HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: apskato@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Bad tactical position ( was Psychology in Defense)
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:37:56 GMT
Organization: Mankato State University

In article <9211100547.AA06545@hpfcso.HP.COM>, post@hpfcso.fc.hp.com (David Post) writes:
# Eric writes about holding the bad person at gun point:
#  >I know the answer for law enforcement whichis "No. You can't shoot someone for
#  >not following your verbal commands".  If a subject refuses to prone out for me
#  >and I have him at gun point, I can't shoot him.  What I would suggest is to
#  >continue to give the verbal commands until he either complys or the cavalry
#  >arrives.   Time is probably going to be on your side, there is no reason to do
#  >anything stupid like trying to force him to the ground and end up having to
#  >fight him.  
# 
# I was wondering...  there is no guarantee that the perp will be reasonable,
# but you DO have its attention.  Before repeating verbal commands, or
# interspersed with verbal commands, do you think it might sometimes be
# helpful to explain that it would be better for them that they do what you
# ask and that it might actually save them from being shot if they move a
# little too fast or lose their balance?

Sounds reasonable to me.  If things are at a standoff explaining to this person
what the situation is and what might happen might work.   The worst that would
happen is that the suspect would continue ignoreing you.

# 
# I am wondering whether police or terrorist psycologists have any researched
# professional opinions on this.

They might have, but I can't remember if the staff here at potato state has
said anything about "explaining the situation" to someone.  I would certainly
give it a shot, but this is just my personal opinion. (certianly not an expert
opinion)

# 
# David Post  davep@hpfcpp.fc.hp.com  hplabs!hpfcla!post

Eric Huber
Mankato State University
Law Enforcement Program

#
From: lairdb@crash.cts.com
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: L.A. Riots vs. Stainless Sig 230
Date: 13 Nov 92 04:10:57 GMT
Organization: "Well, a head on top, an arm on each side, two legs...."

In <BxL95w.44A@scylax.uucp> scylax!tiglath@uunet.UU.NET writes:
[SIG 230 described as "a bit of a mouse gun".]

#A Glock 21 (45 ACP) would be my choice for the next L.A riot.
#To face multiple assailants a low recoil high capacity
#gun may be even better.  (9mm. Glock 17, SIG 228?).  

No facts, just some food for thought.  Some personal-protection people
I was talking to recently were discussing high-cap vs. low-cap., and
the consensus seemed to be that due to *societal* changes in the last
10 years or so, it was time for the "suppressive fire" concept to
make its way into the civilian lexicon.  Many long faces and regretful
head-shaking at the state of affairs, but little disagreement.


#I agree that showing a gun hoping to deter is asking for trouble.  Only
#top experts can afford to do that.  I tend to think that you do not 
#pull a gun out till you are convinced you need to use it.  It's tough,
#but you need to commit yourself mentally for that occasion if you are 
#going to be carrying guns.  Your must establish your own rules of 
#engagement and stick to them. 

I think it's not unreasonable to *hope* to deter.  Every time I go
rock climbing, I *hope* my shoes will hold and my skill will be
sufficient.  Nevertheless, I am both equipped and mentally prepared 
to take a fall.  I agree with you that there should be *no* doubt 
in your mind by the time you draw that you are prepared to fire, 
but I'm not sure you should write your rules to say that "I will not 
draw unless I intend to draw-and-fire."

-- 
Laird P. Broadfield     lairdb@crash.cts.com    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
Hi!  I'm a shareware signature!  Send $5 if you use me, send $10 for manual!
From: wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Class III again
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:00:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: rutgers.9211061715.AA15068
Organization: Indiana University

In article <ROLLEND.92Nov6073725@rocket.sanders.lockheed.com> rollend@rocket.sanders.lockheed.com (Matt Rollender) writes:
#
#In article <1992Nov5.152505.15939@chpc.org> rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) writes:
#
#
##   As of May 19, 1986 the BATF will no longer approve form 1 applications to
##   manufacture full auto firearms for civilian use.  The only legal way to
##   convert a semi auto rifle into full auto is to obtain and install a 
##   registered "auto sear", or (alternatively) registered full auto reciever.
##   Either of these parts require payment of the 4200 transfer tax, plus a
##   hefty "scarcity" payment to the current lucky owner.
#
#
#If you go ahead and get a registered full auto receiver, can you still
#use a semi-auto reciever to use the gun/rifle to go hunting? Or does
#the whole gun become a full auto in the BATF's eyes for now and
#evermore? I know that the receiver is what the BATF is more interested
#in, but if you are out hunting with the rifle configured in its
#semi-auto only mode, will they still get "upset" if the remainder of
#the rifle has been altered in any way?
#
#I've been debating on whether to buy a registered trigger pack for one
#of my rifles, but don't want to give up being able to also use it for
#hunting.


BATF doesn't care what you hunt with. They have no say. It's up to 
your state wildlife management law enforcement types. In general, they
only care about what your rifle can do while it's in the field. For example,
a rifle may be capable of having a 50 shot magazine but as long as you're
only carrying a 3 round mag while you're out hunting they're content.
They really don't care about what accessories you have in the garage.




-- 
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | Wayne J. Warf -- WWARF@ucs.indiana.edu -- I speak for myself only  |
 | Midterm Countdown-Bill and the Congress have to '94 to screw it up |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: scylax!tiglath@uunet.UU.NET
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: AMT .380, Colt Mustang, or other?
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:49:52 GMT
Organization: ScylaxCorp


someone@mimsy.umd.edu writes:


#Lots of people, obviously, or they wouldn't be buying them.
#The Glock, despite its "safe action" claim, is a single action

#(double action: trigger cocks and releases hammer,  
#single action: trigger cannot cock hammer).

I disagree.  I will never ever have to cock a Glock pistol, a la
single action.  I claim that makes a big difference.  As long as I 
have a holster which covers the trigger, I feel a lot safer with a 
Glock than carrying a typical single action piece "cocked and locked" .
A cocked and locked gun is asking to get snagged in your clothing.

I am sure many people enjoy single action guns, I am not criticizing
them.  My point is that when superior technology becomes available
you stick to older designs at your peril.  God forbid you ever
had to confront a foe with a Glock 21 with 14 45 ACP rounds in his gun,
with a 1911 model in your hand.  All things being equal you are
in serious trouble.  It is fine to go to a competition with a 1911
but to carry a gun cocked and locked all day, would make me real
uneasy.

People still like to shoot arrows and I bet it is terrific fun
Many people like 1911 for their own reasons and thats fine too.
Now, I have a habit to look at police officers' guns to note what
he or she chose.  It is amazing how many of them chose to carry
Glocks.   I guess than when you are expecting trouble you want
the state of the art on your side and no less.
From: lriggins@afit.af.mil (L. Maurice Riggins)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: A "must" for the reloading bench
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:38:28 GMT
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology

In article <1992Nov2.170659.3067@phx.mcd.mot.com> mcdphx!systemname!gcall@enuucp.eas.asu.edu (Glen Call) writes:
#I agree with emphasis on safety.  I do question the safety of the kinetic
#pullers.  Anyone out there have any experiences with accidental detonation of
#primers while using kinetic pullers?

I orginally felt the same way you did about kinetic pullers.  However,
some bullets aren't shaped so that you can get a grip with the die type
pullers.  There was a big thread here a year or so ago and most of the
posters had used kinetic pullers for years with no problems.  Those that
posted opposing them had not one instance of detonation.  So I gave one
a try and have had success, even though I've had to really whack a few 
rifle loads HARD to get 'em pulled.  That's my experience.

-- 
Maurice               INTERNET:  lriggins@afit.af.mil
From: chuckh@apex.com (Chuck Huffington)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: fun things to shoot at
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:44:18 GMT
Organization: Apex Computer Company

In article <RTARAZ.92Nov5125515@bigwpi.WPI.EDU> rtaraz@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Ramin Taraz) writes:
#
#After going to an indoor range for many times, I would like to take my
#Taurus 92 out side for a while.  I like to know what are some fun
#things to shoot at. (i.e.  A television tube should be alot of fun)
#
#rtaraz
#

Please don't shoot at anything you are not willing or able to clean up
after you are finished with it.

Trashing ranges gives us all a black eye.
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: .32-20 winchester questions
Date: 11 Nov 92 01:17:36 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.

Me again...

Thanks for pointers to .32-20 brass/bullets.

Obviously, I wasn't clear about the other part of my question.

Mea culpa.

I'll try again: How about pointers to reasonable suppliers of
factory .32-20 (loaded) ammunition?  I can get it around here
for $20 for a box of 50.  I'd like to do better, for at least
a couple boxes.

Thanks again.

--
-------------------------------------------------------
| Some things are too important not to give them away |
| to everybody else and have none left for yourself.  |
-------------------------------------------------------
From: smpod@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Selling Home-loaded Ammo?
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:51:05 GMT
Organization: who knows

bobk@gibdo.engr.washington.edu (Bob) writes...
#  I attended my first gunshow and was struck by the number of people
#  selling home-loaded ammo.  I'm kind of curious about how easy or hard
#  it is for someone to start selling ammo (or reloading services).
# ....
#  How profitable is it?  For most people, I doubt that there is much 
#  profit, but one guy I talked to claimed he sold about 100,000 rounds
#  per month.  Is there a certain point where you have to start worrying
#  about environmental protection regulations, manufacturing codes, sales
#  tax, etc?

Wouldn't the biggest headache be insurance?  What happens when one your reloads
was a double charge and blew up your customer's gun and hand?  What happens
when a bullets lodges in the barrel because there was no powder and the next
round hits the obstruction?  etc.
From: RRUBERT@CISNCC.intel.com
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: rec.guns submission
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:56:21 GMT


##In article <9211062117.aa09242@s.s.ms.uky.edu> miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen 
##Gran
##|t) writes:
##Those small propane tanks are nice. Merely place a
##road flare appx. 6" from it, go about 50 yards (minimum) away,
##and kablam! :)
##
## *** WARNING, DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME KIDS ***
## I am not responsible, blah blah blah etc etc etc,
##
##
#mcaldwel@netcom.com (Michael Caldwell)
#I saw somebody in the desert place a propane bottle in a puddle of gas.  He
#then lit the gas on fire, backed up about 50 yards, and shot it with a rifle.
#I ran for cover and was able to turn around in time to see the fireball it
#produced.  I don't lack what it takes to do this (brains).  In case anybody
#else has thought about trying this, don't, it looks like a bad idea.  Someone's
#trailer did get hit by the shrapnel.
#
#Michael


While I would never do such a thing, I have heard of those who do. I am told 
that the hot plan (hah) is to tape the road flare to the propane bottle and 
light it. Stand back 15 to 20 yards and fire away. The best results are at 
night. After 10-12 of these events, the only moment of danger was when the 
bottle got some flight time (about 20 yrds). The bottles always had only bullet
holes, no explosive tearing. I think the propane burns only after
it escapes the bottle.

			Rod Rubert
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: LONG, rec.guns discussion
Date: 13 Nov 92 12:30:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: dixie.l#fq!9
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

magnum@cs.umd.edu writes:


#I hope you will pardon an interruption of normal technical discussion in
#rec.guns for a brief bit of introspection about the group itself.  This has
#been precipitated by Mr. Ben Klausner, who calls for rec.guns to become an
#unmoderated group.  

#(a.k.a.  Professor James M. Purtilo

Jim,

I assume you wanted this to be a public discussion so here goes...

As someone who has at times been mightily pissed at your not posting
some of my stuff, I say let's leave things as they are.  I am happy 
enough with the current level of moderation to leave it alone.  
I'd guess that 90% of the discussion is repetition over some 
interval and could be handled with a comprehensive FAQ.  But the
readership seems to like this as evidenced by the success of any
number of gun magazines that say the same thing over and over
and make money doing so.

The last thing I'd want to see is the moderation standards loosened 
to the extent of allowing posts that I can anticipate Mr. Klausner
making, judging from his mail to you.  I've watched sci.military's 
S/N ratio get alarmingly high since Bill Thacker took a sabbatical.
I think the diversity of posts is just about right now.  Any more 
noise and I'll likely miss something interesting.  I don't want 
that to happen.  

At the same time that I'm happy with the level of moderation, I'm
disturbed with your meddling as you've described in your post.  
Your job as moderator should be simply to filter out inappropriate
posts and NOT to play tattletail.  Were I moderating the group,
abusive or other grossly inappropriate messages would simply
go to the bit bucket with no reply or acknowledgement.  I think
you stand far more secure in resisting the assaults of the Klausners
if you stick to the business at hand and leave the mischef to others.

John

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |
Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high tech and computers? 
jgd@dixie.com                        |Write me about PE Magazine
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
From: erudnick@pica.army.mil (FSAC-SID)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: What was the Steyr GB?
Date: 6 Nov 92 01:57:44 GMT


Stephen D. Grant writes:
#wasn't that the big overly square boat-anchor looking thing?
#9mm pistol that was THE ugliest thing i have ever seen.
#am i thinking of the wrong thing here?


The Steyr GB is a 9mm pistol that is now out of production. It's about
the size of a Glock 20/21, and somewhat resembles the Jericho. The
magazine capacity is 18 rounds, locking was gas-delayed-blowback like
the HK P7s, and tritium night sights were standard.

This is way down on my wish list, but as the magazine puts it in the
[adjectives deleted] "assault weapon" category.......

It's not the prettiest of the wondernines, but then it's still a lot
better looking than some relatively common and really grotesque handgun
I keep seeing in the gun rags. I think they call it the "Government
Model" or "1911" or some such. Really stupid looking, and fires the
ridiculous .45 cartridge.

Shutting off the bile now :) :) :) :), remembering that beauty is in
the eye of the beholder.


Ed Rudnicki     erudnick@pica.army.mil     All disclaimers apply
Protect the Second Amendment - boycott Ruger products
"That's not true," Bill hissed to his lawyer. "The facts are-"
"Don't worry about facts, Bill, no one else here does. Facts can't
alter this case."       -"Bill the Galactic Hero" Harry Harrison
From: cdl0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (CONRAD DANIEL LLOYD-KNIGHT)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: explosives question
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:52:35 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

Hi out there!
I wasn't sure where to post this question, so I'm trying here!

1) What kind of surface blast (assuming a direct hit with eg. a missile) would
be required to destroy an underground bunker? I mean an actual military
bunker, not a shelter. I need to know the minimum to put it out of commision,
not necessarily kill everyone inside.

2) Same question, but for a large building complex (about 4 or 5 city blocks
of large buildings).

3) Exactly what energy (in Joules) corresponds to a ton of TNT (since
explosive forces always seem to be given in terms of pounds, tons and megatons
of TNT). While I'm at it - how many pounds are there in a ton of TNT (quite a
lot I should imagine, but are we talking metric tons and pounds or silly
imperial units?)?

Don't worry, I'm not planning to actually blow someone up! I just need to find
out for a friend who's writing a book.

Thanks for any information,
    -Conrad.

-- 

bye...
________________________________________________________________________________
*               Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.               *
*                     Love is the Law, Love under Will.                        *
*______________________________________________________________________________*
                           ___                                     - A.C.
From: matthews@xerox.com (Dave Matthews)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: I got my Dillon!
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:49:41 GMT
Organization: Xerox Corporation, Webster NY

Thanks for the responses to my question about what to order with a Dillon 550.

I placed the order Oct 30 and got the press on Nov 9.  Not too bad for UPS to Geneseo NY.

I got a 550 set up for .38/.357 plus .44 conversion, spare toolhead and powder die, and 
crimp dies for .38 and .44.  Price with shipping and NRA roundup (you all do this don't
you) was $350.  Total set up time was about 3 hours with help from my 3 year old.
Figure on about 2 1/2 hours if you don't have a 3 year old helper :-).  The only bad part about 
the set up was that I didn't have 1/4 inch bolts in the right lengths for mounting so I had to wait a day.
The press needed no adjustments- even with changing primer bars.  Amazing how well 
things work when you RTFM first.

Asbestos suit on:

If you are getting a progressive press for metallic cartridges get a Dillon.  Don't even consider a Lee.
Anybody that provides an 800 number for help and lists it in the third sentence of the manual believes
in their product.  I can think of a few software companies that should start doing this.

Asbestos suit off.

Now to start working on getting the next toy - something to really use the press.   Maybe an SKS
with removable mag modification, or a M1 Carbine, or one of those .32 acp autos from East Germany, or a 1911.

Dave
From: ninah@owlnet.rice.edu (Nina Concepcion Hernandez)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Gun Control Laws -Texas
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:01:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: rice.Bxo0MC.Goz
Organization: Rice University


	I've only been following this group for a few weeks because
	I'm interested in buying a gun for personal protection.

	Could someone please fill me in on the Gun Laws, especially
	Concealed Carry Laws, in Texas.  I live and work in Houston
	but live in Fort Bend County, and work in Harris County.

	Any help would be apppreciated and any advise on a good
	"ladies' gun" would be helpful.

	Thanks.

	P.S. I've already spken to Ken Whitehead and he was very helpful.
From: tssmith@netcom.com (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Arrow proof? Re: Bull
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:38:36 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Nov4.000802.18847@ttinews.tti.com> hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath) writes:
# Friends who claim to know about such things tell me the longbows used at
# Agincourt were not what most people think of when they think of Robin
# Hood, for example.  These were scaled up considerably.  The archers would
# lay on their backs with the bows braced against their feet and use both
# hands to pull and release.

The best description I know of the battle of Agincourt is by the
British military historian John Keegan (_The Face of Battle_), and
Keegan usually gets the technical details correct.  He has
calculated, given the width of the battle field and the number and
positioning of the English archers, that the archers were standing a
yard apart, in six or seven rows.  These archers must have been using
the standard English (Welsh) yew longbow, about 6 feet in length.
Each archer carried about 24 arrows.

#                             Pinpoint accuracy wasn't important.  The
# object was to bring an unavoidable rain of death down on the closely
# packed French, which they did.

The indirect fire in the initial volleys of the battle was more like
a "rain of annoyance", designed to provoke the French into charging. 
The arrows had a maximum range of about 250 yards, and were fired to
reach a height of 100 feet.  To quote Keegan: "These arrows cannot,
however, given their terminal velocity and angle of impact, have done
a great deal of harm..."

In direct fire, at closer ranges, the arrows could penetrate armor. 
No dispute about this.  Even so, the English archers failed to halt
the initial French advance with their arrows.  When they ran out of
arrows, however, they did not flee, but rather attacked the French
flanks with their swords and axes.  In the ensuing melee, most of the
French were killed by the men-at-arms (infantry) and the archers,
using spears, swords, maces, and axes.

# I've no idea what the pull weight of one of those monsters was, but I'm
# told a clothyard shaft from one would go through a knight, his armor and
# the horse under him at 400 yards.  Now, _that's_ crowd control. (-:{

It's hard to imagine that at 400 yards an arrow from any bow, even a
crossbow, could penetrate armor.  I don't think a jacketed steel
bullet from my .357 magnum could penetrate an armor breastplate at
400 yards (assuming I could hit it, that is :-).

# The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)

--Tim (tssmith@netcom.com)
From: mcaldwel@netcom.com (Michael Caldwell)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Need info on small .25 semi-auto handgun
Date: 11 Nov 92 01:16:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Nov10.175048.16562
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

I am looking for an inexpensive semi-automatic handgun.  I think a small
.25 handgun would do.  Does anyone have any recommendations or comments
on various brands?  Any information would be appreciated.

Michael
From: keith@scorpio.ic.cmc.ca (Keith de Solla)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: misc. questions
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:27:05 GMT
Organization: Canadian Microelectronics Corporation

I have a few odd questions:

1. Any other Canadian shooters know where I apply for membership in
   the Ontario Handgun Association (OHA)?

2. Where does one find out more about IPSC shooting, such as a list
   of events, rules, etc?  Are events different for major and minor
   power class/factor?  What equipment does one need for IPSC events
   (besides the obvious - gun, holster, ammo, & ear/eye protection)?

3. Where can I buy bowling pins for pin shooting? (preferably 
   somewhere in Ontario or northern New York)

-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Keith P. de Solla        | "I don't enforce the law, I regulate |
| CMC                      |  human behaviour"                    |
| keith@orion.ic.cmc.ca    |    - Commissioner Scali              |