|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#181
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 10:08:35 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 19:45:15 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 8:54:54 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote: On 1/10/2020 5:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/10/2020 1:08 PM, wrote: Tell us all what happens to any state that bans the ownership of weapons. No state ever has. It's a right wing fantasy. Mexico does. You're allowed to have weapons in Mexico. You're allowed to have weapons in every other nation on earth. But no nation on earth allows _all_ types of weapons for _any_ people. Even though when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs. https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/mexico...everal-others/ Maybe they just "need better laws". The alternative is ... what? Give the kid an AR-15 instead? That doesn't seem to work well here. - Frank Krygowski - Frank Krygowski I find it interesting that AR-15's seem to be treasured mainly by those who never had to carry them in earnest. :-) -- cheers, John B. Kind of like Donald "Bone Spurs" Dump loves the military. Loves to increase its budget at an astronomical rate. Loves to pardon soldiers convicted in a trial of murdering a prisoner. Loves to use the military to threaten any and every other country. Has any Dump family member ever been in the military? |
Ads |
#182
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 06:29:14 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote: On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:54:31 +0700, John B. wrote: On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 21:13:17 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/14/2020 8:13 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: [...] There are many guns optimized for more civilized uses - shotguns optimized for hunting birds, long range hunting rifles for elk at 1000 yards, ordinary hunting rifles (like a Ruger 10/22 for example), competition target rifles, ordinary 0.22s that are good at tin cans, etc. The Ruger 10/22 is a nice, practical choice. I bought one myself. I'm guessing you mention it specifically because you have one or have used one. But. It's a semi-automatic weapon. The standard magazine is 10 rounds, but larger ones are readily available. It does take a much less powerful cartridge than the AR-15, but, really, it works just the same, at least from the operator's perspective. Ruger also makes the mini-14, which is a semi-auto chambered in .223, like the AR-15, but with wood furniture and no carry handle on top. Now, you could have chosen any of a multitude of rifles with falling block, bolt, or pump action, but for *some* reason you chose the 10/22. Why? Didn't you consider that you and yours might be irrestibly tempted to hose down the Ohio countryside with semi-auto fire? Wait. You might have left the evil magazine at home, or thrown it in the trash, and loaded the rifle by hand, single shot. Easy enough if your fingers are small. Enquiring minds want to know. Here's the world in which we actually live: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s....-2018/tables/ expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls Note edged weapons beat rifles 5 to 1. Given Frank's battle-cry "ban the AR-15" it is interesting to see that some 297 murders were commented with rifles, or in other words could have been commented with an AR-15, amounted to 2.8% of the total firearm deaths while those commented with hand guns, i.e., pistols, which Frank never mentions amounted to 64%. Err, does that excludeshootings by cop? The table is titled "Expanded Homicide Data Table" so one assumes that if the "shooting by cop" is deemed a homicide it is included :-) -- cheers, John B. |
#183
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 21:55:40 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 00:30:59 UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 20:22:25 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 14 January 2020 11:51:25 UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/13/2020 11:30 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:17:26 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/13/2020 8:10 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:31:49 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: You mentioned bows and arrows. But the bows sold in sporting goods stores near me were never designed with homicide or armed combat in mind. The AR-15 absolutely was. Why do you say that? Because it's absolutely true. Anyone can look up the history of the gun's development and see what the design objectives were. They can look at the early sales (or procurement) history to confirm things. Do you imagine that modern self bows and arrows are significantly different from the war bows and arrows of, oh say, the battle of Crecy? John, you're picking at nits in an unsuccessful attempt at distraction. Before Crecy (and probably after) armies also used stones as weapons. (Look up the historic military use of slings.) But we've never had modern mass murders committed by people using slings or arrows. Those weapons are irrelevant. The AR-15 type was absolutely designed as a people killer, and it's been used that way by criminals and nut cases with distressing regularity. Its combat features are not needed for normal hunting, for shooting of pest animals, for target shooting or for legitimate self defense. But Frank, the latest "mass killing" at the wasn't a AR-15 type.... it was a Glock 9 pistol as carried by many police officers. The shootings at the Washington Navy Yard shootings in 2013 was with a Remington 870 shotgun. I think that you are witch hunting, After all the AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle and the first semi-automatic rifle produced and sold in the U.S. was the Remington Model 8 which went on sale in 1905. One conter-example doesn't change the facts. You're squirming away from my main point. The AR-15 was designed for killing people, not for any other practical use like hunting or target shooting. It retains the features that make it an efficient people killer but confer no other benefit. It's not needed by sane gun users without a Rambo fetish. What's next? The 20 round magazine? But I have already explained that the Henry, from way back when, held 16 cartridges and as you haven't ranted about that I can only assume that you don't oppose large magazines. Your memory is short. In the past, I've said there is no reason for non-military guns to have a rapid fire capability. I stand by that. Competent hunters don't fire in bursts. That capability is not needed for self defense, and the only target shooters who do that are the Rambo wannabees. Save the "pow pow pow pow pow pow pow" experience for military combat - and if you insist, stupid video games. (Although I'll note the Mexican kid that triggered this thread was into those stupid games.) It is probably also pertinent to mention that mass shootings from 1982 to 1919 have overwhelmingly been carried out with pistols . Right. I'm in favor of Canada's policies on handguns. BTW, Sir Ridesalot never answered my question. How are things going in your city, given Canada's rational gun control laws? Are you able to somehow get by despite those laws? Or perhaps because of them? See https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...ompare-canadas -- - Frank Krygowski Wll, in Toronto, Canada it seems that only the criminals have the handguns. At least it's the criminals using them that I hear and read about. I really hated it back in the 1980s when they came out with the Firearms Acquisition Certificate crap and then arbitrarily banned all long guns with a barrel length less than a certain length. Overnight my Lee Enfield No. V Jungle Carbine, my M1 Carbine with Infra-red scope and a few other rifles were illegal once a certain date passed. Those rifles and carbines were bought fully legally according to the law at the time. Another interesting thing happened during the flooding in High River. The RCMP took a number of rifles from homes. Interestingly enough it was only the homes where the rifles had been registered that lost them. I am very sorry that I sold my carbines and other rifles instead of just hiding them and keeping quiet that I still owned them. Cheers Out of curiosity what is the minimum barrel length and can that include a muzzle brake? In the U.S. I believe it is 16 inches (I somehow think it used to be 18 inches?). I ask as I once acquired a small ring mauser carbine that had a short barrel and made a muzzle brake and silver soldered it onto the barrel and while I never asked the tax people it was acceptable in the trade as it was non removable. -- cheers, John B. I forget what the minimum barrel length is but I do know that it does NOT include a muzzle brake or flash suppressor. For example say the minimum barrel length is your 16 inches and you have a barrel length of 1.5 inches and a flash suppressor of two inches. that weapon would be illegal. Cheers CHeers I had thought something similar and I asked around and was told that if a muzzle brake or adjustable choke was screwed on it couldn't be counted but if it was permanently attached it was part of the barrel. I have no idea whether this was true or not but I silver soldered the muzzle brake on and finished the gun - new stock, blue job, etc and sold it for a good price. I remember it was some odd ball 6mm caliber and ammo was hard to find. -- cheers, John B. |
#185
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 22:50:52 -0800 (PST), "
wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 10:08:35 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote: On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 19:45:15 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 8:54:54 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote: On 1/10/2020 5:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/10/2020 1:08 PM, wrote: Tell us all what happens to any state that bans the ownership of weapons. No state ever has. It's a right wing fantasy. Mexico does. You're allowed to have weapons in Mexico. You're allowed to have weapons in every other nation on earth. But no nation on earth allows _all_ types of weapons for _any_ people. Even though when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs. https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/mexico...everal-others/ Maybe they just "need better laws". The alternative is ... what? Give the kid an AR-15 instead? That doesn't seem to work well here. - Frank Krygowski - Frank Krygowski I find it interesting that AR-15's seem to be treasured mainly by those who never had to carry them in earnest. :-) -- cheers, John B. Kind of like Donald "Bone Spurs" Dump loves the military. Loves to increase its budget at an astronomical rate. Loves to pardon soldiers convicted in a trial of murdering a prisoner. Loves to use the military to threaten any and every other country. Has any Dump family member ever been in the military? Ah but think of all that lovely Defense Department lolly that floats downstream into the civilian economy. "In 2015, for example, military installations in North Carolina supported 578,000 jobs, $34 billion in personal income and $66 billion in gross state product. This amounts to roughly 10 percent of the state's overall economy." -- cheers, John B. |
#186
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 22:50:52 -0800, wrote:
On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 10:08:35 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote: On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 19:45:15 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 8:54:54 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote: On 1/10/2020 5:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/10/2020 1:08 PM, wrote: Tell us all what happens to any state that bans the ownership of weapons. No state ever has. It's a right wing fantasy. Mexico does. You're allowed to have weapons in Mexico. You're allowed to have weapons in every other nation on earth. But no nation on earth allows _all_ types of weapons for _any_ people. Even though when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs. https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/mexico...g-12-year-old- boy-kills-teacher-injures-several-others/ Maybe they just "need better laws". The alternative is ... what? Give the kid an AR-15 instead? That doesn't seem to work well here. - Frank Krygowski - Frank Krygowski I find it interesting that AR-15's seem to be treasured mainly by those who never had to carry them in earnest. :-) -- cheers, John B. Kind of like Donald "Bone Spurs" Dump loves the military. Loves to increase its budget at an astronomical rate. Loves to pardon soldiers convicted in a trial of murdering a prisoner. Loves to use the military to threaten any and every other country. Has any Dump family member ever been in the military? 2What an absolutyly dumb question. The military is not there to be served in, but to protect the families economic interests. Remember his grandpappy started by selling "road kill" and squatting. |
#187
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 02:03:22 UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 21:55:40 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 00:30:59 UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 20:22:25 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 14 January 2020 11:51:25 UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/13/2020 11:30 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:17:26 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/13/2020 8:10 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:31:49 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: You mentioned bows and arrows. But the bows sold in sporting goods stores near me were never designed with homicide or armed combat in mind. The AR-15 absolutely was. Why do you say that? Because it's absolutely true. Anyone can look up the history of the gun's development and see what the design objectives were. They can look at the early sales (or procurement) history to confirm things. Do you imagine that modern self bows and arrows are significantly different from the war bows and arrows of, oh say, the battle of Crecy? John, you're picking at nits in an unsuccessful attempt at distraction. Before Crecy (and probably after) armies also used stones as weapons. (Look up the historic military use of slings.) But we've never had modern mass murders committed by people using slings or arrows. Those weapons are irrelevant. The AR-15 type was absolutely designed as a people killer, and it's been used that way by criminals and nut cases with distressing regularity. Its combat features are not needed for normal hunting, for shooting of pest animals, for target shooting or for legitimate self defense.. But Frank, the latest "mass killing" at the wasn't a AR-15 type..... it was a Glock 9 pistol as carried by many police officers. The shootings at the Washington Navy Yard shootings in 2013 was with a Remington 870 shotgun. I think that you are witch hunting, After all the AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle and the first semi-automatic rifle produced and sold in the U.S. was the Remington Model 8 which went on sale in 1905. One conter-example doesn't change the facts. You're squirming away from my main point. The AR-15 was designed for killing people, not for any other practical use like hunting or target shooting. It retains the features that make it an efficient people killer but confer no other benefit. It's not needed by sane gun users without a Rambo fetish. What's next? The 20 round magazine? But I have already explained that the Henry, from way back when, held 16 cartridges and as you haven't ranted about that I can only assume that you don't oppose large magazines. Your memory is short. In the past, I've said there is no reason for non-military guns to have a rapid fire capability. I stand by that. Competent hunters don't fire in bursts. That capability is not needed for self defense, and the only target shooters who do that are the Rambo wannabees. Save the "pow pow pow pow pow pow pow" experience for military combat - and if you insist, stupid video games. (Although I'll note the Mexican kid that triggered this thread was into those stupid games.) It is probably also pertinent to mention that mass shootings from 1982 to 1919 have overwhelmingly been carried out with pistols . Right. I'm in favor of Canada's policies on handguns. BTW, Sir Ridesalot never answered my question. How are things going in your city, given Canada's rational gun control laws? Are you able to somehow get by despite those laws? Or perhaps because of them? See https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...ompare-canadas -- - Frank Krygowski Wll, in Toronto, Canada it seems that only the criminals have the handguns. At least it's the criminals using them that I hear and read about. I really hated it back in the 1980s when they came out with the Firearms Acquisition Certificate crap and then arbitrarily banned all long guns with a barrel length less than a certain length. Overnight my Lee Enfield No. V Jungle Carbine, my M1 Carbine with Infra-red scope and a few other rifles were illegal once a certain date passed. Those rifles and carbines were bought fully legally according to the law at the time. Another interesting thing happened during the flooding in High River. The RCMP took a number of rifles from homes. Interestingly enough it was only the homes where the rifles had been registered that lost them. I am very sorry that I sold my carbines and other rifles instead of just hiding them and keeping quiet that I still owned them. Cheers Out of curiosity what is the minimum barrel length and can that include a muzzle brake? In the U.S. I believe it is 16 inches (I somehow think it used to be 18 inches?). I ask as I once acquired a small ring mauser carbine that had a short barrel and made a muzzle brake and silver soldered it onto the barrel and while I never asked the tax people it was acceptable in the trade as it was non removable. -- cheers, John B. I forget what the minimum barrel length is but I do know that it does NOT include a muzzle brake or flash suppressor. For example say the minimum barrel length is your 16 inches and you have a barrel length of 1.5 inches and a flash suppressor of two inches. that weapon would be illegal. Cheers CHeers I had thought something similar and I asked around and was told that if a muzzle brake or adjustable choke was screwed on it couldn't be counted but if it was permanently attached it was part of the barrel. I have no idea whether this was true or not but I silver soldered the muzzle brake on and finished the gun - new stock, blue job, etc and sold it for a good price. I remember it was some odd ball 6mm caliber and ammo was hard to find. -- cheers, John B. When the law was passed here that limited non-registered long guns to a certain barrel length, it didn't matter whether the flash suppressor was permanently attached to the barrel or not. It made my otherwise perfectly (and previously legal) Lee-Enfield No. V Jungle Carbine illegal without a special permit. Here in Canada we have all sorts of gun control laws but they don't seem to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals or soon to be criminals; they just keep or remove them from the hands of law abiding citizens. The incidents in High River during the flooding just goes to show the danger of registering your firearms. If I had to do it again, I'd not sell my firearms just before they became illegal. I'd hide them and not let anyone know I still had them. Cheers |
#188
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 04:08:57 UTC-5, news18 wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 22:50:52 -0800, wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 10:08:35 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote: On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 19:45:15 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 8:54:54 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote: On 1/10/2020 5:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/10/2020 1:08 PM, wrote: Tell us all what happens to any state that bans the ownership of weapons. No state ever has. It's a right wing fantasy. Mexico does. You're allowed to have weapons in Mexico. You're allowed to have weapons in every other nation on earth. But no nation on earth allows _all_ types of weapons for _any_ people.. Even though when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs. https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/mexico...g-12-year-old- boy-kills-teacher-injures-several-others/ Maybe they just "need better laws". The alternative is ... what? Give the kid an AR-15 instead? That doesn't seem to work well here. - Frank Krygowski - Frank Krygowski I find it interesting that AR-15's seem to be treasured mainly by those who never had to carry them in earnest. :-) -- cheers, John B. Kind of like Donald "Bone Spurs" Dump loves the military. Loves to increase its budget at an astronomical rate. Loves to pardon soldiers convicted in a trial of murdering a prisoner. Loves to use the military to threaten any and every other country. Has any Dump family member ever been in the military? 2What an absolutyly dumb question. The military is not there to be served in, but to protect the families economic interests. Remember his grandpappy started by selling "road kill" and squatting. Our Prime Minister's father hid during WW2 so he wouldn't have to be in the military. How such people can t hen lead a country's military or choose a qualified defense minister is beyond me. Then again, the titular head of Canada is actually the Queen. Our current Prime Minister would be a joke if things weren't so serious. Cheers |
#189
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 02:02:09 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 04:08:57 UTC-5, news18 wrote: On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 22:50:52 -0800, wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 10:08:35 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote: On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 19:45:15 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, January 10, 2020 at 8:54:54 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote: On 1/10/2020 5:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/10/2020 1:08 PM, wrote: Tell us all what happens to any state that bans the ownership of weapons. No state ever has. It's a right wing fantasy. Mexico does. You're allowed to have weapons in Mexico. You're allowed to have weapons in every other nation on earth. But no nation on earth allows _all_ types of weapons for _any_ people. Even though when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs. https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/mexico...g-12-year-old- boy-kills-teacher-injures-several-others/ Maybe they just "need better laws". The alternative is ... what? Give the kid an AR-15 instead? That doesn't seem to work well here. - Frank Krygowski - Frank Krygowski I find it interesting that AR-15's seem to be treasured mainly by those who never had to carry them in earnest. :-) -- cheers, John B. Kind of like Donald "Bone Spurs" Dump loves the military. Loves to increase its budget at an astronomical rate. Loves to pardon soldiers convicted in a trial of murdering a prisoner. Loves to use the military to threaten any and every other country. Has any Dump family member ever been in the military? 2What an absolutyly dumb question. The military is not there to be served in, but to protect the families economic interests. Remember his grandpappy started by selling "road kill" and squatting. Our Prime Minister's father hid during WW2 so he wouldn't have to be in the military. How such people can t hen lead a country's military or choose a qualified defense minister is beyond me. Then again, the titular head of Canada is actually the Queen. Our current Prime Minister would be a joke if things weren't so serious. Cheers The U.S. Government has estimated that as many as 40,000, from the land of the free and the brave, flew the coop to Canada to avoid the draft. -- cheers, John B. |
#190
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 01:58:16 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 02:03:22 UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 21:55:40 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 00:30:59 UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 20:22:25 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 14 January 2020 11:51:25 UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/13/2020 11:30 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:17:26 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/13/2020 8:10 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:31:49 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: You mentioned bows and arrows. But the bows sold in sporting goods stores near me were never designed with homicide or armed combat in mind. The AR-15 absolutely was. Why do you say that? Because it's absolutely true. Anyone can look up the history of the gun's development and see what the design objectives were. They can look at the early sales (or procurement) history to confirm things. Do you imagine that modern self bows and arrows are significantly different from the war bows and arrows of, oh say, the battle of Crecy? John, you're picking at nits in an unsuccessful attempt at distraction. Before Crecy (and probably after) armies also used stones as weapons. (Look up the historic military use of slings.) But we've never had modern mass murders committed by people using slings or arrows. Those weapons are irrelevant. The AR-15 type was absolutely designed as a people killer, and it's been used that way by criminals and nut cases with distressing regularity. Its combat features are not needed for normal hunting, for shooting of pest animals, for target shooting or for legitimate self defense. But Frank, the latest "mass killing" at the wasn't a AR-15 type.... it was a Glock 9 pistol as carried by many police officers. The shootings at the Washington Navy Yard shootings in 2013 was with a Remington 870 shotgun. I think that you are witch hunting, After all the AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle and the first semi-automatic rifle produced and sold in the U.S. was the Remington Model 8 which went on sale in 1905. One conter-example doesn't change the facts. You're squirming away from my main point. The AR-15 was designed for killing people, not for any other practical use like hunting or target shooting. It retains the features that make it an efficient people killer but confer no other benefit. It's not needed by sane gun users without a Rambo fetish. What's next? The 20 round magazine? But I have already explained that the Henry, from way back when, held 16 cartridges and as you haven't ranted about that I can only assume that you don't oppose large magazines. Your memory is short. In the past, I've said there is no reason for non-military guns to have a rapid fire capability. I stand by that. Competent hunters don't fire in bursts. That capability is not needed for self defense, and the only target shooters who do that are the Rambo wannabees. Save the "pow pow pow pow pow pow pow" experience for military combat - and if you insist, stupid video games. (Although I'll note the Mexican kid that triggered this thread was into those stupid games.) It is probably also pertinent to mention that mass shootings from 1982 to 1919 have overwhelmingly been carried out with pistols . Right. I'm in favor of Canada's policies on handguns. BTW, Sir Ridesalot never answered my question. How are things going in your city, given Canada's rational gun control laws? Are you able to somehow get by despite those laws? Or perhaps because of them? See https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...ompare-canadas -- - Frank Krygowski Wll, in Toronto, Canada it seems that only the criminals have the handguns. At least it's the criminals using them that I hear and read about. I really hated it back in the 1980s when they came out with the Firearms Acquisition Certificate crap and then arbitrarily banned all long guns with a barrel length less than a certain length. Overnight my Lee Enfield No. V Jungle Carbine, my M1 Carbine with Infra-red scope and a few other rifles were illegal once a certain date passed. Those rifles and carbines were bought fully legally according to the law at the time. Another interesting thing happened during the flooding in High River. The RCMP took a number of rifles from homes. Interestingly enough it was only the homes where the rifles had been registered that lost them. I am very sorry that I sold my carbines and other rifles instead of just hiding them and keeping quiet that I still owned them. Cheers Out of curiosity what is the minimum barrel length and can that include a muzzle brake? In the U.S. I believe it is 16 inches (I somehow think it used to be 18 inches?). I ask as I once acquired a small ring mauser carbine that had a short barrel and made a muzzle brake and silver soldered it onto the barrel and while I never asked the tax people it was acceptable in the trade as it was non removable. -- cheers, John B. I forget what the minimum barrel length is but I do know that it does NOT include a muzzle brake or flash suppressor. For example say the minimum barrel length is your 16 inches and you have a barrel length of 1.5 inches and a flash suppressor of two inches. that weapon would be illegal. Cheers CHeers I had thought something similar and I asked around and was told that if a muzzle brake or adjustable choke was screwed on it couldn't be counted but if it was permanently attached it was part of the barrel. I have no idea whether this was true or not but I silver soldered the muzzle brake on and finished the gun - new stock, blue job, etc and sold it for a good price. I remember it was some odd ball 6mm caliber and ammo was hard to find. -- cheers, John B. When the law was passed here that limited non-registered long guns to a certain barrel length, it didn't matter whether the flash suppressor was permanently attached to the barrel or not. It made my otherwise perfectly (and previously legal) Lee-Enfield No. V Jungle Carbine illegal without a special permit. Here in Canada we have all sorts of gun control laws but they don't seem to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals or soon to be criminals; they just keep or remove them from the hands of law abiding citizens. The incidents in High River during the flooding just goes to show the danger of registering your firearms. If I had to do it again, I'd not sell my firearms just before they became illegal. I'd hide them and not let anyone know I still had them. Cheers One of the reasons I view gun laws with a certain amount of skepticism is that they seem to written by people that are not familiar with the subject. California did, maybe still do, have a list of approved hand guns which included a specific model of S&W revolver in blue steel version but the same pistol in the stainless version was not listed and therefore unable to be traded in California :-) -- cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
This is just dumb... | Uncle Dave | Racing | 19 | September 28th 09 08:58 AM |
HOW dumb?? | Brimstone[_6_] | UK | 89 | April 6th 09 03:49 PM |
this is so dumb | brockfisher05 | Unicycling | 10 | December 18th 04 02:38 AM |
Dumb question | the black rose | General | 12 | October 19th 04 09:37 PM |
How dumb am I? | Andy P | UK | 2 | September 18th 03 08:37 PM |