sig pistols have to be some of the tightest and most well put together poly pieces I have ever seen, haven't had a chance to handle a rifle, does anyone remember the name of that south african company that put out that pistol that looks more like a Halo 2 laser (whatever that one was that you could charge)? it has a very fluid form to it, and from the articles I remember seeing on it they'd put over 1000 rounds through without cleaning with impressing results and not a single jam
LOL +1Major_Spittle wrote:
Maybe we could start a thread about Europe's obsession with child pornography? The Pedophilia Culture.
Just because in America we don't drop guns and run away from them, as has been rumored to be the case with some European nationals, does not make us "obsessed" with guns. No more than we are "obsessed" with sissors just because we own them and use them.
That's what happens when you lose your soul and start feeling sorry for Islamofacist's
If this post does not make sense to you...well don't worry you wouldn't get it anyway
Ummm, most Sig Sauer pitsols have steel frames and not a lot of polymer (like Glock/HK, which only use steel inserts)kr@cker wrote:
sig pistols have to be some of the tightest and most well put together poly pieces
But the Sig pistol receivers are machined from a solid piece of steel. Prove me wrong, I hope I'm not wrong because they weigh too much to be polymer framed.
Edit: They might not be machined from pure steel, but it is a steel alloy. Definitely not polymer.
Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-07-28 20:59:22)
I'd just like to say that it's not like theres no gun ownership in Canada, its just regulated so that you can't just buy a AK-47 from Bob's Gun Shack on the corner. In fact, the main differances are that no civilian can own or posses a automatic weapon in Canada, and any rifle needs to be registered with the federal government. Plus you don't have a right to leathal weapons in Canada, so if your nuts, or a criminal, or anything like that they can take any weapons you have away, and refuse to sell you any more. Remember that Canada still has murders and stuff, but most violence is in the form of stabbings, beatings, but not too much gun violence. Though there has been a recent surge in gun violence with I belive 7 RCMP officers killed recently by people armed with heavier weaponry (rifles, and the like), than the RCMP carry (9mm S&W pistols).
EDIT: And I'd just like to mention to the people who are saying that the US needs stricter sentences and longer jail terms, do you have any idea what you're talking about? The US already has the largest prision population this side of Russia, and gives out some of the harshest sentences for the smallest offences, short of those Islamic countries that practice Sharia Law, where you can be stoned to death for talking to the wrong person, or have your hand cut off for stealing.
EDIT: And I'd just like to mention to the people who are saying that the US needs stricter sentences and longer jail terms, do you have any idea what you're talking about? The US already has the largest prision population this side of Russia, and gives out some of the harshest sentences for the smallest offences, short of those Islamic countries that practice Sharia Law, where you can be stoned to death for talking to the wrong person, or have your hand cut off for stealing.
Last edited by Kibbick (2006-07-28 21:20:01)
1) You can't just go down to Bob's Gun Shack in the U.S.A. and buy a true AK-47 (full auto), heavily restricted.Kibbick wrote:
1) its just regulated so that you can't just buy a AK-47 from Bob's Gun Shack on the corner. In fact, the main differances are that no civilian can own or posses a automatic weapon
2) US needs stricter sentences and longer jail terms, do you have any idea what you're talking about? The US already has the largest prision population this side of Russia
2) Stricter sentences and longer jail terms for crimes committed with firearms. Not just all crimes, jeez. And we have the largest prison population mainly due to drug crimes. Do you have any idea what you're talking about. In relation to guns. The emphasis should be on CRIMINALS and their behaviour WITH Firearms. It is the person's action that needs to be taken into account. NOT THEIR EQUIPMENT.
It's very similar in the United States, a Felon looses all rights to firearms, as well as those deamed to be insane.Kibbick wrote:
I'd just like to say that it's not like theres no gun ownership in Canada, its just regulated so that you can't just buy a AK-47 from Bob's Gun Shack on the corner. In fact, the main differances are that no civilian can own or posses a automatic weapon in Canada, and any rifle needs to be registered with the federal government. Plus you don't have a right to leathal weapons in Canada, so if your nuts, or a criminal, or anything like that they can take any weapons you have away.
And while civilians can own machine gun's in the united states, it is very restricted. It has been this way since 1934. IN fact, there has only been one murder commited with a legally owned machine gun in the united states since this law was enacted, and the murderer was a police officer. They are also insanely expensive. A transferable full auto MP5 will often sell for over $30,000, and gun's like M60's or the .50 BMG M2 will sell for over $100,000. Well out of the range of your average criminal.
Yeah, sig's are nice. They've really only got one problem in my book, and that's weak firing pin pressure. They just need a little more spring pressure, they won't always fire outdated or really cheap ammo that has bad primers. Not really a serious problem, but one that bugs me as I like shooting the cheap stuff for practicing.kr@cker wrote:
sig pistols have to be some of the tightest and most well put together poly pieces I have ever seen, haven't had a chance to handle a rifle, does anyone remember the name of that south african company that put out that pistol that looks more like a Halo 2 laser (whatever that one was that you could charge)? it has a very fluid form to it, and from the articles I remember seeing on it they'd put over 1000 rounds through without cleaning with impressing results and not a single jam
And I've always gotta point this out for 1911's. The 1911 is no longer protected by any patents, which means a lot of companies are building it, and all have different quality control. A well built 1911 will be as reliable, if not more reliable than a glock. Sadly very few companies actually build a 1911 that well, and it usually takes a good gunsmith to fix em.
Oddly enough, one of the best 1911's I've found are the cheap $300 Rock Island ones. I buy em cause they are cheap, and I'm gonna be customizing em no matter what, so cheap works for me. But one I bought abotu a year and a half ago I decided to leave it in stock form and see how it did. I didn't oil it, never cleaned it, and shot the cheapest ammo I could find through it. Shot over 1000 rounds with out a single hiccup, no failers to feed or eject, or fire, I think I had about 1200 rounds through it before the slide got so gummed up with powder residue that the spring couldn't push the slide back forward. Cleaned it up and finally oiled it and it just went right back to never missing a beat. It's just to bad the sights really suck on em from factory.
I could be reading into things a bit, but I am just making sure you know of the comment I responded to, and that I am perfectly aware that guns don't crawl around shooting stuff. But from the , I believe (or at least hope) you did recognize how my response was an exercise in sarcastic reply to the previous quote. However, that "refer" message was a bit ominous.AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
And guns don't crawl out of your holster/safe/hand/table/whatever, snatch a magazine/round, and shoot someone all by their lonesome.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Microwaves are used to cook stuff, but they don't crawl across your countertop, snatch a cheese brick, and melt it inside all by their lonesome.Spearhead wrote:
Yeah, but the whole point of guns is to kill in the first place. What a stupid pic, whoever made it has no f*ckin clue what their talking about. That's like saying Microwaves aren't used for burning, they're used to cook stuff
Refer to my post about personal responsiblity for one's ACTIONS not their EQUIPMENT.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-07-30 02:54:51)
I believe they manufacture both, but my brothers is polyAlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
Ummm, most Sig Sauer pitsols have steel frames and not a lot of polymer (like Glock/HK, which only use steel inserts)kr@cker wrote:
sig pistols have to be some of the tightest and most well put together poly pieces
But the Sig pistol receivers are machined from a solid piece of steel. Prove me wrong, I hope I'm not wrong because they weigh too much to be polymer framed.
Edit: They might not be machined from pure steel, but it is a steel alloy. Definitely not polymer.
edit: on a side note, the UN is actively trying to outlaw the 2nd amendment and ban gun sales world wide, and the repubs just defeated a bill allowing the govt to confiscate legally owned weapons during declared states of emergency, have you joined the NRA yet?
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-07-30 08:12:52)
I have never seen, felt, nor head of an all polymer frame (receiever) Sig pistol, at least one thats a fullsize.kr@cker wrote:
I believe they manufacture both, but my brothers is poly
They do have some of those new Sig pro line, but those are mostly compacts. Anyways, I apologize, Sig only makes MOSTLY alloy framed pistols.
Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-07-30 09:19:03)
Like an earlier discussion Pulsar and I have, I still hold the fact that no murder has ever been commited with a legally owned machine gun by a civilian ever, because police officers have greater (not absolute) just greater access than civies. Police officers act on behalf of a city, state, municpality, or federal level. However if they commit a crime, they are in effect civilians, however the machine gun would still be legally and technically OWNED by the police department/federal agency. Thereforets-pulsar wrote:
IN fact, there has only been one murder commited with a legally owned machine gun in the united states since this law was enacted, and the murderer was a police officer.
No murder has ever been commited by a civilian with a machine gun that was owned by him. Also there have been basically zero thefts of machine guns mainly because they are kept locked up nice and tight. If you can afford a 15-30k machine gun, you'd think they could afford a nice 1-2k safe.
Bam!
bottom line is the Lets ban guns crowd, is lost.
Jinto-sk wrote:
No you don't really need them but they all have a practical use (especially the testicals), what use is an assault rifle to a civillian.Horseman 77 wrote:
You dont eally need your music, car, pillows, tv, computer, testicals, airconditioner, carpet, bed, coach, do you. I mean do you really need them ?Jinto-sk wrote:
For what reason does a person need an assault rifle. Other than the argument of defense from invaision, which I disagree with as that is what the armed forces are for.
Not really an answer dude the same effect could be achieved (if I broke into your house) with a handgun, so I ask again what practical use is an assault rifle to a civillian.kr@cker wrote:
break into my house and ill show you
Its the same as owning a Jaguar when a Dodge Aries K will do. You can apreciate fine design and engineering and the more knowledge you have on the subject the more interisting it becomes. I probebly would not understand your need for certian music. Just leave it at that. We don't need each others aprovel do we ?Jinto-sk wrote:
Jinto-sk wrote:
No you don't really need them but they all have a practical use (especially the testicals), what use is an assault rifle to a civillian.Horseman 77 wrote:
You dont eally need your music, car, pillows, tv, computer, testicals, airconditioner, carpet, bed, coach, do you. I mean do you really need them ?Not really an answer dude the same effect could be achieved (if I broke into your house) with a handgun, so I ask again what practical use is an assault rifle to a civillian.kr@cker wrote:
break into my house and ill show you
Jinto-sk wrote:
For what reason does a person need an assault rifle. Other than the argument of defense from invaision, which I disagree with as that is what the armed forces are for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. That is also what a well regulated militia is for.
2. You know, some day we just might have to forcefully implement a new government here in the U.S.
That about covers the second amendment and as far as the first amendment "He who has the gun has the freedom of speech"
For what reason does a person need an assault rifle. Other than the argument of defense from invaision, which I disagree with as that is what the armed forces are for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. That is also what a well regulated militia is for.
2. You know, some day we just might have to forcefully implement a new government here in the U.S.
That about covers the second amendment and as far as the first amendment "He who has the gun has the freedom of speech"
Last edited by JG1567JG (2006-08-01 10:08:09)
So what you are saying is the only reason for someone to own an assault rifle is not for practical use but as a show piece/collectors item. Not looking for or giving approval, everyone has their own opinion and good for you/them for sticking to them. I'm neither for or against guns, I started this thread to try and gain an insight into peoples opinions about America's so called "Gun Culture". One thing I do seem to notice is that the constitution and amendments are quoted alot by pro gun people, but unfortunately being a brit I don't know them all and understand there place in US society/politics (not that I know Much about Britains either ). The whole idea about debate is that no one is specifically right it is opinions and counter arguments.Horseman 77 wrote:
Its the same as owning a Jaguar when a Dodge Aries K will do. You can apreciate fine design and engineering and the more knowledge you have on the subject the more interisting it becomes. I probebly would not understand your need for certian music. Just leave it at that. We don't need each others aprovel do we ?Jinto-sk wrote:
Jinto-sk wrote:
No you don't really need them but they all have a practical use (especially the testicals), what use is an assault rifle to a civillian.Not really an answer dude the same effect could be achieved (if I broke into your house) with a handgun, so I ask again what practical use is an assault rifle to a civillian.kr@cker wrote:
break into my house and ill show you
I still believe my question of PRACTICAL use has not being answered. Quoting amendments and constitution means nothing to me (sorry for my ignorance) the closest answer is JG1567JG's about maybe one day having to overthrow a government.
Keep it comin people
Last edited by Jinto-sk (2006-08-01 10:29:41)
Rifles are also often kept by civilians for deterrence value against various forms of corruption. Criminals are aware of certain risk factors when breaking into unknown homes and a rifle is alot more recognizable and intimidating in low light when levelled at your chest than a handgun, even though the latter can be operated with the same end results. The US government knows very well that, in another civil war, civilians would mark a higher threat than a rabble with small arms and bricks.
But aside from these and their various statistical unlikelyhoods, people just like to take their rifles out to gun ranges and shoot at paper targets.
But aside from these and their various statistical unlikelyhoods, people just like to take their rifles out to gun ranges and shoot at paper targets.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-08-01 12:02:09)
Well for one, I find gun's that you would label as assault rifles (a rifle wwith a pistol grip and detachable mag) are much more comfortable to shoot. A pistol grip is more ergonomical compaired to a traditional rifle stock.Jinto-sk wrote:
So what you are saying is the only reason for someone to own an assault rifle is not for practical use but as a show piece/collectors item. Not looking for or giving approval, everyone has their own opinion and good for you/them for sticking to them. I'm neither for or against guns, I started this thread to try and gain an insight into peoples opinions about America's so called "Gun Culture". One thing I do seem to notice is that the constitution and amendments are quoted alot by pro gun people, but unfortunately being a brit I don't know them all and understand there place in US society/politics (not that I know Much about Britains either ). The whole idea about debate is that no one is specifically right it is opinions and counter arguments.Horseman 77 wrote:
Its the same as owning a Jaguar when a Dodge Aries K will do. You can apreciate fine design and engineering and the more knowledge you have on the subject the more interisting it becomes. I probebly would not understand your need for certian music. Just leave it at that. We don't need each others aprovel do we ?Jinto-sk wrote:
Not really an answer dude the same effect could be achieved (if I broke into your house) with a handgun, so I ask again what practical use is an assault rifle to a civillian.Jinto-sk wrote:
No you don't really need them but they all have a practical use (especially the testicals), what use is an assault rifle to a civillian.
I still believe my question of PRACTICAL use has not being answered. Quoting amendments and constitution means nothing to me (sorry for my ignorance) the closest answer is JG1567JG's about maybe one day having to overthrow a government.
Keep it comin people
And to re-ittirate something I posted earlier. The AR-15, which is basically an M16 that doesn't have the capability of full auto or burst is a very customizable gun. When set up properly it is more accuracte than just about any otehr gas operated rifle in the world. It's used heavily in competition shooting for this reason.
But the main reason I say "assault rifles" are practical, is that a civilian populcae should be armed and ready to stop corrupt governments, not nescisarily because it will ever need to be done, but because it is a very good deterance. Genocide usually starts with a disarmament of the populace. Something that has happend through out history.