HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kknox@logdis1.hq.aflc.af.mil (Sgt Kevin P. Knox)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Book research: Bullets in water
Date: 12 Aug 92 13:34:19 GMT


#From:           mcmanus@dxcern.cern.ch (Leo McManus)
#Subject:        Book research: Bullets in water.
#Organization:   CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research
#
#My hero is being shot at from about 200-300 Meters with an SLR .76
#caliber.  I need to know how far he must dive if he is to be anywhere
#near safe.  Will the bullets travel reasonably straight when in the
#water?
#
#Appreciate your help.
#Leo

According to Hatcher, a man only has to be under about 18 inches of
water to be out of danger from a 150 gr .308 bullet travelling at 2700
fps (I hope I remembered this correctly - If not, I know I'm close).
You might want to refer to Hatcher's notebook to get the exact
numbers.

==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)=
|  Kevin Knox, Assistant DDN NSC                    KKNOX@192.12.64.3        |
|  2046 Comm Group, BCTF                                                     |
|  Cmrcl: (513)257-4088   DSN 787-4088    KKNOX@LOGDIS1.HQ.AFLC.WPAFB.AF.MIL |
|                                                                            |
|  "Time flies like lightning.... Fruit flies like banana!"                  |
|                                                                            |
==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)==  ==(*)=
From: burens@4ccvw101.scg.hac.com (Mark Burens)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Davis P-380
Date: 18 Aug 92 03:00:50 GMT
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA


In article <77399@ut-emx.uucp> parisboy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Ureshisa!) writes:
#
#Hello everyone,
#
#I'm looking for a good defensive handgun that's small and inexpensive. I went
#to the local gun shop and looked at the Davis P-380. The guy there suggested
#I buy the Kurg 380, which was about $80 more. I would like to know, is there
#much of a difference between these 2 guns? The P-380 costs $110, about the
#least inexpensive 380 I've seen. I read a review of it in Guns&Ammo and the
#writer seemed to like it somewhat.                           
#
#Please reply to my e-mail account as I don't get to read this newsgroup very
#often. Thanks in advance!
#
#Tony


Tony,

     Let me be blunt.  You get what you pay for.  My sister bought a
Davis P-380 for self defense and because it was cheap.  Well,  after
going out target shooting with her and seeing the performance of this
weapon,  she now want's to get a quality,  more expensive handgun.

     The choice is your's but,  I personally think my life and my 
family's lives are worth spending a few hundred dollars on a reliable
weapon.

     Don't get me wrong,  I don't judge a product by the price tag.
Just like the next guy,  I'll try to save a buck or two when I can.
But when it comes to my last line of defense,  I want something I 
can depend on every time I squeeze the trigger.


                                                Good luck.
From: lairdb@crash.cts.com
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Travelling help
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:43:59 GMT

In <1992Aug19.022135.16461@ttinews.tti.com> hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath) writes:

[wrt Kalifornia]
#                                                               Remember
#that loaded magazine == loaded gun (in fact, live ammunition touching any
#part of a gun, including the magazine, is legally the same as a loaded
#gun).

Incidenatlly, this has come up before.  I got curious, and talked 
(informally) to several people about it, all of whom "had never heard
such a ridiculous interpretation" (roughly the words of a local ADA.)
He pointed out what I had thought, that the wording of the PC section
in question is most sensibly read to say that if the magazine is out
of the firearm, then it's not loaded.

Not to say that a rabid, conviction-hungry prosecutor couldn't read it
any way he wanted to, but does anyone have a cite?



-- 
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: glaird@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Gordon Laird)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Glock 10mm barrel
Date: 20 Aug 92 21:41:41 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA


death@pembvax1.pembroke.edu  asks:

# could anyone tell me where i could buy a 6 inch or longer barrel for a  Glock
# mod 20?  I'd like to take it deer hunting, but the barrel is too short to be
# legal.

   I doubt such a thing exists.  Even if it did, unless you are prepared to
voluntarily restrain yourself from taking a shot unless you are within
30 yards of the deer, I would strongly recommend that you not try this.
The Glock does not have sufficient accuracy to give a hunter a reasonable
probability of a one shot stop from any meaningful distance.
   I would hate to think that someone was so insensitive as to neglently
wound an animal, with no hope of putting it out of its misery in short order.
   I'm certain that your motivations are the incredible challange and sport of
trying to get that close to a deer as part of the hunt.
From: jheath@fieldofdreams.npirs.purdue.edu (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Stupid shooter tricks
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:04:59 GMT
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University


The worst mistake I remember making was when I was a kid and shot
a spoon out of my hand with a .22 rifle [it's only a .22 ;-{)  ].
I still have lead and powder fragments in index finger and a few
scars on my other fingers.

I remember reading about a guy who was showing his friends his
new Colt.  Apparently, he learned S&W or Browning pistols,
because he thought the Colt had a magazine disconnect.
Unfortunately for him, he chose to demonstrate that the gun would
not fire with the magazine removed by pointing it at his head and
had a live round in the chamber.  (Talk about stupidity being a
capital offense.)
-- 
"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: gonzalez@bbn.com (Jim Gonzalez)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: .40 s&w questions
Date: 19 Aug 92 18:42:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: relay1.9208191756.AA17991

In article <cavasin.714187054@muse> cavasin@convex.com (Vince Cavasin) writes:
#Soon I'll be looking to buy a (probably) large-frame pistol in .40 s&w.  Right
#now I like the big smith and wesson (can't remember model number: 4006?) but
#everyone seems to think it's not worth the money.  I also like the baretta m96
#a lot.  I've heard some positive things about the sig (is it available yet?).
#I'm not very impressed with the glock.  Ideally, I'd like a stainless/alloy
#frame/slide, >=11 round magazine capacity, and traditional double action.
#Concealability isn't a major concern.

My wife and I found the Glock .40 uncomfortable to shoot.  My hand
tingled after about 20 rounds.  I'm already borderline for carpal
tunnel syndrome, so I decided not to take the risk.  Also, I share 
Ayoob's enthusiasm for manual safeties, which Glock and Sig do not
supply.  I'm not as keen on magazine disconnects, but I don't perceive
them as a threat.

The S&W (the full-size DAO; 4046 I think) was milder, probably because
of the additional mass of the steel frame.  If we hadn't finally
decided against .40 S&W, we probably would have gone with the Smith.
By the way, did anyone else notice that Evan Marshall's stats note 
"through-and-through" in almost incident?  He concludes that there is
"a tendency for overpenetration"; an understatement.

#has taurus come out with a model 96 clone yet?

Yes.  There was in an ad for it in American Handgunner, several months
ago.  It's designated the model 100, as I recall.  One thing about it,
and I think this is true of all Taurus clones of the Beretta, is that
they have a 3-position safety-decocker.  I forget the ordering of the
positions, but remember misgivings about hitting the safety too hard in
a tense situation and ending up with weapon unable to fire.

#there's no such thing as a stainless model 96, is there?

I haven't seen a stainless Beretta in .40 S&W, but the Taurus that was
pictured in the ad appeared to be stainless.  

#How are the Rugers? (I haven't looked at these at all)

Ayoob likes them, in the other calibers.  In fact, he participated in
approving them for his department.  I'm a "RKBA extremist", so I won't
have anything to do with Ruger.

#also, if you have recommendations or disrecommendations for a specific
#make/model, please let me know.  I'm also interested in magazine reviews if
#you know of any (er, I should say "reviews in magazines", not to be confused
#with reviews OF magazines...:^).

Ayoob has an article on the 96 in the current American Handgunner.  He 
noticed problems with reliable feeding, apparently due to ramp angle.  
He didn't completely pan the weapon, but you might want to review his 
comments on when it would be suitable.  

By the way, his number-of-rounds-times-energy-per harping reminds of 
the "my amp goes up to 11" scene out of Spinal Tap.

				-Jim.
From: je7@prism.gatech.edu (EDWARDS,JAMES D)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Sight mounting
Date: 13 Aug 92 15:23:56 GMT


   I recently mounted a rear peep sight on a 22 rifle.  I thought that the
front post would be adequate, but the post is too short and I have decided
I really don't like it anyway.  I would like to put a front globe sight on
this rifle.  Does anyone know if a clamp-on mount or some other wonderful
do-it-yourself solution exists for this type of application?  Or will I have
to get a 'smith to install a new sight?  By the way, the current front sight
is soldered onto the barrel -- no dovetail, etc.   

   Thanks for any help.

                          Jim 

EDWARDS,JAMES D.  Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!je7
Internet: je7@prism.gatech.edu
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Actors with guns?
Date: 20 Aug 92 21:41:47 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

I have kind of an odd question, for those folks like me who enjoy
sedate, contemplative movies such as "Terminator".

I rented a movie called "Timebomb" last weekend and, after watching it,
it occured to me that I'd seen the main character use a sawed-off
shotgun in three movies now.  Michael Biehn played Reese in Terminator 1
(the guy sent back to guard Sarah Connor), Hicks in Alien II (the only
soldier who survived that movie) and the main character in "Timebomb".
It just seemed like an odd coincidence to me, so I was wondering if
anyone involved with the net when those two movies came out might know
if there was some reason why Biehn uses shotguns so often.

BTW, he also used a plastic mineral water bottle as a silencer, in
"Timebomb"; creative fellow.  The movie's worth a look.

   don
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Bullets with stainless steel points?
Date: 21 Aug 92 03:35:45 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.


In article <oH8JPB2w164w@raley.Gwinnett.COM> pertinax@raley.gwinnett.COM (Pertinax) writes:
#[MODERATOR:  Not stainless, perhaps, but you might check out the ads for
#"Black Talon" ammo (what is it, from PMC? I forget.).  Looks ferocious in 
#the pix.  But for what its worth, many of us are likely to stay with tried
#and reliable rounds until we see the performance of this newcomer.]

Black Talon is Winchester's; ElDorado StarFire is PMC's (as I recall).
There was a recent article (AH or G&A, probably) by a fellow who helped
field-test Black Talon, with the factory changing the design until he
got excellent results on game animals.  It's nice that a company would
test and modify like that!
From: swatt%mickey@net.yale.edu (Alan Watt)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Stupid shooter tricks
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:14:10 GMT
Organization: Yale University, Computing & Information Systems


In article <13400018@iftccu.boeing.com>, bressler@iftccu.ca.boeing.com (Rick Bressler) writes:
|> 
|>
|> Depends on where you train.  John Farnum may not be as well known as Ayoob, 
|> but he DOES have very good credentials.  He teaches a thumbs up grip 
|> on auto's that has the thumb of your strong hand on top of the safety, 
|> (thumb over safety isn't that uncommon) and the thumb of your weak 
|> hand straight up in front of your strong hand thumb.  Yes, this thumb
|> is riding on the slide.  No it doesn't hurt.  No, it doesn't interfere 
|> with the slide.  You can put your whole hand against it and it will still 
|> cycle.  

This would work for pistols with frame-mounted safeties, such as the M1911.
I don't think I'd care try it with a slide-mounted safety system such as
the S&W autos.  I also wouldn't use it for any safety worked *DOWN* for
*SAFE* (instead of *DOWN* for *FIRE* as God -- through His prophet, John
Browning -- clearly intended).  If you do this with a down-for-safe system
like the luger, the recoil from the first shot could easily cause your
thumb to engage the safety.

My feeling is you should have a grip with all your thumbs, fingers, and
what-not clear of any operating levers, buttons, or other dinguses.  This
is difficult on small-grip autos like the Firestar, where my right thumb
has a tendency to rest on the magazine-drop button.  Sometimes I think
the Europeans with the bottom of the butt magazine release have the right
idea.
-- 
  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: bbx!bbxrbk!russ@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (Russ Kepler)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Stupid Shooter Tricks
Date: 21 Aug 92 23:10:19 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization

In article <1992Aug21.004519.710@ttinews.tti.com> hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath) writes:
#One of them, Henry, brought along an alloy frame .44 snub-nosed revolver,
#also with wood grips.  I can't imagine why anyone would want, or even
#make, such a gun.  Shooting it _hurts_.  It's no fun at all.  Neither is
#it accurate enough to be useful at anything beyond point blank range.
#(Henry got it for $5 from a man who bought it, fired 5 rounds through it
#and never wanted to use it again.  After firing 5 rounds myself, I
#understood completely and agreed).

Frequently a revolver with this problem can be "fixed" by replacing
the grips with rubber grips or wooden grips that round out the rear of
the butt of the grip.  This allows a smoother recoil action, and
allows easier handling.

An example of this was provided by a Ruger Bisley in .45 Colt.  We
(Lee and I) had some loads he had picked up at a show and he had been
warned that they were a "bit strong".  He wanted to fire then for the
cases, then reload what he wanted in them.

He loaded the cylinders and fired a couple of rounds.  After each you
could see him wince, and on the third you could see a great deal of
hesitation and quite a flinch.  He finished them off, handed it to me
and warned me that it was a bitch to handle.  I loaded all 6, and
popped off a couple of rounds.  It wasn't a bitch - it hurt like hell,
feeling something like placing the heel of my hand on an anvil and
hitting it with a hammer (I've done this as well).

I shot 5 and couldn't bring myself to shoot the next, all the while
thinking it was the recoil.

The Lee's wife asked to take a shot.  You'd have to see it - a couple
of husky guys wincing at the recoil and a 4'8" 95# gal (no offence
intended) loading the object of their loathing and proceeding to the
firing line.  We prepared for the inevitable, and waited.

She *loved* it, fired all cylinders and reloaded.  Fired the rest, and
too the bag of cartridges.

We finally started to compare notes and we came to the conclusion that
the butt of the revolver was short enough that the Bisley pattern
caused the recoil of the .45 to cut into a large hand, and a small
hand had a normal (actually lower than normal) recoil moment.

She shot out the rest of the reloads, and had a blask.  Good shot too.

Moral?  Sometimes it's fixable.
-- 
.signature: not found.  Create?
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Carrying spare magazines
Date: 15 Aug 92 02:47:36 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.


In article <9208102126.AA19412@netmail.microsoft.com> alane@microsoft.com (Alan Ezekiel) writes:
#Despite all of the advice, and my respect for the instructors who
#suggested these things, I remain unconvinced.  Modern high-capacity
#firearms carry so many cartridges that spare magazines seem excessive
#somehow -- I cannot avoid the feeling that anybody incapable of
#stopping an assailant with fourteen bullets will fare no better when
#given twenty-seven.

Consider this -- it is quite likely that the assailant you encounter will
be but one of a team of two or more.  You might shoot off all the rounds
in your first magazine in panicky reaction to the first assailant (this
happens a lot) and have no reserve for dealing with the other(s).

While it's true that one would rarely "need" more than a dozen rounds
in a defensive scenario, there is this wastage factor that needs to be
factored in.  I also agree with the sentiment that the added burden of
carrying extra magazines is negligible compared with carrying the weapon.
My recommendation, except for deep concealment, is to carry two extra
magazines; with a belt holster on one side, a double mag pouch on the
other provides a more balanced feeling and appearance.

I wouldn't try using OC for personal defense if I were carrying a
deadly weapon; you risk having your weapon seized.  To me it's OS *or*
a deadly weapon, the choice depending on numerous factors.

Law enforcement scenarios are of course different from personal defense,
and law enforcement officers generally have a wide range of options
including PR-24 batons, sprays, tasers, and several kinds of firearms.
Unless you're strolling through a riot zone, though, I think you're
better off for personal defense purposes in learning how to avoid
trouble, deflect it as it arises, and only as a last resort get physical.
In the last resort, generally you'll be justified in using deadly force.
This may not need to go further than using the weapon as a deterrent,
or you might have to use it to physically stop an assault.  There are
many training courses available that cover the whole range of defense
options, and I'd think it would be a good idea to attend one of these
before making personal defense plans..
From: jalden@coos.dartmouth.edu (Joshua M. Alden)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Travelling help
Date: 16 Aug 92 22:38:42 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

Hi!

    I will, in the next week or so, be driving across the country.
I'll be taking several firearms with me, including my carry gun.  I'll
be travelling through several states and I need to know where it's legal
to carry on my person, in the car, or just lock the carry gun away in a
hard-case box away from the passenger compartment.  I have a concealed
carry permit in my home states.

    I'll be travelling through the following states (among others):  New
York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Colorado,
Utah, Nevada, California.

    Here's what I think I know.  I can carry in Indiana with my home
state permit because Indiana and Michigan are the two states which honor
other states' permits.  I can't carry on my person in any other state.

    In which states can I have it accessible?  And in which states need
I worry about local attitudes and just bury the damn things, however in
the right I may be according to statute?

    Thanks for any help people can give!

-Josh.

--
Josh Alden:  Joshua.Alden@dartmouth.edu
EMT Instructor, DMS Health Education And Rescue Training
Ownership of a weapon is a victimless crime.  (Where it's a crime at all.)
From: zymurgy.megatek!avf@uunet.UU.NET (Andy Funk)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Rust control
Date: 12 Aug 92 23:34:07 GMT
Organization: Megatek Corporation, San Diego, California

In article <9208111454.AA01260@gilligan.webo.dg.com> googs@gilligan.webo.dg.com (Joe Gugliemino) writes:
#
Stuff deleted...
#
#Once I do clean them up, how do I keep the rust from returning?  I've
#thought of applying silicone, oil, or WD40.  I'm not too excited about
# 
More stuff deleted... 
#                             Joe Gugliemino
#
#[MODERATOR:  Easy on the WD40!!!!  It'll take the finish off faster than
#rust....]
 
Well, here's one data point. You milage may vary, etc., etc. 
 
Before my gunsmith, and others in this newsgroup, strongly advised against
the foolishness of using WD40 as a cleaner/lubricant/preservative for blued
firearms, I used it exclusively and liberally for *years* on a blued Mauser
HSc. This gun still has an absolutely perfect finish. 
 
I'm not convinced. I believe that WD40 prevents rust, probably by preventing
oxygen from being available. How this property might actively attack a rust
blued firearm is unclear to me.
 
Does anyone *really* know the chemistry involved here? 
 
Does anyone have *firsthand* knowledge of WD40 damaging a finish? 
 
Disclaimer: I have no connection with the makers of WD40, other than using
it around the house and liking the smell.
From: r36110m@kaira.hut.fi (Mika Matti Jalava)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Underwater shooting???
Date: 20 Aug 92 13:07:39 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

In article <9208191647.AA19096@gtephx.com> forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:

#Remember also that (a) water is not lodged in the barrel, just sitting 
#there (it will move easily) and (b) the pressure outside the gun will be 
#increased by the water.  

I was thinking mostly about shotguns and rifles that are quite
sensitive about the shot charge or bullet weight. You may easily break
a gun with just a few more grams. Of course, as someone has really
tried this, I must believe that a few grams of water isn't as bad as a
few grams of lead.

Anyway, I didn't come to think about the water pressure outside the
gun! Of course it helps keep things together, but at any reasonable
depths, the pressure is negligible compared to the pressure inside the
barrel. And it is the difference, not the ratio of pressures that
counts. 

#guns in general will fire under water, but the effective range is
#two or three feet -- and even then they aren't very effective.

Yes, there shouldn't be too many reasons why guns wouldn't fire under
water. It may or may not (according to the tests, it probably won't)
break. I suggest using harpoons under water. But in emergency, you
probably like to know that it MAY work.

	Mika
From: smrtstr!syspb@uu.psi.com (Paul)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Sotgun or rifle for defense?
Date: 14 Aug 92 13:31:54 GMT
Organization: nonE

I would recommend the shotgun.  The recoil may be more, but there
would be less overpenetration.  I would use a Mossberg 500 with a
Pistol grip on both the forend and back.  Pachmire makes a 'Vindicator'
kit that comes with both grips for about $45.  Then get an 18 in.
riot gun barrel.  This gun would be short enough for close quarters.
The pattern from the riot gun barrel would be wide enough so you
won't miss.  The recoil may be strong, but imagine how the guy on
the other end of the barrel would feel.