Shootist Jeff

The debate over assault weapons

Recommended Posts

Just got complicated:

Quote

 

Texas shooting suspect's choice of guns complicates debate over assault rifles

But Friday's shooting at Santa Fe High School, which left 10 dead, was carried out with a pistol and a shotgun - firearms that even gun-control advocates generally regard as utilitarian.

The reality that weapons not included in proposed assault-rifle bans can still exact a double-digit death toll further complicates a wrenching national debate about how to prevent future tragedies.

"That's true" that weapons other than assault rifles can kill many people at once, conceded Avery W. Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which favors a federal ban on assault rifles but not on shotguns or pistols.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-texas-school-shooting-gun-debate-20180520-story.htm

A basic shotgun and a .38 revolver was used and he killed as many people as Aurora CO fuck-boy did with an AR-15 and a 100 round drum mag.  When do we ban these too?

What's interesting is that NO ONE is talking about the explosive devices they found in and around the Santa Fe HS after the shooting.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the same link in the OP, this is one area that I disagree with the NRA and agree with the Brady Bunch:

Quote

 

The National Rifle Association declined to comment for this article, but the group's spokeswoman, Dana Loesch, said Friday on NRATV that "there is not a single firearm law that would have prevented any of this."

"Nothing would have prevented this, and it's sad to realize that," Loesch added, dismissing calls for new gun-control laws. "It's sad to acknowledge it."

"When we think about the gun-violence epidemic, we can't think just about laws," Gardiner said. "We also have to think about changing social norms and behaviors. This is not simply a problem of having the wrong laws on the books - although that's a big part of the problem - it's also making sure that those people who choose to be gun owners store their weapons securely."

 

I strongly disagree with the NRA that there is not a single law that could have prevented this.  Dana is correct that stronger background checks, waiting periods, licensing, registration, training, assault weapons bans, magazine limits and all the other laws grabbers routinely propose in the wake of these tragedies would not have stopped it. 

But the very thing I have been saying for a while would have prevented this..... and that is to hold parents and others legally responsible for their kid's criminal use of a gun.  This shit would stop overnight when enough parents got perp-walked to jail in handcuffs on national TV.  Guns would be locked up in a heartbeat if that started happening.  I don't propose a law that requires mandatory storage schemes - but civil and criminal liability for anyone who doesn't adequately keep guns out of the hands of disturbed love struck bullied teens would cause a lot of people to re-assess how they store their gunz.  

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

"That's true" that weapons other than assault rifles can kill many people at once, conceded Avery W. Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which favors a federal ban on assault rifles but not on shotguns or pistols.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-texas-school-shooting-gun-debate-20180520-story.htm

That red part is hugely surprising if true. I doubt it's true. I suspect they support DiFi's bill, for example, which has whole sections on both shotguns and pistols and which bans the Intratec TEC 22. Which is a .22 handgun, for those who don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Clove Hitch said:

Does an ordinary .22 rifle count as an assault weapon?

I'm not sure. Do you have a picture?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Clove Hitch said:

Does an ordinary .22 rifle count as an assault weapon?

It depends upon who's definition you use.  The point that y'all have lost the bubble on after Tom's incessant, but accurate rambling is that attempting to define the legality of a thing based upon aesthetic and unimportant factors is a fool's errand.   

"Corvettes are race cars - cars that can do 200MPH shouldn't be allowed on the streets, that's not safe".   I agree - going 200MPH on the streets ISN'T safe, but, we don't outlaw 'Vettes 'cause they can do it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's the dumfuk who created another gun thread? Nevermind, I should have known. Can someone start a GoFundMe for Jeff so he can get some help for his OCD?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

It depends upon who's definition you use.  The point that y'all have lost the bubble on after Tom's incessant, but accurate rambling is that attempting to define the legality of a thing based upon aesthetic and unimportant factors is a fool's errand.   

"Corvettes are race cars - cars that can do 200MPH shouldn't be allowed on the streets, that's not safe".   I agree - going 200MPH on the streets ISN'T safe, but, we don't outlaw 'Vettes 'cause they can do it. 

 

I'm still fuzzy on the concept.  Tom mentions "ordinary .22s" which means there has to be un-ordinary ones. 

I'd like to see a few more photos of .22s-- both kinds-- to really understand his beef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is here, because, well, the first 1000 threads about guns on this forum weren't enough. Or something.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

This thread is here, because, well, the first 1000 threads about guns on this forum weren't enough. Or something.

We could start a couple hundred more just in case we need a few spares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

We could start a couple hundred more just in case we need a few spares.

someone could even post Jack Nicholson masturbating as a stand in for gun-gasm Jeffie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Just got complicated:

A basic shotgun and a .38 revolver was used and he killed as many people as Aurora CO fuck-boy did with an AR-15 and a 100 round drum mag.  When do we ban these too?

What's interesting is that NO ONE is talking about the explosive devices they found in and around the Santa Fe HS after the shooting.  

Actually there were no funtional explosive devices.  They were just decoys.  In one case just a gas cylinder wrapped in duct tape.

You are absolutely correct in that a duck hunting shotgun and a typical mid-20th century police sidearm were able to create the carnage they did.  There is no plausible gun control scenario short of confiscation that targets (sorry) those firearms.  Hell, Biden said folks ought to buy a shotgun if they need protection and there is video of Obama shootin’ one of them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Clove Hitch said:

I'm still fuzzy on the concept.  Tom mentions "ordinary .22s" which means there has to be un-ordinary ones. 

I'd like to see a few more photos of .22s-- both kinds-- to really understand his beef

Good point.

There probably are extraordinary .22's. I'm really not a big expert on the subject. I'm just of the opinion that the ones we own are rather ordinary.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Good point.

There probably are extraordinary .22's. I'm really not a big expert on the subject. I'm just of the opinion that the ones we own are rather ordinary.

 

How do you know that if you don't know about extra-ordinary ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

I'm still fuzzy on the concept.  Tom mentions "ordinary .22s" which means there has to be un-ordinary ones. 

I'd like to see a few more photos of .22s-- both kinds-- to really understand his beef

This is probably an example of an extraordinary .22 in the hands of a teenager.  But she's less likely to be able to shoot up a skool with it than even tom's ordinary one.  

IMG_8516.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Raz'r said:

This thread is here, because, well, the first 1000 threads about guns on this forum weren't enough. Or something.

Reading my threads is voluntary.  Or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

This is probably an example of an extraordinary .22 in the hands of a teenager.  But she's less likely to be able to shoot up a skool with it than even tom's ordinary one.  

IMG_8516.jpg

Negative, Ghost Rider. That looks like an ordinary target  .022.   

If Tom is going to keep talking about ordinary .022s I need to see some extraordinary ones. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

Negative, Ghost Rider. That looks like an ordinary target  .022.   

If Tom is going to keep talking about ordinary .022s I need to see some extraordinary ones. 

Well, OK. Ones like this are considered dangerous and unusual by Florida TeamD grabberz:

marlin-assault-rifles.jpg

And here's a .22 that's considered dangerous and unusual by TeamD grabberz in the US Senate:

P1250328-600x400.jpg

Those are the same pictures I use to describe our .22's.

Because whether they are "ordinary" weapons that are OK for civilians to own or "extraordinary" weapons that are too dangerous and unusual for civilians (you know, like stun guns) depends mostly on whether one is TeamD or not.

The fact that you looked at my pictures and thought you were looking at ordinary .22's instead of realizing you were looking at dangerous assault weapons that must be banned probably means you are somewhat mentally defective. Not a full blown gun nut, but toeing the party line on banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) is an important tribal test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

This is probably an example of an extraordinary .22 in the hands of a teenager.  But she's less likely to be able to shoot up a skool with it than even tom's ordinary one.  

IMG_8516.jpg

Negative, Ghost Rider. That looks like an ordinary target  .022.   

If Tom is going to keep talking about ordinary .022s I need to see some extraordinary ones. 

Starting at $4000 for a .22  - trust me, there is nothing "ordinary" about that rifle.

https://www.eurooptic.com/2016000-Anschutz-1907-Target-in-1918-Precise-Stock-22LR-Rifl.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

If Tom is going to keep talking about ordinary .022s I need to see some extraordinary ones. 

How about this one?  I don't think its that extraordinary - but its not common.

920841358_SR-22withOspreysmall.thumb.JPG.e25ce05bd4e37bdf50898a01f53810e6.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I first learned about the Intratec TEC 22 in marketing material found here.

Never heard of it before, but now that I know it's a naughty assault weapon, I kind of want one.

So I went to gunbroker.

That raised more questions than it answered. They seem to range from a couple hundred to about $600. Several of the ads tout "pre-ban" weapons.

I don't know which ban they're talking about but I'm Uncooperative enough to want to go around it by default.

I see that some have threaded barrels and someone is selling a "vented barrel shroud" which I think is a kind of shoulder thing that goes up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

I'm still fuzzy on the concept.  Tom mentions "ordinary .22s" which means there has to be un-ordinary ones. 

I'd like to see a few more photos of .22s-- both kinds-- to really understand his beef

You didn't..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Starting at $4000 for a .22  - trust me, there is nothing "ordinary" about that rifle.

https://www.eurooptic.com/2016000-Anschutz-1907-Target-in-1918-Precise-Stock-22LR-Rifl.aspx

God damn, I stand corrected.   What is the barrel made of -  adamantine? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

This is probably an example of an extraordinary .22 in the hands of a teenager.  But she's less likely to be able to shoot up a skool with it than even tom's ordinary one.  

IMG_8516.jpg

How many people are shooting that gun anyway? Her left arm appears to go down in front of her body then this other arm wearing clothes that don't match is coming up from the bottom?

Or maybe I should ask: Where were pretty girls with three arms and the ability to afford a ridiculous gun like that one when I was a kid?

I can't tell what's going on with that stock but it looks like it might be one with adjustable length. People usually want that so that they can conceal their .22 and go shoot up a school. Why do target shooters want it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

This is probably an example of an extraordinary .22 in the hands of a teenager.  But she's less likely to be able to shoot up a skool with it than even tom's ordinary one.  

IMG_8516.jpg

And why is she less able to shoot up a school with this gun as opposed to other guns???? (serious question, btw)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Step 1) Look at countries that have fewer gun deaths

Step 2) Copy their gun laws

Step 3) Enjoy fewer murdered children

 

And yes,  it really *is* that simple.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, I agree, but I think in the US we need to look at the other things they do as well.  IE universal healthcare (including mental health care), living wages, maternity leave, etc, etc, etc, etc.  but we can't (won't) because.....profits and stuff.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2018 at 10:56 AM, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

It depends upon who's definition you use.  The point that y'all have lost the bubble on after Tom's incessant, but accurate rambling is that attempting to define the legality of a thing based upon aesthetic and unimportant factors is a fool's errand.   

"Corvettes are race cars - cars that can do 200MPH shouldn't be allowed on the streets, that's not safe".   I agree - going 200MPH on the streets ISN'T safe, but, we don't outlaw 'Vettes 'cause they can do it. 

 

Good point. And yet, Audis, Corvettes and such have different kinds of safety limits, interlocks and speed limiters in those vehicles to prevent them from hitting those speeds without a prepared driver. Why? Because these automakers have been successfully sued when their machines didn't prevent a sufficient safety barrier. The firearms industry is largely immune from such lawsuits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Good point. And yet, Audis, Corvettes and such have different kinds of safety limits, interlocks and speed limiters in those vehicles to prevent them from hitting those speeds without a prepared driver. Why? Because these automakers have been successfully sued when their machines didn't prevent a sufficient safety barrier. The firearms industry is largely immune from such lawsuits.

Not to mention, operation of a motor vehicle requires a license that requires significant training and state-operated testing to prove competency. It also requires mandatory insurance with prescribed minimal coverage.. Plus each vehicle is tracked in a database by serial number (VIN) to track ownership and reduce nefarious usage.

Maybe guns should have all those things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

This is probably an example of an extraordinary .22 in the hands of a teenager.  But she's less likely to be able to shoot up a skool with it than even tom's ordinary one.  

IMG_8516.jpg

That photo is a little odd, the manufacturer of the sport rifle, Anschutz, is the same name of the medical school in which the Aurora theater shooter developed his psychopathy, and which they refused to release his medical report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nice! said:

Not to mention, operation of a motor vehicle requires a license that requires significant training and state-operated testing to prove competency. It also requires mandatory insurance with prescribed minimal coverage.. Plus each vehicle is tracked in a database by serial number (VIN) to track ownership and reduce nefarious usage.

Maybe guns should have all those things.

True. When I was a kid, we could have our learner's permit for all of one day, and apply for our license the day we turned 16. No mandatory classes, nothing more than a pass on the little driver's test.

Times have changed in this state ... now the teenager has to pass a series of written tests before they get the learner's permit, then they have to keep the learner's permit for a full year, log at least a hundred driving hours, then take a behind-the-wheel course, and pass two more tests before they are allowed to drive without an adult. Then for the next several months they can't drive alone past midnight, and they aren't allowed to have friends in the car with them. 

You're right, if that level of oversight was required with firearms, it might be a different kind of landscape in the homicides column.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nice! said:

Step 1) Look at countries that have fewer gun deaths

Step 2) Copy their gun laws

Step 3) Enjoy fewer murdered children

 

And yes,  it really *is* that simple.

 

We could look at New Zealand gun laws they have had no mass shootings since 1997 their last school shooting was 95 years ago they also have a 10% lower homicide rate compared to Australia.

The gun grabbers never cite NZ gun laws because they allow all the scary assault weapons they want to ban and confiscate, you don't even need a license to buy a silencer in NZ you walk in pay cash and walk out with it many consider it rude to shoot without one.

The second worst mass shooting in Australia and the worst before Port Arthur was done with a single shot bolt action .22lr which is a type of gun the grabbers are happy for people to own, a very ordinary .22 was used for our worst mass shooting before Port Arthur and we still allow them with 15 round magazines.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1300&dat=19710907&id=GsNUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=u5ADAAAAIBAJ&pg=5209,1264510&hl=en

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mikewof said:

That photo is a little odd, the manufacturer of the sport rifle, Anschutz, is the same name of the medical school in which the Aurora theater shooter developed his psychopathy, and which they refused to release his medical report.

You find it odd that a name might be found elsewhere in the world? The german company JG Anschutz has been around since 1856 building firearms.  I doubt they have anything to do with a US medical school.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if some would consider this Anshutz  .22lr to be an assault weapon. It has a telescopic stock a pistol grip and a threaded barrel.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LnI7Yuiqmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, sail611 said:

And why is she less able to shoot up a school with this gun as opposed to other guns???? (serious question, btw)

 

Less able?

Look at her eyes. I would bet, that if she wanted to, she could cause a lot of damage with that gun...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2018 at 4:55 PM, Uncooperative Tom said:

That red part is hugely surprising if true. I doubt it's true. I suspect they support DiFi's bill, for example, which has whole sections on both shotguns and pistols and which bans the Intratec TEC 22. Which is a .22 handgun, for those who don't know.

I’m sure you’re going to post a picture soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bpm57 said:

You find it odd that a name might be found elsewhere in the world? The german company JG Anschutz has been around since 1856 building firearms.  I doubt they have anything to do with a US medical school.

 

Yeah, it's just an odd thing to notice is all.

The Colorado Anschutz family seems to have nothing in common with the German rifle maker, they've been in the USA for since about the late 1800s, they came here about the same time my Grandad came down from Canada. Kind of an interesting guy, he's one of those super Christians, the very conservative kind, but he owns a good bit of U.S. Pro Soccer, and he gives hundreds of millions (literally) to good causes like the medical center. Though, he's a billionaire, so hundreds of millions is still probably what he needs to donate to not lose it to the IRS. He has an older sister who still owns a very pretty ranch near my great uncles old land on the Western Slope. They're a good family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mad said:

I’m sure you’re going to post a picture soon. 

Actually, I was going to wait until I own one and then show it.

But I can go ahead and put a pic of some marketing material on it for you.

DiFiScreenshotTruth.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, VhmSays said:

@Uncooperative Tom this one is for you.

Also available in rifle.

 

Hah! Didn't get too far before it jammed, did he?

Typical of huge magazines and why they're good for entertainment and not much else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 6:29 AM, Uncooperative Tom said:

I first learned about the Intratec TEC 22 in marketing material found here.

Never heard of it before, but now that I know it's a naughty assault weapon, I kind of want one.

So I went to gunbroker.

That raised more questions than it answered. They seem to range from a couple hundred to about $600. Several of the ads tout "pre-ban" weapons.

I don't know which ban they're talking about but I'm Uncooperative enough to want to go around it by default.

I see that some have threaded barrels and someone is selling a "vented barrel shroud" which I think is a kind of shoulder thing that goes up.

 

I checked the marketing material from our legislature and found that I definitely want to shell out the bucks for a threaded barrel. Naughty machining is an entertaining concept to me, especially as applied to .22 handguns.
 

Quote

 

b. A semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:

...

   (II) A threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 9:50 PM, mikewof said:

Good point. And yet, Audis, Corvettes and such have different kinds of safety limits, interlocks and speed limiters in those vehicles to prevent them from hitting those speeds without a prepared driver. Why? Because these automakers have been successfully sued when their machines didn't prevent a sufficient safety barrier. The firearms industry is largely immune from such lawsuits.

They do????  I am not aware of that feature.  How does the car know when there is a pro driver vs a poorly trained driver at the wheel so it knows when to unlock the fun gear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

They do????  I am not aware of that feature.  How does the car know when there is a pro driver vs a poorly trained driver at the wheel so it knows when to unlock the fun gear?

The pro gets in the right side first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

They do????  I am not aware of that feature.  How does the car know when there is a pro driver vs a poorly trained driver at the wheel so it knows when to unlock the fun gear?

You have to unlock it in the Tesla. I guess it's done via the computer. In the Audi s-series it just cuts your speed when you hit some limit, around 130 or 140, because the car's tires and aerodynamics aren't built to safely go faster than that, even though I assume those rockets will go much faster. The Nissan Skyline's system is way more advanced. The internal GPS limits the vehicle to 110 or 120 mph, but when when it sees you're on one of the pre-approved tracks, the speed limiter circuit is turned off and you can drive her like a raped ape. I think with some of them though, accessing the unsafe speeds requires a chip change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 6:29 AM, Uncooperative Tom said:

I first learned about the Intratec TEC 22 in marketing material found here.

Never heard of it before, but now that I know it's a naughty assault weapon, I kind of want one.

I asked over at The Firing Line and the gun nutz over there seem to think it's not a great gun.

I've asked them if there's a better .22 handgun from the same shopping list that I might consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

I asked over at The Firing Line and the gun nutz over there seem to think it's not a great gun.

I've asked them if there's a better .22 handgun from the same shopping list that I might consider.

You don't have enough .22's? We need more posts about them Tom. Good job so far. Keep it rolling, like our eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

You don't have enough .22's? We need more posts about them Tom. Good job so far. Keep it rolling, like our eyes.

No, I don't. They seem to be useful for annoying elk and I have lots of them to annoy.

I try to fill that need, which does seem acute.

The problem is, there's only one of me, I have a life, and there are political topics other than guns to discuss.

I took a screen shot the other day when I had a bunch of them gathered...

So where are your non-gun topics, Joe?

non-gun-posts.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

So where are your non-gun topics, Joe?

Let's discuss race relations, and the future of race-baiting on Political Anarchy.  Let's discuss the baseline of armed or unarmed self-defense in North America.  We could discuss the political goals and philosophies of  the eighteenth century.

Let's discuss the civic character desired by Machiavelli, or Jefferson's thoughts on the militia, as he pondered the work Napoleon.

I think you are a two-bit wanker, stuck in a rut Tom.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jocal505 said:

Let's discuss race relations, and the future of race-baiting on Political Anarchy.  Let's discuss the baseline of armed or unarmed self-defense in North America.  We could discuss the political goals and philosophies of  the eighteenth century.

Yes jocal, I think that is an excellent topic.  Here I'll let you start it off with your quote from the recent past:

Quote

The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun nutz really don't think much of Intratec, it seems.

I did receive a couple of recommendations for a new addition to our arsenal of assault weapons. I could get either of these with a threaded barrel:

Ruger Mark IV

40150.jpg

Or S&W Victory

10201_01_lg.jpg?itok=W0qjLhvV

Just looking at those, it seems to me that only one of the two could fit a hand my size. I think I need to go to a store or show and pick them up and hold them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom,

I have this setup (different suppressor tho).  I really like the SR-22 with threaded barrel.  I have large hands too and the Ruger fits me very well.  Much better than the pure target models with the straight grips.  This one has different backstraps included to customize for your hands.  

ruger-sr22-sparrowpack-2.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a mini Glock.

Kinda scary, even without the can in front. I don't really want a suppressor. Just the naughty threads.

I think the Victory is probably best from the standpoint of elk-annoyance. It doesn't look any more scary than my .22.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Yes jocal, I think that is an excellent topic.  Here I'll let you start it off with your quote from the recent past:

 

Ah, we have Jeffie answering Joe's racebaiter dog whistle, meant for Tom. Bpm57 to aisle six. Trayvon to the Jeffie Twitterfeed. :blink:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's better with the original formatting and the link back to the post for context. Like this:

On 5/4/2015 at 2:35 PM, jocal505 said:

The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

No, I don't. They seem to be useful for annoying elk and I have lots of them to annoy.

I try to fill that need, which does seem acute.

The problem is, there's only one of me, I have a life, and there are political topics other than guns to discuss.

I took a screen shot the other day when I had a bunch of them gathered...

So where are your non-gun topics, Joe?

non-gun-posts.jpg

^^^  As organized in the Tom Ray database (which Tom says doesn't exist).

Clever boy.  One day this week, you speed-spammed a dozen of your threads in eight minutes, using the threads laid out in your database, with the same exact message about assault weapons/ordinary .22's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to have to have a talk with the Ed. I suspect he's getting all the revenue from my database. He probably doesn't even know I own this forum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

It's better with the original formatting and the link back to the post for context. Like this:

 

I thought of you amidst the devastation of the inner cities, Tom. (You want perspective?  From there I could see forever. While MLK's understanding encompassed the poor and disenfranchised, his POV contrasted the incomplete understanding of many.)

You were going to take Judge Taney for a boat ride. How did that go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

It's better with the original formatting and the link back to the post for context. Like this:

 

That’s true. I was just too lazy to go look for it and I don’t have joe’s stalker database to fall back on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

That’s true. I was just too lazy to go look for it and I don’t have joe’s stalker database to fall back on. 

Jeff is victimized, by Joe shit which Jeffie said.

Jeff doesn't mind race-baiting, and distributes his own raw justice, against biker rapists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Jeff doesn't mind race-baiting, and distributes his own raw justice, against biker rapists.

Cite?

Remember all the way back a couple of weeks, Joe? When you claimed to not go down the 3rd grade gutter? When were you planning on living up to that claim?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

I truly don't think that the intention of the (proposed?) bill has any intention of restricting .22 cal. rifles.


That's true in the sense that they didn't just cover .22 rifles as "assault weapons."

.22 handguns are also covered, if they have a threaded barrel. Which is why I want to buy one with a threaded barrel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:


That's true in the sense that they didn't just cover .22 rifles as "assault weapons."

.22 handguns are also covered, if they have a threaded barrel. Which is why I want to buy one with a threaded barrel.

And you want a threaded barrel because......?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

And you want a threaded barrel because......?

Because I like to irritate elk. I thought I already made that clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Because I like to irritate elk. I thought I already made that clear.

You may have made that clear earlier, but because I pay little attention to such silliness, I must have missed it. My apple gees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I admit that it's by far the silliest motivation for buying a gun I have ever had.

But you can't help what's funny to you. And I think naughty machining is just a funny concept. It wouldn't be as funny if I actually intended to use the threads for anything. It's funny to me that they're naughty just because they're there, but the same exact gun without them is not a naughty assault weapon.

I also think Rimas and racing Sun Cats are funny. I guess I'm easily amused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

I admit that it's by far the silliest motivation for buying a gun I have ever had.

But you can't help what's funny to you. And I think naughty machining is just a funny concept. It wouldn't be as funny if I actually intended to use the threads for anything. It's funny to me that they're naughty just because they're there, but the same exact gun without them is not a naughty assault weapon.

I also think Rimas and racing Sun Cats are funny. I guess I'm easily amused.

If you do get one, make sure to get a thread protector.  Its very easy to mess up the threads and then they no workey for elk irritation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

If you do get one, make sure to get a thread protector.  Its very easy to mess up the threads and then they no workey for elk irritation.

Are you sure? My shopping list just says a threaded barrel is naughty. No less naughty if the threads are screwed up as far as I can tell.

In fact, you've given me an idea. I think I actually WANT messed up threads. Because it's funnier that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

FFS, make up your mind (In other words, stop lying.)  I saw a new, disgusting post five minutes ago. You were embellishing the breaking of gun laws, and planning to buy  a gun  with a threaded barrel, to intentionally flaunt some law. Uncooperative is your middle name, etc.

Yer a fool and I spend my time elsewhere to avoid the constant .22 silliness.


None of the guns on my shopping list are illegal. Yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's with the disrespect for "some law" anyway, Joe?

My shopping list is not just "some law."

It's the TeamD effort to start rescuing American from the scourge of (assault weapons, ordinary .22's).

I would think that's about the most important piece of proposed legislation in the world to you, but you just call it "some law" as if you don't know or care about it. WTF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

I would think that's about the most important piece of proposed legislation in the world to you, but you just call it "some law" as if you don't know or care about it. WTF?

Given his inability to read or remember Miller, it probably just is "some law" to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had another thought about the naughty threads that turn an ordinary .22 pistol into a feared assault weapon. Instead of screwing them up so they are unusable, I could thread a big, silly, hippy-looking flower onto the end of the barrel.

I'm probably the first person ever to want that particular firearm accessory so I expect I'll have to make it myself.

But I do want a photogenic assault weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

I had another thought about the naughty threads that turn an ordinary .22 pistol into a feared assault weapon. Instead of screwing them up so they are unusable, I could thread a big, silly, hippy-looking flower onto the end of the barrel.

I'm probably the first person ever to want that particular firearm accessory so I expect I'll have to make it myself.

But I do want a photogenic assault weapon.

You could just paint the thread protector orange so it looks like an airsoft gun.  That's probably like doubly illegal.

_57__04372.1435170697.1280.1280.JPG?c=2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:

I will. If my actions cause more people to reassess their ownership of weapons, I win.


Your actions have caused me to think about the merits of buying something off my shopping list from a friend. Darn good plan! Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That flower looks wrong on that gun but I think a .22 Victory with a flower would look better. Like this:

SWVictoryFlower.jpg

But I don't like that flower. It's just the first one I found online that was stuck to a gun. I want a yellow and white flower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2018 at 2:31 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

Given his inability to read or remember Miller, it probably just is "some law" to him.

Have you read Miller, Jeffie? 

  • Let's say that one person has read Miller, he says, but quotes it as considering gun rights for The People, in as many words, repeatedly.. And further, let's say another person admits he hasn't read all of Miller, but can quote the case law in a manner vetted in substantial submissions before the Supreme Court, that Miller is all about militia gun rights, not gun rights for The People.
  • Let's say the first person says that Miller covers males capable of acting in concert for the common defense, in four threads, then says he has "seen no such evidence" that Miller covers Earl Miller as a militia candidate (ahem,with collective gun rights as such).
  • Let's say the first person won't correct his falsehood, but the second can discuss, cite, source,  and document his presentation.

Jeffie, I'll go with the second person. YMMV.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. One guy doesn't read the cases and thus didn't know Otis McDonald from Jack Miller after years of study, let alone know something like whether he's looking at a fourth or fifth amendment case, but thinks he can educate readers by copy/pasting gungrabby propaganda.

How about commenting on something for which no research is required, Joe?

Do you think my new assault weapon will look good with a yellow and white flower threaded onto the barrel? Or would you suggest a different color?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The part of my shopping list related to handguns says this:

Quote

 

(36) The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:
...
(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:

(i) A threaded barrel.

(ii) A second pistol grip.

(iii) A barrel shroud.

(iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.

 

So if some guy makes a Glock 27 do this:

That makes mine an assault weapon.

But not a very photogenic one so I still want the S&W Victory Flower gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you own a semi pistol and no one has made it into an assault weapon by making one fire full auto, you can always convert it to an assault weapon with one of these:

glock-safety-grip-extended2.jpg

I didn't know second grips on a pistol are a thing. Apparently, they're a thing and they turn ordinary handguns into assault weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

If you own a semi pistol and no one has made it into an assault weapon by making one fire full auto, you can always convert it to an assault weapon with one of these:

glock-safety-grip-extended2.jpg

I didn't know second grips on a pistol are a thing. Apparently, they're a thing and they turn ordinary handguns into assault weapons.

I think that's so the "gangstas" can hold it sideways easier.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites