HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sutin@ra.UCSC.EDU (Brian Sutin)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Target .22 Recomendations
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:56:58 GMT
Organization: Lick Observatory UCSC

In article <1993Jan27.025443.16740@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> pdalidow@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Pete Dalidowicz) writes:
#In article <C1Guuo.C5L@world.std.com> archon@world.std.com (Timothy P Szczesuil
#) writes:

##My SO and I are starting out with target .22s before moving on to
##larger calibers.  We've taken the NRA Basic Pistol and developed a
##fondness for one-handed shooting.  We are quite close to purchasing
##a Smith & Wesson Model 422 (6 in. barrel) and a Mitchell Arms
##Sharpshooter Auto Pistol.  My cheap choice would be a Magnum Research
##Mountain Eagle.  I would appriciate any information regarding these
##models or a recommendation of a good quality target .22 in the <$400
##price range.
##              --Tim Szczesuil
#The Ruger Mark II Government Model is a good choice.  It is about $325 but 
#tends to be a little heavier than the high end (Hammerilli, Pardini) 
#competition pistols which are about $1000.
#                                 "Pistol" Pete D.

I purchased a Ruger Mk II bull barrel, shot it for a few months, despised
it utterly, and sold it back.  I then purchased a SW M41, through which I
have put at least 50,000 rounds.  The only wear I have noticed is loss
of blueing on the breach face.  I recall paying about $400 or so for it,
although I am sure it has gone up since.  The 41 uses the same clips as
the 422, which I have never fired.  The only other modern 22 I might
purchase would be the Browning Buckmark, otherwise I would search for a
used High Standard 22 or a used Colt Woodsman.  Everything else is, IMHO,
junk or too exotic.

Brian Sutin				sutin@lick.ucsc.edu
Lick Observatory, UCSC			Santa Cruz, CA 95064
    Fred:   "May I rescue you?"
    Ginger: "No, thank you.  I prefer being in distress."
From: hmueller@orca.tamu.edu (Hal Mueller)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: BEST SHOTGUN DEFENSE ROUND?
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:01:48 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University

In article <n9020351.727559970@waldorf> n9020351@waldorf.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:
#???  Under what circumstances would it be desireable or lawful to 
#use lethal force against a figure 50+ yards away?

Perhaps riots, or other complete breakdowns of civil authority?

Rather unlikely compared to burglary, though.

-- 
Hal Mueller                     If guns are outlawed, only the government
hmueller@orca.tamu.edu          will have guns.
From: reidld@ecf.toronto.edu
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: shooting under water?
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:42:10 GMT
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility

In article <v5q5ie0@twilight.wpd.sgi.com> erikw@bat.wpd.sgi.com.wpd.sgi.com (Erik Wahlstrom) writes:
#One other important consideration is the FLASH point of the powder and primer.
#I recall a problem NASA was haveing with a satellite because it's sun shade did
#not correctly deploy.Some piece of equipment was about to fail because of the
#high internal temperature of the craft. Who ever is involved with aerospace
#correct me if am wrong but i believe temperature differences in the vacuum of
#space can be close to zero and as high as 450 degrees or more.

Another factor:  assuming that the air in the case leaks out, would the
primer flame characteristics be adversely affected?  The lower pressure
that the hot primer gas is expanding into would tend to give a cooler
plume of gas and hot particles.  If your powder happens to be extermely
cold (perhaps because you left your gun in the 'shade' for 20 minutes
or so), you may not be able to ignite the powder.  But then, if your powder
was at 200C or so after soaking up the sun, things may be interesting...

For longer storage, volatile components of the powder would be lost, changing
the burn characteristics.
-- 
reidld@ecf.toronto.edu (Daniel Chisholm)
reidld@ecf.toronto.edu (Daniel Chisholm)
From: x90hornbach1@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: BATF inspection of FFL's
Date: 27 Jan 93 04:55:14 GMT
Organization: Western Michigan University

All this talk about ATF is getting me paranoid.  I would like to hear about any
small dealer (in house) that has been inspected.  A few questions:

What did they want to see?

Did they ask alot of questions? (what)

Did they want to see any tax records, sales slips, etc...

Did they inspect your firearms (I realize most in house don't have any
inventory)?

If they showed up while no one was home, what did they do?

How long did they stay (minutes, tens of minutes, etc.)

Anything else...

Please post or email and I'll follow up

thanks 
John Hornbach
From: mjalava@lk-hp-3.hut.fi (Mika Matti Jalava)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Glock Defense (Re: Glock vs. SIG!?)
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:57:13 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology

In article <4380@eastman.UUCP> (MJ) writes:

#This is impossible to comprend.  I've owned a 6" and own a 4" M29.  I have
#a M23 and M20 Glock.  Glocks are soft shooters.  James is the first person
#I have heard of who believes differently.

Here is another. But as you understand, the grip shape is a personal
preference. My small hands feel 9mm Glock much more uncomfortable to
shoot than a .44 Mag with good grips. I have shot quite a few 9mm
pistols and Glock feels absolutely the worst. My "Bolo" Mauser is
has an even worse grip, but it is so heavy that the light recoil of 9mm
doesn't feel much.

The best grips I've trien on a 9mm were on a friend's Taurus. I
suppose they were Pachmayr's, rubber anyway.

#You'll either love the Glock trigger or hate it.

I just happen to belong to the second group... I am beginning to
believe that Glock is a great gun. It just has these two things, the
grip and the trigger that don't fit to my taste. But these are just
the parts that are most obviously personal preferences.

## 	Accuracy (suffers due to rifling design)

(sorry I don't remember who wrote that)

I don't know if the rifling design (what's there so different about it
in the 17?) makes the gun less accurate, but I don't see any problems
with the accuracy anyway. Even though I don't like Glock, I can shoot
as well with it as with any other 9mm gun.

## Overly tight chamber--can fail to feed reloads and/or rounds which
## 				are beyond spec.

#This is news to me.

It is true, at least in the 17. The chamber is much tighter than in
most other guns. No problem if you carefully resize the brass, so I
don't see why this should make the gun any worse.

#1)  Many will not be able to get by the cost of the SIG.

Actually here in Finland Glocks are quite expensive. The difference in
prices between Glocks and SIGs is much smaller than in USA. Can't
quote any prices right away, though.

#3)  Many will not get by the looks of the Glock.

Hmm, I first thought that Glock must be the ugliest pistol ever made.
Now that I've shot one and had a close look, it doesn't look that bad.
And in any case, the looks of a gun is only a secondary criteria.

	Mika
From: ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: First Shotgun Opinions?
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:02:16 GMT
Organization: Circle 'C' Shellfish Ranch, Shores-of-the-Pacific, California

In article <1jhmm6INNm4u@cronkite.Central.Sun.COM> doc@webrider.Central.Sun.COM (Steve Bunis SE Southwest Chicago) writes:
#A friend of mine is looking to purchase a first shotgun for his
#12 y/o son.  This will be used for target/trap shooting.
#
#Does anyone have any suggestions for good starter guns?

Remmington makes a really nice 20 Ga. with a small stock.  The
whole gun is reduced in dimentions so that it is still properly
proportioned.  (As opposed to the Winchester 'Ladies & Youths' 
version that has this large reciever with a small stock... just
looks funny...).

While I've never owned a Remington, they have a good reputation.
The 20 Ga can do anything you want to do.  It can be had in loads
close enough to 12 Ga loads to be useful, but can also be shot
(Easily!) by kids with target loads.

If it was me, I'd get the Remington... 

-- 

E. Michael Smith  ems@apple.COM

'Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.  Boldness has
 genius, power and magic in it.'  -  Goethe

I am not responsible nor is anyone else.  Everything is disclaimed.
From: kgk@martigny.ai.mit.edu (Kleanthes Koniaris)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Glock vs. Sig!?
Date: 25 Jan 93 13:59:49 GMT


Dear Readers:

I have an old Glock 17 (which I bought in 1986), with 1992 Trijicon
sights.  While I *love* my Glock, I am thinking of a second pistol;
perhaps a collection of one pistol is too small, and our beloved
Moderator's mantra is taking its toll (``Buy them all'' :).

Anyway, given all of the "Sig, Sig, Sig," talk that I hear, I was
considering a Sig P226 with K-kote and Sig-lights (Sig's tritium
sights [which are also from Trijicon?]), in 9mm.  But then, in a
moment of lucid thought, I realized that for the price of a Sig, I
could almost get two Glocks.

The natural question comes to mind, is the Sig better than the Glock?
If so, why?

I know quite a bit about Glocks (I've even read Peter's book :), but
relatively little about Sig's.  Could a Sig lover provide *technical*
reasons for why the Sig is as good as/better than a Glock?  I don't
want to hear "my Sig looks so pleasing that I stare at it all day, but
the Glock is ugly that I recoil in horror, therefore the Sig is
better."

In fact, there seem to reasons to suspect that the Glock is *better*
built: I have heard that the Sig has welding, rivets, etc.; the Glock
has none.  I have heard that the Sig slide is cast (almost to shape)
and then machined, while the Glock slide is cut from a solid piece of
steel.  Of course, the Glock does have sloppy tooling marks, but the
actual method of construction seems superior.  I have heard that the
Sig coatings tend to wear, and that the weapon is easily prone to
rust.  (In a Glock?  Never!)

So, Sig owners, please be so kind as to post *why* the Sig is so good,
and please be so kind, if possible, as to *compare* to the Glock.

        ---kleanthes
From: mtxinu!sybase.sybase.com!thorick@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Thorick Chow)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Why ?
Date: 26 Jan 93 01:51:08 GMT
Organization: Sybase, Inc.


Hi all...

I have a question that maybe someone can answer...

WHy is it that many pistol target shooters put their non-shooting
hand in their pockets ?

I have often puzzled over this...  While informal Bullseye is
a hobby kind of thing for me, I still have an undercurrent of
'self-defense' in my practice.. so naturally I wouldn't
be caught dead (so to speak) with one hand in my pocket.

similarly, when I worked out a load for my REm 700, I chose
to seat the bullet such that it would clear the magazine...
Of course the 100% Benchrester types snicker at me a little,
but I do it because there's some practicality that comes with 
shooting the most accurate load that will still fit in the magazine.

anyway...  any of you handwarmer types...  what's the reason ?

('tradition' is an acceptable reason BTW  :-)   )

-thorick


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"..my songs sound better AFTER you've been to jail. "
               - ICE-T on KPFA 1/12/93                                     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: poppg@columbia.dsu.edu (GARY POPP)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Ruger M77 MkII triggers
Date: 26 Jan 93 05:01:01 GMT
Organization: Dakota State University

In article <C1EwwD.CBE@newcastle.ac.uk> J.M.Spencer@newcastle.ac.uk (Jonathan Spencer) writes:
#From: J.M.Spencer@newcastle.ac.uk (Jonathan Spencer)
#Subject: Ruger M77 MkII triggers
#Date: 25 Jan 93 14:00:27 GMT
#
#roa@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Robert O. Anderson) writes:
#
##anyone know if the Ruger Mark II's have an adjustable trigger (internal) 
##like the Remington 700's?? 
#
#No, they cannot be adjusted. My M77 MkKII has a trigger pull of around
#7lbs which sounds horrific but I can get sub-MOA 4 shot groups with it.
#I spoke to Timney (replacement triggers) and they are working on a
#replacement trigger for the MkII (already make one for the MkI) and
#it'll be ready this time next year. In the meantime, they offered to "do
#a job" on the original trigger - but the problems of transporting the
#rifle between UK & USA nake it impractical.
#
#--Jonathan
=======================================================================

For what it's worth, there's a gunsmith in Mitchell S.D. that has worked on 
a number of my guns triggers (including 2 MkII's) and does an outstanding 
job.  If you would like more info just drop me a line.

poppg@columbia.dsu.edu

Gary
From: leem@jpl-devvax.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Lee Mellinger)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Beretta vs Taurus ?
Date: 27 Jan 93 03:39:51 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory (NASA)

In article <1993Jan25.201605.3879@michael.apple.com> ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:
:If we can take a brief detour from the Sig vs Glock vs Beretta 
:debate for a moment ...
:
:
:The local gun store asserts that Brazil nationalized a Beretta 
:plant and is basically building Berrettas on Beretta tooling
:under a different name.  Is this true?  (And did they start 
:cheapening the metals or quality of labor used ... or kept the same?)
:
:E. Michael Smith  ems@apple.COM

Beretta received a contract from the Brazillian government to
manufacture for the military model 92 pistols.  Beretta set up a plant
in Brazil, not unlike the operation in the US.  When the contract ran
out, beretta sold the plant, inventory, plans, drawings, etc to
Taurus.  Taurus continued to manufacture the 92's for civilian use and
has since begun to modify the design that diverges from the Beretta.



Lee

"Mit Pulver und Blei, die Gedanken sind frei."

|Lee F. Mellinger                 Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA
|4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109 818/354-1163  FTS 792-1163     
|leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV
From: webdw@mvutd.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: the spirit of rec.guns
Date: 28 Jan 93 04:15:46 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <9301252007.aa21687@claudius.pica.army.mil> erudnick@pica.army.mil (FSAC-SID) writes:
#
#gus Baird writes:
##For simplicity, clarity, and a little nostalgia, "army rifles"?
#
#Unfortunately, this fits right in with NJ Governor Florio's "weapons of
#war" BS. As in "legitimate sportsmen don't need _____________..."
#
#I kinda like defense rifles: The selective fire guns are "assault rifles",
#while the semi-only are "defense rifles". Or something like that?
#

Actually, some commonsense terms already exist:

For semi-automatic military rifles-
battle rifle or carbine (dependent on barrel length)

For select fire military rifles capable of burst or full auto-
assualt rifle, carbine or pistol (dependent on barrel length)

BDW
From: rex@iqsc.COM (Rex Black)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: speaking of semi-automatic "assualt" weapons...
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:01:35 GMT
Organization: IQ Software Corp.

Just overheard on NPR, which is covering the Judiciary Committee's 
sessions on Zoe Baird:

Dianne Fienstein (Mrs. 2nd Amendment):  Do you support a ban on semi-
automatic assualt weapons?

Zoe Baird:  Yes.  I know that Bill Clinton is committed to this as well.

Man, it's going to be a _long_ four years...

Rex
From: jhultman@vitalink.com (Jeff Hultman)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Marlin Camp Carbine
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:02:28 GMT
Organization: Vitalink

# I've been thinking of getting one of these to go with my 1911-A1,
#since they are made in .45 ACP, look nice, an who knows when they
#will fall into a banned group.  (Hey, they are a semi-auto with
#removable magazines firing a (ex) military round... almost an
#'assault rifle', I can here them saying ... )

#Back to the main thread:  Anyone have a thumbnail sketch of the good
#and the bad about the Marlin Camp Carbine?

#I vaguely remember some gun mag saying that the 9mm version gunked
#up fairly quickly and needed frequent cleaning ...

#Will 'target loads' cycle the action?
------------------------------------------------

I have a friend who owns one in .45 ACP.  We've taken it out and have put it
through the ringer.  It has cycled every configuration of cartridge with virtually
no problems.  (except the screws on the front sight loosened and it fell off.  Some
loctite and a screwdriver... No problems).  It shoulders and aims very quickly.
The trigger isn't to smooth, kind of like a shotguns.  The mag release on the Marlin 
supplied magazine is also not to positive.  But with the after market Wilsons they
drop right out.  Target loads will cycle the action including reloads!  +P loads are
not to be used as stated in the Marlin owners manual.

Im my opinion it's a good defensive tool for out to 50 yards as it gives grapefruit size
groups.

Overall,  I wish I had one.

Jeff H.

Jeff H.
From: spickett@orion.oac.uci.edu (Steve Pickett)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Seagal's Firearms handling (was: Re: Got One! (Spring. Arm. 1911-A1))
Date: 23 Jan 93 15:59:41 GMT
Organization: University of California, Irvine


I'm surprised nobody said anything about the reloading scene where he pours
the powder into the casing without a funnel. Just straight from the scoop
from the scale. That had to be a one grain at a time maneuver. Oh well :-)
I still think his movies are well above the rest. 

-Steve
From: erudnick@pica.army.mil (FSAC-SID)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: FFL Application Form Question?
Date: 27 Jan 93 03:39:04 GMT


Larry Cipriani writes:
#By the way, there are special Form 4473's you must use if you sell
                                               ^^^^
#less than 50 guns in a year.  Be sure to get the correct forms.


The low volume 4473s are intended to be a paperwork-saving device for
low volume dealers, and are a substitute for the standard 4473/bound book
for low volume dealers. They are not mandatory, but are optional.



Ed Rudnicki     erudnick@pica.army.mil     All disclaimers apply
Protect the Second Amendment - boycott Ruger products
Geordi: "...it's like the laws of physics went right out the
window." Q: "And why shouldn't they? They're so inconvenient."
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Why ?
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:25:19 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab, APG MD.


In article <28549@sybase.sybase.com> mtxinu!sybase.sybase.com!thorick@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Thorick Chow) writes:
#WHy is it that many pistol target shooters put their non-shooting
#hand in their pockets ?

It seems like a good place to put it.  TV technicians working around
high voltage keep one hand tucked into the belt behind their backs..

I think your real question is, why are they shooting one-handed?
That must be because the official rules of their particular competition
require it.  Of course for defense shooting one uses both hands by
preference.

[MODERATOR:  Another consideration.  Folks with a, hmmm, curvaceous 
figure like mine tend to be front heavy.  Standing with one's arm 
straight out holding a few pounds of pistol can further throw off
one's center of gravity.  Anything to get my weight off on the other
side for counterbalance is desirable.... (for precise balancing I 
suppose I should stuff a couple of pizzas in a backpack....)]
From: harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: hand shake
Date: 26 Jan 93 13:05:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

Diet has some effect on hand shake.  I'm not talking about the more
detailed things like calcium deficiency (as someone else mentioned --
I'd never heard that one before).

I noticed one early evening that I was having a severe hand shake
problem when normally my hands are steady as rock.  Thinking back on
that day, I realized that I'd skipped lunch, so I hadn't eaten in nine
or ten hours.  I've noticed before that not eating has made my hands
shake.

In other words, eating a decent meal is important.  That means you
can't have a Coke and a couple Twinkies for lunch and expect to shoot
well later that day. ;)

Also, it might help to let your food digest an hour or two before
shooting.  Early on in the digestive process (if I remember my biology
correctly) a lot of blood is required to run the system.  This blood
comes at the expense of the normal flow to the brain and muscles.

Hey, everything helps...
-- 
-----------------Greg-Harp----------------harp@netcom.com------------------

                     Dallas Cowboys -- NFC Champions
                           The 'Boys are Back!
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: shooting under water?
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:41:38 GMT
Organization: Western Washington University

gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes:

##->Interesting.  So tell me, if you shoot a gun in "space" i.e.
##->near-vacuum, would you hear anything?  No air for the pressure wave,
##->but I would think that the expanding gas would reach your (spacesuit
##->enclosed) ears.  Neglecting the spacesuit for the moment, would you
##->hear anything?  If yes, what would it sound like?

#No, the gas would travel far more slowly than an acoustic wave in a demium.
#You wouldn't hear anything transported by the bulk gas -- it's the WAVE
#propagation, not the atoms of the medium as such, that cause sound.

	Ok, what about if you fired a .45 ACP on Mars, or somewhere else
with an extra thin (~1-2% of sea level pressure), would the noise
the shooter hear be ~1-2% as intense as it would be at sea level,
ie linearly proportionate to the pressure, or is it some other
much more complicated calculation?

	(I don't know why I responded to this, but the image of figures
in pressure suits running tests on 1911s was too much for me. %^)

JD
From: miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Value of AK-47 pre-ban?
Date: 25 Jan 93 01:04:22 GMT
Organization: University of Kentucky, USA. -5 GMT

cjp@megatek.com (Chris "Systems Stud" Pikus) writes:

## I've come across a pre-ban AK-47, with original pistol grip stock and
## a bayonett.  Two 30 rd mags included. The owner is asking $400.  
## I'm considering buying it. Is this a reasonable value?
## Daniel Weed                                       weed@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov

#        Hell yes, buy it now. Before he comes to his senses. These things
#are worth about twice as much on the open market.

  Well, I guess it depends on where you live and what model it is. Norinco
  pre-bans sell for about $500 here in Ky. Legends with milled recievers go
  for about $700. I would still snag it fast if it is a pre-ban model.


#        Of course, assuming this is legit. The key is "pre-ban". The
#after ban ones come with the thumbhole stock, 5-round magazine and
#no flash suppressor. If he purchased a post-ban gun and modified it
#to look more "evil", he (and you) could be risking serious trouble.
#        Does he have documentation as to original purchase?

  It's kinda hard to fake the bayonet lug. :)

#Christopher J. Pikus,        | "Forgive me for not knowing about El Salvador.
From: Thi_Huynh@univel.COM
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Fluted barrel
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:41:04 GMT

Hi netters,

I just ordered a Bushmaster XM15-E2 from Quality Parts with a fluted
barrel for $790 (OUCH!).  From their catalog, they claimed rigidity
is increased by 20 to 25%, among other things such as better cooling
and weight reduction.

Does this claim of increase in barrel rigidity over a non-fluted heavy
barrel sound valid to you?  They say that fluted barrels started out
as heavy barrels and then they shave the metal away.

Thanks,

-tt