HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: km4ba!alan@gatech.edu (Alan Barrow)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: 10mm information needed
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:08:07 GMT
Organization: km4ba's packet radio gateway


In <13400027@iftccu.boeing.com> bressler@iftccu.ca.boeing.com (Rick Bressler) writes:


#The 10 probably has some real drawbacks as a defense round.  I say probably 
#because there are undoubtably people out there that love it.

Various subjective comments deleted. Most sound like opinions developed
from magazines.

I am a long time .45/.38 super shooter. I own and shoot a 10mm Delta Elite 

my opinion is much different:

	In a 1911 Govt frame, the 10mm has less perceived recoil.
	I think it actually pushes harder, but has much less
	"roll" than my .45's.  Thus rapid fire is harder with the .45's.
	Compact .45's are worse. (A compact 10mm might be rough as well.)

	My Delta is easer to shoot a 50 yds than any of my .45's. 
	I do not know if it is trajectory, accuracy or what, but
	playing on the silhouette range made this real obvious.

	It is easier to handload the 10mm. I think the bullet selection 
	(weight range) is better, and it is easy to get good "warm" loads
	without "pushing" the cartridge.

	I have not seen any indication that 10mm is less reliable
	than 9mm or .45 auto. Do you have anything other than .38
	special operation in autos for your data?

I will say I prefer 170-180 gr bullets in both, and the .45 in lighter
bullets does not work that well. 10mm with 230 gr bullets would have much
more recoil.

My goal is to have a 4" .357 class cartridge in a Gvt model pkg. 10mm comes
closest that I can find.

Add to it the .40 SW compacts (I can use the same projectiles) and have
much better performance than 9mm, and It starts to make sense.

I feel that 10mm will be around for a while. 


 Alan Barrow  km4ba | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack
 jab@               | ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched
 hpuerca.atl.hp.com | C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
 ..!gatech!kd4nc!   | All those moments will be lost in time -
         km4ba!alan | like tears in rain. Time to die.          Roy Batty
From: rigg@ssdt-tempe.sps.mot.com (Dana Rigg)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: From jimf@iwtdr.att.com (James R Fehrenbacher)
Date: 29 Aug 92 02:59:16 GMT

# Anyone have any experience with those portable machines for throwing
# clay targets? There are several different brands running around 30
# to 40 bucks, sold at Walmart and sporting goods stores. Any recommendations
# would be appreciated. Also, clay targets. I've bought the Remington's
# sold at Walmart and half the time they break as the machine arm comes
# around. Are Champions better? or some other brand? Thanks.

To be honest, I bought my thrower so long ago (5 years?) that I can't
remember the brand (it was nothing fancy though).  But I did have the
problem of breaking targets the first day out.  The problem wasn't the
targets, it was the thrower.  The thing sets on a steel platform with
4 sharpened legs that supposedly get pushed into the ground (Shh-yea!
Right!).  When throwing targets, the whipping action caused the whole
machanism to jump around, breaking the target before it left the arm.

Solution:  I took the mechanism off of the steel platform, and bolted it
to a piece of plywood.  The plywood is large enough for the operator to
stand on while launching targets, thus holding the thrower steady.  This
setup works very well.

Dana Rigg
Motorola, Inc.
(rigg@ssdt-tempe.sps.mot.com)

***  My opinions are my own and not necessarily shared by Motorola.  ***
From: hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Rating Guns for Purchase
Date: 1 Sep 92 01:55:02 GMT
Organization: NCSU Computing Center - Adams' Family Club

In article <9208311432.AA02686@osnome.che.wisc.edu> rwalton@NeXT.COM (Robert Walton) writes:
#
#For those of you interested in rating firearms, I offer the following  
#digression (see appropriate disclaimers at the end of this posting)...
#
#I was recently in the market for a home defense handgun for my wife.   
                                         ^^^^^^^
#Being a die hard for data and numbers, I compiled some criteria and  
#measured a select number of handguns against these criteria.  Each  
#category gets a 1-10 score multiplied by the category weight (eg., 9 x.25  
#= 2.25), a simple weighted average.  The total weights = 1.0 so the best  
#possible score for a gun = 10.   ...
#	x.25 Reliable (tendency to malfunction for this shooter)
             ^^^^^^^^
  This method doesn't seem to be appropriate to me in general use.
Rather than including Reliability in the mix, (or in addition to)
it would be more appropriate to use it as a disqualification item.
Any gun which doesn't meet minimum reliability standards can't
participate any further.

  However, in the examples you give there is only a very narrow
spread of reliabilities - and so it doesn't hurt to have it in the mix.

# ...

--henry schaffer  n c state univ
From: smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: identifying ammo
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:30:39 GMT
Organization: who knows

keith@scorpio.ic.cmc.ca (Keith de Solla) writes...
#I have a couple of cartridges I would like to identify:
# ...
#2. 7.62mm NATO: the bottom says 'IVI' (Imperial perhaps?), '81', and
#also contains a circle with a '+' in it.  Would this have corrosive
#primer in it?
#My suspicion is Canadian military ammo, but I would like to verify
#this.

IVI is Canadian and tje 7.62 is not of particularly good quality although the
brass may be.  This ammo is used by Canadian highpower target shooters.
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: CA gun laws -- in cars (waS Re: Travelling help)
Date: 31 Aug 92 22:02:21 GMT
Organization: The Cat Factory

In article <23067@hacgate.SCG.HAC.COM> kemasa@ghost.hac.com (Kemasa) writes:
}In article <1992Aug26.180114.24528@ttinews.tti.com> hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath) writes:
}#...
}#As a practical matter, you're not likely to need them in any of the major,
}#or even minor, hotels.  I'd check them into the hotel safe (in locked
}#containers -- no need to worry the staff).
}#...

First, let me state I was talking about hotels/motels in the immediate
vicinity of Disneyland.  This is not a high-violent-crime area, to say the
least.  The Anaheim PD is well aware of who butters their bread.

}Have you read Ayoob's book "In the Gravest Extreme"? He tells of several
}situations that happen in a hotel room. I don't recall where they occured,
}but the point is that it can happen anywhere. I doubt that you would
}need them, but then again that is true in general. How many times
}have you *needed* a gun? If it is the one time that you don't have
}one you will have a problem.

I read it a couple of weeks ago.  I was struck by Ayoob's willingness to
enter situations I'd avoid -- possibly because he was armed.  He tells of
one incident where he noticed a suspicious character hanging around a
sub-freezing parking lot at night.  I'd have gone back to the hotel and
gotten an escort, at least.  He kept going and walked into a trap that
forced him to pull his gun.

}While I don't tend to carry a gun around with me all the time, I think
}that if you have one with you it makes sense to have it with you rather
}than locking it up (which I would not want to do as I am not sure how
}safe motel safe would be.

At J. Random Motel I'd probably agree.  I'll note that your gun would
probably be safer in a Disneyland hotel/motel safe than in your car in
Disneyland's parking lot (you certainly won't need it in Disneyland).
Just tell them the box contains your kid's spare insulin. (-:

The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp                   Turn the rascals out!
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483     No incumbents in '92!
Santa Monica, CA  90405
From: roman@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Black Talon Bullets
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:02:00 GMT
Organization: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing

In article <1992Sep2.194222.23828@icd.ab.com>, kdw@icd.ab.com (Kenneth D. Whitehead) writes:
# #I've personally seen the demos on these; they are impressive.  IMHO
# #they will prove to be more effective than other jhp's as "stoppers"
# #and will change the Marshall statistics after a few years of field
# #use results.  They expand into a wide jagged projectile and would leave
# #a real mess for a surgeon to repair - if possible.
# 
# Well, it sounds like the Black Talons should work, but...
# 
# What happens when you dust a bad guy and the prosecutor finds out about this
# b-a-a-a-d ammo you've been using?  Wouldn't you find yourself in the same
# potential fix as the guy who used special handloads?

I'm not sure that a prosecuting attorney won't try to make you into an
evil, blood-thirsty killer no matter what ammo you used.  Black Talons 
are a legitimate manufactured ammo, and they shouldn't be any more "evil"
than any other good jacketed hollow point.  Hydra-shoks are considered 
acceptable defense loads, and they're not that different in concept.  When
you're talking about your self-defense, what's wrong with tring to get the
most effective round that money can buy?
 
BTW, I tried out my .40 S&W Black Talons out on a head of cabbage a couple
of weeks ago.  With one direct hit, it out-performed the Cuisinart, the
Vegematic, and your basic slaw machine ;-)  It blowed up real good!
-- Roman Olynyk
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Why a sawed-off shotgun?
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:30:04 GMT
Organization: The Cat Factory

In article <1992Aug24.224445.20992@inmet.camb.inmet.com> tas@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Tom Sprott) writes:
}I'm not a rec.guns reader, but the news story of Mr. Weaver (the fugitive holed
}up in Idaho) has made me curious about something.  His original federal weapons law
}violation was the possession of a sawed-off shotgun.  What is the purpose of 
}such a gun, and why is it illegal where a normal shotgun isn't?

It's reasonably concealable and has a wide dispersion pattern of shot.
It's useless for any sporting or hunting purpose, but devastating in close
combat.  They were restricted in 1934 along with a lot of other weapons
(full-autos, mostly) and accessories (silencers, e.g.) thought to be
favored by gangsters of the day.

The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp                   Turn the rascals out!
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483     No incumbents in '92!
Santa Monica, CA  90405
From: wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL (Will Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: "Battle Rifles" - definition?
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:55:38 GMT

In regard to the thread on "battle rifles": I was under the impression
that this was a term either invented by or popularized by Jeff Cooper, and
that he did specifically mean rifles heavier-caliber than .223, and
most likely .308 / 7.62 NATO as opposed to 7.62X39 Soviet. Other
criteria would involve all the usual ones that go into the selection of
a military weapon -- reliability, maintainability, durability, etc.

Whether or not you count a 5.56mm / .223 rifle as a "battle rifle"
(and, since this is the country's current military caliber, that
viewpoint has a lot going for it) or not, I've always felt that it is the
moral duty of a citizen to own such a rifle, and be prepared and
willing to use it against tyranny or invasion.

Regards, Will
From: pauly@netcom.com (Paul Yoshimune)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Summary: Concealed Carry...
Date: 29 Aug 92 02:59:27 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

First of all, I would like to thank all of those who replied to my questions
concerning concealed carry, both through replies and mail.  Just about everyone
had something enlightening to say, and I learned a great many things I just
hadn't thought about before.

Unfortunately, though, the answers were pretty much what I had suspected: It
all depends on your build, clothing, activities, preference, etc.  Far and
away, though, people recommended fanny pack holsters.  These had the advantage
of being unobtrusive with casual clothes (jeans and T-shirts are the most
formal pieces of clothing I own...), as well as being able to handle larger
weapons.  The only downsides to this method of carry are somewhat slow access
time, as well as the fact that police are hip to these things, and they may
make you suspect (especially if they have the quick-access velcro).

So, I suppose I'd better start searching...Thanks again to all who replied.  In
fact, thanks to all those who thought of replying.  And, thanks to all those  
who just couldn't give a squat.  :-)


-- 
DVC,
  Paul

Paul Yoshimune
pauly@netcom.com
From: edhresko@hresko.EOS.NCSU.EDU (ERIC DAVID HRESKO)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: :Re: Stupid Shooter Tricks
Date: 31 Aug 92 17:10:26 GMT
Organization: Techno-Geeks Inc.



	As a matter of fact, I was reading an article on ammunition in house 
fires (I believe it was in the NRA book of facts) and it said the NRA did a test
by subjecting unprotected ammunition to fire and seeing what kind of colateral
damage was caused.  The most significant damage was something like a perforated 
piece of cardboard that was within 5 feet of the explosion.  I don't really
remember all of the facts, but the general idea was that ammunition that 
explodes outside of the firearm poses little threat...unless you are holding it!

-- 


Eric

******************************************************************************
Eric Hresko		* Mail:  edhresko@eos.ncsu.edu                       * 
Kanki House of Steaks   * Voice: (why would you want to call?) 1-919-821-5168*
Dishwasher 2nd Class    * HK Rules!!! (But a FAL will do in a pinch)         *
DISCLAIMER:  I don't wear sandals, eat granola, or tiptoe thru the Tulips    *
******************************************************************************
From: tssmith@netcom.com (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: New handgunner needs advice
Date: 1 Sep 92 13:16:45 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

I am about to buy my first handgun.  I thought I wanted one for
occasional practice, and to have on hand for home defense, in case all
hell breaks loose in this society (p > .00).

To get some experience, I went to a local indoor range and tried out
a few rental guns.  First was a S&W K22 revolver, which they
suggested as a first go since I had never fired a handgun.  Then I
tried a S&W 9mm autoloader, finally a S&W Model 19.  I fired both .38
spl wadcutters and .357 magnum loads in the M19.  Total of 400 rounds
(200 .22, 100 9mm, 50 .38, 50 .357).

Some observations:

(1)  Hey, this is fun!

(2)  I seem to feel more comfortable with a revolver than an auto.
     Firing either double or single action with the M19 I was pretty
     accurate for a beginner, but with the 9mm I was all over the place
     (that was SA). Is this typical of the gun types, or just my
     inexperience?

Since it looks like I'm going to enjoy target shooting, I've changed
my goals a bit.  For me, target shooting really means a .22.  I can't
reload (no space), and the only outdoor range within miles is .22
only.  I still want a bigger gun for defense, but would also like to
get a good .22.

For the bigger gun, the S&W 586/686 seems to get a lot of favorable
comments in this newsgroup.  I'm going to try a 4" barrel 686 next
weekend.  Will 4" vs. 6" barrel make much of a difference in feel or
accuracy?

I could get a new 19 for $300.  Is the 686 worth about $120 more?

What about a .22?  Can you do semi-serious target shooting (whatever
that is) with a revolver?  If not, what's a good .22 auto?  I have
heard positive things about the Ruger Mark II, but much more about the
S&W Model 41 ($$$).

Any other suggestions?  I don't want to buy something that I won't be
happy with as a target pistol as I get more experience.

Lots of questions, I know.  Thanks for any comments or ideas.


--Tim (tssmith@netcom.com)
From: Bob.Smith@lambada.oit.unc.edu (Bob Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Opinions sought on Ruger Mini 14/30
Date: 26 Aug 92 21:42:58 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service


Hello,

Well having just found this group today, and currently looking for
a new semi-assult / home defense rifle (Am I influenced by the current
round of violence, ranging from LA riots to Florida looting?  Yep ...),
I like some thoughts on the Ruger Mini from those who own or have
owned them, or possibly from those who have prior experience with them.
I currently have nothing like this rifle, and although I like to get
an AR15, I rather save a fess $100s and live with a Mini.  My leanings
are toward a stainless Mini 30, but I'd like to hear from users/owners
first.  I don't know much about the rifle's lineage, and seemingly 
neither does any gun shop around here.  If you have any of that info,
it would be much welcomed.

Thanks much in advance,

bob smith


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: purtilo@cs.umd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: tumbler
Date: 30 Aug 92 23:12:48 GMT

So, who knows about both rock tumblers and brass tumblers?  I already
have a Dillon tumbler for polishing up brass.  My wife wants to do some
project concerning rock polishing in the fourth grade class she teaches.
Even though my colleagues assure me I have rocks in my head, I do not 
know much about polishing stones, etc.  So what's the scoop?  Do I already
own what my wife needs? (My guess is not, but it would be nice to find
out otherwise before I plunk down more cash on a different unit.)  What
different media would I need if the Dillon *is* appropriate?  Thanks 
much ---

Jim
From: cramer@optilink.com (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Why a sawed-off shotgun?
Date: 28 Aug 92 01:21:13 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA


In article <1992Aug25.034735.1859@athena.mit.edu>, sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman) writes:
# NFA 34 was challenged in U.S. vs. Miller in the late 30's.  Miller was
# brought up on illegal possession charges under NFA 34.  Something was
# worked out and the charges against him individually were dropped, so
# he lost interest, but the government held to it and--without opposing
# counsel--argued the case before the Supreme Court.  The government

Not quite.  Miller and his co-defendant were released because the
Federal Judge who heard the case against them held that NFA of 1934
was a violation of the Second Amendment, and quashed the indictment.
This is why Miller wasn't represented by counsel at the Court of
Appeals and Supreme Court, and hence, only the decisions favorable
to the prosecution were presented.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
From: storm@atlantis.cs.orst.edu (Mutant Wierdness)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Recommendation for bullet-proof vest wanted.
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:08:32 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University

minh@inst-sun1.jpl.nasa.gov (Minh Lang) writes:

#Hi, I'm looking for info/comment/recommendation/source for a bullet-proof
#vest. It should be thin enough to be worn under normal clothing,
#should be able to stop handguns bullet up to .357 magnum and knife.
#I would really appreciate any personal experience you have and
#I would like to get some recommendations for a manufacturer.
#Thank you very much.

There is NO such thing as a bullet-proof vest. There are ballistic vests.
will [most] stop or reduce a slashing motion with a knife, but other
than that the only thing would be a BV with a shock plate. The plates are
small, uncomfortable, and some statistics tend to say that they are danger-
ous in that at times they can deflect a round off the plate and into your
haed/neck/face or other areas...

storm@atlantis.cs.orst.edu

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
# storm@atlantis.cs.orst.edu                                                  #
# storm@jacobs.cs.orst.edu               Disclaimer: I will deny everything   #
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: rhoten@a.cs.okstate.edu (rhoten r p)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Blood tests for lead
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:05:22 GMT

I just had a complete physical recently, and while
the Doc was explaining what tests he was going
to have done, I requested a blood lead level.  It turns
out that while this is commonly done on children, it is
not done on adults unless you request it.  Since lead
is a cumulative problem, you need to get a measure
early, then if you have one a few years later and
don't get much of a change, you are doing things ok.
Since I am going to be increasing my casting, I am happy
to have this baseline.  By the way, although I can't remember
the units, the doctor said a level of 0 to 40 is considered
normal, with 80 the place to start worrying seriously.
I scored a 27.
Make your New Year's resolutation now to get it
checked the next time you have a blood test for anything.
r. p. rhoten
From: syoung@pecanpi.UUCP (Stan Young)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: SKS 30 Round Magazines...
Date: 30 Aug 92 23:12:50 GMT
Organization: Pecan Pi, Doraville, Georgia


In article <9208291426.AA12143@mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU> C08926RC@WUVMD.Wustl.Edu (Rob) writes:
#
##Could someone tell me, for sure, if 30 round magazines installed on SKS
##rifles are legal or not?  We have been discussing this at work and the
#
#The BATF says it is a violation to install a detachable magazine or
#a folding stock (and perhaps a few other items) on an SKS rifle that
#was imported after Nov. 1990 (I believe 11/20/90 to be exact).  You can
#modify ones legally that were imported before that.
#
#There are SKSes available that were imported with detachable magazines;
#SOG is currently selling a version that takes AK-47 magazines.
#
<stuff deleted>

#Anyway, with that said, this BATF ruling would be difficult, if not
#impossible, to enforce.

In light of the recent Supreme Court decision on the Thompson/Center case,
impossible becomes even more likely.  The Court decided that the standard
of lenity had to be used in any BATF case that involved criminal penalties.
While I'm sure they will fight it, the basic rule means that any ambiguities
must be resolved in favor of the individual, not the agency.

For more info on the ruling, see the latest issue of American Rifleman, or
the October issue of GUNS magazine.

Followups to TPG, please.
-- 

Stan Young                                {emory, slammer}!pecanpi!syoung