Gun Control thread (merged many)

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Platapus

You never know when the British might come for their back taxes.

Do you think I should stop talking to Jim on Skype? Suddenly paranoid...

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Do you think I should stop talking to Jim on Skype? Suddenly paranoid...

Maybe invite him over for a cup of tea and accidently spill it on him.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Maybe invite him over for a cup of tea and accidently spill it on him.

I want to see if he's spying on me, not have him beat me to a bloody pulp!

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I want to see if he's spying on me, not have him beat me to a bloody pulp!

When Jim's in his best boxing stance {fist up, nose in air} kick him right in the nads. When he's laying on the ground moaning about cheap American tactics, just reply as we have before.

"I won"

[August]

Jim's a cop. A dozen donuts and he'll not only help you move, he'll help you move the body.

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by August

Jim's a cop. A dozen donuts and he'll not only help you move, he'll help you move the body.

+



Jim will be your best friend......forever.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Why that one especially?

Because it would be fun to shoot, cheaper to target practice with, looks like it came out of the old west, and would be historically correct with the extractor. Just something to have for fun really.

The other option, while just as fun, isn't historically correct:

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

+



Jim will be your best friend......forever.

Most definitely

[TwoGamers]

Steve thankyou I understand your second amendments reason now. I'm not an expert and Im not saying your wrong. Thank for the explanation

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Because it would be fun to shoot, cheaper to target practice with, looks like it came out of the old west, and would be historically correct with the extractor. Just something to have for fun really.

The other option, while just as fun, isn't historically correct:

Just reading that one review on the site saying that the pistol is prone to jamming. It is a good looking pistol though.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Just reading that one review on the site saying that the pistol is prone to jamming. It is a good looking pistol though.

Very pretty indeed.

I wouldn't mind having a look over the Buntline, real from the era or not, it's still a nice gun and used by my favourite character in For a Few Dollars More.



In regards to real weapons from the era, I'm more of a rifle man but I do admire the original Colt revolvers. I'd love to try a Winchester, and I'd really love to try a Gatling or Maxim...



The impact that thing had on the battlefield...a sobering thought.

There's quite a few weapons I'd like to fire, or just hold to get a feel of them, I've been playing battlefield games for years, simulators and that, but to actually see, to feel, the real thing, it gives an extra connection to history. Sure, you can never really appreciate what our forefathers went through, but with enough thought, you can get fairly close.

Maybe if I ever make it to America.

EDIT: (watching the Dragoon video) Ha, so that's how they do a ramrod on the old pistols, what a clever design, much more convenient than the traditional stick method.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Just reading that one review on the site saying that the pistol is prone to jamming. It is a good looking pistol though.

Seems that design is a bit weak and not truly strong enough to handle smokeless powder.It is a replica of a smokeless frame which means that it is more or less a smokeless frame beefed up to take .38 special but not thousands of rounds.

Of course it seems to be more for fun than for tons of use.If someone had a problem they where likely putting rounds through it as if it where not a replica and not an open frame revolver.Something you take out once in a while and shot a few dozen rounds with.


I would rather have Colt Single Action Army replica* it would have a much more intuitive ejector.The reason I would go with an SSA would be that it can fire .45 long colt with no problems because it was designed to fire long colt.The fire arm replica Ducimus mentioned is actually a movie prop made to look like a percussion cap revolver but firing modern smokeless rounds.It is a replica of a prop gun that only needed to work during the filming of a movie.The firearm it is trying appear to be can be seen at 2:10 in this video as can the Colt SSA which is shown throughout.


* meaning a replica that is actually a modern firearm using original design prints and not "rinky dink" for lack of a better term.Not say that the gun Ducimus mentioned is bad it is just not a sturdy firearm.

[Oberon]

IIRC the Buntline prop I mentioned in my post is also a modification of the SAA (which was also used vanilla [or thereabouts] in For a few dollars more).
Popular in its simplicity, particularly compared to its predecessor.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Oberon

IIRC the Buntline prop I mentioned in my post is also a modification of the SAA (which was also used vanilla [or thereabouts] in For a few dollars more).
Popular in its simplicity, particularly compared to its predecessor.

The firearm in a few dollars more is nothing like a colt SSA though not sure why you think that it is.What it is supposed to be is a Colt 1851 this was a percussion cap revolver not something you want on a movie set so the prop guns where made to appear like a 1851 but fire .38 special in the film blanks of course.The real Colt This man explains it well


In the real old west they actually did convert cap guns over to primer guns not very often though*. the difference would be that back then everything was still black powder which produces far less pressure than smokeless requiring a stronger frame.The guns in the Fist full of dollars films are trying to look like a Colt 1851 converted to primer type rounds.

*I may be 100% incorrect in this statement it seems unlikely when one could simply buy a more modern pistol that was primer fired I think the conversions are Hollywood myth and in the "Fist full of Dollars" trilogy they wanted a different looking firearm than the Colt SSA.

In reality in the real old west most people owned a pistol more to scare away or kill animals (such a coyotes) than anything else so many people used the older cap type pistols well into the 1880s.

Honestly I think that the Colt 1861 Navy is a much better looking design it also used percussion caps.



this is a real Colt 1851 or a replica but black powder and percussion cap like an original.



Colt 1851 original


Colt 1861 original same basic operation as the 1851


Colt SSA


Man with no name prop replica


Not trying to pick on you trust trying clear up confusion between a Colt 1851 a Colt 1851 converted to primer and the prop and replica of said prop.the prop was intended to look like a primer converted 1851.


The best bet is to buy a Ruger Vaquero it is a modern SSA and not a replica I used that term incorrectly earlier.At any rate a later 20th century Colt SSA or a Vaquero is the best bet because t is a sturdy firearm people use them very often and many hunt with them.You can also use this weapon for defense and have no concerns.

http://www.ruger.com/products/vaquero/index.html?r=y

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I disagree. I don't think he's trolling, just stating his opinion. From his point of view he has a valid point, and he doesn't understand the thinking here. Of the colonies only America and India actively tried to throw off British rule, and only America actually went to war over it. He doesn't understand that the American Revolution, the shooting part anyway, started the day the British Colonial Governor of Massachussetts sent troops to confiscate a privately-held armory full of cannons. He doesn't understand that we wrote the Second Amendment to guarantee that it would never happen again. The British government learned the lesson and let the other colonies go peacefully, though they still are part of the Commonwealth and consider themselves to be subjects of the same Crown. He lives in a world where the government is benefactor and friend, though to listen to some British members here you wouldn't think so.

We, on the other hand, live in a world where the government was created by us for our use, not the other way around. That this is no longer true is to our shame, but we keep our guns and our Second Amendment in the hope that if push comes to shove we will be able to do something about it. That these shootings happen is tragic, but it is not the fault of the guns or the gun owners; it is the fault of the sick minds who do these things, and that is what needs to be dealt with.

TwoGamers isn't a troll. He just doesn't understand.

Sorry to dig this up, but was reading a few pages deep and found this, Steve I have to hand it to you this is very well written post, I agree completely about the worlds we live in part.