The Firearm Topic

[GTASAddict]

Come to think of it, the buildup of gun powder within the suppressor sounds dangerous (is it dangerous) so suppressors sound high maintenance. Then again, it does make sense to clean them from time to time.

[Saggy]

Suppressors only really have a purpose in a hunting or combat scenario. Combat because it will obscure the report the gun makes, and the direction of it, making it hard for your enemy to discern location and your arms type. Then with hunting, having a suppressor--even a loud one--seems to spook animals less. Say you were trying to eradicate problem hogs or some other pests that are in large groups, and every time you shot one the rest took off. Then imagine that you could shoot four or five of them at a time before any realize something is going on.

 

The real reason criminals don't use suppressors is because the only point would be to kill silently, which as has been mentioned, a suppressor really doesn't do. The other factor mentioned being cost and accessibility. When it comes down to it, there are so many more lethal, affordable and truly silent means to kill a person that it's just not useful for a criminal.

 

I don't think they'd be particularly useful for protecting your hearing either, since I'm pretty sure the report from a suppressed gunshot is still high enough in the dB range to cause hearing damage. You're not even supposed to shoot .22 LR without hearing protection and that's hardly loud. But really like lil weasel pointed out they have such a huge effect on performance that you're better off just wearing ear muffs.

 

I'd really like to get a pair of the electronic kind that have a microphone built in so that you can hear someone you're shooting with, but as soon as there is a loud noise they cut off all sound. So you can hear everything loud and clear until you go to shoot or your partner shoots or whatever. They're like a couple hundred bucks though

 

 

[lil weasel]

[...]

I'd really like to get a pair of the electronic kind that have a microphone built in so that you can hear someone you're shooting with, but as soon as there is a loud noise they cut off all sound. [...]

I had a pair of those. It was really odd, as I could hear people's conversations from the other side of the Range's wall.

[sivispacem]

 

Suppressors only really have a purpose in a hunting or combat scenario.  Combat because it will obscure the report the gun makes, and the direction of it, making it hard for your enemy to discern location and your arms type.  Then with hunting, having a suppressor--even a loud one--seems to spook animals less.  Say you were trying to eradicate problem hogs or some other pests that are in large groups, and every time you shot one the rest took off.  Then imagine that you could shoot four or five of them at a time before any realize something is going on.

The alteration in frequency and report makes it very difficult to identify the source of a sound. That's why suppressors are still extremely valuable for snipers despite the rounds they use being so fast as to render them completely pointless for reducing noise due to the ballistic crack- because a good one will make triangulation impossible and therefore prevent the adversary being able to effectively determine where a shot came from and respond. I would imagine the same principle applied to animals.

[IM_YOUR_GOD]

Did you just repeat what he posted? Lol.

 

Don't silencers use different ammo instead of the conventional rounds?

[Ex Hellraiser]

Did you just repeat what he posted? Lol.

 

Don't silencers use different ammo instead of the conventional rounds?

...that was just answered a few posts up. In order to get the full effectiveness of a suppressor, you need to use subsonic ammo. However, you can use regular ammo, but won't get the full effect.

 

It is best to use suppressors on weapons already chambered for subsonic rounds standard (.45ACP).

[GTASAddict]

Not only criminals, but also responsible gun owners appear to disfavor suppressors. No wonder, judging by these answers. Since suppressors are merely accessories, will gun control laws extend to them?

[lil weasel]

Why? They are already controlled and Taxed.

200$US for a Tax stamp, that requires a letter from the CEO of the Police, Fingerprint Cards, (BATF approval).

[Ex Hellraiser]

Yeah, suppressors are pretty redundant unless you are in the military. Civilians, criminals, and even collectors have little use to own one, and they are even more regulated than the guns themselves.

 

 

I'm heading to Patuxent River tomorrow to spend my spring break with my older brother, probably going to the range at some point in the week.

[Saggy]

Did you just repeat what he posted? Lol.

Not really, he was a lot more elaborate and accurate with the technicalities.

 

Also as far as the legitimate use of silencers for pest control, cheaper alternatives usually lie in ultra-quit ammunition and short range hunting. You can kill hogs with bullets that barely reach above 96 dB with much the same effect as a suppressor would give you. Lot of people have even switched to air rifles.

[Bellic 4 life]

Hey guys, I'm back for another question. There's a shop in the town north of mine, called the Freedom Shoppe. They have a fairly decent collection, and, despite the appearance of the shop, it is completely legal. No Class 3 weaponry, all semi-auto. They also have some beaters. Me and 3 of my friends were browsing, when we were given a proposal by the dealer. 4 sporterized guns for $400.

 

-Sporterized Mosin-Nagant

-Lee-Enfield

-Lebel (dated 1919)

-Arisaka, with the original mum on top

 

My question is, are they worth it? Even if we just restored the guns, and resold them, would the deal be worth the money?

[GTASAddict]

Besides the scope, is there any difference between a Sniper Rifle & a Conventional Rifle? I fail to notice any discernible difference.

[roebuck34]

Hey guys, I'm back for another question. There's a shop in the town north of mine, called the Freedom Shoppe. They have a fairly decent collection, and, despite the appearance of the shop, it is completely legal. No Class 3 weaponry, all semi-auto. They also have some beaters. Me and 3 of my friends were browsing, when we were given a proposal by the dealer. 4 sporterized guns for $400.

 

-Sporterized Mosin-Nagant

-Lee-Enfield

-Lebel (dated 1919)

-Arisaka, with the original mum on top

 

My question is, are they worth it? Even if we just restored the guns, and resold them, would the deal be worth the money?

If you sell to the right collector and they are of good quality they should go on a profit tough it depends on alot of things...

[Ex Hellraiser]

Besides the scope, is there any difference between a Sniper Rifle & a Conventional Rifle? I fail to notice any discernible difference.

Not really. Only real difference is that snipers are generally chambered for full size rounds, or rounds specifically designed for very long range (7.62x51, .50 BMG, .338 Lapua). But yes, many sniper rifles, you can simply take the scope off, and they function exactly the same as a regular rifle.

 

During WWI and II, most snipers usually just used a regular infantry rifle with a scope attached (Mosin-Nagants, for example).

 

 

A sniper rifle in most senses is a conventional rifle.

[crispypistonx8]

Where do you live ? Mosin is worth 150 all day long right now. Enfield.. probably twice as much not really sure about the other two.

 

I guarantee you won't loose $ if you buy&flip them, But I wouldn't buy to restore, a mosin isn't worth restoring.

 

[lil weasel]

Besides the scope, is there any difference between a Sniper Rifle & a Conventional Rifle? I fail to notice any discernible difference.

The barrel is usually bedded and the trigger(s) are likely to be better machined. Better to research on a Target Shooting site for details.

[Bellic 4 life]

Where do you live ? Mosin is worth 150 all day long right now. Enfield.. probably twice as much not really sure about the other two.

 

I guarantee you won't loose $ if you buy&flip them, But I wouldn't buy to restore, a mosin isn't worth restoring.

I live in Western Connecticut.

 

I understand that the Mosin is at a relatively low price, the reason I ask though, is that the furniture on the rifles are all cut back, in order to make them lighter.

[Saggy]

Besides the scope, is there any difference between a Sniper Rifle & a Conventional Rifle? I fail to notice any discernible difference.

Well, there's not really a definition for what a "sniper rifle" is or should do. If you ask the Army or the Marines what a sniper rifle is you'll get two different answers.

 

But long story short, a "sniper rifle" is typically a rifle that's supposed to kill a target, from a long range, remain concealable, and have very good accuracy. So in some instances a "sniper rifle" might need to have a very heavy barrel ( prevents the wind from moving it and vibrations from the harmonics of the gun shot ), it might be bedded or free-floating, it might have a different twist rate of its rifling, trigger modifications, etc.. More importantly though, you typically see "sniper rifles" as very compact, rugged, reliable designs such as bolt-actions. Semi-automatic varieties are starting to become more common but it just depends on the school of thought. The Marine's "one shot one kill" philosophy is typically the most widely recognized and what most people think of as a sniper, they would more likely than anything else use a simple bolt action, camo'd for concealment, etc.

 

The Remington 700, the M1 Garand, the Mausers, etc. all started off as plain sight rifles before anyone thought about putting a scope to them. The Mosin Nagant was issued to infantrymen with just regular iron sights, while in the meantime it is one of the most successful "sniper rifles" of all time if you look at the snipers who used one. To be a "sniper rifle" that weapon must be tailor fitted much more than just fitting optics. As a matter of fact Simo Hayha is the sniper with the most confirmed kills in history, and his mosin nagant had no scope. Then if you look at Rob Furlong who held the record for the longest confirmed kill shot, he used a .50 caliber M2 machine gun to do that.

 

So the type of weapon or what it's outfitted with isn't what defines a sniper rifle, a "sniper rifle" defines what type of weapon it is and what it's outfitted with. Even now days people are putting scopes and all sorts of stuff on everything from Mausers to Winchester repeating rifles, to "sporterize" them, but that doesn't mean they'd be the first choice of any sniper.

 

[sivispacem]

Besides the scope, is there any difference between a Sniper Rifle & a Conventional Rifle? I fail to notice any discernible difference.

The barrel is usually bedded and the trigger(s) are likely to be better machined. Better to research on a Target Shooting site for details.

Long-range shooting rifles tend to have slightly different stock and comb designs, often incorporating cheek rests, to facilitate comfortable use of a telescopic sight for long periods of time. Many, arguably most modern sniper rifles have gone in the direction of specialised calibres for long-range shooting which aren't as popular in the civilian world. A lot of the newer models incorporate pistol grips and folding stocks, designed as above. Greater use of composite materials. Oh, and bipods and monopods are very commonplace.

[Bellic 4 life]

Then if you look at Rob Furlong who held the record for the longest confirmed kill shot, he used a .50 caliber M2 machine gun to do that.

 

 

False. It was the McMillan Tac-50 he used, not a Ma Deuce.

[Kaj.]

Then if you look at Rob Furlong who held the record for the longest confirmed kill shot, he used a .50 caliber M2 machine gun to do that.

 

 

False. It was the McMillan Tac-50 he used, not a Ma Deuce.

Yeah Sag, the Browning M2 is a .50 machine gun. Probably the farthest thing from a precision rifle you could imagine.

[Saggy]

Then if you look at Rob Furlong who held the record for the longest confirmed kill shot, he used a .50 caliber M2 machine gun to do that.

 

 

False. It was the McMillan Tac-50 he used, not a Ma Deuce.

Yeah Sag, the Browning M2 is a .50 machine gun. Probably the farthest thing from a precision rifle you could imagine.

Ahh, okay, I have always wondered how he managed to do that with a machine gun.

[sivispacem]

Then if you look at Rob Furlong who held the record for the longest confirmed kill shot, he used a .50 caliber M2 machine gun to do that.

 

 

False. It was the McMillan Tac-50 he used, not a Ma Deuce.

Yeah Sag, the Browning M2 is a .50 machine gun. Probably the farthest thing from a precision rifle you could imagine.

Ahh, okay, I have always wondered how he managed to do that with a machine gun.

It was Carlos Hathcock who held the world record for the longest confirmed sniper kill using a Browning M2. Modified to fire semi-automatic only and fitted with a telescopic sight.

[Chunkyman]

Gahahahahahaha!

 

A Colorado congresswomen, speaking in favor of banning magazines holding more than 10 rounds, made it clear she had absolutely no idea what a magazine even is. She justifies the effectiveness of magazine prohibition by saying that once the magazines currently in existence have all of their bullets fired they are no longer available, naturally decreasing the "problem". She thinks magazines are a one-time-usage item, incapable of being refilled. It wasn't even a simple misstatement, she really is a retard.

 

Link

 

But according to her spokesperson, it really was a simple misstatement. She was really referring to (totally unrefillable) "clips", and specifically those high capacity 30 round clips which are so commonly used in AR-15's and those dangerous high capacity assault handguns that they want to ban.

 

Here's her spokesperson's quote about her comments regarding magazines:

 

“The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,” Johnson said. “Quite frankly, this is just another example of opponents of common-sense gun violence prevention trying to manipulate the facts to distract from the critical issue of keeping our children safe and keeping killing machines out of the hands of disturbed individuals. It’s more political gamesmanship that stands in the way of responsible solutions.”

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Here's the best photo I've taken of my Colt Frontier Scout (only camera is my phone). It looks pretty good all cleaned up IMO, especially with those striking original grips.

 

[CryptReaperDorian]

@Chunkyman: OH GAWD! My sides!

 

Seriously, and I'm not even joking, that's probably the funniest thing I've heard within the last few weeks. Where can I get one of these "30-round clips" for an AR-15? It sounds like they were probably used by paratroopers during 1914.

 

Also, nice revolver. I always found Colt handguns to be quite beautiful. I'm still thinking of what kind of handgun I should get when I turn 21. Tokarevs kind of interest me even though many people say they have a little bit of a "snap" to them.

[Saggy]

Wait, huh? I watched the video and she doesn't even say magazines... She keeps saying that the bullets will all have been shot.

 

Meanwhile, nice colt, those look pretty nice. It's in .22 isn't it?

 

Nice clean up job. Leave most of the original patina?

[lil weasel]

Wait, huh? I watched the video and she doesn't even say magazines... She keeps saying that the bullets will all have been shot.

 

About Eight seconds in she says, "Magazine Clips" and about 25 seconds she say, Magazine". She only 'keeps' saying, "the bullets will all have been shot" once.

 

This post makes me feel like Our Sheldon, ick.

[Chunkyman]

 

Meanwhile, nice colt, those look pretty nice.  It's in .22 isn't it?

 

Nice clean up job. Leave most of the original patina?

Yeah, it's a .22 magnum.

 

The original finish on it is mostly gone, with maybe 30% of it's original bluing remaining. Not a big deal though as the original bluing on these was pretty unattractive IMO. I've left it in it's unpolished, bare metal state for now as I like the looks of it. Since it's vulnerable to rust in this state I'm going to try and keep it as dry and greasy-fingers free as possible, but if any rusting does shows up I may be forced to re-blue it.

 

In a completely unrelated matter, tastefully engraved custom 1911's.

 

Image 1

 

Image 2

 

This one belonged to a mafia hitman.

 

 

Edited April 4, 2013 by Chunkyman

[Saggy]

Meanwhile, nice colt, those look pretty nice.  It's in .22 isn't it?

 

Nice clean up job. Leave most of the original patina?

Yeah, it's a .22 magnum.

 

The original finish on it is mostly gone, with maybe 30% of it's original bluing remaining. Not a big deal though as the original bluing on these was pretty unattractive IMO. I've left it in it's unpolished, bare metal state for now as I like the looks of it. Since it's vulnerable to rust in this state I'm going to try and keep it as dry and greasy-fingers free as possible, but if any rusting does shows up I may be forced to re-blue it.

 

In a completely unrelated matter, tastefully engraved custom 1911's.

 

Image 1

 

Image 2

 

This one belonged to a mafia hitman.

Yeah I don't think you'd need to reblue it really. Keep it dry and clean, wipe it down with a thin coat of oil when you store it, don't keep it in a leather holster for too long. That's what people do for carbon steel blades, and over time when carbon steel gets a nice patina like that it doesn't really rust very easily anyway. Even if you get rust spots you can generally take them off with a super mild abrasive like a pencil eraser. Plus, there are products like Tuffglide that you can coat the outside with that dry and protect from rust and they work really well.

 

I'm kind of a carbon steel nut. Practically all my knives are carbon steel.

 

I love engraved 1911s, reminds me of the engraved colt peacemakers but cooler

[sivispacem]

This post makes me feel like Our Sheldon, ick.

Are you disappointed that no-one else has adopted your nickname for me? I feel like you're disappointed that no-one else has adopted your nickname for me.