• Firearms VI - Mosin McNuggets and Tokarev Tartare
    10,000 replies, posted
Fuck you Americans and your cheap ammo. We'd pay at least $250 for the cheapest surplus 7.62x54r ammo
[QUOTE=download;36934816]Fuck you Americans and your cheap ammo. We'd pay at least $250 for the cheapest surplus 7.62x54r ammo[/QUOTE] Not our fault.
What state is the best to live in gun wise?
[QUOTE=download;36934816]Fuck you Americans and your cheap ammo. We'd pay at least $250 for the cheapest surplus 7.62x54r ammo[/QUOTE] Yell at your government, not us!
[QUOTE=roxter;36934896]What state is the best to live in gun wise?[/QUOTE] Any one of the southern states. I highly recommend Virginia!
[QUOTE=Kartoffel;36934913]Any one of the southern states. I highly recommend Virginia![/QUOTE] Haha then it's what i expected ;) Would be awesome to move to the states one day.
[QUOTE=roxter;36934896]What state is the best to live in gun wise?[/QUOTE] Anywhere in the bible belt, I recommend South Georgia.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;36934945]Anywhere in the bible belt, I recommend South Georgia.[/QUOTE] Georgian here, it's a pretty awesome state gunwise. Vermont and Arizona are also great places in terms of loose gun laws.
only 7,62x54R sold here is expensive as fuck Barnaul feels bad [QUOTE=roxter;36934896]What state is the best to live in gun wise?[/QUOTE] Alaska. License-less open and concealed carry, no ASSULT WEPON bans and NFA things are legal. Also got the coolest nature.
[QUOTE=TacticalBacon;36934784]Ah, ok. Interesting that they allow that, do the people in power just not know that the AIA mags will fit in an M-14 or are they ignoring that little loophole?[/QUOTE] They ignore the loophole, and officially recognize it. It's the same thing with the AR-15 rifle and the LAR-15 pistol, the LAR has different 10-round mags that happen to fit in a normal AR, but are made for a pistol, therefore they can have a 10-round capacity, which means people can get 10-round mags for their ARs instead of having to pin the 30/50/100 round mags to 5. The RCMP officially recognize this loophole, as long as it isn't designed for something, but conveniently happens to work, it's legal. This happens with Hi-Power and Glock pistols, people put 13 rounds of 9mm in a mag for .40S&W, but it fits in the 9mm pistol. Because the mag is for .40, you can do this. Same thing with a Beretta semi-auto shotgun fitting 6-7 rounds of 12GA 2.75", it's designed for 3.5", so as long as it fits only 5 of those it's good, and being that there's a significant size difference at that point, it fits more of the shorter shells. I just wonder why nobody's made a 30-round lever action that uses mags "similar to but not quite exactly" a STANAG magazine, they'd be able to sell them for $200 because they'd work in the AR, as long as they're just different enough and not advertised as compatible or built for it. People will pay that much to basically give the RCMP a huge middle finger. This is why the Remington 7615 can't be used, as they advertise that it accepts STANAG mags, therefore the same restrictions as an AR apply.
Take pot shots at Russia in Alaska
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;36935286]They ignore the loophole, and officially recognize it. It's the same thing with the AR-15 rifle and the LAR-15 pistol, the LAR has different 10-round mags that happen to fit in a normal AR, but are made for a pistol, therefore they can have a 10-round capacity, which means people can get 10-round mags for their ARs instead of having to pin the 30/50/100 round mags to 5. The RCMP officially recognize this loophole, as long as it isn't designed for something, but conveniently happens to work, it's legal. This happens with Hi-Power and Glock pistols, people put 13 rounds of 9mm in a mag for .40S&W, but it fits in the 9mm pistol. Because the mag is for .40, you can do this. Same thing with a Beretta semi-auto shotgun fitting 6-7 rounds of 12GA 2.75", it's designed for 3.5", so as long as it fits only 5 of those it's good, and being that there's a significant size difference at that point, it fits more of the shorter shells. I just wonder why nobody's made a 30-round lever action that uses mags "similar to but not quite exactly" a STANAG magazine, they'd be able to sell them for $200 because they'd work in the AR, as long as they're just different enough and not advertised as compatible or built for it. People will pay that much to basically give the RCMP a huge middle finger. This is why the Remington 7615 can't be used, as they advertise that it accepts STANAG mags, therefore the same restrictions as an AR apply.[/QUOTE] because a lever action using stanag mags would be wide as fuck?
[QUOTE=Honesty;36935359]because a lever action using stanag mags would be wide as fuck?[/QUOTE] Who gives a shit, as long as 1 exists in the country, they can sell the mags and make all their money off those. It's not about practicality of the gun, it's about exploiting poorly written laws to piss the shit out of bureaucrats. It could also be a pump or a bolt, as long as it's manual action there's no mag restrictions.
[QUOTE=roxter;36934896]What state is the best to live in gun wise?[/QUOTE] Mississippi, Louisiana, or Georga as far as purchasing goes, just owning is vermont, firing is georgia
[QUOTE=Kartoffel;36934913]Any one of the southern states. I highly recommend Virginia![/QUOTE] Except Florida, ALL the laws here suck, not just the gun ones. Alabama is pretty good for shooting, in the rural area's at least.
Come to Montana, Alaska like gun-laws with actual civilization included. I'll even throw in no state sales tax for no extra charge!
[QUOTE=SomeENG;36937164]Come to Montana, Alaska like gun-laws with actual civilization included. I'll even throw in no state sales tax for no extra charge![/QUOTE] montana doesn't have any civilization you liar
Montana has some pretty beautiful scenery. Passed through there on a trip to Yellowstone a few years back. [editline]25th July 2012[/editline] In other news, I convinced my grandpa to get a FOID card. He got it yesterday. Today he told me he bought a few things. [sp]Glock 17 Glock 23 or 27, can't quite remember S&W 686 Ruger 10/22[/sp] My grandpa is cool.
Well, the Tea Party's worse fear has been realised, "Obongos going to take our gunz!" While I do agree with plans to keep legally purchased guns out of the hands of nutters, banning Ak47 won't do squat
Wait, what's this about an assault rifle ban?
[QUOTE=ewitwins;36940979]Wait, what's this about an assault rifle ban?[/QUOTE] I don't think it will be an "Assult" weapon ban, he just said "Most American gun owners would agree, people don't need AK47s" Anyway, no one in the Republican party will vote for this, and a few Democrats won't also [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] "He offered no specific proposals but referred to background checks to prevent criminals and fugitives from purchasing weapons, and preventing guns from getting into the hands of the mentally unbalanced." [url]http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/us-president-barack-obama-gets-tough-on-gun-control/story-fnd134gw-1226435721625[/url] [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] "Obama said today that every day and a half, the same number of young people die as a result of violent crime as were lost in the Aurora massacre." Which is pretty true [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] To me it doesn't sound like any sort of ban. more like he wants tougher background checks, maybe having them linked with your medical history in an attempt to find nutters like the Aurora Shooter
Honestly, if you've ever failed a psychological examination at any point in time, you should either have to go through extensive procedural testing and examination to have your file scrubbed, or you should not be allowed to purchase firearms. Also, shit like this wouldn't happen if people fucking reported strange behavior in their coworkers and in their fellow students. The Tucson shooting wouldn't have happened if Pima Community College had taken the appropriate actions to secure the shooter (who was obviously mentally ill), and I'm sure people noticed signs of mental issues in the Aurora shooter long before the events that happened. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] Long story short if we had even a fraction of the mental health system that we had before Reagan fucking demolished it shit like this might not happen on such a frequent basis. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] Oh shit I just made an argument for gun control, I'd better take fucking cover
Agreed. In Australia, we've had full background checks since 1996 (When a nutter who didn't even have a licence shot up a historical site and killed 35 people). Another thing they implemented was that whenever a doctor deems you mentally unfit, they fill out a form and send it to the police, the police then check your name against the gun registry and a few other things, then they confiscate your guns and blacklist you from owning them. Somehow though, despite this, a guy who was a [i]diagnosed schizophrenic[/i], managed to get a licence, buy a few pistols, and shoot up Monash University in Melbourne. So who fucked up? Either his doctors or the police. Yet despite the government fucking up, they ban all "concealable" handguns (i.e. handguns with barrel lengths under 120mm), magazines over 10 rounds, and calibres over 38cal/9mm.
- I posted this from my phone at like 2 AM give nee a break. I don't even remember what I posted actually.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/LDWm4.jpg[/img] laugh or cry LAUGH OR CRY
[QUOTE]"Most American gun owners would agree, people don't need AK47s"[/QUOTE] Breaking news: Obama out of touch with American gun owners!
A democrat not knowing fuck all about gun owners or ownership? whaaa?
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;36946944]A democrat not knowing fuck all about gun owners or ownership? whaaa?[/QUOTE] ... I'm a democrat. Really Trunk Monkay :I [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] Also [b]I FUCKING KNEW IT, GODDAMN IT[/b] [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1200818[/url] This is why we need more communication between the mental health sector and law enforcement, for fuck's sake.
[QUOTE=Ridge;36946658]Breaking news: Obama out of touch with American gun owners![/QUOTE] The rest of his speech was agreeable though. Hell, even in that snippet I think the emphasis is on [I]need[/I]. Wanting is a separate thing that it seems this speech acknowledges. [url]http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/07/26/Obama-AK-47s-do-not-belong-with-criminals/UPI-24711343287800/[/url] He's not saying AK-47s and similarly classed rifles should be banned and never touch the hands of American civilians, he's just saying that gun control should be reasonable and safe. Of course, this is just a speech, and I don't stalk presidential candidates and everything they say so this may be contrary to any number of other things Obama has said, but it's worth at least half an ounce of comfort.
But once the government determines what you do and don't need, they can make the leap to disallowing said unneeded property, and mandating what is needed. Like health insurance. We don't [i]need[/i] V6 or bigger engines. We don't [i]need[/i] high speed internet.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.