• Firearms V. Super Redneck Edition
    5,000 replies, posted
Getting a Smith and Wesson AR-15 tomorrow. Hells yeah.
[QUOTE=Whatwhat1337;27604618]Getting a Smith and Wesson AR-15 tomorrow. Hells yeah.[/QUOTE] Isn't it Colt that manufacture AR-15?
[QUOTE=Lufttygger306;27604788]Isn't it Colt that manufacture AR-15?[/QUOTE]Not just them (IIRC they are the ones with the contract to manufacture all of the military's M16s), there's a veritable shitton of manufacturers.
[QUOTE=Lufttygger306;27604788]Isn't it Colt that manufacture AR-15?[/QUOTE] The original AR-15, yes, but there's a ton of copies, just in the states I bet there are over 20 companies making their version of the AR-15
[QUOTE=Campin Carl;27605063]The original AR-15, yes, but there's a ton of copies, just in the states I bet there are over 20 companies making their version of the AR-15[/QUOTE] I believe it was actually Armalite first, but soon after they sold production rights to Colt.
[QUOTE=Hunterdnrc;27600828]Oh youtube.[/QUOTE] I was talking with someone a little while ago about how much the Medieval period is still with us today, and the attitude towards guns is almost exactly unchanged. Back in the 1400s and 1500s firearms were looked upon as devil work, black powder was looked upon as witchcraft and anyone making black powder was in danger of being burned at the stake. So the powder makers had to hide their work, often writing the powder formulas in the form of code inside books so no one would find it. At least until royally sanctioned powder manufacture came about. Then the soldiers who used firearms were considered cowardly and weak, using a powerful weapon to kill people who thought of themselves as superior to the gunners in every way. Times haven't changed much. This Medieval era mindset is probably the influence behind a great deal of gun hate out there.
First it was crossbow users then handgunners, although to be fair handgunners rarely hit anything, they were in large groups that made them lethal.
It's the weeaboos man. If it wasn't for them, there would be a lot less of that sentiment floating around.
[QUOTE=Mabus;27606576]First it was crossbow users then handgunners, although to be fair handgunners rarely hit anything, they were in large groups that made them lethal.[/QUOTE] Gonnes and Arquebus are actually a lot more accurate than people give them credit for. I can't speak for the Gonne with personal experience just yet, but with the Arquebus it's not hard to hit a man sized target at 100 yards, you're just not going to hit it with a perfect dead center grouping like with a modern rifle. That's another thing, when people say medieval guns and smoothbores in general weren't accurate, they're talking about the grouping not being as good as Joe's fancy deer rifle, when in reality it's easy to hit something with them, and with the amount of lead they usually fire you could shoot someone in the foot and they'd out of the fight. Not take a musket like the Brown Bess and load it with military standard loads and it's going to shoot like crap, but load it with a patch and it'll do just fine. I'm guessing they did this on purpose so soldiers wouldn't pick a specific target to shoot at and just shoot at the enemy formation as a whole instead. [QUOTE=rossmum;27606581]It's the weeaboos man. If it wasn't for them, there would be a lot less of that sentiment floating around.[/QUOTE] Except that sentiment has been around longer than weeaboos have. A lot longer.
Yeah, but it's also been a lot less common. Now there is a big pop culture influence telling easily misled (read: stupid) teenagers that SWORDS ARE THE HONOURABLE WAY (like anyone really gives a fuck anymore).
[QUOTE=Whatwhat1337;27604618]Getting a Smith and Wesson AR-15 tomorrow. Hells yeah.[/QUOTE] Get a stag AR15. S&W ar15s are just re-branded stags. You'll pay a lot less for the stag as well, plus their logo is better, heh.
Let them have their swords. Anyone with a gun can just shoot them down as they charge towards them. Unless they pull some ninja bullet dodging bullshit. Cause everyone knows when you have a sword that increases your mental and physical capabilities tenfold. Especially a katana. Didn't you know that's why they shot Japanese officers in the Pacific first? The Marines had to take them out before they did somersaults into the palmtrees and showered them with shuriken. It only makes sense.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMeooVB3olE[/media]
My new Czech 8mm Mauser. Sorry for the meh cell phone quality. [IMG]http://i1100.photobucket.com/albums/g405/hippyman23/241.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i1100.photobucket.com/albums/g405/hippyman23/244.jpg[/IMG]
So I want to get the facts straight on this and don't know where else to turn. There was a discussion on this somewhere back in the thread I thought but I don't know. So guys, the Desert Eagle. Is it completely impractical for everything? If I had the money, I would get one in .44 magnum. A semi-auto hand cannon in .44 just sounds fuckin' awesome and since I already have a .44 revolver, I've got the experience and the ammo for it and I've shown I don't favor practicality in all my gun purchases. .44 is so much cheaper than .50 AE and offers just about the same ballistics with less recoil anyway. But I've also heard the Desert Eagle is unreliable and very inaccurate. Is this true or not? If you bought a Deagle chambered for .50AE can't you just switch barrels and mags and shoot .44?
I've only shot guns twice before, but in the future once I move out and land a stable job I want to get a sniper rifle. I'm a fan of old things, but don't want something that'll cause me to merge the back to pockets of my pants so I can fit all the money I'll need in there. Any suggestions oh wise thread of guns?
[QUOTE=credesniper;27618407]I've only shot guns twice before, but in the future once I move out and land a stable job I want to get a sniper rifle. I'm a fan of old things, but don't want something that'll cause me to merge the back to pockets of my pants so I can fit all the money I'll need in there. Any suggestions oh wise thread of guns?[/QUOTE] Sniper rifle isn't that specific. Do you want a range gun, a collector's piece, or a hunting rifle? Or something tacticool? Anyway, you said you like old guns, so I'll start there. Many C&R eligible or antique rifles in a marksman or sniper format are rare and thus extremely expensive. Infantry models, however, can be retrofitted with either period or reproduction mounts and optics. A cheap option would be a the M91/30 Mosin Nagant in 7.62x54mm. A lot of power and, depending on the condition of the gun, the potential to be a dead-on tack driver. However you'll need to replace the bolt handle and tap and drill the receiver to mount a scope. Overall price, you're looking at $200-$300 (these figures are coming from my experience at local gunshows in Virginia and from gunbroker). More practical approach for range shooting or hunting would be something made by Savage. I am a huge Savage fan because they're priced fairly, built sturdy, and usually very accurate. A good bolt action Savage in a chambering like 30-06 or whatever might put you back $500-$800 depending on if it's new or used. This is all from estimation on my part, I should mention. A good site to look for guns and range your prices is [url]www.gunbroker.com[/url]. Check seller feedback before buying and pay close attention to description and pictures. Also, always ALWAYS make sure to check local ordnances and laws on rifles. If your rifle has to be imported, check regulations at state, federal and even county level. Oh yeah, and where is it you live, anyway?
[QUOTE=Teal Moose;27618305]So I want to get the facts straight on this and don't know where else to turn. There was a discussion on this somewhere back in the thread I thought but I don't know. So guys, the Desert Eagle. Is it completely impractical for everything? If I had the money, I would get one in .44 magnum. A semi-auto hand cannon in .44 just sounds fuckin' awesome and since I already have a .44 revolver, I've got the experience and the ammo for it and I've shown I don't favor practicality in all my gun purchases. .44 is so much cheaper than .50 AE and offers just about the same ballistics with less recoil anyway. But I've also heard the Desert Eagle is unreliable and very inaccurate. Is this true or not? If you bought a Deagle chambered for .50AE can't you just switch barrels and mags and shoot .44?[/QUOTE] Desert Eagles are actually damn accurate and the ones in 44 are a bit more reliable than their 50AE counterpart. Not 'To Hell and Back' reliable but enough for a fun time at the range I'd imagine.:v:
Sorry about that, I'm going for a range gun. Just looked over the M91/30 Mosin Nagant, and it looks like a great choice. Thanks.
[QUOTE=credesniper;27618869]Sorry about that, I'm going for a range gun. Just looked over the M91/30 Mosin Nagant, and it looks like a great choice. Thanks.[/QUOTE] Good thing about the Mosin is that with cheap surplus you can shoot and shoot until your shoulder will no longer allow it on a meager ammo budget. Cheap surplus though is often corrosive and doesn't provide the best performance. If you're gunning for accuracy, buy good brand name ammo in the smaller boxes. Those are usually loaded for hunting or just to be more accurate in general. They're also cleaner burning and more reliable. [url=http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=213176751]880 rounds for $240.[/url] I also like older rifles myself because of the cheap price and wide availability of differing ammo qualities. They were also built to last. There are Mosins from turn of the 19th century still in use and on the civilian market today. Hell I have a 106 year old Swedish M96 from the Carl Gustaf armory that'll still drive 'em right where you line up the sights, no adjustments on my part or anything.
Well boys, I fired the beast. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvhq2U_DzEw[/media]
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;27619267]Well boys, I fired the beast. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvhq2U_DzEw[/media][/QUOTE] That is so damn awesome.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;27619267]Well boys, I fired the beast. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvhq2U_DzEw[/media][/QUOTE] I love the slo mo stuff. It's too freaking cool.
If you watch closely, when Kotick gets shot in the throat you can see the ball flying through the air. Oh and as promised, the aftermath: [img_thumb]http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/5928/cimg0039qh.jpg[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/4523/cimg0040t.jpg[/img_thumb] I would also like to stress that this was only the first rinse.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;27619267]Well boys, I fired the beast.[/QUOTE] Holy shit, and I complain about my Mosin kicking.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;27619801]If you watch closely, when Kotick gets shot in the throat you can see the ball flying through the air. Oh and as promised, the aftermath: [img_thumb]http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/5928/cimg0039qh.jpg[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/4523/cimg0040t.jpg[/img_thumb] I would also like to stress that this was only the first rinse.[/QUOTE] Sorry, I thought you meant Bobby Kotick...
[QUOTE=Ridge;27620320]Sorry, I thought you meant Bobby Kotick...[/QUOTE] Sadly I wasn't able to acquire the actual Bobby Kotick, but a box with his face on it was just as satisfying to shoot.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;27620378]Sadly I wasn't able to acquire the actual Bobby Kotick, but a box with his face on it was just as satisfying to shoot.[/QUOTE] Next time: Ballistics gel model! with fake blood and all.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;27619267]Well boys, I fired the beast. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvhq2U_DzEw[/media][/QUOTE] That is incredible.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;27606844]Not take a musket like the Brown Bess and load it with military standard loads and it's going to shoot like crap, but load it with a patch and it'll do just fine. I'm guessing they did this on purpose so soldiers wouldn't pick a specific target to shoot at and just shoot at the enemy formation as a whole instead.[/QUOTE]Wasn't that mainly so it was easier to get the ball down the barrel? I'd figure they'd have loved to have more accurate guns than their opponent, just they didn't want to compromise rate of fire for it, as that's what won them battles at the end of the day.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.