Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:

 Adeptekon wrote:
Move to another state.

In my scenario, I'm sure the property settlement will still apply.

Some years ago I was browsing in a gun shop and found several high-quality firearms on consignment for outstandingly low prices. I asked what was wrong with them and the salesperson just laughed.

"The owner got them from her ex-husband in a divorce settlement, and she wants to sell them as quickly as possible without regard for price. She wanted them even cheaper, but I told her people would think they were broken or stolen. Do you want one, because I don't think they will be here by the end of the week."

Alas, I was short on funds, so I could not profit by the poor fellow's misfortune.

I'd have to check the castle laws wherever I did move. Not going anywhere there isn't one

 cuda1179 wrote:
Actually, yes, there were such things as belt fed revolvers. They never caught on, for obvious reasons, but they were an experiment to get higher capacity into a handgun before someone thought up the stacked magazine.

For a long time, most revolvers were belt-fed. You emptied the cylinder, and grabbed the extra cartridges on your belt.

Rewatching a YouTube about the Puckle Gun.

If money was no object and I could afford not only the original, but commission a working replica, and a suitably experienced lawyer for the legal side?

Puckle Gun is my jam. Low tech High Tech. An innovation so far ahead of its time the concept was solid but the execution was a bit wonky, and by the time everything caught up it was obsolete.

That looks Steampunk.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Rewatching a YouTube about the Puckle Gun.

If money was no object and I could afford not only the original, but commission a working replica, and a suitably experienced lawyer for the legal side?

Puckle Gun is my jam. Low tech High Tech. An innovation so far ahead of its time the concept was solid but the execution was a bit wonky, and by the time everything caught up it was obsolete.

I don't think it would be that hard to fabricate one. I think there was a British dude some years ago who published book on how to make a submachine gun out of standard hardware store bits.

A smoothbore pepperbox would be pretty easy as well, mostly a question of knowing what pressures your barrels can take and keeping the cartridge loads in line with that.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Rewatching a YouTube about the Puckle Gun.

If money was no object and I could afford not only the original, but commission a working replica, and a suitably experienced lawyer for the legal side?

Puckle Gun is my jam. Low tech High Tech. An innovation so far ahead of its time the concept was solid but the execution was a bit wonky, and by the time everything caught up it was obsolete.

As with many early repeating firearms, and this held true even up to WW2, they were held back by the miserly attitudes of the world's governments when it came to ammunition. Paying for ammo was like pulling teeth in wartime, and in peacetime it was out of the question.

IIRC the training allotment for the British army in the 1800s was 5 rounds a year. So trying to convince the treasury to buy a gun that shoots how many rounds per minute was basically impossible.

Anyone have any experience collecting military surplus stuff, especially buying online? Any advice on how to make sure you aren't getting a broken bunch of scrap metal that looks good in a photo but doesn't work or is unsafe to fire? If I'm going to make a boating trip I'd like to make sure I'm at least sending good guns to the bottom of the lake!

If you get a curios & relics license, they can be shipped to your door rather than an ffl.

 Grey Templar wrote:
IIRC the training allotment for the British army in the 1800s was 5 rounds a year. So trying to convince the treasury to buy a gun that shoots how many rounds per minute was basically impossible.

Attitudes changed in the 1850s when they introduced the rifle-musket. Having a weapon capable of hitting out to 800 yards turned out to be pointless if no-one knew how to shoot!

So they setup the school of musketry at Hythe and placed a great deal of emphasis on weapon training, in particular range estimation owing to the parabolic trajectory of the bullets.

And there was an annual musketry qualification for each soldier where 90 rounds were fired.

Ork-en Man wrote:
If you get a curios & relics license, they can be shipped to your door rather than an ffl.

Right, but how do you make sure you're buying a good one? Like, my former M1 carbine wants a friend to keep it company at the bottom of the lake but I live in an AWB state so my options are kind of limited. A Johnson rifle would be cool but how do I make sure I'm not spending all that money on a broken gun? It's rare enough that finding one locally where I can check it out in person is wishful thinking. Am I missing something or do people just buy and hope it works?

 Slinky wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
IIRC the training allotment for the British army in the 1800s was 5 rounds a year. So trying to convince the treasury to buy a gun that shoots how many rounds per minute was basically impossible.

Attitudes changed in the 1850s when they introduced the rifle-musket. Having a weapon capable of hitting out to 800 yards turned out to be pointless if no-one knew how to shoot!

So they setup the school of musketry at Hythe and placed a great deal of emphasis on weapon training, in particular range estimation owing to the parabolic trajectory of the bullets.

And there was an annual musketry qualification for each soldier where 90 rounds were fired.

Hythe is just down the road from me. And has a nice goth shop. Maybe I’ll go see if I can find!

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Ork-en Man wrote:
If you get a curios & relics license, they can be shipped to your door rather than an ffl.

Right, but how do you make sure you're buying a good one? Like, my former M1 carbine wants a friend to keep it company at the bottom of the lake but I live in an AWB state so my options are kind of limited. A Johnson rifle would be cool but how do I make sure I'm not spending all that money on a broken gun? It's rare enough that finding one locally where I can check it out in person is wishful thinking. Am I missing something or do people just buy and hope it works?

Are there no consumer protection laws in the US? In the UK, we have an absolute right to return faulty goods for a full refund within a certain time period. If the gun was sold as functional and safe but wasn't, it would be returnable.

 Slinky wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
IIRC the training allotment for the British army in the 1800s was 5 rounds a year. So trying to convince the treasury to buy a gun that shoots how many rounds per minute was basically impossible.

Attitudes changed in the 1850s when they introduced the rifle-musket. Having a weapon capable of hitting out to 800 yards turned out to be pointless if no-one knew how to shoot!

So they setup the school of musketry at Hythe and placed a great deal of emphasis on weapon training, in particular range estimation owing to the parabolic trajectory of the bullets.

And there was an annual musketry qualification for each soldier where 90 rounds were fired.

What? Only in the 1850s?!? No Shooting competitions to facilitate training beforehand?

 Haighus wrote:
Are there no consumer protection laws in the US? In the UK, we have an absolute right to return faulty goods for a full refund within a certain time period. If the gun was sold as functional and safe but wasn't, it would be returnable.

For new stuff, yeah, it would be under warranty. But from what I've seen most historical pieces are sold labeled "as-is, collector value only, function not guaranteed" or similar because the dealer doesn't want to deal with verifying function on 50-100+ year old relics. Most of them will work fine but AFAIK you wouldn't have any legal rights if it doesn't.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Slinky wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
IIRC the training allotment for the British army in the 1800s was 5 rounds a year. So trying to convince the treasury to buy a gun that shoots how many rounds per minute was basically impossible.

Attitudes changed in the 1850s when they introduced the rifle-musket. Having a weapon capable of hitting out to 800 yards turned out to be pointless if no-one knew how to shoot!

So they setup the school of musketry at Hythe and placed a great deal of emphasis on weapon training, in particular range estimation owing to the parabolic trajectory of the bullets.

And there was an annual musketry qualification for each soldier where 90 rounds were fired.

What? Only in the 1850s?!? No Shooting competitions to facilitate training beforehand?

My era of interest basically starts in the 1850s, so I am not totally sure what happened beforehand, but I am pretty certain there was minimal shooting practice for the line infantry.

 Slinky wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
IIRC the training allotment for the British army in the 1800s was 5 rounds a year. So trying to convince the treasury to buy a gun that shoots how many rounds per minute was basically impossible.

Attitudes changed in the 1850s when they introduced the rifle-musket. Having a weapon capable of hitting out to 800 yards turned out to be pointless if no-one knew how to shoot!

So they setup the school of musketry at Hythe and placed a great deal of emphasis on weapon training, in particular range estimation owing to the parabolic trajectory of the bullets.

And there was an annual musketry qualification for each soldier where 90 rounds were fired.

To add on to this, the more effective Swiss, German, and Italian mercenary arquebusiers and musketeers of the 1500s-1600s (Italian Wars through the Thirty Years War- basically the heyday of Renaissance mercenaries) trained and practiced extensively, including live fire practice at ranges as high as 400yds. At the Battle of Mühlberg in 1547, Spanish musketeers achieved decisive fire across the span of the Elbe river, over 200yds. All that pop-history stuff about muskets being effective to 50yds is pretty much garbage.

But the value of marksmanship declined as mercenary companies gave way to professional standing militaries, and the expense of live-fire was seen as excessive on top of the expense of maintaining a standing army. Jagers and other light infantry of the 1700s-1800s, often armed with rifled muskets, did practice, but the basic line infantry typically did not. And so you get infantry in the American Civil War, armed with rifled Springfield muskets and Minie balls capable of significant range, going into battle having never actually fired live ammunition before. I have read multiple accounts of such units lining up at as little as 30-50yds and firing at one another without effect, despite the mechanical capabilities of their weapons being far superior to those of centuries prior.

The development of individual marksmanship as a basic requirement for infantry coincided with the adoption of breechloading centerfire rifles in the mid-to-late-1800s, the decline of formation fighting necessitating an ability to engage point targets, and the widespread acceptance that future battles would be decided at far longer ranges than those of the century prior.

 catbarf wrote:

 Slinky wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
IIRC the training allotment for the British army in the 1800s was 5 rounds a year. So trying to convince the treasury to buy a gun that shoots how many rounds per minute was basically impossible.

Attitudes changed in the 1850s when they introduced the rifle-musket. Having a weapon capable of hitting out to 800 yards turned out to be pointless if no-one knew how to shoot!

So they setup the school of musketry at Hythe and placed a great deal of emphasis on weapon training, in particular range estimation owing to the parabolic trajectory of the bullets.

And there was an annual musketry qualification for each soldier where 90 rounds were fired.

To add on to this, the more effective Swiss, German, and Italian mercenary arquebusiers and musketeers of the 1500s-1600s (Italian Wars through the Thirty Years War- basically the heyday of Renaissance mercenaries) trained and practiced extensively, including live fire practice at ranges as high as 400yds. At the Battle of Mühlberg in 1547, Spanish musketeers achieved decisive fire across the span of the Elbe river, over 200yds. All that pop-history stuff about muskets being effective to 50yds is pretty much garbage.

But the value of marksmanship declined as mercenary companies gave way to professional standing militaries, and the expense of live-fire was seen as excessive on top of the expense of maintaining a standing army. Jagers and other light infantry of the 1700s-1800s, often armed with rifled muskets, did practice, but the basic line infantry typically did not. And so you get infantry in the American Civil War, armed with rifled Springfield muskets and Minie balls capable of significant range, going into battle having never actually fired live ammunition before. I have read multiple accounts of such units lining up at as little as 30-50yds and firing at one another without effect, despite the mechanical capabilities of their weapons being far superior to those of centuries prior.

The development of individual marksmanship as a basic requirement for infantry coincided with the adoption of breechloading centerfire rifles in the mid-to-late-1800s, the decline of formation fighting necessitating an ability to engage point targets, and the widespread acceptance that future battles would be decided at far longer ranges than those of the century prior.

Funnily enough in switzerland it was pretty much shooting competitions for certain time periods tieing us together after the reformation. Therefore competition shooting and drilling of large militia forces never really stopped especially since it was into the 19th century a monetary concern that you could export infantry.
That was why i was so surprised.

How do I store my firearms (can't find the link to where this started, for whatever reason)

For me and my wife, its just a question of being able to get to them quickly. No grandkids around, or any other reason to have to worry about anything but burglars.

So I keep them in an unlocked plastic gun box, and spritz them slightly with gun oil every week or so.

 Haighus wrote:

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Ork-en Man wrote:
If you get a curios & relics license, they can be shipped to your door rather than an ffl.

Right, but how do you make sure you're buying a good one? Like, my former M1 carbine wants a friend to keep it company at the bottom of the lake but I live in an AWB state so my options are kind of limited. A Johnson rifle would be cool but how do I make sure I'm not spending all that money on a broken gun? It's rare enough that finding one locally where I can check it out in person is wishful thinking. Am I missing something or do people just buy and hope it works?

Are there no consumer protection laws in the US? In the UK, we have an absolute right to return faulty goods for a full refund within a certain time period. If the gun was sold as functional and safe but wasn't, it would be returnable.

For new products, sure.

Used stuff is pretty much sold as is. And when you are talking military surplus it is definitely beyond any sort of liability. Now if you bought from a large company that is handling surplus they might have return policies and such, but for private individuals you won't have such protections. You could potentially sue them for fraud if they clearly scammed you, but that would require an egregiously bad case.

For me personally, I wouldn't buy a surplus firearm without having examined it in person if it wasn't coming from a reputable importer.

If you get the gun and it's just a jam'o'matic you're not going to get anywhere claiming foul play. Its a used milsurp gun and was sold as such. Same thing with like buying a used car. You can't buy a car from someone and then go after them complaining if the oil pan leaks or the tire is bald and needs replacing. It was a used car.

This is actually a longstanding tenant of common law and would hold up pretty much anywhere that uses that as a base for your legal system. Outside of being able to prove you were actively deceived as to the nature of what you were buying you have no recourse.

I'm not a collector, but if I were, I'd just look for local auctions. If you got any rural papers in your area there's always a bunch of estate auctions with all sorts of guns farmers have collected over the years. Some of the auctions do have websites though.

Okay, in order...

By Napoleonic times, most armies fired one live round annually (so they knew how it felt) and then several blank rounds to get used to the mechanics and BOOM.

The British were unique in that they actually did target practice and their army got several times as many practice rounds as the Continental rivals. Since the emphasis was on rigid formations and mass volleys, individual marksmanship was not something anyone worried about - except for the British.

Now, as for collecting an antique, the first requirement is research. Know what it is you want to buy, especially the features, weaknesses, quirks and desirable traits. Did the army using it have corrosive ammo? If so, were they disciplined enough to clean them properly?

The best way to be safe is to handle the item personally at a store or show. I would not go online unless you really know what to look for. Among the most important elements is the condition of the bore. Always check this. Always.

If buying online, demand either clear photos or a detailed description of its condition. If the description is inaccurate, it amounts to fraud.

Depending on what you are collecting, other features may be important, but barrels are kind of a big deal. For example, you can generally replace a firing pin and spring without anyone even noticing. Firing pins and springs are generally not serialized, so it's not going to hurt the value of an "all match" weapon.*

Other parts (like magazines) may be serialized, but you get the point. I would not buy online until you've had good success collecting in person.

*Nambu Type 14s do have serialized firing pins, and they are notoriously fragile. If you have a serialized one, take it out and shoot it with a modern replacement.

Another idiot question, based purely on the media I consume.

On-screen, hunters are shown to wear camo, and a high vis vest of some kind.

Now in that, I get the high vis vest is to be immediately noticeable to other hunters in the area. For the obvious reason. Which makes the camo fatigues seemingly redundant, and maybe the result of Stupid Writing.

But Dakka? What is your truth of the matter? Up to an including studies and that which suggest animals don’t see high vis colours the same way we do.

It depends on the animal.

Humans normally have red, green, and blue cones in our eyes. Deer(and related animals) only have blue and green cones. Thus anything that is red appears green or brown to them. Interestingly, for animals like this the color blue is the worst color to wear as it lights up like neon colors do to us and doesn't occur naturally as much. Jeans would look like a blazing blue shimmer to them.

Birds on the other hand see in color just like we do so they can see hunter orange just fine.

I believe dogs are the same. They don't see in black and white technically, but only in blues and greens and shades thereof.

Hunter orange is just the convention for us because it is both bright and unnatural so the person with it stands out. Very few things in nature have a neon orange color.

This picture illustrates what a deer actually sees by filtering out all red light from the image on the right vs the normal one on the left.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Another idiot question, based purely on the media I consume.

On-screen, hunters are shown to wear camo, and a high vis vest of some kind.

Now in that, I get the high vis vest is to be immediately noticeable to other hunters in the area. For the obvious reason. Which makes the camo fatigues seemingly redundant, and maybe the result of Stupid Writing.

But Dakka? What is your truth of the matter? Up to an including studies and that which suggest animals don’t see high vis colours the same way we do.

Many game animals do not have full color vision, but they can see patterns quite well. Thus a blaze orange camo pattern is effective.

Exactly, an orange and black camo pattern just looks like a green/brown and black pattern to them.

This would actually be an interesting premise for an alien conflict. Humans are fighting aliens, but the aliens lack one color receptor, thus they can be fooled by camo patterns with that color while normal humans can see friends just fine.

Cheers dudes.

I’m gonna chalk this one up to “lazy writing”, where the hunter is wearing regular camo, but with a high vis vest over the top.

The sample photos and explanations are satisfactory to my idiot curiosity

Who else here is a lefty?

Politically or hands?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Politically or hands?

The later, won't open the rabbit hole on the former so as not to get the topic shutdown.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Cheers dudes.

I’m gonna chalk this one up to “lazy writing”, where the hunter is wearing regular camo, but with a high vis vest over the top.

The sample photos and explanations are satisfactory to my idiot curiosity

No, it's not lazy writing, I happen to have one of those vests. Not all seasons require high visibility (archery, for example, does not). So rather than have multiple outfits, just wear a vest when you need it. This is particularly true if you are hunting small game, where you are going to be moving so concealment isn't as much of a priority.

The vest also lets you have flexibility in terms of clothing type underneath - is it a warm fall day or a crisp, cold January morning?

My particular vest is designed for small game hunting, so it has a game pouch and the pockets are designed to carry shotgun shells.