• Firearms VI: Glocknades galore!
    4,009 replies, posted
[QUOTE=ewitwins;32199337]Wow, fuck, so apparently the machine pistol I posted only fires blanks or flares, and it's specifically built that way. Why would anyone want something like that?[/QUOTE]Wow, that's stupid.
[QUOTE=faze;32199361]Wow, that's stupid.[/QUOTE] I'm curious as to how hard it would be to...alter it. It also explains why I found so many youtube videos of people firing off in their bedrooms and offices.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;32199455]I'm curious as to how hard it would be to...alter it. It also explains why I found so many youtube videos of people firing off in their bedrooms and offices.[/QUOTE]Idiots. Also, altering it would be illegal without a class III FFL.
[QUOTE=faze;32199517]Idiots. Also, altering it would be illegal without a class III FFL.[/QUOTE] So hypothetically I could get it altered to fire live ammunition if I went through a Class III FFL?
My mistake, my Mosin was manufactured in Tula. I can't even see any pitting when I removed the bolt and peered down the rifle. 10 days to go
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32190991]And? It's not hard to clean a gun after firing corrosive, you just have to, y'know, actually [i]clean[/i] it. It's FMJ, so only able to really be used on ranges for target practice, because you can't hunt with FMJ. It's $100 for 440 rounds of the milsurp from what I hear, and corrosive doesn't mean your barrel starts disintegrating the second you fire it, corrosive means the primer leaves salt residue in the barrel that collects water and accelerates the process of rusting the gun. Wash the barrel in hot water after getting home from the range, clean it with some patches until one comes through the barrel clean and dry, clean the rest of the mechanism, and you're good to go. Check it a few days after just to make sure it's not rusting, but you should be fine. If you want to, you could clean it again a few days later just to be sure. "Corrosive" isn't as bad as it sounds; it's cheaper, and just requires you are a responsible gun owner and actually give your gun the cleaning it deserves.[/QUOTE] I do tend to clean them after using no-matter what, but FMJs or any special ammo are not allowed at my local ranges. I was so put off by corrosive rounds because the guy at the Big 5 I got my Mosin from said never use corrosive ammo as it wears down the steel quickly.
[QUOTE=Trooper0315;32202971]I do tend to clean them after using no-matter what, but FMJs or any special ammo are not allowed at my local ranges. I was so put off by corrosive rounds because the guy at the Big 5 I got my Mosin from said never use corrosive ammo as it wears down the steel quickly.[/QUOTE] Hot damn, California's gun laws are worse than up here, most ranges don't care because they know FMJ, which isn't really all that special, is abundant and that ranges are the only paces to fire them, really. Also, as I said, I don't see how it would, it doesn't begin dissolving the barrel or anything, it just leaves salt behind that, if left there, attracts moisture to accelerate rusting. As for if it's the bullet, I think the copper wash on the steel jacket on most milsurp bullets is there to prevent wear on the barrel and rust on the steel jacket. Think about it this way: your Mosin likely fired plenty of that kind of ammo 60 years ago, and it still works today because even a Russian Soldier could maintain it. It doesn't damage shit that hard if the guns are still in the condition they are after having used that shit some 60 years ago then being marinaded in cosmoline.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;32201264]So hypothetically I could get it altered to fire live ammunition if I went through a Class III FFL?[/QUOTE]Converting a not-real gun to a real gun, yes.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32203441]Hot damn, California's gun laws are worse than up here, most ranges don't care because they know FMJ, which isn't really all that special, is abundant and that ranges are the only paces to fire them, really. Also, as I said, I don't see how it would, it doesn't begin dissolving the barrel or anything, it just leaves salt behind that, if left there, attracts moisture to accelerate rusting. As for if it's the bullet, I think the copper wash on the steel jacket on most milsurp bullets is there to prevent wear on the barrel and rust on the steel jacket. Think about it this way: your Mosin likely fired plenty of that kind of ammo 60 years ago, and it still works today because even a Russian Soldier could maintain it. It doesn't damage shit that hard if the guns are still in the condition they are after having used that shit some 60 years ago then being marinaded in cosmoline.[/QUOTE] It isn't just FMJs and special ammo, they have to check your ammo with a magnet, and if it attracts it you can't use it. If they catch you using it you get a fine of about $100-$300 (I don't remember) even if they didn't check yours. EDIT: Let alone the fact that most of the ammo here is about 1/2 to 2 times as much as it was in Nevada and Oregon at our local gun store. The only upside of our Gun store is that they have about 4-5 original Mausers, a few old Springfields (ranging from 1920s to 1940s) and even an original Johnson rifle (competitor to the Garand in Testing) and Trenchgun.
[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;32203819]so what the fuck is wrong with a round that's magnetic dumb question but what the hell.[/QUOTE] They assume if it's magnetic then it has a steel core, which is considered Armour Piercing. However, because it's considered AP, importation of it to the US (and likely here too, as we get the steel jacket ones too) is banned, and instead they import lead core-steel jacket with a copper "wash," a light coat of copper for preservation and (presumably) to guard against steel-on-steel wear on the barrel. The steel jacket still attracts the magnet, so they assume steel core and therefore AP and therefore illegal, when in fact, it is not. It's really stupid given that FMJ can only be practically used for plinking, as hunting with it is banned (due to penetration, it's designed to go through), and the milsurp crap for Eastern Bloc shit is extremely abundant. Also, if ammo is cheaper in Oregon or Nevada, can't you buy it there and bring it home, or does California have its own "border patrol" to ensure you can't? It can't possibly be illegal to transport ammo across state lines, and even if it is, how could they know it came from out of state? As long as you don't get pulled over and get asked for proof of purchase, if you get it home how will they know where it came from? Not that I'm saying you should if it is illegal, but how would they keep track? It may be worth the gas if it saves that much on ammo to head to Nevada or Oregon.
[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;32203819]so what the fuck is wrong with a round that's magnetic dumb question but what the hell.[/QUOTE] Something about that if it ricochets off a rock or something it can start a brush-fire from the sparks and heat it makes. I hear that since North Cali is a much more forested area their ranges allow it. (I live about 2-3 hours away from the Mojave Desert, alot of dry brush around) Regarding above- It would be about a 7 hour drive to get out of state from where I live. This is the range I go to, [url]http://www.aplacetoshoot.net/[/url] and as you can see it is mostly dry brush so if what they say is true I can understand that.
[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;32203819]so what the fuck is wrong with a round that's magnetic dumb question but what the hell.[/QUOTE]US laws are the problem.
For some reason I don't see ricochets doing that all too often, or at all really. It probably happened once, likely out of coincidence, and they flipped a shit and banned them. Also, at least Cali allows you to bring out pre-ban weapons and high-cap mags, around here any non-pistol pre-bans can't be taken to a range and ALL semi-auto rifle mags have to be pinned at 5, even pre-ban, except for like 50 not very well known exceptions... [editline]9th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=faze;32204304]US laws are the problem.[/QUOTE] We get it, "The gubment tryna take my gunz away!" Try living somewhere with REAL restrictions, where guns are a privilege, before you go off complaining about taking guns away/gun laws. Also, that one is a range policy, not a US law, so in that case US laws AREN'T the problem, that range's policy is.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32204397]For some reason I don't see ricochets doing that all too often, or at all really. It probably happened once, likely out of coincidence, and they flipped a shit and banned them. Also, at least Cali allows you to bring out pre-ban weapons and high-cap mags, around here any non-pistol pre-bans can't be taken to a range and ALL semi-auto rifle mags have to be pinned at 5, even pre-ban, except for like 50 not very well known exceptions...[/QUOTE]Maryland is the same with magazines. You can't buy mag's in state holding over 20 rounds, but it's perfectly legal to go outta state and buy them. So fucking stupid. It's just irritating. If I were to go on a shooting spree, I'd just buy tons of 20 round magazines. 75 round drums are bulky and heavy.
[QUOTE=faze;32204440]Maryland is the same with magazines. You can't buy mag's in state holding over 20 rounds, but it's perfectly legal to go outta state and buy them. So fucking stupid. It's just irritating. If I were to go on a shooting spree, I'd just buy tons of 20 round magazines. 75 round drums are bulky and heavy.[/QUOTE] Up here you can't get above 5 legally, except for rimfire or belt-feds designed before 46. Either way, if I were to go on a shooting spree I'd get an illegal gun and illegally unpinned magazines, they're not hard to find in the bad parts of the city from what I've heard. That, and pistols are allowed 10 in the mag. A pistol can have more shots in it than a rifle, but which is more likely to be used in a modern school shooting, an easily concealable pistol or a large and obvious rifle? The only reason that restriction is there in the first place is one shooting in the late '80s done with a semi rifle that was legal. If you think Maryland's gun laws are dumb, or any other states', check out [url=http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11.6/]The Firearms Act of Canada[/url] and some of its restrictions, contradictions, and prescribed prohibitions of guns that "look evil." Even farther than that you could look up Britain's or Australia's gun laws. Then you'll know about dumb restrictions.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32204397]For some reason I don't see ricochets doing that all too often, or at all really. It probably happened once, likely out of coincidence, and they flipped a shit and banned them. Also, at least Cali allows you to bring out pre-ban weapons and high-cap mags, around here any non-pistol pre-bans can't be taken to a range and ALL semi-auto rifle mags have to be pinned at 5, even pre-ban, except for like 50 not very well known exceptions... [editline]9th September 2011[/editline] We get it, "The gubment tryna take my gunz away!" Try living somewhere with REAL restrictions, where guns are a privilege, before you go off complaining about taking guns away/gun laws. Also, that one is a range policy, not a US law, so in that case US laws AREN'T the problem, that range's policy is.[/QUOTE] Actually, I just checked some more ranges in my area and they all have that same exact rule, so I don't know if it is law or just a general range rule.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32204576]Up here you can't get above 5 legally, except for rimfire or belt-feds designed before 46. Either way, if I were to go on a shooting spree I'd get an illegal gun and illegally unpinned magazines, they're not hard to find in the bad parts of the city from what I've heard. That, and pistols are allowed 10 in the mag. A pistol can have more shots in it than a rifle, but which is more likely to be used in a modern school shooting, an easily concealable pistol or a large and obvious rifle? The only reason that restriction is there in the first place is one shooting in the late '80s done with a semi rifle that was legal. If you think Maryland's gun laws are dumb, or any other states', check out [url=http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11.6/]The Firearms Act of Canada[/url] and some of its restrictions, contradictions, and prescribed prohibitions of guns that "look evil." Even farther than that you could look up Britain's or Australia's gun laws. Then you'll know about dumb restrictions.[/QUOTE]A few US states are like that too. Sucks. Is it a Canadian law or a state law up there?
[QUOTE=faze;32204616]A few US states are like that too. Sucks. Is it a Canadian law or a state law up there?[/QUOTE] "States" up here are called provinces, and provinces really only regulate firearms registration, approval/denial of license applications (both of which have to go through the Royal Canadian Mounted Police federally too anyways), and hunting laws. Gun laws are set at a federal level, but I've heard Quebec has some of its own, not sure of the scope of them, all they could possibly be is more restrictive than the federal ones (provinces can't make any law more lenient than federal laws, and if they do federal law overrides it), but Quebec always has to be "special" within the country. For the most part, though, gun laws are almost entirely federal, any further restrictions tend to be for hunting only.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32204768]"States" up here are called provinces, and provinces really only regulate firearms registration, approval/denial of license applications (both of which have to go through the Royal Canadian Mounted Police federally too anyways), and hunting laws. Gun laws are set at a federal level, but I've heard Quebec has some of its own, not sure of the scope of them, all they could possibly be is more restrictive than the federal ones (provinces can't make any law more lenient than federal laws, and if they do federal law overrides it), but Quebec always has to be "special" within the country. For the most part, though, gun laws are almost entirely federal, any further restrictions tend to be for hunting only.[/QUOTE]Gotcha. Whereabouts are you?
Away from the annoying laws, I just found this. [url]http://www.lakesideguns.com/[/url] They make 1/2 scale .22 M2 brownings, and AR-15 conversion kits to make them into Belt-fed .22s
[QUOTE=Trooper0315;32204820]Away from the annoying laws, I just found this. [url]http://www.lakesideguns.com/[/url] They make 1/2 scale .22 M2 brownings, and AR-15 conversion kits to make them into Belt-fed .22s[/QUOTE]Look up the 22 gatling gun on YouTube. Pretty cool.
[QUOTE=faze;32204799]Gotcha. Whereabouts are you?[/QUOTE] Toronto, Ontario. We're apparently second worst in terms of gun attitudes in the country, mostly because Toronto was traditionally a Liberal stronghold and there was all this anti-gun attitude around here. Once you get up north, though, where less of Ontario's population is, they're all fine with guns, probably because most are either farmers, ex/current-military, or a combination of both. AFAIK we have no extra restrictive gun laws, and if ATTs were abolished federally we could hunt with pistols in this province, but the CFO is apparently usually a slow ass dick, who likes making up his own rules for getting a gun/license, like needing to belong to a club for a restricted (you don't, collecting is technically also a valid reason to own a gun, but the CFO here doesn't like people NOT belonging to a range, for some reason). I think with the upcoming provincial election the CFO, being guided always by the party in power in the province, the Liberals, is trying to make it seem like the Libs don't hate guns, which they do, they're the ones who banned all of them, to try and get more of the gun vote, because he's been extremely and unusually efficient and fast recently with licenses, registration, and ownership transfers.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32204903]Toronto, Ontario. We're apparently second worst in terms of gun attitudes in the country, mostly because Toronto was traditionally a Liberal stronghold and there was all this anti-gun attitude around here. Once you get up north, though, where less of Ontario's population is, they're all fine with guns, probably because most are either farmers, ex/current-military, or a combination of both. AFAIK we have no extra restrictive gun laws, and if ATTs were abolished federally we could hunt with pistols in this province, but the CFO is apparently usually a slow ass dick, who likes making up his own rules for getting a gun/license, like needing to belong to a club for a restricted (you don't, collecting is technically also a valid reason to own a gun, but the CFO here doesn't like people NOT belonging to a range, for some reason). I think with the upcoming provincial election the CFO, being guided always by the party in power in the province, the Liberals, is trying to make it seem like the Libs don't hate guns, which they do, they're the ones who banned all of them, to try and get more of the gun vote, because he's been extremely and unusually efficient and fast recently with licenses, registration, and ownership transfers.[/QUOTE]Interesting. Always cool to hear about how this new belief system came to be. Maryland has apparently always been this way. I'm just NW of Baltimore. Very liberal down here.
California only asks if you have any produce before entering the state, which is odd
[QUOTE=beanhead;32205920]California only asks if you have any produce before entering the state, which is odd[/QUOTE]California is stupid.
[QUOTE=faze;32204943]Interesting. Always cool to hear about how this new belief system came to be. Maryland has apparently always been this way. I'm just NW of Baltimore. Very liberal down here.[/QUOTE] This "new belief system" here mostly arose from the following university massacres: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89cole_Polytechnique_Massacre[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concordia_University_massacre[/url] Hence why Quebec also has stupider laws, they happened in Quebec. Also, after this, they made "self defence" an invalid reason to own a firearm across the country. Fucking Liberal Party. The RCMP will actually deny you a license or a registration of a firearm if you cite "self defence" as the reason for acquisition, unless you're one of the extremely few who got an Authorization to Carry, which is literally next to impossible.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32207045]This "new belief system" here mostly arose from the following university massacres: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89cole_Polytechnique_Massacre[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concordia_University_massacre[/url] Hence why Quebec also has stupider laws, they happened in Quebec. Also, after this, they made "self defence" an invalid reason to own a firearm across the country. Fucking Liberal Party. The RCMP will actually deny you a license or a registration of a firearm if you cite "self defence" as the reason for acquisition, unless you're one of the extremely few who got an Authorization to Carry, which is literally next to impossible.[/QUOTE]Yeah, you have New England laws basically. In New England states, you have a duty to flee your home when invaded. Fuck if my house is broken into, I'm drawing weapons. I have had several instances in the past couple months where I have drawn a gun. One I had a very thug-tastic looking gentleman pounding at my door. I grabbed my 45, racked a round and sat facing the door for an hour. Thank God for peepholes, very happy I can see who is pounding at my apartment door. Other two times I heard loud bangs (which were my cats) at 3am. Needless to say, I sleep very light I'm up and alert in a half second. Two loaded pistols next to me, I'm good to go. Fuck this liberal shit.
In Norway the only way to get a gun for self-defense is if you live at Svalbard, which means you'll need it to defend yourself against polarbears and not thugs breaking into your home to steal your tv.
Well, I think I'm pretty lucky. I don't need no silly licenses, but I wonder if there are any banned firearms here...
just got back from the gun show. got a 10 lb bag of tannerite and some 5.56 ammo
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.