• Announcements

    • Brentonator

      Forum Rules (Please Read)

      Hello everyone and welcome to the No More Room In Hell Forums! We greatly appreciate your interest and support. Please feel free to begin post and become a part of this community. But please make sure that you read and understand the following rules so things can stay as clean and as orderly as possible around here. These rules are expected to be follow by any and all members at all times. Disobeying these rules will result in disciplinary action by a moderator. #1. Off color remarks are acceptable but can be deemed inappropriate at the discretion of the moderators. #2. Flaming and disrespecting other members of this community or this mod is strictly prohibited. #3. Please do not post links relating to warez or illegal downloading. #4. No offensive content is to be posted (gore, dead babies, porn). #5. Please do not spam topics to increase your post count. #6. No excessively large signatures. Signatures that violate this will be modified. #7. Signatures are not to be used as a spamming tool. If your signature's sole purpose is to annoy or distract other members, it will be removed. #8. Please do your part to be as friendly, respectful, and helpful to anyone and everyone on this forum. #9. Your posts may be removed at any time at our sole discretion. #10. Remember the terms of your registration...a copy is posted below but may not represent the latest version of our terms of use. #11. No advertising other communities or products. Have fun.
Hoff

The Gun thread

210 posts in this topic

Ugh Ruger 10/22 are so dumb. Yeah, I own one lol

My friend is obsessed with his Ruger 10/22 in such a weird way that it makes me uncomfortable. I'd rather fondle my AR15 thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd take my AR any day of the week, but the Ruger SHOULD be a lot cheaper to shoot, if I could actually find ammo for it. People are hoarding .22 ammo. Dafuck :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

really? I find case upon case upon case of it here. I have like 3k .22LR rounds stocked up but even still, it's fucking everywhere.

WELCOME TO OBAMA'S AMERICA.

H3MZRDh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't go to walmart and grab them right now. Not in the US anyway. There hasn't been many boxes of .22 or .223 or really any damn ammo type. and when you can find them, the .22s cost 12 bucks per damn box. I don't know why our government bought all the damn ammo from us, but i suppose its just a way for them to *attempt* to reduce gun violence on the peoples expenses seeing as how we are paying for the billions of dollars that the government spent on ammo through our taxes. Sigh... so im assuming its abundant and cheap up there in Canada huh.

Edited by C0DE 13LACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we have some here in NC...well up here in the mountains at least. my brother in law, my dad and myself go up the road from my parent's old house and shoot .22 rifles/pistols all the time on top of 9mm, .45s and an ar-15 for shits n giggles. i could be wrong, but we buy a couple of boxes at a time every couple of months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy there fellah, just saying it'd probably cost about $300-350 to get the equivalent over here. Not crazy money or anything, but a fair bit if you bought it all at once (and for one person, I assume you and your buds split the cost).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found some match winchester .22lr for 40$ brick. Terrible, but good product- and the only one I could find.

If you're bored of semi automatics and want a .22 as well, try the best of both worlds in a henry .22lr repeater. fires 22 short, long, and long rifle and feeds all types flawlessly. Lot of fun to shoot and pretty damn economical as well.

P1040183.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy there fellah, just saying it'd probably cost about $300-350 to get the equivalent over here. Not crazy money or anything, but a fair bit if you bought it all at once (and for one person, I assume you and your buds split the cost).

I WILL NOT EASY CANNOT EASY NO EASY!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want a lever action but I want it in big boy caliber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we have some here in NC...well up here in the mountains at least. my brother in law, my dad and myself go up the road from my parent's old house and shoot .22 rifles/pistols all the time on top of 9mm, .45s and an ar-15 for shits n giggles. i could be wrong, but we buy a couple of boxes at a time every couple of months.

What was being said is that there's a massive shortage right now of everything except like 12 gauge and 20 gauge bird shot, and then some of the hunting rounds (i.e. rounds found almost exclusively in hunting rifles like .240, 7mm, .270, etc.). One can also find the premium match-grade or self-defense loads more often than budget ball or hollow points. Everything else is difficult to find and jacked up in price, especially 5.56x45/.223, 7.62x39, 9x19mm, .45ACP, and now .22LR as well. Ranges sometimes have decent amounts of ammunition, but within the last six months there have been primer and cartridge shortages (definitely the former, probably the latter). There have also been large federal indefinite quantity indefinite time orders which allegedly cap at around 1.5 billion or so rounds, mostly of 9mm, .40, .45, and 5.56, though allegedly only a few million rounds have actually been delivered. Most of the supply-demand fuckery has been due to component shortages and panic buying, some fueled by speculation that's starting to crash and resettle. That's the lay of the land. I'm glad I bought a case of like 300 7.62x39 and over 400 7.62x54R while it was still "cheap" last year.

Mind you, this all happened in the shit storm following Sandy Hook. Everyone who knew anything knew that Obama's reelection was going to result in increased sales, and thus less supply and a little higher cost. Until the second or third week of December, though, it wasn't too bad. After that point, EVERYTHING was gone. AR-15s were flying off fucking shelves like hot cakes because everyone was afraid that they were going to do 1994 2.0, despite the fact that anyone who knows anything knows that the original 1994 "AWB" achieved jack diddly fuck all in terms of anything but wasting time, money, and the ability of citizens to purchase standard sporting rifle features for a ten year period. The new legislation wanted to make it so that a rifle could only possess one EVUL characteristic, whereas in 1994, a rifle could have two (these included bayonet lugs, standard capacity detachable magazines, flash suppressors/muzzle breaks/compensators, threaded barrels, foldable or collapsible butt stocks, pistol grips, and so forth). The proposed legislation would have banned certain firearms from import or sale by name, tried to close the nonexistent "gunshow loophole" (which is actually the we can't enforce monitoring of private sales, and it's small fish, so let's not waste money chasing shit for no good raisin loophole), among other stupid, pointless, generally frivolous shit that lawmakers do for ribbon cutting ceremonies, smiling whilst they fuck over shit tons of non-violent criminal citizens without provocation. Thankfully, that went nowhere. For now, that is. Some of the panic has subsided a bit, and ammo and sporting rifles like AR15s aren't disappearing as much.

So for any Americans who don't live in one of the Gunbanistan states, I highly suggest getting a sporting rifle with features that would potentially become impossible to buy without special license sooner rather than later (FALs, CETMES, G3s, AR15s, AK47s/AKMs/AK74s, and so on). The same would apply to sidearms with magazine capacities higher than 10 rounds and features that might be banned on those as well. With luck, wait to see if prices drop a bit and keep an eye on the blasted Senate. We live in a time of regime uncertainty, and while the recent legislation fell apart, there's no reason to believe that this situation will approach permanence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean as for Canada who knows what is going to happen when it comes to firearms. Unfortunately Stephen Harper is in power until 2015... And although the conservatives are generally better on guns they are worse for the country overall.

They got rid of the long gun registry so you no longer need to register rifles/shotguns with barrels over 18.5 inches. We can still acquire all the same shit as you can see from my collection so far. Ammo and ammo making supplies have been running out here since they are selling out so hard in the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I"m glad to see firearms are more easy to acquire in Canada then I first thought, . I can see in the U.K gun control doesn't work because then criminals find some other way to harm you like with knifes or whatever and ultimately that just leaves people even more vulnerable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I"m glad to see firearms are more easy to acquire in Canada then I first thought, . I can see in the U.K gun control doesn't work because then criminals find some other way to harm you like with knifes or whatever and ultimately that just leaves people even more vulnerable.

Yeah we should legalise firearms that way gun crime can rise. Good thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah we should legalise firearms that way gun crime can rise. Good thinking.

A gun makes people equal. Have you heard of that saying "God made man, but colt made them equal".

If there a granny with a knife against a burly man with a knife. The odds are the granny is screwed. But a granny with a gun and a burly man with a gun are pretty much equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A gun makes people equal. Have you heard of that saying "God made man, but colt made them equal"

If there a granny with a knife against a burly man with a knife. The odds are the granny is screwed. But a granny with a gun and a burly man with a gun are pretty much equal.

Not sure what bizarre world you live in when old women mug burly men in the street. But it's safe to say the granny is more likely to shoot herself, a family member or somebody by accident than she is to be involved some John McClaneesque shootout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

old ladies down here'll sit behind a locked door in a rocking chair with a shotgun pointed at the door...then again most of them grew up on farms and would do shit like cut a hog's nuts off and fry them up before the hog stopped running around screaming...guess it has a lot to do with the area you're in. a friend of the family up on the hill has an old lady living in the house that packs a 357 and she will kill you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean as for Canada who knows what is going to happen when it comes to firearms. Unfortunately Stephen Harper is in power until 2015... And although the conservatives are generally better on guns they are worse for the country overallThey got rid of the long gun registry so you no longer need to register rifles/shotguns with barrels over 18.5 inches. We can still acquire all the same shit as you can see from my collection so far. Ammo and ammo making supplies have been running out here since they are selling out so hard in the US.

Enjoy!

Not sure what bizarre world you live in when old women mug burly men in the street. But it's safe to say the granny is more likely to shoot herself, a family member or somebody by accident than she is to be involved some John McClaneesque shootout.

The point is, it's a relatively low-probability occurrence which one should, if one has balls and mind enough, take caution and prepare for. When I strap myself in with a seat belt, it's for the unlikely scenario in which I am involved in a high speed collision (like, faster than 50 km/h or something), where I am at a high risk of ejection or crush injuries from rolling over. When I purchase insurance for, say, a house, its purpose is protection in the case that the house suffers extensive damage, which is unlikely unless I live in the middle of dry scrub or a flood plain. Plenty of people are afraid of either airport security or at least unwilling to put up with the hassle associated with it, and they prefer to drive in automobiles, while being an order of magnitude more likely to die in a fatal automobile collision than in an airplane crash or other system failure.

It's true that one is far more likely to die in an automobile than in a gun fight or by a criminal's hands, all things equal. Most gun owners also spend more money on ensuring automobile safety than they do on firearms and carry gear (assuming they even conceal or open carry). If a dedicated shooter, they probably do spend more time practicing with firearms than they do executing vehicle escape drills or performing routine maintenance procedures. That's probably because it's fun to shoot guns, and the clean-up process is rather short, whereas cars require a lot of work when one does get to working on them. Oh, and it's not fun to fuck around with brakes, transmissions, radiators, and all the fluids that go into operating an engine and the vehicle's other systems. I know this first-hand. Still, as a shooter myself, I also think it wise to carry a first aid kit with bandages, tourniquets, antiseptics, fluids, and on and on at least in their vehicle and when they're doing something like shooting or hiking; and to carry a pocket knife or purpose-made device capable of being generally handy but also cutting through a seat belt (some people have burned to death, strapped into a malfunctioning seat belt that wouldn't disengage).

Knives are also nice as a back-up weapon, but if I can avoid a knife fight, say with a firearm, I would prefer to do so. Using knives deftly requires a massive shit ton of skill, especially if one wants to avoid significant injury in the process. Firearms seem to possess a deterrent effect well beyond what knives can do; in over 90% of the cases of self-defense where a person brandishes a firearm, the would-be assailant flees either after seeing the firearm produced or after a first shot (which often fails to strike the target). Since we're talking primarily about handguns here, about 6/7 people shot by others with handguns in the US survive. (With long arms, the prospects of survival are dismal.) The fewer times the person is shot, the quicker they receive medical attention, and obviously the less vital the location, the better their odds of survival. So we can expect an assailant to surrender quickly after a firearm is produced, probably by the point of sustaining one or two wounds if not before. There's no data that shows the same holds true with knives. Further, if in a knife fight, I would make damn sure that the other party is either dead or otherwise incapacitated. So knife and bludgeon wounds are far more likely than a single gunshot wound to permanently and significantly disfigure or mutilate a victim, and the tools are far less likely to deter the assailant before lethal force is necessary.

Lest it be raised, that one study that said something to the effect of "a gun in the home is twenty times more likely to kill its owner or members of their family than an intruder or criminal" is thoroughly debunked and regarded in the critical thinking sectors of the planet as baseless horse shit molded from hilariously fudged stats. These anti-gun folks are generally the same crowd who argue that eager compliance with criminals' demands is the best method of survival (hint: reality says "au contraire"). There are about somewhere in the region of 600 or so officially recognized justifiable homicides every year in the US, most committed by police officers. If we say the actual numbers accounting for genuine self-defense cases among all citizens including police amounts to 900 per year for recent years, that's probably a good 800 shit-eaters rotting, assuming that 100 of the victims were perhaps not in the wrong despite judgment falling without their favor. Are we worse off? Should the victims of whatever depredation caused them to fear for their lives roll over and get ass-fucked in an effort to save a shit-eater's life?

I doubt I'll ever convince any significant number of anti-gun folks since their stance seems to stem mostly from a visceral fear of firearms, especially in the hands of the universally inept masses, while at the same time entrusting politics and automobiles to those same masses. (Yes, those two tools contribute to far more deaths than firearms, even in the US. Considering politics, perhaps especially in the US given the wars abroad.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is, it's a relatively low-probability occurrence which one should, if one has balls and mind enough, take caution and prepare for. When I strap myself in with a seat belt, it's for the unlikely scenario in which I am involved in a high speed collision (like, faster than 50 km/h or something), where I am at a high risk of ejection or crush injuries from rolling over. When I purchase insurance for, say, a house, its purpose is protection in the case that the house suffers extensive damage, which is unlikely unless I live in the middle of dry scrub or a flood plain. Plenty of people are afraid of either airport security or at least unwilling to put up with the hassle associated with it, and they prefer to drive in automobiles, while being an order of magnitude more likely to die in a fatal automobile collision than in an airplane crash or other system failure.

Putting firearms on the same level of cars on the danger scale is a kind of kneejerk response to gun lovers, that and partaking in reductio ad absurdium, which is just really poor on their part. For the most part the obvious answer is that cars were designed with multiple functions in mind firearms were specifically designed with the purpose of taking a life. Any car can become a weapon in the wrong persons hands, but a gun is already one. Not being condescending but just expanding the point.

I've often wondered if, particularly with people in America, if they had not been brought up around weapons then they would share an equal disinterest or distaste in their possession. But perhaps it is this idea of "God Given Right" or rather people the people vocalising it that creates such a distaste with others. I have relatives in America and whenever they have brought up the issue I incur "why do you keep a gun?" to which the answer was either "self defence" or "To shoot at the range" Now I asked if they would utilise the ranges option of storing firearms there as opposed to keeping them on their person. They responded negatively and when I asked what situation they were preparing for with self defence, Perhaps a ravaging bear would storm their home from 800 yards away under cover of darkness. I have met people who simply say "I just like guns" which is fine. At least they can be honest about it, doesn't make me like them still but at least they have the balls to admit it's not for defence but about having a silver penis extension.

I doubt I'll ever convince any significant number of anti-gun folks since their stance seems to stem mostly from a visceral fear of firearms, especially in the hands of the universally inept masses, while at the same time entrusting politics and automobiles to those same masses. (Yes, those two tools contribute to far more deaths than firearms, even in the US. Considering politics, perhaps especially in the US given the wars abroad.)[/Quote]

I don't "fear" firearms, in the same way I don't "fear" child molesters. Yet I despise them both. Ugly, unnatural, monstrous creations. They are not beautiful machines or extensions of ones arm. They are ugly blocks of metal carved for nothing other than death, created by those fearful, ignorant and filled with hatred that they're only answer is to shoot something. Now despite my opinions I have no objection to those owning guns, sure keep it at home in cabinet hell my Father has a cabinet of weapons downstairs, and we've never been broken into. Then again I also keep a set of glass unicorns in front of it so maybe it's that...seriously everybody buy glass unicorns it will Change. Your. Life

And I'm fine with people who just want to shoot it a gun range, nothing wrong with that. Go out make a few friends do something you enjoy etc. And even the people who use firearms as a masturbation aid, whatever go nuts...stay the fuck away from the rest of society but go nuts.

However I don't see the problem with tighter gun control laws and stricter background checks. You can still go the range, can still defend your home. But I guess some people are so paranoid that they won't pass these checks (or are fearful that people discover they are dangerous) that they cry out that its an abuse of their rights.

Got no problem with certain gun owners, most of you are fine people who simply enjoy the gun for whatever reasons and will defend it. But to respond to what you said earlier Noobles the people on the other side of the argument don't despise you. They despise nutbags, survivalists and maybe they just don't want to have to see the corpses of children on the news after another school shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've often wondered if, particularly with people in America, if they had not been brought up around weapons then they would share an equal disinterest or distaste in their possession.

You know the 2nd amendment is actually you could say an antecedent of the English Bill of Rights. In 1688 in the English bill of rights is written for people to own arms suitable for their defense. Also Castle law comes from "Anglo-saxon common law". As you may probably know the Anglo-saxons were people that lived in England and their culture evolved around warfare, so defending your house with a weapon was seen as okay. When firearms were invented the kings wanted everyone to own arms. When the British colonists came to America they brought with them these long standing English traditions. So its not surprising this is still a major part of the English culture its been with us for forever.

I bet though after the Americans rebelled against the British rule, the British ruling class starting changing their minds pretty quickly about citizens owning firearms. lolol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know the 2nd amendment is actually you could say an antecedent of the English Bill of Rights. In 1688 in the English bill of rights is written for people to own arms suitable for their defense. Also Castle law comes from Anglo-saxon common law. Anglo-saxon culture evolved around warfare and when firearms were invented the kings wanted everyone to own arms. When the British colonists came to America they brought with them these long standing English traditions. So its not surprising this is still a major part of the English culture its been with us for forever.

I bet though after the Americans rebelled against the British rule, the British ruling class starting changing their minds pretty quickly about citizens owning firearms. lolol

Gun control amongst individuals was still fairly tight during the colonisation period right through till the reign of the British empire, this wasn't the case amongst the wealthy of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's going on with that No.4? Extended mag or is it just falling out of the rifle lol

Oh and I got my M1- Maxx, you will appreciate da serial

P1040808.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hahahaha that's awesome! As for my Enfield, the magazine is just removed sitting below the rifle. I have a lock in the bolt so the mag won't fit in (safety)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now