HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Glock 17L? Information
Date: 3 Oct 92 20:37:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: henson.1992Oct3.163057.5194
Organization: Western Washington University

alexank@jasper.cs.orst.edu (Kelly Alexander) writes:

#|> #| For what you want, the Glock 17 cannot be beat.   Accurate, reliable,
#|> #| cheap, sturdy.
#|> #  Has anyone shot or heard anything about the Glock 17L?  I'd like to
#|> #  hear some opinions about it (compared to the 17).

#	The December issue of Combat Handguns has a full review of the
#Glock 17L, you might want to look there for info.

	All they say about it is the same thing they say about all of
the other products they advertize, including the zinc-cast Davis P-32,
which is essentialy:  "Whotta great gun!".

Jim Del Vecchio

Oh, btw, the author also praises it for being usefull for
concealed carry*.  They didn't say this about the Davis, so the
17L must be special for this "concealability" trait.  %^)

*(for those dingbats who like to CC giant guns. [...he forgot to 
include this qualifier...])
From: smmyers@pbhyg.pacbell.com (Sean M. Myers)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: A bunch of 223 reloading questions
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:14:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: pbhyg.1992Sep30.213450.22852
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA


 
     I have recently been pondering whether I should try and get a Federal
Firearms License.  I'm getting tired of paying *huge* markups for my rifles
and pistols.  Not to mention powder.  Can anyone in the California area
help me out here?  Like, where should I call ? How much $$$ ?  What kind of
training is required ?


     Thanks for your help.


Sean Myers
From: wa4mei!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: What does Magnum mean?
Date: 28 Sep 92 11:20:56 GMT
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Sep25.190530.7764@news.columbia.edu> pes3@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Paul Eric Stoufflet) writes:
#Aside from that, I have always wondered exactly what is the difference
#between regular and "Magnum" cartridges.  I know that magnum's tend to
#be more powerful than standard, but is there a specific definition?
#Does each magnum cartridge have a corresponding non-magnum cartridge?
#If so, what about .41 Magnum?

Magnum is simply a *marketing* term. It's applied somewhat haphazardly
to various cartridges reputed to be "powerful". Note for example that
a .22 Hornet is more powerful than a .22 Magnum and both are hotter than
a .22 Long Rifle, and all three are much milder than a .22-250. So the
magnum description is fairly meaningless other than as a *name* for a
particular cartridge.

Gary
From: dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu (Donald R. Newcomb)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: National forms for Highpower (fullbore) rifle competition.
Date: 5 Oct 92 02:19:48 GMT
Organization: University of Southern Mississippi

As a Highpower Rifle (a.k.a fullbore) target shooter, I am quite
interested in the "National forms"  of rifle shooting practiced
in various countries. For Americans, our National Match is so
much more "fun" than UIT matches that it is hard to get anyone
interested in UIT shooting. (Besides, we HATE kneeling position
and can't understand why sitting isn't used instead.) Some
countries stick strictly to UIT type matches and some have
rather interesting National forms. As I understand, the British
do a lot of long-range prone shooting with .308, the Canadians
shoot a variety of matches on meter and yard ranges with
some rapid fire. I heard about one Canadian match in which the
targets appear from random positions and are pulled when hit
but I'm not sure if this is a regular event or a specialty
event. My discussions with Norwegians about their matches
led to my becomming the only American I know of who owns a Krag
speed-loader.

I would find it very interesting if readers from various countries
would post a "thumb nail" sketch of how fullbore rifle is shot
under their National form or in any special of "fun" matches
they shoot with centerfire rifle.

-- 

Donald R. Newcomb
dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu
newcomb@usmcp6.bitnet
From: kmarko@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (Kurt Marko)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Are there restrictions on carry in public places
Date: 29 Sep 92 00:03:58 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho

In article sykes@donner.cc.bellcore.com (sykes,michael) writes:
#
#Question: 
#
#If you have been granted a permit to carry concealed weapons are there
#any places that you are not allowed to carry at all. (e.g. public places
#such as malls, sports arenas, etc.) I would figure the police would 
#give you such a hard time you might as well leave your weapon at home.
#
Since I've just been studying this issue, it's still fresh in my mind.
This is obviously a 'state-specific' answer, since many of the laws are
in a state's penal statutes, however the Idaho Code lists specific places
where a citizen is prohibited from carrying a concealed weapon (assuming
they have a CC license).  These include:  jails, court houses, juvenile
detention facilities, and public and private schools.  Note also, as
someone has previously mentioned, that Federal law prohibits carrying
firearms in airports (which are under Federal [FAA] jurisdiction), and
other federally regulated buildings or areas (I'm not sure what the Forest
Service's policies are).

Note also, that the owner of _any_ public business has the legal right to
ask you to leave if they discover a concealed weapon on you, and many places
will have signs to that effect (e.g. No Smoking or Firearms).  If you carry
a concealed weapon onto the premises of an establishment in violation of 
such posted signs, you may be guilty of disturbing the peace or trespass,
and could conceivibly be arrested.

Finally, there are some places where, although legal, it is inadvisable to 
carry a concealed weapon.  These would generally be businesses which are
at a very high risk from armed robbery (e.g. banks, jewelry stores, 
convenience stores, etc.).  Of course, there are always exceptions (you're
taking $10,000 in cash to deposit at the bank and don't want to get
'hijacked' on the way), but you don't want to be seen as a potential
threat in these establishments.

B.t.w.	Idaho does not register handguns (just the normal Federal forms)
and has no waiting period for purchase (if you are a resident).  Idaho
does issue concealed carry licenses which require filling out another form
(similar to the purchase form; a little more detailed), a background check,
fingerprinting, and a photo ID.  The license is good for 4 years and costs 
about $20.  The law does not distinguish between concealed handguns and
other deadly weapons, and specifically mentions certain types of knives
and other apparatus.  So, theoretically, you need the license to carry 
a (I'm quoting here:  Idaho Code 18-3302) "dirk, dirk knife, bowie knife,
dagger, sling shot, pistol, revolver, gun or any other deadly or dangerous
weapon".

Kurt Marko
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Advice Wanted: CC
Date: 3 Oct 92 13:21:16 GMT
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA

forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:

#The extra punch to your hand from wood grips might well distract you
#for a 1/2 second as you realize something is different, think about it
#and understand it is the wooden grips: 1/2 of a second is more than time
#to die in.

#The second consideration is, IMHO, even more important.  With different
#grips, the gun will handle differntly and the barrell will move differently
#(likely to move more with wooden grips).

	Having a Ruger Old Army in .45BP, the wooden grips didn't bother
me too much as recoil wasn't too bad.  When I put the pachmeyers on it,
I felt like I was shooting a mildly hot .22.  Recoil was so light I was
back on target sooner, shot better, and thanks to having fairly large
hands I was able to grip the gun more comfortably.  Times for drawing
the weapon have improved too, thanks to the comfortable grips.

	In a self-defense setting, you are going to be either 1) calm
as a cucumber, or 2) nervous and scared.  The latter produces the side
effect of sweaty palms.  The wooden grips are not at all good with damp
hands, and for this reason too I recommend checkered rubber grips.

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"I see angels on Ariels in leather and>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | chrome, Swooping down from heaven to >
<viking@iastate.edu      | carry me home."   ---    R. Thompson >
<ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee.>
From: rob@spot.Colorado.EDU (Rob Cuthbertson)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Concealed Weapons Permit ( again.... )
Date: 2 Oct 92 21:23:12 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

Ken Burner (kb13+@andrew.cmu.edu) writes:
#David Lin (kdlin@uswest.com) writes:
#
##As a side question, if I do put my loaded pistol ( Beretta -- Hey! Defend your
##life with style!! :) in my car and get stopped by a cop for traffic
##violations,
##what are the good excuses to tell him/her about why do I have a loaded 
##shinning beautiful pistol in my car? Thanks again.
#
#I hope you're not thinking of leaving the pistol in your car.  Car theft
#in Boulder must be as popular as it is elsewhere in this country.  You
#don't want to lose your car AND your shiny weapon...
#

I'm sure that car theft is as bad or worse in Boulder, but David will have
a different problem if he tries to bring his pistol to work.  I work in the 
same building (one suite over, in fact -- hi David!) and U S WEST expressly 
prohibits firearms of any kind on the premises, including the parking lot.

About the traffic offense, where exactly do you keep the pistol in your car?
Sitting on the passenger seat may not be the safest place for a number of
reasons.  (random motion in the event of an accident, bad news if a pedestrian
decides to shoot you with it at a stoplight, idiot in the truck next to you
drives off the road staring, ... )
The glovebox should do a good job of containing the gun both from flying
around in the car and from curious people, but if that's where you keep
registration and insurance information (compulsory in CO) the cop might not 
like it when you reach in there.  If I carried, I'd keep the pistol in a
holster in the glovebox, and the paperwork clipped to the sun visor.  I don't
know how Colorado stands w.r.t attaching the holster to the car, but that
might help to keep it from bouncing around.

As for your original question, (edited from this post, but regarding CC
permits in Boulder) you might want to give the Boulder County Sheriff's dept
a call.  They have their fair share of boneheads, as will any other department
anywhere, but they also have some down-to-earth people.  

--Rob Cuthbertson, rob@spot.Colorado.EDU
"Person Man, Person Man / Hit on the head with a frying pan
Lives his life in a garbage can / Person Man." -- TMBG
From: rnoguchi@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ryan Alexander Noguchi)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Sight picture and eyes
Date: 2 Oct 92 21:46:00 GMT
Organization: Princeton University

In article <9210020511.AA07933@hpfcpp.fc.hp.com> davep@hpfcpp.fc.hp.com
(David Post) writes:
[...]
#The past few trips to the range I have noticed the my dominant eye doesn't
#seem so dominant anymore.
#
#I seem to focus on the handgun's front sight ok, but often there are two
#target images.  I don't exactly need to work to make sure I have the right
#target, but it is distracting.  It is especially bad when there is motion in
#my field of vision.
#
#When I lower the handgun and my focus shifts to the target, I see one
#target.
#
#I'm not so sure what I am observing is abnormal, but something has changed.
#Has anyone else noticed this?

I know this is a silly question, but are you using very close targets?
If so you could just be getting parallax errors (the same reason you see
two sets of sights if you focus downrange).

What you're observing just now I've had all my life.  When I bring the 
gun to bear, my eyes automatically focus on the
target. The right set of sights (I'm left eyed) is much much sharper and
more solid appearing than the left sights, so I have an excellent sight
picture and a clear view of the scenery downrange.  I've never
accidentally used the wrong set of sights.  In fact, my arms are so
short that the two sets of sights are displaced by more than one rear
sight's width.  So, unless we're both mutants, it doesn't seem too
abnormal.  Perhaps less than optimal, but not abnormal.

- Ryan                               rnoguchi@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
===================================================================
"We, too, born to freedom, and believing in freedom, are willing to 
fight to maintain freedom. We, and all others who believe as deeply
as we do, would rather die on our feet than live on our knees."-FDR
===================================================================
From: pauly@netcom.com (Paul Yoshimune)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: 45 for IPSC
Date: 26 Sep 92 15:39:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <9209251816.AA08877@austlcm.sps.mot.com> jeffs@austlcm.sps.mot.com (jeff stump) writes:
#
#   I would like to hear from anyone shooting .45cal in IPSC. As a new 
#shooter, and reloader , I am developing a load for competition. 
#The requirement is minimum power factor of 175. I am using the following :
#
# Win brass
# Win LP primer
# Win 231 powder      ( Gold Cup Nat'l Match )
# 200gr. SWC

This is pretty close to what I'm shooting.  I use brass of just about every
make (Federal, Winchester, TZZ, IMI, etc.), with CCI large pistol primers
(just got a couple cases of Federals, but haven't loaded them yet), with the
200 gr. lead SWC, and 5.7 grains of 231.  This is actually down from the 6.1
I used to use.  Supposedly, the 6.1 grain load is Mickey Fowler's combat 
load.  I found that these were excessively hot, though, and well beyond any
loading data I've ever found for this particular round.  In fact, 5.7 is
pretty much the max I've seen.  My experience has been that this particular
combination is easy to deal with (recoil-wise), and very accurate.  I've used
Bear Creek and Western Nevada bullets, both with good results.

#  The first reloads chrono'd out at approx. 800fps using 5.4gr of powder.
#I would like to be at 900fps and above (actual bullet weight is 195gr.) 
#Does anyone know (can look up) approx. the maximum grains for 231 ? Some 
#of my loading manuals would indicate that 6.2gr and above is the MAX but,
#this is about what I'd have to load for the correct velocity ??? Any help
#would be appreciated.

I believe the 5.7 grain load is somewhere in the 900 fps neighborhood, actually
slightly less.  The 6.1 grain load was supposed to be somewhere around 950
to 975 fps.  This is pretty much from memory, though, and should be double-
checked.  Good luck...

-- 
DVC,
  Paul

Paul Yoshimune
pauly@netcom.com
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Children and toy guns...
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:57:27 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

davidst@microsoft.com (David Steckler) writes:

#My wife is a 2nd grade teacher at a rural school. Apparently, last weekend
#some kids (aged 5, 7, and 8) "accidently" broke one of the school's windows
.
#year old) was brandishing a toy cap gun. According to the cop, he came within
#1/4 second of shooting when the boy turned and (unknowingly) pointed the gun
#at the cop. Self-restraint on the officer's part, however, saved the boy's
#life.

Self-restraint?  The cop puts himself in a situation where he has to make
a split-second decision regarding whether a child is going to shoot 
him with a toy gun and it is called "restraint?"  I call it a 
combination of recklessly triggerhappy and luck.  There is something
tragically wrong with the way we're allowing cops to operate when
they are trained to react like this.  There was once a time where cops
were expected to put their lives on the line to protect those of 
civilians instead of coming within 250 milliseconds of gunning down
a child.

#I've already decided that my (future) children will not own toy guns that
#look anything like real guns. There are guns and there are toys and they
#are separate things. I would never dream of telling anyone how to raise their
#kids (especially since I'm not a parent yet), but I just thought I'd relate 
#this story as food for thought.

Gee, I carried a real gun as a play pistol as a child and nothing seems
to have gone wrong.  It was a naval arms black powder revolver.
I even wore this gun in my REAL holster to school where the teachers
thought it was pretty neat.  This was a suburban school in
Chattanooga, TN, btw, not some backwater. 

Best thing you could do for your future kid would be to get him toy
guns and teach him proper handling techniques.  My father trained me from
as far back as I can remember the difference between real and play guns.
By the time I was in the 2nd grade, I was an accomplished shooter and had
my own .22 rifle.  My brother and I and the rest of the kids in the 
neighborhood played cowboys and indians and Army and somehow we managed 
to distinguish the difference between snapping toy caps and snapping the 
real things.  I find it somewhat insulting to the child to suggest he/she
is not intelligent enough to be taught the difference.

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: steffen@stud.cs.uit.no (Steffen Baeroe)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Need advice on semi-auto rifles
Date: 6 Oct 92 19:40:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Oct6.161815.21841
Organization: University of Tromsoe, Norway

In article <1992Oct6.041916.20209@guinness.idbsu.edu>, betz%gozer@uunet.UU.NET (Andrew Betz) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct5.230130.14862@osf.org> craig@osf.org (Craig Peterson) writes:
|> #A demo film of H&K shows their weapons being dumped into the mud, mud
|> #poured down the barrel and oozing out of every "pore".  They then let
|> #most of the mud drain out of the barrel, and bangbangbang.  No
|> #problem.
|> 
|> Geez, this make my skin crawl, abusing a gun like that :-).
|> There's a similar photo in one of my SigSauer catalogs, with a
|> P225/6/8 (can't remember which) oozing mud.  You sure know
|> that those are demo models.  I can't imagine anybody but the
|> factory doing something like that.
|> 
|> Drew 
|> --
|> betz@gozer.idbsu.edu
|> *** brought into your terminal from the free state of idaho ***
|> 
|> 

It is very common in the Norwegian army do do the following during
exercises:
Soldier crawls in the mud with his H&K G3 rifle. It gets VERY muddy.
The gun is then "cleaned" with a waterhose and immediately taken to the 
range and fired. I'd like very much to this beeing done to a M16. HAH!!!!


Steffen Baeroe

steffen@stud.cs.uit.no
From: rnoguchi@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ryan Alexander Noguchi)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: .40 S&W Help Sought
Date: 30 Sep 92 01:57:20 GMT
Organization: Princeton University

In article <1992Sep28.211839.4257@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com
(Peter Cash) writes:
#In article <1992Sep27.132956.29775@ke4zv.uucp> wa4mei!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu (Gary Coffman) writes:
#...
##Since the Glock system gives you, in practice, the exact same safety
##as a transfer bar equipped revolver, and most people have little concern
##about holster carrying loaded revolvers, I fail to see the issue. *If*
##you are terrified of carrying a loaded revolver, *then* I can see that
##the Glock is not for you. The Glock was designed to be a revolver 
##replacement with more firepower for police and personal defense use.
##Manual safeties are not popular on revolvers, so there isn't one on
##the Glock either.
#
#Yes, but there's one crucial difference between the Glock and a double
#action revolver (or DA autoloader)--the trigger pull required to fire the
#piece is much shorter for the Glock (also lighter, unless you go to the
#"New York" trigger). The apprehensions about the safety of the Glock center
#around this fact: it is simply easier to accidently let off a shot with a
#Glock by unintentionally squeezing the trigger than it is with an uncocked
#DA revolver or auto. To my mind, these apprehensions are justified.

I think we're confusing two very different beasts in this discussion.  I
was referring to (and I think Jim was as well) the standard Glock with
the 5 lb (i.e. very light, practically "single-action" despite a
somewhat longer length of pull) trigger weight.  If we're talking about
the 12lb New York Glocks, then we have to include every other DAO model
(e.g. S&W 6944, Colt AA2000, etc) since they are all tactically equivalent.
However, the one standout among all combat handguns I know is the Glock
with 5lb trigger, the only one with effectively a single-action weight
of pull, and no active safety device.  I agree that a 12lb Glock doesn't
need a safety lever any more than does a normal DA revolver with a
respectable trigger pull weight (namely, not at all).  I can't see how
having a safety can really hurt; you should be well enough versed in the
handling of your weapon that you know to actuate the safety when you need
to, and it would make things more difficult for the casual
would-be-killer who snatches your piece away from you before you can
deploy it.

While no one advocates that a safety lever is a substitute for training
or proper shooter safety procedure, it adds what seems to some a
substantial measure of added safety for little additional cost.  Wearing
a seatbelt while driving a car doesn't promote reckless driving.

- Ryan                               rnoguchi@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
===================================================================
"We, too, born to freedom, and believing in freedom, are willing to 
fight to maintain freedom. We, and all others who believe as deeply
as we do, would rather die on our feet than live on our knees."-FDR
===================================================================
From: betz%gozer@uunet.UU.NET (Andrew Betz)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Need advice on semi-auto rifles
Date: 6 Oct 92 11:16:51 GMT
Organization: SigSauer Fan Club

In article <1992Oct5.230130.14862@osf.org> craig@osf.org (Craig Peterson) writes:
#A demo film of H&K shows their weapons being dumped into the mud, mud
#poured down the barrel and oozing out of every "pore".  They then let
#most of the mud drain out of the barrel, and bangbangbang.  No
#problem.

Geez, this make my skin crawl, abusing a gun like that :-).
There's a similar photo in one of my SigSauer catalogs, with a
P225/6/8 (can't remember which) oozing mud.  You sure know
that those are demo models.  I can't imagine anybody but the
factory doing something like that.

Drew 
--
betz@gozer.idbsu.edu
*** brought into your terminal from the free state of idaho ***