beerface702 wrote:
Yugo or Chinese?
yugo
Poll
Do you own a gun?
| Yes... I own a gun | 41% | 41% - 71 | ||||
| No ....because it not legal where I live but I would | 21% | 21% - 36 | ||||
| No.... its not legal where live and dont want one | 18% | 18% - 32 | ||||
| No... its legal where I live and don't want one | 18% | 18% - 31 | ||||
| Total: 170 | ||||||
yugo
I'm only a slight gun enthusiast, so my state of comparison is very limited. The support I mentioned earlier for the gun was based on my experiences with higher calibers and guns with more power (but were harder for me to aim as a result).IRONCHEF wrote:
Turq,
So is the Sigma as horrible and unreliable as many say? I frequent the m&p pistol site and most M&P owners are split 50/50 on the sigma, saying it was S&W's worst design, but good looking and for the other half, it's absolutely fine..aside of the heavy trigger.
I was actually looking to get one because they're priced nicely, but then got a wiff of all the naysayers and backed down (same with the SU16-ca 223 rifle).
I think you'd like the M&P..it's what the Sigma should have been.
I guess if you have a lot of experience with handguns, you might find the Sigma to be underpowered. Its main selling point is the price. You really can't beat the deal they had going for a while -- not for a new gun anyway.
Truth be told, I tend to prefer Glocks (the Glock 20 in particular), but I didn't buy one because of the price difference.
Caliber should not affect how you aim...at least for slow fire.
Glocks are OK, IMO. I'm not a huge fan of the trigger (the mushy first part of the trigger pull doesn't thrill me). Overall, it's very simple to operate and easy to clean. That much I definitely appreciate.
Glocks are OK, IMO. I'm not a huge fan of the trigger (the mushy first part of the trigger pull doesn't thrill me). Overall, it's very simple to operate and easy to clean. That much I definitely appreciate.
Glocks are great realiable, accurate guns. But dullRAIMIUS wrote:
Caliber should not affect how you aim...at least for slow fire.
Glocks are OK, IMO. I'm not a huge fan of the trigger (the mushy first part of the trigger pull doesn't thrill me). Overall, it's very simple to operate and easy to clean. That much I definitely appreciate.
I own 2 glocks and wont buy another for the simple fact if you own one, you own them all. No diversity, unless you look at barrel length and a couple of features or cals.
Same design almost for over 20 years in their full line up.
i much prefer a hammer anyway.
if they were legal, and you owned one. Why not use it for defense?jord wrote:
No but I would if they were legal. For the cool factor and enjoyment, I wouldn't defend myself with it.
would you rather run or throw stones at an attacker? Perhaps some martial arts(good altertative if your trained properly)
if some thug trys to carjack me, or break into my home. Either he better run when he hear's the slide clack, or he is gettin a bullet.
I really don't like the feel of Glocks. They are too light and dull, and the safety on the trigger is annoying. I think the H&K USP got the weight ratio right with the polycarbonate pistol bodies.
Overall, I'm for heavier guns just for the fun of it. 1911s and heavy-bore revolvers are my cup of tea.
Overall, I'm for heavier guns just for the fun of it. 1911s and heavy-bore revolvers are my cup of tea.
if you like heft get a SIG Sauer. They feel like a solid block of steel in your hand. They also shoot extremely well and hold value.Marconius wrote:
I really don't like the feel of Glocks. They are too light and dull, and the safety on the trigger is annoying. I think the H&K USP got the weight ratio right with the polycarbonate pistol bodies.
Overall, I'm for heavier guns just for the fun of it. 1911s and heavy-bore revolvers are my cup of tea.
That is too true about the "safety" on the Glock. (I don't consider something that is disengaged when the trigger is pulled very much of a safety!) IMO, the trigger should be a trigger, period.Marconius wrote:
I really don't like the feel of Glocks. They are too light and dull, and the safety on the trigger is annoying. I think the H&K USP got the weight ratio right with the polycarbonate pistol bodies.
Overall, I'm for heavier guns just for the fun of it. 1911s and heavy-bore revolvers are my cup of tea.
+1 on 1911s. The trigger is much better than a glock! Plus, it's an accurate, proven design. (...and it's a classic)
Various reasons. One, the law. You have to defend with equal force. Which means if someone breaks in with a stick then you can't put 6 holes into him.beerface702 wrote:
if they were legal, and you owned one. Why not use it for defense?jord wrote:
No but I would if they were legal. For the cool factor and enjoyment, I wouldn't defend myself with it.
would you rather run or throw stones at an attacker? Perhaps some martial arts(good altertative if your trained properly)
if some thug trys to carjack me, or break into my home. Either he better run when he hear's the slide clack, or he is gettin a bullet.
2, I'd rather just fight someone as they're likely to be unarmed here.
3, No I wouldn't throw stones. I have lots of knives arouund the house and 3 swords. As well as something called hands.
4, Martial Arts never work... Fact.
5, Nothing more to add. Just wanna add my points on a nice round number.
jord, I'd still prefer the best tool available. Based on US data (FBI UCR), those injured least often resisted with a firearm. Next, was submitting to the attacker. All other defenses (knives, clubs, blunt objects, stune guns, pepper spray, etc) were all more likely to end with the victim injured or dead.
God Save the Queen wrote:
http://www.demopolislive.com/gallery/im … r_arms.jpg
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Can't argue with that. Just once people start defending with guns, people start attacking with guns. And instead of someone getting knocked out with a crowbar or stabbed a few times. They get shot and die.RAIMIUS wrote:
jord, I'd still prefer the best tool available. Based on US data (FBI UCR), those injured least often resisted with a firearm. Next, was submitting to the attacker. All other defenses (knives, clubs, blunt objects, stune guns, pepper spray, etc) were all more likely to end with the victim injured or dead.
That can´t be true can it? aint it you have the right to defend yourself ( or someone else for that matter ) with as much force that´s necessary. It can get really tricky for the court to decide if you overdid though.jord wrote:
Various reasons. One, the law. You have to defend with equal force. Which means if someone breaks in with a stick then you can't put 6 holes into him.beerface702 wrote:
if they were legal, and you owned one. Why not use it for defense?jord wrote:
No but I would if they were legal. For the cool factor and enjoyment, I wouldn't defend myself with it.
would you rather run or throw stones at an attacker? Perhaps some martial arts(good altertative if your trained properly)
if some thug trys to carjack me, or break into my home. Either he better run when he hear's the slide clack, or he is gettin a bullet.
Sounds quite harsh otherwise to me. Don´t think the laws are that different in Britain from here on that matter.
"As the law stands, if you hurt someone while defending yourself, or while stopping a crime, you won’t be prosecuted even if you kill, so long as what you did was reasonable in the circumstances. You’ll only be prosecuted if you have acted unreasonably."madmurre wrote:
That can´t be true can it? aint it you have the right to defend yourself ( or someone else for that matter ) with as much force that´s necessary. It can get really tricky for the court to decide if you overdid though.jord wrote:
Various reasons. One, the law. You have to defend with equal force. Which means if someone breaks in with a stick then you can't put 6 holes into him.beerface702 wrote:
if they were legal, and you owned one. Why not use it for defense?
would you rather run or throw stones at an attacker? Perhaps some martial arts(good altertative if your trained properly)
if some thug trys to carjack me, or break into my home. Either he better run when he hear's the slide clack, or he is gettin a bullet.
Sounds quite harsh otherwise to me. Don´t think the laws are that different in Britain from here on that matter.
From Times online.
There was a story on it a few years back if anyone from here remembers. A farmer shot 2 burglars with a shotgun and killed one, he was put in prison. Every sitution is differant. I would imagine if a guy is beating you with a golf club you could stab and kill him. Or even shoot him and kill him. But if you see him first you have to warn him, like "Freeze!". You couldn't just blow his brains out before he noticed you.
You also can't shoot people as they run away with whatever they stole. You have to be in immediate danger.
A .357 is small??Volatile wrote:
Only own a small .357 revolver now for protection(good for CCW).
Oh and yeah I owned 2 weapons... a .22 Bolt action rifle for rabbits and possums, and a Luger 9mm handgun. Surrendered them both to the police about 13 years ago.
Last edited by -101-InvaderZim (2008-05-11 14:13:16)
I think he was just saying it's a short .357 pistol, not saying .357 mag is a "small" chambering.-101-InvaderZim wrote:
A .357 is small??Volatile wrote:
Only own a small .357 revolver now for protection(good for CCW).
Oh and yeah I owned 2 weapons... a .22 Bolt action rifle for rabbits and possums, and a Luger 9mm handgun. Surrendered them both to the police about 13 years ago.
When you surrendered your guns, did they come to your house, or did you drop them off somewhere? Describe it. I'm just curious about how they did it and how the people responded.
I really hope that was sarcasm. If not, I hope you are just really young.jord wrote:
Various reasons. One, the law. You have to defend with equal force. Which means if someone breaks in with a stick then you can't put 6 holes into him.beerface702 wrote:
if they were legal, and you owned one. Why not use it for defense?jord wrote:
No but I would if they were legal. For the cool factor and enjoyment, I wouldn't defend myself with it.
would you rather run or throw stones at an attacker? Perhaps some martial arts(good altertative if your trained properly)
if some thug trys to carjack me, or break into my home. Either he better run when he hear's the slide clack, or he is gettin a bullet.
2, I'd rather just fight someone as they're likely to be unarmed here.
I gotta agree. Only an idiot desires a "fair" fight. I'll take any advantage I can get, should my continued well-being be on the line!Deadmonkiefart wrote:
I really hope that was sarcasm. If not, I hope you are just really young.jord wrote:
Various reasons. One, the law. You have to defend with equal force. Which means if someone breaks in with a stick then you can't put 6 holes into him.beerface702 wrote:
if they were legal, and you owned one. Why not use it for defense?
would you rather run or throw stones at an attacker? Perhaps some martial arts(good altertative if your trained properly)
if some thug trys to carjack me, or break into my home. Either he better run when he hear's the slide clack, or he is gettin a bullet.
2, I'd rather just fight someone as they're likely to be unarmed here.
Edit:
Kimber or Springfield for a 1911? What say you?
Last edited by RAIMIUS (2008-05-14 20:39:34)
THREAD NECRO!
A gun update:
A month ago I picked up a new Glock 27 (subcompact .40-cal) for $385. Today I swiped this beauty:
That's an RPK, folks! Go ahead and guess how much.
edit: yes, I know the safety's off. There's nothing in it.
A gun update:
A month ago I picked up a new Glock 27 (subcompact .40-cal) for $385. Today I swiped this beauty:
That's an RPK, folks! Go ahead and guess how much.
edit: yes, I know the safety's off. There's nothing in it.
Last edited by HollisHurlbut (2009-01-16 19:18:02)
Usually see the C.A.I. RPKs for $600-700 at gunshows.
I estimated that, if I wanted to turn around and dump it, I'd get about $650. I'd make a tidy profit there -- your guess is too high!
300 bucks.
Well that would have been awesome, but I actually got it for $535. Hart Brothers Weaponry in Albert Lea, MN is a frickin' goldmine. The guy that runs that place is top notch. He's also got a couple Dragunovs that I would have been interested in for about $950, if I could have afforded that. Even this RPK was pushing it, but I figured I'd better get it before I can't.
What are you gonna use it for? Intimidating would-be burglars?