hope my Glock doesnt do this
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,375
Likes: 1
From: inver grove heights MN
Originally posted by jim henderson
Oh well, this argument has gone on for years and no "logic" will sway either side. Even I have shamelessly contributed to the hijacking of this safety discussion.
Just my opinions, we are all free to have one, for now,
Jim Henderson
Oh well, this argument has gone on for years and no "logic" will sway either side. Even I have shamelessly contributed to the hijacking of this safety discussion.
Just my opinions, we are all free to have one, for now,
Jim Henderson
hey Jim, i started this thread. im glad to see replys like yours. even King Tritons replys are welcome
its been a good learning experience.
Elder User
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
From: Billings, MT
I know, I know, I helped derail this topic, but I do have a legitimate Glock question.
Why is is that we originally saw this in the .40S&W and now .45ACP models, but haven't seem this in either of the 10mm Glocks? If the .40 and .45 are too much for the basic design, shouldn't we have seen Glock 20s coming apart since the early '90's?
Why is is that we originally saw this in the .40S&W and now .45ACP models, but haven't seem this in either of the 10mm Glocks? If the .40 and .45 are too much for the basic design, shouldn't we have seen Glock 20s coming apart since the early '90's?
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
From: Laveen
I own a several pistols my favorite is the 1911. I trained on it in the army and have liked it ever since. One thing I have never had a problem with is ammo. I buy a lot of cheap reloads to just practice with and I have never had a feeding or firing problem. I have encountered "dirty" firing ammo but one thing about a 1911 is that if you just halfway care for it it works great. I have had a problem with light or match loads but I avoid them as I just don't care to change out the recoil spring I just stick to combat loads.
As for gun laws and restictions on handgun ownership anyone that believes any additional laws will do any good is fooling themselves enforce the laws we have and stop sending repeat offenders back out to the streets. Gun laws do not prevent crime because criminals don't care about the law or you and me.
As for gun laws and restictions on handgun ownership anyone that believes any additional laws will do any good is fooling themselves enforce the laws we have and stop sending repeat offenders back out to the streets. Gun laws do not prevent crime because criminals don't care about the law or you and me.
Junior User
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
From: NC
icicle is right. I've seen pics of KBd ar-15, mi1a,and various handguns. The last defect I read about that was dangerout to the operator was a bolt operated shotgun sold through sears. If incorrectly reassembled the firing pin assembly could blow back. not good. 99.995% of the time it is due to stupidity. lack of attention to detail when reloading can be fatal to you and people near by.
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
From: South Dakota
Is it the JC Higgins shotgun that you are talking about? It must be. I saw an ad about it in a hunting magizine several years ago. From what I understood, the announcement that I saw was due to a screw not being sufficiently tight when the bolt is put back into the gun(a screw holds the bolt in place on those guns). When someone works the bolt, it may come out and him them in the face. The bolt could be sent in and the owner would recieve $100. I have one of these guns, but it is worth more than that to me. I got it for free from an uncle. I did not feel very threatened.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Junior User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: Delaware
2nd ammendment....
Just a question here guys. How many of you have actually read the constitution? Bill of rights? Second ammendment?
It is very common to come accross gentlemen who quote the second ammendment, however it is quite rare to actually have someone who has read it/properly interpretted it. Now surely I will be blasted for this 'against the norm' interpretation, however after much research of the time period, and doing reports on the topic myself (with aide of those more knowledgable of course) it is clear that our forefathers never expected us to tote handguns.
Don't believe me? Here's the direct quote
Read that, think about the country at the time. Do you think the stockpiles in Massachusetts during the Revolutionary war had 1000's of muskets to provide for the soldiers? No, they were supplied by the citizens themselves.
Need analysis of this? How about United States v. Miller Supreme court case?
Now granted, there are 3 handguns in this household. But lets not run to the Bill of Rights (first ten ammendments) for our protection unless we plan on battling it to the Supreme court.
Carlo
It is very common to come accross gentlemen who quote the second ammendment, however it is quite rare to actually have someone who has read it/properly interpretted it. Now surely I will be blasted for this 'against the norm' interpretation, however after much research of the time period, and doing reports on the topic myself (with aide of those more knowledgable of course) it is clear that our forefathers never expected us to tote handguns.
Don't believe me? Here's the direct quote
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Need analysis of this? How about United States v. Miller Supreme court case?
In United States v. Miller,4 the Court sustained a statute requiring registration under the National Firearms Act of sawed-off shotguns. After reciting the original provisions of the Constitution dealing with the militia, the Court observed that ''[w]ith obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be interpreted with that end in view.''5 The significance of the militia, the Court continued, was that it was composed of ''civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.'' It was upon this force that the States could rely for defense and securing of the laws, on a force that ''comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense,'' who, ''when called for service . . . were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.''6 Therefore, ''[i]n the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well- regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.''7
Carlo
Junior User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: Delaware
Originally posted by wick246
Then lets change the bill of rights to read that each citizen is entitled to defend his/herself with a handgun and heaven help your butt if you mean to do them harm.
Then lets change the bill of rights to read that each citizen is entitled to defend his/herself with a handgun and heaven help your butt if you mean to do them harm.
Postmaster
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,758
Likes: 7
From: colorado
Re: 2nd ammendment....
Originally posted by carlo
Just a question here guys. How many of you have actually read the constitution? Bill of rights? Second ammendment?
It is very common to come accross gentlemen who quote the second ammendment, however it is quite rare to actually have someone who has read it/properly interpretted it. Now surely I will be blasted for this 'against the norm' interpretation, however after much research of the time period, and doing reports on the topic myself (with aide of those more knowledgable of course) it is clear that our forefathers never expected us to tote handguns.
Don't believe me? Here's the direct quote
[/B]
Just a question here guys. How many of you have actually read the constitution? Bill of rights? Second ammendment?
It is very common to come accross gentlemen who quote the second ammendment, however it is quite rare to actually have someone who has read it/properly interpretted it. Now surely I will be blasted for this 'against the norm' interpretation, however after much research of the time period, and doing reports on the topic myself (with aide of those more knowledgable of course) it is clear that our forefathers never expected us to tote handguns.
Don't believe me? Here's the direct quote
[/B]
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
From: tucson/luray usa
when the problems with glocks blowing up first surfaced, glock took several models in different calibers and fired 1,000's of rounds through each weapon. the rounds included many different factory rounds, factory reloads, and hand loads. they also use a large variety of propellants up to, but not including C4, including hot loads, and found that all the glocks would handle just about everything thrown at them, except when some cheap reloads were run through the guns. they found that these "factory reloads" were really non factory reloads, boxed in factory boxes. glocks will choke down almost everything you can run through them with virtually no failure. also one bit of information, most of the glocks sold in the US are made in smyrna, georgia right here in the US.
Junior User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: Delaware
Re: Re: 2nd ammendment....
Originally posted by wlihntr
their were handguns back when the constitution was writen, and like you said read the quote it says" the right to bear arms shall not be infringed on" not the right to bear rifles,long guns, muskets, ect. but all arms
their were handguns back when the constitution was writen, and like you said read the quote it says" the right to bear arms shall not be infringed on" not the right to bear rifles,long guns, muskets, ect. but all arms
Another key point. In the Declaration of Independence, we can recall one statement clearly, "We the People." In this clause, the People represent an entire nation. In the second ammendment we again see, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms." This once again could be in reference to the country as a whole, reinforcing the concepts of a militia intent, not personal right to carry a gun for unmilitaristic causes.
Believe me, this debate could go on for years. There are a few masters in the English language who have dissected the sentence based on the verb tense and similar writing from the time periods. I'm pretty tired so I truthfully don't feel like referencing them, but perhaps I will when I return from work tomorrow.
Just remember, I'm all for personal handguns, so long as they're registered and kept at home like mine. However, I do believe people often cite the law incorrectly.
Carlo
Postmaster
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,758
Likes: 7
From: colorado
Re: Re: Re: 2nd ammendment....
Originally posted by carlo
Yes, there were handguns during the Revolutionary War. They were not however readily available or commonly used. I personally own a black powder pistol. However, I was not referencing handguns directly. I was simply stating, based on the grammar used in the sentences (note the positions of the commas, it is necessary to properly dissect the wording) they were referring to the right for a group to rise up and form a militia, as they did during their revolution in Concord and Lexington.
Another key point. In the Declaration of Independence, we can recall one statement clearly, "We the People." In this clause, the People represent an entire nation. In the second ammendment we again see, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms." This once again could be in reference to the country as a whole, reinforcing the concepts of a militia intent, not personal right to carry a gun for unmilitaristic causes.
Believe me, this debate could go on for years. There are a few masters in the English language who have dissected the sentence based on the verb tense and similar writing from the time periods. I'm pretty tired so I truthfully don't feel like referencing them, but perhaps I will when I return from work tomorrow.
Just remember, I'm all for personal handguns, so long as they're registered and kept at home like mine. However, I do believe people often cite the law incorrectly.
Carlo
Yes, there were handguns during the Revolutionary War. They were not however readily available or commonly used. I personally own a black powder pistol. However, I was not referencing handguns directly. I was simply stating, based on the grammar used in the sentences (note the positions of the commas, it is necessary to properly dissect the wording) they were referring to the right for a group to rise up and form a militia, as they did during their revolution in Concord and Lexington.
Another key point. In the Declaration of Independence, we can recall one statement clearly, "We the People." In this clause, the People represent an entire nation. In the second ammendment we again see, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms." This once again could be in reference to the country as a whole, reinforcing the concepts of a militia intent, not personal right to carry a gun for unmilitaristic causes.
Believe me, this debate could go on for years. There are a few masters in the English language who have dissected the sentence based on the verb tense and similar writing from the time periods. I'm pretty tired so I truthfully don't feel like referencing them, but perhaps I will when I return from work tomorrow.
Just remember, I'm all for personal handguns, so long as they're registered and kept at home like mine. However, I do believe people often cite the law incorrectly.
Carlo
