Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

The Firearm Topic

2,633 replies to this topic
NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#61

Posted 21 January 2006 - 01:27 AM

Demarest - Not bad for an offhand group. I'd be interested if you kept me posted on the progress in Ohio. From a law enforcement perspective, however, I alread like the plain sight statutes while driving. Traffic stops are up there with domestic disputes as a number 1 officer fatality incident, and anything that makes us safer helps the entire public. I want to be able to see the weapon, or know it's out of reach and unloaded. If I can catch a crim who is carrying concealed and driving (obviously crims don't follow the statute) I know what to look for AND it gives me more ammo when I'm citing charges. Felony traffic stop or a misdemeanor drug possession for marijuana can become a felony arrest; the community becomes safer.

On the other hand, if you're not a crim and just happen to be carrying concealed while driving, and I were to pull you over for speeding, chances are I would ignore the offense; either declare it if you feel necessary (we love honest citizens) or just let me write the ticket or issue the warning and I'll be none the wiser...

That's why I support plain sight statutes - more ammo against serious offenders, no hassle for honest citizens.

O'Brein - Instead of breaking the law and endangering your ability to even own a gun, why not just run out, get a PI ticket, and get your CCW... then all your gun expenses can be tax write offs if you do a little PI or bail enforcement work on the side. tounge.gif

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#62

Posted 21 January 2006 - 06:27 AM

QUOTE (NorthwestRastafarian @ Jan 20 2006, 20:27)
That's why I support plain sight statutes - more ammo against serious offenders, no hassle for honest citizens.

I don't rize easily, but you have GOT to be sh*tting me. Why should I have to tuck in both sides of my shirt to get into a vehicle? This makes being a guest in somebody else's car awkward, rules out the possibility of helping out those whose car broke down, etc. When I get out of my car, anybody looking will assume I'm a bad guy. All for wanting to pump my gas? I could link you to tons of accounts of motorcyclists who were pulled over after police received multiple phone calls about a gun. Etc etc.

And for what? So you feel safer? First off, when you pull me over and run my plates, your computer beeps to alert you that I have a CHL. Keep in mind that before Ohio had CCW laws, that beep meant one thing and one thing only: felon. Furthermore, in order to get your CHL, you are subject to a series of background checks. So consider our CHL as being our proven good guy ID. Not to mention that somebody carrying is carrying for one reason only: self defense. There should NEVER be a reason to have to defend yourself against a police officer. Not to mention that those that carry are advised to regularly practice, so they are familiar with their gun. This ensures the equipment we carry is suitable for saving our lives and also helps that in the event of a misfeed or other malfunction, we are prepared to clear it or otherwise work around it with minimal effort/thought as it will be in the heat of the moment to begin with. When you consider that some police only carry a gun because they're required and only shoot it when qualifying with it, this makes the average gun owner and/or carrier AT LEAST AS responsible with a gun as a law enforcement officer.

You are more than safe. In Ohio, we're required to inform you during official police business. Both that we have a license and that we're carrying. During a traffic stop I was involved in tonight, the officer asked where it was. This is common and all that is needed. Fact remains that I can pull my guns a LOT faster with my shirt tucked away to comply with a silly plain sight provision than if I just hopped in the car and buckled up. That's not safer. That's stupid. Just ask the soccer mom transporting her kids home that just peeked over at a red light only to see a gun. It's unnecessary panic.

It is a LOT of hassle for carriers and innocent bystanders alike. Since you asked to be kept updated, Ohio House Bill 347 (the one I was in Columbus to speak on) proposes many improvements to Ohio's CCW laws, one of which is to ELIMINATE the plain sight provision. You use ammo against serious offenders as a usefulness and I'm sorry, but I refuse to be punished for what OTHERS are doing. Not to mention that if they're serious offenders, they're not legally carrying to begin with. There's ammo. Which also probably means their gun(s) is stolen. More ammo. You don't need the fact that they're not complying with a ruling that was only placed there to trap us to get your ammo. Punish the criminals, not those exercising their constituntional rights.

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#63

Posted 21 January 2006 - 06:48 AM Edited by NorthwestRastafarian, 21 January 2006 - 06:51 AM.

QUOTE (Demarest @ Jan 21 2006, 06:27)
QUOTE (NorthwestRastafarian @ Jan 20 2006, 20:27)
That's why I support plain sight statutes - more ammo against serious offenders, no hassle for honest citizens.

I don't rize easily, but you have GOT to be sh*tting me. Why should I have to tuck in both sides of my shirt to get into a vehicle? This makes being a guest in somebody else's car awkward, rules out the possibility of helping out those whose car broke down, etc. When I get out of my car, anybody looking will assume I'm a bad guy. All for wanting to pump my gas? I could link you to tons of accounts of motorcyclists who were pulled over after police received multiple phone calls about a gun. Etc etc.

And for what? So you feel safer? First off, when you pull me over and run my plates, your computer beeps to alert you that I have a CHL. Keep in mind that before Ohio had CCW laws, that beep meant one thing and one thing only: felon. Furthermore, in order to get your CHL, you are subject to a series of background checks. So consider our CHL as being our proven good guy ID. Not to mention that somebody carrying is carrying for one reason only: self defense. There should NEVER be a reason to have to defend yourself against a police officer. Not to mention that those that carry are advised to regularly practice, so they are familiar with their gun. This ensures the equipment we carry is suitable for saving our lives and also helps that in the event of a misfeed or other malfunction, we are prepared to clear it or otherwise work around it with minimal effort/thought as it will be in the heat of the moment to begin with. When you consider that some police only carry a gun because they're required and only shoot it when qualifying with it, this makes the average gun owner and/or carrier AT LEAST AS responsible with a gun as a law enforcement officer.

You are more than safe. In Ohio, we're required to inform you during official police business. Both that we have a license and that we're carrying. During a traffic stop I was involved in tonight, the officer asked where it was. This is common and all that is needed. Fact remains that I can pull my guns a LOT faster with my shirt tucked away to comply with a silly plain sight provision than if I just hopped in the car and buckled up. That's not safer. That's stupid. Just ask the soccer mom transporting her kids home that just peeked over at a red light only to see a gun. It's unnecessary panic.

It is a LOT of hassle for carriers and innocent bystanders alike. Since you asked to be kept updated, Ohio House Bill 347 (the one I was in Columbus to speak on) proposes many improvements to Ohio's CCW laws, one of which is to ELIMINATE the plain sight provision. You use ammo against serious offenders as a usefulness and I'm sorry, but I refuse to be punished for what OTHERS are doing. Not to mention that if they're serious offenders, they're not legally carrying to begin with. There's ammo. Which also probably means their gun(s) is stolen. More ammo. You don't need the fact that they're not complying with a ruling that was only placed there to trap us to get your ammo. Punish the criminals, not those exercising their constituntional rights.

Keep in mind our system is a bit different than the Ohio system: We have NO required informing of CCW status to officer, and there is no allowance of any kind for a loaded weapon, CCW or otherwise, in a motor vehicle. This means my opinions on plain sight statutes are based on my street survival training opinions as an officer.

Now, in theory, I agree 110% with YOUR opinions, I'm a firm libertarian and I know convenience when I see it, but in application here it gets very grey in a way that is hard to explain to someone who isn't an LEO. When you pull someone over in the middle of asscrack-AM for a broken tail light, you're not at all sure what is going to happen; everything is a "human question mark".
So, I run the plates, but in the state of Washington, I don't see your CCW status on a basic check as a Port of Seattle PD officer. I walk up to the car and I see a gun; I know how to procede with caution; because I know that if it is in any way properly contained, that person is most likely (never certaintly) responsable. But if I see that the vehicle is reported stolen, that is a whole different ballgame; I walk up to the car, don't see a gun, and have no idea what I'm facing. I want every safety precaution I can have, you see?

Plus, you can [i]never[i] have enough felony charges on a crim. devil.gif

My prefered method as an honest CCW'er off duty, with no experience with the Ohio system, is to unload the handgun(s), place them in the glove box or my duty bag in the passanger seat, and avoid any areas where you would for some reason need them at your hip.

EDIT:

I'm conceeding defeat here, sort of smile.gif

I just checked my code, and we actually have a statute that states that CCWers NEED to have their gun out of plain sight; albeit always unloaded, when in a vehicle.

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#64

Posted 21 January 2006 - 07:12 AM

QUOTE (NorthwestRastafarian @ Jan 21 2006, 01:48)
there is no allowance of any kind for a loaded weapon, CCW or otherwise, in a motor vehicle...

I just checked my code, and we actually have a statute that states that CCWers NEED to have their gun out of plain sight; albeit always unloaded, when in a vehicle.

According to RCW 9.41.050
QUOTE
(2): A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (a) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (b) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, or © the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle.
Sounds to me like a CHL'er may carry loaded while in a motor vehicle so long as it's on them. I like how locked up, it must stay out of sight. In Ohio, if you choose to lock it up while you're travelling, the locked container needs to be either the glovebox (precedent has revealed that truck center compartments do NOT count) or in plain sight.

Back to that traffic stop I mentioned earlier, the officer thanked me for complying by informing him, providing my CHL, and having the guns in plain sight. I responded that I was required to and that it was just as well as I didn't wish for him to feel unsafe. We're the good guys wink.gif I only had to take a stand because you said it's no hassle to the law abiding and that couldn't be further from the truth. Point in fact, there are those who won't get licensed and or those that are licensed that won't carry because of the plain sight provision. And I know that I carry other than how I'd like so that I can transform to plain sight mode easier. But Ohio is young with CCW and the younger they are, the more they're irrational to appease the anti's while being pushed through the doors in the first place. I'm sure in time, all will be well.

I'm also looking forward to state pre-emption. It's a statute that will basically strip localities of being able to impose their own restrictions to the CCW laws. For example, in Toledo, a person can have a high-capacity magazine, but not loaded more than 10 deep. Go figure. Also, the mayor of X years ago thought he'd make a name by coining the phrase Saturday Night Special. It was meant to encapsulate any VERY small gun as illegal because of its high level of concealability. Again, go figure. And if you wish to travel through the state? You must first bone up on all the locales you'll be passing through and familiarize yourself with their restrictions. Insanity.

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#65

Posted 21 January 2006 - 07:31 AM

sarcasm.gif I swear some legislatures must think the constitution says the right to "bear arms" tounge.gif

I can see why you're looking foward to it. The Washington code covers all of Washington, which is nice, no jurisdictional changes (It's much easier on us police too, keeping track of only one set of rules is hard enough as it is). CCW is pretty well established here, so the laws are pretty clear (Although that code you quoted conflicts with a few others, and there is alot of dissent over whether or not a licensee of a concealed weapon can carry it loaded in the vehicle, the case law leaning towards a 'no if they're caught' stance sarcasm.gif ). Best of luck getting that fixed, it sounds like you are very passionatly involved. I applaud that. Mark Mallor sounds like a decent mayor who at least listens to LEOs when it gets him votes; a damn site better than that ex gangbanger in LA, or some of the more liberal-socials up here. icon13.gif




OBrien97
  • OBrien97

    $$H Biaaaaatch!

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2001

#66

Posted 22 January 2006 - 09:39 PM

QUOTE (NorthwestRastafarian @ Jan 20 2006, 20:27)

O'Brein - Instead of breaking the law and endangering your ability to even own a gun, why not just run out, get a PI ticket, and get your CCW... then all your gun expenses can be tax write offs if you do a little PI or bail enforcement work on the side.  tounge.gif

PI licenses aren't easy to get... i looked into it when i turned 21...cuase u have to b 21 to get one...u need 5 years Law Enforcement/investigative experience in order to get a PI license...which yes...does give u a license to carry a concealed weapon...maybe i could get a job working for a PI and in 5 years i would b able to get a license...but i dont have the time for that sh*t...

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#67

Posted 23 January 2006 - 03:32 AM

sarcasm.gif Wish the PacNorWest had such limits on PI's, any criminalistic POS can get a ticket out here if they pass a test. I'm not saying that PIs are bad, of course, but alot of gangs and the like use them to find witnesses etc...

Anyway, you should really look into a way to get a valid CCW, and also get involved like Dema in the movement to make NJ a Shall Issue state. Better to make CH carriers look good by not adding to the number of responsable gun owners commiting an offense such as carrying with out a license.

The_Scorched1
  • The_Scorched1

    VCPD Heli Pilots- Put your weapon down and surrender!

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2006

#68

Posted 23 January 2006 - 03:38 AM

Me and my dad have many guns we shoot! cool.gif My favorite gun we shoot is our .38 special. .357 magnum revolver. Its a fun little dude.

SagaciousKJB
  • SagaciousKJB

    Captain tl;dr

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 21 Jun 2003

#69

Posted 23 January 2006 - 04:59 AM

What's everyone's opinions on red-dot optic systems? I don't mean laser-targeting system, but the actual optics that just use a red-dot as your sight. I think they're usually mounted like a scope, but are just useful because you don't have to align sights.

I don't really know that much about them, but they seem pretty awesome.

anuj
  • anuj

    iconic

  • Inactive Staff
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2002
  • None

#70

Posted 23 January 2006 - 05:02 AM

QUOTE (SagaciousKJB @ Jan 22 2006, 22:59)
What's everyone's opinions on red-dot optic systems? I don't mean laser-targeting system, but the actual optics that just use a red-dot as your sight. I think they're usually mounted like a scope, but are just useful because you don't have to align sights.

I don't really know that much about them, but they seem pretty awesome.

I love them. They can get ridiculously expensive, but they're much better than traditional optics when you're closer.

Pros:

+Easy acquisition
+Large FOV

Cons:
-batteries
-cheap ones break easily.

If you spring ~$400-1000 on "top-of-the-line" models, you won't be disappointed. But if you (like me) pick up a cheap BSA red-dot, you'll be just as happy.

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#71

Posted 23 January 2006 - 06:58 AM

Anuj is right on.

However, there are some cons to the red dot systems in that they do not have as many magnification options, and they are hard to spot with in very bright or desert conditions, and they are battery dependant, which can be inconvienient.

desert_eagle
  • desert_eagle

    I like beer

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2001

#72

Posted 23 January 2006 - 10:04 AM

QUOTE (SagaciousKJB @ Jan 23 2006, 04:59)
What's everyone's opinions on red-dot optic systems? I don't mean laser-targeting system, but the actual optics that just use a red-dot as your sight. I think they're usually mounted like a scope, but are just useful because you don't have to align sights.

I don't really know that much about them, but they seem pretty awesome.

I use one on my .22 pistol. It's great, but it also makes shooting at distances closer than 20 yrds a bit too easy. You can aim with both eyes open and targeting goes much quicker. Problem is thaht they are often bulky, depending on quality.

The_Scorched1
  • The_Scorched1

    VCPD Heli Pilots- Put your weapon down and surrender!

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2006

#73

Posted 24 January 2006 - 02:01 AM

QUOTE (anuj @ Jan 23 2006, 05:02)
QUOTE (SagaciousKJB @ Jan 22 2006, 22:59)
What's everyone's opinions on red-dot optic systems?  I don't mean laser-targeting system, but the actual optics that just use a red-dot as your sight.  I think they're usually mounted like a scope, but are just useful because you don't have to align sights.

I don't really know that much about them, but they seem pretty awesome. 


Yea man! Red dots kick butt! On pistols they work best. If you get one for an M-16 or something like that. Weeewy! Watch out! Great modification for a weapon. Easy to handle and work with too. wink.gif

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#74

Posted 30 January 2006 - 03:59 AM

Red Dot sight on pistols? Talk about a lumbering hulk of unconvenience. Are you sure you don't mean laser? The only red dot sights that make sense for pistols are pure hobby shooting pistols. There is no way in hell to comfortably conceal a pistol with a big ol red dot scope on it without putting out an a**load of money on a special holster, and even then, iron sights or lasers will do you better in just about any situation.

Anyway...

OH MY GAWD THIS GUN!
http://www.springfie...stl-45acp.shtml

I must get my hands on one... anyone test fired it yet?

A medium frame .45 with 14 round hicap that maintains 1911 functionality? Wet dream. Skrew kimber, I now love Springfield.

the only king
  • the only king

    There is too much blood in my alcohol stream

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2006

#75

Posted 30 January 2006 - 04:08 AM

My dad owns a (legal) desert eagle 5.0 very powerful
kinda like this
user posted image

and i own a 22 and a couple pellet and bb guns from when i was little

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#76

Posted 30 January 2006 - 05:26 AM

@NR: As I'm sure you're aware, the XD line has a LOT of followers. I myself don't get into them as I'm not a big fan of hammerless. But I've spoken to a guy that owns one and he loves it. Thought you might find this amusing:

user posted image

@tog: Is his DE .50 AE? There's no such thing as a 5.0. Just wanted to make sure we're on the same page. They're sexy. I'd want a blued one though. Not that $2/round is something I'd look forward too. At least the gun itself is very affordable in terms of cost:hardware.

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#77

Posted 30 January 2006 - 10:51 AM

Was never able to get into the XDs until I saw that thing, it's pretty incredible.

I've actually never understood the whole desert eagle fixation though. I've fired a few, didn't find them at all ergonomic; and I think they're rather ugly. Not to mention lacking in function, because of their simple size. If you want a big motherf**cker of a handgun, might as well go for broke on a S&W X-frame Model 500.

@the picture: funny funny funny smile.gif

Truth be told, I've never liked the fat .45s, I like the high velocity rounds of .40sw or .357 better. Doesn't make too much of a difference when you're throwing out XTPs anyhow.

MAcSandNinEs
  • MAcSandNinEs

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2005

#78

Posted 30 January 2006 - 03:49 PM

The DE is not something I'm a fan of. It isn't worth the recoil and price to carry that gigantic thing around. @ Demarest: In that picture of your 12 gauge, why are there Airsoft BBs? Do you shoot airsoft, too? tounge.gif .-JD

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#79

Posted 30 January 2006 - 06:14 PM

QUOTE (MAcSandNinEs @ Jan 30 2006, 10:49)
@ Demarest: In that picture of your 12 gauge, why are there Airsoft BBs? Do you shoot airsoft, too? tounge.gif .-JD

What in god's name are you blathering about? I don't have a shotgun. To answer your question though, no, I do not shoot airsoft. I have real guns wink.gif

MAcSandNinEs
  • MAcSandNinEs

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2005

#80

Posted 31 January 2006 - 02:03 AM

Oops, it was Anuj's post blush.gif . I don't shoot airsoft. I'd like to get a real gun. My dad was thinking of getting me and my brother a .22, but we can't yet. My brother went to a range in Columbus for ONE DAY and fired 10+ guns.-JD

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#81

Posted 31 January 2006 - 05:35 AM

QUOTE (MAcSandNinEs @ Jan 30 2006, 21:03)
My dad was thinking of getting me and my brother a .22, but we can't yet.

Why not? And what do you mean by a .22? Rifle? Hangdun?

Ray1
  • Ray1

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2005

#82

Posted 02 February 2006 - 05:31 AM

This is an awsome gun, but I don't have one. Yet.

************
* H&K G-11 *
************

It's revolutionary rotary bolt increases fire rate while virtually elliminating recoil.

Caseless rounds allow an entirely enclosed action, providing an unparalleled reliability.



The future is HERE.



cookie.gif catloaf_by_anuj.gif cookie.gif



http://world.guns.ru...ault/as42-e.htm

paraphrased:
QUOTE
Caliber: 4.7 mm caseless
Action: Gas operated, rotating breech
Overall length: 750 mm
Barrel length: 540 mm
Weigth: 3.6 kg empty
Magazine capacity: 50 or 45 rds

Rate of fire:  2000 rounds per minute


The caseless ammunition in its early appearance was designed as a block of propellant, coated

with flammable laquer, with bullet and primer "glued onto" the propellant. Final ammunition

design DM11, that appeared in the mid-1980s, featured "telescopic" design, when bullet was fully

enclosed in the block of the propellant. The cartridge propells a bullet weighing 3.25 gramms 950

meters per second.


The rifle features a unique cylinder breech/chamber system that rotates 90 degrees. The

cartridges in the magazine are located above the barrel, bullets down. Prior to each shot, the

first cartridge is pushed down from the magazine into the chamber and then the breech/chamber

rotates 90 degrees to align the cartridge with the barrel. After that, the cartridge is fired and

the breech/chamber rotates back, ready for the next cartridge to be chambered.


The latest versions feature THREE 45 rounds magazines - one in the loaded position within the movable

housing and two spare magazines on the top of the rifle, asides from the loaded magazine.



NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#83

Posted 02 February 2006 - 07:13 AM

Uh, no.

From a soldiers perspective, make it an XM-29 SABR/OICW anyday; if we're talking 'super guns'

The G11 was never very successful and is variantly regarded as too far ahead of it's time, or a big pile of sh*t. Obviously having never fired one, I'm not sure which is the truth.

I've been thinking about using my new LEO purchasing powers for evil, because when I could use military ID I was always poor as f*ck, to get a G36. Those are slick little numbers, and would be useful for... home defense, and stuff... tounge2.gif

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#84

Posted 02 February 2006 - 07:26 AM

I've fired a G36. Almost too short a barrel for that large a caliber. Also not a fan of the way the Glock's psuedo-safety pinched your fingertip during recoil.

Great for putting holes in things though wink.gif

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#85

Posted 02 February 2006 - 07:31 AM

They sure are. The SPD emergency response teams, which have been called by the media in some cases 'terrorists', are equipped with some very neat little G36c's, and I *really* like playing with them at the range.

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#86

Posted 02 February 2006 - 08:48 AM

I don't know. Hammerless and DAO aren't really my style. No real safety to speak of, boxy... I'm not sure they're for me. And when I first was looking for a carry piece, I was obsessed with the PPK/S. Once I found out disassembly involved pulling the trigger, I swiftly leaped over to my Thunder 380's that have a disassembly lever. Having had an ND before, I'm more "overly safe" about such things. So probably no G36 for me. Though if I was to get a Glock, the single stack model 36 would be my first choice.

NorthwestRastafarian
  • NorthwestRastafarian

    Doughnuts are a 10-80 in your mouth.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2005

#87

Posted 02 February 2006 - 12:19 PM

Oh no no, I meant the Heckler and Kock G36's!

f*ck me if I ever carry a glock off-duty. I hate them.

Sumanjit
  • Sumanjit

    Wicked Thing

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

#88

Posted 03 February 2006 - 10:50 AM

I have searched high and low for this particular handgun, but due to Australia's bullsh*t laws regarding gun ownership, can't get it over here.

It's the Colt AMT .45, affectionately known as Ballers. It was made famous (or infamous, depending on your sources, by the game Hitman: Codename 47)

But I'm moving to the States come the end of this year, which leaves me free to build up a personal armory.

-=apology=-
When your only exposure to firearms has been using a Glock at a competition shoot, you can forgive me my delusions.

Demarest
  • Demarest

    what could be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2003

#89

Posted 03 February 2006 - 03:13 PM

"Ballers" are 1911's. What caliber Glock did you fire? You should start off small to hone your aim and technique. Though 1911's are designed to absorb the recoil of a 45 ACP quite nicely. I've fired one by Springfield Armory and its perceived recoil was less than the 9mm Sig I fired just before it.

Sumanjit
  • Sumanjit

    Wicked Thing

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

#90

Posted 04 February 2006 - 03:53 AM

It was a Glock 20 and chambered for the 10mm Auto round. I know they're a good gun, but the whole...'gangbanger' stigma that's attatched to it has always been unnerving to me.

Speaking of starting off small, a relative of mine has recently paid the price for overconfidence. He was handed a Freedom Arms in the .454 Casull caliber, lifted it in a Dirty Harry-esque pose...and ended up with his arm in a cast for just under a month.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users