The Firearms Thread

ApTyp · Post by **ApTyp** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:47 pm

It would've costed me just as much money to order a Ruger 22/45, and even more to get Buckmark. Besides, I like this gun.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 6:08 pm

Aonaran wrote:Walthers are retarded expensive, also in alot of cases you can do better, that is why I got a sig variant of the PPK. I do love my P99 though.

Interestingly enough, they were selling P99's for what seemed to me like a really good price, $525 for a brand new one. Isn't suggested retail $800 and some odd for it?

Also - Never fear Aonaran.....it appears they mislabeled it so it seems I got a 229 instead.

They also gave me law enforcement clips instead of the 10 round clips.

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:17 pm

Wolfman Walt wrote:They also gave me law enforcement clips instead of the 10 round clips.

Blang

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:20 pm

ApTyp wrote:It would've costed me just as much money to order a Ruger 22/45, and even more to get Buckmark. Besides, I like this gun.

Buckmarks are quite nice, don't have an acessory rail though which is essential for having the tactical advantage with your .22 calibur. But yeah, the Walther .22s are cool, I have to admit. My father has one and it is a fun shooter.

airsoft guy · Post by **airsoft guy** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:33 pm

Wolfman Walt wrote:
Also - Never fear Aonaran.....it appears they mislabeled it so it seems I got a 229 instead.

They also gave me law enforcement clips instead of the 10 round clips.

How could you mistake the two? The 229 is smaller and it clearly says on the slide "P229" does it not? Returnify it at once to correct their mistakification.

Also, I don't see why you would mention the standard capacity magazines. Unless you live in a shit state you can have standards rather than the neutered 10 round mags. And you live in Kentucky, a "free state" that allows such naughtiness.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:11 pm

"all sales are final" might be a hinderance there. They mislabeled it and had it on the side with the "P229" facing away. Doesn't matter, it's still a good firearm.

I may live in a free state, but this was bought from an Army Post Exchange meaning they might apply different rules to it being that the people who buy the guns probably won't be in a "free state" for long.

Edit: Theres also the fact that the manual says "Law Enforcement Personel Only" for their 12 and 13 round clips.

airsoft guy · Post by **airsoft guy** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:21 pm

Wolfman Walt wrote:"all sales are final" might be a hinderance there. They mislabeled it and had it on the side with the "P229" facing away. Doesn't matter, it's still a good firearm.

I may live in a free state, but this was bought from an Army Post Exchange meaning they might apply different rules to it being that the people who buy the guns probably won't be in a "free state" for long.

Edit: Theres also the fact that the manual says "Law Enforcement Personel Only" for their 12 and 13 round clips.

If it was bought on post it's under Federal laws, meaning they can sell them with the standard capacity magazines. If you're in the military and they move you to a non-free state it doesn't matter, as long as you keep the restricted item on base or Federal property it falls under Federal laws. So if you had an AR and a sack full of thirty-round magazines for it the state of California can't do shit about it. If you leave the base though, then they can get you.

Check the date, if it says the standard cap mags are for law enforcement only it was probably made before 2004.

And it's a magazine for Christ's sake, not a clip.

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:42 pm

We need some sort of regularly updated line graph to chart the piss trajectories of gun knowledge flowing from this thread's contributers. Whoever has the most points by rapture has the choice between free passage into heaven (can we get JC in here for an official sanction?) or one weapon and sidearm complete with a massive cache of ammunition for the ensuing undead hordes. Don't know who we need to contact for an official sanction on the latter but I figure it being the rapture and all we could find a way to make it work.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 4:28 am

airsoft guy wrote:And it's a magazine for Christ's sake, not a clip.

It is when you don't care.

airsoft guy · Post by **airsoft guy** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:03 am

Wolfman Walt wrote:
airsoft guy wrote:And it's a magazine for Christ's sake, not a clip.
It is when you don't care.

My balls, your ass, NOW.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:15 am

Do you save the gay stuff you find on Duck and Cover in that folder if you're the one who posts it? Cause that was pretty gay.

Also - firing the gun tommorow, now that I have ammo, along with my P-90. I'll give my impressions then.

ApTyp · Post by **ApTyp** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 4:28 pm

What, the Ruger?

Carib · Post by **Carib** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 5:25 pm

P-90? Ain't that something made by FN? That niffty submachine gun that uses the 5.7x28mm ammo?

Is it just me or is California gun phobic. I read some laws you can't even own an AR-15, .50 caliber based weapons and a string of other suppressive laws.

baby arm · Post by **baby arm** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:06 pm

Assault rifles are banned here (unless it lapsed when I wasn't looking) and any rifles chambered for the .50 BMG were added to the list last year. The .50 BMG ban was added out of fear of terrorists using it for long distance (1 mile away) assassinations. For a supposedly gun-phobic state, it seems like a shitload of people here are into firearms. Probably a quarter of the people I know are gunowners of one kind or another. People that own assault rifles are usually just careful about where and how they use them.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 8:34 pm

Well the federal "Assault rifle" ban ended some time ago when Bush just never resigned it. As for California laws on it, from what I read, you can purchase weapons on the State "assault rifle" list, BUT you must get a special permit or something to that effect.

The P-90 = The Ruger I mentioned some time ago, my friend liked shooting it so I'm packing it intow today.

airsoft guy · Post by **airsoft guy** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:55 pm

"Assault weapons" in California cannot be transferred, at all, except out of state and even then the CaDOJ shits itself over the transfer of an "assault weapon."

All the "assault weapons" had to be registered with the CaDOJ, thus all AWs in the state are all that there ever will be*, even on death an AW couldn't be transferred to a family member unless they're out of state. The CaDOJ simply confiscates the weapon and has it destroyed. They might, if it's some sort of significant piece with historic value, they will keep it around, but you'll never get to see it. They'll have it locked up in a gun room somewhere where only the other pigs can see it.

California is a strange state in that it does have the most gun owners in the United States, but it's also got some of the most restrictive gun laws around. The problem is that most gun owners either don't care or think there's nothing they can do about it because more gun laws always get passed, but that's because they never take a stand against them. It's a moronic cycle perpetrated by morons.

The other reason is that California is a very elitist state, and this includes their gun owners. You got people who own guns for shooting trap, but they turn around and denounce hunters saying the practice is barbaric, so they try to ban hunting and hunting weapons, and the hunters turn around and try to ban "assault weapons" because nobody needs more than ten rounds in the gun to get the job done. Another stupid cycle, this time perpetrated by stupid people.

They fail to understand that gun owners have to stick together or else the antis will knock us down, one by one.

Carib · Post by **Carib** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:16 pm

Damn spineless bunch. Me want guns!!!

Okay, well I know New York is tough on gun ownership (well it is a city area)... Uh, Rhode Island doesn't seem to restrictive, and well it's my home state after all.

Damn peaceknicks!

And well Texas is pretty cool on gun laws, right?

Nicolai · Post by **Nicolai** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:28 pm

You live in Rhode Island? Seriously?

Carib · Post by **Carib** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:23 am

I was born there. Providance, Rhode Island. I love that small state.

Redeye · Post by **Redeye** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:53 am

Carib wrote:I was born there. Providance, Rhode Island. I love that small state.

Perfect for a survivalist take over.

Just flood it with gunlovers and sieze electoral control.

Its small enough that you could probably do without federal highway
money or whatever, so anti-freedom coercion would be ineffective.

You could legalize just about anything.

How to make up for the lost FedCash?

Lower drinking age to 18 and cash in on New Yorkers.
Arrange a Drunk Bus system.
Like in Ocean City.

Drive-thru gunshop/liquor stores!