Posted on 09/02/2012 8:42:09 AM PDT by real saxophonist
Another video from Yeager.
Thanks. Got me reading on what exactly that means. I plan on staying away from reloads with it, but may look at 165 gr ammo for future use. Once I get through what I have bought of 180gr.
Hey, I have that one! I use an ankle holster for concealed (sort of) carry....
That’s the kind of comment based on EXPERIENCE!
I don’t want restrictions either, because they’d be applied to my AR.
Please site a story where a civilian, away from home, fired more than 9 rounds in self defense.
Good on you.
It's your claim of EXPERIENCE! You site the story that shows civilians acting in self defense never carry more than 9 rounds.
Your comment was utterly asinine. Your claim that you have "experience" that gives you insight into everyone else's intentions is just plain delusional.
Max SAAMI pressure for 9mm & .40 caliber are the same.
So I don't know what he's talking about.
Thanks, will be on the lookout for those Frog rounds. Been wanting to try some Winchester PDX1’s.
Learned to stay away from ruski made rounds, regardless. Makes you wonder how they conquer anyone with such low quality manufacturing.
Low chance of finding this stuff in stores, the French experiments were, oh, 30-50 years back.
Basically they went for hypervelocity in place of expansion, and some unusual bullet materials. One place the French thinking on bullets turned up was the 357 rounds used in the murder of the Swedish Prime minister, Olof Palme. Tv showed a bullet pic, most ppl wouldn’t recognize that thing but it was one of the French designs. I’ve been dying to actually get production going of that pattern for the 44 mag, it would be a one-shot bear killer with a normal load, which would be a very useful thing. Anyway, the one bullet maker who knows the 357-pattern today, in Romania, wants a start order of a million bullets or so.
Good luck, such would be very handy even if most of us never run into a grizzley and instead more likely a butthead!
Holy crap, I need a cigarette after seeing that!
Dear delusional,
I said no civilian has ever FIRED more than 9 rounds in self defense.
It makes no difference how many rounds they “carried”.
I also never cited anyone’s “intentions”.
Put up or shut up!
No problem!
From your first post I answered:
If a civilian needs more than 9 rounds, it’s because he went looking for trouble.
The first rule of holes is when you find yourself in one: stop digging.
“He doesn’t like high pressure rounds.
Max SAAMI pressure for 9mm & .40 caliber are the same.”
Yeah, the more I hear from this guy the less impressed with him I am. Ask Trayvon Martin how professional Kel-Tecs are, if you can find a medium to hook you up.
I guess I’m old-fashioned. I think a S&W Model 36 is a great carry pistol.
You seem to have forgotten to cite a case where that “need” was demonstrated.
For God’s sake man. show some dignity and stop making an ass of yourself.
Any citable case that demonstrated “need,” would presuppose “have,” you moron!
Instead of trying to come up with some arbitrary number of bullets that allows you to toady to the “Zumbo” crowd, how about just SUPPORTING FELLOW GUN OWNERS!
While you’re all flustered about the possible misuse of my point of view, by the gun-grabbers, YOU are making an ass of yourself by attempting to conflate “want”, “need”, and “have”.
While millions of CCW holders carry weapons with more than 10 rounds, meaning they “HAVE”, there is no record that I’m aware of that demonstrate their USE.
All I did was post the reasoning for my CCW choice, and you chose to shine a spotlight on it, by condemning it as bait for the gun-grabbers.
It’s really quite simple, I want the right to larger capacity magazines for the very reason the 2nd Amendment was written in the first place. To protect against the potential of tyranny.
All I did was post the reasoning for my CCW choice, and you chose to shine a spotlight on it, by condemning it as bait for the gun-grabbers.
If a civilian needs more than 9 rounds, it’s because he went looking for trouble.
You might want to just walk away from this one. Your cognitive dissonance (no doubt due to embarrassment) is really kicking in.
You might want to enroll in a couple semesters of logic.
You seem to be criticizing my assessment of other people’s “needs”.
A “need” is validated by demonstrating a consequence resulting from lack of access to supply.
The subject here is civilian self-defense, not a tyrannical take-over.
The unit of measure is not “want”.
If there were “need”, there would be evidence of a consequence due to lack of supply.
You have provided NONE.
Repeating my posts back to me and suggesting I might be embarrassed, is NOT exactly a thoughtful evaluation and rebuttal of my position.
You posts certainly have brought no objective facts to the discussion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.