I'm 21 (ITT: Guns)
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=183874
Printed Date: 12 December 2025 at 3:46pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: I'm 21 (ITT: Guns)
Posted By: DeTrevni
Subject: I'm 21 (ITT: Guns)
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 5:00pm
|
So today is my birfday. Yay, 21! Now, I didn't feel the need to get smashed, so I asked myself, "Hey, how can I celebrate?" So I visited the local pawn shop. :D    It's an FNP-9. Yeah, I know, "ewww, plastic," and "ewww, 9mm." But this really is a comfy gun. It fits me very well, is light and has all the basic features I've been looking for. Brand new, came with three 16 rd. magazines and interchangeable back straps, all for a total of $630. It was $580 plus taxes. But why 9mm? Well, this is my first "true" handgun. My dad has a .38, and I've got black powder, but this is my first auto. I figure 9mm is a good way to get introduced to it, and 9mm comes cheap. Can't wait to take her to the range! ------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell" 
|
Replies:
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 5:20pm
|
My first two pistols were 9mm. A S&W 909 (horrible first trigger pull, but comfy) and a Glock 17. I got rid of both and now have a Glock 23 .40. There is nothing wrong with 9mm as long as you have the right ammo. I like the Golden Sabers, but my buddy who used to be a cop swears by the Hydrashoks.
BTW: Happy Birthday! ------------- 
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 5:29pm
|
You could trade that for a hell of a tattoo. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 5:31pm
Especially a self-defense tattoo! -------------
|
brihard wrote:Posted By: Snipa69
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 5:50pm
|
Very nice purchase. I just recently picked up my FNP 40. I have a glock 19 9mm and wanted something new and SA/DA so that's what lead me to the FNP. It's actually a very solid piece and the composite is really nice, and it is quite comfy for a bigger hand. ------------- http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://img456.imageshack.us/img456/857/sig9ac6cs1mj.jpg - |
Posted By: impulse!!
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 5:52pm
|
The only problem I have with 9mm is finding ammo right now. Seeing you live in TX and can't open carry, do you plan on getting a CCW? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 5:55pm
-------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:04pm
| I still want to shoot a handgun :( |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:07pm
You could always defect to the US. -------------
|
Posted By: Rofl_Mao
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:10pm
| how old do you have to be to shoot? |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:13pm
|
I still need to fix up my 1911.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Koolit32
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:18pm
| Ewww, plastic. |
Posted By: DeTrevni
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:21pm
|
Yes, I do intend to acquire a CHL. That was some of the motivation behind this gun. It's light and fairly compact, while still comfy for my larger hands. And here it's actually easier to find 9mm than it is .45. MUCH cheaper too. More range time was another motivator. Also, this thing has a HUGE magwell. Quickly loading a mag is a cinch.
------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"
|
Posted By: impulse!!
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:29pm
Its easier to find than 45 by far. But I have seen it's easier to find 40 and 357 sig right now. The next gun I want will be a pain to find ammo for.  -------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:34pm
Five seveN? ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: impulse!!
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:39pm
|
Yes.
-------------
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:40pm
|
God I hated the five seven in CS. SIG P228 headshots ftw.
-------------
|
Posted By: impulse!!
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:43pm
Have you shot it in real life? -------------
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 6:57pm
|
OMG COPKILLAR!
------------- 
|
Posted By: impulse!!
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 7:13pm
Haha. -------------
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 8:08pm
Obviously not, else I wouldn't have made the CS reference. -------------
|
Posted By: impulse!!
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 8:12pm
Touche' I have never met more a liberal from Tenesse in my life. -------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 8:23pm
|
How many people have shot a Five Seven? They're not exactly common.
------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 9:55pm
| Haven't shot the Five-Seven, but the P-90 is sweet IRL. |
Posted By: merc
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 10:33pm
|
im thinking about getting a 5.7mm upper for my AR... but thats another topic...
sweet deal on getting a pistol... DA only or DA/SA? FN makes some nice firearms. 9mm is for girls and all but im sure you will have fun with it non the less ;) ------------- saving the world, one warship at a time. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 10:40pm
|
5.7mm? That's about the last round I've heard of people picking up. 5.45 for cheap shooting, and 4.6mm pops up occasionally, but I'm assuming you'll be paying an arm and a leg for the upper and ammo if you go 5.7. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 10:55pm
|
Pariel, 5.7mm isn't an AR round. It's proprietary to FN, used in the Five seveN pistol and the P-90 SMG. It's a pistol round, that happens to be shaped like a rifle round. Generally deemed effective out to about 200yds, and better than most at penetrating armour. Talon arms does make a 5.7mm upper, but it doesn't take normal AR mags, isntead the upper is set up to feed from the horizontal P90 mags. Pretty cool actually. http://www.talonarms.com/talonarms/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=490&products_id=1427&zenid=4b605a356bd42d82724c6c48fd439ce3 - http://www.talonarms.com/talonarms/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=490&products_id=1427&zenid=4b605a356bd42d82724c6c48fd439ce3 ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 11:14pm
Welcome to Memphis? -------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 11:24pm
I fully understand that. Those are all reasons I was wondering why Merc wanted an upper in that caliber. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 11:39pm
Oh hell, didn't see his post. My bad. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 11:40pm
|
I hate you guys. I always come on here and see threads about new guns and they make me want to buy one.
------------- 
|
Posted By: DeTrevni
Date Posted: 09 December 2009 at 11:54pm
DA/SA. A few of the reasons I chose this one over the XD was that it has an external hammer and a decocker. Overall, I just like it so much better. Good size too. Also, I can change the size of the back strap to fit my hand. :D I was originally going to get a Springfield 1911, but that gun is just not practical. But oh my God are 1911's sweet... ------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 10 December 2009 at 1:21pm
Step 1) Find a cheap flight to DC Step 2) Link up with Shorty and me Step 3) Go to the MGWMA range with Shorty and me Step 4) Shoot almost EVERYTHING you've ever wanted to shoot Step 5) Link up with me and my buddy Skip Step 6) Go to the Quantico Club range at Quantico USMC Base Step 7) Shoot anything that Shorty and I didn't have Step 8) Fly back to the frozen north and start a militia now that you're obsessed with guns due to your proximity to Shorty and me. Seriously, if you come down and give me enough notice, we can shoot machine guns, anti-tank guns, etc etc. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 10 December 2009 at 6:10pm
|
The FNP 9 is a good gun.
Don't listen to the people moan about 9x19mm. It is only really sucky in FMJ configuration. And just about any round, including the kill everything it sees .45ACP, sucks in terms of terminal ballistics with FMj ammo. Modern hollowpoint ammo means the 9x19mm is up there kicking ass with the others, and you get to carry more of them, and they recoil less. Gratz on the gats. Happy Birthday for the big day, when was it? KBK |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 10 December 2009 at 6:33pm
I AM COMING TO DC! ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: FROG MAN
Date Posted: 10 December 2009 at 8:57pm
|
I will never understand Americans and guns, but I got a few questions. Do you buy hand guns as a sport/hobby to take to the range? or do you buy them for protection? If you buy it for the range, what makes a gun good? Consistency? accuracy? But then why would it matter if the gun was light or small? Do you feel guns are a good idea to carry for protection? I am sure everyone has different opinions, but I seriously dont have a clue, I am 22 and I have seen maybe 2 hunting rifles and a shotgun once in my life, thats it. ------------- <1 meg sig = bad> |
Posted By: merc
Date Posted: 10 December 2009 at 11:13pm
|
i buy guns for both sport/hobby and protection
IMO a good range gun (plinker) is good if it is reliable and ammos cheap yes, i feel guns are a good idea to carry for protection*. if im not travaling to, from, or on a military base i have a pistol on my hip. i keep a loaded rifle next to my bed for home defense *IMO police are only good for paperwork, you might get lucky and have one there at the right time, but when it comes down to it you need to protect yourself first and then let the police come and write a report about it... imagine having one of your friends stand just inside the front door with a paintball gun, imagine calling 911 (or what ever you have up there) and tell them you have an armed intruder in the house. do you think: A) you will have a welt and a few angry cops at the house B) your friend will be stopped by the police ------------- saving the world, one warship at a time. |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 10 December 2009 at 11:19pm
This is why you live in a communist country. -------------
|
Posted By: FROG MAN
Date Posted: 10 December 2009 at 11:24pm
do you buy into the argument that guns cause more crime/violence then they prevent? If not, do you disagree with Canada's gun control? Do you believe a country like Canada would be better off to have the same gun laws as the US? ------------- <1 meg sig = bad> |
Posted By: DeTrevni
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 1:24am
I buy guns (this may be my first handgun, but far from my first gun) as a hobby primarily. I see shooting much like I see archery. I enjoy competing against my friends and getting better. But I also purchased this handgun with the idea of protection. I do intend on acquiring my CHL, and I'd like to carry. It's just another tool. As for America's gun policy, I don't know. I feel because people that can hurt me and my family have easy access to weapons, I probably should as well. What does that mean? It means that if weapons were extremely controlled, both legal and not, I wouldn't feel the necessity to arm. As a firearm enthusiast, I wouldn't like that, but it's the way it is. But guns and weaponry have become so ingrained into America, for better or worse, that it is more beneficial for me to own and be trained in using firearms than it would be if I didn't. In places like Canada and the UK, where guns are extremely controlled, the necessity to arm just isn't there. However, I live in America, and, as sad as it may be, I feel it is a necessity. I figured I'd act on it while that necessity is still a right. It's just a difference of culture. It's how we are, and that's not going to change for a long while. That being said, there are situations where having a gun just makes things worse. It's up to me to decide when and where to use it, if it ever should come to that. I believe I'm responsible enough to judge properly. Especially after CHL classes. ------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 2:04am
Personally, and I think this applies to a lot of owners, I buy them for both.
It all depends on what kind of target shooting you're doing. If you're shooting bench-rest, then a .22 pistol will do just fine, but if you're into other types of competition (scenario situations, field courses, etc) then other calibers/types are necessary. Light weight is almost always good for any kind of target shooting. The less weight in your hands, the less effort it takes to keep the pistol up, and on target. However, some larger calibers can be rougher on the shooter if they're fired from too light a firearm. My PA-63 is far more accurate than I'll ever be. It's light weight, inexpensive to shoot, and perfect for the size of my hands. It's a military/police weapon though, not some target pistol made only for punching holes in paper. The factors governing what is/isn't a "good range gun" are limitless and usually differ from person to person.
Yes, as Merc said, when a situation arises where your life is threatened, the police won't be there in time to save you. You can't even be certain you'll be able to get to phone to call them. Never depend on someone else when your life is on the line, only depend on yourself. If you depend on others, you have no control over the situation. If you depend on yourself, you can, at the very least, even out the odds. You wouldn't go out camping without being prepared for any possible eventuality, why would you go through the rest of your life not being just as prepared for other eventualities? As for your question about number of guns in relation to crime, the FBI's statistics have shown that while the number of firearms in private hands in the US have increase greatly over the past 20 years in the US, violent crime has steadily decreased. If more guns were to equal more crime, then the trend would be the opposite. The British have found out that criminals will commit crimes regardless of the law. They'll find guns to use, if they can't find them, then they'll make their own (yes, it's very easy to do) or resort to edged weapons or blunt instruments which make you just as dead, and if you don't die, generally leave you far worse off than if you took a bullet and survived. As for the Canadian gun laws. If it works for your country, great! But that doesn't mean it would work here. You have 1/10th the population of the US and 1/10 the population density as well. This means you have fewer people in much more space than we do down here. Furthermore the disparity of income is far less due to a smaller population. That means that you're going to inherently have less crime than the US, violent or otherwise. Strict gun control =/= safety for the people. Look at Russia, they've virtually outlawed all guns. Over there, "private handgun ownership is totally prohibited. A permit is required to purchase a long gun. All guns are registered with authorities. When transporting a long gun, it must be disassembled. Long guns may only be used for self-defense when the gun owner is on his own property." Sound familiar? Yet their murder rate is a staggering 3.3% That means that if you filled a room with 1000 Russian citizens, 33 of them would be murdered by year's end. That's murder with a capital 'M' Not car accidents, not deaths in general, MURDERED. By comparison, the US with far more privately held guns, has a per-1000 rate of homicide of only 5/1000 per year and according to most of the developed world, we're a bunch of gun-toting loonies. The fact is, you rarely ever hear about the people who successfully defended themselves from intruders and assailants with firearms because it makes a less sensational news story. You always hear about the murder victim or the innocent bystander that got shot, but you rarely ever hear about the 80 year old woman who successfully defends her home with a gun from a raging mad man who attempts to break into her house and assault her. Do this for me. See if your local library has copies of "American Rifleman" magazine and look in the front few pages. Every issue there are tons of stories of recent situation where American men and women have defended themselves successfully with handguns, shotguns, and rifles from intruders. There would be many many more except that the articles must be submitted by readers and those are tough to come by in the news as is. So, do Canadian gun laws work for Canada? I guess so. Would they work for the US? No. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 2:48am
|
Frogman, I don't live in the USA and I own firearms.I do it both as a hobby and for protection.
As a hobby it is great. There are so many aspects to it that it is actually very hard to describe to someone who doesn't "get" it. At the very very basic level it is fun to choose which firearm to buy. It's kinda like buying a car. You have to shop around a bit to get the right one. Not every weapon feels the same, and some just click with you. Then you can think about modifying the weapon. One of the guns I own is a 1911. Now the 1911 is a fantastic platform, and it will do everything you need from a gun right out the box. However the basic design is around 98 years old. Things have changed and there are improvements you can make to it. You can also just shell out the cash up front and buy a weapon that has been modernized already, but building it up to how you want it is a hobby in itself. I've spend about as much as I did on the original weapon on modifications to it over the years. Then you can make your own ammo as well. This is a whole other hobby again. While it is technically siple and easy to do, once you get into it, it is like any other hobby, it takes time and money :) There are two practical advantages to making your own ammo. You can tailor the load to exactly what your weapon likes. This is especially handy with long range or extra accurate rifles. It also works with handguns, but factory ammo is mass produced, there are variations and they are made to fit "most" weapons. A well known ammo manufacturer here produces rounds that have a velocity variation of over 50 feet per second. This leads to inconsitancies in accuracy. When I make my own I often have less than 10fps difference. You can also make ammo cheaper than you can buy it. Personally it costs me about between R2 and R10 for a single round of .45 ACP ammunition, depending on where and who I buy it from. I can make my own ammo for around R0.50 a round. So by making my own I can shoot between 4 and 20 times as much. This is both more fun, and more practice. I shoot competatively in a sport called IDPA, International Defensive Pistol Associatoin. This is a sport that generally gets the anti's up in arms because it isn't just shooting at circular targets. You use vaguely humanoid targets, and you shoot in stages. Each stage is set up to resemble a semi plausable real world scenario, and you have to shoot it as if it was really happening, but against the clock. You shoot every day carry guns, not gun that have been heavily modified (there are other sports for that). You have to draw your weapon from under a jacket or such and shoot the targets while moving. I said semi realistic scenarios but honestly you end up doing stuff which would make a SWAT officer sweat sometimes. But it is great fun, and shooting while moving is an extra challenge, forcing you to push your skills to the limit. Shooting is great hand eye co-ordination. It makes you work hard to get the propper result. It isn't just a case of picking up a gun and pulling the trigger. There are techniques you have to learn to be able to do it for the best result, like any other hobby. There are also so many different sports that involve shooting that you are pretty much guarenteed to find on that appeals to you. Inside every sport there are nuances that subtly change the sport to something you'd like more. I also carry a weapon for self defence. My daily carry, and I do mean daily, is a Glock 26. This isn't because Glocks are fantastic weapons, or invisible to metal detectors or because I want to feel like James Bond. It is simply because I know there are evil people who are willing to harm me and my family and I am unwilling to let them. One thing people always mention on the internet when you talk about protection with firearms is what happens if the badguy gets it off you. They always, ALWAYS, mention more and more improbable things to ensure the badguy attacking you has the drop on you. This can happen, but mostly people on the internet give your attacker super ninja skills that you can never counter because IRL you simply can't cover all the bases anyway. Self defence isn't just about owning a gun. Too many people, unfortunately on the "pro" side as well think this is just the case. "I have a gun, I am safe". NO. Firearms are tools that require training to use properly, not only on how to use them, but WHEN to use them as well. There is a whole legal as well as moral aspect to using a firearm for self defence. In South Africa (where I live) you can only use lethal force to protect a life or to protect someone from bodily harm. You can't legally shoot someone stealing your TV. You can't legally shoot someone breaking into your car. You can't actually legally shoot someone who has broken into your house in the middle of the night. You can only shoot someone to stop someone being killed, or seriously injured. On top of that there are some other requirements. The threat must be immediate and real. You telling me the next time you see me you're gonna kill me isn't immediate. You shouting at me from the other side of the car that you'll kill me isn't immediate. You standing down the road and yelling isn't immediate. However take a step towards me after that, or while doing that, and you just made the threat immediate. A 5 year old yelling at me that he's gonna kill me also isn't a real threat. The threat must be illegal. You can't shoot a cop who is trying to arrest you and claim self defence. You also can't instigate it and claim self defence. I can't walk up to you and punch you, and when you punch back shoot you and claim self defence. I must have exhausted all other options of escape. This includes running away. I'm very happy to run away. I'm GOOD at running away. However there are times and places that you simply can't do that. It also includes de escalation of the situation. Verbally trying to talk you down. Yealling at you that your mother * *@#$$@* ** #$*@#$*!@$#(@%(#^!!!!! isn't really trying to escape and will be seen as escalating the situation. It also means you have to follow the ladder of force. Finally there must be a disparity in force. This one is a little tricky. What it basically means is you HAD to rely on lethal force because you could not match them force for force any other way. The easies example is if you are outnumbered or if you are a female being attacked by a male. Another example is if the badguy has a weapon of any sort, you are allowed to use an appropriate and reasonable ammount of force in return. Another thing people often mention in these arguments is if you outlaw firearms, no one has them. This is patently false, and actually an incorrect argument anyway. Generally criminals, by their very nature, don't follow laws. All firearm laws do is restrict legal owners from owning firearms. Even in countries where firearms are heavily restricted, firearm crime still happens. It might be less frequent, but it does happen. But firearms don't only protect you from other firearms. They can protect you from other weapons (knives, bats, bricks...) they can also allow you to fight back when out numbered, or simply over matched. But like I said, self defence isn't about buying a gun and relaxing. It is a way of life, a lifestyle choice. It takes dedication, training and money. And the worst (best?!) part about this, is that after all this you probably won't ever need to use it. One of the basic staples of self defence is if you look like a target you will be one. Make yourself not look like a target and you'll probably get left alone. With the right training courses you'll get taught how to observe your enviroment, how to not stand out like a target, how to minimize your risk, how to improve your chances. You'll get taught how to fight for control of your weapon, how to fight in close quaters with a weapon, how to fight effectively under stress. Decent training should also teach you the lagalities of shooting, how to behave after you've shot someone, how to treat trauma patients. You aren't always going to be there for the beginning of the event, you might need to help patch things up before the paramemdics arrive. Dialing 911 (or your equivalent) is always on the cards, but sometimes you need to adjust things in your favour. People own fire extinguishers to help control fires before the fire brigade show up. People own first aid kits to help before the paramedics arrive. Why shold you not own a firearm to help protect yourself before the cops show up? Honestly I have insurance on my stuff to replace it in the event of theft, I cannot replace my family. I will do everything and anything to protect them. This might require me to kill someone to do so, and I am happy with my decision. KBK |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 2:50am
| PS , DAMN i type slowly. I started that before Tallen had posted. 40+ minutes?! Madness. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 7:27am
|
I got a kel tec a few weeks ago.
Was considering the LCP, but .38 ammo is really hard to find around here. And .32 is much easier to buy (got my last box at walmart for $17.)
Plus the kel tec holds 8 instead of 7...
It also is VERY light in your pocket unlike most other guns. After about a week of constant carry, you don't even notice it anymore.
I like how it shoots as well, pretty accurate for a gun with about a 1 1/2 inch barrel...
Saw this on fox news last night.
------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 11:39am
|
A P-32, FE? Not a weapon I would have bought, but definitely a popular gun, especially as a CCW. The LCP is a great gun, according to everyone I know who owns one. Also, Tallen and Kayback, wall of text. Not a bad wall of text, but still, two posts of wall-of-text was a bit much. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 12:17pm
|
Yeah, actually the kel tec is the original, and has a lifetime warranty. The LCP is the copy, so says the lawsuit, I keep hearing about... Course you know how that is...
And the lcp was recalled for going off when dropped... and I think the warranty is only 2 years.
I don't drop my guns, but the guy I got mine from is buying a lcp, as he wants the .38.
Personally, I'm a pretty good shot, and I would feel fine protecting myself with a .22. The hole from a 32 would stop most humans, especially with hollow points...
My brother in law has a lcp, and we are going to a gun show tomorrow to try and buy another for my father in law...
I got my kel tec for $200... with the pocket holster. At that price I couldn't pass it up. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 1:06pm
You are complaining about two long text posts on a forum? Sorry, isn't that like complaining about the sea being wet? If your brain can only deal with bite size pieces, go Twitter. He asked a question, and one that can't be answered in 140 characters. Deal with it. KBK |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 1:10pm
|
Perhaps you should be more concise. Also, you didn't answer his question, you wrote on essay on gun ownership. There's a difference. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 1:24pm
|
Got a new muzzleloader coming this Thursday. I'm excited.
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 1:25pm
And his post contains a lot of interesting information; it's good of its own merit. Posts aren't limited to specifically and only answering a previously asked question. I think it was remarkably concise for the amount of stuff he covered. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 1:30pm
|
I have conflicting views on guns. I don't really like the idea of people having something that its main purpose in history has been to kill, but the prisoner's dilemma and general awesomeness I have been conditioned to associate with firearms makes me like them. For home defense, I I think it makes sense that there is nothing better than a shotgun. For CCW, obviously, a pistol makes the most sense. What I can't wrap my mind around is the "necessity" people see in having ARs. The only practical reason to have them is to kill people as efficiently as possible; the only reasons I can see that being necessary are when the goal is to RAGE against other civilians, for an invasion, or for defense against one's (oppressive) government. If the goal is to RAGE, then you are obviously doing something illegal. If an invasion happens, chances are their weapons will be much more effective (and in much greater supply, and more explosive) than yours, so any resistance that isn't militarily aided seems like it would be an altogether futile attempt at anything. If your government is going to come fore you, it will be one of two general ways: in the night (for an individual) or in force (for a militia/group). If at night, you're screwed because it will be a SWAT-esque secret police so "prying" anything from your "cold dead hands" probably won't happen because they will have the resources to disable/get past any devices set up to stop them or alert you, thus getting to you before you can get anything in your hands. If it is in force, again, the AR won't do much against their artillery or air-support. I'm currently fixated with Glocks. Apparently people think they are ugly, but I think they (some, anyway) are beautifully simple-looking and effective pieces of machinery. I also really like the idea of having an AR with a red dot sight for the sake of sport/enjoyment. I'm stuck on deciding which AR to want, though. Obviously a sub-machine gun. would be fun to have too. The problem with THOSE are my desire is to have something from WWII (see: something that is extremely expensive) or my desire is strictly a result of the MW series, and thus I feel like a tool. Also, obligatory MG42 mention for a gun thread.  I really can't think of anything cooler to have. ------------- 
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 2:16pm
There's also a reasonable limit for post lengths. I'm not saying that he's limited to answering questions. I'm just saying that he's incorrect in claiming that was all he did. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: DaveEllis
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 4:21pm
|
Guns are one of those things that if you don't "get" you won't get it till you try it. You never realize how difficult it is to punch paper at even 7 yards or the thrill of shooting a bullseye from 100 yards out. That suffice? I think its about 140 character.s |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 4:31pm
 You forgot to mention the significant legal requirements and ramifications of shooting people though. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 4:56pm
I bet you are one of those who crys about the health care bill being long too. -------------
|
Posted By: merc
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 4:59pm
|
people are going to commit crimes regardless, there are sick people out there who just want to harm you (rape/murder)...
i dont know the statistics on # of guns vs % of crime but i do know if something happens where i come across an individual that wants to cause harm then i want a firearm on my hip (or at that point possibly in my hand) ar15s are fun and cheaper to shoot... yes they are efficiant weapons, but isent that what you want for a defensive tool? look at paintball again (because its something familiar to everyone on this board) would you stand a better chance carrying a talon pump or an angle/cocker/timmy/whatever the new crap is? is an ar15 overkill for home defense, hopefully, but when it comes down to it i would rather have to much gun than not enough... (thinks of springfield's slogan "bring enough gun") ------------- saving the world, one warship at a time. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 6:02pm
It depends. Am I walking around with my angel pointed at the ground when I get surprised by a man carrying a Talon pointing it in my face? The angel isn't going to do much good in this situation. It will probably make you more likely to get shot in the face rather than surrendered. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 6:15pm
Maybe not the best analogy. A .223 stands a reasonable chance of going right through your house and into a neighbouring house. Worse if you're in an apartment setting. Being aware of your backdrop is critical if a firearm is intended for personal defense. You wouldn't want to shoot a guy, and then find out the round carried on through him, through the drywall and into your kid's bedroom. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 6:22pm
|
My friend, lives in the city with 4 foot alleys between houses, wanted to use a Springfield 1903 for home defense. Talk about over penetraiton
-------------
|
Posted By: Rofl_Mao
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 6:25pm
Oh you know it! |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 6:29pm
Giggity. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: sporx
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 8:07pm
|
well.... I turned 21 yesterday. Happy Birthday to me. ------------- 
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 9:21pm
|
^w00t! ------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: DeTrevni
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 9:44pm
Since no one reads the last post on previous pages, I'll restate what I said. I think it applies.
------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"
|
Posted By: Rofl_Mao
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 10:48pm
Did you get besotted, buzzed, drunk as a skunk, drunken, half-seas over, in one's cups, inebriated, intoxicated, loaded, pickled, plastered, polluted, s***-faced, sloshed, smashed, soused, tanked, three sheets to the wind, tipsy, trashed, wasted...? |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 1:28am
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 2:20am
|
Also when the Commies invade, we can fight back.
-------------
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 4:14am
Actually I wrote an essay on self defence. And I don't see where I drifted away from the question.
Answered that one. I also expanded on what a gun owning hobby actually is.
I didn't answer this one, I did say you had to choose one you liked and one that felt right. And why MY sport requires light/small guns.
Definately answered this one. I think it is a good idea. I expanded on that by explaining why I think it is a good idea, and why I think it is only part of an idea. There are legal and practical restrictions on using a firearm for self defence, and it shouldn't be the only egg in your basket. I explained why it isn't "owning a firearm" that makes one self defense concious. This needed a little bit of explanation, because it IS a difficult / loaded question.
Speaking to someone who has said they "dont have a clue" you need to draw big pictures, as well as fill in some detail. Using this as a basis I did also explain some of the very basic wrong arguments that anti's throw up, which happened one page after I gave him the headsup. In my opinion it was an essay question. Seriously, it's a forum. Expect people to write more than "+1" or "lol" on occasion. If you don't like it, hit PgDn. Not that hard. He asked a serious question and got a serious answer. Infact he asked about 10 questions. KBK |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 4:45am
But that is honestly the reason for any self defence weapon. It is to remove the threat as quickly and as fast as possible. Using a firearm is using lethal force. If it has come down to that, you better be using something that will kill as efficiently as possible. There are plenty of options better than a shotgun for home defence, one of them is an AR. It all depends on how you plan on protecting your house, and where your house is, and what your house is made of. And about a thousand other considerations. Personally I like the idea of an AR for home defence. Even though I am damn good with a shotgun, my preference would be for an AR. Remember my criteria are slightly different from most of the 'States and the houses we live in are all brick construction. Not much drywall around. .223 rounds that hit brick tend to say hit. Aside from that there are other considerations. "Shotguns are eady to use". BS. Obviosuly espoused by people who have no idea. Running a shotgun takes way more skill than running a semi auto rifle. Using a shotgun under stress is very very hard, and it is very easy to short stoke a shotgun and jam it. Shotguns that jam are very hard to clear. To get an AR to function reliably, all you need to do is pull the trigger. There is no further user interaction required. Shotguns require fine motor coordination. Not something people do well under stress. Tap Rack Bang drills are easier on an AR than a shotgun. "Shotguns are point and click". BS. They require aiming just as much as any other weapon. The simple sight arrangement on shotguns fools people into thinking they are area weapons, and they aren't. A consistent cheekweld is even more important on a shotgun than a rifle because that's how you make sure the front bead is going to be accurate. At most indoor type of ranges, the shot won't spread much, if any. And if it DOES, this increases the chances of accidental shootings. I want the rounds I shoot to hit exactly where I want them to. Not to spread. "The sound of a shotgun racking will stop an intruder dead"/"shotguns are intimidating". BS BS BS. While a shotgun racking MIGHT stop an intruder, it's the 2 rounds to center mass that'll stop them dead. If you have your shotgun at hand you obviously think your life is in danger. Do you want to risk that by having a gun with no bullets in the chamber? Are you only going to rack the weapon when someone is close to you? If you have your gun out, you shouldn't be trying to intimidate people. Guns come into play when it is life or death. Shotguns are also very very loud. Especially indoors. Your hearing is something that you'll need in a self defence situation. Getting a shorty AR with a supressor will make shooting indoors much more survivable. Being able to hear the cops when they arrive and start issuing commands is a GOOD thing. Another often espoused theory is shotguns are shorter and easier to handle. This is again, bovine excretement. While you can shorten a shotgun to any length you want (up to 18 inches legally) IIRC, this sacrifices capacity. If I shorten an AR's barrel, I still have 30 rounds in the mag. 
This is a picture of a shorty shotgun with an 18 in barrel, and 5+1 IIRC. The M16 is an original style AR-15, with a 20 round mag and a 20" barrel. The AK is an 1952 AK-47 with 30 rounds of 7.62x39mm. As for shooting people being the only reason to own AR's, I disagree. I use AR's all the time for 3 gun shoots. They include shotguns, rifles and handguns. And are great great fun. I also partake in shooting competitions that are for military issue weapons. Not fancy bench rest rifles. For this you need an AR. While AR's won't do much against air support and artillery, you still need to send troops in on the ground to occupy territory.... KBK |
Posted By: DeTrevni
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 5:10am
|
^^^ The thing is, suppressors are illegal in America, so if we pull off a shot our hearing is gone regardless of what we shoot.
------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"
|
Posted By: DaveEllis
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 8:34am
Suppressors are legal if you are willing to get your tax stamp and pay for it. Its state by state |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 9:32am
|
Suppressors also make the weapon longer, you probably won't want one on your CCW, and they don't work on shotguns. So, you're screwed either way, legal or not. I believe there are only a handful of states that don't allow suppressors. I know Michigan doesn't, and I'd bet NJ and CA, and possibly MA don't. Other than that, I would bet they're legal, in general. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: merc
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 11:04am
|
montana law states suppressors are legal with no tax stamp as long as they are made and stay in montana... i dont want to but heads with the ATF over this one but thats what they say...
an 11.5" or 12.5" ar upper with a suppressor should be ~ 16" OAL for the barrel+ suppressor, same length as the 16" required for a non SB rifle and still 2" shorter than the 18" required for a non SB shotgun... how do you like the A1 kbk? have any problems with the lack of fwd assist? ------------- saving the world, one warship at a time. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 2:26pm
The ATF's stance on the issue is currently being challenged by Montana in court. The governor himself specifically told Montana residents not to attempt to take advantage of the law until the case has been decided, so it's not all that helpful right now. Also, I don't imagine there are many manufacturers of firearms or their components in Montana (and any gun covered by the law must be fully manufactured in Montana, not just shipped their and assembled or some such). ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: merc
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 2:51pm
|
actually there are a few gun manufacturers in montana (custom rifles for high altitude big game stuff)
while there arnt many firearm manufacturers in montana, it helps the private citizen that wants to manufacture their own... (not hard at all) ------------- saving the world, one warship at a time. |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 2:55pm
Your hearing will be affected, but it probably won't be gone. Yeah, you'll be ringing for a while, but it's likely that your hearing will not be completely affected by the shot. What's far more likely is for someone in a lethal force situation to experience auditory exclusion- that is, their sympathetic nervous system is so keyed up that it induces odd psychological effects to eliminate any irrelevant stimulus to the immediate survival situation. Hearing normally comes back quickly once the lethal force situation is resolved. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 2:59pm
So basically, if you're one of the less than 1 million people living in Montana (given that you live in the US, there's a 0.3% chance or so of that being the case), and you want to manufacture your own firearms, and this law is declared valid, you're good to go. So we're talking about...you, on this forum? Maybe a couple thousand people in the entire nation (well, state, I guess)? My point is, in reality this law has little to no effect, except that it would set a precedent for other states. Which would allow places like NJ to clamp down even harder on guns. Which would be bad. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: DeTrevni
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 3:05pm
|
Bri: That was hyperbole. I know it's not going to be truly "gone," but it's gonna be loud for sure. And I know about the tax stamp. You require the same thing to legally use a paintball silencer. But who really wants to pay $200 for that? And you aren't even guaranteed the license. ------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"
|
Posted By: sporx
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 4:04pm
nope. i had 28 shots and a class of wine. walked off and watched DBZ at my house. -------------
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 4:05pm
|
GT is superior.
-------------
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 10:40pm
Why don't they work on shotguns? Even if they don't thats another plus to having a defensive AR. Yes you can't easily get one for a CCW, and yes they do lengthen the weapon, but you can register the weapon as a Short Barreled Rifle and put one on.you'll then have a normal length rifle. It'll still be easier to use that a shotgun. While I would avoid using a full auto for self defence, forking out the extra tax stamps for the suppressor and the SBR shouldn't put you off that much. How much is your life worth to you? I have never been in a life or death self defence situation before, but i have fired unsuppressed weapons indoors before. Trust me you'll want a suppressor. Maybe auditory exclusion works, I've been in a couple of high stress situations, some that have involved gunfire, and I've never experienced it. True I was never the shooter on those occasions either, thats just my experience with it. Merc, it was a sweet little rifle, that I only got to shoot a handful of rounds out of, then the firing pin shattered. Literally it broke like glass. Took us about 2 months to get a new one. I got to shoot it a couple of times in social settings after that, and never thought about a forwards assist. IIRC I've only shot a rifle with one a couple of times. Most of the ones I shoot are AK variants of some sort. I have been taught a Tap Rack Bang that involves the forward assist, but I don't recall ever using it. Don't think I've shot one enough |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 11:27pm
I'm not sure it's impossible to create one, but I don't know of anyone who makes one. Mainly because the gun itself has to be modified to fit a suppressor (although I believe that isn't the case with semi-automatic shotguns).
I think personally I would prefer a shotgun as a home defense weapon, but I can understand why people want SBRs. As far as CCW goes, using a CCW with a suppressor on it doesn't seem like a sensible alternative. Even if it's a quick-detach model, you're going to be spending valuable time attaching the suppressor, and if it's simply on the weapon, it's no longer something you can holster, or get out of a holster rapidly. As far as full auto weapon go, I wouldn't use one for self defense mainly because people in the US freak out when they hear about automatic weapons. It can be immediate point for the other side if you should come to trial for any reason. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 14 December 2009 at 1:38am
|
Pariel, yes, that's exactly why I wouldn't use a full auto. And they are also actually quite hard to use. It also means you are dumping a couple extra THOUSAND dollars into a weapon that the cops will probably confiscate if you ever do shoot someone with it. The thing is full auto weapons in the US are Class 3 items, the same as supressors. To own one you need a $200 (last time I checked) tax stamp. Same as the supressor. I was making a point that you eventually hit diminishing returns. Spending that much money on a full auto is silly for self defence, but I can see the extra you spend on the tax stamp and the supressor itself as a worthwhile investment. It'll only be a couple hundred bucks more.
I still don't see where I said you should use a suppressor on a CCW. I never meant to imply this, and I don't think it is a good idea. CCW's do sacrifice power and ability for size and ease of concealment. I agree 100% that it is a bad idea to use one on a CCW. However in a house gun, size isn't REALLY an issue. True using a M1 Garand isn't going to be as easy as using an M1 Carbine, but still. A reasonably shot rifle, with a supressor will still be short and easy to manouver, especially when compared to most shotguns. You don't need to conceal a house gun, so the extra length isn't that much of a problem, and because you are using it at really short ranges, you can cut the barrel way down, but still have your rounds going fast when they hit their targets. There is a 99.99999999% chance that if you shoot your home defence gun in self defence you will be inside a building. It WILL be loud. I don't see your point about the weapon being modified to take a supressor. There are many weapons out there that need that. While some AR's and some supressors have the ability to mount without any modification, threading a barrel for a supressor isn't that much of an issue. This top black shotgun is a modified Mossberg. 
The big thing on the end is a compensator. (it has been rotated 90 degrees to not work as a comp, because they are not allowed in this match.) It is screwed on the the threaded barrel. You can easily replace it with a supressor. The only problem with that is the extended mag is in the way of a supressor. Here are some examples. Pump action shotguns: 
Double barrel O/Under (!!!!) 
Pump/Semi auto SPAS-15 
And the internal workings of a shotgun supressor. 
But they don't do much for the overall length of a weapon. Lookit that compared to a .223 supressor. 
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 December 2009 at 8:12am
|
Well, pops ended up getting the new sig p238. Pretty sweet little gun.
http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/ShowCatalogProductDetails.aspx?categoryid=67&productid=266 - http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/ShowCatalogProductDetails.aspx?categoryid=67&productid=266
Now we have the kel tec, lcp, and sig... We sold the kahr as it jammed too often. Replaced it with a glock 27.
Anyone ever use the new tcp by taurus? I saw a bunch of them, and a titanium one would be very light... But the fit and finish seemed "taurus" like... not too smooth. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: SSOK
Date Posted: 14 December 2009 at 4:48pm
|
You people are idiots. Silencers work awesome on shotguns, whenever you use them you never show up on radar and pwn on team deathmatch.
As for home defense, best bet is to use an M9 with a nice knife. That way, you can manuver quickly and stab the intruder rather than accidently shoot your family/dog/neighbor/TV etc.
Or a riot shiled would work as well, so the shield absorbs that 5.56 and not you. Better safe then sorry.
On a serious note, I'd love to own a CCW, but never will. I live in PRNJ ------------- 
|
Posted By: DeTrevni
Date Posted: 14 December 2009 at 5:59pm
|
So I just registered for a CHL class...
------------- Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"
|
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 14 December 2009 at 6:14pm
newb. stops the 50 cals as well. want good home defense? use either the Model 1897, Ranger, or G18, of course it has to be akimbo also ------------- 
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 14 December 2009 at 6:25pm
Just throw the knife over the roof. It'll kill any intruder. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 15 December 2009 at 2:04am
Word up. That 97 is the bomb. I wish the other shotguns in the game acted like that. I'd love to run around with the M1014 with that sort of range. Can't wait to get my hands on the 97. Currently stabbing people left right and center. Honestly it is stupid. Was 32/5 the other day, and I think I shot 1 person....(true my Harrier and AC-130 helped, but still). Hmmmmm AC-130 for home defence. Grin? KBK |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 15 December 2009 at 2:57am
Meh, the SPAS w/ foregrip is pretty beast. I don't have the 1897 yet tho.  ------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 15 December 2009 at 6:47am
|
akimbo rangers= best house clearing weapon
-------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 15 December 2009 at 8:53am
LOL. Best suggestion I've heard so far. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 15 December 2009 at 10:09am
|
Meh, just got it. The 87 doesn't shoot fast enough. You almost HAVE to use it akimbo.
Ah well. KBK |
Posted By: SSOK
Date Posted: 15 December 2009 at 4:09pm
|
Not into shotguns myself.
I normally run with a SCAR fmj/m203. Although my favorite class is my riot shield with throwing knife. Im serious, the throwing knife is leathal with the riot shield. Works great for people spraying you in the open, or when you dont want to melee twice. -------------
|
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 15 December 2009 at 7:17pm
|
normally run with the TAR-21 with unbarrel shotty and akimbo rangers, or the intervention FMJ with akimbo G18s
-------------
|