The Gun Thread

Reminds me of an old cartoon I saw in a magazine:

Traffic cop: "Well sir, your tank's registration seems to be in order, and you're obviously not a revolutionary or anything dangerous like that. Have a nice day, and drive safely."

If I'm not mistaken a bulldozer license is all you need to legally drive a demilitarised tank in the UK. Does the same apply to the US?

I don't think we have any such thing as a "bulldozer license" over here. (EDIT: yes we do; it's called a "Heavy Equipment Operator" license.)

At any rate, most military vehicles don't meet Department of Transportation safety and/or emissions standards (which they are exempt from while in active service) so they can't be registered as street-legal for civilian use.

Of course, DOT regs vary from state to state, and you might be able to modify a Humvee, cargo truck, or armored car to pass inspection. But in general, you can't drive them on public roads.

edited 8th Dec '16 8:08:56 AM by pwiegle

Which just means you invest in a flatbed to carry them on and limit yourself to rampaging around on private property (ideally, private property where the owners don't mind you rampaging around.)

As I recall, that's what Arnold Schwarzenegger did with the M48 Patton he bought. He has truly lived the American Dream: Moved to America, became a movie star, married a Kennedy, and bought a tank.

EDIT: I know there are privately-owned Deuce and a Halves and such out there. Not sure if those are modified specially to be street-legal, or if it just indicates that some military vehicles are made to be street legal even if they don't necessarily have to be.

edited 8th Dec '16 9:14:04 AM by AFP

In Pennsylvania, any vehicle 25+ years old can be registered as a "classic car" — in which case, it's exempt from annual inspection and emissions tests. However, you can't use it as a daily driver.

But we're kind of getting off-topic, here...

edited 8th Dec '16 9:26:37 AM by pwiegle

Where is the "one" part of that rule from?

https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/docs/0501-firearms-top-10-qaspdf/download

EDIT: It's is probably implied, but not explicitly stated, by the wording of the regs (i.e., An individual may make a firearm, etc. — but it doesn't actually say: "no more than one.")

EDIT 2: The ATF is cracking down on gunsmiths who finish an 80% receiver for a customer. In short, you can still do it, but you have to do it yourself, using your own know-how and tools.

edited 8th Dec '16 12:38:37 PM by pwiegle

Interesting. Fortunately, jigs are getting more and more common so...

As shown in Band of Brothers, was using a Luger P08 really a death trap?

The point of that scene was less "the Luger is a death trap" and more "keeping a cocked and loaded pistol in your pants is a bad idea".

Interestingly enough, the Colt M1911 was actually designed to be carried that way, but also included a grip safety specifically to minimize the chance of it being discharged when not being held. I don't think the Luger featured such a safety.

Some early model Lugers did have a grip safety, but it was eliminated on the variant adopted by the German Army in 1908.

I've always been of two minds about the 1911's grip safety. For one thing, it is nice that the gun should only go off if you are holding it in your hand, on the other hand, it still does nothing for folks fumbling the dexterity check on a draw, but then nothing will do that short of keeping the chamber empty.

I never seen the reason why hammer cocked and a chamber in round in a single action semi auto to be anything other than suicidal overconfidence.

It isn't like SA semi autos don't already have a light trigger to begin with.

While I would generally agree with you, the concept was to simplify the action and give a lighter trigger than in a DAO/ DA/SA gun. Especially when you consider that striker fired guns like Glock and its imitators (before anyone gets pissed at me, I carry M&P) are essentially SA with a doohickey to prevent accidental discharge, much like the 1911.

Soooooo, it's got a manual safety for active control, and a grip safety for passive control in case someone fumbles the manual.

Not exactly. While double-action triggers had been introduced half a century earlier (as seen in multi-barrel "pepperbox" revolvers of the 1840s), in the design and development of semiautomatic pistols, a single-action trigger mechanism was the only viable option, at least for the first few decades. The first (successful) semiauto pistol with a double-action trigger was the Walther PP, introduced in 1930.

edited 24th Dec '16 9:58:38 PM by pwiegle

M. D. Harmon, a columnist for the Portland Press Herald who had written against proposed legislation in Maine that would have required gun owners to take a firearm safety course, was killed after being accidentally shot by a visiting boy.

I would've preferred him to learn that lesson without getting killed in the process. Sucks to be that boy...

Sounds like a good argument for firearms safety courses in grade school.

Picturing some kindergarten teacher screaming at a five year old to get their booger-picker off of the fun switch.

LA Times: At L.A.-area gun store, Chinese immigrants exercise an unfamiliar right

What do you call that arrangement of the ammo of a Hotchkiss M1909?

Strip magazine.

Or a feed strip, or simply a strip.

RE: Strip: But nowadays, can you still have automatic guns that are strip-fed?

I suppose you could, but it's a long-obsolete system. Today's machine guns have much higher rates of fire, and eat ammo like popcorn. With a 30-round strip-feed, you'd spend more time reloading than shooting.

Disintegrating-link belt-feed is much more practical. Belts usually come packaged in 100-round increments, but you can snap them together and have any amount you please in one continuous length.

edited 2nd Jan '17 6:26:51 AM by pwiegle

Yeah, basically stuff isn't made like it was in the 40s and earlier for a reason.