Guns and envy


PDA






John Ross
July 8, 2003, 02:04 PM
This is a bit of a rant. I have lately started seeing much more of something that bothers me, namely supposed gun enthusiasts taking swipes at various guns and/or preferences.

I have been frequenting several gun boards recently and am seeing this more and more. Example: the .17 HMR.

I have seen a number of posts saying things like "You're crazy to want one, a .223 is cheaper to shoot and much better" and "This cartridge is all hype. If the .22WMR didn't exist, and they introduced it tomorrow, it would kill off the .17 HMR right away."

I do not yet own a .17HMR nor have I fired one. Here is what many others have reported about it: It has a much flatter trajectory than the .22WMR. It is extremely accurate in a variety of factory guns. Under 150 yards it blows up crows etc. like a Swift. Recoil is so slight you can *always* see the bullet strike through the scope. THIS IS A NOT INSIGNIFICANT COMBINATION OF VIRTUES.

I keep seeing negative posts on new products from people who have no experience with them. Why are they posting? Why take the time to type in your theorectical distaste? Lately I have seen this also with the new S&W .500 and Ti/Scan revolvers. Both have been called "Answers to nonexistant problems." (I disagree 100% here.) One poster was mad that the new 329 was in .44 Mag instead of .44 Special! Hunh? It *IS* in .44 Special, just .44 Mag also!

The reason this bothers me is that I have always felt the gun culture was a "big tent," and given the fact that we're always under assault, it makes NO sense to badmouth parts of it.

One of my favorite people is famous (retired) benchrest gunsmith and recordholder Art Freund. Art made the action for my first full custom .50 BMG rifle. When I got interested in machine guns, I was always getting Art to make heavier bolts for subguns to slow down the cyclic rate, or reline a barrel on a rare gun to make it shootable with available ammo, or put scope mounts on MGs. He also made a swage die for me to make jacketed 1" slugs for my 4-bore. Art's attitude was always "Hey, this is an interesting new project John's dreamed up. I can't wait to see him try it out." He once told me I was his favorite customer. My affinity for big-bore rifles led him to build for himself *his own* .510 Wells at age 81(!)

This attitude is sorely lacking among many people who frequent the boards, and I don't understand it. We should all be excited that the factories and custom shops are responding with so many great new products! The fact that I have little interest in semiauto handguns does not make me blind to the fact that S&W's introduction of a 1911 has many people turning handsprings (I feel the same way about the .500). Seeing a Shiloh Sharps custom rifle in .40-65 or a $3000 racegun warms my heart, even though I'll never own either.

This isn't a time of *rationing,* people! The brass companies aren't *discontinuing* .357 mag production to tool up for the .500 S&W or .17 HMR! They're making *everything,* and at great prices!

Is it envy that makes some people be so negative? That makes no sense to me. Say the gun in question, with all accessories (like components, scope, dies, holster, whatever) costs $2000 (most are a lot less.) I think a $2000 object is an attainable goal for 99.9% of the people out there. How? Well, for starters, how many drive late-model cars? If you really want the gun, try owning a car worth $2000 less. Exercise at home and save the gym membership, if you have one. Sell some stuff you don't really want any more. Do some part-time work, like writing magazine articles, or casting bullets for someone who shoots a lot, whatever. If you *don't* want the gun badly enough to do any of those things, fine, but why does it bother you that other people do?

I've always known that there are people in this world who dislike seeing others happy. Up until now I thought these types were conspicuously absent from the ranks of shooters.

JR

If you enjoyed reading about "Guns and envy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Keith
July 8, 2003, 02:20 PM
It's less about guns and more about the anonymity granted by the Internet. People feel free to post an opinion on a subject they know little about. If they stated the same opinion in person they'd actually see the rolled eyes and grins, etc, that denote when you're saying something stupid... and in most cases, they'd cut short their "thesis" before they got too far out on the limb.
So, instead of writing an entire thesis on how "bad" the .17 HMR is, they'd end up cutting it off short with a more reasonable; "I don't quite trust that round, yet."
It is such non-verbal feedback that directs normal conversation in constructive directions, and does so without the need to verbally point out the gaffe and humiliate the speaker.

It's all different here. Everything you say is "on the record" and many feel they must defend their position of record even when it's soundly deflated by the next guy to make a post.

Keith

Tamara
July 8, 2003, 02:44 PM
I think a lot of people confuse "I have no use for..." with "Nobody has a use for...". For instance, I have no use for an X-frame; the longest tube in my S&W collection is a 5" N-frame. I sold my 8 3/8" 586 because I really had no use for it. Does this mean I think nobody has a use for one? Obviously not. I'd love to shoot one, I just have no particular desire to buy one. (As far as the riboflavin-framed 329 goes, I'm all about that! With the right loads and a bobbed hammer, it could replace my 296 as the ultimate purse howitzer... :D )

To those folks who say "Nobody needs a ______", remember that it sounds suspiciously like the crowd that claims "Nobody needs an 'assault weapon'/handgun/sniper rifle/machine gun/whatever." Once you appoint yourself as the arbiter of what other folks need or want, the difference between you and HCI is just a matter of degree.

Bobarino
July 8, 2003, 02:54 PM
i tend to agree. but it will never go away. its just like like cars, motorcycles, or just about anything else that people are interested in or collect. chevy vs. ford, 9mm vs. .45ACP, Glock vs. 1911 etc, etc, ad nauseum.

i'd like to see people say stuff like," hey thats pretty cool!. that type of (fill in the blank) isn't really my cup of tea, but i'm glad you like yours, good on ya!"

but that won't likely happen, because we're men. and men are teritorial and love that mine-is-better-than-yours stuff. one-upmanship and all that stuff.

it is really irritating when someone puts down your choice of firearm/cartridge/holster/whatever even though they have never tried one. and if they have tried it, and have formed an opinion, what then, makes it so hard to believe that anyone would want one if you didn't like it? sheesh.

all that being said, my H&K is the BEST!! :-)

Bobby

p.s. please find a sorry attempt at ironic humor in that last line.

braindead0
July 8, 2003, 02:54 PM
About the only thing I'll 'badmouth' is junk guns, others seem to think Jennings/bryco..etc fill a niche market for those with smaller pocketbooks, but from my experience with these brands they are useless and no better than having no gun at all. Particularly when there are so many good inexpensive firearms to be had (Makarov for example).

Just my 2cents, good post!

Mark Tyson
July 8, 2003, 02:59 PM
I agree that people should not badmouth firearms simply because they are new and unique. Innovation and invention of new firearms, cartridges, accessories is a good thing. Just because a certain gun/gun accessory/cartridge isn't right for me doesn't mean that I will demean it. Different strokes for different folks.

I also get upset at people who get so into a particular firearm (such as in the AK vs AR debate) that they go out of their way to knock down someone else's gun, to say that it's a piece of junk. If someone enjoys his AR-15/AK-47/98 Mauser then so what? Let them enjoy it! This is not a zero sum game.

Moparmike
July 8, 2003, 03:03 PM
Lots of people dont need lots of things, some of which they do have and most they dont.

I personally have no use or need for a S & W 500 (.500 Mag), but when I saw one I had this DeeDee (from Dexter's Lab, try to keep up :D) "Oooooooooooo" thing going. I also thought of drawing it in a CCW situation (supposing I could hide the damned thing) and watching the perp's eyes center on that half-inch hole and crap themselves.:D :D

Before anyone flames me, please note that I realize the large amt of responsibility in CCW and that a gun should not be drawn unless necessary. That responsibility is not a thing to be taken lightly. However, the responsibility does not negate the fun in watching someone look down a hand-fired Howitzer pointed at their head.:neener:

4v50 Gary
July 8, 2003, 03:04 PM
What has "use" got to do with anything? It almost goes back to the same argument of why do we want guns? Like many others here and elsewhere, I have things I don't need, guns and otherwise. But I enjoy owning them and I'm not hurting others (other than keeping them for my greedy self :) ).

Certainly the internet with its anonymity has made us more vocal (or is that literal?) about our views. In some ways this is good and in others, well, you just have to have your own filtering system. It's like a salad bar, you pick & choose what you want.

Beav
July 8, 2003, 03:20 PM
I think some people are just insecure, they feel that they need to degrade other people's decisions to justify their own.

braindead0
July 8, 2003, 03:23 PM
I think some people are just insecure, they feel that they need to degrade other people's decisions to justify their own.

I think some people put down others firearms because it didn't cost as much as theirs.. so they must demean it in order to not feel like they've overpaid.

Mike Irwin
July 8, 2003, 03:25 PM
"It has a much flatter trajectory than the .22WMR. It is extremely accurate in a variety of factory guns. Under 150 yards it blows up crows etc. like a Swift. Recoil is so slight you can *always* see the bullet strike through the scope. THIS IS A NOT INSIGNIFICANT COMBINATION OF VIRTUES."

The same once could be said about the Remington 5mm Rimfire Magnum.

Best damed thing since the Winchester Rifle, S&W Revolver, Ford's Car, Willis Carrier's air conditioning, Nylon, Penicillin, etc. etc. etc.

Only now, those people who bought 5mms are spending upwards $100 a box for ammo, IF they can find it, or spending a couple hundred dollars to have their guns converted to a centerfire 5mm cartridge.

Virtues don't ensure success.

Personally, I've counseled a couple of people to avoid the .17. For now. For the reasons I've listed above. Let someone else ensure that it's a success. If it's a failure, you're not caught with an expensive paperweight.


So is it envy?

Or practicality?

El Tejon
July 8, 2003, 03:29 PM
Funny, we had an argument/discussion in boxing club just last night. Several of the young lions were debating the various merits of various weapons.

The instructor shut everyone up with: "The weapon is just wood and metal. It has no kung fu. That is up to you."

People are free to be as unhappy or as happy as they so choose and to possess any opinion they wish. As long as no one interferes with my right to own a .17 GunRagDrivenHype round.:D

bogie
July 8, 2003, 03:34 PM
The gun culture has MANY facets, and most of 'em don't seem to like the other folks all that much. Trap/skeet shooters look down their nose at duck hunters, who sneer at deer hunters, etc...

If it goes bang, I like it.

And don't even get me started about how CMP and benchrest shooters feel about folks who shoot at moving clay pigeons with subguns... (grin)

If it goes bang, I like it.

John, you can hit clays better with single shots than I can with full magazines out of a friend's Spas-12 (it _is_ possible to fire six times at a target before it hits the ground... I've proven that...), but I still like the occasional time I hit one. It's fun. This coming weekend, I'm leaving the 6PPC in the safe, and taking out several folks who want to "learn about guns." We're taking a 10/22, an AR, a 1911 (with one of Jon's uppers) and a .357 Python (and a boatload of .38 specials). May even pop a few out of a black powder revolver...

If it goes bang, I like it.

Keith
July 8, 2003, 03:42 PM
Mike,

I don't think anyone is being critical of an honest debate on the pro's and con's of a particular gun, cartridge, etc.
I think the issue is the sweeping (and stupid) generalizations like "9mm's are C&@&", etc.


Keith

waynzwld
July 8, 2003, 03:51 PM
Whenever there is something new in the gun world, I always think "Wow, I wonder what people will do with that and how popular it will become? I never think, "why would anyone want that".

Some people who shoot the 17HMR give the new cartridge "Mystical Powers" and others them down as "useless" or "just a fad" and have never shot one.
It is what it is, and it does fill a niche in the rimfire lineup.

It always amazes me all the people that are bad mouthing the S&W 500 that haven't even shot it yet, let alone even seen one. I like heavy recoiling pistols!

For all those people that are afraid to buy a 17HMR because it might be a fad, you can always buy another barrel in 22Mag and have something more than a "paper weight". The actions are the same, 22Mag or 17HMR.

Skunkabilly
July 8, 2003, 04:10 PM
I think a lot of people just want everyone else to know they're too smart to get sucked into a marketing ploy :rolleyes: so they have to diss every new thing that comes around even if the new product addresses the legitimate needs of people out there.

braindead0
July 8, 2003, 04:16 PM
The worst ones are those who diss something because they don't sell it.. had a guy tell me that Fobus holsters are garbage and only blade-tech are any good..of course he sells blade-tech and nothing else..

Funny, I've been using Fobus holsters for several years..and never have had any problems....I guess they'll fall apart tomorrow ;-)

Mike Irwin
July 8, 2003, 04:16 PM
"For all those people that are afraid to buy a 17HMR because it might be a fad, you can always buy another barrel in 22Mag and have something more than a "paper weight". The actions are the same, 22Mag or 17HMR."

Say what?

Taurus is making a swap barrel .17 HRFM revolver?

There are more than rifles chambering this cartridge.

Just having an "action that's the same" isn't a panacea to the possibility that the .17 will go out of production. And simply buying "another barrel" isn't an option with most of these firearms. Having the barrel & chamber reamed if the .17 goes out of existence maybe.....

I'd be more inclined to buy a .500 Magnum, even though it's equally unproven, simply because it's a centerfire cartridge, not a rimfire.

If a rimfire cartridge goes out of production, you're pretty much screwed. Making your own rimfire cartridges is pretty much an impossibility.

Centerfire cartridges are a LOT more forgiving in that sense, though.

BigG
July 8, 2003, 04:31 PM
People like to line up on different sides. That's why there are sports teams and horse races.

Over the years, one of my favorite gunwriters was Elmer Keith. He waxed poetic over certain things and had utterly no use for other gun related thngs. And he didn't mind telling you. I think a lot of us here cut our gun teeth on old Elmer Keith articles! ;)

John Ross
July 8, 2003, 05:15 PM
Mike Irwin: "Say what? Taurus is making a swap barrel .17 HRFM revolver?
There are more than rifles chambering this cartridge."

Yes, but the factory (Taurus, Ruger, or S&W) could convert a .17 revolver to .22 WMR. The 5mm shot a LITTLE flatter than the .22WMR. It was chambered in two Remington rifles and nothing else (besides the Contender.)

I think the .17 HMR is here to stay if only because there are over a dozen good guns made for it already. Maybe this will brand me as a rich dillettante, but I can't see worrying that a gun I paid $300-$600 for today *might* be unfeedable 30 years from now (when I'm 76) unless I get a new barrel and maybe a cylinder for it.

BigG: "Over the years, one of my favorite gunwriters was Elmer Keith. He waxed poetic over certain things and had utterly no use for other gun related thngs. And he didn't mind telling you. I think a lot of us here cut our gun teeth on old Elmer Keith articles!"

Very true. But I spent a good bit of time with Elmer and he was eager to shoot *anything.* Remember when he called the 7mm Mag "a good pest rifle"? Point was, he said it was GOOD for that, not "Remington shouldn't have brought it out and no one should buy it, it's junk." He reserved his true scorn for guns that didn't do what they promised (like not break.)

Bogie: "The gun culture has MANY facets, and most of 'em don't seem to like the other folks all that much. Trap/skeet shooters look down their nose at duck hunters, who sneer at deer hunters, etc...
If it goes bang, I like it."

Yours is the attitude we all should have. I once asked Britt Robinson (champion trapshooter and the only man EVER to go 30 straight at crazy quail at NILO Farms) about my shooting clays with a rifle. I told him I'd like to see what he could do with a rifle and asked him if it would screw up his technique with a trap gun (I assumed it would). His response:

"Hell, no! You got a place to shoot clays with a BAR and not kill anybody in some subdivision a mile away? How do I get there?"

JR

bogie
July 8, 2003, 06:08 PM
Heh - I used to date a girl who lived within BAR distance of NILO...

nextjoe
July 8, 2003, 06:27 PM
What REALLY bothers me, personally, is that a lot of the "new and exciting" stuff we're getting are just gimmicks.

Smith & Wesson coming out with the .500 has no interest to me. There's already the .500 Linebaugh in two lengths, and the .50 AE. BUT if they announced tomorrow that they were publicly renouncing the agreement, dropping MIM parts, and ditching the internal lock, I'd be VERY interested.

Winchester coming out with two new lines of short magnum cartridges has no interest to me. They don't offer any real benefits (to me) over existing, widely available cartridges. We've already got plenty of good cartridges to choose from. If they just built the models they already have with better quality control and better materials, I'd be interested.

Kimber coming out with a new "Tactical" (oooooh! tactical!:rolleyes: ) limited edition every week has no interest to me. Dropping MIM and the Series II safety and making quality more consistent would get my interest.

I don't WANT the "caliber of the week," limited edition, "tactical" gimmicky stuff. I ESPECIALLY don't want any politically correct internal safeties. I want QUALITY. Unfortunately, what this particular consumer wants and what the majority of the firearms industry wants to sell me are very different things.:banghead:

Best,
Joe

Mike Irwin
July 8, 2003, 06:45 PM
"Yes, but the factory (Taurus, Ruger, or S&W) could convert a .17 revolver to .22 WMR."

They could also convert a .22 Mag. to .17 if the occasion ever arises.

The simple fact remains that I'm never very receptive to people (whether consumers or the magazines, etc.), when talking about the newest cartridge, gun, item, etc., doing the basic equivilent of running in circles, flopping around on the ground and undergoing paroxysms of ecstasy that this supposed new development is the greatest thing since the First Coming of Christ.

Sometimes the hype is well placed, and the item actually catches on.

Sometimes, however, all of the hype is nothing more than a flash in the pan -- the 8mm Remington Magnum springs to mind... As does the .244 Remington...

Envy has nothing to do with my position. Practicality does.

If that's not nearly dilitante for you, could you buy me a new .223? A Remington? And then we'll both be happy? :)

Tamara
July 8, 2003, 06:49 PM
I see your curmudgeon-do training is coming along nicely. What belt are you at now? :D

bogie
July 8, 2003, 07:05 PM
At the same time, I see a bit of what JR is talking about at this forum...

There are folks who see firearms as _only_ for defense, or _only_ for preservation of constitutional rights, and have a very hard time understanding beyond that... To them, a day at the range is serious - hard work, practice for when it hits the fan... I think that it's sad that they're missing out on so much else that's in the gun culture. Those folks are as lacking as the duck hunters who agree that one doesn't need an AK-47 to hunt ducks with...

Yeah, y'all know who you are. Lighten up.

When something is fun, you do it more. And you do it better.

jerryd
July 8, 2003, 07:16 PM
So many guns, so little time and money! Ilove them all, i had to give up shotguns and rifles cause of a bad shoulder, so now im into pistols. So far have glock 19c hot weather carry gun, sweat like a pig, 2 kimbers, colt commander, SA loaded, walther p-22, ppks and a new DW razor Back on order. Every gun has its purpose to someone thats the way i feel, if you dont like it dont buy it, I guess they just dont understand. How about sending me donations for Jerrys Kids!!! HA. HA. good topic.

Majic
July 8, 2003, 07:58 PM
I can relate to Bogie's post. I once posted a question about who enjoyed firearms. I was expecting the posts about collecting, plinking, or just admiring, but of course there were several stating that firearms are just tools for self-defense. In a way I pity these people because they are missing out on one of the biggest virtues anything can provide for you...FUN.
I don't care for every firearm or caliber on the market, but that's why the market is as vast as it is today. Something is most likely out there for everyone who is looking.
Bad mouthing a product can come back and bite you sometimes too. Many have posted about Jennings, Bryco, and the others being junk or POS, but I do know of a Jennings .22lr and a Bryco .380 that has served well for many years (and yes both have been shot alot not just tucked away). Most peole who purchase these handguns know very little about the market and feel it is better to purchase something new than used. I've seen posters say that the people should save more money and buy a better model, but we can't count the pennies in others pockets. That compares to saying not buy that Ruger Blackhawk, but save for the Freedom Arms. Theres a big difference in $300 and $1500, but the same rationality applies to the buyers of lesser guns.
Yes I have my favorites and will tell what I like about them, but that gives me no right to degrade your favorite because it doesn't fit my personal criteria.

Sorry about being longwinded, I just wanted to point out a few things.

BigG
July 8, 2003, 09:38 PM
Mr. Ross: Very true words about Elmer Keith. I remember in one article he stated, "I'm in favor of any sport that burns powder." :D

BryanP
July 8, 2003, 10:09 PM
Everybody's got their opinions. It's what works for you that should determine how you spend your money, not what Joe Schmoe thinks about it.

Me, I don't understand the huge appeal of the 1911. I've fired several and there's nothing WRONG with them, but I don't feel any desire to own one. I don't care for Glock's just because the grip angle puts me off. Both are fine weapons. OTOH, I'm sure there are people out there who wouldn't care for my P220 or who would kid me for owning Taurus revolvers.

Again, it's your money. It's your hobby / avocation. If you want it, get it.

OEF_VET
July 8, 2003, 10:47 PM
Braindead,

Can you please explain to me how these two statements don't contradict each other?

About the only thing I'll 'badmouth' is junk guns, others seem to think Jennings/bryco..etc fill a niche market for those with smaller pocketbooks, but from my experience with these brands they are useless and no better than having no gun at all. Particularly when there are so many good inexpensive firearms to be had (Makarov for example).

I think some people put down others firearms because it didn't cost as much as theirs.. so they must demean it in order to not feel like they've overpaid.

Now, I know from personal experience that Lorcin/Hi-Point/etc. firearms aren't quality weapons. However, your opinion of 'junk' guns and someone else's isn't necessarily the same. Some people (on this very board even) think Mak's are junk, or 1911's, Glocks, SiG's, HK's, etc., etc., etc.. Does that mean they are? To that person, yes, but not necessarily to the next person. However, to make two seemingly contradictory statements within the very same thread no less, really impairs my ability to take your opinion seriously. On the face, it appears hypocritical. Maybe I'm totally off base, and if I am, I apologize, just thought I'd share my viewpoint.


Frank

brookstexas
July 8, 2003, 11:03 PM
Pleasure to see you here, I owe you a large debt.
Thanks,
BrooksTexas

St. Gunner
July 9, 2003, 01:19 AM
There are folks who see firearms as _only_ for defense, or _only_ for preservation of constitutional rights, and have a very hard time understanding beyond that... To them, a day at the range is serious - hard work, practice for when it hits the fan... I think that it's sad that they're missing out on so much else that's in the gun culture. Those folks are as lacking as the duck hunters who agree that one doesn't need an AK-47 to hunt ducks with...

Who says you don't need an AK to shoot ducks with???:D

I had some guys told me the AK was junk and if I bought one i'd never kill as many hogs with it as I did my bolt gun. So course being the shy bashful type I went out and did this...

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=129300

Course a week later, they had one to, dang ol pieces of junk.:D

The other thing I have found is most antis when you finally get em to the range and they want to shoot, they don't care about that pretty wood on the ol Custom German Mauser action, the don't think the Browning lever action .22 looks like much fun, even the Yugo sks looks sorta drab, but they have to burn off 20-30rds out of the AK. Then I got em.

I think part of our problem is some of us are pretty close minded about alot of issues, some of it comes from the continous assualt we see on our rights and lifestyle, but we adopt and attitude of "I'll trash em all to protect mine." From what I have gathered that is the very attitude that trashed Australia a few years back. We are seeing it here more and more.

I've noticed over the past year my collection of guns has dwindled to a few that get shot a bunch, i've weeded out the stuff I consider worthless and just kept a few, but some of the stuff I got rid of, others really like. So why should I trash them for that purchase, it helped advance my own? Just as these guys buying all sorts of stuff you seem to think is junk or whatever, keeps the firearm guys in business, a goal we all should be striving for. I saw one of the new Eos pistols, or something like that, real different design, i'll never own one, but the gunshop says they sell like crazy to young guys and gals. Yet another way it helps us all out, more shooters. Most guys I know don't own more than a gun, maybe two in one caliber, so the only option left to sell guns to the big buyers who have a couple of every kind is to come up with something new. Why should we ever dump on someone for making a living?

I recently bought a Remington Sendero in .270, as soon as I purchased it people starting telling me how I made a horrible mistake, shoulda bought the new short, shoulda bought a .300 mag, shoulda done this or that. Well I had a few thousand pieces of .270 brass around all weighed and trimmed and prettied up, so I figured I might as well get something to use it in. Course I already had a few other .270's. But I made the decision based on information I had.

Buddy bought a Marlin .17, he loves that gun, he has been blasting squirrels with it since he got it. Wouldn't trade it for the world. Will I own one, nope, don't hunt stuff anymore that doesn't hunt me back or at least pose a danger, less i'm hungry. I keep a .22 around for my daughter to get broke in on. But I don't think I ever dogged him for that purchase, what would be the point?

For the sports nuts that have to pick sides, do it on the range and put your pocketbook where your opinion is.:D Otherwise it is just cheap talk. :neener:

priv8ter
July 9, 2003, 01:38 AM
Is it okay if I say that I don't see the point behind a NAA Mini Revolver chambered in .17HMR?

Because, I really don't...maybe for those crows that get too close?

:evil:

Mike Irwin
July 9, 2003, 02:36 AM
"I see your curmudgeon-do training is coming along nicely. What belt are you at now?"

Training?

I am more than honorable curmudgeon-do master, my dear Tams.

I've been seriously burned by the "latest and greatest," "best of its kind" before, and I don't intend for that to happen again.

:cuss: ing Chrysler and their :cuss: ing Ultradrive transmission.

What a pice of :cuss: :cuss:ing :cuss: .

Lee Iacoca can kiss my fat :cuss: .

Mike Irwin
July 9, 2003, 02:39 AM
"but of course there were several stating that firearms are just tools..."

Firearms ARE just tools, Majic.

But at the same time, my router and I have a very deep and meaningful friendship... :)

Tamara
July 9, 2003, 02:51 AM
Firearms ARE just tools, Majic.

When I figure out what tasks my Arisaka, Bearcat or .32 Pepperbox are supposed to perform, I'll be sure and start a thread... ;)

Some are tools, some are toys, some are large, cosmoline-soaked postage stamps/antique coins/Hummel figurines. :cool:

sm
July 9, 2003, 04:34 AM
John Ross wrote:
The reason this bothers me is that I have always felt the gun culture was a "big tent," and given the fact that we're always under assault, it makes NO sense to badmouth parts of it.

Very well said, I agree 100%.
Had a conference call with my longtime friend / gunsmith, and another gentleman. This 3 rd party was stating he didn't care about mag capacities, the new X frame...all he cared about was his wheel guns and 1100's.

Needless to say I countered with "so until they come after your wheelies and 1100's your going to be complacent?"

Nope, Its a matter of principle with me. I may not participate in a certain type of firearm use, hunting, collecting, or degree of enthusiasm that someone does-- the principle is we share a "big tent" thats being pelted.

About tools, I have a cyl from and old model 19 I use for a pencil holder. My neice, when 2, was more creative...makes real neat patterns in Pla-Doh :p

I think its a matter of principle, but , I am that uncle they warn you about...those evil cyls as toys...:)

vmi93
July 9, 2003, 09:27 AM
Some are tools, some are toys, some are large, cosmoline-soaked postage stamps/antique coins/Hummel figurines.

Thank you for giving me a one-line way to describe my collection. :D

280PLUS
July 9, 2003, 11:20 AM
and i want to try the 500 but i don't want one

i'd like to try the .17hmr but i dont really want one of those either right now

subject to change

i need a good .45 tack driver, actually, so thats what i'm saving the pennies for

but then again the :cuss: tv is gettiing ready to go...:banghead:

:D

Pebcac
July 9, 2003, 12:05 PM
Just wanted to throw in my "Amen brother!" to the original post. We, as a community (to use an anti's buzzword to make my own point) are allowing them to kill us with a thousand tiny cuts. United we stand, etc. etc. That's why I joined NRA - I don't always agree 100%, but the sheer number of members means something to politicians come election time.

Stetson_CO
July 9, 2003, 12:25 PM
I have gun envy...I envy anyone that has more of them than I do.

And I DO want a .17HMR and a S&W 500 and anything else I can get my hands on. I want them because I don't currently have them. Alot of this will be remedied if I ever get to move back to Texas. My dad told me he is holding a Enfield .303, some sort of shotgun, and a few others for me.

The whole this cartridge/rifle/pistol is @#$% has been hashed out in the previous posts in a much better way than I can argue it.


c):{

Jim March
July 9, 2003, 12:34 PM
The closest I've come to the "syndrome" John talks about was when I reposted some material from the sixgunner forums on the massive wrist damage John Taffin has suffered.

I have concerns that some people with ultra-light guns shooting monster power levels are liable to end up in Mr. Taffin's boat, with basically no wrist cartilage left, barely able to shoot 22LR and in constant pain...typing with capslock on because the shift key hurts too much.

Could a lot of full-house 44Magnum in the Scandium cause "more cases of Taffin wrist"? I think it's possible. The possibility needs at least discussing and pondering and I don't regret raising the issue.

That said, I'm not personally sure that the "practice only with the power levels you carry on the street" school of thought is correct. I base that on the massive physiological changes *I* experience under lethal threat - the change is significant enough that it dwarfs almost any possible recoil difference. My thinking goes, if the "feel" is going to change that much anyhow, why not practice with 38Spl but carry 357 (or the equivelents for your caliber/gun).

Now, that's MY personal practice, and there are people out there saying otherwise (including most police departments).

Oh yes, one other thing: the reports of Scandium pieces in particular yanking rounds of their shells on recoil and tying up the guns concerns me. I buy revolvers for reliability and the ability to eat whatever ammo is handy or seems neato :D, and distrust anything that makes a wheelgun as ammo-sensitive as most slideguns if not moreso :scrutiny:.

Mike Irwin
July 9, 2003, 12:58 PM
"When I figure out what tasks my Arisaka, Bearcat or .32 Pepperbox are supposed to perform, I'll be sure and start a thread..."

Hey, just because a tool may be obsolete, or is used for a different purpose, doesn't make it any less than a tool.

I've got a 2 man 12 ft. cross cut saw that's not seen the trunk of a tree since I got it. It's taken on an added life as a decorative item, but it's still a tool.

I think the only exception to that would be if you were to alter them so that they couldn't be used in the manner in which they were originally intended, such as the old "rifle lamps" that were all the range in the 1950s, and which saw the ruination of numerous fine firearms.

bogie
July 9, 2003, 01:02 PM
OOOHH!

I want one... Time to go find a suitable junker of some sort....

Mike Irwin
July 9, 2003, 01:36 PM
You know, I've been mulling this over for awhile now, and John I'm going to have to disagree with the bulk of your message.

People who come here asking questions about firearms come for one thing -- opinions.

I think most people who come here are more than capable of handing an opinion, even if it's negative.

People base their opinions on their own experience, their own wants, their own desires, and their own views of what is right and wrong on many different levels.

Free exchange of ideas, opinions, and experiences, is the entire purpose of a bulletin board system such as this.

Ultimately, what you're suggesting isn't a good thing, it's a bad thing, as it would serve to stifle justifiable criticism and counter opinions.

I think you're really misreading the effect that this all has on the firearms community.

A difference of opinion, with a little controversy thrown in, is a GOOD think in any community.

It fuels discussion, debate, and understanding.

If we simply turn into a bunch of homers, lauding every decision, product, service, etc., as the best thing since sliced bread on a stick, much valuable insight and information will be lost.

Even Elmer Keith wasn't above this.

The comment Elmer made about the 7mm being a "good pest rifle" isn't a compliment. That was his way of expressing a SERIOUS dig against the round.

Elmer also wasn't above expressing his feelings a lot more bluntly.

Around 1977 Remington brought out its 8mm Rem. Mag. At the Remington writer's seminar (I wasn't there, but it was later reported in G&A, and confirmed to me by a half-dozen people who were there) Remington reps were gushing over the capabilities of the new round.

Elmer apparently stood up, was recognized, and only paused long enough to pull his cigar out of his mouth and say "What the hell good is it?" before sitting back down. That was reported pretty widely, and Elmer knew it would be, too.

As far as I can tell, Elmer never gave the 8mm anything even remotely resembling praise in the gun rags.

Well, ultimately, perhaps people can be a little more diplomatic in their responses, but the LAST thing we as gun owners should do is become a bunch of 'homers,' issuing unwavering praise, support, and accolades, no matter what the situation, no matter what the product, no matter who's asking.

In my mind that's a lot worse than being harsh.

John Ross
July 9, 2003, 03:13 PM
Mike, I wasn't talking about only this board. This one is much better than many others. Good discussion abounds here, but I do see posts with a lot of negativity about things with which the poster has zero personal experience, and that puzzles me.

Discussion and criticism are one thing. "I had an XYZ and is was a POS because..." are excellent and helpful posts.

"Why would anyone want the XYZ (with which I have no experience whatsoever), I'm announcing to the world that I will never buy one" posts serve no useful purpose IMO.

Re: Elmer Keith. I *know* the hilarious "Good pest rifle" comment was a dig. Elmer believed game animals merited minimum .338 caliber, minimum 250 grain bullet. (I agree, BTW.) That was also the basis for his "What good is it" 8mm Remington comment (although .323" and 225 is getting pretty close to .338 and 250.) Rightly or wrongly, Elmer believed that the 8mm Rem. was doomed to being a slightly better .300 Mag and inferior to the .338. However, if you bought an 8mm and told Elmer it was because you liked long range plinking and wanted something big enough to give good visible bullet strikes at long distances, I am certain Elmer would have given you all sorts of suggestions as to what he felt were the best bullet types and load techniques to achieve this with your 8mm. His primary focus was on hunting utility, but he spent an awful lot of time doing things with guns just for fun or to see what was possible.

In 1977 I brought one of my inventions, a .375-.50 Sharps 3 1/4" wildcat with a 30" Hobaugh barrel on a Ruger #1 to Salmon. I told Elmer I was getting 3400 FPS with a 300 Sierra boattail and 1 1/4" groups at 200 yards. Elmer told me the velocity was way too high for good penetration and that bullet was not a good one for game anyway. I replied that I knew that, but that I didn't intend to shoot any animal with it you couldn't kill with a rimfire. Elmer got a big smile on his face and said "Let's go shoot it!"

Point is, a fair number of posters I see would say "Why on earth would anyone waste his time and money building a .375-.50 Sharps?" instead of "I've never heard of anything like that--tell me more about it."

When people say "Everyone has a right to like whatever gun they want" the hair on the back of my neck goes up because when someone *says* it, it sounds like he is generously granting me his approval (which he might later decide to rescind.)

This isn't a life-or-death issue, so don't think I view it as such. It's just that I admire positive passion: "I've been shooting the ABC and I think it's great and here's why", but I see an awful lot of replies like "I'd never buy an ABC and I have no use for it (though I've never even handled one) but I respect your right to make your own choices (even if you're obviously a moron for liking the ABC)." The parts in parentheses are not actually in the posts but come through loud and clear.

Maybe you think posts like the hypothetical reply above constitute "Free exchange of ideas, opinions, and experiences." I don't. I think they're a waste of bandwidth.

JR

bogie
July 9, 2003, 04:10 PM
At the same time, experience comes into play...

Say we've got a newbie get on here, wants to buy a plinker rifle, shoot at soda cans, maybe a little pest control.

Do I tell him to get a .17, or, given that ammo is going to be a bit more expensive, etc., if he goes that route, instead point him toward a "standard" 10/22? Now, I've never shot a .17HMR, but hey, I'd like one. But I don't think that it's the "one gun" for a newbie... Heck - finding cleaning stuff by itself is a chore... (assuming a Wally World shopping trip).

I guess that it's the sorta thing where folks just get "hammer syndrome." You give a three-year-old a hammer, and everything looks like a nail. If Bubba likes Berettas, he's likely to recommend 'em all over the place, and nothing is as good - Heck, you can even take that 92 elephant hunting! (granted, it might get a big mangled after being stomped on...). Then there's the folks who think that anything smaller than .429 is a wee popgun, contrasted with the folks who think that concealment is everything, who want NAA to make a .17...

I'm taking some folks shooting this coming weekend. They're three female non-gun folks who want to learn. Gonna take a bolt gun (Savage 110 trued by Dorsey in a BR-profile stock, 6BR Shilen Select Match barrel by Billy Stevens, stuffed with some of Bart Sauter's finest - oh yeah, and it's pretty - painted with that color-shifting paint...), a 10/22, a 1911 with one of Jon's tops in addition to the .45, an 8" Python with .38 loads (and some .357s...) and a Winchester in .357. Wendy will be bringing a scoped AR... It'll be fun, and hopefully they'll get a taste of a lot of different things...

If you enjoyed reading about "Guns and envy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!