HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: moore@tc.fluke.COM (Matt Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: AMT .380, Colt Mustang, or other?
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:52:17 GMT
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA

In article <1992Nov10.054607.10721@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:

#So you got a gun you like.  There are lots of people who are happy
#using guns that can't be cocked with the trigger: 1911s, Mustangs, 
#Glocks, Firestars, etc etc.   If it's your gun, you're supposed to
#learn how it works.

 You are wrong about the Glock "safe action". It is best to think of the
Glock as a "cocked and unlocked" single action automatic. With a round in
the chamber, the Glock can always be fired by a 1/2", 5 lb or so pull of
the trigger, and no external control exists to disable the firing
mechanism. In this sense the pistol is always cocked. The maker refers to
the pistol as having a "safe action" because the action is drop-safe. No
amount of impact can fire the pistol without a finger on the trigger. You
could put a Glock in a paint shaker and it would not go bang.

 I own a Glock model 19 and IMHO it is the best defensive handgun on the
market today. The pull is light enough for fast, accurate shooting but not
so light that I feel likely to fire it unintentionally. There are no
safeties to fumble with - just point gun, pull trigger. Felt recoil is
less than any other light-weight automatic I have tried, because the bore
axis is so close to the shooting hand. There are no protruding parts to
snag on clothing. It holds 16 rounds of 9mm Para in a pistol that is
slightly smaller than a 2" .38 Spec revolver, yet the barrel is a full
4".  The grip is suitable for all but the smallest hands. What more could
one ask?

						Matt Moore
						John Fluke Mfg. Co.
						standard disclaimers apply
From: holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe))
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Glock (& lock)
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:27:18 GMT
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA

se08+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth Adam Eliot) writes:
#I shoot a Glock 17 at the range yesterday and loved it.  It feels right
#and looks great.  But I am interested in carry, and am concerned about
#having the right amount of 'readiness' and 'safety'.

I do not carry a Glock, although I own a G19.   IMHO,  the  Glock
trigger  pull  is  too  light to feel comfortable while carrying.
Maybe it's just paranoia, but I don't feel  safe  with  a  loaded
Glock.   I have no such problem with a DA revolver or a de-cocked
DA pistol.

If I had to carry a Glock, I would  certainly  choose  a  holster
which  doesn't  allow the trigger to be accessed while the gun is
holstered.

-- 
| Holger Reusch                             |
| Technical University of Vienna, Austria <-+--- No kangaroos here,
| Dept. for Real-Time Systems               |    sorry!
| holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |
From: schuette@roadkill.nrl.navy.mil (Larry Schuette)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: I like moderated rec.guns
Date: 13 Nov 92 14:21:22 GMT


1.  Anybody who thinks that an unmoderated mildly controversial
	newsgroup will have a high snr, has not followed comp.sys.super.

2.  Complaints about moderator style are unjustified.  a.  they are the
	small payback that a moderator gets for doing his job.
	b.  rec.guns is NOT (repeat NOT) the only news group with a 
	hands on moderator (check out sci.military (gasp!)).

3.  I honestly can not imagine rec.guns, rec.hunting as unmoderated 
	newsgroups.  Well, I can, but I don't feel like relearning
	kill files.

So,  vote 1 for moderated, Jim, I owe yah 20 rounds of ACP.

Larry
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
	"He who wants to protect everything, protects nothing" -- Galland

Lawrence C. Schuette			  schuette@roadkill.nrl.navy.mil
Code 7133				  (202)767-2739  
Naval Research Laboratory		  (202)767-5561 (fax) 	
Washington D.C.	20375-5320
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Psychology in Defense
Date: 7 Nov 92 00:34:34 GMT
Organization: Twilight Zone

In article <1992Nov5.164803.16103@CERIS.Purdue.EDU> jheath@fieldofdreams.npirs.purdue.edu (Jim Heath) writes:


#It seems to me that, aside from being prepared to shoot, the most
#important thing is to convince the other person that _yes indeed,
#you will shoot them_. 

	For me this is a non-issue.  If I apprehend an opponent at gun
	point, I will give clear and terse instructions, if I speak to
	them at all.  Any deviation from my wishes is likely to result
	in their untimely demise.  When in a life/death situation such
	as this, it is generally a very bad idea to engage in any type
	of extraneous communications as this raises the potential for
	your becomming distracted.  Even the slightest level of distraction
	can afford a desperate enemy the opportunity to challenge the
	balance of power between you and them, the possible results of
	which I assume are plain enough.  The opponent will be in a state 
	of high concentration, and if he's ballsy enough to make a play for 
	you gun (or whatever) chances are he's going to make the best of
	it, which will make things VERY tight and unpleasant for you, even
	if you prevail.

	I would concentrate more on being quite wiling to blow a hole in
	the bastard at the first hint of cuteness on their part, and
	dispense with all speech beyond the most essential.   Get him
	into an EXTREMELY poor tactical position (from his standpoint,
	of course) and get yourself out of his field of vision, making
	sure that he cannot spy you through reflections.

	Such situations call for minimal interaction with the criminal,
	lest you set yourself up for far greater problems.

	-Andy V.
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Psychology in Defense
Date: 8 Nov 92 13:27:09 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <1992Nov6.220117.7276@cbfsb.cb.att.com> osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X) writes:
##It seems to me that, aside from being prepared to shoot, the most
##important thing is to convince the other person that _yes indeed,
##you will shoot them_. 

#	For me this is a non-issue...
#	When in a life/death situation such
#	as this, it is generally a very bad idea to engage in any type
#	of extraneous communications as this raises the potential for
#	your becomming distracted....
#	I would concentrate more on being quite wiling to blow a hole in
#	the bastard at the first hint of cuteness on their part, and
#	dispense with all speech beyond the most essential.

I think you are both suggesting the same thing: The above is a 
very good description of how _non_verbally_ to "convince the 
other person that _yes indeed you will shoot them_." The very
intensity and focus of certain actions can convey a serious 
threat, without a word being spoken.

                                           Frank Crary
                                           CU Boulder
From: evore@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Eric J Vore)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Fletchette
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:49:20 GMT
Organization: The Ohio State University

the fletchette round was produced during vietnam for the 12 gauge shotgun, the 
m-79 grenade launcher, and the 105 mm howizer and tank guns.  in fact it is 
still in use today in the good old u.s. army although in limited use.

rlauer  using my brother in laws password since i am not at my home computer.
From: garry@alice.att.com (garry hodgson)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Little-known membership benefits of the NRA
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:37:52 GMT
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs

[Note to moderator:  I don't *think* this violates the non-political
charter of this group.  If I'm wrong, feel free to edit or delete it]

In article <7dGH02Nl2aX.01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> efk00@cd.amdahl.com (Eddie Kieger) writes:

   In article <9211090626.AA13672@relay2.UU.NET>, m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK
   NEY) writes:
   #
   #
   #I guarantee that the NRA sticker is used by the DC police as probable
   #cause to search your vehicle for contraband firearms.

   Is this really legal (as in upheld in court)??
   I knoiw they probably WOULD search you in any case, but could they make 
   it hold up in a court as probable cause, or will they have to "invent"
   something else (and we ALL know THAT doesn't happen, right??)??

In a slightly different context (the WOD), the Supreme Court has upheld 
the use of "profiles" as probable cause for search.  For example,
a young black man in a late model car driving at the speed limit on
the highway can be stopped because he fits their profile of a
drug dealer.  Without commenting on whether this is right or wrong,
I expect that if their profile of some criminal type included
NRA membership, you could have a problem.

Despite being involved in NO criminal activites, I am unable to
place stickers for my favorite band (Grateful Dead) on my car, 
for fear of attracting unwanted attention.  Welcome to the '90's.

-- 
Garry Hodgson			A slow winter day
AT&T Bell Labs			A night like forever
garry@alice.att.com		Sink like a stone
att!alice!garry			Float like a feather

[MODERATOR: I think its probably appropriate to take this to t.p.g.]
From: watt-alan@net.yale.edu (Alan Watt)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: distance a .22 lr travels
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:51:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Nov9.160840.11066
Organization: Yale University, Computing & Information Systems


In article <BxB8BM.3F5@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, cs125c51@dcl-nxt31.cso.uiuc.edu (cs125 student) writes:
|> I'm fairly new to shooting .22's, and I have a question about how far they  
|> really travel. I use CCI mini-mags, hv, and do all of my shooting in the  
|> country, although there are some houses about a mile or mile and a half in
|> one direction, a direction I need to shoot in. Now, (that's my Ross Perot  
|> imitation), on the box it says, "Dangerous to 1 1/2 miles", and I believe
|> that.  I'm not totally stupid. 
|> 
|> My question: Is that at a shooting angle of 45 degrees? Most of my shooting  
|> will be at angles of about 30 degrees and lower. Now how far will the bullet  
|> travel? After traveling a mile, will the terminal velocity really be enough
|> to do some damage to a body, both head and non-head areas?
|> 
|> Can I simply use 1.5 miles as maximum distance traveled at 45 degrees and use  
|> trig to figure out the rest? How much different is std velocity?
|> 
|> Mucho thanko!
|> 
|> Deer season in Illinois opens in 13 days!
|> 
|> Bryan
|> 

Bryan:

  1)	The 45 degree angle figure neglects air drag.  Depending on the
	ballistic coefficient of the bullet, the maximum range elevation
	will be somewhat less that 45 degrees.  I believe the max. range
	elevation for a .30-06 is approximately 30 degrees.

  2)	You shouldn't be shooting *anything* and *any* elevation without
	providing an adequate backstop.  Unless you have the equivalent
	of a military artillery range at your disposal, shooting rifle
	bullets up in the air is irresponsible.

  3)	The courts are open year-round for people who ignore (1) and (2).
-- 
  Alan S. Watt
  Yale University			Computing and Information Systems
  Box 2112 Yale Station			(203) 432-6602
  New Haven, CT  06520-2112		Watt-Alan@Yale.Edu
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: "do it yerself" blue finish on rusting Lee dies
Date: 10 Nov 92 15:05:50 GMT
Organization: Western Washington University

jheath@fieldofdreams.npirs.purdue.edu (Jim Heath) writes:

##From article <1992Nov8.051231.6168@henson.cc.wwu.edu>, by n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio):
## If the solution is not pure, for example if I put a bit of dish-soap
## on the metal surface to make application easier, will it
## change anything?
## 	Lastly:
## Is there some finish better than this that's cheap?
##

#I believe I have heard of people getting them "armaloyed". 

Dies cost 20 bucks.   Blue costs 3 bucks.  Armaloy costs 100 bucks.
I mean cheap. 

Somebody told me that parkerizing solution could be had for 5 bucks
and involved boiling the parts.  I have to try it on some scrap
first, but it sould like worth a try.

Jim
From: btm@well.sf.ca.us (Brian Millin)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: ammo to use for shooting match
Date: 9 Nov 92 23:48:07 GMT
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link

You did not mention any need to make a certain power level; with  10mm it
shouldn't be a problem anyway. You should look for a combination of power and
accuracy. I try to use the lightest rounds I can get away with, as the less
recoil the faster your recovery time is. Sometimes the light loads are not
as accurate, so you then go to the lightest accurate load. 

For the steel, most competitions calibrate them to drop with a 9mm. You
shouldn't have to worry about that.

Have fun. Shooting in competition is a lot of fun, and it is nothing like
punching paper at the range by yourself.
From: holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe))
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Laser Guns (was Re: Arrow proof? Re: Bullet Proof Vests)
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:27:22 GMT
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA

ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:
#As I remember the fuel laser systems, there isn't much to 
#prevent them from being scaled down to a shoulder weapon 
#size.  The biggest problem, at least from a many years old
#memory of a popular fluff article ;-), was the nasty gas.

#From what I heard, the main problem with a laser operatin in  the
visible part of the spectrum is the moisture of the air and, to a
lesser degree, the air itself.  Every drop of water  in  the  air
fractures  away a little bit of energy.  During a fog (natural or
man-made), lasers in wavelengths below UV are  pretty  much  use-
less.

#Oh, I should add:  All this is just speculation on my part with
#no special or authoritative knowledge whatsoever.  Could be all wet...

Ah, yes, the same goes for me...

But, if all else fails, we can always cite Star Trek as a  refer-
ence.   Where  people  smartly step out of the way of approaching
phaser blasts. :-)

-- 
| Holger Reusch                             |
| Technical University of Vienna, Austria <-+--- No kangaroos here,
| Dept. for Real-Time Systems               |    sorry!
| holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |
From: mjalava@lk-hp-9.hut.fi (Mika Matti Jalava)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Fletchette
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:01:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: nntp.1992Nov13.172555.736
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology

I have read somewhere about plastic flechettes. Claimed to be nasty
things, as it's very difficult to find them, even with X-rays. The
source may not have been very reliable, does anyone have any info on
these? I think plastic "darts" would be far too light to do much
damage if they weren't fired at extremely short ranges and high
velocities.

	Mika
From: gt4458c@prism.gatech.edu (John Stephens Cronin)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Misc ramblings was(Re: Norwegian Krag Question)
Date: 13 Nov 92 12:29:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: hydra.74668
Organization: Common Container Liberation Front


In article <1992Nov12.064341.1907@ke4zv.uucp> ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu (Gary Coffman) writes:
#The local toy store has about a dozen of them on the rack
#for about $200 each. They also had some beautiful FN 8mm 
#semi-autos, armory refurbished, with new military stocks 
#for $245. I was sorely tempted. They also had piles of Haikem 
#8mm semis for dirt cheap prices, only dropped once. :-)
#
Which local toy store is this?  I want one of those FN49's or SAFN's or
whatever they call them real bad.  Last time I saw them they were in 7mm,
but I want one of the 8mm or .30-06 ones.  By the way the only 8mm version
I am aware of was the Egyptian one so they are probably also in "only
dropped in sand once" condition. :-)

Thanks in advance for any help.

John Cronin
-- 
John Cronin	Internet: gt4458c@prism.gatech.edu	Phone: (404) 876-1419
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live each day as if it's your last.  One day you'll be right.  -- me
Lighten up, you're gonna die whether you have fun or not.      -- me again
From: se08+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth Adam Eliot)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Update RE:What handgun to buy?
Date: 7 Nov 92 00:34:20 GMT

#                1. Start with a revolver (I was told they were more 
#                                          accurate)
#                2. Get a .357 magnum/.38 special.
#                3. Use the .38 special for target shooting and the
#                   .357 magnum for defense and/or silhouette.
#                4. I was advised to buy a S&W 586/686.
                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^

Why do you need such a big frame gun.  A S&W 66 will save you some $ and
still deliver performance.  Better yet, a Taurus 66 is even less
expensive, and still high quality (it's comparable to the S&W 66) 

-Seth

__________________________________________________________________________
"We... have no use for adventures.  Nasty disturbing uncomfortable
things!  Make you late for dinner!"  -- B. Baggins 

Seth Eliot,            Dept of Material Science and Engineering
                       Carnegie Mellon Univerity,   Pittsburgh, PA
ARPA    :eliot+@cmu.edu            --------------------------------------
   or    se08+@andrew.cmu.edu
Bitnet:  se08%andrew@cmccvb        
---------------------------------
From: jheath@fieldofdreams.npirs.purdue.edu (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Aiming, Dillon Reloaders, and HK Rifles
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:51:26 GMT
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University

#From article <9211100433.AA30557@tsw>, by marc@tsw.UUCP (Marc Kilburn):
# 
# I hope no one minds 3 disparate questions.
# 
# I have put a couple thousand rounds through my first gun, a Sig P228.
# Great gun, I group a clip in 6-7 inches at 25 yards.
# 
# 1) How do I get better at aiming?
#

Practice.  If that is off-hand, it isn't too bad.
 
# 2) Which re-loader should I get?  The owner at the gun shop
#    Burien Discount Guns in Seattle, recommends a single-stage
#    press so I learn the 'art' of making cartridges.
# 
#    I lean toward the 550 or 650 Dillon.
# 

I wouldn't buy a press that didn't auto-index (I think the 550 is
manual, the 650 is auto).  I like the Lee products myself (1000 &
Loadmaster).  It seems much easier to double charge with a manual
indexer, but I have never used one.

# 3) I am thinking about semi-automatic rifles, and I think I like
#    the HK-91 or the SR-9.  I would like to know more about rifles
#    and what opinions there are about Heckler & Koch Firearms.
#

I didn't like having the cocking lever on the left side on the 91
myself.  It also had a tendency to smack me in the face when I
shot it because (I'm told) the buttstock was too short.
 
# 
# [MODERATOR:  Your Humble Moderator studied long and hard before
# purchasing his first press, and then bought the 550.  He has never
# regretted it, but does not recommend it without the prior research.
# Pick up a copy of the Lyman guide, the NRA Handloader manual, maybe
# one or two more separate books that describe the process (Speer,
# Sierra....), THEN call Dillon's 800 number and ask for the back issue
# of Blue Press which describes how the 550 works.  THEN you'll be able
# to make a very informed opinion about whether (1) a progressive is
# for you, and (2) whether Dillion would meet those progressive needs.
# Also on the net in our archives is Henry Schaffer's summary "adventures
# in reloading", which I recommend too.]
-- 
"Land of song, said the warrior bard,           Jim Heath
Though all the world betrays thee.
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard, (The Minstrel Boy)
One faithful harp will praise thee."         (Thomas Moore)
From: holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe))
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: GLOCK 17L
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:24:56 GMT
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA

kdlin@advtech.uswest.com (David Lin) writes:

#I'd like to hear some comments and/or review on the GLOCK 17L.
#Has anyone used it for serious competition? Has anyone shot
#both the GLOCK 17 and 17L? Any comments on the comparison? Thanks.

I shot them both and the G19, too.  IMHO, the G17L is a waste  of
money,  since  it  doesn't  offer important improvements over the
G17.  Glocks aren't target guns, they are made for  carrying  and
defense.   I  found the G17L by no means more exact than the G17.
The additional weight isn't worth the bulk and the $$, too.

#An article I read somewhere suggested to put a bicycle tire tube on the
#grip of GLOCKs. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

No.  Glock grips are as-is on the huge  side.   For  people  with
average  hande the Glock grips are already at the acceptable max-
imum.  As a G19 owner, I wouldn't recommend it.

#It seems to be a good idea to buy all the guns I want before '93.

Indeed, it does.  Same situation in Austria.  Here  it's  the  EC
which  is about to bring draconic gun laws.  Followups on this to
t.p.g, please.

-- 
| Holger Reusch                             |
| Technical University of Vienna, Austria <-+--- No kangaroos here,
| Dept. for Real-Time Systems               |    sorry!
| holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |
From: btree!hale@UCSD.EDU (Bob Hale)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Arrow proof? Re: Bullet Proof Vests
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:44:38 GMT
Organization: Brooktree Corporation, San Diego

In article <1992Nov4.190835.13565@guinness.idbsu.edu> betz%gozer@uunet.UU.NET (Andrew Betz) writes:
[ regarding lasers as weapons ]
##this is getting to be ridiculous.  Anything big enough to carry around
##the power supply for a gigawatt laser ought to be able to make one shot
##kills on large naval vessels such as aircraft carriers.  A gigawatt is
##a LOT of juice.
##
#which brings up the obvious question - at what power level would a
#laser weapon change from essentially a scalpel to a destructive
#device?  are such power levels currently portable?

A gigawatt is a lot of power - most electrical utility generating plants
are designed to produce approximately 1 gigawatt (continuous duty).
However, a gigawatt pulse need not contain much energy.  For example,
a one gigawatt pulse for one nanosecond contains one joule of enery.
For comparison, you can store about 2.5 million joules in a car battery.
This is a trick comparison, though; you might as well compare black
powder to TNT; the comparison would be about as meaningful.

The muzzle energy of a 30-06 bullet is roughly 6000 joules.  If a
pulse laser were to produce one gigawatt for 20 nanoseconds (a
reasonable output) then the laser would output 20 joules.  The
bullet has lots more energy.

The big gotcha is that lasers are *inefficient*.  In fact, they are
horribly inefficient.  They really don't make good weapons unless
you happen to need some characteristic which they uniquely possess.
To produce a one gigawatt pulse with a "portable" laser will
probably require a tractor-trailer rig to haul the laser around,
and access to 3-phase power (or another trailer with a generator)
to run it.

If you happen to need a weapon that shoots straight regardless
of range and wind, which can be aimed in milliseconds or microseconds,
and which makes very small holes in the target then a laser may be
the right answer.  But don't expect rapid fire; a couple of minutes
between shots is normally needed for cooling and recharging.

Note the followup-to line.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net
From: jackson@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Dwight Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: .356 T S&W  (Info anyone?)
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:54:14 GMT


Just picked up a new cartridge, headstamp:  FC  356 T S&W.

It's said to be a new run byy Federal for S&W, as they were (are?)
designing a new semi-auto for IPPCS (?).  It's nothing more than
the 9x21mm (dimentionally at least), sso maybe nothing new.

ANyone know anything else about either the cartridge or handgun?

(if this is a repeat, sorry about that, I don't get back to the
news very often...)

...dwight