Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

My daughter on the other hand hasn’t wanted to go. But all the anti News has her shunning the idea of it before giving it a try. Hoping she ends up having some friends that hunt or shoot considering where were at and maybe that’ll open her up enough to give it a chance.

 

How old? May need a more interesting target. I'm sure some of those anti news people might consider taking shots at a Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby target.

Or, this:

funny-printable-targets-primary-accordingly-tactic.jpg.1b5c71c3f2f1c2c77ab62f46e656ce85.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

Almost 15. She's super quiet, shy and errs on the conservative side. The political aspect probably doesn't help, but I think its more a matter of the high speed, loud noise side of it that really isn't her thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@6Pennies just had to decline an invite only CL class (VET), but thinking we should link up and try and hit a different one this summer if you have the time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently got my lady to do a women's firearms course for a day. Started out .22 pistol/rifle and was then free to browse through an assortment of firepower brought by various instructors... know she shot a big game rifle and a S&W revolver. First time shooter, said she liked the S&W best because she felt like Dirty Harry. Can't be mad about that. Came in at the end and had her fire these before leaving (not mine), looked pretty sexy dropping 3 round bursts.

 

IMG_4551.png.966d40ba16e6eb80b9f43e6f686d2e2f.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crazy what full autos sell for. If I could go back in time I’d have hoarded a bunch or gotten into sales. Then again I’d have also invented Google, Facebook and put everything I had into mining bitcoin.

 

In any case, looks fun. Seen a lot of dudes come through class with full autos just to sort of show off and have fun. Usually they’ll let you throw your upper on it and dump a mag or two. Fun stuff, but definitely see why they’re aren’t standard for most military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Recently got my lady to do a women's firearms course for a day. Started out .22 pistol/rifle and was then free to browse through an assortment of firepower brought by various instructors... know she shot a big game rifle and a S&W revolver. First time shooter, said she liked the S&W best because she felt like Dirty Harry. Can't be mad about that. Came in at the end and had her fire these before leaving (not mine), looked pretty sexy dropping 3 round bursts.

 

[ATTACH=full]247215[/ATTACH]

 

That's amazing! I'd also like to try a firearms course soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's amazing! I'd also like to try a firearms course soon.

 

What city / state do you live in? I’d suggest starting with a fundamental proficiency course if you don’t have military experience or grew up hunting (even then it’s not a bad idea). If you google map Logan gun shops and gun ranges for the ones with best reviews, then maybe swing by the three most promising looking ones. Virtually all will have a community board or something with courses listed or people offering to do courses. Likely they’ll also offer their own safety or CCW (concealed carry permit) course, which is really just a safety course for the most part. Start with that, then move on to some local marksmanship courses. Once you thoroughly understand safety, know the general theory / practice of marksmanship and know how to safely disassemble, clean and reassemble the firearm you shoot with, then I’d say you’d be ready (and fairly comfortable) with some of the national circuit type tactical courses. Especially if you’ve managed to squeeze in plenty of range time and hopefully have someone experienced that you’re friends with to partner up with.

 

Sounds like a lot, but it’s not too deep and mostly a ton of fun. Also, videos don’t substitute hands on training and real world experience, but you can learn a lot and it’s a great primer as well as good supplement to real work training and experience.

 

Though fairly old at this point and some of the technique have evolved a little, the Magpul Dynamics series with Chris Costa and Travis Haley are still the gold standard for training videos IMO. Worth a watch, even if you’re just curious and want an intro glimpse at it.

 

*Keep in mind the videos are fairly advanced and not what you’d encounter at one of the fundamental courses you’d be starting with. Also, these are usually about $20 per set if you look around. Might even find a stream or at least excerpts on YouTube or online.

 

Magpul The Art of the Dynamic Handgun https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00373PEVW/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_UasiBbGD4KVAE

 

3EDEE38A-863F-4DEC-AB80-16B444FA66F3.jpeg.a1ba2681fce660612de598050a3e90c8.jpeg

 

Magpul 2nd Art of Tact Carb (Set of 4 Dvd) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007P5551W/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_AbsiBbANABWDH

 

84E64D41-A426-49D9-A002-AF9EA1D1C801.jpeg.266ffbd72a5d93f15e4084fbda96ec46.jpeg

 

Magpul Art of Tact Carb V2 2nd 4 Dvd https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007DN5T1C/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_.bsiBb7BMBTZ6

 

B9B3A643-A154-4762-88E1-995BB0F86378.jpeg.3027cd06e023628a00891ff53e67310f.jpeg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@6Pennies We should really get this thread going man. Lots of knowledge, experience, suggestions, insight and even a lot of really cool pictures you could share (if you don't mind doing so). Honestly, just reposting a lot of your earlier Instagram stuff would be a great start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's amazing! I'd also like to try a firearms course soon.

 

There are a lot of them out there from beginner to advanced. Do you own a firearm/have you shot before? Check with your local range or gun club for what's available. I really don't care for or about the NRA, but you can check through them too if you like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of another thing I found interesting in regards to the gun debate... it’s clear there are cultural shifts in regards to what we find acceptable or not, in addition to differences in lifestyle, ideologies and ethics.

 

What few people ever consider in regards to debates like the Bill of Rights and Second Amendment, is that language also evolves.

 

It’s most obvious when you hear, or more often read, words that are antiquated and fallen out of the common vernacular. Further to that, however, are words that remain in use, but have shifted significantly in meaning or have had words obfuscated purposefully (there’s an entire discipline on that which is commonly applied in politics called Psycholinguistics).

 

For example:

 

Excerpt sourced from Cornell University School of Law: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311 and https://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2013/04/regarding-pesky-“well-regulated-militia”-2nd-amendment-what-exactly-did-it-mean

 

 

“The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, 1789: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

 

 

The meaning of the word “Militia” was later codified under the Militia Act of 1792 which holds in part that the militia is made up of “each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States” who “shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia.” Naturally once the Thirteenth Amendment made African Americans free and equal citizens, the “white” part was made invalid.

 

The Federalist Papers (Number 29, Alexander Hamilton) gives us our clue as to what “well regulated meant.”

 

“The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.”

 

So, “well regulated” really meant “properly functioning.” It didn’t have anything to do with setting rules and laws for the militia. They also commonly imagine that doing the “regulation” should be done on a federal level where the founders expected the militias to be organized at the state level and not under federal control.

 

As to the individual vs collective right claim, libertarians and conservatives both say that the Constitution obviously confers the right to own a gun on the individual. Lately, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed with this individual right.

 

Lastly, we all know that those of the right of center generally assume the Constitution to be the law of the land, a fixed document that only has to be read, not constantly “interpreted” in new and unusual ways.

 

The Future:

 

The recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court (Heller and McDonald) have thrown a bone in the left’s argument that the Second Amendment is only a “collective right.” From these two momentous decisions, courts are revisiting strict gun laws across the country. This will continue and many more cases will likely head toward the SCOTUS for debate. We will also see states and federal laws written to push the envelope.

 

Commentary:

 

Several things need to be pointed out. Firstly the founders did not want to exclude any standing, national army. After all, the army is taken care of elsewhere in the Constitution. The militia was supposed to exist concurrently with the standing army but operate separately.

 

Secondly, the founders expected that the right to self-protection was an inalienable right given to us by God. After all, without the power to protect ourselves and our property–and the sanctity of personal property is key, here–we were not free men. Those that must look to others for protection of life, liberty, and property are beholden to someone else and, therefore, not free men.

 

In this light, Thomas Jefferson was adamant in his drafts of the Virginia Constitution of 1776: “No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

 

You see, the founders based a lot of their ideas of the law on the ideas of an English lawyer named William Blackstone whose works were widely reprinted in the colonies.

 

Here is what Blackstone said about being armed in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, Vol. 2, 1765: “…since it is impossible to say, to what wanton lengths of rapine or cruelty outrages of this sort might be carried, unless it were permitted a man immediately to oppose one violence with another. Self-defence therefore, as it is justly called the primary law of nature, so it is not, neither can it be in fact, taken away by the law of society…”

 

I mention this to explain why the founders did not include in the Constitution any language that specifically notes the individual’s rights. It was taken as granted and therefore unnecessary to reiterate in a document they were trying to make as concise as possible.

 

So, in modern terms, you cannot take away from a man the right to self-defense on either the micro or macro level. This hardbound natural right codified by Blackstone led Supreme Court Justice Joseph story to put it in clearer terms where it concerns the purpose of the militia: “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms,” Story wrote, “has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

 

Thirdly, the founders also located power over the military/militias in four places to further prevent its tyrannical use. Congress regulated all branches of the military, but the president was the ultimate commander of that military, yet the states were placed over the militias when not in federal service. Finally, the individual citizens were in control of their firearms never to be disarmed.

 

As founding father Samuel Adams said during Massachusetts’s convention to Ratify the Constitution: “That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”

 

One last point needs clarification and that is the discussion of muskets vs today’s arsenal.

 

The word “bear” meant to be able to carry or hold. In some parlance of the time “bear” even meant to be able place in one’s coat. This necessarily restricts the sort of arms we are talking about as it means we are talking about an arm that is operated by one person, not a team of men.

 

Certainly the founders meant Americans to “bear” military grade arms. One cannot be a member of a para-military group using small caliber plinkers and varmint guns. In their day arms meant military weapons. Muskets, pistols, even swords were “arms.” Cannons, land mines, and ships of war, however, were the “weapons of mass destruction” of the founder’s era. They never expected that the people had any right to those weapons of war. Such weapons of mass destruction are more properly, then and now, called ordnance as opposed to arms. It is also why the Navy is dealt with elsewhere in the Constitution.

 

This means that when the left taunts you by saying, “what, did the founders think you should have a rocket launcher, a jet fighter plane or a nuclear weapon?,” they are revealing their ignorance, not making a valid argument. The founders meant for the people to have military grade rifles and pistols. They excluded ships of war and cannons so by logical extension modern ordnance would similarly fall outside the rights of the Second Amendment.

 

So, no, the founders would NOT have thought we had a right to a nuclear weapon.

 

In conclusion, the Second Amendment clearly gives an individual a right to firearms, those firearms can be military grade, they can and should be expected to be used for both personal protection and to prevent government from become tyrannical by arranging themselves into para-military groups, and the government has no right whatever to take your firearms away from you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if you think that psycholinguistics and the gun control debate is some tin foil hat conspiracy theory craziness, have a look at the attached PDF and then ask yourself what else is being manipulated to get you to rally behind a certain political position or social topic.

gun-violencemessaging-guide-pdf-1.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought this was interesting... Once thing to see a box logo on dudes pelican case, but custom PMAGS...

 

Definitely will do yup a batch of hydro dipped PMAGS for 12oz once of these days.

 

IMG_9933.thumb.png.fb33a714670b9a80e4aa4d6c2a6b818d.png

 

IMG_9931.thumb.png.db8c290d01592cbeee1ddbc9023bf3b6.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.png.46df0a65eac98ea017929959607a145e.png

image.png.5097fae812f3afc54ccced2f7a8c4313.png

 

 

Now this last one may represent irresponsible use of firearms but who knows, I wasn't there and he may be legally defending himself.image.png.d10076fc789d615b6cf22394ae45b465.png

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@misteravenI didn't say guns & skateboarders don't mix...

 

Interesting read about your friend.

 

The thought of him skating around the deck of that ship shooting pirates is intriguing....maybe need to rethink my comment if that is what he is doing. 

  • LOL! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HA! Just thought it was a funny intro to an interesting story. I’ll try to get him in here one of these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what purpose that last one has in that it's .223 but doesn't appear to share much with the AR? Also, wondering why they've got it promoted as .223 instead of 5.56 NATO unless its not multi cal. Cycling bolt is kind of dumb I think, considering better options exist for a fully ambidextrous platform. Also wonder why they ditched all the top rail space? Gun doesn't make a lot of sense, especially with everyone dropping that caliber.

 

Reminds me a little of the ACR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the pic on some Russian AK conference site. I'm frankly amazed you were able to break it down like that just from those specs, its cool. I couldn't understand what most of it meant. I just though it looked really modern in a stripped down way.

Do some Russian rifles use the NATO rounds or do they have their own? The profile def reminds me of the Bushmaster ACR your'e spot on. Who would use those? Specialized units? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading up on it now.. "Other features, unique in the world of AK-type rifles, include a cross-button manual safety above the trigger guard, a last round hold-open device with a release lever located on the left side of the receiver above the magazine catch, and a funneled magwell for faster mag change."

 

This sounds pretty cool

Edited by Kults

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...