Feinstein-Schumer Gun-Control Act

The Federalist ^

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

PatriotPetitions. US has launched a national campaign entreating our President, House of Representatives and Senate to reject legislation renewing the 1994 Clinton-Feinstein-Schumer Gun-Control Act. Please read this brief description of the campaign and let your voice be heard on this matter.

Though House Majority Leader Tom DeLay says "The votes in the House are not there" to renew the measure, Feinstein and Schumer just introduced a bill in the Senate to renew the law, and they will press the House for a roll call vote in the upcoming election year. Unfortunately, President Bush has reiterated that he SUPPORTS the gun-ban -- an affront to the Constitutional right of all law abiding citizens to own semi-automatic sporting rifles for lawful purposes. Feinstein and Schumer even applauded President Bush, saying: "We welcome your support and look forward to working with you to gain swift passage of this legislation. With your assistance, we will be able to pass legislation to continue the ban and help make America's streets safer."

"Safer"? For whom? Such laws claim, ostensibly, to protect law-abiding citizens. Of course, only law-abiding citizens comply with these restrictions -- and at their own peril. Criminals don't care if the weapon they are using comport with the 23,000 federal, state and local gun restrictions already on the books. The Democrat's "incremental encroachment" on the Second Amendment is a thinly-veiled strategy to achieve their ultimate goal of gun confiscation, as Ms. Feinstein made clear after passage of her 1994 legislation: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate...for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it!"

Please join fellow Patriots on the frontlines in defense of our Constitutional liberties.

Link to -- http://patriotpetitions.us/nogunban.

[Charles Martel]

Freepmail me your suggestions, I'd love to help relieve certain parties of their overconfidence.

BTW, the import ban under GHWB - was that done by actual Executive Order, or was a wink and a nod from the President to the BATF all that was required? I thinkit was the latter, although I often see references to an '89 EO. I ask mainly because those would seem to be the "rules" to which we will revert, should the AW Ban sunset.

[archy]

that's not NEARLY as funny as the TM which says that TENT PEGS must be painted BRIGHT ORANGE. ... .isn't that just like the experts?????

I was always amused by the Russian AK47 manual translation, which among other info, described the weapons simplicity as having been so perfectly tuned to the field soldier's needs that designer Kalishnikov had developed it so that the only tool needed for its complete disassembly was a round of ammunition, useful for pressing out retaining pins and other uses.

In the chapter on ammunition, it was noted that it was strictly forbidden to use ammunition for such purposes as tools for disassembling the weapon....

-archy-/-

[archy]

Now, now, the BATFE "dynamic entry" types don't really wear jackboots, just standard combat boots.

You've not met them in the privacy of their own bedrooms, where helpless restrained sheep and their other barnyard paramours await their fate in terror.

-archy-/-

[archy]

Delay is not the Speaker of the House. Dennis Hastert of Illinois is. Delay is Majority Leader.

Just so. Correction noted, and thanks. I know better, but either overlooked the error in repeating a possibly incorrect report, which bothers me, or I just glitched it myself while tired and distracted, which is certainly possible. But I'll try to backtrack and check.

-archy-/-

[archy]

the G3 mag will fit the CETME;the reverse is NOT true.

Depends. I've tried CETME magazines both in my HK91s [and a previous HK41] I've had and in West German Army G3s, and they worked okay. But I believe some of the reproduction HK/CETME receivers now on the market were intentionally dimensioned [or reworked] to allow the use of either. And it's just as likely that some are just the opposite, as per TAPCO's advertisement.

In any event, there's at least some possibility either way, and it's certainly worth the price of two single magazines to check in a particular rifle The original Spanish CETME magazines are $4.99 each, and the German G3 magazines $3.49, last time I looked. And my 30-round HK magazines from the Dominican Republic seem to work okay in either, at least fit and fed in the two CETMEs I've tried 'em in without a problem.

That also suggests a possible easy solution for anyone who's noted that their original magazines are a little bit loose or rattle in their individual weapon. Those early aluminum-receivered versions from Century with the full-length scope rail atop the receiver would seem to be prime possible candidates for wear, and that could apply to them in particular, too.

-archy-/-

[oyez]

What do you think of Springfield's new Garand reissue?EMFBI

Got one for Christmas. I love everything about it but the kick and weight, but it wouldn't be a Garand with out it. If something happend that I had to give up everything but one gun, I'd be keeping the M-1, unless I had a M1A.

[oyez]

8-round clips that make such a neat package for carrying.

Sexy ain't it?

[oyez]

8-round clips that make such a neat package for carrying.

Sexy ain't it?

[Shooter 2.5]

i guess i'm going to have to go look up the AMU manual that CLEARLY states that the MAX EFFECTIVE range of BOTH M2 ball (150 grains) AND the "NM target" loads (168 grains) are 200 METERS greater than the standard for M14 rounds, since you don't seem to be able to do so. will that please you????

You want to match a target load to the military load? That may be why you're getting the wrong numbers. That would be like matching M59 ball to M72 Match.

Try matching the M2 ball with the M59 ball.

[archy]

8-round clips that make such a neat package for carrying.

Sexy ain't it?

Indeed, though Garand's earlier designs for the improved .276 cartridge might have resulted in a rifle withought the pregnant-appearing swell under the action...or in a magazine capacity of 10 shots.

And just imagine a WWII US infantry squad with the new semiauto rifle in that caliber, backed by a Canadian Bren Gun in the same chambering with 36 rounds in the magazine or so.

[Shooter 2.5]

I misunderstood what you wrote concerning the match rounds. You can ignore the comment I wrote about matching target ammo.

Here's the numbers for M2 and M59

M2
Velocity- 2740
Bullet- 152

M59
Velocity- 2750
Bullet- 150.5

That's from "Cartridges of the World" 8 th edition.

You can use those numbers for any ballistic program. According to the Hornady book the BC is .398 for a Full Metal Jacket 150 grain.

[archy]

Try matching the M2 ball with the M59 ball.

Better, try matching the M2 .30-06 ball with M80 7,62 NATO ball. Or a comparison of the M72 National Match .30-06 loaded with a 172/173 grain bullet with the 7.62 NATO M118 Special ball with the same bullet.

The 168-grain Match King used in the M852 match load standard since the M118 NM loading was discontinued in 1995 was developed as the *Mexican Match* ammo used by pulling the 172-grain bullet from a [then XM118] match round, as used at the international shoot at Mexico City in '62, hence the name.

[Shooter 2.5]

I was staying with the standard military ball loads because that's what was issued.

I didn't notice the improved M80 7.62 ball until you mentioned it. I wonder how that would measure against M2?

In that case, the M80 is

Bullet- 149
Velocity- 2750

The only difference seems to be the powder.

I use Sierra MatchKings, 2520 Accurate Powder for the Garand and the M1A. Lake City brass for the Garand and Remington brass for the M1A.

[stand watie]

YEP!

[stand watie]

also YEP!

LOL!

FRee dixie,sw

[stand watie]

OK!

[stand watie]

did you bother to READ what i wrote before typing?????

i said BOTH M2 & NM were, according to the AMU manual, superior in range to the M59.

you even cut & pasted the relevant section!

FRee dixie,sw

[stand watie]

my book says 2972 for M2 ball and 2750 for NM.

you are correct about the velocity of M59.

BUT there are a WHOLE BUNCH of errors in Cartridges of the World;don't trust your head to the figures-you have just one.

for example check out the figures for the .401WIN; the specs are DANGEROUSLY WRONG in the edition i have (5th i think)!

Free dixie,sw

[Shooter 2.5]

I checked and the 3RD edition "Cartridges of the World" for M2 is 2740.

The Army ammunition data sheet 43-0001-07 for M2 says 2740.


I checked my Accurate poweder manual and no safe load was written for 2975. Anything close to that was a hot load.

I checked my Sierra book and out of 17 loadings, no load approached 2975 without being a hot load.

I checked my Hornady book and all loads at 2900 were hot loads.

Midrange for all books was 2700.


Your "book" which you don't identify, is wrong.

[stand watie]

check out the latest reloading book by Richard Lee of Lee Precision.

he shows ACCEPTABLE hot loads for the 3006, 150 grains at as high as 3200 AND standard load at 2900.

sorry, but you're, as usual, wrong.

the book i quoted was the tech circuliar 11-1973 published for the Ft Benning AMU in 1974. it was one of my text books when i went to the "benning school for boys", LONG AGO.

FRee dixie,sw