I recently bought a used Ruger Mini-30 (7.62x39 cal.) in good condition through the classifieds for $350. As the previous owner used it for deerhunting in Pa., the original wood stock has it's dings and chips and the barrel and receiver are in need of re-blueing. I bought a synthetic folding stock with stainless extension online for $75 and plan on shipping it to Ruger for a factory re-blueing and overall facelift (figure it'll cost about $100 + S&H).

It came with 30, 10, and 5 rd. clips and two boxes of ammo. Let me tell you, folks -- this piece kicks ass! I took out to the field a couple Sundays ago and was very impressed. Never fond of ghost-ring sights, I was surprised at the grouping I put together at approx. 100 yds. And it feels as though the trigger's got a 3 oz. pull on it -- very fast.

Anyone else out there owning a hot assault rifle with a total cost of under $1,000? Let's hear about it.

I wanted to get a ruger mini-30 at one time (either that, or the legendary deerfield :eek: ). Right now I'm saving my money for a hk g3 caliber .308 that comes with 2 20 rnd magazines for $550. I'm pretty poor, so it may take awhile. Take that thing assault-varmint hunting yet? :cool:

http://www.martialartsupply.com/Fantasy___Medieval/Medieval___Fantasy_Axes/f-2327.jpg

Cheap, easy to use, and grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat for lopping off the heads of untermensch.

And it "swings both ways".

I wanted to get a ruger mini-30 at one time (either that, or the legendary deerfield :eek: ). Right now I'm saving my money for a hk g3 caliber .308 that comes with 2 20 rnd magazines for $550. I'm pretty poor, so it may take awhile. Take that thing assault-varmint hunting yet? :cool:Any H&K is a damn fine piece and a .308 will take any animal on the North American continent -- four-legged or bipedal. ;)

my experience with this piece is that you need to use stock ruger magazines because the aftermarket ones are shit. you can sometimes find ac556 20 rd mags but I would not trust 30 rd mags to feed reliably. I dont know if ruger made these for the 762 version or not.

you dont want to waste any money on junky ass magazines that will misfeed in a pinch. when you are under pressure things go wrong and the magazine is the weak link in the rifle loading chain more often than not.

I like the choice of caliber ( 7.62 X 39 ), it's plentiful enough, at this moment.
Also, 5.56 mm, ( M-16 ammo ). I would say both are good medium range cartridges, with my preference leaning to the Russian round, because it has more mass, is not deflected off course as easily by twigs, foliage, or the wind.
We must remember however, that distance is life, especially when an individual might be hypothetically one day find himself against the might of a large, organized force, armed with optics, infra-red, communications net, air-support-on-demand, advanced body-armor, and a massive logistics system to support it all.
This is why having at least one long-range precision rifle, with good optics, and good training, is a good idea. Calibers like 7.62 X 51 NATO (.308) are the minimum. The Russian 7.62 X 54 is I think, even better, when loaded to full strength. Both are plentiful. 8mm Mauser, is another good one, also when full-strength ( not down-loaded as US ammo makers do for liabilty reasons ).
US 30'06 is another excellent one, but you don't see as many deals on ammo, that there are with the 8mm and Russian 7.62 X 54.
Now, if you are in a riot situation, with masses of armed thugs roaming nearby, then yes, the fire-power of a self-loading rifle is advantageous.
Here is an old proverb that IU read once: "The Best Armor is to Stay Out of Range". Get reckless and you'll end up like swiss cheese. :D
-just my two cents..

DPMS AR Carbine, 16" Barrel- $700 OTD. Very ergonomic, 5.56x45mm, handy, and reliable with USGI mags and any ammo that's not WOLF. PS, if you're going to buy an AR, don't waste your time with "rails", laser sighting, flashlights, etc. She's high class, but won't put up with BS and she's high on the maintenance.

Cugir SAR-1- $300. Short, quick to shoulder with simple iron sights and a scope mount on the side for Soviet-pattern optics. Eats the shittiest ammo on earth, and then begs for more. Mags are plentiful and are strong enough to be considered "melee" weapons. Its 7.62x39mm cartridge is ballistically similar to the .30-30 Winchester, but the x39 is lighter and a hell of a lot cheaper than the -30 Win. This unseemly broad ain't much to look at, but she'll always cook and clean, and she's always "in the mood" when you are.

DPMS AR Carbine, 16" Barrel- $700 OTD. Very ergonomic, 5.56x45mm, handy, and reliable with USGI mags and any ammo that's not WOLF. PS, if you're going to buy an AR, don't waste your time with "rails", laser sighting, flashlights, etc. She's high class, but won't put up with BS and she's high on the maintenance.

Cugir SAR-1- $300. Short, quick to shoulder with simple iron sights and a scope mount on the side for Soviet-pattern optics. Eats the shittiest ammo on earth, and then begs for more. Mags are plentiful and are strong enough to be considered "melee" weapons. Its 7.62x39mm cartridge is ballistically similar to the .30-30 Winchester, but the x39 is lighter and a hell of a lot cheaper than the -30 Win. This unseemly broad ain't much to look at, but she'll always cook and clean, and she's always "in the mood" when you are.


ha, all good suggestions and observations. Remember, also, that Che Guevarra said the insurgent must use the same rifle chambered in the same round used by the occupation army.

my experience with this piece is that you need to use stock ruger magazines because the aftermarket ones are shit. you can sometimes find ac556 20 rd mags but I would not trust 30 rd mags to feed reliably. I dont know if ruger made these for the 762 version or not.

you dont want to waste any money on junky ass magazines that will misfeed in a pinch. when you are under pressure things go wrong and the magazine is the weak link in the rifle loading chain more often than not.
I have one 30 rd. mag (not Ruger. Matter of fact, no markings on it whatsoever) and I zipped through it w/o a hitch. I pulled the trigger as fast as I possibly could, trying to get it to jam. No dice.

I've fired hundreds of rds. through 20 rd. mags (M-16) while in the military and had many, many jams. M-16s are famous for that. Not so with Ruger -- at least not in my experience.

Somebody who has bought several guns should post what a newbie buyer should expect when he approaches the gun store proprieter to ask him to order a nice SAR-1 or Colt Commando. What papers does the buyer have to show? What questions does the buyer have to answer? What "gotchas" are in the process, if any? What disqualifies someone from buying a rifle such as these? What laws can you run afoul of, if you're not careful? Give a walkthrough.

Jerry Abbott

Need your driver's license. Need to answer form 4473. Answer truthfully but read carefully. If you are a convicted felon, you're prohibited. If you're under a domestic restraining order, you're prohibited. Don't show up and try and buy a gun if you're prohibited.

Those are two things that people run afoul of most regularly. There are other questions too.

Can't recall some of the other stuff. Don't buy guns for anybody else, that is a straw man purchase-- regardless of your intentions-- and that is prickly topic too.

Here is an example

http://www.instapunk.com/archives/BATF_Form_4473a.html

What papers does the buyer have to show? What questions does the buyer have to answer?
Most gun dealers know why people like powerful guns and they aren't going to pry too deeply into your reasons or potential uses so long as your papers are in order and you don't bring up illegal activity. "Target shooting for fun" is a good catch all reason for purchasing ANY firearm.

Keep in mind that some laws may vary by state.

If you live in a non-communist state where there are no "Assault Weapon" bans or registration requirements, the ATF form and a background check is all you'll have to worry about. Answer (truthfully) "yes" to question 9a on the 4473 and "no" to the others, and put your real name and address.

The background checks are required by the "Brady Bill" but they are up to the States for particular implementation. Here in Georgia, there is an instant check. Cost = $5. They take your ID, name, birthdate, and optionally SSN and run you through the GCIC/NCIC database. If you are clean, you pay and walk out with your gun. If you have a CCW permit, there is no check and you save $5. In Florida, it is similar, but there is a 3-day waiting period on handguns.

If you're under a domestic restraining order, you're prohibited.
The sheriff told me that to be under domestic restraining order or EPO it has to be made by your spouse. He said you can’t get a restraining order against a neighbor or the like.

Also the country attorney said someone has to directly threaten your life or point a gun directly you and threaten your life before you can get a warrant for their arrest.

Was that all a crock or any truth to it?

Most gun dealers know why people like powerful guns and they aren't going to pry too deeply into your reasons or potential uses so long as your papers are in order and you don't bring up illegal activity. "Target shooting for fun" is a good catch all reason for purchasing ANY firearm.

They ask questions? I wouldn’t say anything, just pick up the gun and hand them the money. The more you say the more suspicious you look. BTW I was at a gun show once and the guy sold a gun to some gook who couldn’t even speak English. He just picked up the gun (Taurus 9MM) and started snapping it. No papers or anything just paid double the book value and walked off.

They ask questions? I wouldn’t say anything, just pick up the gun and hand them the money. The more you say the more suspicious you look.
I'm thinking small talk, here. Every time I have bought a gun, I have at least discussed the basics of that particular firearm with the dealer, or compared it to others, or talked about it's suitability for a particular purpose (e.g. deer hunting). No honest gun dealer would ever consider such an exchange a "red flag".

Do you think talking is suspicious but paying double the asking price in cash without saying a word isn't? :confused:

Who pays double the asking price? I am a pacifist I don’t believe in buying guns, my lethal weapon is my mind. The creativity of the Aryan mind is enough to defeat any weapon in the world.

But the last time I bought a gun (before I saw futility in owning firearms) I told the person I was stocking up for the race war. Then he said he was going to buy some talons (popular ammo at the time) because he had been stocking up for the race war as well. :eek:




Do you think talking is suspicious but paying double the asking price in cash without saying a word isn't? :confused:

Somebody who has bought several guns should post what a newbie buyer should expect when he approaches the gun store proprieter to ask him to order a nice SAR-1 or Colt Commando. What papers does the buyer have to show? What questions does the buyer have to answer? What "gotchas" are in the process, if any? What disqualifies someone from buying a rifle such as these? What laws can you run afoul of, if you're not careful? Give a walkthrough.

Jerry AbbottI myself never buy guns through FFL dealers. I simply do not want ZOG (or any of it's minions) knowing what weapons I possess. At present, I own 4 guns (3 handguns and 1 rifle). All are legal and I am not a convicted felon. In Florida, it's perfectly legal to buy guns through the classifieds with absolutely no paperwork whatsoever. None. Zippo. In most cases, you don't even exchange first names with whomever you're buying/selling to.

As Steve B. pointed out to me months back, S&W cut a deal with ZOG whereas every one of their guns sold through a licensed dealer must be registered.

I've got lots to say on the subject, but I'm pressed for time. Catch y'all later.

HO :box:AX

btw -- did you know that in CT. they have 11 misdemeanors on the books that if convicted of, prevent you from owning any type of gun?...not so much as a musket?

As I understand it, a straw sale is a sale in which someone eligible to buy a gun buys a gun for someone who is ineligible to buy a gun. That's illegal.

But if someone eligible to buy a guy buys a gun for someone else who is also eligible to buy a gun - i.e., the first guy is buying it as a Christmas present for the 2nd guy - this is NOT a straw sale, and it's legal. Or so I hear.

A straw sale does not necessarily occur when one person buys a gun for another person. The other person has to be someone who could not legally buy a gun for himself in order for the sale to be a straw sale. Or so I suppose.

My dad bought me a shotgun when I was 12 years old. Was it a straw sale?

Edit: I think that it's still considered a straw sale if someone eligible to buy a gun supplies the necessary money to someone else to be the buyer. What's the difference? I think the government is counting on people not buying other people expensive presents unless they are near relatives who might share them anyway. In order to be a legal non-straw sale, the gun must be bought as a gift for someone else. The someone else isn't allowed to remunerate the buyer.

Assuming that this is in fact how the law stands, anybody who wants to buy me an SAR-1, or SLR-95, or some similar (7.62x39) rifle and a few 30-round AK mags is hereby notified that such a gift would give me great emotional satisfaction. Be sure to check the laws, though, and don't do it if it's illegal despite my research that indicates the legality of such a gift.

(There might be something illegal about shipping a hunting rifle across state lines, but I haven't researched that, so I don't know. Also, what I'm doing at the moment is "soliciting a gift," which is illegal when Congressmen go seeking bribes or when corporate representatives do business for their employers. I don't know of any law that makes it illegal to grant a request for a firearm as a gift, but make sure: if there is, don't do it.)

I've never been convicted of anything except traffic citations, none of which was felonious. If I had a nice rifle, I'd hunt for food with it, and practice shooting paper targets. I don't anticipate using any firearm to threaten or harm humans, but of course if it comes down to killing an armed intruder or being killed by an armed intruder, I'll use any weapon that I can get my hands on...and so would you. When I wasn't using my rifle for legal purposes, I'd keep it on a wall mount inside my house.

Remember, it's got to be a gift. So I can't promise any remuneration or return favor. Naturally, my receipt of this gift doesn't rule out my doing you any favor that I would have done anyway, but it doesn't make such favors any more likely, either.

Edit #2: Naah, never mind. Forget about giving me a rifle, in case anybody was thinking about doing it. There's just no telling which law the giver and I would both miss, but which a Justice Department lawyer would know about. Not worth taking a chance.

Jerry Abbott

Who pays double the asking price? I am a pacifist I don’t believe in buying guns, my lethal weapon is my mind. The creativity of the Aryan mind is enough to defeat any weapon in the world.

But the last time I bought a gun (before I saw futility in owning firearms) I told the person I was stocking up for the race war. Then he said he was going to buy some talons (popular ammo at the time) because he had been stocking up for the race war as well. :eek:

Yeah, unfortunately I lost all my firearms in a boating accident last year. ;)

I am a pacifist I don’t believe in buying guns, my lethal weapon is my mind.

But the last time I bought a gun (before I saw futility in owning firearms) Would you care to elaborate? :mad:

it's believed by many dealers that any purchase for another person is a straw man sale, and a violation of law, regardless of whehter the other person is a lawful owner of firearms or not.

My dad bought me a shotgun when I was 17 too, ironically, and yes, many would now regard that sort of transaction as a potential violation of law.

there's been quite a bit written about this in the NRA magazine which I have not wasted time reading in years since I caught the whiff of Jews about the place.

Looks like ATF just changed the rules for GA. :(
http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/101705georgia-openletter-ffls.pdf

there's been quite a bit written about this in the NRA magazine which I have not wasted time reading in years since I caught the whiff of Jews about the place.

The NRA has become infiltrated by the Kikes. It's really a shame..their new president is a Jewess

I'm no longer a member

a .308 will take any animal on the North American continent -- four-legged or bipedal. ;)
This is true, indeed. However, before attempting to use this particular round on an Alaskan brown bear, you had better make sure you are an absolutely spectacular shot - or are a looooooong way off. :D I don't think I'd use anything under a .338; .375's better.

This is true, indeed. However, before attempting to use this particular round on an Alaskan brown bear, you had better make sure you are an absolutely spectacular shot - or are a looooooong way off. :D I don't think I'd use anything under a .338; .375's better.
A man with a modest AK shooting 7.62x39 out of a 20-round magazine at a bear initially 100 feet away should get the bear, most of the time.

it's believed by many dealers that any purchase for another person is a straw man sale, and a violation of law, regardless of whehter the other person is a lawful owner of firearms or not.

My dad bought me a shotgun when I was 17 too, ironically, and yes, many would now regard that sort of transaction as a potential violation of law.
Not so. On the third page of the form ATF F 4473, it says:

1. WARNING - The Federal firearms laws require that the individual filling out this form must be buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift. Any individual who is not buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift but who completes this form, violates the law. Example: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. If Mr. Jones fills out this form, he will violate the law. However, if Mr. Jones buys the firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Smith as a birthday present, Mr. Jones may lawfully complete this form. A licensee who knowingly delivers a firearm to an individual who is not buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift violates the law by maintaining a false ATF F 4473.

Does anyone know whether the gifts-are-OK part of this form has been superceded?

Jerry Abbott

A man with a modest AK shooting 7.62x39 out of a 20-round magazine at a bear initially 100 feet away should get the bear, most of the time.
Yeah, you're probably right about that. I'd still be scared shitless. Those things can get up to 10' in height, c. 1700 lbs., and the fuckers are fast! You come across one of those critters at it's food source (e.g., dead moose carcass it's protecting) or around cubs, and that thing is going into a blind rage rarely witnessed. That 100' you mentioned would be covered very quickly, and when enraged, they can be unbelievably difficult to stop. I've read reports about how much ammo they can take, and it's often of fairly high caliber. It does depend on the situation, and bears do vary in temperament. Some turn around or drop more quickly than others. I'm thinking of a worst case scenario.

I've always been fond of FN FALs and their clones (CETMEs etc.) and would likely get one of them if I wanted to get a rifle.

This is true, indeed. However, before attempting to use this particular round on an Alaskan brown bear, you had better make sure you are an absolutely spectacular shot - or are a looooooong way off. :D I don't think I'd use anything under a .338; .375's better.
Well-said. I see now why you chose "Centerfire" as a name -- you know wtf you're talking about.

I read an article years ago in a gun rag about just such a hunt. The author using the .06 in this case, was a lifelong hunter and gun enthusiast. He'd hunted "The Big Five" in Africa. On this particular hunt, he was after Kodiak bear specifically (they're the biggest of the browns/grizzlies) and nailed one on a riverbank that weighed in at over 1,600 lbs. His guide, equipped with a .375 H&H was right alongside him, just in case. ;)

Well, my post was leading off topic, this thread being about assault weapons. I found it hard to resist, though, when I saw .308 as a round which can take any critter on the continent. It certainly can! The .308 is what I had in my last rifle (Sako 75), and I just couldn't picture myself using that to take one of the big aggressive brownies in AK. Similar comment could possibly be made about one of the giant AK mooses... though, again, depends on the situation.

He'd hunted "The Big Five" in Africa.
Gosh! < $ > I know this is not a very popular thing with quite a few VNNers, but I sure would love to give that a shot. Long as it's fair game. I sure as hell wouldn't be toatin' a .308 along! :D

Gosh! < $ > I know this is not a very popular thing with quite a few VNNers, but I sure would love to give that a shot. Long as it's fair game. I sure as hell wouldn't be toatin' a .308 along! :D For the leopard (avg. male weighing around 90 lbs.), a .308 would be overkill -- to say the least. On a full-grown male lion I wouldn't know what to use. Elephant, rhino, and cape buffalo you'd need something in the neighborhood of a .412 Rigby or .460 Weatherby.

Although I did read of a professional big-game hunter who killed an African bull elephant with a single shot from -- ready for this? -- a .22 caliber rifle! :eek:

Talk about balls.

update:

I contacted Ruger over the weekend and was told it would cost $50 (plus S&H) to re-blue my rifle and that it'll take 4-6 weeks to do so.

A couple weeks ago, I took the rifle to my local gun dealer and was told it would cost $130. He also told me that it would take approx. 4-6 weeks to get the job done.

You see what this cocksucker's trying to pull here? :mad:

Not so. On the third page of the form ATF F 4473, it says:

1. WARNING - The Federal firearms laws require that the individual filling out this form must be buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift. Any individual who is not buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift but who completes this form, violates the law. Example: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. If Mr. Jones fills out this form, he will violate the law. However, if Mr. Jones buys the firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Smith as a birthday present, Mr. Jones may lawfully complete this form. A licensee who knowingly delivers a firearm to an individual who is not buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift violates the law by maintaining a false ATF F 4473.

Does anyone know whether the gifts-are-OK part of this form has been superceded?

Jerry Abbott

The law is confusing enough that some dealers will not sell if they think that the sale is for another person they just won't sell it to them. Confusing laws allow for easy entrapment and some dealers just don't want the hassle.

For the leopard (avg. male weighing around 90 lbs.), a .308 would be overkill -- to say the least. On a full-grown male lion I wouldn't know what to use. Elephant, rhino, and cape buffalo you'd need something in the neighborhood of a .412 Rigby or .460 Weatherby.

Although I did read of a professional big-game hunter who killed an African bull elephant with a single shot from -- ready for this? -- a .22 caliber rifle! :eek:

Talk about balls.
Expectation on such a trip is that you want trophy quality animals, so average weight is not really what you are considering. Trophy weight male African leopard is, oh, c. 180-220 (huge) lbs. The .308 is enough, I suppose, just depends on how you wish to hunt 'em. I'd prefer to get as close as possible, so a .308 is not an option. Not so much what the animal weighs, rather, what it can do to you and the guide if everything doesn't go perfectly (want to hit 'em hard). You also want to take as few guns as necessary on such a trip. Expensive and cumbersome. A lot of American guys take along something like a .338 WM or .375 HH for medium game and .416 RM to .458 WM for big stuff. Yeah, you can get exotic w/ the doubles and heavier, just talkin' about average stuff. It all depends; fun to shoot the bull about this stuff.

Not to get uh, too technical on you, but you surely mean the .416 Rigby (never heard of the .412), which is what I'd use on big male lion up close. At a distance a .375 is good, maybe .338.

.460 Weatherby ( :( OUCH!)
Although I did read of a professional big-game hunter who killed an African bull elephant with a single shot from -- ready for this? -- a .22 caliber rifle!

Talk about balls.

Yeah, there are several such stories usually involving a native who didn't have anything else, and I'm sure some are true. Through the ear to the brain. Interesting but not at all something a professional would want to do. Would look really bad ethically, and he'd almost surely have his license yanked unless he (for some reason) had no other weapon at disposal.
A couple weeks ago, I took the rifle to my local gun dealer and was told it would cost $130. He also told me that it would take approx. 4-6 weeks to get the job done.

You see what this cocksucker's trying to pull here?
Yeah, I hear you. Does he have much competition? I do prefer to support the local smiths (if they're any good), as long as I'm not getting ripped. If the gun doesn't hold a lot of sentimental value, you can do it yourself, heheh. :) I've watched an old buddy of mine do it, and it's not too difficult for cold blue. Can be a fuckin' mess, though.

Not to get uh, too technical on you, but you surely mean the .416 Rigby (never heard of the .412), which is what I'd use on big male lion up close. At a distance a .375 is good, maybe .338.

.460 Weatherby ( :( OUCH!)

Yeah, there are several such stories usually involving a native who didn't have anything else, and I'm sure some are true. Through the ear to the brain. Interesting but not at all something a professional would want to do. Would look really bad ethically, and he'd almost surely have his license yanked unless he (for some reason) had no other weapon at disposal.

Yeah, I hear you. Does he have much competition? I do prefer to support the local smiths (if they're any good), as long as I'm not getting ripped. If the gun doesn't hold a lot of sentimental value, you can do it yourself, heheh. :) I've watched an old buddy of mine do it, and it's not too difficult for cold blue. Can be a fuckin' mess, though.You're absolutely right, of course. There is no .412, it's .416.

And yes, that's exactly where the guy made the shot on the bull elephant -- through the ear and into the brain.

And no, my local "gunsmith" :rolleyes: has no competition whatsoever 'round these parts, hence, his ripoff prices on store goods and services. I only go there for targets, cleaning supplies, etc. Even his ammo is overpriced. He wants $13 for a 50-count box of no-name .45 ACP ammo. Meanwhile, I'm buying Winchester ammo at Wal-Mart for $18 per 100 rd. box.

This guy's a real lollapalooza, let me tell you. No one I've spoken to has much good to say about him. I'd love to support my local dealer, but this prick makes it really hard.

btw -- Re-blue the whole gun by myself?! No way. It takes a certain touch and it's very easy to mess up. I once watched my stepfather fuckup a .22 semi-auto rifle trying to re-blue it. A couple months back, I bought a bottle of "Perma-blue" just to touch-up the barrel tip and outer edges of the cylinder wall on a Charter Arms .38 snubby. It worked, but not all that well. Looking closely at it, you can see where the blueing doesn't quite match the original factory job.

This guy's a real lollapalooza, let me tell you. No one I've spoken to has much good to say about him. I'd love to support my local dealer, but this prick makes it really hard.
That seems to be a problem in a lot of places. I have just come across a couple good ones wherever I've been. Lot of good ones out there, just depends... whereabouts!

btw -- Re-blue the whole gun by myself?! No way. It takes a certain touch and it's very easy to mess up. I once watched my stepfather fuckup a .22 semi-auto rifle trying to re-blue it. A couple months back, I bought a bottle of "Perma-blue" just to touch-up the barrel tip and outer edges of the cylinder wall on a Charter Arms .38 snubby. It worked, but not all that well. Looking closely at it, you can see where the blueing doesn't quite match the original factory job.
Yep, the ole aptitude test. Fortunately, I haven't been too venturesome with my guns but have had some fun repairing some second hand rifles & no real problems.

I know it's your thread, but it's about assaults. I don't know all that much on the tactical side, and some of these guys do. Maybe I'll PM you or start a new thread. Fun stuff about guns. :cheers:

update:

I contacted Ruger over the weekend and was told it would cost $50 (plus S&H) to re-blue my rifle and that it'll take 4-6 weeks to do so.

A couple weeks ago, I took the rifle to my local gun dealer and was told it would cost $130. He also told me that it would take approx. 4-6 weeks to get the job done.

You see what this cocksucker's trying to pull here? :mad:

Ruger does great shop work. They are reknowned for customer service.

Ruger does great shop work. They are reknowned for customer service.I've yet to send a gun to a factory for repair, but from what I hear, you're absolutely correct -- Ruger has a rep as being excellent in customer service. After all, it makes great business sense. Fuck me over, and the next gun I buy will be from another manufacturer...

dammit! :mad:

I know it's your thread, but it's about assaults. I don't know all that much on the tactical side, and some of these guys do. Maybe I'll PM you or start a new thread. Fun stuff about guns. :cheers:You're right -- we'll keep the conversation on course: assault weapons only.

And here I thought "Alaskan brown bear" was a euphemism for cold-weather niggers.

What is the VNN favorite? AK or AR? They are becoming more common, and cheaper too.

Before I lost all my guns to river pirates, I had a respectable AR that was purchased for $700. These things have the best iron sights I have ever used.

One of the plusses of having an AR-15, is that there are all these different calibers available for it by just attaching a different upper receiver with the 2 takedown pins and add the appropriate type magazine for the new caliber.
There are tons of accessories of all kinds made for the AR.

There are tons of accessories of all kinds made for the AR.You want accessories? Go to www.cheaperthandirt.com and ask them to send you their gun catalogue. I just got mine in the mail a couple days ago and it has every damn thing imaginable for ARs and Ruger Minis. Everything.

And their prices are unbeatable. :cool:

What is the VNN favorite? AK or AR? They are becoming more common, and cheaper too.
Before I lost all my guns to river pirates, I had a respectable AR that was purchased for $700. These things have the best iron sights I have ever used.

Che G. said the insurgent must carry the same weapon as the occupation forces. Draw your own conclusions.

I haven’t seen one is a couple years are they cheaper then www.sportsmansguide.com? The last time I checked sportsman’s guide had them beat by at least 10% on ammo, magazines, scopes and stocks.

You want accessories? Go to www.cheaperthandirt.com and ask them to send you their gun catalogue. I just got mine in the mail a couple days ago and it has every damn thing imaginable for ARs and Ruger Minis. Everything.

And their prices are unbeatable. :cool:

I haven’t seen one is a couple years are they cheaper then www.sportsmansguide.com? The last time I checked sportsman’s guide had them beat by at least 10% on ammo, magazines, scopes and stocks.Whoops! Looks like I've got some comparison shopping to do.

Thanks, Doc -- I'll check it out.

I doubt that there's a prohibition on gun gifting that the Federal form 4473 says doesn't exist. It says in plain English that it's legal for someone to buy a gun with his own money and then give it to someone else as a birthday present.

With a statement like that, what jury would convict a gift giver on the basis that a law had a vague wording? I certainly would not. Once I'd taken a look at that form, the defendant will either walk, or my fellow jurors had better resign themselves to spending the rest of their lives with me in sequestration.

Jerry Abbott

I haven’t seen one is a couple years are they cheaper then www.sportsmansguide.com? The last time I checked sportsman’s guide had them beat by at least 10% on ammo, magazines, scopes and stocks.

yep CDT is cheaper.

I doubt that there's a prohibition on gun gifting that the Federal form 4473 says doesn't exist. It says in plain English that it's legal for someone to buy a gun with his own money and then give it to someone else as a birthday present.

With a statement like that, what jury would convict a gift giver on the basis that a law had a vague wording? I certainly would not. Once I'd taken a look at that form, the defendant will either walk, or my fellow jurors had better resign themselves to spending the rest of their lives with me in sequestration.

Jerry Abbott

There are-- local laws. That's a federal form that doesnt touch on them at all. For example a person living in Chicago can't lawfully own a firearm which is not registered and kept within city limits, but Chicagoans go outside the city and buy thousands of guns a year. Unless they pop up stolen, nobody investigates.

The only local-fed cooperation is mostly in the area of licensing local FFL dealers. A FF licensee has to be in compliance with local zoning laws, and yes the ATF checks. Kind of like they do with Class III possession licensing as well.

A three foot length of Lead piping swung in anger can in terms of 'delivered impact' (measured in Newtons/mm2 or lbs/in2 per gross area of impact) , can in the right circumstances, far outweigh the delivered impact effects of more conventional assault weaponry.

Use of a blunt instrument also calls for more courage than sitting behind a trigger or 'scope, in order to get up close and personal with a foe.

The ability needed to eficiently use a blunt instrument is a 'transferable skill', and is far more discreet than walking around with a 45 magnum or AK47.

Bottom line:
What can be 'better value' than a blunt instrument?.
:box:

A three foot length of Lead piping swung in anger can in terms of 'delivered impact' (measured in Newtons/mm2 or lbs/in2 per gross area of impact) , can in the right circumstances, far outweigh the delivered impact effects of more conventional assault weaponry.

Use of a blunt instrument also calls for more courage than sitting behind a trigger or 'scope, in order to get up close and personal with a foe.

The ability needed to eficiently use a blunt instrument is a 'transferable skill', and is far more discreet than walking around with a 45 magnum or AK47.

Bottom line:
What can be 'better value' than a blunt instrument?.
:box: Yeah, well, a length of pipe might come in handy in a pinch, but I think I'll stick with making myself proficient in the use of firearms, thank you. Call me crazy, but something tells me I'll have a better shot at holding back the hordes the day the SHTF if I'm equipped with an AR or AK, rather than something a neanderthal might consider a step up in advanced weaponry.

Lots of luck on The Big Day swinging your piece of pipe as LeRoy comes at you with a Mac-10 or streetsweeper clasped in his grubby paws.

Yeah, well, a length of pipe might come in handy in a pinch, but I think I'll stick with making myself proficient in the use of firearms, thank you. Call me crazy, but something tells me I'll have a better shot at holding back the hordes the day the SHTF if I'm equipped with an AR or AK, rather than something a neanderthal might consider a step up in advanced weaponry.

Lots of luck on The Big Day swinging your piece of pipe as LeRoy comes at you with a Mac-10 or streetsweeper clasped in his grubby paws.

In the UK it is what we call "illegal" to walk or drive around with an AR or AK, not to say, mighty difficult to get the ammo and the weaponry in the first place.

Blunt instruments are not only obtainable, but their possession can be regarded as 'legal' - an important consideration for 'Brits' in a marxist Police State.

BTW when 'Leroy' and two of his chums (a whole horde of 3 niggery interlopers) tried to mug yours truly, I avoided the SHTF and managed to very effectively incapacitate the ringleader (tracked later by the Police to an hospital :D ) and scared the liviing crap out of his accomplices by applying a 'blunt instrument' a regularly file-sharpened hedge-laying billhook that we country yokels are allowed to carry in our vehicles for the quaint English farming past-time of hedge laying.

Mac-10?. Doesn't scare me at all. I can get up close and leave a new centre parting in a groid's haircut before the average street-coon's dinosaur reflexes could reach for the safety catch.

Plus using a blunt instrument is more socially acceptable?:

The buck nigger I had to take out with a bill-hook can now gain useful employment? - perhaps as a toast-rack thanks to the neatly cut deep horizontal slot that for reasons of self-defense I had very effectively made in his dense boney pea-brained African skull.

A three foot length of Lead piping swung in anger can in terms of 'delivered impact' (measured in Newtons/mm2 or lbs/in2 per gross area of impact) , can in the right circumstances, far outweigh the delivered impact effects of more conventional assault weaponry.

Use of a blunt instrument also calls for more courage than sitting behind a trigger or 'scope, in order to get up close and personal with a foe.

The ability needed to eficiently use a blunt instrument is a 'transferable skill', and is far more discreet than walking around with a 45 magnum or AK47.

Bottom line:
What can be 'better value' than a blunt instrument?.
:box:
The effectiveness of an actual hit on a foe with a blunt instrument isn't the point in favor of the gun. Range of action is. It's not a matter of courage so much as it is of tactical advantage.

I like clubs, personally. I prefer desert ironwood or lignum vitae billy clubs of 1.25"-1.50" diameter and 18"-24" length. But in combat with niggers, I'd prefer a good military rifle any time.

Soldiers are pretty brave guys, usually. But do you see any of them putting down their M-16's in order to grab a nightstick? No? I wonder why not.

Jerry Abbott

Yeah, well, a length of pipe might come in handy in a pinch, but I think I'll stick with making myself proficient in the use of firearms, thank you. Call me crazy, but something tells me I'll have a better shot at holding back the hordes the day the SHTF if I'm equipped with an AR or AK, rather than something a neanderthal might consider a step up in advanced weaponry.

Lots of luck on The Big Day swinging your piece of pipe as LeRoy comes at you with a Mac-10 or streetsweeper clasped in his grubby paws.

Firearms are decisive, if not Jewish efforts at gun confiscation and restriction would be minimal, which they are not. Sadly, Britian has become a tragic example of what "gun control" ultimately leads to, and sadder still many Americans have failed to learn that lesson.

If I'm not mistaken, the 12 gauge Winchester shotgun proved decisive in the American campaign in the Philipines, post Spanish American war. Apparently those Philipinos were using blunt instruments with great effectiveness against our rifles and pistols, but once the shotgun came into play short work was made of the little monkeys.

The effectiveness of an actual hit on a foe with a blunt instrument isn't the point in favor of the gun. Range of action is. It's not a matter of courage so much as it is of tactical advantage.

I like clubs, personally. I prefer desert ironwood or lignum vitae billy clubs of 1.25"-1.50" diameter and 18"-24" length. But in combat with niggers, I'd prefer a good military rifle any time.

Soldiers are pretty brave guys, usually. But do you see any of them putting down their M-16's in order to grab a nightstick? No? I wonder why not.

Jerry Abbott

Fair point JA, but people in civil society do not engage in normal social intercourse by carrying an assault rifle:

Most are too busy working, driving, shopping, taking the kids to school or getting on with everyday life to approach life as if they were attending an NRA shooting detail on a range .To take a position prone or standing to engage an approaching nig by leisurely looking through a tactically advantageous long distance rifle scope is an abnormal scenario.

Your quoted example of the soldier is an exceptional case - it is their duty and job to kill from a distance - not least to prolong their own ability to survive to kill again.

For 'Joe Civilian' with no comparable licence to kill (either from a distance in comfort, or up close and ugly) the idealised weapon of an assault rifle for defense is rarely going to be ready or available in a typical days engagement with the real world ?. Thus an assault weapon needed for the most probable case, is something that can be readily available, legally carried in the majority of circumstances, comfortable to carry wield and use.

For the most probable social scenarios where self defense is needed (street mugging, car-jacking by coons, Nignog knife attack,et etera) - a response by using a blunt instrument requires less preparation than chambering a round, detaching the safety release, looking down a scope or open sight, aiming, and squeezing a trigger.

When Adrenalin is mixed with fear,and survival takes precedence; gun use requires high intensity a priori preparation. Why bother?when to survive, a rapid defensive attack is a must, using whatever mass of dense inert material is literally closest to hand.

Go swot the attacker with an heavy assault weapon made of dense or sharp-edged material.

It worked for me.

Fair point JA, but people in civil society do not engage in normal social intercourse by carrying an assault rifle:
In times such as ours, it would be wise to establish a custom of always being armed, if not with rifles, then with sidearms. In fact, even if we didn't have constant threats of attack by niggers and other muds, an armed society might be a good thing. After an intial adjustment spasm during which hotheaded fools killed each other and were killed in turn, the remaining population would form a polite and mannerly society.

Most are too busy working, driving, shopping, taking the kids to school or getting on with everyday life to approach life as if they were attending an NRA shooting detail on a range .To take a position prone or standing to engage an approaching nig by leisurely looking through a tactically advantageous long distance rifle scope is an abnormal scenario.
There have been times when men carried guns to work, while riding horses, while shopping, while taking the kids to school, while doing chores around the house. Back then the threat was Injuns. In some places, it still is Injuns. But elsewhere there are others who threaten: niggers in the southeastern states, spics in the southwestern states, in the cities and near the coasts, and so on. There's plenty of reason to bring back the 19th century's universal carry of guns, propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding.

It isn't be abnormal to shoot a nigger. A nigger in a White country is an invader, even if he was born here: he's a racial enemy, and enemies fight until one side is gone, one way or another. Even the niggers understand this truth; you can read them telling each other, in published writing, that Blacks must kill Whites. They're confused about which race deserves to have these lands, but they do have the correct attitude toward the conflict between us.

Your quoted example of the soldier is an exceptional case - it is their duty and job to kill from a distance - not least to prolong their own ability to survive to kill again.
In a racial struggle, there are no "civilians." Everyone is a legitimate military target: even a newborn baby. Fight or die, that's the rule, and it's from nature's own rulebook. It is everyone's duty to kill the enemy that his own race might expand and prosper, enjoy safety and land to work upon, to gain resources and promote the racial ideals of culture. This is not an endorsement of political consolidation of power; rather, it is an endorsement of racial patriotism apart from any other political consideration.

For 'Joe Civilian' with no comparable licence to kill (either from a distance in comfort, or up close and ugly) the idealised weapon of an assault rifle for defense is rarely going to be ready or available in a typical days engagement with the real world ?. Thus an assault weapon needed for the most probable case, is something that can be readily available, legally carried in the majority of circumstances, comfortable to carry wield and use.
Carry your pistol on your hip. Carry your rifle, when you think you need a rifle, on your back in a rucksack type holder.

For the most probable social scenarios where self defense is needed (street mugging, car-jacking by coons, Nignog knife attack,et etera) - a response by using a blunt instrument requires less preparation than chambering a round, detaching the safety release, looking down a scope or open sight, aiming, and squeezing a trigger.
Revolvers. All the speed of a blunt instrument, twenty times the effective range of a blunt instrument, and after six shots you grab ahold of the barrel and you have...a blunt instrument.

Rifles afford longer range, and they should be used while the enemy is at long range, precisely because they are awkward in close quarters. However, you only chamber the first round. After that, you've got 29 more rounds to shoot before you need to switch mags and chamber another. Defense of one's self and one's people need not be limited to reaction; you can reasonably anticipate threats and neutralize them with a preemptive attack.

When Adrenalin is mixed with fear,and survival takes precedence; gun use requires high intensity a priori preparation.
You mean marksmanship training? Yes, there's a bit of practice involved. But effective stick fighting requires at least as much practice. More, probably.

Do you mean, instead, drawing the weapon and using it? Which can be done faster: drawing a revolver and firing, or drawing a stick from a belt harness and swinging it? Revolver would be at least as fast. If you claim that your stick was already in your hand, then my revolver was already in mine.

Why bother?when to survive, a rapid defensive attack is a must, using whatever mass of dense inert material is literally closest to hand.
You'd be surprised, I think, how often happenstance does not make available any suitable object for you to reach down and grab. You pretty much have to bring your pipe or mace along with you.

Go swot the attacker with an heavy assault weapon made of dense or sharp-edged material. It worked for me.
You're 20 feet from a nigger who has this itty bitty revolver. There's nowhere to run. You have a pipe in your hand. What's your odds of winning this engagement?

Jerry Abbott

In the UK it is what we call "illegal" to walk or drive around with an AR or AK, not to say, mighty difficult to get the ammo and the weaponry in the first place.

Blunt instruments are not only obtainable, but their possession can be regarded as 'legal' - an important consideration for 'Brits' in a marxist Police State.

BTW when 'Leroy' and two of his chums (a whole horde of 3 niggery interlopers) tried to mug yours truly, I avoided the SHTF and managed to very effectively incapacitate the ringleader (tracked later by the Police to an hospital :D ) and scared the liviing crap out of his accomplices by applying a 'blunt instrument' a regularly file-sharpened hedge-laying billhook that we country yokels are allowed to carry in our vehicles for the quaint English farming past-time of hedge laying.

Mac-10?. Doesn't scare me at all. I can get up close and leave a new centre parting in a groid's haircut before the average street-coon's dinosaur reflexes could reach for the safety catch.

Plus using a blunt instrument is more socially acceptable?:

The buck nigger I had to take out with a bill-hook can now gain useful employment? - perhaps as a toast-rack :D thanks to the neatly cut deep horizontal slot that for reasons of self-defense I had very effectively made in his dense boney pea-brained African skull.So, if and when The Big Day does finally arrive, and the mud criminals in the UK pile out onto the streets with guns (I'm making the assumption that a lot of criminals in Britain do use guns to commit many of their crimes) to hunt Whitey down, your game plan is to arm a mob with pick-axes, scythes, and pitchforks to do battle with these turds?! For some strange reason, the movie "Frankenstein" keeps popping into my head as I write this....:confused:

As for your confrontation with the niggers -- aren't you just the teensiest bit relieved that the fuckers didn't pull a gun on you? Tell me, what good then would a pipe have been in such a situation? Sure, anything is better than nothing, but don't try to give the impression that a pipe or some farm tool is just as effective as a gun.

The assertion that you would not be afraid of someone trying to pump a magazine of bullets into you via the barrel of a Mac-10 while you yourself are "armed" with a stick of some sort is, IMO, nothing more than sheer bravado on your part. I think you'd brown-out in your bermudas. I know I would. Do you really think you're going to be able to sneak cat-like up to any ol' nigger of your choosing and WHOMP!, lay him out like a dead carp? It's an utterly absurd contention. Assuming the nigger has the safety on in the first place, what makes you think you're going to be able to put the shitskin on a slab when it takes but a split second to release the catch?

I know the jew has finally disarmed Brits entirely -- and believe me when I say I feel for you -- but no matter how you slice it, when the SHTF you are going to need firearms to protect you and yours, whether they're illegal to possess or not. Lead is a helluva lot more effective coming out of the end of a barrel than it is in the form of a pipe being swung by the human arm.

Many of us are locked in the mental prison thought that a man with a gun is more dangerous than the one without. A person who hesitates will get his gun taken away from him. A chimp who can’t handle the white man’s boomstick is not as dangerous as one would think.

The true danger lies within the creative mind of the Aryan warrior. With a gun you shoot once and kill once. Someone like Tim Mcveigh (if you truly believe he did it) can kill several hundred without a gun. People like the Arabs of the WTC can kill several thousand people without the use of a firearm.

True danger lies in the creativity of the Aryan mind to improvise and overcome. One Tim Mcveigh can take out a building full of a thousand armed chimps.

While I don’t advocate improvised weapons I am simply trying to show people that the white man is far from impotent without his fire rod.


So, if and when The Big Day does finally arrive, and the mud criminals in the UK pile out onto the streets with guns to hunt Whitey down, your game plan is to arm a mob with pick-axes, scythes, and pitchforks to do battle with these t----?!

Many of us are locked in the mental prison thought that a man with a gun is more dangerous than the one without. A person who hesitates will get his gun taken away from him. A chimp who can’t handle the white man’s boomstick is not as dangerous as one would think.

The true danger lies within the creative mind of the Aryan warrior. With a gun you shoot once and kill once. Someone like Tim Mcveigh (if you truly believe he did it) can kill several hundred without a gun. People like the Arabs of the WTC can kill several thousand people without the use of a firearm.

True danger lies in the creativity of the Aryan mind to improvise and overcome. One Tim Mcveigh can take out a building full of a thousand armed chimps.

While I don’t advocate improvised weapons I am simply trying to show people that the white man is far from impotent without his fire rod.No one here even remotely implied that the White man is "impotent without his fire rod." And we already know that Whites are capable of making people go KABLOOIE!! -- if'n they have a notion.

Nice little speech there, Doc, but you've simply got to plant your boots firmly back on Ground Reality and realize that we're talking about the best way to save the lives of your loved ones and yourself in an all-hell-breakin'-loose situation (think of the White farmers in Rhodesia) -- sans all the pacifist bullshit.

You know that if the SHTF it's all going to come down to fighting in the streets. And that's if it isn't too late already: that scenario is about our only hope at this point. There's not going to be a peaceful resolution to the mess we find ourselves in, unfortunately.

When the time comes, there's only going to be one way out. I only hope I live to see the day.

Think about this. Look at the damage the Vietnamese did to the well-trained and superior armed American soldiers with not much more than booby traps. During times of revolution, anarchy or guerilla warfare improvised weapons have often become victorious over a well-armed military. The ability to defend ones self is more than owning a gun it is an ideology. The natural instinct of self-preservation. The whites in New Orleans would sit idly by while monkeys killed their wives and raped their daughters.

ZOG could crack down tomorrow on all weapons owners and the Turner Diaries could become a reality. Some of the people make good points about lead pipes in self-defense. We can never outlaw pipes or other such weapons. While some people may spend several thousand dollars on guns, they are only one congressional act away from losing their investment and suffering death or prison time.

To truly defend yourself you must prepare your mind and body. Your gun could malfunction, you could lose it or it could be outlawed all together. There are to many variables with guns. We must be able to bring ourselves beyond that ideology into unarmed combat in self-defense situations.

Now I am not saying go out and sell all of your guns, but rather grow beyond the need of a gun to defend yourself. In my recent study of Soyac Kali I am confident that a well-trained knives man is just as dangerous as a gun-wielding thug. In such an event I am also confident a well-trained knives man could take the thugs gun if he thought the need would arise.

We should face facts. Right now if a white racist pulls a gun he will more than likely go to jail. If he uses the gun he will go to prison. Assuming he has the gun handy, if he is ambushed and can’t get to his gun quick enough his adversaries will have his gun. This isn’t high noon at Dodge City, people won’t wait for your quick draw technique, they will nail you as soon and efficiently as possible.

We may think about range but the only time we will have range is in the event of an assassination. If you get far enough away from your opponent the court will ask why you didn’t keep running once you were out of harms way. You won’t see your opponent coming in time to pull your weapon either. If you do pull a weapon and fire it in a populated area and strike someone innocent you will go to prison for a long time. When you pull a gun you have to be ready to kill, die and face the consequences. The chances of a white racist defending himself with a gun and not going to prison are slim. Doles had guns and didn’t use them against anyone nor did he threaten anyone. WN’s who own weapons stand a strong chance of ending up with the same fate.

Also I forgot about the felony factor. You could easily get convicted of a trumped up hate crime and lose your rights to own a firearm.


Call or talk to Kurt Saxon he has a really sound ideology on being armed.

Whatever works for you, I guess. :cheers:



Nice little speech there, Doc, but you've simply got to plant your boots firmly back on Ground Reality and realize that we're talking about the best way to save the lives of your loved ones and yourself in an all-hell-breakin'-loose situation (think of the White farmers in Rhodesia) -- sans all the pacifist bullshit.

You know that if the SHTF it's all going to come down to fighting in the streets.

A person who hesitates will get his gun taken away from him. A chimp who can’t handle the white man’s boomstick is not as dangerous as one would think.

:rolleyes: When I read something like that, I have to conclude you have almost no experience with firearms or much knowledge of them. Gun disarmament is extremely difficult and dangerous and if you're facing the business end of a gun, and more than 12 inches away, your odds suck bigtime. They aren't that much better up close either, but you might have a fighting chance, but it's a big if, and while the chimps are somewhat incompetent, don't kid yourself that they'll be getting disarmed with ease.

Nice little speech there, Doc, but you've simply got to plant your boots firmly back on Ground Reality and realize that we're talking about the best way to save the lives of your loved ones and yourself in an all-hell-breakin'-loose situation (think of the White farmers in Rhodesia) -- sans all the pacifist bullshit.

You know that if the SHTF it's all going to come down to fighting in the streets. And that's if it isn't too late already: that scenario is about our only hope at this point. There's not going to be a peaceful resolution to the mess we find ourselves in, unfortunately.

When the time comes, there's only going to be one way out. I only hope I live to see the day.

How many of us hope to live to see that day! :box:

All good points btw, if we lose our gun priviliges in America, it's going to be a wrap. I'm actually amazed at how few White men are even bothering to exercise their privilige to own and keep arms. :( We should keep in mind that if gun confiscation and restriction were to our advantage the Jew wouldn't be working overtime to make that a reality here in America. They've already done it everywhere else White.

That is the most comical post of the day. You’re right, you are the expert and I know nothing. How many gun stores have employed you? How many guns have you shot?

You didn’t read the post. If you hesitate the monkey will have your gun. The monkey won’t just stand there and hold the gun he will shoot you. Disarming someone isn’t difficult if they don’t have the drop on your. However if you let the situation escalate to the point the monkey is holding the gun a foot from your face then you have abandoned all hope.

You are saying things I didn’t say. I never said anything about standing 12 inches from a monkey holding a cocked weapon in your face and then doing a Steven Segal or Jeff Speakman. I am talking about sneaking up on an armed sentry during times of war. I am talking about defending yourself when there is anarchy in the streets. Preparing yourself to defend yourself without a firearm. If you have allowed the monkey to get the drop on you and stick the gun in your face you have lost already. And I have disarmed someone once before, he hesitated and I didn’t and because of that no one got hurt. Had he pulled the trigger I am sure I would be dead or in the hospital right now.

If a warrior is defined by his ability to own a gun then anyone with $300 can be as an effective warrior and anyone else in the world.

I notice you have the name white fist and not white firearm. You must hold some importance in using your fist. :rolleyes:

Next time read and think before you post.

:rolleyes: When I read something like that, I have to conclude you have almost no experience with firearms or much knowledge of them.

That is the most comical post of the day. You’re right, you are the expert and I know nothing. How many gun stores have employed you? How many guns have you shot?

Actually I have worked for an FFL dealer, and beyond that I own and have shot probably more firearms then you could name, not to mention that I have actually worked an occupation that involved the legal carrying of a firearm.

You are saying things I didn’t say. I never said anything about standing 12 inches from a monkey holding a cocked weapon in your face and then doing a Steven Segal or Jeff Speakman. I am talking about sneaking up on an armed sentry during times of war. I am talking about defending yourself when there is anarchy in the streets. Preparing yourself to defend yourself without a firearm. If you have allowed the monkey to get the drop on you and stick the gun in your face you have lost already. And I have disarmed someone once before, he hesitated and I didn’t and because of that no one got hurt. Had he pulled the trigger I am sure I would be dead or in the hospital right now.

If a warrior is defined by his ability to own a gun then anyone with $300 can be as an effective warrior and anyone else in the world.

I notice you have the name white fist and not white firearm. You must hold some importance in using your fist. :rolleyes:

Next time read and think before you post.

If you are actually going to make the claim that weapon disarmament is easy then I stand by what I said, you have no idea wtf you're talking about. The truth of the matter is that firearms have and do make adversaries orders of magnitude more dangerous.

So basically what you are saying is without a gun you are completely useless as a warrior. If guns are banned and you use one or even pull one you go to prison. Let’s say you are out passing out WN literature and are attacked by a monkey and then get convicted of a federal hate crime resulting in a felony. Then if you own a gun you go to prison.

You are locked in prison already because you are in a mental prison. I can name over 400 different guns off the top of my head so I am glad to see you have shot more than that many different types. Everyone is an expert online. It is pointless arguing about who knows what. But I see you are afraid to use your real name, so why should I think you are a brave warrior?

If you need a gun to be a man, who am I to argue. More power to you brother. Just don't call me when you need bail money.


Actually I have worked for an FFL dealer, and beyond that I own and have shot probably more firearms then you could name, not to mention that I have actually worked an occupation that involved the legal carrying of a firearm.



If you are actually going to make the claim that weapon disarmament is easy then I stand by what I said, you have no idea wtf you're talking about. The truth of the matter is that firearms have and do make adversaries orders of magnitude more dangerous.

So basically what you are saying is without a gun you are completely useless as a warrior. If guns are banned and you use one or even pull one you go to prison. Let’s say you are out passing out WN literature and are attacked by a monkey and then get convicted of a federal hate crime resulting in a felony. Then if you own a gun you go to prison.

You are locked in prison already because you are in a mental prison. I can name over 400 different guns off the top of my head so I am glad to see you have shot more than that many different types. Everyone is an expert online. It is pointless arguing about who knows what. But I see you are afraid to use your real name, so why should I think you are a brave warrior?

If you need a gun to be a man, who am I to argue. More power to you brother. Just don't call me when you need bail money.

Fact: A gun is a tool.

Fact: A White man is a weapon.

Fact: A properly trained White individual with a firearm makes for a very dangerous combination.

Good Idea: Weapons should acquire useful tools when they are easily available, so they can reach their maximum effectiveness.

Bad Idea: Disregarding effective tools when they are readily available because of personal pride.

So basically what you are saying is without a gun you are completely useless as a warrior. If guns are banned and you use one or even pull one you go to prison. Let’s say you are out passing out WN literature and are attacked by a monkey and then get convicted of a federal hate crime resulting in a felony. Then if you own a gun you go to prison.

You are locked in prison already because you are in a mental prison. I can name over 400 different guns off the top of my head so I am glad to see you have shot more than that many different types. Everyone is an expert online. It is pointless arguing about who knows what. But I see you are afraid to use your real name, so why should I think you are a brave warrior?

If you need a gun to be a man, who am I to argue. More power to you brother. Just don't call me when you need bail money.

Your posts are full of so much bullshit, where shall we start with the shovel?

There are many states in America that allow for legal, concealed carry, and there is absolutely no reason for White men to be afraid to exercise that right/privilige. We all understand White men are not limited to firearms alone to defend themselves, their loved ones and their property. We can either make use of this right/privilige we have or lose it. Using a firearm for self-defense does not automatically mean indictment or conviction in a court of law. As things stand right now, America is still very pro-gun and gun friendly. We should see to it that it continues to be.

Also, you are no expert if you're going to put forth the fiction that weapon disarmament is in any way easy, or without extreme risk. Furthermore if you did in fact know anything about firearms and firearm disarmament, the best chance you have is in fact to be as close as possible, your odds improve significantly the closer you are to your assailant and the weapon, hopefully the assailant would be fool enough to close the gap and put that weapon as close to you as possible, even if close to the face.

Well I am sure when Uncle Zoggy comes to your house he will find you willing to start a revolution. Or do you think if you got a visit from the Feds you would just give up your gun and go quietly?

Not everyone is legal to carry a weapon. Do you really think the guns are a threat to anyone? How difficult do you think it would be for the government to disarm America? They have done it in several cities and a few states. Your faith is in a privilege that could be gone tomorrow. Without your precious guns what would you be able to do? Any monkey can pull a trigger but it takes a white mind to plan a revolution. It can be done without one shot fired.

There are many states in America that allow for legal, concealed carry, and there is absolutely no reason for White men to be afraid to exercise that right/privilige.

Spoken like an NRA Neocon.
We should see to it that it continues to be.

Tell it to the judge.
Using a firearm for self-defense does not automatically mean indictment or conviction in a court of law.

No you are the expert. I am sure Smith and Wesson or Ruger pays you a ton of money for your expertise. No wait, you are the editor for Guns and Ammo that is why you can’t give your real name. I bet you are Massad Ayoob. Is that who you are? Such an honor to be in the presence of such an expert.
Furthermore if you did in fact know anything about firearms and firearm disarmament,

It is easy to sit anonymously behind a computer talking about who you are going to “blow away” but it is a completely different story when it comes time to put the gun in someone’s face and pull the trigger. If someone freezes at that split second they can be disarmed easily. That has nothing to do with being an expert on guns it is a fact of human psychology.






Actually you think my social ideologies about owning guns proves I have no actual knowledge about guns themselves. Stop being a clown. :rolleyes:

I hate to butt in, but I have to respond to this:

Well I am sure when Uncle Zoggy comes to your house he will find you willing to start a revolution. Or do you think if you got a visit from the Feds you would just give up your gun and go quietly?I can only speak for myself, but I will never give up my guns as long as I live. If I allow someone to take my guns from me, then that makes me a slave to whom they can do anything they want. That's not going to happen. Everyone dies anyway -- possible much more slowly and painfully than from bullets -- so if I'm going to die, it will be with my boots on, while taking a few of the ZOG bastards with me. And I can certainly do that. I have excellent rifles, plenty of steel-core ammo, NIJ Class IV body armor (can stop armor-piercing rifle rounds), an NIJ Class IIIA helmet (will stop subgun rounds), and an excellent gas mask with filters. That's the kind of preparation we anti-ZOG people need.


Not everyone is legal to carry a weapon. Do you really think the guns are a threat to anyone?Of course they're a threat. You can blow someone's head off from hundreds of yards away with a rifle.


How difficult do you think it would be for the government to disarm America?It would be literally impossible. There are too many guns out there, and too many people will never give them up.


They have done it in several cities and a few states.Only on paper. In cities such as D.C. people get shot all the time. Laws don't mean squat unless people enslave themselves by choosing to follow them out of fear.


Your faith is in a privilege that could be gone tomorrow.How will it be taken away? Anyone who tries to get my weapons will be met by a hail of steel-core bullets. And who says that all combat against ZOG has to be done from inside one's home while surrounded? That's a last resort.

Look at how much trouble those whackos at Waco gave the feds. They repelled the initial raid despite being outnumbered, outgunned (a helicopter with a mounted machine gun was even used on them) and having women and children to look after. The BATF was forced to back off, some with their hands in the air, others dragging their dead and wounded with them. Of course the Branch Davidians were still surrounded and couldn't escape, but they fought heroically and took some of the lousy fuckers with them.

Government thugs are basically cowards who will run from a fair or unexpected fight. But guns necessary to do anything to them. Guns are power; without guns, you're powerless. All the intellect in the world is useless at repelling force -- unless that intellect is being used to make or use weapons.

As for the best assault weapon value, I recommend one of the 7.62x39 or 5.56x45 AKs ("VEPRs") sold by Robinson Armament:

http://www.robarm.com/

The VEPRs are around $600. They are basically a form of AK, but they're made from a heavier receiver (the one used for the Russian RPK machine gun). These guns weight a bit more than other guns of the same caliber -- maybe too much more -- but they are extremely reliable, durable, and even accurate. I recommend them highly.

AR-15s are also good. Bushmaster is a good maker, as is Rock River Arms. (The pigs at the DEA recently ordered a whole lot of semi-auto carbines from RRA. They are just like the "civilian" version but with 14.5'' barrels rather than 16" -- big deal.) Colt makes good firearms but is a government whore and thus should not be patronized. Armalite and DPMS are also pretty good, I hear. Just be sure to get an AR with a NATO 5.56 chamber rather than a SAAMI .223 chamber (they are NOT the same). Also try to get a chrome-lined barrel and chamber rather than stainless steel or even chrome-moly.

Which is better, 5.56x45 or 7.62x39? It depends. For potentially fighting ZOG's thugs in the future when they're trying to round up us political dissidents and put us into camps, 5.56 NATO (that is, steel core M855, which is still available in the US from ammoman.com and other places) is better because it's better at penetrating body armor. (5.56 NATO is an NIJ Class IV threat, which is as high as personal body armor gets. I believe all nearly 7.62x39 currently available in the US is Class III.) It also has a flatter trajectory, and at ranges inside of 100 yards or so (depending on barrel length) it does more tissue damage than 7.62. Its main drawback is its inferior ability to penetrate materials other than body armor, such as car windshield glass. It also gets deflected fairly easily by foliage and such. I currently own rifles that fire both rounds, but if I had to stick with only one of these two calibers, it would be the 5.56 without a doubt. That body armor penetration is crucial.

To sum up, my first recommendation for less than $1000 is a VEPR .223 with a 16" barrel for cities or 20" for rural areas. Make sure you get the flash suppressor on the end of the barrel rather than the muzzle break!

http://www.ak47.com/products.asp?cat=10

My second recommendation is an AR-15 with 16" or 20" A2 barrel, flash suppressor (esp. the "Phantom"), and 5.56 NATO chrome-lined chamber. If money permits, get a rail system onto which you can mount goodies such as a Surefire light, laser sight, etc.

If you have about $1500 and want something more potent, it's hard to beat one of the .308 FALs (proprietary name: SA58) made by DSArms:

http://www.dsarms.com/subcats.cfm?Category=01&storeid=1

If you live in an area where assault rifles are illegal and you're too chicken to break the law (or you have family who depend on you, etc.), then I recommend something that's quite politically correct but is deadlier than ANY assault rifle: a semi-auto hunting rifle in a caliber such as .300 Win Mag. For example:

http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/detail.asp?value=002B&cat_id=031&type_id=008

Any ZOG thug with a brain would be terrified of you while you're wielding that thing from behind a barrier!

Also don't forget a good (NIOSH-approved, NATO-spec, NOT SURPLUS) gas mask and filter! They are almost as important as guns! The company Scott makes some good ones, such as the M95. Shelf life is about 20 years for the mask and 15 years for the unopened filters. Get these while you still can!!!

Also buy NIJ Class IIIA or higher body armor if you can possibly afford it!

Spread the word, folks. There could come a time when we desperately need this stuff.

........

You're 20 feet from a nigger who has this itty bitty revolver. There's nowhere to run. You have a pipe in your hand. What's your odds of winning this engagement?

Jerry Abbott

Since most niggers don't know how to use sights, your chances are about even I'd say. If it's a small caliber revolver, it won't stop you even if you take a hit, unless he gets lucky. If it's a major caliber, that's different, but it's even less likely he want hit because it will be a bigger bang that will make him flinch.

......, 5.56 NATO (that is, steel core M855.........

keep in mind that steel core 223 is now only available in 62 gr bullets, which need a newer 1:7 twist barrel. Lots of old AR15s have the 1-12 twist barrel which will only stabilize the 55 grain old style NATO bullets or lighter.

You didn’t read the post. If you hesitate the monkey will have your gun.
If he's within arm's reach, he might. The advantage to guns is that they solve the problem of distance. Bows and arrows do, too, but guns have a faster multiple-shot rate. Let's try to avoid false dichotomies when speaking of combat distance. There's arm's reach. There's sniping range. But there's also across-the-room and across-the-street ranges for which pistols will avail a warrior, whereas sticks and knives will not. In the second that two enemies require to cross a room, you can kill one of them with a bullet. In the five seconds that four enemies require to cross the street, you can wound or kill two or three of them with bullets, greatly improving your odds against those who remain.

The monkey won’t just stand there and hold the gun he will shoot you.
Then...don't hesitate.

Disarming someone isn’t difficult if they don’t have the drop on your. However if you let the situation escalate to the point the monkey is holding the gun a foot from your face then you have abandoned all hope.
Then begin shooting before the niggers get close. You do have to assume that they mean you trouble before they give warning of their intentions. That's why mixed race countries don't work. One race has to be a bunch of fools, whom the other race can take advantage of simply by not making obvious threats until getting close enough to their intended victim that most of the advantage of firearms is lost. If one race is such a bunch of fools, the other race WILL take advantage of it. Law of nature.

Shoot, then. And if the state executes you, at least you've likely saved the lives of all of the White people who would otherwise have been among the victims of those particular niggers.

Given the situation we are in, it's probably morally wrong to put a premium on your personal survival. When you do, you place upon your race the risks and dangers that you seek to ward away from yourself. Consider that practically all of the threat to us could be eliminated in one, single morning, if every White person picked up a gun, went out, and killed every non-White he saw. It would be over before lunch. And if some deluded government agents didn't like what we'd done, we could put them down as well. There'd be enough of us to do it.

The main business that our government has with White nationalism, at present, is preventing us from getting organized enough to carry off, at some level, precisely what I just described. That's why they infiltrate us, turn us one against another, subvert us with threats or bribes, and generally make it difficult of us to trust each other enough to build a solid organization. And they've done it successfully for a long time. There've been so many turncoats, so many snitches, and so many backstabbers that no White nationalist really trusts any other White nationalist. As the result, we confine our activities to what even a Jew-lawyer would assure us was legal. And as the result of that we are less effective at getting the changes we want than a gang of teenage punks who aren't afraid to get down and bloody with their competition.

You are saying things I didn’t say. I never said anything about standing 12 inches from a monkey holding a cocked weapon in your face and then doing a Steven Segal or Jeff Speakman. I am talking about sneaking up on an armed sentry during times of war.
Taking out a sentry by sneaking up on him, assuming that the sentry is reasonably alert, is difficult. Not impossible, but much harder than you might think. Try this. Tell a friend of yours to sneak up behind you the next day and tickle your ribs without your catching him on the approach, and tell him to approach you for no other reason on that day. What's the chance that you won't see or hear him coming before he can put a hand on you? The chance is a poor one: most of the time, his attempt to sneak up on you will fail. He will make a small noise, however much he might try to be silent. Or you might turn and see him as he moves from a point 40 feet from you to a point half as far.

But with a silenced pistol, you can usually take out a sentry with ease. To be sure, silencers are usually illegal. But so is killing someone standing sentry. If you must be on the shady side of the law anyway, then there's no reason not to go wholeheartedly, and plenty of reason in favor. Most of the people who get caught are people who didn't break all the laws they would have had to break in order to avoid getting caught. Failing to use a silencer is an example. Leaving a witness alive is another.

I am talking about defending yourself when there is anarchy in the streets.
Failure to secure a full-auto weapon is yet another example of how to get killed, when among your foes there are those with full-auto weapons. I don't mean just the police. There's the JDL, negro drug pushers, Mexican insurgents... any of which might be among your opponents in a street fight. Even if none of your foes in a street fight have full-auto weapons, how else can you inflict enough injury on 20 hostile rioters to render them otherwise manageable or put the survivors to flight? Grenades, maybe? Got any?

Don't answer that. And don't announce an intention to break the law in any way. I'm just pointing out that the law outlaws some of the weapons you would need to survive in certain combat situations. We both know that the government knows that criminals, breaking gun control laws, will get any weapon that money can buy without the "benefit" of an ATF background check. That is, we both know that the purpose of those laws is to weaken the race that by long tradition comprises the greatest part of the most lawful: the White race. We both know that the Jews are the authors and initiators of this strategy for weakening us.

Nonetheless, facts are facts. Nobody armed with only a pipe is going to beat anybody else with a pistol from across the room (at least a pistol is needed). Nobody armed with only a pistol is going to beat 20 thugs armed with pipes approaching him from across the street (a full auto rifle is needed). Nobody will survive for long if he must sneak up on sentries closely enough to hit them with a stick (a silent, accurate ranged weapon is needed).

Preparing yourself to defend yourself without a firearm. If you have allowed the monkey to get the drop on you and stick the gun in your face you have lost already. And I have disarmed someone once before, he hesitated and I didn’t and because of that no one got hurt. Had he pulled the trigger I am sure I would be dead or in the hospital right now.
Do you trust this sort of luck to continue?

If a warrior is defined by his ability to own a gun then anyone with $300 can be as an effective warrior and anyone else in the world.
Not true. Marksmanship is an acquired skill, and it can make all the difference in the world.

Next time read and think before you post.
Excellent advice.

Jerry Abbott

Since most niggers don't know how to use sights, your chances are about even I'd say. If it's a small caliber revolver, it won't stop you even if you take a hit, unless he gets lucky. If it's a major caliber, that's different, but it's even less likely he want hit because it will be a bigger bang that will make him flinch.
I disagree. Twenty feet, though beyond clubbing distance, is an easy point-shoot distance on a man sized target. You don't really need to aim. Of course, you can still aim and get off shots before the club-user can close the distance. Niggers aren't necessarily poor shots, either. And if a nig has fired guns before (a safe bet) he'll be expecting the bang and won't flinch.

I disagree. Twenty feet, though beyond clubbing distance, is an easy point-shoot distance on a man sized target. You don't really need to aim. Of course, you can still aim and get off shots before the club-user can close the distance. Niggers aren't necessarily poor shots, either. And if a nig has fired guns before (a safe bet) he'll be expecting the bang and won't flinch.I can put at least three rds. out of five in someone's chest at that distance with my Charter Arms .38 snubby -- and I'm just an average shot. Niggers aren't necessarily good shots either, despite all the practice they get shooting the hell out of one another fighting over gang turf. Half the times on "drive-bys" they wind up hitting innocent bystanders rather their intended victims. But anyone can stop a man with a small caliber weapon at a distance of 20 feet, if a vital organ is hit.

I recommend something that's quite politically correct but is deadlier than ANY assault rifle: a semi-auto hunting rifle in a caliber such as .300 Win Mag. For example:

http://www.browning.com/products/ca...031&type_id=008


The knock on these has been that they aren't designed to stand up to the rigors of battle as say an AK is, meaning not meant to shoot thousands of rounds in short period of time and under conditions such as in Iraqi desert etc.
However hunting is an all too often muddy and dusty affair so maybe that part isn't accurate, I do wonder about ability to sustain high levels of fire for extended periods before breaking down.

How do you clean the barrel of the Browing semi-auto from the muzzle end?
That isn't a good idea but is that the only way to do it? As with the lever actions?
BTW,I don't think you are the jew Masaad Ayoob, who supported the high-mag ban when first proposed by George HW Bush in 1989.

Just a quick observation.
I have always followed what Commander Rockwell said, KEEP IT LEGAL.
I think that is the way to live your life and there is no reason to think or do otherwise.
I also do not think that the men and women of law enforcement, whether federal, state or local, are "cowards" or "thugs."
I do think that bad administrations, bad brass, make bad street attitudes.
There was time that the law enforcement officers were all our best friends, they conducted themselves, at the federal levels, in many cases, just as portrayed by Efrem Zimbalist Jr., but again bad administrations equate to bad field actions and that was the case when J.EDGAR allowed extralegal methodologies in the Democrats war against the Klan.
Law enforcement, SHOULD, act in accordance with the law, they should not descend to levels that thugs and criminals act at, this is a nation founded on the idea of law, order, and equality before the bar of justice, let's hope this is the attitude that our sworn personnel uphold.

I disagree. Twenty feet, though beyond clubbing distance, is an easy point-shoot distance on a man sized target. You don't really need to aim. Of course, you can still aim and get off shots before the club-user can close the distance. Niggers aren't necessarily poor shots, either. And if a nig has fired guns before (a safe bet) he'll be expecting the bang and won't flinch.

I wouldnt give you 50-50 against a White person, but against a nigger I would.

Niggers can't aim worth spit. They have poor fine motor coordination. They dont do well in racing or shooting sports. Has a nigger ever won Bianchi cup or an olympic medal in shooting or Camp Perry? No way. There' stupid but they're smart enough to know they might as well get an automatic because "spray and pray" is their usual modality.

As for 20 feet, that's 7 yards. 2 seconds to get there. If I can jump first, and the nigger has to react, that gives me at least a half second to close the gap.

Nigger gets one shot, he better make it good. If he doesnt hit me in the pelvis, spine, heart or head, I'm gonna put a hurt on him.

I can put at least three rds. out of five in someone's chest at that distance with my Charter Arms .38 snubby -- and I'm just an average shot. Niggers aren't necessarily good shots either, despite all the practice they get shooting the hell out of one another fighting over gang turf. Half the times on "drive-bys" they wind up hitting innocent bystanders rather their intended victims. But anyone can stop a man with a small caliber weapon at a distance of 20 feet, if a vital organ is hit.

You think so? Most real world "gunfights" occur in about that much space and reality is hardly as decisive as that. I'm not the expert, but I've read them for years. I also shoot regularly in timed competition and you'd be amazed how often people miss even up close when under pressure. Especially me!

..........way to do it? As with the lever actions?
BTW,I don't think you are the jew Masaad Ayoob, who supported the high-mag ban when first proposed by George HW Bush in 1989.

He's Lebanese.

He's Lebanese.
Why does he have a Hebrew name then? His name is a JEWISH name Ayoob.
Massad is also a jew name could he be a lebanese jew?

You think so? Most real world "gunfights" occur in about that much space and reality is hardly as decisive as that. I'm not the expert, but I've read them for years. I also shoot regularly in timed competition and you'd be amazed how often people miss even up close when under pressure. Especially me!Actually, most gunfights occur within 7'-10' -- at least according to the FBI stats I read years back. Kinda narrows the odds a bit.

Also, I know you shoot competition (I plan on getting into that myself at a range in Leesburg, Fl.) and I know somewhat of the pressure matches can bring to bear on shooters (I shot a 16 competitively in the military for a brief time). But, you're under pressure that's been instilled by the anticipation of competing -- you work yourself into it. I seriously doubt a potentially lethal run-in with a nigger is going to involve the shitskin getting all "nuvvus an' shit" about hitting his target in the kill zone -- there's simply not enough time.

Actually, most gunfights occur within 7'-10' -- at least according to the FBI stats I read years back. Kinda narrows the odds a bit..

Right, you got it.

.....I know somewhat of the pressure matches can bring to bear on shooters (I shot a 16 competitively in the military for a brief time). But, you're under pressure that's been instilled by the anticipation of competing -- you work yourself into it. ..

OK, true enough. Hopefully one gets to the point where you get over that. My scores have gotten better over time.

.....I seriously doubt a potentially lethal run-in with a nigger is going to involve the shitskin getting all "nuvvus an' shit" about hitting his target in the kill zone -- there's simply not enough time.

Well, since we're talking self defense only here-- I'm seeing some boon groid hitting on the crack pipe, getting all hyped up to committ crime or whatever, because they are of low moral quality and they needto build up their nerve, and so I don't see the average low quality ape as being able to successfully STOP me if I have a decent cudgel and I am 20 feet or less away, and he has a small caliber revolver and I am in fear of my life and know that I am legally justified to cave that fucking nigger's head in like a rotton pumpkin. I think it is no better than 50-50 chances and unless I get hit in the head, spine, pelvis, or heart, there will be justice served.

Well, since we're talking self defense only here-- I'm seeing some boon groid hitting on the crack pipe, getting all hyped up to committ crime or whatever, because they are of low moral quality and they needto build up their nerve, and so I don't see the average low quality ape as being able to successfully STOP me if I have a decent cudgel and I am 20 feet or less away, and he has a small caliber revolver and I am in fear of my life and know that I am legally justified to cave that fucking nigger's head in like a rotton pumpkin. I think it is no better than 50-50 chances and unless I get hit in the head, spine, pelvis, or heart, there will be justice served.Agreed. The one good thing about confronting a "nigger on the trigger" is that they never develop the disciplinary skills of proper combat-shooting techniques. No matter what the distance -- and I've seen this in the military time and again -- they just point and pull.

You're 20 feet from a nigger who has this itty bitty revolver. There's nowhere to run. You have a pipe in your hand. What's your odds of winning this engagement?

Jerry Abbott

Thanks for your measured reply JA. If a man walks round with a gun, or even armed with a grenade launcher, a couple of RPGs and bazooka slung over his butt like like an urban caricature of 'Rambo'; if "you're 20 feet from a nigger who has this itty bitty revolver and he pulls the trigger" - it matters little whether you are unarmed, carrying a length of Lead plumbing or whether you are kitted-out like Rambo - if rastus pulls the trigger on you.

The pre-emptive trigger-happy solution of blasting away at any potential threat in the form of bipedal denizens from the 'dark continent' that you may see - doesnt equate with everday reality.

BTW I am all in favour of training to acquire precision target shooting skills. I am a member of my local rifle club and use small bore '22 Anschutz and BSA match rifles and currently working to attain sufficient competency under club guidance to acquire NRA 'Sharpshooter' level marksmanship grade under its Qualification Program. In my heart of hearts, out there on the streets I know I am not likely to be off to buy my next root beer with an assault rifle slung over my shoulder - so for practical assault weapon purposes I know I will have to rely on other means for self-defense.

I wouldnt give you 50-50 against a White person, but against a nigger I would.

Niggers can't aim worth spit. They have poor fine motor coordination. They dont do well in racing or shooting sports. Has a nigger ever won Bianchi cup or an olympic medal in shooting or Camp Perry? No way. There' stupid but they're smart enough to know they might as well get an automatic because "spray and pray" is their usual modality.

As for 20 feet, that's 7 yards. 2 seconds to get there. If I can jump first, and the nigger has to react, that gives me at least a half second to close the gap.

Nigger gets one shot, he better make it good. If he doesnt hit me in the pelvis, spine, heart or head, I'm gonna put a hurt on him.
Do you get first jump? I don't know. I do know that it takes me about two seconds to fire all six bullets in my .357 magnum, if I have a reason to shoot quickly. Against a White guy, I wouldn't give you 10%. Against a nigger, maybe 10%. Twenty feet is a very easy target distance, even for a snubby pistol, even for somebody who's never used a gun before. It's just too far to swing a club from. And you have to do more than hurt the nigger with your club. You have to either knock him out, knock the gun out of his hand, or kill him...with the first blow, or he gets to shoot you again from point-blank range while you're trying to cock back for another swing.

I think one could go for a smashing pumpkin move, but the old kotegaishi on the gun hand disarm is supposed to work as well as anything.

some very interesting debate here.....
My take on this is, if you can legally carry, then by all means do so.....if the laws in your particular area do not allow for any type of firearms carry, there may still be cases where it would be prudent to carry. You must be the judge of whether or not the risk of legal problems is worth it.
In my book, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, but that does not change the de facto reality of the state overstepping its bounds, and victimizing those good citizens who choose to go about their business armed.
The other things to do, are to get some practical martial arts training -it MUST include sparring, so that you can learn how to react to the movements and strikes from an actual opponent. This also builds courage and confidence.
The other thing is to learn how identify and use "everyday" objects as weapons. In the course of a day, try evaluating everything that you come across, no matter how innocent looking, for it's potential as a weapon.
A sharpened #2 pencil. Imagine the close-range damage one of those could do when used by a very determined person. The key is to ACT when attacked, not freeze up. -You freeze up, you are as good as dead.

You entire premise is based on shooting someone at a distance. Sniping is murder pure and simple and any jury will convict you of such. A criminal won’t threaten you at 20 feet he will close the distance before he becomes a threat. If you shoot someone at 20 feet the prosecuting attorney will show that they were not a threat and you had reasonable distance to get out of harms way. Firefights from across the street are only common in ghettos and movies.
If he's within arm's reach, he might. The advantage to guns is that they solve the problem of distance.

Then begin shooting before the niggers get close. You do have to assume that they mean you trouble before they give warning of their intentions.

Yes and you bring more reason for tighter gun control thus taking away the future privileges of whites. Then you may cause many others to be victims of groids.
Shoot, then. And if the state executes you, at least you've likely saved the lives of all of the White people who would otherwise have been among the victims of those particular niggers.

You get caught making one you go to prison no questions asked. That is the worst case the best case if you get an expensive lawyer and get fined $10,000.
But with a silenced pistol, you can usually take out a sentry with ease. To be sure, silencers are usually illegal.

Full auto weapons are fantasy guns and a waste of ammo. Every competition shooter I have met has made this claim. I am sure you know the exception. You dump a lot of rounds with the hopes of hitting your target. Everyone knows you can’t properly aim a weapon on full auto. As AE said the spray and spray ideology. If you are going to get a gun get a few and master them well. Practice daily. The scenarios you present are under the assumption the shooter is highly trained, experienced and completely calm in a life or death situation. Look at those LA bank robbers. Thousands of rounds fired while wearing body armor and they didn’t actually kill anyone other than themselves, I live in America where do you live fantasyland? Remember these were hardened bank robbers who had previously beaten the system and carried illegal weapons. Their opponents were outgunned as well. One trained sniper could have taken both of them, but they were in a fire fight with automatic weapons and body armor and they still didn’t kill anyone other than themselves.
Failure to secure a full-auto weapon is yet another example of how to get killed, when among your foes there are those with full-auto weapons.

Again try shooting a moving target under pressure. Then factor in that the lighting may not be so well or the sun could be in your eyes. Your chances are better than you would think.
Nonetheless, facts are facts. Nobody armed with only a pipe is going to beat anybody else with a pistol from across the room (at least a pistol is needed).

Easy to say difficult to do.
Don’t hesitate.

Luck? I am skilled but that is all I will say about that at this time.
Do you trust this sort of luck to continue?

Very true and under ideal conditions a great thing. But how many gun owners are true marksmen who can make perfect shots with bad lighting and life or death pressure? Again I am sure you know the exceptions to the rule.
Not true. Marksmanship is an acquired skill, and it can make all the difference in the world.

As is all my advice.
Excellent advice.

Jerry Abbott

Try shooting a moving target at 20 feet. Hang up a cardboard cutout on a clothesline and have someone pull it towards you as it moves in the wind. Not try to shoot it, then have someone pouring cold water down your back this will give you an idea what it is like trying to shoot under pressure. This is also a tactic marine sniper drill instructors use on their students, the cold water thing that is or they usually yell at them while they are trying to make a shot.

Shooting competition has that much pressure now imagine your target moving with the added pressure that your life is at stake and you are being shot at or directly threatened. Couple that with the fact that you are about to take another life and may face life in prison or the death penalty. The pressure of a life ruining decision makes it that much more intense. Anyone on this board that claims they could be 100% calm and shoot to the best of their ability in that type of situation is a liar.

I also shoot regularly in timed competition and you'd be amazed how often people miss even up close when under pressure. Especially me!

Niggers can't aim worth spit. They have poor fine motor coordination. They dont do well in racing or shooting sports. Has a nigger ever won Bianchi cup or an olympic medal in shooting or Camp Perry? No way.


Here lies another problem. Just as pressure can cause you to freeze, fear can cause you to shoot to soon. If you are carrying a gun and shoot without being able to prove just cause you will go to prison. If you pull your gun and threaten you will go to jail. Groid criminals can live their life with 20 outstanding warrants, however something like this would cramp most of our lives.

Then if you justly pull your gun you have to think of the consequences. Well anyway while someone is wildly blasting all 6 rounds in 2 seconds from their pistol, you must think about every round that didn’t hit its target. Where does it land? Does it hit someone’s property? Does it hit innocent people?
some very interesting debate here.....
My take on this is, if you can legally carry, then by all means do so.....

Back to the original topic. I went to a couple gunstores near Ashland today and I saw some of the junkiest looking 223’s I had ever seen. These were bushmasters and one of them weighed about 2 pounds. I have never held a gun that expensive and made that cheaply before. It had the tag of $750 and was almost entirely constructed of plastic. It had a fluted barrel and everything about it was plastic. Even the lower receiver felt like plastic. The other had a tag of $850 and the stock was in shambles. The entire gun was rickety at best. After holding those to guns I will say I won’t own a Bushmaster arms no matter what the gun shop owner says about them.

On the other hand I saw some rally nice Yugoslavian SKS’s. And this one store had a used Smith and Wesson Shotgun with a 9 round tubular magazine for $225. That is an assault weapon. Ten rounds of 00 or 000 buck shells. With 50 or more pellets that is like firing 50 rounds into something. And you don’t have to be a marksman to fire a 00 buck round effectively into your target at 10 yards. Then consider shooting half-ounce slugs through that sucker. Probably the most disheartening sound to an intruder is the chu chunk of a 12 gauge shotgun. One shot with that weapon at any distance under 30 feet even in extreme conditions and I wouldn’t give someone a 1 in 10 chance.

I have shot the mossberg high cap shotguns and you can cycle them as fast as you want. I have never seen one jam in anyway. While I have never shot the Smith and Wesson ones I am sure they are better quality.

My ideal weapon would be either a Romanian AK ($300) or a high cap shotgun. That is a combo that is difficult to beat for the price.

By the way when you are closing the distance you don’t move in a straight line. Many martial arts teach a drop and roll technique, which puts you at a 45-degree angle of your attacker and closes the distance quickly. When you do the roll you come up really fast at an angle that is difficult for your attacker to defend. And they way you are moving gives a difficult target to hit. This is for a distance of 12 feet or less depending on your height. When you come up you are at the perfect angle to deflect and control the weapon.

My teacher had us do this drill where 2 or 3 other students would get on either side of you with a club or knife (with the edges and tip dulled but still painful) and you had to escape using this method. If any student failed in his attempt to legitimately attack you he was then put in the circle and forced to evade. After the first wack across the shoulder (sometimes we had on head gear) back or whatever you learned to move really fast and make this thing work. They were not allowed to strike you in the head, not super realistic but a strike across the back gives you the picture to get out of the way really quickly.

My teacher’s goal was to teach self-defense that actually worked in the street and we would some times go to the street (20 feet from his house) and try these things.

If I ever taught a martial arts class again I would incorporate the outdoors in my teaching. Getting in and out of cars, carrying groceries, jogging, opening doors and things of that nature. Most people learn in an open room on 3 inches of padding and have to experience in actual situations.

There is a lot of difference between falling on concrete and padding, and maneuvering in a 20-foot clear circle and bumping into tables and trees.

I think one could go for a smashing pumpkin move, but the old kotegaishi on the gun hand disarm is supposed to work as well as anything.

Look at those LA bank robbers. Thousands of rounds fired while wearing body armor and they didn’t actually kill anyone other than themselves, I live in America where do you live fantasyland? Remember these were hardened bank robbers who had previously beaten the system and carried illegal weapons. Their opponents were outgunned as well. One trained sniper could have taken both of them, but they were in a fire fight with automatic weapons and body armor and they still didn’t kill anyone other than themselves.


Actually, trained snipers did take out the bankrobbers you're talking about -- they didn't "shoot themselves."

The ones I am talking about are the ones they made that movie about. The ones that the cops shot one in the legs 30 times and the other one committed suicide. They may not have been in LA but they committed the crimes in California.

Actually, trained snipers did take out the bankrobbers you're talking about -- they didn't "shoot themselves."

The ones I am talking about are the ones they made that movie about. The ones that the cops shot one in the legs 30 times and the other one committed suicide. They may not have been in LA but they committed the crimes in California.
I know "the ones" you're talking about. At least one of them was shot dead by a police sniper -- dropped him with a neck shot. I think the other was killed by snipers too, not sure though.

Look at those LA bank robbers. Thousands of rounds fired while wearing body armor and they didn’t actually kill anyone other than themselves, I live in America where do you live fantasyland? Remember these were hardened bank robbers who had previously beaten the system and carried illegal weapons. Their opponents were outgunned as well. One trained sniper could have taken both of them, but they were in a fire fight with automatic weapons and body armor and they still didn’t kill anyone other than themselves.Yet they held off what I believe was well over 100 cops for quite some time. If only two people can do that, imagine what 50 well-equipped people with better shooting skills could do.

Part of the reason those bank robbers didn't kill any cops (though they did shoot and wound several) is because they were relying on "spray-n-pray" shooting. Shooting weapons on full-auto empties a mag within seconds (thus leaving the gunner vulnerable at a potentially inopportune time), and makes aiming after the first shot nearly impossible. Full-auto fire in shoulder-fired weapons is basically useless except at very close range. Rapid semi-auto fire is almost always deadlier. Here's what a US military manual says:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-22-9/c07.htm#7_8

The most important firing technique during modern, fast moving combat is rapid semiautomatic fire. Rapid-fire techniques are the key to hitting the short exposure, multiple, or moving targets described previously. If properly applied, rapid semiautomatic fire delivers a large volume of effective fire into a target area. The soldier intentionally fires a quick series of shots into the target area to assure a high probability of a hit.

...

When a soldier uses rapid semiautomatic fire properly, he sacrifices some accuracy to deliver a greater volume of effective fire to hit more targets. It is surprising how devastatingly accurate rapid fire can be. At ranges beyond 25 meters, rapid semiautomatic fire is superior to automatic fire in all measures (shots per target, trigger pulls per hit, and even time to hit). The decrease in accuracy when firing faster is reduced with proper training and repeated practice.

Body armor is also key. Those robbers definitely selected good body armor. The rest of us should do the same for self-defense (NIJ Class IIIA or better to stop subgun rounds; Class III or IV rifle plates to stop M4 or M16 rounds).

ZOG's thugs, as well as criminal groups such as the JDL, have firearms. So should you and the rest of us. If you don't, then the Jews own you. Three or four of them can waltz into your home at any time, armed, and do what they please to you unless you have a good shotgun or assault rifle. (Handguns aren't enough.)

The knock on these has been that they aren't designed to stand up to the rigors of battle as say an AK is, meaning not meant to shoot thousands of rounds in short period of time and under conditions such as in Iraqi desert etc.

However hunting is an all too often muddy and dusty affair so maybe that part isn't accurate, I do wonder about ability to sustain high levels of fire for extended periods before breaking down.These are reasonable concerns, which is why I only advised people to get a semi-auto hunting rifle if they live in an area where assault rifles are illegal and they don't want to break the law. Or a large-caliber hunting rifle might be a good purchase if one already owns a good assault rifle (AR-15, AK, FAL, M14, etc.).


How do you clean the barrel of the Browing semi-auto from the muzzle end? That isn't a good idea but is that the only way to do it? As with the lever actions?I don't actually own one of those rifles (yet). But one way to clean it properly, from breech to muzzle, would be with an Otis kit or other cable pull-through system.


BTW,I don't think you are the jew Masaad Ayoob, who supported the high-mag ban when first proposed by George HW Bush in 1989.I certainly hope you don't think I'm a Jew! (BTW, I think Ayoob is Arab, not Jewish.) If Ayoob supported that ban, then he's another scumbag, just like most pigs who believe in restricting our freedom to defend ourselves in the name of "officer safety." I know not all cops think that way, but many, many do.

I certainly hope you don't think I'm a Jew! (BTW, I think Ayoob is Arab, not Jewish.)


I did not, for a minute, think you were a jew.
I was simply making a reference to what someone who was debating you had posted earlier on the thread.

My follow-up post on AYOOB (http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=317657&postcount=80)

Thanks for the input on the cleaning.

Why does he have a Hebrew name then? His name is a JEWISH name Ayoob.
Massad is also a jew name could he be a lebanese jew?

There are these middle eastern sephardic or sometimes called "oriental" jews, from Arab lands. Like Mordechai Vannunu, who was from Morocco. But, if they were American citizens I do not think they would be calling themselves Lebanese. I have read that he is Lebanese and though there are Lebanese who are friendly to Jews-- viz the civil war alliances of the 80s-- I doubt any American Jew would call itself by the country of origin.

Most Jews in the USA like this would just change their names.

There are these middle eastern sephardic or sometimes called "oriental" jews, from Arab lands. Like Mordechai Vannunu, who was from Morocco. But, if they were American citizens I do not think they would be calling themselves Lebanese. I have read that he is Lebanese and though there are Lebanese who are friendly to Jews-- viz the civil war alliances of the 80s-- I doubt any American Jew would call itself by the country of origin.

Most Jews in the USA like this would just change their names.

I used to think he was some sort of Arab also until I learned that it is a jew name.

Just one example:
The Jewish Exponent (http://www.jewishexponent.com/Guide.asp?uid=&szparent=497&pubID=278&Archive=)

and as a Jewish couple, Robin and Randy Ayoob of Elkins

Part of the reason those bank robbers didn't kill any cops (though they did shoot and wound several) is because they were relying on "spray-n-pray" shooting. Shooting weapons on full-auto empties a mag within seconds (thus leaving the gunner vulnerable at a potentially inopportune time), and makes aiming after the first shot nearly impossible. Full-auto fire in shoulder-fired weapons is basically useless except at very close range. Rapid semi-auto fire is almost always deadlier. Here's what a US military manual says:

Don't kid yourself, full auto fire is devastating, and wouldn't be banned in civilian firearms if the government didn't think it an advantage. I'd give and arm and a leg for a full auto BAR or even a full auto Thompson submachine. ;)

As for the infamous bank robbers, the reason they didn't inflict fatalities and actually escape is because they didn't move! They remained stationary despite having a complete and total advantage, had they been in motion and advanced on the police they would have inflicted 100% fatalies, also had they got their asses in gear they could have escaped, the SWAT units took some time before arriving on scene. One was killed by a sniper shot from the overhead helicopter. The other succumbed to concentrated ground fire, by that time the police officers were using tactical rifles if memory serves me. There was a very minor controversy that the police let the 2nd perp bleed to death on the scene, which probably was the case...

In any event, the thugs had a decisive advantage which they squandered, but had they been in motion instead of remaining stationary until the very end, it could have gone very differently. The full auto fire made a difference, they just didn't have the smarts to capitalize.

You entire premise is based on shooting someone at a distance. Sniping is murder pure and simple and any jury will convict you of such.
Certainly, in this corrupted multiracial country of ours, we're damned (by the jury) if we shoot while shooting is advantageous, but we're damned (by our attacker) if we wait until he makes his intentions plain enough that even a liberal idiot would agree that we might, perhaps, have been entitled to defend ourselves with a gun...what a shame it was too late.

Rather than keep that liberal idiot happy, then: shoot, scoot, and don't yap.

In any situation where a cop might acceptably shoot someone, then so may anyone else, and if the law doesn't like that, then there's something wrong with the law. If you see juries convicting people for doing what they had to do to stay alive, then follow my advice: shoot, scoot, and don't yap.

A criminal won’t threaten you at 20 feet he will close the distance before he becomes a threat.
That is almost what I said. But it isn't quite what I said. He's a threat at 20 feet, but he's not yet acting like a threat.

If you shoot someone at 20 feet the prosecuting attorney will show that they were not a threat and you had reasonable distance to get out of harms way.
No, actually. If you turn your back on an enemy, you worsen your position. And 20 feet isn't nearly enough to ensure a getaway by running. A prosecutor who makes this argument is either playing your jury for gullible fools, or he's giving a jury of anti-white muds a figleaf with which to hide the nakedly political motive for their inevitable, preconceived "guilty" verdict.

Potentially, you have two groups of deadly enemies. The first group is that couple of niggers who attacked you on the street. The second group is the jury of leftists and niggers who will decide that you had no right to defend yourself. You can't possibly avoid all the nigs who might try to harm you, but you might avoid that jury. So, again, my advice: shoot, scoot, and don't yap.

Yes and you bring more reason for tighter gun control thus taking away the future privileges of whites. Then you may cause many others to be victims of groids.
You accomplish nothing by limiting your freedom because of fear of more freedom loss if you don't. At least let ZOG put the prohibitions down on paper. Then...join the criminals! That is, adopt their methods for ensuring their survival vis-a-vis the police and criminal competitors. I don't, of course, advise anyone to adopt the usual goals of criminals: extortion, robbery, drug-dealing, etc.

You get caught making one you go to prison no questions asked. That is the worst case the best case if you get an expensive lawyer and get fined $10,000.
You were talking about silencers. Then...don't get caught. When we were discussing silencers, it was in connection with a hypothetical need to remove sentries. Somebody made a rather funny suggestion that a common practice of sneaking up on them from behind, close enough to hit them on the head, was a sensible thing to do. It isn't. A silent, accurate, ranged weapon is required, so you can take out that sentry and not alert his nearby friends.

In most of your objections, I see a common flaw. You project the fear of the law's penalties as a means of obfuscating the immediate threat. But better in prison than dead on the street - and that's assuming you get caught. You might not be. Not every crime is solved. Not every criminal is apprehended. Rather than incur a very large threat of dying the moment you meet an attacker, shoot, scoot, and don't yap.

Full auto weapons are fantasy guns and a waste of ammo. Every competition shooter I have met has made this claim. I am sure you know the exception. You dump a lot of rounds with the hopes of hitting your target. Everyone knows you can’t properly aim a weapon on full auto. As AE said the spray and spray ideology.
Full auto weapons have a valid purpose, and the situation is not that of competition shooting. Full auto shooting sends a stream of bullets at a massed group of attackers in a situation where time is more crucial than conserving ammunition. Each bullet in the spray has a chance of hitting one or more attackers and forcing others to abandon their charge and take cover. Most full auto weapons can be set on semi-auto, in which case they're reasonably precise, if not so precise as some rifles that lack the full-auto feature.

If you are going to get a gun get a few and master them well. Practice daily. The scenarios you present are under the assumption the shooter is highly trained, experienced and completely calm in a life or death situation. Look at those LA bank robbers. Thousands of rounds fired while wearing body armor and they didn’t actually kill anyone other than themselves, I live in America where do you live fantasyland? Remember these were hardened bank robbers who had previously beaten the system and carried illegal weapons. Their opponents were outgunned as well. One trained sniper could have taken both of them, but they were in a fire fight with automatic weapons and body armor and they still didn’t kill anyone other than themselves.
You applied a characterization to those bank robbers that defines their shooting skills, their personalities, and their intentions for which you have no actual facts. You fantasized about the nature of bank robbers whom you have never met. You dreamed up why they failed to kill anyone despite firing thousands of rounds.

Were their rounds numbered in the thousands, or did you dream that up too? Who did the counting? Where did you find the total published? Let's see: two bank robbers, and they fired "thousands of rounds"...hm. That's at least fifty mags for each of them, isn't it? Sean, I've read lots of your posts here, and your problem is that you "wing it" too much, and you never expect anyone else to notice the glitches.

Again try shooting a moving target under pressure. Then factor in that the lighting may not be so well or the sun could be in your eyes. Your chances are better than you would think.
At 20 feet, I can hit a man-sized target, even if he's on the move.

Easy to say difficult to do.
For whom?

Luck? I am skilled but that is all I will say about that at this time.
Huff and bluff. I earned a marksmanship ribbon at Hurlbert Field, Eglin AFB in June 1980. I was a member of the Sharon Johnston State Park shooting club for a few years while I lived in Huntsville, AL (1987-1990). Feel free to check.

Very true and under ideal conditions a great thing. But how many gun owners are true marksmen who can make perfect shots with bad lighting and life or death pressure? Again I am sure you know the exceptions to the rule.
"Perfect" shots? You mean, like hit a dime at 100' with a revolver? I'm not that good. But I can hit a man at 20' with a revolver almost every time, in any lighting except what is insufficient to see at all, pressure or no pressure.

Try shooting a moving target at 20 feet. Hang up a cardboard cutout on a clothesline and have someone pull it towards you as it moves in the wind. Now try to shoot it, then have someone pouring cold water down your back this will give you an idea what it is like trying to shoot under pressure. This is also a tactic marine sniper drill instructors use on their students, the cold water thing that is or they usually yell at them while they are trying to make a shot.
Not bad. They should vary the routine though. Slapping your shoulder with a wooden ruler or riding crop, maybe. I could still hit that target, almost every time. You apparently fail to appreciate that 20 feet is easy shooting distance on a mansized target, even with a handgun. Easy, Sean. As in "even you can do it." Even with your off-hand, even in an icestorm. 20 feet is 8 normal steps. Light poles are longer than 20 feet. A two-lane rural highway is usually about 20 feet wide.

Shooting competition has that much pressure now imagine your target moving with the added pressure that your life is at stake and you are being shot at or directly threatened. Couple that with the fact that you are about to take another life and may face life in prison or the death penalty. The pressure of a life ruining decision makes it that much more intense. Anyone on this board that claims they could be 100% calm and shoot to the best of their ability in that type of situation is a liar.
Nobody shoots "to the best of their ability" except in ideal conditions, such as those found on a range. The point is that 20' is beyond clubbing distance, but it is EASY shooting distance. If you shoot at all, with the intention of hitting a man at that distance, then you will almost always succeed, calm or scared, cold water or none, loud noises or not.

And since corruption of law IS a threat, shoot, scoot, and don't yap. That really is your optimal strategy. If you fail to shoot, you will have to win a fight against an attacker or two who might be too much for you. If you lose, you will die, because they are niggers who want to see you dead. If you win, you have a chance of evading apprehension, SO TAKE IT. If you get caught, THEN you can make your best case. A fair jury might look askance on your attempt to evade arrest, but a corrupt jury will look askance at you for being White, no matter what you did or didn't do or what the circumstances were.

Here lies another problem. Just as pressure can cause you to freeze, fear can cause you to shoot to soon. If you are carrying a gun and shoot without being able to prove just cause you will go to prison. If you pull your gun and threaten you will go to jail. Groid criminals can live their life with 20 outstanding warrants, however something like this would cramp most of our lives.
This might not be the sort of world where you can sustain the kind of life you are used to, then. If you're in immediate danger, do your best to get out of it, and cross the next bridge later.

Then if you justly pull your gun you have to think of the consequences. Well anyway while someone is wildly blasting all 6 rounds in 2 seconds from their pistol, you must think about every round that didn’t hit its target. Where does it land? Does it hit someone’s property? Does it hit innocent people?
I'd regret hitting an innocent person with a stray bullet. But I'd regret being killed by an attacker even more (if for not as long). The innocent person's blood is most on his hands, not mine, as they'd have been no need for me to shoot if he had not been a threat to me.

I really don't care about property losses, given the situation. Sure, I'd pay for property damage...assuming that I could do it without being identified to the police. What might keep me from compensating property owners for their losses resulting from my shooting at an attacker is the increased risk of being apprehended by law and made subject to its corrupt workings. Otherwise, I'd happily pay for this busted window, or that blown automobile tire.

And when I said that I could fire six times in two seconds, I meant that I wasn't limited to "one shot" like AE said I'd be. No, I'd have all six shots, if I needed them. I'd shoot until I didn't need to shoot more.

Jerry Abbott

I like R-Mac’s better “shoot, shovel & shut up”.

Rather than keep that liberal idiot happy, then: shoot, scoot, and don't yap.

Tell it to the judge. If I am ever on the jury and you are tried for something like that I would vote innocent, however 99% of the jurors you will face wouldn’t .
That is almost what I said. But it isn't quite what I said. He's a threat at 20 feet, but he's not yet acting like a threat.


No, actually. If you turn your back on an enemy, you worsen your position. And 20 feet isn't nearly enough to ensure a getaway by running. A prosecutor who makes this argument is either playing your jury for gullible fools, or he's giving a jury of anti-white muds a figleaf with which to hide the nakedly political motive for their inevitable, preconceived "guilty" verdict.

Actually they were using 110 round AK drums. So actually a thousand rounds would be 5 of them each. The guys went out in their car and got more weapons, not to mention there were there for 45 minutes or more. I don’t think the people you and Hoax are talking about are the same ones. I have seen the movie about these guys, the documentary and the news programs and never once did I see a sniper mentioned.

But perhaps you should tell us why they failed? I didn’t dream up why they failed and anyone can watch the same news programs I did and draw their own conclusions.
You fantasized about the nature of bank robbers whom you have never met. You dreamed up why they failed to kill anyone despite firing thousands of rounds.

Were the rounds numbered in the thousands, or [i]did you dream that up too? Who did the counting? Where did you find the total published? Let's see: two bank robbers, thousands of rounds...hm. That's at least fifty mags for each of them, isn't it?
Well thanks, I have read yours as well and your website. I must strike your interest or you would have said I rarely read your posts. :)
Sean, I've read lots of your posts here,.

The AK-47 uses a 75-round drum magazine, not 110 round.
The North Hollywood bank robbers, one shot himself in the head at almost the same time as a police officer shot him in the head from behind. The 2nd bankrobber was shot by police and left to bleed to death on the ground, for which his widow sued the LAPD.

Having seen demonstrations by law enforcement and military and licensed civilians using full auto it is not easy especially when dealing with rifle, not pistol calibers. E.g. the FN/FAL in full auto, in 7.62mm NATO is probably better at scaring people than in hitting them in a defensive situation.

Tell it to the judge. If I am ever on the jury and you are tried for something like that I would vote innocent, however 99% of the jurors you will face wouldn’t .


The guys went out in their car and got more weapons, not to mention there were there for 45 minutes or more. I don’t think the people you and Hoax are talking about are the same ones. I have seen the movie about these guys, the documentary and the news programs and never once did I see a sniper mentioned.

Sure, 99% of the jurors in NYC maybe. You think the same would hold true in a small to medium-sized Southern or Mid-Western town?

btw -- we're talking about the same guys, Doc. Just how many armor-covered bank robbers have you heard about shooting it out with the cops as they casually stroll down the street picking their noses?

2, one group drove a black van and the other group drove a white car.

btw -- we're talking about the same guys, Doc. Just how many armor-covered bank robbers have you heard about shooting it out with the cops as they casually stroll down the street picking their noses?