Ditto. Although I was a PO for 38 years, carrying a weapon off duty was like a carpenter carrying a hammer whenever he wasn't working. I rarely carried an off duty weapon. Now that I am retired, I have no handguns, nor even a license to carry.
in this tweaker town, single guy could have a ready made family in 5 minutes. there are so many abandoned women with kids it's depressing. more depressing is that 2 minutes after they opened their mouths, you know why he left, agree with him, and start heading anywhere that's away from her.
it's kind of like carving the turkey it's kind of like mowing the lawn, everyone is shouting which side are you on. talking about the good life, in the food chain.
...love among the ruins...everything gets down to this certain dimension...
It's about the same here, and getting worse - courtesy of the County. The more parolees they dump on us, the worse it gets. And the gangs are moving in...we're having a town hall meeting about that next month.
Good point. But if I sold them now, I would have to pay a huge capital gains tax. If I still have them when I die, my heirs get a stepped-up basis. Besides, what alternative investment would yield as high a rate of return as just keeping them? And they're neat to look at...
gangs are supposed to be here, but they must keep a low profile. it certainly isn't due to our lackluster police! are you going?
The best thing to do, if there is time, is to emplace the weapon, and/or sandbag it. The idea is to get both the weapon and the firer/crew as close to the ground as possible. Remember, when you're firing at *them*, they're firing at *you*.
The line of sight on the M2HB, when mounted on the M3 tripod (see
If you dig a foxhole behind the weapon, you can not only kneel or sit cross-legged behind it, you can even stand up if the foxhole is deep enough.
I think we should take historical preservation seriously. Things like ships, aircraft, vehicles, and guns used in past wars are part of our heritage. They aren't being produced any more, and when they're gone, they're gone. This is everyone's concern, not just the owner's. For example, you may "own" a dog or cat, but if you torture it or mistreat it, society steps in and accuses you of animal cruelty. This is one of those situations when we should think of the community as well as just ourselves.
Have you been to Sarco and looked at their stuff? $225 will get you a barrel with a "sewer pipe" type bore. If you want something decent, as I said, it's going to cost three times as much.
That said, it just bothers me to wilfully ruin anything with a historical/collector significance. And machine guns have been "capped" for private citizens. They're going to be more and more rare and valuable as time goes on.
I'm seriously considering it. I've got a personal axe to grind about the increasing number of reprobates being dumped on us - you never know where you might meet one, my last ex being a case in point. Serious fugitive drawn here because she felt safe amongst the rest of the rest of the criminals in town. I've already had a brief chat with a Council member on the subject.
I understand perfectly well the libertarian viewpoint that property rights are absolute, and that you can do anything you damn well please with property that you "own." I just don't agree with it, nor does the law, or majority opinion. All sorts of property rights are restricted for the social good. For example, you may own a building lot, but what you build on it has to follow the zoning rules, fire codes, etc. If you live in a historical district, you can't just tear down a significant building.
When it comes to preservation of historical aircraft, vehicles, guns, etc., there may not be codified regulations like those that pertain to buildings, but nevertheless, to me, there's an unwritten moral obligation not to wantonly destroy them. We, as individuals, don't live in a vacuum. We're part of a community. and we have obligations to that community.
do it. you may not be in favor of anything but you certainly be against stuff!
nope, don't see it. the analogy is based on a false comparison. apples and bicycles. i believe historical machinery should be functional and used for active display. fly the planes, drive the tanks, shoot the guns. one offs or last survivors, ok save. the idea of big brother stealing machines from owners is heinous, disgusting and foul. ask a coin collector about big brother and the 1933 double eagles. NEVER allow a government the authority to steal anything you own legitly. yech, phooey, gack, that idea makes me ggag.
you use a lot of invlaid comparisons. logical fallacies that may have currency in the mind of current popular thought but they are not valid. you are suggesting theft and seizure in the name of preservation. and you would give that to politicians and government? read some history to see where that leads. that whole idea make me sick! especially when you try to wrap it in the tryuly dumb concept that there is some "unwritten moral obligation". was that a joke? you want to define required religious beliefs, when and where i work? that concept is really sick and disgusting. you don't have the right to decide, i hope you're not dumb enough to give that to someone else. stay the f*ck out of my stuff.
You have mistaken a living, breathing creature for a tool. Both my cats are spoiled rotten as befits thei self image of godhood (see ancient Egyptians and cats). Whereas my guns are tools, no more and no less than the several demoltion hammers I have from back in the day, each missing a claw. The hammers being tools were used as such and eventually too beat up for their intended use, they then got relegated to "hammer hell" and used to beat things apart so remodelling could happen with the newer, better hammer. Guns are only tools, not pets.
Wait, don't tell me I should savor and preserve the historical heritage of my 18th century smithing hammers simple because they're old. Maybe I should stop honing and using the 150 year old Henkels knife that is my main slicer when I cook..........
Can't say I have, I used custom made Obermeyer and K&P barrels for match rifles. Sarco was and is only useful to me for small parts. Still doesn't matter one whit to me, barrels are by nature consumable, period.
You still don't get it, if YOU don't own it and the OWNER uses it safely it's HIS business, NOT YOURS! The damned things are tools and nothing more.....granted to some they're toys but if used safely, no big deal.
You are being deliberatly obtuse. Unwritten means IT IS NOT LAW. SO long as the owner uses it safely you have NO ground to stand upon but your inflated opinion, hot air makes a lousy platform.
You have a point there, none of us lives in a vacuum, and we are well advised to pay attention to the prevailing opinion of our community.
Now, if the posts here are anything to go by, the opinion of the community is that owning a gun and not occasionally blazing away with it is dead wrong in a whole bunch of ways. So, by your own logic, anyone owning a gun should be obliged to shoot it, let's say, at least once a year.
Rob
Just looking at them sitting there waiting for me gives me this delightfully warm and fuzzy feeling:-)
Rob
I believe that's the law in Switzerland........;)
I wonder if the community would be willing to chip in and buy me a Ma Deuce? ;-)
WmB
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.