Timbonez Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Nice review, Brick. You're definitely a better shot than me if you're getting consistent 8 rings at 25 yards. It's interesting you listed 9mm as a con. You're much better off with that caliber because it's cheaper to train with, and all pistol calibers are inadequate man-stoppers anyway. Shooting 9mm is easier than .40 and .45 for most people as well because of less perceived recoil. Shot placement is most important, followed by penetration, with expansion following that. Modern 9mm bullet technology is more than adequate to fulfill the last two requirements, as long as you fulfill the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brickhistory Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 My shooting would be in the "adequate" category. To ensure we are talking the same 8 ring, I use the B-27E standard law enforcement-type black silhouette target. The 8 ring is a shade under 12 inches wide and just under 18 inches tall. At 25 yards, that's still pretty big. My consistency hitting that is with untimed, aimed fire, i.e., I don't shoot until I like the picture. For center of mass, more rapid fire, the target comes forward quite a bit. I also have been averaging 200-300 rounds per week since October. Practice certainly helps. As to the 9mm vs. .45, you are correct. The 9mm is very effective as demonstrated in it's worldwide use for military, law enforcement, and personal roles. I'm just old-school (probably just old) and prefer a .45 if given a choice. As the psychology is an important element of the confidence needed for any self-defense weapon, I likes what I like. For me, size matters and I make the choice to have fewer .45 bullets available as opposed to using a similar sized 9mm. YMMV which is fine by me. But I really do like that P99. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flyinrock Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Nice review, Brick. You're definitely a better shot than me if you're getting consistent 8 rings at 25 yards. It's interesting you listed 9mm as a con. You're much better off with that caliber because it's cheaper to train with, and all pistol calibers are inadequate man-stoppers anyway. Shooting 9mm is easier than .40 and .45 for most people as well because of less perceived recoil. Shot placement is most important, followed by penetration, with expansion following that. Modern 9mm bullet technology is more than adequate to fulfill the last two requirements, as long as you fulfill the first. ************************************* Hmmmmmm...."all pistol calibers are inadequate man-stoppers anyway". ALL That is a pretty broad statement? What do you base that statement on? Just curious. I know the .22 Stingers can fail to do the job based on personal experience. I can also say the 45acp is a stopper, again based on personal experience. Its fun when you can refute statistics based on personal exerience rather than quoting some article..... Best Regards and Semper Fi Rocky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbonez Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 (edited) ************************************* Hmmmmmm...."all pistol calibers are inadequate man-stoppers anyway". ALL That is a pretty broad statement? What do you base that statement on? Just curious. I know the .22 Stingers can fail to do the job based on personal experience. I can also say the 45acp is a stopper, again based on personal experience. Its fun when you can refute statistics based on personal exerience rather than quoting some article..... Best Regards and Semper Fi Rocky Let me rephrase. The standard service pistol calibers ARE inadequate compared to a rifle or shotgun, but that doesn't mean they can't get the job done. What makes them attractive is their relative effectiveness vs. size, weight, and velocity. Your personal experience really means nothing. That's a sample group of one, and it's hearsay. I'm not trying to be a dick and knock your experience, but it doesn't really prove your point. It is more important to have correct shot placement with a pistol caliber than it is with a rifle or shotgun. Look at the 1986 FBI Miami shootout. FBI agents used .38s, 9mm, and shotguns against two assailants. One took 6 shots before succumbing and the other took 12. Neither were on any drugs. The point is shot placement, shot placement, and shot placement. That being said, also look at the current shooting in Tucson. Rep. Giffords was shot in the head with a 9mm and survived. Thankfully she wasn't killed. Brick, I thought you were using 100yd rifle targets. I don't know why I thought that. Regardless, that is still pretty decent shooting, and like you said it is much more precise closer in at normal pistol engagement ranges. I can totally respect your .45 caliber choice. I wasn't trying to spark a .45 vs 9mm debate, as I'm a fan of both. Edited January 17, 2011 by Timbonez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flyinrock Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 (edited) Let me rephrase. The standard service pistol calibers ARE inadequate compared to a rifle or shotgun, but that doesn't mean they can't get the job done What makes them attractive is their relative effectiveness vs. size, weight, and velocity. Your personal experience really means nothing. That's a sample group of one, and it's hearsay. I'm not trying to be a dick and knock your experience, but it doesn't really prove your point. It is more important to have correct shot placement with a pistol caliber than it is with a rifle or shotgun. Look at the 1986 FBI Miami shootout. FBI agents used .38s, 9mm, and shotguns against two assailants. One took 6 shots before succumbing and the other took 12. Neither were on any drugs. The point is shot placement, shot placement, and shot placement. That being said, also look at the current shooting in Tucson. Rep. Giffords was shot in the head with a 9mm and survived. Thankfully she wasn't killed. Brick, I thought you were using 100yd rifle targets. I don't know why I thought that. Regardless, that is still pretty decent shooting, and like you said it is much more precise closer in at normal pistol engagement ranges. I can totally respect your .45 caliber choice. I wasn't trying to spark a .45 vs 9mm debate, as I'm a fan of both. OK now you have changed the dynamics when you compare pistols vs rifles/shotguns. I agree entirely that shot placement is the key regardless of caliber. And my personal experience means nothing to you which is fine with me. But, I have the scars of multiple gunshot wounds as a part of the basis for my comments. Several surgeons have told me judging from the shot placement on me, I should be dead. I have a close friend who got hit 7 times in the torso with Speer Lawman 9mm 125gr hp and he survived. I was in his hospital room within hours after hearing of it. He too should be dead.I don't think it makes any difference of caliber short of a nuke as to ultimate outcome. Shot placement is critical with any caliber as previously stated. I know of several who have experienced headshots and were drt, and others who survived. I've been on scene and saw both. Both that involvled 45acp were drt with headshots. I know many who have been hit with rifle or shotgun and are still around. Some should be dead? I have been on scene when suicides happened with rifle and shotgun. It wasn't pretty and damned spectacular when the shot was fired.... both were head shots. So, my comments are based more on personal experience than hearsay or reading stats from publications. Semper Fi Rocky As for the FBI shootouts, or any others, were you attendant? If not, it is all hearsay on your part. There are so many factors that come into play that it is nearly impossible to say what will happen in any given shooting situation. The point I was/am trying to make is your blanket statement that ALL pistol calibers are inadequate is not correct IMNSHO Edited January 17, 2011 by Flyinrock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbonez Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 You ask for examples and then call them hearsay because I wasn't there? WTF? There is clear documentation to shootings for those to review. Now you're being disingenuous. The point I was/am trying to make is your blanket statement that ALL pistol calibers are inadequate is not correct IMNSHO Opinion, copy. So let's leave it at that. We have differing opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flyinrock Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 You ask for examples and then call them hearsay because I wasn't there? WTF? There is clear documentation to shootings for those to review. Now you're being disingenuous. Opinion, copy. So let's leave it at that. We have differing opinions. Fine with me. I was responding to your statement my experiences didn't have any weight and were hearsay. Semantics I hope? Disingenuous? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72mako Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Has anyone seen or heard of RBCD ammo? Local gun store was touting it the other day as a great personal defense load. Made in San Antonio and online at rbcd.net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Making a "Good Deals Thread" on another Forum I am on. Check it out: http://seatstaysup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27401 There is a Comp Aimpoint M2 w/LaRue mount for $499! I ordered it a couple hours ago. Great deal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbonez Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 (edited) That's a good deal, especially since it comes with a Larue mount. 72mako, I've never heard of them. It would be nice if there was ballistic information and gel tests available. This linky might steer you in the right direction for defensive ammunition selection. There is also a link with a PDF file within that link that has a lot of good info provided by the FBI. Edited January 18, 2011 by Timbonez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Has anyone seen or heard of RBCD ammo? Local gun store was touting it the other day as a great personal defense load. Made in San Antonio and online at rbcd.net. Nope, but that's just up Military Dr from Brooks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HU&W Posted January 20, 2011 Share Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) New gun day... Academy had Savage-stevens 200's in .270 on sale for $179 so I jumped. I've been looking for a good hunting rifle for some time and couldn't be more excited. It has the same action, receiver, barrel, etc. as the old Savage 110. It doesn't have accutrigger, but the trigger breaks clean and crisp at 2.5 lbs with no creep. The stock is ugly but pillar bedded and the barrel is free-floating. I also bought the Nikon 3-9x40 on sale for $99 to go with it, but the tube is too short for the action. I will say the guys working at Academy were complete idiots. Worst gun-buying experience I've had and if it wasn't for the incredible price I would have walked away. I also bought my son his first rifle, a Thompson Center Hot Shot .22lr. It's a single-shot break barrel based on the T/C pro hunter rifles. Very nicely constructed gun, locks up tight, and has an aperture sight for teaching the kids. It also has an expanding stock (like the mossy 500's) to grow with the kids. It's only 30" and 3lbs. I think it might actually make a nice backpacking/squirrel gun... Range reports to follow. Edited January 21, 2011 by HU&W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbonez Posted January 20, 2011 Share Posted January 20, 2011 Sweet deal on the rifle! In my experience many gun shops, the dedicated ones too, employ individuals that are inept. A lot of them also give bad advice. Let us know how the Savage and TC shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Not this is a great way to sell guns! Sherwin Shooting Sports Auctions Guns selling guns! OK, a few are a little butter-faced; but at least they've got their fingers off the triggers! Cheers! M2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HU&W Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 (edited) Range reports to follow. As promised, I just got back from the range and had a great time. The Stevens 200 in .270 is a respectable shooter. It was laser-boresighted to a Bushnell Banner 4x32. The boresight was off a full 22" at 100yds so I had to realign the scope. Once properly sighted, I was able to get 1.5" groups from a benchrest (no vise) at 100yds on the bullseye with 150gr factory loads. That's about the accuracy I hoped for. Recoil was manageable. No FTF or FTL. Loading the blind-box mag was a little quirky, but I got the hang of it. Overall I'm satisfied with this as a hunting gun. As far as the Thompson Center hot shot... No gun this small and light should shoot this good. With the cheap Walmart Federal ammo and iron sights (ghost ring) I was able to get sub-moa groups offhand at 25yds and moa benchrest at 100yds. At 25yds it would rip a ragged hole in the bullseye shot after shot. It is very diminutive feeling at 3lbs and 30" and the stock is very plasticky. But, the action locks up tight and the sights were dead-on from the factory. My 7 year old son had no problems shooting it and was getting bullets on the paper at 25yds. It is excellent for teaching gun safety with the single shot breech loading and the transfer bar safety under the hammer. IMNSHO I think this would make an exceptional survival/squirrel/rabbit gun (for adults), especially if they made it a takedown with a quick-release hinge pin and lengthened the stock a few inches. Edited January 21, 2011 by HU&W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 I just wanted to wish John Moses Browning, the man responsible for so many outstanding firearms but especially the pistol that celebrates its 100th anniversary this year, a very happy birthday on 23 January! He had 128 gun patents approved during his lifetime. Cheers! M2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbonez Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 (edited) I made it to the range today and put another 500 rounds through the Glock. Ammo consisted of 200rds of 115gr FMJ Sellier & Bellot and 300rds of 115gr PMC. Performance from the Glock was much, much better today with these two ammo types than with the Prvi Partizan crap I had. Anyway on to the review: Glock 17 Gen4 9mm semi-auto Safe Action Steel slide and polymer frame Dot front sight and U-line rear sight 4.49" barrel, polygonal 17+1 round capacity I bought the pistol brand new for $423 after tax from a local dealer that is a preferred Glock dealer. They get preferential treatment (I think) from Glock and also can sell the pistols at greatly reduced prices compared to other gun stores. The case is marked with a blue label, which designates it as a pistol for the preferred dealers to sell to law enforcement. Included are EMS, firefighters, military, etc. You get the discount pricing set forth by Glock. The package came with the pistol, two removable backstraps (more on this later), a tool for removing the trigger housing (backstrap) pin, 3 17-round magazines, a useless gun lock, and the standard documentation expected when buying a new pistol. There are several differences between the Gen4 line of Glocks and the third generation Glocks. Before I describe them I just wanted to note that Glock will continue to produce the third generation models. The most obvious, external difference on the Gen4s is the new rough texture. It is more aggressive than the third generation but not quite as aggressive as the RTF pistols with fish scale cocking serrations Glock put out. Another external difference is the use of removable backstraps. The Gen4 comes with a 2mm shorter backstrap, compared to the third generation, that is a physical part of the frame. There is a medium size attachment, which mimics the same size as previous generations, and a large size attachment which is 2mm larger than the previous generations. You simply remove the backstrap pin and place the M or L backstrap on the pistol and drive in the larger backstrap pin to use them. They are affixed by this pin and by hooking on the small opening at the heel of the pistol. I prefer the smaller grip size, so I do not use the M or L attachment. Another major difference is the use of a dual captured recoil spring assembly à la the baby Glocks (26, 27, 29, etc.) rather than the single captured assembly from previous generations. This design is very strong and it works well with the Gen4 G22s and G23s. Some, myself included, have had problems with the Gen4 G17. If you've read my previous posts on this subject you should already know that the RSA is very strong. Weaker ammo may choke and the shooter can experience FTEs and FTFs. I've already explained what I did to try and help offset the problem, and there is plenty of literature out there on the issue and fixes so I won't belabor the point. With this last outing (500rds) I didn't experience any FTEs or FTFs. Finally, the other change was the the magazine catch was enlarged and is now reversible. The Glock magazines that come with the pistol will work with the catch on either side. The older Glock magazines will also work in the pistol, but only if the catch is on the traditional left side. I assume Gen4 Glock mags will also work in older models. In addition to the 3 17rd magazines, I purchased another 2 17rd magazines and a 33rd magazine. Through the course of three range days I put a total of 1174 rounds through the gun. This included several brands of FMJs, Remington Golden Sabers, and Federal Hydra-Shoks. All 174 of the hollowpoints functioned flawlessly. As mentioned before, the only problem ammo I ran into was the PPU. The gun was not cleaned at all and only lubed before I started shooting. Accuracy is more than acceptable. I shoot this pistol more accurately than all my other handguns except for maybe one or two of my 1911s. The distances I shot at were between 7 and 20 yards. Headshots, with time in between shots, are easily made at all distances. Quick center mass shots to the lungs and heart areas are consistent as well. The sights are very useable, but they are plastic. The white dot on the front is large and the rear sight U-line shape is not overwhelming or obnoxious. I will probably change the sights out with some Heinie Ledge plain black front and rear. This will help facilitate one handed racking of the slide. The trigger pull is not too bad and is always consistent. It's also very easy to pull the trigger fast. It's no tuned 1911 trigger, but it works. It's important to mention that Glocks are not double action only pistols. They are striker fired. When a round is chambered the pistol's striker is slightly precocked. As the shooter pulls the trigger, their finger disengages the trigger safety. The trigger bar moves rearward with the pull and disengages the firing pin safety. Finally, the trigger bar acts as a drop safety preventing the firing pin from launching forward if dropped. Once the trigger bar reaches the end of its rearward travel it is deflected away, allowing the firing pin to be released. This makes for a relatively safe weapon without any traditional external safety. Here is an animation that should explain it very well. I detail stripped the pistol after the range today and cleaned it. This is by far the easiest handgun I've ever completely disassembled and reassembled. By my count the pistol is made up of 29 parts (pins, springs, slide, frame, barrel, etc.), not including the magazine and its parts. That's a lot fewer than most pistol designs out there. Aesthetically speaking I really like this Glock. It's not as pretty as some classic pistols, but it is very utilitarian working and looking and that commands a certain charm. I carried the pistol today in a POS Uncle Mike's IWB holster and it was quite comfortable despite being a duty sized pistol. I'll continue to carry it with the Uncle Mike's until my Raven Concealment holster comes in. That's pretty much it. I'll stay away from Pros and Cons on this one as most people already have a feel for Glocks. Edited January 23, 2011 by Timbonez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 There's a rumor abound that the ATF is going to change its ruling concerning pistol-gripped shotguns, which may (emphasis on 'may') cause problems for folks that own or want to buy them... An interpretation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that pistol grip shotguns are not shotguns has created an unforeseen legal liability for owners of such firearms. ATF's Nov. 2009 FFL Newsletter declared: Certain commercially produced firearms do not fall within the definition of shotgun under the GCA even though they utilize a shotgun shell for ammunition. For example, firearms that come equipped with a pistol grip in place of the buttstock are not shotguns as defined by the GCA. Here's another wrinkle, from Mike Vanderboegh at Sipsey Street Irregulars: An October 27, 2010, letter from the Firearms Technology Branch ruled that such a firearm, with a 17" barrel and 26-1/4" overall length, was not subject to the National Firearms Act. You can click here to read the letter. That would seem to indicate there's no issue with violating National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR) requirements, right? No worries if you own one, or want to buy one…? Not so fast. If the pistol grip firearms are not "shotguns," what are they? The NFA Owners Association points us to the only "legal" definition seemingly available with which to classify these firearms (click on link for "National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, as amended" to open up the text): [T]aken at face value, a "pistol grip firearm" with a bore diameter larger than 1/2" in diameter is a "Destructive Device" under the NFA, unless the Attorney General determines that it is "a shotgun . . . generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes." By determining that a "pistol grip firearm" is not a shotgun, it is difficult to understand how current law would not classify such as firearm as a Destructive Device." A "Destructive Device"? "Any weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes." Source: 26 U.S.C, Section 5845(f). Which means registration on the NFRTR would be required. But there's no way to do that retroactively, is there? Per Vanderboegh: It appears there are only two solutions: (1) change the law to revert things as they were before ATF made the foregoing rulings, or (2) establish an amnesty period so millions of "Pistol Grip Firearms" can be lawfully registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR) system. Otherwise, he notes: This action has apparently created millions of unregistered Destructive Devices, currently possessed by millions of law-abiding gun owners who do not realize they now illegally possess unregistered NFA firearms. That is, depending on what ATF chooses to do next. Or what they have forced on them. But certainly this is all hysteria and an unjustified over-reaction to some "poor wording"? Some would counsel us not to worry, broadly assuring: There's no way these'll turn into NFA-controlled guns or suddenly become illegal. Let's hope such confidence is well placed, and the final word, and more authoritative than, say, the implications of ATF Ruling 95-3 (bearing in mind that per ATF, the pistol grip firearms in question are NOT shotguns, so any determination that they are "particularly suitable for sporting purposes" would be irrelevant by their own definition.) What a confusing mess. Source: ATF position on pistol grip 'shotguns' creates new danger - National gun rights Now, before anyone gets excited, there was a reply to this that made good sense... "This is getting a lot of coverage lately for nothing. Yes, pistol-grip only shotguns are not "shotguns". Shotguns are made or remade, designed or re-designed to be fired from the shoulder. Clearly these PGO-shotguns aren't actually "shotguns". But they aren't DD's either. The ATF basically maintains that anything that fires a regular sporting-purpose shotgun shell is legal, unless and until they declare it a DD. This is why the street sweeper, stryker-12, etc were declared DD's after they were allowed as regular Title 1 firearms. The ATF IS NOT going to re-classify all these Mossberg cruisers as DD's. There are too many millions of them sold. It's just not going to happen. As to their classification, they are a Title 1 "Other" firearm (note, not AOW) that fires shotgun shells. Nothing more. They are legal to own. Regarding barrel length, since they are not shotguns, there is no law requiring them have a barrel length of 18" or more. As long as their OAL is kept to 26" or greater, they can have a shorter barrel. However, some states (like CA) might have laws that override that, which is why most of them have 18" barrels anyways. Also, the ATF didn't just recently "re-classify" these guns. They've never been shotguns according to the Federal definition of shotguns laid out in the GCA of '68. They've ALWAYS been Title 1 "other" firearms." An announcement is expected tomorrow (Monday, 24 January 2011), I just wanted to post the above info in case anyone was considering buying a shottie in the near future. The bottom line looks to be there won't be anything to worry about, but sometimes with the ATF you just don't know how they're going to respond... Cheers! M2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFreddie Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 There's a rumor abound that the ATF is going to change its ruling concerning pistol-gripped shotguns, which may (emphasis on 'may') cause problems for folks that own or want to buy them... Now, before anyone gets excited, there was a reply to this that made good sense... An announcement is expected tomorrow (Monday, 24 January 2011), I just wanted to post the above info in case anyone was considering buying a shottie in the near future. The bottom line looks to be there won't be anything to worry about, but sometimes with the ATF you just don't know how they're going to respond... Cheers! M2 Rumor has it they squashed the Taurus 28 gauge pistol... Said it was a short barreled shotgun and not a pistol. Taurus apparently removed it from their booth at SHOT Show. BF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbonez Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 That's what I heard too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) Pretty cool online toy for building/customizing popular modern fire arms: http://pimpmygun.doctornoob.com/ Attached is what my AR actual should look like once I buy the upper. Edited January 25, 2011 by stoleit2x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Rumor has it they squashed the Taurus 28 gauge pistol... Said it was a short barreled shotgun and not a pistol. Taurus apparently removed it from their booth at SHOT Show. BF That's what I heard too. Yeah, it looks like the rumors turned out to be BS. There was a study released yesterday, that's about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Way to go, Utah! Utah Lawmakers Propose M1911 as Official State Gun SALT LAKE CITY – State lawmakers are debating whether to designate a semiautomatic pistol as the official gun of Utah, despite protests from people who believe it's inappropriate because of recent mass shootings. The bill to make the Browning M1911 the official gun breezed through a committee hearing this week and is scheduled to be debated by the full House as early as Wednesday. Republican Rep. Carl Wimmer said the state should have the gun as one of its state symbols to honor John Browning, a Utah native who invented it in 1911. "He invented a firearm that has defended American values and the traditions of this country for 100 years," Wimmer told the House Political Subdivisions Committee. Utah has 24 state symbols recognizing the history, geography and culture of the state. They include a state cooking pot, a state tree, a state hymn and a state folk dance. The committee approved the bill to add a state gun on a 9-2 vote. Wimmer said the Browning M1911 is widely used by the military, police officers and private citizens, which is why he chose the pistol instead of another Browning gun. Gun Violence Prevention Center board member Steve Gunn told The Associated Press honoring the M1911 is wrong because the people who opened fire in most recent U.S. mass shootings used semiautomatic pistols. That includes the Jan. 8 Arizona shooting in which six people were killed and 13 — including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords — were wounded with a Glock. "It's an embarrassment to the state to have as a symbol that was used only a few weeks ago to kill innocent people," Gunn said. Wimmer told the AP he had been planning the bill for about a year and the shootingdid not change his mind. "There is nothing about the actions of a madman to change the fact that firearms have been used throughout our history to defend American values and traditions," Wimmer said. House Minority Leader David Litvak said while he opposes designating a state gun, the Arizona shooting did not give the debate any urgency. "We need to be careful about using that tragedy to push a political position," the Democrat said. He suggested the state honor Browning in a different way that focused on his many inventions, not just one of his guns. Jennifer Seelig, who voted against the measure said she did not see the debate as pro- or anti-gun. Instead, it is about the message sent by the state having such a polarizing symbol, she said. "It has a lot of deep-rooted, complex and complicated meanings on a wide spectrum, from defending life to taking it," said Seelig, also a Democrat. Seelig said she supports rights and has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. But like Litvack, she would prefer to honor Browning in a different way. Republican Rep. Stephen Sandstrom told the committee that recognizing the M1911 is an appropriate honor for Browning. Instead of the gun being blamed for killing people, it should be credited for saving lives on the battlefield, Sandstrom said. "Tragic events happen because of bad people in this world. But handguns, and firearms in general, do not kill people," Sandstrom said. "We need to stop demonizing firearms." ___ The bill to designate a state firearm is H.B. 219. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brickhistory Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Out-fu*king-standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaMikeFoxtrot Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Sons of Guns premiered tonight on discovery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now