heavy use. With a normal hilt (on a well made sword) the tang of the blade extends well into the hilt providing it strength. With the attachment points so close to the "surface" I'd find certain types of impact on the blade worrying.
Keeping the blade light enough that the pistol still swings easily enough for one handed use is another point that can be countered with fullers (improperly referred to as blood grooves) and just generally keeping everything properly balanced to start with, though excessive fullering of the blade WILL weaken it.
This is just my initial thoughts on the matter, but I think these technical issues are all pretty simple to overcome with some applied research and maybe a few test shots and consulting with local swordsmiths.
So I fired a gun today, some kind of Beretta Over & Under at a clay pigeon shooting range. It was my Dad's idea to go along but I ended up really enjoying it.
There's something inherently satisfying about seeing that small disk explode into hundreds of tiny pieces.
I totally forgot to ask which model it was at the time. Was a tad nervous at first. It took me a while to realise that I had to be a little bit forceful when opening the action (? Oh god my terminology) when reloading, I was treating it as if it would shatter in my hands at first.
From looking online it seems like it was perhaps in the 680 series. Really smart looking.
The strangest thing I noticed that it wasn't as loud as I thought it was going to be. Or more accurately it was loud in a different way than I expected.
I'm totally considering taking it up as a hobby, although I appreciate that it's fairly pricey to get going. I think i'll sign up for some lessons and roll from there.
Obviously don't own a gun, but thought I'd share here rather than create a new thread.
When it comes to grips for a shotgun (Pistol, or full stock) for in the home, I think a full stock adds a little too much bulk. However a pistol grip (the ones that look like a Semi-auto pistol grip) are a pain to fire and hurt your wrist.
Medium of Death wrote: So I fired a gun today, some kind of Beretta Over & Under at a clay pigeon shooting range. It was my Dad's idea to go along but I ended up really enjoying it.
There's something inherently satisfying about seeing that small disk explode into hundreds of tiny pieces.
I totally forgot to ask which model it was at the time. Was a tad nervous at first. It took me a while to realise that I had to be a little bit forceful when opening the action (? Oh god my terminology) when reloading, I was treating it as if it would shatter in my hands at first.
From looking online it seems like it was perhaps in the 680 series. Really smart looking.
The strangest thing I noticed that it wasn't as loud as I thought it was going to be. Or more accurately it was loud in a different way than I expected.
I'm totally considering taking it up as a hobby, although I appreciate that it's fairly pricey to get going. I think i'll sign up for some lessons and roll from there.
Obviously don't own a gun, but thought I'd share here rather than create a new thread.
Skeet shooting is great fun. My sister in law has won a few competitions and can out shoot me in skeet. (though not in other areas. )
When it comes to what I keep, and how I keep it, in my home I have a vast majority of my personal arms collection in a locked room. They are also in a locked gun case. They also all have trigger locks on them. The pistols are additionally kept in locked storage cases inside the gun case.
Ammunition is kept in a separate locked case inside locked ammo cans.
If my children wanted to fire any these handguns in my home they would need to defeat a minimum of 6 locks.
I do however keep two fully-loaded .38 special revolvers hidden in my home. They are cheap, but functional. When I did some home remodeling I hung them on cradles INSIDE the walls in discreet locations with a thinner layer of breakable material over them. I then textured the walls and painted. You would have no idea where they are if I didn't tell you. In an emergency I could literally punch into the wall with my hand and have a loaded gun ready for me. Kind of a "break Glass in Case of Emergency" kind of deal.
I must be irresponsible, I almost sleep with a loaded handgun under the pillow.
Instead is is unloaded next to the pillow (on the nightstand). Granted we have no children (nor do we have any over).
Cuda, I love the guns hidden in the walls. Way cooler than the hidden gun furniture that doesn't work because people post pictures everywhere.
Switching gears away from safes, anyone else super excited for the HK VP9. As a HK fanboy, I can't wait to get one. If I didn't have to pay for a semester of class, I would buy 3 of them.
cuda1179 wrote: When it comes to what I keep, and how I keep it, in my home I have a vast majority of my personal arms collection in a locked room. They are also in a locked gun case. They also all have trigger locks on them. The pistols are additionally kept in locked storage cases inside the gun case.
Ammunition is kept in a separate locked case inside locked ammo cans.
If my children wanted to fire any these handguns in my home they would need to defeat a minimum of 6 locks.
I do however keep two fully-loaded .38 special revolvers hidden in my home. They are cheap, but functional. When I did some home remodeling I hung them on cradles INSIDE the walls in discreet locations with a thinner layer of breakable material over them. I then textured the walls and painted. You would have no idea where they are if I didn't tell you. In an emergency I could literally punch into the wall with my hand and have a loaded gun ready for me. Kind of a "break Glass in Case of Emergency" kind of deal.
you sir,
are doing it right!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
KalashnikovMarine wrote: So I've been working on some design notes for a fully functioning (and by functioning I mean useable, not just actually fires) gun blade.
cool, I hope that works out for you, but I would have to second the revolver idea, seems like a moving slide on the 1911 would give a lot of ways for the slide to get in the way of the sword.
things like the kokuri, since they have the angled grip might work well, but to be frank, it sounds a lot like my trials with pistol bayonets.
kind of fun and funny,
200% impractical and worse then just carrying a sword and gun lol
Remington 870
Eotech xps-2 holo sight
AR stock conversion
Hydraulic recoil buffer
Red laser
This is my duty gun for room clearing and standoffs.
Wilson combat 1911 custom
Bulletproof everything
VZ grips with enhanced mag release cutout
Concealed carry/duty sidearm
The most accurate handgun I've ever fired. Will put 8 shots through a quarter at 25 yards.
Custom built AR-15 in 5.56
Harris bipod
Leupold optics
LAR-OPS4 ambi side charging upper
This is my SPR. Accurate to 800 yards with black hills 77gr bthp match hand loads. An absolute tack driver. Good for anything from groundhogs to humans although I prefer the 7.62x51 for the latter.
Tavor-chan is Israel, and as Hamas propaganda teaches, all Israelis are trained into elite, professional killing machines from a young age, so proper weapons safety is second nature!
How's buying the ammunition for it though? Wolf's the main manufacturer right, but its plants are in Russia? Well unless you pick up one of the newer export Aks, or just one which is already chambered for 5.56, in which case its just finding the right mags.
The '74 is really neat, just wished I'd been able to pick up an SGL-31 before the Kalashnikov Concern embargo hit and their prices skyrocketed
Ammo isn't too bad. Finding it locally is often a pain, but it's plentiful online, 30 round boxes are $7.50. Wolf, Golden Tiger, etc make it and you can get it for about $0.25/round, Hornady also makes 5.45 but it's not as cheap, ~$0.60-$0.70/round.
The bigger issue is that many of the ranges around here have sticks up their butt about steel ammo, they don't like steel cased rounds for some reason and can't recycle steel cases so get bumhurtt about it, and even the Hornady stuff is steel cased. No brass 5.45 exists.
Fortunately it only affects products from Kalashnikov Concern and associated companies, so Bulgarian made SLR-104's (which are functionally identical to Russian AK-74's) are still around (just specifically banned by name in CA so I can't get one) as are things like Waffen Werks/ARAK AK-74's like mine that are a bit more affordable.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Colour me jealous, we went to the range Saturday and tried out a .45 compact
Nice, I need to get me a .45 one day...but there are so many rifles I must get!
MWHistorian wrote:AK prices aren't as bad as PSL prices. When I bought mine they were $600. Now they're around $1,000
Saigas have gone through the roof, Saiga based SGL's that were $900-1050 a month ago are now $1400-1500. They're only going to get worse I feel.
That said, I need to get a PSL too at some point...
Hordini wrote: What do you guys think of Romanian AKs, like WASR-10s?
WASR-10's are fine as long as you give them a once-over first. Century Arms has some QC issues, things like sights being canted, etc. But, if it was put together right (they're increasingly better about that and many places will inspect them first now, like RRC Firearms and Atlantic Firearms), they're pretty solid. The one thing I don't like about the WASR-10's I've seen is the lack of dimples on the receiver, that's to add rigidity in the case of an out-of-battery fire, but it's not a dealbreaker. Mag wobble is a common thing but not unique to the WASR, canted sights are something you see a lot but can avoid just by looking at it before you purchase it or by getting it from a place like Atlantic or RRC.
ThatSwellFella wrote:https://www.google.hr/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCMQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fm.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DVmj7DzTBXMM&rct=j&q=tokarev%2057&ei=3nvyU5fSN6fH7AbF4IGAAg&usg=AFQjCNGjyyg3QW6d3Nt1GYWb7uMxGhxILg&bvm=bv.73231344,d.ZGU
I got this gun (disabled) as a present from my grandfather for 18th Bday
Not like i am intending to ever buy a firearm, if i get caught in a nasty situation in a dark alley, i got butterfly knife with me when i go out at late night.. thankfully i never had to use it
Tokarev's are pretty cool, my local's actually selling a bunch for ~$300 each, they're neat guns.
Hordini wrote: What do you guys think of Romanian AKs, like WASR-10s?
WASR-10's are fine as long as you give them a once-over first. Century Arms has some QC issues, things like sights being canted, etc. But, if it was put together right (they're increasingly better about that and many places will inspect them first now, like RRC Firearms and Atlantic Firearms), they're pretty solid. The one thing I don't like about the WASR-10's I've seen is the lack of dimples on the receiver, that's to add rigidity in the case of an out-of-battery fire, but it's not a dealbreaker. Mag wobble is a common thing but not unique to the WASR, canted sights are something you see a lot but can avoid just by looking at it before you purchase it or by getting it from a place like Atlantic or RRC.
Looks like Atlantic and RRC offer quite a bit of variety in terms of AKs. What about Century C39s? Is the increase in quality worth the increase in price? If I was to get an AK, it wouldn't need to be anything fancy. I'd mostly be looking for something reliable that would serve as a good introduction to the AK family.
I haven't seen anything bad about the Centurion C-39's. The muzzle brake looks a bit goofy, the lightening cuts are a bit more shallow than on an actual type 3 milled receiver, and the safety for some reason is a different finish than the rest of the rifle, but those are all really cosmetic things that don't affect functionality and are really subjective issues, most people probably won't care. They seem to be well put together overall. I haven't gotten to shoot one so I couldn't give you more advice than that.
Hordini wrote: What do you guys think of Romanian AKs, like WASR-10s?
If you want a tacticool Romanian AK, I have an M&M M10 and I love it. I've put about 1200 rounds through it, pretty much exclusively the cheapest Russian ammo available, and I've never had a problem ever, not one failure to feed or anything.
Sorry kind of a grainy cell phone pic I just took:
Some new AK owner advice:
If you're just plinking/target shooting, you might want an AR or even a 10/22. It's really not super accurate. With my super cheap ammo, at 50 yards I'll probably have 3-4 inch groups if I shoot carefully. If I bought better ammo I could probably improve that but it's not a tack driver.
Buy steel surplus magazines, don't get those plastic promags. They're cheaper but also garbage, whereas the steel mags will outlive you.
If you are going to use a grip, you need to get a stubby one. Most foregrips are too long to use with a 30 round mag. I now have 3 different grips in my drawer that I couldn't really use.
The side mounting rail for using a scope is too heavy and sucks at best. Just use a red dot/holo sight, it's the way it's meant to be.
The slotted muzzle device as pictured is the most effective at reducing recoil, although it's pretty tame anyway. You will need loctite to keep it on. If you get an M10 they used to, and may still, come with a RAZR muzzle that looks neat but makes a weird ringing noise every time you shoot.
I got a side-folding stock because I lock it in a file cabinet. It came with a side-folding wire stock. Don't get the wire stock, it costs a bit more and it's super uncomfortable. I replaced it with an ATI side folder, I like it.
I really need to grab an underfold Polish AK at some point, probably go ahead and spend the cash to get it set up as an SBR too so I don't have to pin it.
Looks like I have my Mauser actions for my Dangerous Game (.458 Win Mag) and Scout Rifle (.308) projects for school over the next year.
As previously mentioned the .458 is going to be a in a traditional walnut stock, prepared for that trip to Africa I'm never going to take, and moose and kodiaks in the meantime. I'm still figuring out a stock for the scout, I might carve a custom Dragunov style stock or just use a Hogue overmold drop in. The key is keeping it light, a proper scout rifle is under seven pounds, and ideally should be about 3 kilos (6.6 lbs) unloaded, with accessories, with a maximum possible weight of 3.5 kilos, a short barrel helps with that, but using the AI floor plate and magazine system to convert it to a magazine feed is going to add some of that back. Colonel Cooper also specified synthetic stocks in his original scout design, so the Hogue overmold may be the real winner here if I'm doing a "traditional" scout vs. a psuedoscout. I'm going to move the scope back a little bit as well, I'm not a big fan of the forward mounted look and it's just not as functional for me personally, I find putting too much weight forward of the action is a real down side for easy snap and movement.
Considering an M1A style receiver mount to keep the iron sights clear and the action clear.Maybe a red dot with a 2x magnifier built in mounted just forward of the action in a position to cowitness the iron sights.
Looks like I have my Mauser actions for my Dangerous Game (.458 Win Mag) and Scout Rifle (.308) projects for school over the next year.
As previously mentioned the .458 is going to be a in a traditional walnut stock, prepared for that trip to Africa I'm never going to take, and moose and kodiaks in the meantime. I'm still figuring out a stock for the scout, I might carve a custom Dragunov style stock or just use a Hogue overmold drop in. The key is keeping it light, a proper scout rifle is under seven pounds, and ideally should be about 3 kilos (6.6 lbs) unloaded, with accessories, with a maximum possible weight of 3.5 kilos, a short barrel helps with that, but using the AI floor plate and magazine system to convert it to a magazine feed is going to add some of that back. Colonel Cooper also specified synthetic stocks in his original scout design, so the Hogue overmold may be the real winner here if I'm doing a "traditional" scout vs. a psuedoscout. I'm going to move the scope back a little bit as well, I'm not a big fan of the forward mounted look and it's just not as functional for me personally, I find putting too much weight forward of the action is a real down side for easy snap and movement.
Considering an M1A style receiver mount to keep the iron sights clear and the action clear.Maybe a red dot with a 2x magnifier built in mounted just forward of the action in a position to cowitness the iron sights.
@Frazzled - Yeah. I'm a pretty big guy, I usually wear button-down shirts that I blouse a bit, and I carry the weapon low-slung in a minotaur MTAC. Works pretty well, most annoying part is buckling my seat belt when I'm driving.
I've mentioned them before and I'll mention them again. Old Glory is the BEST deal in ITWB holsters ever offered, I am not a huge dude and I pack a full size 1911 and I haven't been made once, including walking past a four star general's security team and their tag along LEO a few times.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I've mentioned them before and I'll mention them again. Old Glory is the BEST deal in ITWB holsters ever offered, I am not a huge dude and I pack a full size 1911 and I haven't been made once, including walking past a four star general's security team and their tag along LEO a few times.
So either my googlefu sucks (probably) but all I am finding is Old Faithful.
I need to get a couple holsters for the lady and I.
Hordini wrote: Nice! Looks like a cool giveaway. And I can't believe that that bill is actually a thing. The "Responsible Body Armor Possession Act." What a crock.
yeah they have been passing them up here prior to that,
because hey, someone could get beaten to death with body armour!
or some crook might survive being shot! that would be horrible, or exactly what people wanted, but thats a topic of another thread on cops shooting robbers!
Hordini wrote: Nice! Looks like a cool giveaway. And I can't believe that that bill is actually a thing. The "Responsible Body Armor Possession Act." What a crock.
yeah they have been passing them up here prior to that,
because hey, someone could get beaten to death with body armour!
or some crook might survive being shot! that would be horrible, or exactly what people wanted, but thats a topic of another thread on cops shooting robbers!
I couldn't imagine concealed carrying a full size anything IWB. OWB maybe, but I still would go for a compact or sub-compact. That's totally just me though. Much respect for anyone who can manage to deal with a full size CCW.
Hordini wrote: I couldn't imagine concealed carrying a full size anything IWB. OWB maybe, but I still would go for a compact or sub-compact. That's totally just me though. Much respect for anyone who can manage to deal with a full size CCW.
I carry fullsize but OWB, and I have to dress for it. I'm now shopping for something a little smaller to carry, either an XDS 3.3" in 9mm or a Taurus PT111 (also in 9). Taurus has a poor rep but I think it's based on outdated information, they seem to make solid guns now and I like their ergonomics.
Hordini wrote: I couldn't imagine concealed carrying a full size anything IWB. OWB maybe, but I still would go for a compact or sub-compact. That's totally just me though. Much respect for anyone who can manage to deal with a full size CCW.
I carry fullsize but OWB, and I have to dress for it. I'm now shopping for something a little smaller to carry, either an XDS 3.3" in 9mm or a Taurus PT111 (also in 9). Taurus has a poor rep but I think it's based on outdated information, they seem to make solid guns now and I like their ergonomics.
That's the thing, I don't really want to dress around my CCW when I can avoid it. I could see carrying something bigger during the winter though, theoretically. I honestly don't think I'd ever go for anything bigger than like a Glock 19 though.
I would agree about Taurus (in that I think the bad rep is outdated). Just make sure you do your research on what model you are buying. For example, I have a TCP .380 and I love it. However I've heard the earlier models have had trouble, specifically the ones with A and B at the end of the serial number. I've heard that Cs are fine. Mine is a D and I've had no problems, and I passed up a B just for that reason. I would definitely buy a Taurus again, but I would do some very specific research on whatever model I was interested in.
I wear shorts and a t-shirt with my full size 1911, IWTB roughly 4 o'clock/4:30 . If my shirt's a little tight I might print a wee bit, but I've never had an issue. Nice easy draw, not about to feth up my spine if I fall, all good.
The little LCP (.380) is perfect for a little pocket carry gun, and they make a slightly bigger 9mm version now. You'll only be able to carry 6+1 I think but they are nice. I like the LCP and my dad has an LC9 and likes it too. He often uses it as a BUG when doing deputy work.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Figure this is the best place to ask... This came up in a fiction book that I'm reading, and it got me curious:
Is an MP5 considered a pistol, or a carbine?
its submachine gun in general nomenclature IIRC
That's what I thought, but the author called it an MP5 "machine pistol" I mean, it's a fictional work, not a political book that's pro- or anti- gun, so its not a big deal.
Machine Pistol I think is the "correct" term for it according to HK, who manufactured it. The MP stands for Machine Pistol (if I remember correctly)
You may be correct in that, but I thought I had read somewhere that MP stands for Military and Police (as the MP7 is not available for us schmucks, only police departments/military groups), due to their initial runs of the weapons being available only to Military and Police
Machine Pistol I think is the "correct" term for it according to HK, who manufactured it. The MP stands for Machine Pistol (if I remember correctly)
You may be correct in that, but I thought I had read somewhere that MP stands for Military and Police (as the MP7 is not available for us schmucks, only police departments/military groups), due to their initial runs of the weapons being available only to Military and Police
MP from HK does not stand for military and police, they stand for Machine Pistol, from the German word for it. They are basically a full automatic pistol. The MP5 is weird, because it is a mix of Machine Pistol and Carbine (which are commonly called submachine guns).
MP5's are legal to own as a civilian, even the full auto ones (as they are older than 86). MP7's are not because they traditionally only come in full auto and are new (therefor can't be registered as NFA). HK does make a semi MP7, but hasn't offered it the civilian market (and may never, because they don't see it as a big market).
S&W does have the M&P line, which stands for Military and Police, but there is no restrictions on who can own them. I have an M&P 15 AR-15.
edit: The MP7 is still a Machine Pistol, thus the MP part. They are more considered to be a PDW than a sub machine gun, but PDW is kind of a new concept also.
Hordini wrote: I couldn't imagine concealed carrying a full size anything IWB. OWB maybe, but I still would go for a compact or sub-compact. That's totally just me though. Much respect for anyone who can manage to deal with a full size CCW.
I could do it with a .45, but not a double column.
Hordini wrote: I couldn't imagine concealed carrying a full size anything IWB. OWB maybe, but I still would go for a compact or sub-compact. That's totally just me though. Much respect for anyone who can manage to deal with a full size CCW.
I carry fullsize but OWB, and I have to dress for it. I'm now shopping for something a little smaller to carry, either an XDS 3.3" in 9mm or a Taurus PT111 (also in 9). Taurus has a poor rep but I think it's based on outdated information, they seem to make solid guns now and I like their ergonomics.
is the Taurus DA/SA? Man I cannot shoot DA/SA for squat.
The German term "Machine Pistol" is older then dirt, and refers to the pistol caliber rounds being fired, compared to the "Machine Gun" of the day. Remember when this terminology came into effect semi auto battle rifles weren't a thing yet.
Then think of it like a venn diagram. Automatic pistols are handguns, that fire handgun caliber rounds. Sub-Machineguns are carbine sized weapons that fire handgun caliber rounds. Some weird models are in between those standards. However my general rule of thumb is unless it's a handgun modified to fire at a fully automatic rate like that Glock 18 above, it's a submachine gun.
So this MAC-10 and Mico Uzi are both submachine guns
and this Beretta 93R
Is a pistol.
Personally I avoid the term machine pistol just because it can be confused with German terminology for a submachine gun.
Ouze wrote: I carry fullsize but OWB, and I have to dress for it. I'm now shopping for something a little smaller to carry, either an XDS 3.3" in 9mm or a Taurus PT111 (also in 9). Taurus has a poor rep but I think it's based on outdated information, they seem to make solid guns now and I like their ergonomics.
is the Taurus DA/SA? Man I cannot shoot DA/SA for squat.
I did carry a full size 1911 single stack IWB for a few years, but in the last year switched to a Glock 26. My body shape lends itself to conceal carry (5'10" 43 1/2 chest, 34 inch waist, 205 lbs), so carrying a full size isnt that hard. It was easier in the Fall/Spring with use of a sport coat/sweater, and in the summer, I had to pick baggier shirts. But with the Glock, I can carry without the sport coat/baggy shirt and not print. Its easier if I limit myself to the 10rd mag.
I had to switch because by the end of the day, my hips hurt from carrying the 1911 and 2 spare mags. With the Glock, I can run around all day and not even feel Im carrying.
While I'm at school I qualify for a pro discount (22% better then a dealer discount) on Springfield Armory weapons. I can buy one of each type of XD series, one 1911, and one M1A. A fully loaded M1A with walnut stock clocks in at 1190. Roughly $800 less then retail. A 1911 Range Officer (which is SA's "race gun" 1911 with all the bells and whistles you could fantasize about) will just you about $570 vs. $960 retail.
Soooooo. I'mma buy me some guns.
Some more guns any way. I also had my hand forced on my caliber debate for my project rifle. The school is no longer letting us do .375 H&H Magnum, So .458 Win Mag it is!
KalashnikovMarine wrote: While I'm at school I qualify for a pro discount (22% better then a dealer discount) on Springfield Armory weapons. I can buy one of each type of XD series, one 1911, and one M1A. A fully loaded M1A with walnut stock clocks in at 1190. Roughly $800 less then retail. A 1911 Range Officer (which is SA's "race gun" 1911 with all the bells and whistles you could fantasize about) will just you about $570 vs. $960 retail.
Soooooo. I'mma buy me some guns.
Some more guns any way. I also had my hand forced on my caliber debate for my project rifle. The school is no longer letting us do .375 H&H Magnum, So .458 Win Mag it is!
Pietta .44 Blackpowder Revolver
Some single barrel break action 12 guage I got super cheap because previous owner is an idiot and thought to clean it with a wire mesh pad. We call that one hillbilly deluxe
Mossberg 500a 12ga
Ruger 10/22
S&W .45 Pistol
ATI Omni AR-15
Mosin Nagant
Not nearly enough revolvers for my taste, but I make do when it comes to plinking things on the weekend.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: While I'm at school I qualify for a pro discount (22% better then a dealer discount) on Springfield Armory weapons. I can buy one of each type of XD series, one 1911, and one M1A. A fully loaded M1A with walnut stock clocks in at 1190. Roughly $800 less then retail. A 1911 Range Officer (which is SA's "race gun" 1911 with all the bells and whistles you could fantasize about) will just you about $570 vs. $960 retail.
Soooooo. I'mma buy me some guns.
This is my jealous face -> I really like the Springfield XD pistols. Last one I shot was the XDS in .45, I didn't do great with it.
I have had many missed opportunities over the years, but the one that really bugs me was a danwesson revolver in .454 with about a 4 inch barrel and a whip-it style grip. I had never, nor since, gazed upon a frame cut like that. Probably for a good reason. I loved the feel of the monster, and I swear I could see bits of the original owners hand between the hammer and frame. Still I wanted it. Too much money at the time though.
I have a .454 on my "To Buy" list. However the good quality/high cal Smiths are pricey enough that a Mateba Unica 6 comes first. ($3000 minimum, a very rare auto-revolver).
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I have a .454 on my "To Buy" list. However the good quality/high cal Smiths are pricey enough that a Mateba Unica 6 comes first. ($3000 minimum, a very rare auto-revolver).
All the auto revolvers are rare, but interesting. I remember recording and watching frame by frame "the Maltese Falcon" because I couldn't believe they would screw up a line about a .45 automatic while showing a revolver. Looking closely you can see the zig-zag of a webly auto revolver conversion. The caliber probably would have been .455 though.........
I wish someone would make another auto-revolver, or reproduction of the Mauser zig-zag. Heck I would dig a Mauser c96 reproduction. Give my old commercial model a break. You have not lived until you have fired a clip fed pistol! When the stripper clips and I are working well it is a fast reload
Yep, .454 Casull I gave up on typing casull because of AC.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I was in Alaska and .44mag, and .454 Casull were popular with folks that wanted a pistol that could potentially stop a bear. My first revolver was a S&W Mod 29 with an 8"3/8" full luged barrel and a un fluted cylinder. The trigger was reworked by the S&W pro shop, and it had pachmyer grips. I had little faith that a .44mag would stop a bear, but it would be preferable to harsh language. Shot lower power loads very well. I could perform a circumcision at 50yards with .44special wad cutters. It was an excellent pistol, but suffered from the weak older design. S&W released an improved M29 classic about the same year I purchased the older style. :(
I can buy a Barrett M107A1 for $9000, $3000 under MSRP. I just can't find a reason to have a 10 shot 50. BMG rifle laying around. If I fell on top of a huge bag of money I would buy one for sure, who doesnt want a Barrett?
I used to work at a pawn shop and left on good terms so I still get a huge discount on most any firearm make. Right now I am considering getting either a CZ SP-01 in 9mm or a Taurus Raging Bull in 44 mag. They will have to wait though since I still want to get a ACOG for my ar and a CQT for my AUG.
Plus my work is selling us their old rifles so I might be getting two more ar-15s with eotechs for $450 each.
If I had 9k laying around I'd be buying said Mateba Unica 6 first and foremost. Then I'd buy the M1A and a Range Officer, a Colt MARSOC 1911, Finnish Mosin-Nagant, and a Rem 700 action to do up all pretty in a AI stock with Leupold glass, tuned timany trigger and a suppressor. Anything left over would go towards a Delyle Carbine. Which would probably have to be a custom build or order.
If there's anything left after that (probably will be if I shop smart.) I'll finish off my rifles of WW2 collection with a Lee Enfield, a 1903 and a K98.
And that's why I can't convince myself to buy a Barrett, even though I want one. It's that for the cost I could get a dozen or more "pricey" toys I want just as much if not more then the Barrett itself.
MWHistorian wrote: How's the trigger on the rhino? Heard it was kind of rubbish.
I had some interest in the Rhino and have handled three. On one the trigger was ok, the other two would need some serious break in time at the least. Or maybe just needed to have gritty bicycle chain grease cleaned out of the trigger.
Sadly, no, it was a field modified Sd.Kfz. 251/9 "Stummel". I guess someone felt they needed more penetrating power than the KwK 37 offered. Or just didn't have a spare when it broke and so slapped that bad boy in place. Whole bloody half track rocked when that sucker fired.
Sadly, no, it was a field modified Sd.Kfz. 251/9 "Stummel". I guess someone felt they needed more penetrating power than the KwK 37 offered. Or just didn't have a spare when it broke and so slapped that bad boy in place. Whole bloody half track rocked when that sucker fired.
Takes a lot to give me ride envy.
Will trade an MR2 for said Sd. 251/9
Just picked up one of 500 made Ruger Old Model Vaquero Sheriff's model with 3 3/4" barrel and Bird's Head grip in 45 colt. Beautiful revolver. Here's a stock photo till I get a chance to post one online:
I'm in the market for a solid, entry level AK-47. I've seen plenty of WASRs and NPAPs, but I'm wondering about the C39 Sporter with the grip and rails. Anyone have any experience with that rifle? Additionally, my range doesn't let us shoot FMJs. How well do SP and HP cartridges feed into the AK47 platform?
I've never owned a rifle before, so I want to get something not too cheap, but not too expensive. Cheers!
Edit: I'm a man of shorter stature (5'4" and fully grown). Is there an easy way to get a collapsable stock or something smaller on a milled AK receiver with two prongs? Because the polymer stock it comes with looks gigantic compared to the traditional Warsaw length stocks. Plus, I'd have to saw off the lower prong in order to install a CAA aftermarket stock, which I really don't want to do.
I've heard of ranges not allowing steel core ammunition (I think that's pretty common) but never FMJs. That's pretty interesting that they don't allow it. Why is that, if I may ask?
I never asked, but their range consists of man-made hills with hard material as a flat surface to tack your targets onto. I'd assume FMJs (and steel core, they don't allow those) would tear up the range. That pretty much restricts me to buying the more expensive 7.62x39 ammo, which I'm not against, but it's somewhat upsetting.
Do some testing if you can shoot somewhere else. you may find that some of the FMJ is made with very frangible lead. Then bring your evidence to whomever runs the range. For a test media you can line up old telephone books, or encyclopedias. I haven't done any InsurgencyWalker style box of truth with various 7.62x39 ammo however I have been surprised but what I have seen with many other @.30 cal ammo I have messed about with. They may tell you to take a hike, they may make an exception.
any range that disallowed full metal jacket is run by people who dont know what they are talking about...
not only is it the most common ammo, it wont degrade backstops any more then anything else would...
complaining about FMJ .223 or 7.62 is rediculous when you consider how much "damage" a 30 06 or 452 casul will do to the back stop, even if its HP or soft point.
steel core can damage equiptmeent that holds up targets or richochet worse off steel targets so thats a legit concern for ranges,
but standard FMJ???
sounds like someone is trying to appease the wrong crowd with bad range rules.
Again, I said I assumed that was the deal with it. Lead contamination is more likely I suppose. I'm not up to telling the range owners what they can and cannot do or enforce on their land.
thats 99.9999% of all ammo thats banned, for... reasons that dont make sense...
lead contamination isnt a valid concern etiher, so im not sure why either.
we have had a few ranges up here convert to "frangable only" ammo, mostly due to pressure from anti gun groups.
the ranges that switch usually find there membership dwindle and then close down due to lacking $,
if they are really anal about it though, you can actually make wax projectiles for pistols, fairly cheap actually.
other then that, not many options for you,
wish I could help more,
I know there are some pure copper projectiles, but they are just as expensive as the frangible crap.
as for the sporter model, I have heard good things about it, generally all the AK family stuff is pretty good, if you can get a chezch smal arms sporter they are pretty good as well, and benifit from milled parts instead of all stamped parts and have a better safety/bolt then standard AK's while retaining all the durability and reliability of the AK.
Well, for now I settled on a cheaper, unused M57 Tokarev from an online retailer. I also ordered 100 JHP cartridges as well as an extra magazine. The AK can come next year when I get my tax return.
If anyone's interested, I'll post some data when I get some range time with it.
So I have been denied the ability to make my dinosaur hunting gun. Technical reason: Head instructor doesn't want me investing the time required to open the standard bolt face up to a .458 Win Mag. It's doable, but again time and effort required aren't worth it in his mind. So I can select any round that fits a "standard" bolt face (vs. say a magnum bolt face). So since the bolt came set up for a .30-06 I'm doing a .338-06. A .338-06 is a necked up .30-06 cartridge that now rolls deep with a .338 round. It has INCREDIBLE ballistics, it's hit point at 300 yards is LITERALLY a straight line from point of origin. That's fething insane.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: So I have been denied the ability to make my dinosaur hunting gun. Technical reason: Head instructor doesn't want me investing the time required to open the standard bolt face up to a .458 Win Mag. It's doable, but again time and effort required aren't worth it in his mind. So I can select any round that fits a "standard" bolt face (vs. say a magnum bolt face). So since the bolt came set up for a .30-06 I'm doing a .338-06. A .338-06 is a necked up .30-06 cartridge that now rolls deep with a .338 round. It has INCREDIBLE ballistics, it's hit point at 300 yards is LITERALLY a straight line from point of origin. That's fething insane.
If you're hunting Dinosaurs, consider the McMillan FatMac. When I hunt a Tyrannosaur, i want a 20mm necked down to .50 cal.
I got me a PT111 G2. I like the 1911 but it's just too damn heavy and bulky. I can conceal it but I have to dress for it.
12 rounds of 9mm, 3.25" barrel. I'm not a ballistics expert but in my lay opinion, a Speer Gold Dot 9mm +P JHP is probably good enough.
Taurus has a historically poor reputation, but I think that's no longer as deserved as it once was. I think they generally make pretty good guns now, and I really like their ergonomics. I shot a lot of subcompacts trying to pick a dedicated CCW gun and as always, the Taurus just... feels right to me.
The biggest complaint a lot of reviews had was the safety, but that's actually not a problem on the one I got, flips up and down no problem, no abnormal stiffness. The slide release... that's a different story. I'm hoping that will loosen up a bit in time but it's acceptable as is.
It has has a tactical rail, which is nice. The only thing I have left to decide is if I should go with a bayonet or a bipod for it.
This is an Aimpoint ML3 but I need a Night Vision-compatible aiming solution, so I ordered Streamlight's TLR-2 IRW. The Aimpoint is there for shooting indoors or during day time...most of the time I'll be hip shooting this thing with the laser through my PVS-14.
Check out some of the ballistics data on barrel lengths. There are some significant changes in velocity from 10.5" to 11.5" if you're using 5.56.
FWIW, if you're thinking of dropping the hammer on a pistol with the Sig Brace, I can tell you that it's literally a 6 month shortcut to an SBR. The thing runs 99% as well as a SBR without the NFA headache.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Check out some of the ballistics data on barrel lengths. There are some significant changes in velocity from 10.5" to 11.5" if you're using 5.56.
FWIW, if you're thinking of dropping the hammer on a pistol with the Sig Brace, I can tell you that it's literally a 6 month shortcut to an SBR. The thing runs 99% as well as a SBR without the NFA headache.
Thanks for the tip about the ballistics info, I'll read up on it.
And I have to go with the Sig brace - Iowa bans all NFA items
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Check out some of the ballistics data on barrel lengths. There are some significant changes in velocity from 10.5" to 11.5" if you're using 5.56.
FWIW, if you're thinking of dropping the hammer on a pistol with the Sig Brace, I can tell you that it's literally a 6 month shortcut to an SBR. The thing runs 99% as well as a SBR without the NFA headache.
Thanks for the tip about the ballistics info, I'll read up on it.
And I have to go with the Sig brace - Iowa bans all NFA items
The CA thing is a dealbreaker...the whole pistol thing is really just a way of building a short barreled AR15 without waiting 6 months for your NFA paperwork to clear. The Sig Brace makes it pretty much just as usable as a real SBR.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: 1" can make a difference of over 500 fps which is a big deal when we're talking about a round that reeeeeally needs to fragment to do its job.
That is... cray cray. I never would have imagined that would be so abrupt.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: 1" can make a difference of over 500 fps which is a big deal when we're talking about a round that reeeeeally needs to fragment to do its job.
That is... cray cray. I never would have imagined that would be so abrupt.
Right? Between 11.5" and 14.5" it's pretty much a wash, but 10.3 to 11.5 and it's night and day.
It really makes me rethink AR15s over 11.5". A full-length 20" barrel is only gaining a couple hundred FPS over 11.5" and in terms of barrel length it's almost twice as long. Seems like anything over 11.5" and you might as well just step up to a bigger caliber as most of the powder burns off in the first 11.5" anyway.
From a civilian POV, 11.5" barrels help get your AR15 pistol up to an overall length of greater than 26", which allows you to mount vertical foregrips on it if you want (since it's no longer a "pistol" but a "firearm")
And a new picture because my TLR-2 IRW just came in. This little module is MEAN. 1 mW IR laser and a white light in one small package. The light is ~300 lumens so it's not a total face melter...you can still use it indoors but it's useful out to reasonable night time outdoor ranges.
Went for a walk last night in the woods...at 25 yards the bloom isn't awful but I was able to lase houses about 100 meters out easy. I expect this thing to perform to about 200m reliably as long as there's not too much ambient light, and/or you aren't using an IR illuminator.
Speaking of IR illuminators, I'll need to grab one of those soon.
Speaking of ARs, has much came out about the new recoil system that Jim Sullivan is working on? I'd think it'd be of interest to AR owners in that he said that he's been wanting to go back to the design for years to sort out some critical flaws with it. Seeing a rifle with his changes fired in comparison to a regular AR really shows the difference in the barrel lift, though well that's perhaps not saying much given how small a round the thing's firing in the first place. Ah, given how much people have forked out for their existing guns though buying one that's just more of the same but better might not be the best excuse when talking to the wife perhaps.
Hey I wasn't saying that he was on the ball with any of his personal thoughts. He seemed a bit like a third wheel when talking about his involvement with the AR to me. Someone's hired him to make these changes though, even if its just for publicity.
Here's the video. The comparison's at 10:00. I would note that the RPM's lower on Sullivan's gun.
I'll be curious to see an actual review of his gun rather than the snippets that the company's allowing at the moment (the mechanism might be proprietary but that means feth all once someone can give a proper look at it). Like I said, he's a name for some marketing, and I doubt any of his changes will be taken up outside of the civilian market (like hell the US Military's replacing a load of guns with the same thing when they could be upgrading or doing their usual thing of just sticking with what they have).
Frankly though I'd rather have the moderised FG 42 the same site looked into than that AR any day (though well I'm a little biased against 5.56 automatics).
So basically he's cut the cyclic rate almost in half. It might be too late to tell Sullivan that nobody in the West fires his M4 in anger on full auto.
I own a Rem 700 chambered in 7mm rem mag-no optics yet the ziess will come soon..otherwise i have a rem 870 12 gauge which is old reliable...i maintain my firearms like its religon..they are stored unloaded and away from ammo, although i have stashes of various rounds around the house in case home defense comes into the day to day scenerio
djones520 wrote: So I just learned that here in TN, my military training satisfies the states requirement for training to get a CCL.
That'll save me a decent bit of cash. Might as well get that ball rolling.
Awesome!
The girlfriend and I did a class almost a year ago. It was buy one get one free, so it cost us $50 each to take the class and range. It took us almost a year but we finally got our applications in.
Hope your issuer is better than my county. It takes them a full 30 days to process and do the background check. Yet somehow the county next door can get them out the next week. At least they finally bumped their fees down to the state minimum.
Hordini wrote: Nice! What kind of laser system are you using?
Thanks! It's a Streamlight TLR-2 IRW ~1 mW IR laser.
Next step is getting my helmet rig in order. Right now it's serviceable but not very comfortable. I've got a set of Oregon Aero pads on order along with their BLSS kit. Spreading out the straps to an H configuration hopefully will give me enough room to mount my muffs while I'm wearing the helmet. I'd prefer to mount the muffs on an ARC rail or something but my muffs don't come stock with ARC rails and, without the parts in front of me, I don't want to go ordering an assload of stuff I won't need, and that will render my muffs useless without the helmet!
djones520 wrote: So I just learned that here in TN, my military training satisfies the states requirement for training to get a CCL.
That'll save me a decent bit of cash. Might as well get that ball rolling.
It's the same in Ohio, which is quite nice (I wish it was like that in every state, to be honest). That said, if you do get the chance to take a CCW class at some point, I would still highly recommend it. Not for the firearms training part in your case, but rather specifically for the legal aspects of it. I was already a decently experienced shooter when I took the course, but I learned a lot about self-defense laws and use of force and firearms, which is something that can vary a lot by state. More specifically, things like the castle doctrine and stand your ground don't work like a lot of people think they do and how the media tries to portray them, and it behooves you (that is, anyone with a CCW) to educate yourself on those kinds of things.
Hordini wrote: Nice! What kind of laser system are you using?
Thanks! It's a Streamlight TLR-2 IRW ~1 mW IR laser.
Spoiler:
Nice! Would you recommend it? I was exploring a bit about IR laser systems that are available to civilians the other day and wasn't sure where to start. Are you using it paired with a PVS-14 monocular? I thought I saw you post a photo of one the other day.
Hordini wrote: Nice! What kind of laser system are you using?
Thanks! It's a Streamlight TLR-2 IRW ~1 mW IR laser.
Spoiler:
Nice! Would you recommend it? I was exploring a bit about IR laser systems that are available to civilians the other day and wasn't sure where to start. Are you using it paired with a PVS-14 monocular? I thought I saw you post a photo of one the other day.
Definitely! Yeah I'm using an ITT 6015 which is basically a PVS-14 with automatic gain adjustment.
IR laser is probably the best way to aim a rifle with NODs on. In the IDF I had an Akilah, and later a Lior, both of which are magnified rifle scopes. They're better for accurate shooting at long range (~300-500m) but closer than that, a laser is way better. It's also better for situation awareness to have the thing attached to your head!
My old Akilah...wonder where you are today:
As for which laser you should buy...you can spend as much as you want, as with most things. The top of the line in terms of civilian lasers is probably the ATPIAL-C, which has visible and IR lasers, along with an IR illuminator. Very nice piece of kit...also over $1,000 for just a laser and illuminator. Other options include the OTAL / ITAL, which are just IR, and the DBAL which contains visible and IR lasers (nice because you only have to zero the visible laser...the IR laser is slaved).
Streamlight's IR is actually more powerful than most civilian rifle LAMs. The TLR-2 IRW Secret Service model is 1 mW while the -C variants of the above lasers are capped at .7 mW. People say they like the lower power because you get less bloom but at close range I don't notice the bloom being too strong on this. Obviously it's very nice to be able to zero a visible laser and use a slaved IR, because zeroing IR lasers is a pain, but it's not a dealbreaker (you can use a PVS-14 with a pinhole cap to zero during the day). I also like that it's integrated with a white light, so it's one module handling both your lighting and laser needs.
My other night-ready rifle has a MARS-IR, which is the Israeli version of an EOtech EOLAD (it actually came out first). It's a red dot with a slaved IR laser, which makes zeroing the IR a breeze!
If I was going to do just one, I'd definitely say that an optic like the MARS is the way to go. The nice thing about a dedicated LAM is that you aren't tied into the red dot...and you still have a way to aim if your laser goes down or runs out of batteries. Pros and cons to both honestly...
That was all a really long way of saying: YES! Definitely recommend it, but it's going to burn a hole in your pocket real fast.
Hordini wrote: That said, if you do get the chance to take a CCW class at some point, I would still highly recommend it. Not for the firearms training part in your case, but rather specifically for the legal aspects of it. I was already a decently experienced shooter when I took the course, but I learned a lot about self-defense laws and use of force and firearms, which is something that can vary a lot by state. More specifically, things like the castle doctrine and stand your ground don't work like a lot of people think they do and how the media tries to portray them, and it behooves you (that is, anyone with a CCW) to educate yourself on those kinds of things.
I wish Iowa covered this stuff - my test was strictly about basic gun safety, and the places you can't take your gun. It was super, super basic and easy, if you had all your ducks in a row you could go from zero to hostering a new gun with a CCW in your wallet in about 3 hours. I am pretty sure for hunting licences it's a little more stringent, but I would like to have seen some of the basic concepts you mentioned covered as a requirement.
Jihadin wrote: What are you using for counter weight? I at times use a plug of pig iron or a roll of quarters
I've got a battery roll back there. If friends of mine grab NVGs I'll add an IR beacon. Right now an IR light stick on the side of the helmet fulfills that role.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Finally figured out how to get these electronic muffs to fit under this helmet...omfg that was a fight.
Muahahhaha...
Great Scott! That is a lot of stuff mounted to your noggin. Ever thought of just mounting the NVGs to the rifles rails in front of the optics? I used to to that with my ACOG and it work like magic. So much smoother and natural.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Finally figured out how to get these electronic muffs to fit under this helmet...omfg that was a fight.
Muahahhaha...
Great Scott! That is a lot of stuff mounted to your noggin. Ever thought of just mounting the NVGs to the rifles rails in front of the optics? I used to to that with my ACOG and it work like magic. So much smoother and natural.
That works for shooting, but it starts to get old if you have to sight down your rifle just to walk around. Or drive.
I've never really walked around with NVGs its just awkward. I relied more on my ears out in the dark. An after doing about 200 hours of off road driving I never will willimg drive by NVG again haha.
M&P Shield - I fething this little thing. Thinking about getting a big dot sight for it or maybe a crimson trace. Possibly both. Depends on if I would be able to fit the thing in my holster.
Kimber Crimson Carry II - Fantastic gun, though it posted like a mother fether and it had a bad habit of pulling my pants down.
Remington 870 in 16g - Great little shotgun. Suppose it's purpose would be in the event of an Indian uprising or something.
Huglu 103 FE - Bird shooting gun, though it's almost too pretty to take out.
As far as where I keep these, they're all at my parents place while I'm at school. Not really enough time for me to hunt and UO police might get a bit pissy if I concealed carried on campus.
Stonebeard wrote: M&P Shield - I fething this little thing. Thinking about getting a big dot sight for it or maybe a crimson trace. Possibly both. Depends on if I would be able to fit the thing in my holster.
Stonebeard wrote: M&P Shield - I fething this little thing. Thinking about getting a big dot sight for it or maybe a crimson trace. Possibly both. Depends on if I would be able to fit the thing in my holster.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Finally figured out how to get these electronic muffs to fit under this helmet...omfg that was a fight.
Muahahhaha...
Great Scott! That is a lot of stuff mounted to your noggin. Ever thought of just mounting the NVGs to the rifles rails in front of the optics? I used to to that with my ACOG and it work like magic. So much smoother and natural.
Much better SA with a monocular. I was issued a Litton Akilah (4x NV riflescope) and a Lior (3x NV riflescope) at various points during my service, so I've got a good amount of experience with weapon-mounted NV. It's better for shooting than a monocular, but with a monocular your SA is better, it's faster to use out to ~100 yards (with a laser), and it's nice not to have to point your weapon at everything you want to see in the dark especially in a civilian environment.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrotherGecko wrote: I've never really walked around with NVGs its just awkward. I relied more on my ears out in the dark. An after doing about 200 hours of off road driving I never will willimg drive by NVG again haha.
Good Gen3 can help you spot targets out to a few hundred meters in the right conditions, and make ID out to 100+ especially if you're using an IR illuminator. Can't do any of that with your ears.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hordini wrote: Do you have the 9mm or .40 version of the Shield?
Just chiming in but I've got the 9mm version and love it. It shoots like a much larger piece...very flat and easy to hide.
BrotherGecko wrote: I've never really walked around with NVGs its just awkward. I relied more on my ears out in the dark. An after doing about 200 hours of off road driving I never will willimg drive by NVG again haha.
Fun fact #1: Concertina wire does not show up in NVGs (at least the PVS-7s we had)
Fun Fact #2: Once wrapped in the axles of your M1026, concertina is definitely not your friend.
Just out of curiosity, anyone else looking at CZ's new Scorpion EVO 3? It looks really fun, supposedly they'll start becoming available after SHOT show, might add it to the list of "must gets" after finally getting my AR past just being a bare receiver and a Cx4. I think my WW1 bolt action collection plans may have to wait
BrotherGecko wrote: I've never really walked around with NVGs its just awkward. I relied more on my ears out in the dark. An after doing about 200 hours of off road driving I never will willimg drive by NVG again haha.
Fun fact #1: Concertina wire does not show up in NVGs (at least the PVS-7s we had)
Fun Fact #2: Once wrapped in the axles of your M1026, concertina is definitely not your friend.
I almost managed to drive off a 20ft cliff my last rotation at NTC using PVS-14s. My 1SG navigated the whole damn place off star light and memory.
Vaktathi wrote: Just out of curiosity, anyone else looking at CZ's new Scorpion EVO 3? It looks really fun, supposedly they'll start becoming available after SHOT show, might add it to the list of "must gets" after finally getting my AR past just being a bare receiver and a Cx4. I think my WW1 bolt action collection plans may have to wait
Jihadin wrote: Jebus I hated walking around with NVG's. No depth perception. Some cruel evil SoB would also spay paint the concertina wire black to.
You could always mate two PVS14s using a bridge and git you some of those binocular vision. This is a dedicated binocular system but mated PVS14s look pretty similar.
Or you could step up to not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 g-d damn tubes!!!!!
For dat peripheral vision itch you need to scratch. I don't know how many of these units are out in the wild but suffice to say that if there are any out there, they are MONEY.
Jihadin wrote: Jebus I hated walking around with NVG's. No depth perception. Some cruel evil SoB would also spay paint the concertina wire black to.
You could always mate two PVS14s using a bridge and git you some of those binocular vision. This is a dedicated binocular system but mated PVS14s look pretty similar.
Or you could step up to not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 g-d damn tubes!!!!!
For dat peripheral vision itch you need to scratch. I don't know how many of these units are out in the wild but suffice to say that if there are any out there, they are MONEY.
id love to look thru that. i heard its like panoramic. dual tubes give you some depth. these would be interesting.
Vaktathi wrote: Just out of curiosity, anyone else looking at CZ's new Scorpion EVO 3? It looks really fun, supposedly they'll start becoming available after SHOT show, might add it to the list of "must gets" after finally getting my AR past just being a bare receiver and a Cx4. I think my WW1 bolt action collection plans may have to wait
Lots of positives
What do you guys think about weapons like this being used as home defense weapons over, say, a simple pump shotgun?
Seems like a lot of people own Assault Rifles here (from the states)
Can I ask you why you guys own them? Other than military people why do you guys buy ARs and pistols? Do you hunt with them or just for the range?
I'm not against them or anything as I own 2 guns myself but strictly for hunting purposes so I just don't see the need for a pistol or an AR. Although if I could I'd probably buy one if they were allowed in Canada (they sort of are but are a hastle to get)
I'll stick with my trust break action 20ga and a .22 for now lol
What do you guys think about weapons like this being used as home defense weapons over, say, a simple pump shotgun?
No problem with it at all - AR15s in general penetrate no more interior walls than shotguns, have a better magazine capacity, more precision, and lower recoil for faster followup shots. They're also more reliable under stress (people screw up pumps in 3-gun all the time). My house gun is, and likely always will be, an AR15.
This "pistol" is my current nightstand gun...ear pro highly recommended.
And yes, the VFG is legal as the OAL is greater than 26".
chiefbigredman wrote: Seems like a lot of people own Assault Rifles here (from the states)
Can I ask you why you guys own them? Other than military people why do you guys buy ARs and pistols? Do you hunt with them or just for the range?
I own precisely zero assault rifles. I do own an AR-15, which is NOT an assault rifle, despite what others would have you think. I own one, and own multiple pistols, because I want them. That's reason enough. I have other reasons but that's my own business.
Not necessarily speaking to chiefbigredman here, but people have to get their head around the fact that Americans aren't required to provide a reason for owning a firearm. The "need" terminology that leftists throw around all the time gets old, and is a slippery slope. There's very few things that humans "need". Leftist anti-gun folks don't "need" their Prius, latte or smartphone. Maybe we should confiscate them...
chiefbigredman wrote: Seems like a lot of people own Assault Rifles here (from the states)
Can I ask you why you guys own them? Other than military people why do you guys buy ARs and pistols? Do you hunt with them or just for the range?
I'm not against them or anything as I own 2 guns myself but strictly for hunting purposes so I just don't see the need for a pistol or an AR. Although if I could I'd probably buy one if they were allowed in Canada (they sort of are but are a hastle to get)
I'll stick with my trust break action 20ga and a .22 for now lol
If by pistol you mean a typical semi auto polymer pistol like a Glock or M&P then speaking for myself I have them because I have a carry permit so I have them to keep on my person and to practice with. Self defense in and out of the home and practicing/having fun at the range. If you're talking about AR pistols, I personally don't have any, until the Sig brace came out recently I didn't think they were very practical.
Regarding regular mid length ARs I find them to be ergonomical, easy/fun to shoot, simple to customize/accesorize and they're necessary if you want to do any competition shooting or noncompetitve fun shoots. I've heard of people using Garands or M1carbines for 3 gun type events but I wouldn't want to try it personally unless the stages had really low round counts.
I own precisely zero assault rifles. I do own an AR-15, which is NOT an assault rifle, despite what others would have you think. I own one, and own multiple pistols, because I want them. That's reason enough. I have other reasons but that's my own business.
Not necessarily speaking to chiefbigredman here, but people have to get their head around the fact that Americans aren't required to provide a reason for owning a firearm. The "need" terminology that leftists throw around all the time gets old, and is a slippery slope. There's very few things that humans "need". Leftist anti-gun folks don't "need" their Prius, latte or smartphone. Maybe we should confiscate them...
Well I'd consider it an assault rifle but then again I don't know the general definition of what is really an assault rifle lol
I assumed that its just because you want them (I never understood the "its for home defense" reason but maybe that's cause I'm from Canada and I've always felt safe where I live, having guns because they are fun to shoot is a better reason for me...that's why I have a .22 lol).
Do you just go to the range to use them or can you guys use them anywhere? In Canada you can only use a pistol at a firing range which is why I don't own one (I could get one tho) just such a hastle here. And same with ARs here we can't have mags bigger than 5+1 (maybe its 4+1) for centerfire guns which is kinda weird when I can buy huge mags for ruger .22s like wut?
I was just stating Americans for ARs and pistols cause you guys have an easier time getting them than up here. Such a pain to get them here and even bigger pain to actually get to shoot them.
If by pistol you mean a typical semi auto polymer pistol like a Glock or M&P then speaking for myself I have them because I have a carry permit so I have them to keep on my person and to practice with. Self defense in and out of the home and practicing/having fun at the range. If you're talking about AR pistols, I personally don't have any, until the Sig brace came out recently I didn't think they were very practical.
Regarding regular mid length ARs I find them to be ergonomical, easy/fun to shoot, simple to customize/accesorize and they're necessary if you want to do any competition shooting or noncompetitve fun shoots. I've heard of people using Garands or M1carbines for 3 gun type events but I wouldn't want to try it personally unless the stages had really low round counts.
Uhhhhh well by pistols I ment pistols like a a 1911 or whatever and by AR I ment like M1 carbines and things like that...like a military style gun.
My knowledge of either of those is very limited just because we don't get much options up here and very few people own them so I don't really know all the differences.
Plus is stupid expensive for centerfire rounds up here like $1-$2 a round so its expensive. What are the prices down there? Its just so much cheaper to get a .22 to go plinking and stuff but then again it doesn't have the same feel as a centerfire
What do you guys think about weapons like this being used as home defense weapons over, say, a simple pump shotgun?
Personally I just keep a few extended mags for my M&P45 in the house for home defense. It's a great pistol, I shoot it well enough, it's got a light, I find it easier to use inside than something like an 870Express. I like my shotguns but I don't want to rely on something with such a low capacity for home defense and long guns are awkward indoors for me (but I've never done any CQB training or courses). Chances are I'll never need to use it and if that rare event occurs chances are .45 self defense rounds will do the job just fine.
In regards to the CZ Evo specifically, I don't like pistol caliber carbines. They're very task specific in my opinion and I don't have the kind of disposable income to spend on something with a lot of limitations. For less cost than Evo you can get a Glock, a light and some extended mags and the Glock will be more useful. A pistol AR would be better, 5.56 would be just as good inside the home but would have better performance at longer ranges if you ever wanted to use it outside. If you have the money and the desire go get an Evo and enjoy it but it's hard for me not to default to the more frugal options.
chiefbigredman wrote: Seems like a lot of people own Assault Rifles here (from the states)
Can I ask you why you guys own them? Other than military people why do you guys buy ARs and pistols? Do you hunt with them or just for the range?
I'm not against them or anything as I own 2 guns myself but strictly for hunting purposes so I just don't see the need for a pistol or an AR. Although if I could I'd probably buy one if they were allowed in Canada (they sort of are but are a hastle to get)
I'll stick with my trust break action 20ga and a .22 for now lol
Lots of reasons...home defense, keep one in the car, range toy, and I'd hunt with one in a heartbeat if I could do so legally in PA. Semi autos are a no-go here in PA for hunting...stupid but that's the law.
An assault rifle has a fire selector allowing fully automatic fire. They are rare and expensive in the US, and require extensive paperwork, fees and background checks to legally acquire. Your typical AR-15 is semi-automatic, shooting once for each pull of the trigger.
If you have mag capacity limits on centerfire firearms, then it wouldn't apply to .22s/l/lr caliber firearms as the .22s/l/lr is a rimfire cartridge.
AR means "Armalite Rifle". It is not a catch-all for "military style" firearms.
I was just stating Americans for ARs and pistols cause you guys have an easier time getting them than up here. Such a pain to get them here and even bigger pain to actually get to shoot them.
If by pistol you mean a typical semi auto polymer pistol like a Glock or M&P then speaking for myself I have them because I have a carry permit so I have them to keep on my person and to practice with. Self defense in and out of the home and practicing/having fun at the range. If you're talking about AR pistols, I personally don't have any, until the Sig brace came out recently I didn't think they were very practical.
Regarding regular mid length ARs I find them to be ergonomical, easy/fun to shoot, simple to customize/accesorize and they're necessary if you want to do any competition shooting or noncompetitve fun shoots. I've heard of people using Garands or M1carbines for 3 gun type events but I wouldn't want to try it personally unless the stages had really low round counts.
Uhhhhh well by pistols I ment pistols like a a 1911 or whatever and by AR I ment like M1 carbines and things like that...like a military style gun.
My knowledge of either of those is very limited just because we don't get much options up here and very few people own them so I don't really know all the differences.
Plus is stupid expensive for centerfire rounds up here like $1-$2 a round so its expensive. What are the prices down there? Its just so much cheaper to get a .22 to go plinking and stuff but then again it doesn't have the same feel as a centerfire
I figured that's what you mean but there are also AR-15 pistols so I wanted to make sure to clarify. I spoilered two comparison pics below to illustrate the difference between an AR-15 and a pistol AR.
Spoiler:
Currently 5.56 ammo is around $0.45-$0.50 per round. Depending on manufacturing and the amount you order it can vary. I'm not sure what the current cost breakdown is for people who reload, that can depend on the cost of the components which varies with when you bought them.
Rimfire is usually cheaper although .22lr did get more expensive recently.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alex C wrote: An assault rifle has a fire selector allowing fully automatic fire. They are rare and expensive in the US, and require extensive paperwork, fees and background checks to legally acquire. Your typical AR-15 is semi-automatic, shooting once for each pull of the trigger.
If you have mag capacity limits on centerfire firearms, then it wouldn't apply to .22s/l/lr caliber firearms as the .22s/l/lr is a rimfire cartridge.
AR means "Armalite Rifle". It is not a catch-all for "military style" firearms.
True but if I could buy a Sturmgewehr44 I totally would and be unashamedly proud of my assault rifle.
Stonebeard wrote: What do you guys think about weapons like this being used as home defense weapons over, say, a simple pump shotgun?
The pistol in that video is chambered in 9mm, the same as many pistols used for home defense. It has a longer barrel so will be more accurate than a pistol and a larger magazine capacity so the homeowner does not have to reload as often (notwithstanding States with arbitrary limits on magazine size). You can also use hollow point rounds to reduce the risk of over penetration.
chiefbigredman wrote: Seems like a lot of people own Assault Rifles here (from the states)
Can I ask you why you guys own them? Other than military people why do you guys buy ARs and pistols? Do you hunt with them or just for the range?
I'm not against them or anything as I own 2 guns myself but strictly for hunting purposes so I just don't see the need for a pistol or an AR. Although if I could I'd probably buy one if they were allowed in Canada (they sort of are but are a hastle to get)
I'll stick with my trust break action 20ga and a .22 for now lol
The reason why a lot of people own an AR is because they are extremely versatile. They are simple to build and maintain, plus they have thousands upon thousands of after market parts to make it unique. They can pretty much come in any caliber you want, with .223 or 5.56 being most common. Switching between uppers is easy. I can use the same lower for my home defense gun as I can for my long range hunting rifle. That being said, I only use my AR for the range, but it is more of a safe queen as I am broke.
As far as "need", in the last month in a half, we had our garage broken into, a stolen car dumped in the neighbors drive way, the neighbors house broken into and trashed, a homeless guy crashing in his truck (in a 2 hour parking area) and casing the apartments near by (was arrested, is back now again). If you feel safe with all that going on, then I will freely trade living arrangements. Unfortunately in the real world, "why don't you move" isn't a very easy answer. I would love to be able to get move out in the country with no neighbors for miles where 3S hunting is the norm.
edit: about the homeless guy, the police were called multiple times and never did anything until we got the mayor involved. Even then, the city next to ours was the one that ended up even doing anything about it.
chiefbigredman wrote: Seems like a lot of people own Assault Rifles here (from the states)
Can I ask you why you guys own them? Other than military people why do you guys buy ARs and pistols? Do you hunt with them or just for the range?
I'm not against them or anything as I own 2 guns myself but strictly for hunting purposes so I just don't see the need for a pistol or an AR. Although if I could I'd probably buy one if they were allowed in Canada (they sort of are but are a hastle to get)
I'll stick with my trust break action 20ga and a .22 for now lol
The rifles you see are semi-automatic rifles, and therefore not assault rifles. An assault rifle is commonly accepted to be a rifle that is is chambered for an intermediate round, has select fire capability, and is fed from a detachable magazine. AR15's are incapable of select fire.
As an item of housekeeping I would ask that the OP also be respected going forward;
djones520 wrote: Since the other thread was locked, I'll try this and see if it works. Lets discuss the firearms you own, what you use them for, and online resources that you use to enhance your shooting experience. ANYONE is welcome post in here, but please keep it on the topic. Also share any online resources that you have for purchasing equipment, or just learning about the differant aspects of firearms.
Alex C wrote: An assault rifle has a fire selector allowing fully automatic fire. They are rare and expensive in the US, and require extensive paperwork, fees and background checks to legally acquire. Your typical AR-15 is semi-automatic, shooting once for each pull of the trigger.
If you have mag capacity limits on centerfire firearms, then it wouldn't apply to .22s/l/lr caliber firearms as the .22s/l/lr is a rimfire cartridge.
AR means "Armalite Rifle". It is not a catch-all for "military style" firearms.
It's also important to note that there actually are a few hundred thousand legally owned "machine guns" floating around the usa. Most are collector pieces, but some are owned by people who were willing to pay for the fees and do the paperwork and all that and now they legally own a fully automatic weapon.
Despite this, in the history of the USA, there has been exactly one crime committed with a legally owned machine gun. A SWAT officer took his issued submachinegun and shot someone who was cheating with his wife or something. When it comes to legally owned fully automatic firearms, our laws are unquestionably functional, and frankly overkill. There is absolutely no need to be concerned over US gun laws regarding fully automatic weapons.
Now, rarely a drug dealer from mexico or something will smuggle in an illegal assault rifle or something, but that's already very illegal and it has more to do with our drug laws than any gun control measures.
I assumed that its just because you want them (I never understood the "its for home defense" reason but maybe that's cause I'm from Canada and I've always felt safe where I live, having guns because they are fun to shoot is a better reason for me...that's why I have a .22 lol).
Do you just go to the range to use them or can you guys use them anywhere? In Canada you can only use a pistol at a firing range which is why I don't own one (I could get one tho) just such a hastle here. And same with ARs here we can't have mags bigger than 5+1 (maybe its 4+1) for centerfire guns which is kinda weird when I can buy huge mags for ruger .22s like wut?
Im in the market for probably a bullpup design or one of the thousands of "M-4 clones" out there for the house.... Obviously the first thing is that I merely "Want" it... the second part of that is that with all the riots going on, Im not afraid that they'll suddenly come out to Unincorporated Washington, USA, but it never hurts to be prepared.
As for "Why" beyond "I want"... just look up what happened in Koreatown, LA during the April, 1992 riots... The long and short of it was that the police "abandoned" K-town to black/african-american rioters, and so the Korean shop owners all banded together on their rooftops and defended themselves, and their properties with rifles, shotguns, pistols, etc (there were reportedly a few full-auto rifles in the group, as they hadn't been banned yet), until the National Guard was able to move in and actually secure the area.
Basically, I don't want to be up gak creek without a paddle, JUST IN CASE some seriously fethed up stuff like that happens again.
they own modern semi automatic mag fed firearms which are completely different.
semi auto mag fed rifles are simple what everything is now a days, people use this kind of gun for the same reasons we dont use black powder and muskets or drive model T's anymore.
modern designs are what gets used, and if you dont know why you need a semi auto to hunt some things, or even where a pistol for hunting is needed/appropriate, I suggest you educate yourself as these things are real, and Canadians enjoyed these activities for many years with out it being a problem.
I can go out and hunt gophers, yotes, or whatever with a mag fed semi auto .223 rifle, legally, with just the regular license.
but other "scary looking" guns with the *exact same functionality* mags, semi auto, .223, are illegal to hunt with, because emotions > reason and facts with lots of people, especially zealous political types.
however we have literally been socially re engineered to believe that anything thats not a bolt action single shot rifle is and assault rifle.
heck people who made the laws what they are, are on public record as having said this.
Sharon Carstairs
"C-68 has little to do with gun control or crime control, but it is the first step necessary to begin the social re-engineering of Canada."
you used to be able to own actual assault rifles up here as well,
"The fact is that no legal and privately-owned full automatic firearm has been used in any crime of violence in all of Canadian history."
— Charles Moore via Garry Breitkreuz
Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #444 < Off Site >, 1998 June 17
modern designs are what gets used, and if you dont know why you need a semi auto to hunt some things, or even where a pistol for hunting is needed/appropriate, I suggest you educate yourself as these things are real, and Canadians enjoyed these activities for many years with out it being a problem.
I can go out and hunt gophers, yotes, or whatever with a mag fed semi auto .223 rifle, legally, with just the regular license.
Didn't mean to stir the pot with my previous comment.
Just for the record I am a gun owner and I have had my firearms lisence since I was 15 (turning 16 so I could get it) and I own a H&R pardner 20ga and a Ruger 10/22 carbine black synthetic.
I enjoy hunting and stuff I was just asking why people buy these guns. I feel I stirred the pot a bit accidentally so sorry about that but I'm not against it was just merely posing a question as to why they buy them because I don't see the function of a 20 round mag for hunting deer lol only for the range. But I'm too poor to afford the ammo for that haha
While you may not technically "need" a 30 round mag for hunting deer, I would consider it very desirable for home defense. Especially if there was also lots of large dangerous wildlife around. Of course I would also want a large caliber pistol for that same reason.
Guns also aren't exactly cheap, so if you have a budget you would want a gun that can do all the things you want/need a gun to do. An AR is perfectly capable of being used for hunting, its pretty accurate. It also is perfect for home defense and for just going to the range.
5.56mm isn't a legal deer hunting round in my state, so there's that consideration too for some folks.
I don't know anywhere it's legal for deer (with maybe the exception of harvesting them with a property destruction permit), but it's a legal varmint round (things like coyotes, wild boar, etc.) in at least my home state, and I'm guessing in others.
Yep, we can take boar and coyote with it. I'd like to try someday. I'm sure the local farmers appreciate it! The DNR was asking people to shoot boar on sight at one point, the population had gotten so out of hand.
What are some popular non AR-15 semi-automatic rifles on here? I've got a few different bolt-actions and I'm thinking about branching out and getting my 1st semi-auto. Most likely going to be a .22 for blinking, but I'm keeping my options open.
d-usa wrote: What are some popular non AR-15 semi-automatic rifles on here? I've got a few different bolt-actions and I'm thinking about branching out and getting my 1st semi-auto. Most likely going to be a .22 for blinking, but I'm keeping my options open.
If not for ARs (and AR pistols) I'd be all over a bullpup - either a Tavor or a MSAR (AUG).
Other options include the SCAR and ACR rifles.
I've shot the SCAR and it is phenomenal, but if I didn't already have the trigger time with an AR I'd say the Tavor is probably a better rifle for a lot of reasons.
There's also a few other semiauto rifles based on military rifles that are good alternatives, like the SIG550. There are some civilian only rifles like the Mini 14. There are a lot of options if you look.
d-usa wrote: What are some popular non AR-15 semi-automatic rifles on here? I've got a few different bolt-actions and I'm thinking about branching out and getting my 1st semi-auto. Most likely going to be a .22 for blinking, but I'm keeping my options open.
I like the AK quite a bit. However, I suggest a 10/22 for plinking. It's cheaper and more fun.
d-usa wrote: What are some popular non AR-15 semi-automatic rifles on here? I've got a few different bolt-actions and I'm thinking about branching out and getting my 1st semi-auto. Most likely going to be a .22 for blinking, but I'm keeping my options open.
You'll pay a bit more in the ammo department, but M14's are fun as hell. That being said, there are a gak ton. You want a bullpub or a conventional?
EDIT: Also, you can get just about any modern rifle chambered in .22LR.
Ouze wrote: However, I suggest a 10/22 for plinking. It's cheaper and more fun.
Aye, and also very quiet with a suppressor. Less noise pollution for the neighbors. My plinking rifle is a Sako in .22LR with a scope and suppressor, very nice though a bit pricey compared to many US manufacturers with larger production runs.
Yes, sound suppressors are legal here with no additional permit required. Protecting your own hearing - and your hunting dog's - is good. Use a "silenced" gun in a crime and you will probably get extra time though, as it's that much harder to explain how it wasn't premeditated.
Spetulhu wrote: Aye, and also very quiet with a suppressor. Less noise pollution for the neighbors. My plinking rifle is a Sako in .22LR with a scope and suppressor, very nice though a bit pricey compared to many US manufacturers with larger production runs.
Yes, sound suppressors are legal here with no additional permit required. Protecting your own hearing - and your hunting dog's - is good. Use a "silenced" gun in a crime and you will probably get extra time though, as it's that much harder to explain how it wasn't premeditated.
In the US you need to get permission (Form 4) from the ATF for a suppressor, and pay the tax stamp. This might end up costing the same or more than the rifle itself.
I own an AK and a PSL. I'd recommend the PSL if you could still get them for $600l, but now they're up to $1000. :(
For bullpups, I really want a Tavor and FS2000. Fired the FS several times and it's my guilty pleasure gun.
If you got the money, I highly, highly recommend getting a Crusader rifle. They're custom AR's that are by far the best I've shot. Ever.
d-usa wrote: What are some popular non AR-15 semi-automatic rifles on here? I've got a few different bolt-actions and I'm thinking about branching out and getting my 1st semi-auto. Most likely going to be a .22 for blinking, but I'm keeping my options open.
I got a M4 looking .22 (Umarex/Colt collaboration)
Other companies make them, and you can get HK looking ones, and others as well.
Mine is a blast, even the daughter can handle it and we regularly empty a few magazines out on the range set up behind the pond.
One of my other non-AR semis is a HK-91. Much more expensive to shoot, but it is a great rifle.
Discussions on the wisdom or lack thereof of the ATF would still be off topic, I post this just as an informational aid to anyone looking to build or buy an AR pistol with a SIG brace.
Spoiler:
OPEN LETTER ON THE REDESIGN OF “STABILIZING BRACES”
The Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from the public concerning the proper use
of devices recently marketed as “stabilizing braces.” These devices are described as “a shooter’s
aid that is designed to improve the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped
pistols.” The device claims to enhance accuracy and reduce felt recoil when using an AR-style
pistol.
These items are intended to improve accuracy by using the operator’s forearm to provide stable
support for the AR-type pistol. ATF has previously determined that attaching the brace to a
firearm does not alter the classification of the firearm or subject the firearm to National Firearms
Act (NFA) control. However, this classification is based upon the use of the device as designed.
When the device is redesigned for use as a shoulder stock on a handgun with a rifled barrel under
16 inches in length, the firearm is properly classified as a firearm under the NFA.
The NFA, 26 USCS § 5845, defines “firearm,” in relevant part, as “a shotgun having a barrel or
barrels of less than 18 inches in length” and “a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16
inches in length.” That section defines both “rifle” and “shotgun” as “a weapon designed or
redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder….” (Emphasis added).
Pursuant to the plain language of the statute, ATF and its predecessor agency have long held that
a pistol with a barrel less than 16 inches in length and an attached shoulder stock is a NFA
“firearm.” For example, in Revenue Ruling 61-45, Luger and Mauser pistols “having a barrel of
less than 16 inches in length with an attachable shoulder stock affixed” were each classified as a
“short barrel rifle…within the purview of the National Firearms Act.”
In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF considered the objective design of the item as
well as the stated purpose of the item. In submitting this device for classification, the designer
noted that
The intent of the buffer tube forearm brace is to facilitate one handed firing of the
AR15 pistol for those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap. It also
performs the function of sufficiently padding the buffer tube in order to reduce
bruising to the forearm while firing with one hand. Sliding and securing the brace
onto ones forearm and latching the Velcro straps, distributes the weight of the
weapon evenly and assures a snug fit. Therefore, it is no longer necessary to
dangerously "muscle" this large pistol during the one handed aiming process, and
recoil is dispersed significantly, resulting in more accurate shooting without
compromising safety or comfort.
In the classification letter of November 26, 2012, ATF noted that a “shooter would insert his or
her forearm into the device while gripping the pistol's handgrip-then tighten the Velcro straps for
additional support and retention. Thus configured, the device provides the shooter with
additional support of a firearm while it is still held and operated with one hand.” When strapped
to the wrist and used as designed, it is clear the device does not allow the firearm to be fired from
the shoulder. Therefore, ATF concluded that, pursuant to the information provided, “the device -2-
is not designed or intended to fire a weapon from the shoulder.” In making the classification
ATF determined that the objective design characteristics of the stabilizing brace supported the
stated intent.
ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun while
shooting with a single hand—the device is not considered a shoulder stock and therefore may be
attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm. However, ATF has received numerous
inquiries regarding alternate uses for this device, including use as a shoulder stock. Because the
NFA defines both rifle and shotgun to include any “weapon designed or redesigned, made or
remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder,” any person who redesigns a stabilizing
brace for use as a shoulder stock makes a NFA firearm when attached to a pistol with a rifled
barrel under 16 inches in length or a handgun with a smooth bore under 18 inches in length.
The GCA does not define the term “redesign” and therefore ATF applies the common meaning.
“Redesign” is defined as “to alter the appearance or function of.” See e.g. Webster’s II New
College Dictionary, Third Ed. (2005). This is not a novel interpretation. For example ATF has
previously advised that an individual possesses a destructive device when possessing antipersonnel
ammunition with an otherwise unregulated 37/38mm flare launcher. See ATF Ruling
95-3. Further, ATF has advised that even use of an unregulated flare and flare launcher as a
weapon results in the making of a NFA weapon. Similarly, ATF has advised that, although
otherwise unregulated, the use of certain nail guns as weapons may result in classification as an
“any other weapon.”
The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock,
and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor
has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary
to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.
Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol
(having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18
inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting
firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA.
If you have any questions about the issues addressed in this letter, you may contact the Firearms
and Ammunition Technology Division at fire_tech@atf.gov or by phone at (304) 616-4300.
Discussions on the wisdom or lack thereof of the ATF would still be off topic, I post this just as an informational aid to anyone looking to build or buy an AR pistol with a SIG brace.
Spoiler:
OPEN LETTER ON THE REDESIGN OF “STABILIZING BRACES”
The Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from the public concerning the proper use
of devices recently marketed as “stabilizing braces.” These devices are described as “a shooter’s
aid that is designed to improve the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped
pistols.” The device claims to enhance accuracy and reduce felt recoil when using an AR-style
pistol.
These items are intended to improve accuracy by using the operator’s forearm to provide stable
support for the AR-type pistol. ATF has previously determined that attaching the brace to a
firearm does not alter the classification of the firearm or subject the firearm to National Firearms
Act (NFA) control. However, this classification is based upon the use of the device as designed.
When the device is redesigned for use as a shoulder stock on a handgun with a rifled barrel under
16 inches in length, the firearm is properly classified as a firearm under the NFA.
The NFA, 26 USCS § 5845, defines “firearm,” in relevant part, as “a shotgun having a barrel or
barrels of less than 18 inches in length” and “a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16
inches in length.” That section defines both “rifle” and “shotgun” as “a weapon designed or
redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder….” (Emphasis added).
Pursuant to the plain language of the statute, ATF and its predecessor agency have long held that
a pistol with a barrel less than 16 inches in length and an attached shoulder stock is a NFA
“firearm.” For example, in Revenue Ruling 61-45, Luger and Mauser pistols “having a barrel of
less than 16 inches in length with an attachable shoulder stock affixed” were each classified as a
“short barrel rifle…within the purview of the National Firearms Act.”
In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF considered the objective design of the item as
well as the stated purpose of the item. In submitting this device for classification, the designer
noted that
The intent of the buffer tube forearm brace is to facilitate one handed firing of the
AR15 pistol for those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap. It also
performs the function of sufficiently padding the buffer tube in order to reduce
bruising to the forearm while firing with one hand. Sliding and securing the brace
onto ones forearm and latching the Velcro straps, distributes the weight of the
weapon evenly and assures a snug fit. Therefore, it is no longer necessary to
dangerously "muscle" this large pistol during the one handed aiming process, and
recoil is dispersed significantly, resulting in more accurate shooting without
compromising safety or comfort.
In the classification letter of November 26, 2012, ATF noted that a “shooter would insert his or
her forearm into the device while gripping the pistol's handgrip-then tighten the Velcro straps for
additional support and retention. Thus configured, the device provides the shooter with
additional support of a firearm while it is still held and operated with one hand.” When strapped
to the wrist and used as designed, it is clear the device does not allow the firearm to be fired from
the shoulder. Therefore, ATF concluded that, pursuant to the information provided, “the device -2-
is not designed or intended to fire a weapon from the shoulder.” In making the classification
ATF determined that the objective design characteristics of the stabilizing brace supported the
stated intent.
ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun while
shooting with a single hand—the device is not considered a shoulder stock and therefore may be
attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm. However, ATF has received numerous
inquiries regarding alternate uses for this device, including use as a shoulder stock. Because the
NFA defines both rifle and shotgun to include any “weapon designed or redesigned, made or
remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder,” any person who redesigns a stabilizing
brace for use as a shoulder stock makes a NFA firearm when attached to a pistol with a rifled
barrel under 16 inches in length or a handgun with a smooth bore under 18 inches in length.
The GCA does not define the term “redesign” and therefore ATF applies the common meaning.
“Redesign” is defined as “to alter the appearance or function of.” See e.g. Webster’s II New
College Dictionary, Third Ed. (2005). This is not a novel interpretation. For example ATF has
previously advised that an individual possesses a destructive device when possessing antipersonnel
ammunition with an otherwise unregulated 37/38mm flare launcher. See ATF Ruling
95-3. Further, ATF has advised that even use of an unregulated flare and flare launcher as a
weapon results in the making of a NFA weapon. Similarly, ATF has advised that, although
otherwise unregulated, the use of certain nail guns as weapons may result in classification as an
“any other weapon.”
The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock,
and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor
has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary
to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.
Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol
(having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18
inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting
firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA.
If you have any questions about the issues addressed in this letter, you may contact the Firearms
and Ammunition Technology Division at fire_tech@atf.gov or by phone at (304) 616-4300.
Can't say I didn't see that charging in from a mile away. Sucks, but, again, was coming the moment feth-tards started throwing gak up on youtube about it.
I can't see it standing up in court if challenged, as there's been no actual redesign of the firearm itself, only the way someone handles it.
That said, we all expected this at some point. However, by largely the same logic with their definition of "redesign", using any handgun two handed (as a proper shooting grip really should) would also then qualify as a "redesign" it would appear...
Vaktathi wrote: I can't see it standing up in court if challenged, as there's been no actual redesign of the firearm itself, only the way someone handles it.
That said, we all expected this at some point. However, by largely the same logic with their definition of "redesign", using any handgun two handed (as a proper shooting grip really should) would also then qualify as a "redesign" it would appear...
Not unless you add a vertical grip, I don't think.
Vaktathi wrote: I can't see it standing up in court if challenged, as there's been no actual redesign of the firearm itself, only the way someone handles it.
That said, we all expected this at some point. However, by largely the same logic with their definition of "redesign", using any handgun two handed (as a proper shooting grip really should) would also then qualify as a "redesign" it would appear...
Not unless you add a vertical grip, I don't think.
This was (and possibly still is) legal on pistols with an OAL > 26" because they are technically no longer pistols but "firearms" at that point.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: This was (and possibly still is) legal on pistols with an OAL > 26" because they are technically no longer pistols but "firearms" at that point.
I'm aware of the distinction but it should definitely have been pointed out, thanks for that. In a thread where people, especially overseas people are unfamiliar with the vagaries of US law it's probably best to be precise.
Personally, I feel like once you have an OAL of 26", you might as well just get a full length 16" barrel, AR-wise.
Really, the whole thing is pretty stupid if you bother to stop and think about it. I mean, they have laws regarding short-barrel rifles ostensibly because they're concealable, but it's not like you can hide an AR pistol in your back pocket. Even with a 10.5" barrel, an AR-15 with a stock is long enough it won't fit in most common backpacks without being disassembled, and if that's the case then it's easy to fit most any firearm in a large backpack or dufflebag.. The only criminally relevant use of of concealable firearms would apply to actual pistols small enough to hid in the waistband or pockets, and as it turns out the vast majority of crimes are committed with exactly that: cheap, small handguns. From the standpoint of preventing crime, there's no logical reason for short barrel rifle laws in the first place.
Well, there might be something of an issue there for defendants, and, depending on how the ATF makes their argument, the case of the ATF might be stronger than one might initially think.
If the ATF were to bring someone to court and argue that that individual made the gun illegal by their use of it, then the case of the ATF could be hard to make; however, if the ATF argues that the brace was INITIALLY purchased with INTENT to be used to create an SBR and circumvent the tax, the ATF could use a picture of someone firing their "pistol" while shouldering it as evidence of an individual's intent to use the brace as a stock, which makes that specific addition a modification with intent to create an SBR. If they use that argument, the legality of using this brace or the brace itself doesn't change, because they wouldn't be making the argument that improper use is illegal, rather that the improper use is evidence of intent illegally circumvent the tax by creating an SBR without a license.
That all being said, I doubt they will need to take people to court. The fear that they could will probably stop enough people from screwing with this rather than risking being taken to court.
Stonebeard thanks for the analysis. Here's an issue to ponder - say you buy a pistol and Sig brace it and never fire it from the shoulder. Now you hand it to a friend and he shoulders it. What happens now?
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Stonebeard thanks for the analysis. Here's an issue to ponder - say you buy a pistol and Sig brace it and never fire it from the shoulder. Now you hand it to a friend and he shoulders it. What happens now?
The ruling is totally a crazy can of worms!
Shooting an SBR isn't illegal, as far as I know, so the ATF couldn't do anything to your friend. If they were going to charge anyone there, they would have to charge the owner, and then they would have to make the argument that your friend firing your pistol improperly proves that you, as the owner, originally purchased the weapon with the intent to create an SBR and avoid taxation and registration, despite having no evidence of you using the weapon improperly. The argument would be an ungodly cluster-feth for them to make.
To be perfectly honest - and, note that I am saying this as a person who disagrees vehemently with the laws' very existence to begin with - according to the spirit of the law and the obvious outcome, they probably should have never given sig the go ahead to begin with. This opinion, essentially, is how they have to rule on this brace given what every moron who sent letter to them has asked. If asked, they HAVE to say that to purchase this brace with the intent (which is KEY here) to shoulder it is illegal unless you apply for a license. Why? Because intent is everything in the law, and, if asked if it ok the purchase this brace and shoulder it you are at least implying that your intent is to purchase the brace to create an SBR, which means they would (and did) have to say that that would be illegal, because to say otherwise would be to give at least tacit approval to tax evasion, which they cannot do. But, yeah, it's a cluster-feth.
EDIT: It should be noted that I am saying this without any formal legal training, so EVERYTHING I have said could be complete bs
It doesn't have to be ugly, there's quite literally eleventy billion and seven ways to configure an AR platform rifle or pistol, for example this lovely engraved, color case hardened and wood furniture number from Turnbull.
It's a one of kind and sold for somewhere over 100k.
You can do similar set ups on your own for significantly less... and far more usability though. Wood AR stock sets for example are becoming quite popular.
d-usa wrote: Thanks for the feedback everyone. I know the AR-15 is popular, but I just think it's fugly.
There are so many after market parts for it that you can set it up to look how you want. Is there a particular part of the design you feel is off putting?
d-usa wrote: Thanks for the feedback everyone. I know the AR-15 is popular, but I just think it's fugly.
There are so many after market parts for it that you can set it up to look how you want. Is there a particular part of the design you feel is off putting?
It's pretty much the whole "tacticool" look of them that you usually see, I don't know if I can describe it any better .
I like the old fashioned look of the M4s and others like it better, but after looking at some of the wood stock options for the AR-15s that have been pointed out it becomes less of a problem.
Youknow that's not something you don't see in post-apocalyptic settings much. How come in the Walking Dead nobody ever scavenges a bright pink rifle with stars on the side?
d-usa wrote: It's pretty much the whole "tacticool" look of them that you usually see, I don't know if I can describe it any better .
I like the old fashioned look of the M4s and others like it better, but after looking at some of the wood stock options for the AR-15s that have been pointed out it becomes less of a problem.
Gotcha I can see the utility for adding features on an AR15, but some people really take it to extremes (and then keep going). There seem to be quite a few wooden furniture kits;
Wyrmalla wrote: Youknow that's not something you don't see in post-apocalyptic settings much. How come in the Walking Dead nobody ever scavenges a bright pink rifle with stars on the side?
d-usa wrote: Thanks for the feedback everyone. I know the AR-15 is popular, but I just think it's fugly.
There are so many after market parts for it that you can set it up to look how you want. Is there a particular part of the design you feel is off putting?
It's pretty much the whole "tacticool" look of them that you usually see, I don't know if I can describe it any better .
I like the old fashioned look of the M4s and others like it better, but after looking at some of the wood stock options for the AR-15s that have been pointed out it becomes less of a problem.
See, the tacticool look of a decked out AR15 is exactly what I like about them. Like this:
d-usa wrote: Thanks for the feedback everyone. I know the AR-15 is popular, but I just think it's fugly.
There are so many after market parts for it that you can set it up to look how you want. Is there a particular part of the design you feel is off putting?
It's pretty much the whole "tacticool" look of them that you usually see, I don't know if I can describe it any better .
I like the old fashioned look of the M4s and others like it better, but after looking at some of the wood stock options for the AR-15s that have been pointed out it becomes less of a problem.
You would have loved the M14 I saw at Gander last night. Beautiful wood, scope, bipod. Mmm it was sexy. They also had 3 Colt 1911A1s that were well used, but a piece of history!
Tacticool is often an expensive look to go for, particularly when most of said equipment will only ever be used f a controlled shooting lane putting holes in paper. Not that it doesn't look cool, but it's a lot of money for a look and equipment that isn't going to see routine use.
Something like the above AR with underslung flashlight, IR illuminator, magnifier and eotech, etc, is a *very* expensive piece of kit. Easily $2k+ on top of the rifle.
Different strokes for different folks I guess, about the most I'll put on most guns is a red dot or a scope if warranted.
Personally however, I'm more of a fan of Glorious People's Rifle in the first place.
Vaktathi wrote: Tacticool is often an expensive look to go for, particularly when most of said equipment will only ever be used f a controlled shooting lane putting holes in paper. Not that it doesn't look cool, but it's a lot of money for a look and equipment that isn't going to see routine use.
Something like the above AR with underslung flashlight, IR illuminator, magnifier and eotech, etc, is a *very* expensive piece of kit. Easily $2k+ on top of the rifle.
Different strokes for different folks I guess, about the most I'll put on most guns is a red dot or a scope if warranted.
Personally however, I'm more of a fan of Glorious People's Rifle in the first place.
Vaktathi wrote: Tacticool is often an expensive look to go for, particularly when most of said equipment will only ever be used f a controlled shooting lane putting holes in paper. Not that it doesn't look cool, but it's a lot of money for a look and equipment that isn't going to see routine use.
Something like the above AR with underslung flashlight, IR illuminator, magnifier and eotech, etc, is a *very* expensive piece of kit. Easily $2k+ on top of the rifle.
Different strokes for different folks I guess, about the most I'll put on most guns is a red dot or a scope if warranted.
Personally however, I'm more of a fan of Glorious People's Rifle in the first place.
Same can be said about all the "extras" people put on their cars.
Vaktathi wrote: Tacticool is often an expensive look to go for, particularly when most of said equipment will only ever be used f a controlled shooting lane putting holes in paper. Not that it doesn't look cool, but it's a lot of money for a look and equipment that isn't going to see routine use.
Something like the above AR with underslung flashlight, IR illuminator, magnifier and eotech, etc, is a *very* expensive piece of kit. Easily $2k+ on top of the rifle.
Different strokes for different folks I guess, about the most I'll put on most guns is a red dot or a scope if warranted.
Personally however, I'm more of a fan of Glorious People's Rifle in the first place.
Same can be said about all the "extras" people put on their cars.
It's all about hobbies.
If it's about looks then I agreed it's expensive. For me it's all about the capabilities those tools give you - hip shooting heads at 100 meters in pitch black is nothing to scoff at, and well worth the money if you ever consider the potential need to use it on man or beast.
For trained military personnel in on deployment in combat, I can see the point of paying for such equipment.
However, typically, at least in my experience, most people couldn't reliably hit a head sized target at 100 meters in full daylight, firing from the shoulder, with off the shelf ammo in a mil-spec barrel (and M855 in such a barrel averaging ~4 MOA anyway), without a rest, and especially if the target were moving (or if both they and the target were moving, also most soldiers can't either, that's why center-mass is prioritized). At night, even through IR, probably even fewer could reliably hit such a target, and fewer still live anywhere where any beasts of sufficient size to worry about exist. I can't even imagine a realistic situation where someone could legally take a shot at human a hundred meters away (and again, even if possible, two or three shots to center mass is probably both easier and more productive) and especially at night.
As such, most of that kind of equipment is usually just for looks and cool factor, which is fine, not saying people shouldn't be able to do that if they want to, I can appreciate the capabilities of such equipment and the aesthetic qualities, and I guess there's always people that want to be equipped for the *unrealistic* situations, but I just find it somewhat overboard for most shooters, at least any that I've seen in real life. Going back to the car example, my opinions are much the same.
I'd much rather have the functionality of a giggly-switch myself
d-usa wrote: What are some popular non AR-15 semi-automatic rifles on here? I've got a few different bolt-actions and I'm thinking about branching out and getting my 1st semi-auto. Most likely going to be a .22 for blinking, but I'm keeping my options open.
For .22s: Your big ones are Ruger 10/22, and Remlins (Marlins and Remingtons which are now one company). I think CZ may make one as well. these are typically either mag fed or tube fed. These are also typically FUN AS HECK TO SHOOT One can get a cheap semi auto .22LR for less than $150, with a $50 scope and you can have more fun than a wiener dog sitting below a bunch of teenagers eating pizza.
There are also rifles now chambered in .17 hornet which is a newer rimfire round. People like them but I don't know much about them.
To name a few non .22LRs AR-10 types (7.62 rifles) AK types SKS types Battle rifle types (M1 - aka M14), HKs, FN and FN clones. newer generation 5.56 types: SIGs, HKs, Tavors M1 carbine dedicated semi-auto hunting rifles (Remington as an example) with 5ish round capacities. These are more rare.
Just a random thought D, but if you got an AR15 in .22 and you wanted to diversify what you shoot would you be able to switch out uppers to accept 5.56?
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Just a random thought D, but if you got an AR15 in .22 and you wanted to diversify what you shoot would you be able to switch out uppers to accept 5.56?
I'm not sure there are too many ARs in .22 this would work for. I know the Colt/Umarex I have and posted a picture of could not do this. The rifle looks like an AR, but the innards/working parts function a lot differently. Most people I know of that want dual functionality start with their AR in 5.56/.223 and get a conversion kit (usually consists of a special bolt and magazine). You can get a .22 upper, but I think they are more expensive than the typical kit.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Spear, tent pole, boat oar, war club, the nugget is like paracord. Unlimited uses.
There's no excuse not to own a Mosin. They're so cheap and so useful.
I go for commie rifles myself, but I love optics, so my AK has a red dot and nothing else.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Spear, tent pole, boat oar, war club, the nugget is like paracord. Unlimited uses.
There's no excuse not to own a Mosin. They're so cheap and so useful.
I go for commie rifles myself, but I love optics, so my AK has a red dot and nothing else.
Likewise, I've got a red dot on my Arsenal SAM7R, but by Waffen Werks 74 just uses irons for now.
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Just a random thought D, but if you got an AR15 in .22 and you wanted to diversify what you shoot would you be able to switch out uppers to accept 5.56?
I'm not sure there are too many ARs in .22 this would work for. I know the Colt/Umarex I have and posted a picture of could not do this. The rifle looks like an AR, but the innards/working parts function a lot differently. Most people I know of that want dual functionality start with their AR in 5.56/.223 and get a conversion kit (usually consists of a special bolt and magazine). You can get a .22 upper, but I think they are more expensive than the typical kit.
you dont need to even swap out uppers as cpt jake said
one of my biggest gripes about canuckistan is that I cannot drop my .22 conversion kit into my AR and go gopher/squirrleing while still using the same gun for yotes/boar/ect.
basically you can take a standard 5.56 nato or .223 Caliber AR-15, and buy a drop in bolt and a magazine that let you shoot .22LR out of it.
cost like 150$, and I can swap between the two in about 20 seconds
its awesome, works well, accurate, ect. just takes a bit longer to clean out after .22lr but thats just how .22 works
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Just a random thought D, but if you got an AR15 in .22 and you wanted to diversify what you shoot would you be able to switch out uppers to accept 5.56?
Dreadclaw, as others have mentioned there are .22 LR conversion kits for AR15s that work great.
I've had one by Spike's Tactical and three by CMMG. The CMMG kits win by a MILE, and CMMG makes their own mags.
)
I'm going to need another gun safe... 
