I gotta have this rifle...

http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/desert-tech-reveals-details-bullpup-mdr-shot-show/

Nice, but for $2,450.00 I'd stick with an AK.

Why? Gonna make you a tough guy much less a man.
What would your mother think?
Join the arm forces and defend the country first.
With a name like yucky you still playing with squirt guns.

Yucky24. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I gotta have this rifle...
>
> http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/desert-tech-reve
> als-details-bullpup-mdr-shot-show/

Looks a 'lil bulky in the back, plus the name 'Desert Tech' has negative connotations for me. It sounds low rent, like I'm swapping a couple camels and a goat for it. Not to mention it brings up bad memories of a couple of tours of duty in a certain sandy shithole.

No, the name 'Bushmaster' or 'Remington' sounds much better to me.

Not Impressed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yucky24. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I gotta have this rifle...
> >
> >
> http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/desert-tech-reve
>
> > als-details-bullpup-mdr-shot-show/
>
> Looks a 'lil bulky in the back, plus the name
> 'Desert Tech' has negative connotations for me. It
> sounds low rent, like I'm swapping a couple camels
> and a goat for it. Not to mention it brings up bad
> memories of a couple of tours of duty in a certain
> sandy shithole.
>
> No, the name 'Bushmaster' or 'Remington' sounds
> much better to me.

I know what you mean. I've never really cared for the "bullpup" design even though I've never fired one. When my unit switched from the M-14 to the M-16
I wasn't impressed either. Felt like a toy and not suitable for bayonet fighting.

Another wannabe yuckster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why? Gonna make you a tough guy much less a man.
> What would your mother think?
> Join the arm forces and defend the country first.
> With a name like yucky you still playing with
> squirt guns.


+1

McDonald v. Chicago

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

McDonald v. Chicago
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 2, 2010
Decided June 28, 2010
Full case name Otis McDonald, et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al.
Docket nos. 08-1521
Citations 561 U.S. 3025 (more)
130 S. Ct. 3020; 177 L. Ed. 2d 894
Prior history Judgment for defendants, 617 F. Supp. 2d 752 (N.D. Ill. 2008), aff'd, 567 F.3d 856 (7th Cir.), cert. granted, 557 U. S. ___ (2009)
Argument Oral argument
Holding
The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense in one's home is fully applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded.

Court membership
Chief Justice
John G. Roberts
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Case opinions
Majority Alito, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy (all); Thomas (all except parts II-C, IV and V)
Concurrence Scalia
Concurrence Thomas
Dissent Stevens
Dissent Breyer, joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. II, XIV

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), is a landmark[1] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that determined whether the Second Amendment applies to the individual states. The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states.

Initially the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had upheld a Chicago ordinance banning the possession of handguns as well as other gun regulations affecting rifles and shotguns, citing United States v. Cruikshank, Presser v. Illinois, and Miller v. Texas.[2] The petition for certiorari was filed by Alan Gura, the attorney who had successfully argued Heller, and Chicago-area attorney David G. Sigale.[3] The Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sponsored the litigation on behalf of several Chicago residents, including retiree Otis McDonald.

The oral arguments took place on March 2, 2010.[4][5] On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, reversed the Seventh Circuit's decision, holding that the Second Amendment was incorporated under the Fourteenth Amendment thus protecting those rights from infringement by local governments.[6] It then remanded the case back to Seventh Circuit to resolve conflicts between certain Chicago gun restrictions and the Second Amendment.

Contents

1 Cause
2 McDonald v. Chicago as compared to NRA v. Chicago
2.1 Regulations challenged
2.2 Legal basis for incorporation
3 Amici curiae
4 Decision
4.1 Dissents
5 Reception
6 Related cases
7 See also
8 References
9 External links

Cause

In McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S.Ct. 3020, 177 L.Ed.2nd 894 (2010), Chicago resident Otis McDonald, a 76 year old (in 2010) retired maintenance engineer, had lived in the Morgan Park neighborhood since buying a house there in 1971.[7] McDonald decried the decline of his neighborhood, describing it as being taken over by gangs and drug dealers. His lawn was regularly littered with refuse and his home and garage had been broken into a combined five times, with the most recent robbery committed by a man McDonald recognized from his own neighborhood.[7] An experienced hunter, McDonald legally owned shotguns, but believed them too unwieldy in the event of a robbery, and wanted to purchase a handgun for personal home defense. Due to Chicago's requirement that all firearms in the city be registered, yet refusing all handgun registrations after 1982 when a citywide handgun ban was passed, he was unable to legally own a handgun. As a result, in 2008, he joined three other Chicago residents in filing a lawsuit which became McDonald v. Chicago.[7]
McDonald v. Chicago as compared to NRA v. Chicago

Despite being consolidated at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, the cases are different in scope in terms of the specific regulations challenged and the legal argument for applying the Second Amendment against state and local governments. The Second Amendment Foundation brought the McDonald case to the Supreme Court with its lead attorney Alan Gura. The cases were appealed separately to the U.S. Supreme Court.[8]

McDonald Petition for Certiorari
Chicago Brief in Opposition to Cert Petition

Regulations challenged

McDonald challenged four broad aspects of Chicago's gun registration law, which, according to the plaintiffs:[9]

Prohibit the registration of handguns, thus effecting a broad handgun ban
Require that guns be registered prior to their acquisition by Chicago residents
Mandate that guns be re-registered annually, with another payment of the fee
Render any gun permanently non-registrable if its registration lapses

Legal basis for incorporation

All of the post-Heller cases, including McDonald, NRA v. Chicago, Nordyke and Maloney, argued that the Second Amendment, in addition to applying to federal jurisdictions, should also be applied against state and local governments, using a judicial process called selective incorporation. Selective incorporation involves convincing the court that a right is "fundamental" by being “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” or “deeply rooted in our nation’s history and traditions” as defined most recently in the Supreme Court case Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968).

In addition to claiming the Second Amendment should be incorporated through the selective incorporation process, McDonald is unique among post-Heller gun cases in that it asked the court to overturn the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873). Slaughter-House determined that the 14th Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause did not apply the Bill of Rights to the actions of states (and by extension, local governments). If it had been overturned, the Selective Incorporation process may have become unnecessary, since the entire Bill of Rights, including the 2nd Amendment, would arguably be applied to the states.[10][11]

In attempting to overturn Slaughter-House, this case garnered the attention and support of both conservative and liberal legal scholars interested in its potential application in areas outside of firearms law. Their interest was that if Slaughter-House had been overturned, it would have been possible that constitutional guarantees such as the right to a jury in civil cases, right to a grand jury in felony cases, and other parts of the Bill of Rights, as well as future court rulings and existing federal precedent, not universally guaranteed in actions by the states, would have been applied against the states automatically.[12][13][14]

In his concurring opinion, Justice Thomas alone supported overturning the Slaughter-House and Cruikshank decisions,[15] proposing that "the right to keep and bear arms is a privilege of American citizenship that applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause."[16]
Amici curiae

Thirty-three amici curiae ("friends of the court") briefs for this case were filed with the Clerk of the Supreme Court.[17]

One of these briefs was filed by U.S. senators Kay Bailey Hutchison (R, TX) and Jon Tester (D, MT) and U.S. representatives Mark Souder (R, IN) and Mike Ross (D, AR) asking the Supreme Court to find in favor of the petitioners and rule that the Second Amendment does apply to the states.[18] The brief was signed by 58 senators and 251 representatives, more members of Congress than any amicus curiae brief in history.[19] Furthermore, thirty-two states under the aegis of Texas (and California independently) also filed amici curiae.[clarification needed][20]
Decision

Writing for the majority, Justice Alito held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller.[21] Writing a concurring opinion, Justice Thomas reached the same conclusion regarding the incorporation issue on different grounds: Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.[22] The majority decision also reaffirmed that certain firearms restrictions mentioned in District of Columbia v. Heller are assumed permissible and not directly dealt with in this case.[23] Such restrictions include those to "prohibit...the possession of firearms by felons or mentally ill" and "laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms".[23]
Dissents

Justice Stevens wrote a lengthy dissenting opinion. Among his disagreements with the majority was the statement that incorporation was not at issue in this case. Citing Cruikshank, Stevens wrote, "The so-called incorporation question was squarely and, in my view, correctly resolved in the late 19th century." In addition, he argues against incorporation, taking issue with the methodology of the majority opinions.

Justice Breyer wrote, "In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self defense. There has been, and is, no consensus that the right is, or was, 'fundamental.'"[24]
Reception

The initial reactions of the Court's ruling were favorable from both the National Rifle Association[25] and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.[26] Both issued statements to the public that they feel they were vindicated by the Court's holding. However, the court did not include a "clarification of the standard for review" as requested by the Brady group in their amicus brief.[27] In a discussion on the day of the ruling Wayne LaPierre of the NRA and Paul Helmke of the Brady Center both agreed that the Court's ruling protected specifically against bans on handguns for self-protection in the home. But as to the general question of gun laws not covered in McDonald; a large number of lawsuits are needed in order to determine whether any other existing gun regulations might also be unconstitutional. Wayne LaPierre expressed caution that the NRA has "a lot of work ahead" attempting to overturn other gun control regulations not covered by McDonald, while Paul Helmke voiced his opinion that the NRA was "going to lose most of those lawsuits".[28]
Related cases

The day after Heller was filed the National Rifle Association filed five similar lawsuits challenging local gun bans:

Guy Montag Doe v. San Francisco Housing Authority. In January, 2009, the San Francisco Housing Authority reached a settlement in favor of the Plaintiff, Guy Montag Doe, which allows residents to possess legal firearms within a SFHA apartment building.[29]
Three unnamed suits against the Chicago suburbs of Evanston, Morton Grove and Oak Park[30]
NRA v. Chicago – eventually merged with McDonald.

Other notable post-Heller Second Amendment court cases:

Nordyke v. King, 563 F.3d 439 (9th. Cir. 2009) Held that the 2nd Amendment did apply to the states in the Ninth Circuit, though the ruling was vacated for en banc reconsideration, and the Alameda County, California prohibition of firearms on county property remained constitutional until overturned by McDonald v. Chicago.
Maloney v. Rice (a.k.a. Maloney v. Cuomo and Maloney v. Spitzer), 554 F.3d 56 (2d. Cir. 2009) Held that the 2nd Amendment does not apply to the states in the Second Circuit. The case involved a state ban on Nunchaku sticks (a martial arts weapon). In a memorandum opinion dated June 29, 2010, the Supreme Court vacated the Second Circuit decision in Maloney and remanded for further consideration in light of McDonald's holding that the Second Amendment does apply to the states.
State of Washington v. Sieyes The Washington Supreme Court held that the 2nd Amendment is incorporated and applies to Washington State, via the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Superseded by, but consistent with, McDonald.
The Commonwealth V. Runyan, 456 Mass. 230 (2010) The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that Heller did not apply to the Massachusetts state legislature and that the gun locks ordered under Massachusetts law are different from those regulated in Heller. Partially overturned by McDonald; The decisions made in Heller do apply to the State of Massachusetts (as with all States), but the gun lock requisite under MA law may indeed differ enough from D.C.'s statute to be found constitutional.
In Ezell v. Chicago, decided July 6, 2011, the Seventh Circuit reversed a district court decision that the post-McDonald measures adopted by the City of Chicago were constitutional. The Chicago law required firearms training in a shooting range in order to obtain a gun permit, but also banned shooting ranges within the City of Chicago. The City had argued that applicants could obtain their training at gun ranges in the suburbs. The opinion noted that Chicago could not infringe Second Amendment rights on the grounds that they could be exercised elsewhere, any more than it could infringe the right to freedom of speech on the grounds that citizens could speak elsewhere.
In Moore v. Madigan, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued a ruling in December 2012 that required the Illinois Legislature to modify existing State law to adopt a concealed carry law to allow the denizens of Illinois the right to bear arms outside of the home. In February 2013, the entire Court of Appeals decided to let stand the December 2012 decision of a three-judge panel.[31][32] Following a final 30-day extension, Illinois was required by the court to draft a concealed carry law by July 9, 2013. In the end, the legislature overrode a veto of the governor and approved Illinois concealed carry to begin January 2014, at the latest.[33][34][35][36]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._Chicago

Desert Tech makes some of the best bullpup sniper rifles in the world. Their triggers are fantastic. And bullpups are the future of rifles. The USA is way behind in this regard. The only disadvantages that they have is that the triggers tend to suck and the rifles tend to be a bit heavier. Desert Tech will probably solve both of these problems since their prototype assault rifles weigh around 7 pounds and the trigger pull is around 3 pounds. I just hope that they're robust and reliable. A semi-auto bullpup rifle in .308 made by a high-end sniper rifle manufacturer that weighs around 7 pounds and holds 20 rounds is an ideal battle rifle.

Yucky24. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Desert Tech makes some of the best bullpup sniper
> rifles in the world. Their triggers are fantastic.
> And bullpups are the future of rifles. The USA is
> way behind in this regard. The only disadvantages
> that they have is that the triggers tend to suck
> and the rifles tend to be a bit heavier. Desert
> Tech will probably solve both of these problems
> since their prototype assault rifles weigh around
> 7 pounds and the trigger pull is around 3 pounds.
> I just hope that they're robust and reliable. A
> semi-auto bullpup rifle in .308 made by a high-end
> sniper rifle manufacturer that weighs around 7
> pounds and holds 20 rounds is an ideal battle
> rifle.


And you know by serving your country on the battlefield?

Most combat veterans are low-skilled and low-IQ trash. Who cares what they think? Unless you were in the U.S. Army Special Forces or above, don't talk to me...

Likewise for police officers. Unless you were in a SWAT team in a major city, then you probably can't shoot for shit...

Yucky,you are better off with a SCAR 16S & 17S.These will take care of all your self defence needs.

Yucky24. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most combat veterans are low-skilled and low-IQ
> trash. Who cares what they think? Unless you were
> in the U.S. Army Special Forces or above, don't
> talk to me...
>
> Likewise for police officers. Unless you were in a
> SWAT team in a major city, then you probably can't
> shoot for shit...

Bullshit. Check out the range at the Izaak Walton League sometime and you will find plenty of excellent marksmen. You really need to get out more often.

I already own an FN SCAR 17s.

Yucky24. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I already own an FN SCAR 17s.





...but you're under 18, you can't own any weapons.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know what you mean. I've never really cared for
> the "bullpup" design even though I've never fired
> one. When my unit switched from the M-14 to the
> M-16
> I wasn't impressed either. Felt like a toy and not
> suitable for bayonet fighting.

Ooo, old timer huh? I mean, it was a couple less pounds and any possible weight reduction is a good thing, 'cause God knows you've got enough shit on you already. But all these new light, shorter firearms are not simply suitable for melee situations. I guess we probably don't encounter them as much as you guys used to, but that doesn't mean that facet of the gun design should be discounted entirely.

And typical racist, ungrateful yucky trashing servicemen. Yucky, the only thing you're a veteran of is a going in for fifths at Golden Corral.

Not Impressed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I know what you mean. I've never really cared
> for
> > the "bullpup" design even though I've never
> fired
> > one. When my unit switched from the M-14 to the
> > M-16
> > I wasn't impressed either. Felt like a toy and
> not
> > suitable for bayonet fighting.
>
> Ooo, old timer huh? I mean, it was a couple less
> pounds and any possible weight reduction is a good
> thing, 'cause God knows you've got enough shit on
> you already. But all these new light, shorter
> firearms are not simply suitable for melee
> situations. I guess we probably don't encounter
> them as much as you guys used to, but that doesn't
> mean that facet of the gun design should be
> discounted entirely.

I was signal intelligence not infantry and I preferred the 7.62mm round over the 5.56 because it's a much more powerful round. If you can see the whites of their eyes, they're too close. The operations areas we had to defend were usually cleared for hundreds of yards thanks to Agent Orange and I felt more comfortable with the M-14. The Brits seem to like the bullpup design but I really don't see it gaining traction at Aberdeen Proving Grounds.

The bullpup was designed by IDF for close guarter intervention. Clearing buildings and narrow streets. Accurate for field work because unlike the movies, you don't change your guns or undies for differant situations.
Silly boys need to spend more time developing your social skills and concentrate on getting laid.

--
Attachments:

Everybody wanna gun Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The bullpup was designed by IDF for close guarter
> intervention. Clearing buildings and narrow
> streets. Accurate for field work because unlike
> the movies, you don't change your guns or undies
> for differant situations.
> Silly boys need to spend more time developing your
> social skills and concentrate on getting laid.

The bullpup design has been around since 1901, (ref Thornycroft carbine) BTW, I've been married for 35 years and getting laid is not a problem. You need to focus on doing your homework before shooting your mouth off.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nice, but for $2,450.00 I'd stick with an AK.


$2,450 seems like a bargain when you consider the direction things are going. More gun grabbing, a currency that will become meaningless. Spend the money now and get two or 3 of them for when they are needed.

Or, buy 10 or 12 AK-47s instead. Just buy something!

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I was signal intelligence not infantry and I
> preferred the 7.62mm round over the 5.56 because
> it's a much more powerful round. If you can see
> the whites of their eyes, they're too close. The
> operations areas we had to defend were usually
> cleared for hundreds of yards thanks to Agent
> Orange and I felt more comfortable with the M-14.
> The Brits seem to like the bullpup design but I
> really don't see it gaining traction at Aberdeen
> Proving Grounds.


The M-60 was pretty impressive until you'd get a round that would "stove pipe". To me, that was frustrating. Then again, having access to many types of ammo was a big plus. Armor piercing, armor piercing incendiary (tracers) provided some great options depending on the mission.

Then again, having the M-203 mounted onto an AR-15 meant you'd have a different mission also.

Ah, the good ol' days.

--
Attachments:

==
Attachments:

You sigint guys and your toys. Meanwhile I'm out in the shit patties shooting up crappy smack. Kicked the habit has soon as I got out, but dear God I was a mess.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another wannabe yuckster Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why? Gonna make you a tough guy much less a
> man.
> > What would your mother think?
> > Join the arm forces and defend the country
> first.
> > With a name like yucky you still playing with
> > squirt guns.
>
>
> +1


Gerry, were you ever in the American armed forces? Yeah ... I thought so.

Debbie Downer Democrat XIII Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerry, were you ever in the American armed forces?
> Yeah ... I thought so.

Didn't you read? Your buddy Yucky24 was trashing our soldiers. I'm on Gerry's side with this one.

Rose Colored Glasses Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You sigint guys and your toys. Meanwhile I'm out
> in the shit patties shooting up crappy smack.
> Kicked the habit has soon as I got out, but dear
> God I was a mess.

I liked my toys. I got to fly in some really neat aircraft on intercept missions. We were the high end techies of the day. Nothing like finding VC/NVA radios and calling in air/artillery strikes. Too bad about your smack problem. I saw a lot of good troops go down the tubes over there but was never tempted myself.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everybody wanna gun Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The bullpup was designed by IDF for close
> guarter
> > intervention. Clearing buildings and narrow
> > streets. Accurate for field work because unlike
> > the movies, you don't change your guns or
> undies
> > for differant situations.
> > Silly boys need to spend more time developing
> your
> > social skills and concentrate on getting laid.
>
> The bullpup design has been around since 1901,
> (ref Thornycroft carbine) BTW, I've been married
> for 35 years and getting laid is not a problem.
> You need to focus on doing your homework before
> shooting your mouth off.

And you're posting on the forum? Right.

35 years? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And you're posting on the forum? Right.

Not everyone on FFXU is a loser. Just most.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rose Colored Glasses Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You sigint guys and your toys. Meanwhile I'm
> out
> > in the shit patties shooting up crappy smack.
> > Kicked the habit has soon as I got out, but
> dear
> > God I was a mess.
>
> I liked my toys. I got to fly in some really neat
> aircraft on intercept missions. We were the high
> end techies of the day. Nothing like finding
> VC/NVA radios and calling in air/artillery
> strikes. Too bad about your smack problem. I saw a
> lot of good troops go down the tubes over there
> but was never tempted myself

Amazing how many vets there are. And brags about it

Everyone over sixty is a vet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Amazing how many vets there are. And brags about
> it


Maybe they are just proud of what they've done. It doesn't mean that they are bragging.

Yucky24. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I gotta have this rifle...
>
> http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/desert-tech-reve
> als-details-bullpup-mdr-shot-show/


fuckin sweet, but Id be happy with a Tavor which is a bit cheaper, too.

Everyone over sixty is a vet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Rose Colored Glasses Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > You sigint guys and your toys. Meanwhile I'm
> > out
> > > in the shit patties shooting up crappy smack.
> > > Kicked the habit has soon as I got out, but
> > dear
> > > God I was a mess.
> >
> > I liked my toys. I got to fly in some really
> neat
> > aircraft on intercept missions. We were the
> high
> > end techies of the day. Nothing like finding
> > VC/NVA radios and calling in air/artillery
> > strikes. Too bad about your smack problem. I saw
> a
> > lot of good troops go down the tubes over there
> > but was never tempted myself
>
> Amazing how many vets there are. And brags about
> it


Yeah and about 10% might even be real.

Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> fuckin sweet, but Id be happy with a Tavor which
> is a bit cheaper, too.





Have you ever fired an FS2000? Those things look so futuristic.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > fuckin sweet, but Id be happy with a Tavor
> which
> > is a bit cheaper, too.
>
>
>
>
>
> Have you ever fired an FS2000? Those things look
> so futuristic.

No, but those are cool, too, but 'spensive.

That MSAR rifle that's a clone of the Steyr AUG is pretty cool too.

Pistol caliber carbines like the Beretta CX4 are nice.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That MSAR rifle that's a clone of the Steyr AUG is
> pretty cool too.


Those are 5.56 and I think take STANAG mags, too. I've been on a pistol kick lately, after i built my third AR.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2014 08:55PM by Ralph Pootawn.

The FN PS90's magazine is soooooo awkward and clumsy.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The FN PS90's magazine is soooooo awkward and
> clumsy.


Maybe that's why they made it a 50 rounder, so you wouldn't have to reload so ofter. I'd love to shoot one of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_MP7

Have you ever seen the Masterpiece Arms clones of the Ingram Mac -10?

Gun stores refuse to carry them because of the thug image, but these things are really good quality.

Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The FN PS90's magazine is soooooo awkward and
> > clumsy.
>
>
> Maybe that's why they made it a 50 rounder, so you
> wouldn't have to reload so ofter. I'd love to
> shoot one of these:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_MP7




That whole personal defense weapon/PDW category is weird.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > eesh Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The FN PS90's magazine is soooooo awkward and
> > > clumsy.
> >
> >
> > Maybe that's why they made it a 50 rounder, so
> you
> > wouldn't have to reload so ofter. I'd love to
> > shoot one of these:
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_MP7<;
> /i>
>
>
>
>
> That whole personal defense weapon/PDW category is
> weird.


Yeah I would only want one if it's full auto. Semi is pointless.

Debbie Downer Democrat XIII Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone over sixty is a vet Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > Amazing how many vets there are. And brags
> about
> > it
>
>
> Maybe they are just proud of what they've done.
> It doesn't mean that they are bragging.

You just don't get it.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have you ever seen the Masterpiece Arms clones of
> the Ingram Mac -10?
>
> Gun stores refuse to carry them because of the
> thug image, but these things are really good
> quality.


I have seen those, but I guess they're just not practical. Can't carry them, and only in semi-auto, right?

I would buy one of these if they weren't so expensive:

http://www.kriss-usa.com

Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I have seen those, but I guess they're just not
> practical. Can't carry them, and only in
> semi-auto, right?




Yeah, they come in 45 ACP and 9mm. I've only seen 30 round magazines for them.

Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would buy one of these if they weren't so
> expensive:
>
> http://www.kriss-usa.com




Colonial Shooting Academy had a used one on sale for around $1300. Very cool.

Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would buy one of these if they weren't so
> expensive:
>
> http://www.kriss-usa.com


Unfortunately, their SMG is only available to law enforcement and to the military. SMG - sub machine gun. Now, that's 2014 "Gangsta" style.

I just bought the newly released Glock 41. $600 plus some 27 round KCI .45 mags to go with it.

BTW the pic of the girl with the AR-15, that's like a $3,000 AR with the KAC lower and Keymod upper and ACOG. Nice! Girl too.

Just stay away from schools,churches and malls.
And me.

You boys going to war? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just stay away from schools,churches and malls.
> And me.


War? I wouldn't call enjoying a nice collection of guns a war. They're a great item to purchase. Plus, most are made right here in the U.S. Very few products can make that claim nowadays.

Debbie Downer Democrat XIII Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You boys going to war? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Just stay away from schools,churches and malls.
>
> > And me.
>
>
> War? I wouldn't call enjoying a nice collection
> of guns a war. They're a great item to purchase.
> Plus, most are made right here in the U.S. Very
> few products can make that claim nowadays.

Your father didn't like you to much,Debbie. Do you collect toy soldiers also?
A weapon is a tool for some men, while others collect.

.
Attachments:

"My name is Sue,how do you do" Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your father didn't like you to much,Debbie. Do you
> collect toy soldiers also?
> A weapon is a tool for some men, while others
> collect.


Nice to meet you Sue. I also like Johnny Cash - assuming that's where you pulled your name from and a line from the song. My father liked me. Toy soldiers? Not since I was about 10 years old. I don't even have any Star Wars action figures at this point in my life. No need for it.

Weapons. Partially for collecting. Partially for home safety for my family to use as needed.

RA or US Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Debbie Downer Democrat XIII Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Everyone over sixty is a vet Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > >
> > > Amazing how many vets there are. And brags
> > about
> > > it
> >
> >
> > Maybe they are just proud of what they've done.
>
> > It doesn't mean that they are bragging.
>
> You just don't get it.f

I just ignore idiots like this. They couldn't pass the physical or or psych exams.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RA or US Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Debbie Downer Democrat XIII Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Everyone over sixty is a vet Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > >
> > > > Amazing how many vets there are. And brags
> > > about
> > > > it
> > >
> > >
> > > Maybe they are just proud of what they've
> done.
> >
> > > It doesn't mean that they are bragging.
> >
> > You just don't get it.f
>
> I just ignore idiots like this. They couldn't pass
> the physical or or psych exams.

You are full of shit,Mikhail Mchail...whatever

VEV? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > RA or US Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Debbie Downer Democrat XIII Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Everyone over sixty is a vet Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > >
> > > > > Amazing how many vets there are. And
> brags
> > > > about
> > > > > it
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Maybe they are just proud of what they've
> > done.
> > >
> > > > It doesn't mean that they are bragging.
> > >
> > > You just don't get it.f
> >
> > I just ignore idiots like this. They couldn't
> pass
> > the physical or or psych exams.
>
> You are full of shit,Mikhail Mchail...whatever

Tell you what. Find yourself an Army Recruiter and sign up for a hitch. Let us know when you've paid some dues.

http://www.inscom.army.mil/

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I just ignore idiots like this. They couldn't pass
> the physical or or psych exams.




There are no psychological exams when going into the military....

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Tell you what. Find yourself an Army Recruiter and
> sign up for a hitch. Let us know when you've paid
> some dues.
>
> http://www.inscom.army.mil/





Ummmmm.....why would you post a link for INSCOM when talking about a recruiter? I think you want to post a link to USAREC.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Tell you what. Find yourself an Army Recruiter
> and
> > sign up for a hitch. Let us know when you've
> paid
> > some dues.
> >
> > http://www.inscom.army.mil/
>
>
>
>
>
> Ummmmm.....why would you post a link for INSCOM
> when talking about a recruiter? I think you want
> to post a link to USAREC.

INSCOM is the successor to the Army Security Agency, my old outfit.
(Signal Intelligence)

I really don't think they would recruit me. I am a bit mentally unstable when Vietnam Vet wannabes post shit. You are no more a vet than I was a hippie. But I did enjoy a couple of Thai sticks. I did my tour.

Gee Mchail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I really don't think they would recruit me. I am a
> bit mentally unstable when Vietnam Vet wannabes
> post shit. You are no more a vet than I was a
> hippie. But I did enjoy a couple of Thai sticks. I
> did my tour.

Quite frankly, I don't give a flying fuck what you believe. Xin Loi

Knob Creek !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PygaQVDjWI

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mikhail Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > Tell you what. Find yourself an Army
> Recruiter
> > and
> > > sign up for a hitch. Let us know when you've
> > paid
> > > some dues.
> > >
> > > http://www.inscom.army.mil/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ummmmm.....why would you post a link for INSCOM
> > when talking about a recruiter? I think you
> want
> > to post a link to USAREC.
>
> INSCOM is the successor to the Army Security
> Agency, my old outfit.
> (Signal Intelligence)


Eesh proves again he was never in the military but loves to pretend he was.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I just ignore idiots like this. They couldn't
> pass
> > the physical or or psych exams.
>
>
>
>
> There are no psychological exams when going into
> the military....


http://prepareforpsychologicaltest.com/army-psychological-test/

"It would be expensive mistake for the army to hire incompetent employees. The authorities are continuously developing better psychological tests to weed out potential soldiers. It’s quite difficult to judge a person base d on physical appearance. With the pre-employment screenings, only the best-fit soldiers will be hired by the army."

online marine Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mikhail Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > I just ignore idiots like this. They couldn't
> > pass
> > > the physical or or psych exams.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > There are no psychological exams when going
> into
> > the military....
>
>
> http://prepareforpsychologicaltest.com/army-psycho
> logical-test/
>
> "It would be expensive mistake for the army to
> hire incompetent employees. The authorities are
> continuously developing better psychological tests
> to weed out potential soldiers. It’s quite
> difficult to judge a person base d on physical
> appearance. With the pre-employment screenings,
> only the best-fit soldiers will be hired by the
> army."

There was a time you had a choice, Jail or the military. The test was the direction you pointed the business end of your weapon.

online marine Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> http://prepareforpsychologicaltest.com/army-psycho
> logical-test/
>
> "It would be expensive mistake for the army to
> hire incompetent employees. The authorities are
> continuously developing better psychological tests
> to weed out potential soldiers. It’s quite
> difficult to judge a person base d on physical
> appearance. With the pre-employment screenings,
> only the best-fit soldiers will be hired by the
> army."




LOL That's not real.....and the mentality of the military is that mentally ill servicemembers will be weeded out in initial entrance training.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mikhail Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > Tell you what. Find yourself an Army
> Recruiter
> > and
> > > sign up for a hitch. Let us know when you've
> > paid
> > > some dues.
> > >
> > > http://www.inscom.army.mil/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ummmmm.....why would you post a link for INSCOM
> > when talking about a recruiter? I think you
> want
> > to post a link to USAREC.
>
> INSCOM is the successor to the Army Security
> Agency, my old outfit.
> (Signal Intelligence)




And? You still talk about recruiting, posting a link to INSCOM. They don't handle recruiting. LMAO

a facists using weapons that they paid for ? out of pocket ?

a fucking sho sho

facists only have nice weapons if they manage to fabricate money to use someone else's taxes to get them

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > eesh Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Mikhail Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > > Tell you what. Find yourself an Army
> > Recruiter
> > > and
> > > > sign up for a hitch. Let us know when
> you've
> > > paid
> > > > some dues.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.inscom.army.mil/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ummmmm.....why would you post a link for
> INSCOM
> > > when talking about a recruiter? I think you
> > want
> > > to post a link to USAREC.
> >
> > INSCOM is the successor to the Army Security
> > Agency, my old outfit.
> > (Signal Intelligence)
>
>
>
>
> And? You still talk about recruiting, posting a
> link to INSCOM. They don't handle recruiting. LMAO

Recruiting handles for INSCOM. You got it turned around dumbass. Go play on the Beltway boy! :)

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Recruiting handles for INSCOM.




You don't know what you are talking about.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Recruiting handles for INSCOM.
>
>
>
>
> You don't know what you are talking about.


I've noticed you resort to this sentence often when you're the one who doesn't know what they're talking about

I suspect Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mikhail Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > Recruiting handles for INSCOM.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > You don't know what you are talking about.
>
>
> I've noticed you resort to this sentence often
> when you're the one who doesn't know what they're
> talking about




You don't know what you are talking about.

I am ferfux / meh and I don't have any children. Im also rockhound

I suspect Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am ferfux / meh and I don't have any children.
> Im also rockhound





You don't know what you are talking about.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Recruiting handles for INSCOM.
>
>
>
>
> You don't know what you are talking about.

If you want to sign up with INSCOM the recruiters will determine if you're qualified and send you in the right direction. You fail again.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mikhail Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > Recruiting handles for INSCOM.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > You don't know what you are talking about.
>
> If you want to sign up with INSCOM the recruiters
> will determine if you're qualified and send you in
> the right direction. You fail again.


If you served in southeast Asia then that was 40+ years ago and you're still pushing the signal corp? What was your MOS? Radio repairman?

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> online marine Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> http://prepareforpsychologicaltest.com/army-psycho
>
> > logical-test/
> >
> > "It would be expensive mistake for the army to
> > hire incompetent employees. The authorities are
> > continuously developing better psychological
> tests
> > to weed out potential soldiers. It’s quite
> > difficult to judge a person base d on physical
> > appearance. With the pre-employment screenings,
> > only the best-fit soldiers will be hired by the
> > army."
>
>
>
>
> LOL That's not real.....and the mentality of the
> military is that mentally ill servicemembers will
> be weeded out in initial entrance training.

You really need to grow up and stop the bullshit.

http://csf2.army.mil/takethegat.html

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> You really need to grow up and stop the bullshit.
>
>
> http://csf2.army.mil/takethegat.html




That's not a requirement to get into the military.....and that test is more like some personality inventory.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mikhail Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > Recruiting handles for INSCOM.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > You don't know what you are talking about.
>
> If you want to sign up with INSCOM the recruiters
> will determine if you're qualified and send you in
> the right direction. You fail again.




You don't "sign up" with INSCOM, or with any command. You sign up for the Army; USAREC determines the needs of the Army and recruiting standards.


You pick an available MOS; the recruiters don't "send you in the right direction." LMAO

Same thing with officers, the Army will branch you according to current needs and strengths, you don't get to pick what command you want to be with.


You don't know what you are talking about.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > eesh Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Mikhail Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Recruiting handles for INSCOM.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > You don't know what you are talking about.
> >
> > If you want to sign up with INSCOM the
> recruiters
> > will determine if you're qualified and send you
> in
> > the right direction. You fail again.
>
>
>
>
> You don't "sign up" with INSCOM, or with any
> command. You sign up for the Army; USAREC
> determines the needs of the Army and recruiting
> standards.
>
>
> You pick an available MOS; the recruiters don't
> "send you in the right direction." LMAO
>
> Same thing with officers, the Army will branch you
> according to current needs and strengths, you
> don't get to pick what command you want to be
> with.
>
>
> You don't know what you are talking about.

Now I get it. You didn't have high enough ASVAB score for INSCOM. Sorry.

Dinky dau Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > eesh Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Mikhail Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Recruiting handles for INSCOM.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > You don't know what you are talking about.
> >
> > If you want to sign up with INSCOM the
> recruiters
> > will determine if you're qualified and send you
> in
> > the right direction. You fail again.
>
>
> If you served in southeast Asia then that was 40+
> years ago and you're still pushing the signal
> corp? What was your MOS? Radio repairman?

Signal Corps and INSCOM are not the same.
MOS 72B40 and secondaries 05C20 and 32D20. Cross trained
but not officially in 05H20.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Signal Corps and INSCOM are not the same.
> MOS 72B40 and secondaries 05C20 and 32D20. Cross
> trained
> but not officially in 05H20.




Signal Corps is a corps, INSCOM is a command; apples and oranges.


MOS72B40.....the 40 is your skill level, that usually doesn't get mentioned when you tell someone your MOS.

The two secondary MOS would imply that you reclassed twice.


It's obvious you are just Googling this crap before posting.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Signal Corps and INSCOM are not the same.
> > MOS 72B40 and secondaries 05C20 and 32D20.
> Cross
> > trained
> > but not officially in 05H20.
>
>
>
>
> Signal Corps is a corps, INSCOM is a command;
> apples and oranges.
>
>
> MOS72B40.....the 40 is your skill level, that
> usually doesn't get mentioned when you tell
> someone your MOS.
>
> The two secondary MOS would imply that you
> reclassed twice.
>
>
> It's obvious you are just Googling this crap
> before posting.

Would you care to meet me at the American Legion so I can show you my DD214?

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Would you care to meet me at the American Legion
> so I can show you my DD214?



Just scan it and upload it to this thread.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Would you care to meet me at the American
> Legion
> > so I can show you my DD214?
>
>
>
> Just scan it and upload it to this thread.

That's not gong to happen. The American Legion offer stands. You know, I had this same conversation once with Vince(1) and he refused to meet me too.

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> That's not gong to happen. The American Legion
> offer stands. You know, I had this same
> conversation once with Vince(1) and he refused to
> meet me too.




Aren't you that Olde Farte II that used to post here?

Wait......Jerry Rubin, that was the name.

LOL, yeah Jerry Rubin.


http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/search.php?40,search=vince%281%29,author=Jerry+Rubin,page=1,match_type=ALL,match_dates=0,match_forum=ALL,match_threads=0

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > That's not gong to happen. The American Legion
> > offer stands. You know, I had this same
> > conversation once with Vince(1) and he refused
> to
> > meet me too.
>
>
>
>
> Aren't you that Olde Farte II that used to post
> here?

Nope. Not me.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOL, yeah Jerry Rubin.
>
>
> http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/search.php
> ?40,search=vince%281%29,author=Jerry+Rubin,page=1,
> match_type=ALL,match_dates=0,match_forum=ALL,match
> _threads=0

Yeah, that's me. Vince couldn't deal with vets either. He actually thought registering my screen names would change things. All I had to do was add a period or comma.

So you were drafted?

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you were drafted?

No, I enlisted two weeks out of high school. I was only 17 and didn't want to flip burgers until the Draft called me up. Lots of guys in my situation.

...and were you LRS?

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Signal Corps is a corps, INSCOM is a command;
> apples and oranges.
>
>
> MOS72B40.....the 40 is your skill level, that
> usually doesn't get mentioned when you tell
> someone your MOS.
>
> The two secondary MOS would imply that you
> reclassed twice.
>
>
> It's obvious you are just Googling this crap
> before posting.


duuude, there are millions of vets. give it up, lots of people served.

why do you accuse every single person of faking it. I think you're the one pretending.

Shame on Eesh!
Attachments:

the sign is correct, eesh is a sham

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...and were you LRS?

I have no idea what LRS means.

LOL AT eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> >
> > Signal Corps is a corps, INSCOM is a command;
> > apples and oranges.
> >
> >
> > MOS72B40.....the 40 is your skill level, that
> > usually doesn't get mentioned when you tell
> > someone your MOS.
> >
> > The two secondary MOS would imply that you
> > reclassed twice.
> >
> >
> > It's obvious you are just Googling this crap
> > before posting.
>
>
> duuude, there are millions of vets. give it up,
> lots of people served.
>
> why do you accuse every single person of faking
> it. I think you're the one pretending.

7.4 million Vietnam era veterans and many of us moved to the DC area to take advantage of Federal hiring preference.

Only a brother will relate with another brother. Somethings are best forgotten or locked away deep. When your previous life burns in your throat,you swallow, wash it down with whiskey. You learn to live with your ghosts. Eventually they become friends.
But only your friends.

Oh dear....

Mikhail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ...and were you LRS?
>
> I have no idea what LRS means.



Long range surveillance. It's an organic asset of some MI brigades. and INSCOM used to have their own special forces assets well into the 1980s.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mikhail Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > eesh Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > ...and were you LRS?
> >
> > I have no idea what LRS means.
>
>
>
> Long range surveillance. It's an organic asset of
> some MI brigades. and INSCOM used to have their
> own special forces assets well into the 1980s.

There are such units but I was never assigned to one.

CZ doesn't get enough credit.


The P-09 can hold 19 rounds of 9mm, the CZ 75 is a classic, and their autoloading shotguns are some of the most reliable on the market.

There is only one gun.
It's the one available when you need it.
Everything else is chickenshit.

the supreme court takes that case 10x per session to avoid whatever it is they are supposed to be doing

it's like school prayer in court: it never get's out of court they just keep redeciding it

-------------------------
the italians used to say if it keeps coming in court and being changed that it must not be a matter of law to begin with

and doesn't the constitution say they CANNOT decide to begin with ?

why do we care if a democrat supreme court decide for or against a ruling they are not allowed to decide in the first ?

http://www.jgsales.com/colt-1877-bulldog-gatling-gun,-45-70-government,-on-a-wheeled-carriage,-new.-p-64839.html

This is a Colt Classic Remake 1877 Bulldog Gatling Gun chambered in 45-70 government caliber. This Gatling Gun is museum quality, built to original size and fully operational with a polished brass finish. The crank operated mechanism can fire up to 800 rounds a minute. There are five 18.5'' fully brass encased direct drive barrels and a V-notch rear sight that is graduated to 1,000 yards. Comes with a beautiful hardwood wheeled carriage, transit chest, feed tray and loading block. This is a title 1 firearm, there is no need for a NFA transfer tax. New.



-
Attachments:

eesh should be put in front of a firing squad.

If you can't have a big penis,then get a big gun.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.jgsales.com/colt-1877-bulldog-gatling-g
> un,-45-70-government,-on-a-wheeled-carriage,-new.-
> p-64839.html
>
> This is a Colt Classic Remake 1877 Bulldog
> Gatling Gun chambered in 45-70 government caliber.
> This Gatling Gun is museum quality, built to
> original size and fully operational with a
> polished brass finish. The crank operated
> mechanism can fire up to 800 rounds a minute.
> There are five 18.5'' fully brass encased direct
> drive barrels and a V-notch rear sight that is
> graduated to 1,000 yards. Comes with a beautiful
> hardwood wheeled carriage, transit chest, feed
> tray and loading block. This is a title 1 firearm,
> there is no need for a NFA transfer tax. New.
>
>
>
> -

I'd like to have one of those for my front porch but the HOA won't let me. Maybe in the bay window of the kitchen and keep the curtains drawn.

,
Attachments: