patrick.net

I'm looking to sell a gun, can any of you gun nuts offer advice for fetching top dollar?

Not certain the year off the top of my head, but it's an older Ithaca Gentlemans skeet shotgun

Yes, I've been to Chicago. Had a lot of fun there. Mainly North side, Lincoln Park. Caught the Chisox playing in Wrigley. Had the free zoo pretty much all to ourselves (how neat is that). We felt safe.

Have you been?

errc says

I'm looking to sell a gun, can any of you gun nuts offer advice for fetching top dollar?

Not certain the year off the top of my head, but it's an older Ithaca Gentlemans skeet shotgun

Like this

http://www.armslist.com/posts/1638502/rochester-new-york-shotguns-for-sale--ithaca-nid-16-gauge-double-barrel-shotgun

Ironman says

BayArea says

Yup, will be picking up my first handgun shortly - Glock-19

You haven't picked up that new toy yet??

Almost there! Should have it soon. Pretty excited!

Then I'll be looking for you to recommend a nice 12gauge for me as the follow-up toy.

Goran_K says

It leads me to believe that some racial sensitivity may be the invention of those who profit from selling race as a product.

Yes, absolutely.

Personally, I think the extreme obsession the mainstream media has with race is deliberately funded and pushed by the powers that be, so that we are divided and unable to challenge them about where all the money went:

Of course there are specific groups which literally profit directly from the media's obsession with race, like BLM, but I don't think they are the real power behind it.

Dan8267 says

f we are going to use historical evidence, it should be the evidence most applicable to the U.S. I did not cherry pick Australia. It is highly representative of the United States in exquisite detail including how the conservative and liberal politics works. However, you did cherry pick Mexico, a society so different from the U.S. that half the U.S. population wants to build a wall along the border with it. We don't want to build a wall along the Canadian border, another country with strict gun control and no mass shootings. Nor would we want to build a wall if Australia were the country along our southern border. So, let's stay honest.

I brought up Vermont, Israel, and Sweden as well. But I guess you chose not to mention those because it didn't fit your narrative?Dan8267 says

You do realize that anecdotal evidence means nothing in contrast to statistics and historical evidence? There have been numerous voter ID laws that the courts declared to be intentionally racist and targeting minority voters with "surgical precision". Such laws are proof positive of racism, even if that racism is motivated entirely by greed and self-serving political interests.

Which voter ID laws? How are voter ID laws "racist"?

Dan8267 says

A lot of political correctness is bullshit virtue signally, but that does not mean that racism isn't systematic in policing and the court system. Math doesn't lie, and the math shows. Blacks and whites use pot at close to the same rate, but blacks are 10 times more likely to be arrested for it. There's statistically significant and then there's statistically what the fuck?

I don't usually click WaPO articles but I did this time just to see what you were referencing and I wasn't disappointed. It doesn't say that blacks are arrested while whites let go for crimes involving marijuana, it simply says blacks are arrested more for marijuana crime. Why is this important? It's dishonest wordplay. What if blacks are simply committing more drug crime? Unless you can show that whites are being "let go" for the same crime and blacks are not, that article is simply saying blacks commit more drug related crime, which is of course more likely IMO than whites being let go for the same crime.

errc says

Have you ever been to Vermont?

Context is always important

What's the context? What's your point?

BayArea says

Goran_K says

Anyone else here into guns or own firearms

Yup, will be picking up my first handgun shortly - Glock-19

Good pick. :)

rando says

Yes, absolutely.

Personally, I think the extreme obsession the mainstream media has with race is deliberately funded and pushed by the powers that be, so that we are divided and unable to challenge them about where all the money went:

I used to be much further left leaning in my younger years. I used to assume racism was just inherent, what a lot of people call "institutional racism". Then I started looking around for all the racist white KKK/Nazi members who were out there looking for "colored people" blood. I began to find out through reading crime statistics, and just observing the world, that those people don't exist. They are an invented bogeyman. The KKK is irrelevant in Western society, they have a membership of less than 5,000 members. The Nazi party is in much the same position, too small and irrelevent to be noteworthy.

So why then is MSM flooded with editorialized content about racial victimization? I came to the conclusion that someone is benefiting or profiting from purposefully dividing people on ethnic and racial lines.

Goran_K says

Anyone else here into guns or own firearms?

Nice AK.
Just bought my first handgun a couple of months ago and I'm getting inherited shotgun restored. Next gun will be rifle but need a bigger safe first.

Ironman says

Slacker.... anything under 10K is a lightweight.

I'm just starting out. Though I'm sure I could use more. Better to have and not need than to not have and need.

Goran_K says

errc says

Have you ever been to Vermont?

Context is always important

What's the context? What's your point?

ermont (Bernie Sanders land) has some of the loosest gun laws in the country (you can own automatic weapons, supressors, short barreled rifles, etc) and is Top 3 in LEAST gun violence out of all 50 states.

-----------

You're comparing Vermont to the other 49 states. Having been to many different states, I know first hand that Vermont is unique, and comparing gun violence in Vermont to Chicago, is worthless.

Have you ever been to Vermont?

What is it with a certain type of interwebs poster, that they ask many questions, yet never extend the courtesy of answering them in return when asked? Is it that they lack any social intelligence or communication skills? Or are they just disingenuous as hell when pretending to want to engage in discussion?

errc says

You're comparing Vermont to the other 49 states. Having been to many different states, I know first hand that Vermont is unique, and comparing gun violence in Vermont to Chicago, is worthless.

Have you ever been to Vermont?

What is it with a certain type of interwebs poster, that they ask many questions, yet never extend the courtesy of answering them in return when asked? Is it that they lack any social intelligence or communication skills? Or are they just disingenuous as hell when pretending to want to engage in discussion?

I have a 20+ year career of working for various large financial institutions including Goldman Sachs, Fidelity, among others. I've been to every state in the Union besides Alaska (which I will be visiting for the first time in June/July), Wyoming, and North Dakota. So yes, I do have experience with different states, and the frequent flyer miles to prove it. I also happen to live in low density, rural area where gun laws are relaxed just like Vermont.

So what is the context of your question? What point are you trying to make?

That Using Vermont in an attempt to compare Gun Violence with the other 49 States in the Union, is apples and oranges

How about comparing it to these cities. What do you notice

I notice that you cannot glean anything from comparing Vermont gun crime statistics to any of those Large cities.

The entire state of Vermont probably has less population than a city like Baltimore

That's what I mean by context

errc says

That Using Vermont in an attempt to compare Gun Violence with the other 49 States in the Union, is apples and oranges

There are other states in the United States that also have very low gun violence and loose gun laws such as Iowa (very loose gun laws, ranked Top 10 safest for gun crime per capita), South Dakota, and Nevada where I now live. Do they fall into the apples or oranges category?

errc says

How about comparing it to these cities. What do you notice

I notice that you cannot glean anything from comparing Vermont gun crime statistics to any of those Large cities.

The entire state of Vermont probably has less population than a city like Baltimore

That's what I mean by context

So your point was that places with lower population density experience less crime?

I wouldn't disagree with that, I'm not sure why it took you so many post to actually state that.

Goran_K says

The only prohibited places are what you would expect (post office, federal buildings, etc).

Just read the 2nd Amendment,again. Didn't find this infringement.

HEY YOU says

Just read the 2nd Amendment,again. Didn't find this infringement.

I suppose it could be considered an infringement. There are a lot of laws on the books that could be considered constitutional overreach.

Dan8267 says

Canadian border, another country with strict gun control and no mass shootings.

"Notable mass shootings in Canada include the 1989 École Polytechnique massacre, the 1992 Concordia University massacre, the 2014 Edmonton killings and the 2017 Quebec City mosque shooting."

Fail!

Ironman says

Let's get back to a more important topic instead of debating with these anti-2A knuckleheads..

So, what's next on your wish list after the AK?

A nice bolt action custom build probably. I want to get into long distance target shooting.

Goran_K says

I don't usually click WaPO articles but I did this time just to see what you were referencing and I wasn't disappointed. It doesn't say that blacks are arrested while whites let go for crimes involving marijuana, it simply says blacks are arrested more for marijuana crime. Why is this important? It's dishonest wordplay. What if blacks are simply committing more drug crime? Unless you can show that whites are being "let go" for the same crime and blacks are not, that article is simply saying blacks commit more drug related crime, which is of course more likely IMO than whites being let go for the same crime.

If you don't like WaPO, I can reference dozens of other newspapers and reports that say the exact same thing. And no, it's not that cops are "letting go" whites, it's that they aren't even targeting whites while they do blacks. There is no dishonesty here on the part of the article, but let me get another source... actually, I'll let Adam handle this one. He's already done the leg work.

If you think the War on Drugs isn't about racism, then watch this.

www.youtube.com/embed/sXPOw2unxy0

You cannot honestly say that the War on Drugs has nothing to do with racism, even if the racism is just a means to an end, rigging elections by preventing citizens from voting.

The thing about history is that it's well documented. It's not hard to prove historical facts.

Goran_K says

A nice bolt action custom build probably. I want to get into long distance target shooting.

Isn't the AK the wrong platform for that?

Dan8267 says

it's that they aren't even targeting whites while they do blacks.

The article you pasted doesn't present much evidence to prove that claim.

rpanic01 says

Isn't the AK the wrong platform for that?

Yeah that's why I want a nice bolt action rifle. Maybe a Tikka T3.

Wow nice

Goran_K says

The article you pasted doesn't present much evidence to prove that claim.

There were numerous references quoted by Adam. And if you need more, here's what to do. Do I really have to spoon feed you everything?

Dan8267 says

Australia proves this beyond any doubt,

Little known fact- Australia has more guns now than before the "ban". The million guns destroyed after the Port Arthur shooting have all been replaced. Lower capacity firearms but more guns nevertheless.

Robert Sproul says

Little known fact- Australia has more guns now than before the "ban".

Yes, that fact is so little known, it merits evidence.

Dan8267 says

Robert Sproul says

Little known fact- Australia has more guns now than before the "ban".

Yes, that fact is so little known, it merits evidence.

"Australia has more privately owned guns than before the Port Arthur massacre that led to the introduction of strict gun control laws, University of Sydney researchers say."
"Associate Professor Philip Alpers from the University of Sydney said "the million guns destroyed after Port Arthur have been replaced with 1,026,000 new ones".
"By 2015 the arms trade had broken all previous records, and last financial year Australia ported 104,000 firearms,"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-28/australia-has-more-guns-than-before-port-arthur-massacre/7366360

While I agree with the choice of the 7.62x39 caliber (my favorite), you could have bought a much better gun for just a little bit more money. The CMMG Mutant is an AR platform chambered in 7.62x39 that accepts any standard AK magazine (even drums) with all the ergonomic benefits of the AR platform. It is also built to eat steel case ammo. The metallurgy of the barrel is also superior. They use a case hardening process where they use a molten salt containing lots of carbon and nitrogen to form a very hard layer around the entire barrel of the rifle to a depth of a few microns. They call it salt bath nitriding. This case hardened exterior is extremely tough and hard. You could run many rounds through it an never see any wear.

Along with the top notch barrel, they designed this platform to accept basic AR-15 parts like triggers, and butt stocks. The bolt carrier of this rifle is also a great innovation. Instead of milling out a 5.56x45 bolt to accept the 7.62x39 case, they started with an AR-10 bolt (7.62x51), cut the bolt carrier down by a few inches, and made a custom lower and upper. The bolt carrier group is not as large as the AR-10 but a lot beefier than the AR-15.

It comes with a nice free floating hand guard that is either Keymod or Mlok depending on your preference. On my Mutant I have a simple QD Sling swivel mounting point and a set of Mbus Pro Iron sights. The Mbus Pro sights are awesome because they have a M1 style aperture sight system with both elevation and windage adjustments on the rear sight and elevation adjustments on the front sight. The sight radius of my Mutant Rifle is 21" which is 1" longer than an AR-15 A2 setup.

I took the rifle to an Appleseed event over the weekend and was getting quarter sized groups from a seated position at 25 meters. I can usually keep it to about 3 MOA at 100 yards in the prone position. I have shot it with limited success at 500 yards. The round is just not designed for the extreme ranges that a full powered rifle round like the .308 or .30-06 will give you. I was however able to adjust the rear sight to raise the elevation by 12 MOA to mortar the rounds in (7.62x39 has about a 63 inch drop at 500 yards) and was getting about 50% hits on a 24" steel plate at 500 yards.

I don't like the AK platform for rifle calibers. My opinion changes if you use the AK platform in a shotgun because that is where the AK platform shines. The AK sights just plain suck and adding aftermarket sights with a long sight radius is just not an option with the dust cover design. The "looseness" of the gun that makes it so reliable also reduces the precision of the rounds.

The only thing that I don't like about the Mutant is the lack of a bolt hold open device. This is not an oversight of CMMG because the AK was never designed with a bolt hold open feature and there is no way to make one work with the standard AK magazine. You would have to trade off the many options of AK magazines for a more expensive magazine redesign in order to get this feature. The fact that I can buy 40 rounds of steel cased TulAmmo for $10 at Walmart makes me think that CMMG made the right choice.

Disclaimer I am not a CMMG employee nor do I have a financial interest in their company. I just happen to like this brand a lot after seeing, buying and, using many of their innovative products over the last few years. Their dedicated .22 LR uppers and .22 LR conversion kits for the AR-15 has been some of the best money that I have spend on firearms. They just announced their new Guard rifle which is an AR platform chambered in the .45 ACP (accepts Glock 21 magazines). I was puzzled at first expecting it to be another one of those direct blowback designs with a 5 lb bolt. To my delight and a pleasant surprise, they figured out a way to make a delayed blowback system that allows them to use a much lighter bolt.

CMMG Mutant

The Muzzle brake on the end really reduces the recoil based on my comparison to how a Yugoslavian SKS feels. The guys off to your sides on the firing line however may not like the concussive muzzle blasts that are being directed at them.

Goran_K says

A nice bolt action custom build probably. I want to get into long distance target shooting.

Take a look at the Ruger Scout Rifles. They come in a 7.62x51 (.308) or 5.56x45 (.223) flavor. The Scout rifle has a Mauser style bolt, detachable box magazine, iron sights, and the ability to mount a standard optic over the bolt or a scout scope forward of the receiver. The other alternatives would be a M1 Garand, M1A, or a standard AR-15 A2 with a 20" barrel.

You should also go attend an Appleseed to learn the skills and techniques for shooting a rifle at long ranges. Their metric for success is shooting at 4 MOA or better using nothing but your self, a USGI web sling, and the rifle.

Goran_K says

Which voter ID laws? How are voter ID laws "racist"?

India has voter ID and a much higher percentage of the population participate in voting

thenuttyneutron says

Appleseed

Did you make Rifleman score?

Straw Man says

thenuttyneutron says

Appleseed

Did you make Rifleman score?

Yes. I scored a 210 (minimum score for Rifleman) last year, and a 212 last Winter with a Ruger 10/22. The Ruger 10/22 is has some Techsights on it and I used CCI Minimag ammo (40 grain). I also scored a 211 last weekend with a RRA NM A2 AR-15. I shot 55 grain American Eagle bulk ammo.

I am signed up for a KD (Known Distance) event in June. I plan to use my RRA NM rifle and American Eagle 62 grain M855 bulk ammo for this event.

thenuttyneutron says

While I agree with the choice of the 7.62x39 caliber (my favorite), you could have bought a much better gun for just a little bit more money. The CMMG Mutant is an AR platform chambered in 7.62x39 that accepts any standard AK magazine (even drums) with all the ergonomic benefits of the AR platform. It is also built to eat steel case ammo. The metallurgy of the barrel is also superior. They use a case hardening process where they use a molten salt containing lots of carbon and nitrogen to form a very hard layer around the entire barrel of the rifle to a depth of a few microns. They call it salt bath nitriding. This case hardened exterior is extremely tough and hard. You could run many rounds through it an never see any wear.

That looks like a cool gun. I have been thinking about getting an AR15 or AR type rifle. Thanks for the review and input.

MMR says

India has voter ID and a much higher percentage of the population participate in voting

That seems to show that voter ID laws are actually helpful in the voting process.

Dan8267 says

There were numerous references quoted by Adam. And if you need more, here's what to do. Do I really have to spoon feed you everything?

This isn't the first time someone has tried to tell me on the internet that systemic racism exist in law enforcement agencies. I have never found any peer reviewed research that has proven, backed by credible studies, that law enforcement are more likely to specifically arrest or target black people over whites.

Robert Sproul says

"Australia has more privately owned guns than before the Port Arthur massacre that led to the introduction of strict gun control laws, University of Sydney researchers say."

OK, let's examine the facts and the claim you are trying to make. Since you haven't explicitly made your claim, but rather tried to imply it, I'll explicitly state the claim you are conveying to the audience. If this isn't the claim you intended, then you should explicitly and clearly state your central point. However, it is clear that the claim implied to the audience is as follows.

Claim: Because there are more guns today in Australia than during or before the Port Arthur massacre, the prevalence of guns has absolutely no impact on the frequency of mass shootings.

This claim is easily refuted. A simple Google search of "gun ownership in australia by year" and "I'm feeling lucky" reveals an article completely debunking this talking point.

ABC News Australia: The truth about gun ownership after Port Arthur

For the first time in 20 years, Australia's national arsenal of private guns is larger than it was before the Port Arthur massacre. But this statistic belies the gains that have been made, writes Philip Alpers.

In recent years, arms dealers have imported more guns than ever before. And last year we crossed a symbolic threshold: for the first time in 20 years, Australia's national arsenal of private guns is larger than it was before the Port Arthur massacre.

This increase must be seen in context. Australia's population grew by five million in the same period, so per-capita firearm ownership remains 23 per cent lower than it was before Port Arthur.

From the late 1970s, gun deaths in Australia have trended downwards. The risk of an Australian dying by gunshot remains less than half what it was before Port Arthur. Research shows that murderers did not move to other methods.

But although Australia hasn't seen a public mass shooting since 1996, we have no shortage of firearm-related crime. Gun owners who know each other well - be they family members or gang members - have always been the ones to kill each other most frequently.

The million guns destroyed after Port Arthur have been replaced with 1,026,000 new ones. And the surge only shows upward momentum.

But here's the thing: fewer Australians now own guns. Since 1988, the proportion of households with a firearm fell by 75 per cent.

The reason? Those who already possess several guns have bought more. Until recently, the average Australian shooter owned three to five firearms. The same people now keep a larger collection, and a proportion of their guns continue to leak into the illicit market.

As no law is effective until taken seriously, enforcement and resistance to backsliding are now key. Realising the potential of our toughened firearm legislation, police have led two decades of national attitude adjustment reminiscent of the 1980s turnaround on drink-driving enforcement.

These days, dedicated gun-crime taskforces target armed career criminals; firearm-related prosecutions have soared; police launch "nationwide blitzes" on gun owners' homes and seize thousands of firearms; lethal weapons are removed from violence-prone or suicide-risk households; and actual sanctions are imposed on shooters who ignore safe storage regulations.

All this adds up to a new generation of police and political awareness.

But perhaps the most profound change has been in public attitude. At this 20th anniversary of the Port Arthur massacre, we've seen in media coverage a resurgence of public scepticism about the motives of self-interested groups seeking to wind back gun laws.

So, here are the facts.

1. The gun control laws passed in Australia after the Port Arthur massacre worked. This is indisputable. Mass shootings were common before the laws and non-existent after the laws. And don't think a rare mass shooting would invalidate the effectiveness of the laws. It would still be an enormous improvement.

2. The per capita gun ownership is still lower than before the gun control laws were pass. This obviously relevant fact was omitted by you because it does not support your claim. This is called cherry picking. The article you referenced, which comes from the same source as the one I referenced, explicitly states

However, the greater number of firearms has been outpaced by Australia's growth in population, so per capita firearm ownership remains 23 per cent lower than it was before the Port Arthur massacre.

"The proportion of households with a firearm fell by 75 per cent since 1988. Those who already possess several guns have bought more," Associate Professor Alpers said.

That's identical to part of the article I reference. It is also a hell of big oversight to make unless you are intentionally cherry picking evidence to support your claim regardless of what the truth is.

3. More importantly, the percent of households possessing guns is still far less than it was before the anti-gun laws. This statistic is far more important than the per capita gun possession because...

4. Gun owners are the primary victims of gun violence, and that's completely discarding suicide. Gun owners shoot other gun owners.

5. The enhanced law enforcement raiding the homes of gun owners and seizing illegal arms has kept crime under control.

6. Changes in public attitude towards guns has kept crime down.

7. The rise in per capita gun ownership, although concentrated in the hands of a few, has created problems in terms of illegal arms smuggling and trade. So gun ownership, even by a few individuals, generates crime.

8. The number of murders went down. The myth that restricting or banning guns will cause people to just choose different methods of killing like stabbing is simply false.

Look, it's obvious that you like guns so much that none of these facts matter to you. You value guns and the manly feeling they give you more than you value actual safety. Maybe you even feel safer with guns. But that does not mean you are safer with them. The indisputable facts prove otherwise. If you want to make the case that guns are so fun and manly that public safety should take a backseat to recreational shooting and threatening home invaders, then make that case. But don't make the clearly false case that society is better off with guns being prevalent.

If the facts supported your claim, I'd be the first to defend your claim. But the facts contradict your claim. The more people with guns in a society, the more murder in the society.

Patnet goon squad needs to show up at Berkeley tomorrow to resist Antifa thugs at Coulter's speech. I'm not saying bring a gun, but a few baseball bats would be helpful.

Dan8267 says

Mass shootings were common before the laws

Were they?

I don't think anyone doubts that "gun homicides" are down in Australia since guns have been effectively taken away from the population. But the stats shows the effects on overall homicides/murders has been negligible. So instead of people getting killed by guns, they are being killed in other ways.

Here what happened after the handgun ban in the UK:

Gun bans do not solve the core problem of people being murdered, it just changes the method of how people are murdered.