Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pistol sights

yarchive.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 331 posts

Re: Pistol sights

#131

Post by mi100hael »

rhcom2 wrote: post #69
seibelj wrote: post #51

Anyone who is diehard anti-gun for personal use, I recommend taking a pistol class from a reputable organization, and keep an open mind. No one is telling you to get a license or buy a gun, just go take a class. They will teach you all about safety, how to shoot, gun cleaning and maintenance, and all of the basic skills needed to properly own a gun. Then if you are still diehard anti-gun, great! But if you have no ex…

I couldn't agree more with this. As a liberal gun owner I've often thought that some sort of class for other progressives on gun safety, gun history and gun culture would lead to better and effective gun laws. Yeah 50 caliber sniper rifles, fully auto machine guns and AR-15s look and sound scary... but when it comes to gun crime in this country they're a drop in the bucket compared to hand guns.

> Yeah 50 caliber sniper rifles, fully auto machine guns and AR-15s look and sound scary...

The word you are looking for is "awesome"

Re: Pistol sights

#133

Post by maxerickson »

mirimir wrote: post #132
maxerickson wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've only used a lightweight one to cut long grass.

I have an 18" military issue machete. It takes and holds a razor edge. I can sever 4-5 cm saplings with one angled cut.

From several feet? While the sapling runs away?

I'm also not real sure what your point is. I said I wouldn't want to face someone wielding a machete anymore than. I was acknowledging that a malicious person can be plenty dangerous with weapons that basically can't be restricted (a machete can be improvised much more easily than a repeating firearm or ammunition for said firearm).

Re: Pistol sights

#135

Post by coredog64 »

rhcom2 wrote: post #69
seibelj wrote: post #51

Anyone who is diehard anti-gun for personal use, I recommend taking a pistol class from a reputable organization, and keep an open mind. No one is telling you to get a license or buy a gun, just go take a class. They will teach you all about safety, how to shoot, gun cleaning and maintenance, and all of the basic skills needed to properly own a gun. Then if you are still diehard anti-gun, great! But if you have no ex…

I couldn't agree more with this. As a liberal gun owner I've often thought that some sort of class for other progressives on gun safety, gun history and gun culture would lead to better and effective gun laws. Yeah 50 caliber sniper rifles, fully auto machine guns and AR-15s look and sound scary... but when it comes to gun crime in this country they're a drop in the bucket compared to hand guns.

I'm always shocked and amazed that progressives rail against "abstinence only" sex ed and then turn around and promote the same thing for firearms.

Re: Pistol sights

#136

Post by oh_sigh »

simonh wrote: post #90
daleharvey wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(a die hard anti gun brit) As a Scout we were taught to shoot various things (rifle's, bow and arrow etc). I dont see what it does anything to help introduce sane gun laws?

I think the idea is people who use guns will love them and think how great they are. I'm a Brit and we have next to no gun ownership culture here, but I was in the TA for 4 years and got extensive firearms experience. I don't want a gun ownership culture anywhere near me or my family. I just don't see how it could ever be worth the human and social cost.

How many people did you kill?

Re: Pistol sights

#137

Post by mi100hael »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #94
dreamcompiler wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're willing to go through the red tape, you can buy a suppressor (silencer) and a bullet trap and do target shooting with your 9mm in your living room. (I have no affiliation with this company. It just seems to be an informative website on the process of buying a silencer.) https://www.silencershop.com/how-to-buy-a-silencer

Its typically called a suppressor. And it doesn't make the gun silent at all. But at least it won't blow out your hearing. Still, even equipped, I wouldn't try it in my living room.

Eh, "suppressor" is a term that became popular in reaction to the fact that anti-gunners took "silencer" too literally, but "silencer" is the more common and older term.

Re: Pistol sights

#138

Post by mirimir »

maxerickson wrote: post #133
mirimir wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an 18" military issue machete. It takes and holds a razor edge. I can sever 4-5 cm saplings with one angled cut.

From several feet? While the sapling runs away? I'm also not real sure what your point is. I said I wouldn't want to face someone wielding a machete anymore than . I was acknowledging that a malicious person can be plenty dangerous with weapons that basically can't be restricted (a machete can be improvised much more easily than a repeating firearm or ammunition for said firearm).

No, saplings don't run away. But sometimes people don't either, especially when they're getting ready to shoot.

We agree that both machetes and guns are dangerous. But I'm arguing that a machete can be more dangerous than a handgun, in the hands of a trained attacker.

I was quibbling with the "physically work quite a bit" aspect of your comment.

Re: Pistol sights

#139

Post by CapitalistCartr »

maxerickson wrote: post #106
ythn wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if one side only ever pushes in one direction and the other side only ever "compromises" to keep from being pushed too far, eventually the one side has everything they want (total gun control) and the other side has nothing. I'd like to see some compromise in the other direction too. Like "Ok, we'll relax CCP regulations or 'assault weapons' regulations so that normal citizens can have them, but in return we nee…

We are starting from a compromise. A reasonable thing would be to almost totally restrict pistols, but the Constitution hasn't been amended on the matter since the days when a rifled barrel on a long gun was cutting edge technology, so we have people walking around with highly dangerous concealable weapons. I mean, I wouldn't want to face someone wielding a machete anymore than I'd want to face someone wielding a bag…

When the constitution was written, repeating rifles existed. Lewis and Clark took one on their famous expedition.[0] Owning cannons was legal, and people did. During the American Civil War, wealthy men outfitted their own company of men and led them. American history has some crazy stuff in it. Private ship owners acting as privateers, for instance. My (lawyer) wife dearly wants a "letter of marque"[1] ever since she found out what they are in maritime law class.

0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_air_rifle

1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_marque

Re: Pistol sights

#140

Post by viggity »

rkangel wrote: post #114
dfsegoat wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally, I think guns belong on shooting ranges, and nowhere else, unless used for a practical purpose, such as hunting. I take great issue with this. You say you came from 'country living' - but I find that hard to believe in light of your comment above. Anyone who lives in the country, where it will take the cops 10-20 minutes to respond, knows damn well why we have the 2A and the right to keep firearms in our…

I'm interested that you don't see this as an issue mostly with police response time. In the UK, the situation is a bit different: Rural/Country living is still much closer to urban areas because the country is much smaller The strict control over firearms means that it's very unlikely that a home invasion robbery is going to involve guns on their part. Personally, if that happens - despite the fact that I own 3 shotg…

being burgled in the middle of the night or when they don't expect you to be home is certainly one scenario. But some people break into your house to hurt you. There is no magic insurance policy that can un-rape my wife. So if some mother fucker comes in my house in the middle of the night, I'm not going to confront him, but you can bet your ass he's going to get a face full of lead the moment he heads up my stairs.

As far as the "age of the country"... I'm calling BS. Unless your country was formed within the last generation, the matter is irrelevant how long people have been living in a certain territory. And if you want to get technical, the US Constitution is the oldest, surviving charter of government in existence. I resent the fact that Europeans have the gall to suggest that we're the immature ones when it comes to government.

Post reply on HN