File :-(, x, )
Cool handguns Jolle
Aint this one a beauty?
>> Anonymous
no.
>> Jander !I.ESZpjoBQ
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
Are you kidding?

Taurus created the "Raging Hornet" as a sort of "concept gun". Basically, they took their .454 Casull "Raging Bull" and modified it to shoot the ancient .22 Hornet "varmint" round. As far as revolvers are concerned, it's just about as geeky as you can get.
>> Anonymous
>>68163
I'm sorry, but I find that revolver ugly. Does it even have the accuracy that would jusify a scope like that?
>> Jander !I.ESZpjoBQ
     File :-(, x)
>> Jander !I.ESZpjoBQ
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>68194

> Does it even have the accuracy that would jusify a scope like that?

The .22 Hornet is a fairly accurate cartridge. And since the gun frame itself was originally designed for overpowered (penis envy) cartridges like the .454 Casull and .500 Magnum, it's so heavy that it probably doesn't even move when it fires off a round of .22 Hornet. That makes it a very stable (and therefore more accurate) weapon, but there are better, and lighter, ways to stabilize and improve the accuracy of a handgun.

The question, then, is whether or not the _shooter_ is accurate enough to justify the scope. In other words, can he hold its one and a half kilograms steady enough at arm's length to justify the scope?

I'm thinking no.

As a side note, Taurus also makes a revolver based on the "Raging" series of frames chambered to fire .410 shotgun shells. That's right, SHOTGUN shells. From a revolver. And you just know some idiot out there has one with a scope mounted on it, too.
>> Jander !I.ESZpjoBQ
>>68209

So owning any kind of high caliber handgun/round is just penis envy?
>> Anonymous
>>68226

Any kind? No.

.38 Spc, .357 Mag, or .45 ACP? No.
.44 Mag or .45 Super? Maybe.
.454 Casull, .50 AE, or .500 Mag? Yes.
>> Teg
Hey, person who posted #68209, what is the model number of that .410 Taurus? I couldn't find it. It sounds interesting... I sort of collect 'oddities' in guns, and now you have me wanting to see one.
>> Anonymous
ok i shoot a .45 normaly but i think it's kinda fun to go out on to the range and let some larger cal. shots off , I normaly wouldnt carry anything bigger than .45 but they are fun to shoot none the less i wouldnt regard them as "penis envy" tbut they arent for me normaly...as for a 410 in a revolver well that's where I draw the line at "penis envy"...
>> Anonymous
/k/ is that way -->

>.>
>> Anonymous
>>68229

Cuz, ya know... Nobody hunts with high caliber pistols...
>> Anonymous
>>68235
meplat is gone, right now it's like /b/ with guns.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
This is cool ;)
>> Anonymous
>>68272

and meplats a total faggot, you're point?
>> Anonymous
>>68277
i am not a point.
>> Anonymous
>>68278

you goddamn well are!
>> Anonymous
>>68277
Why is he a total faggot?
>> Anonymous
>>68291
Obviously because he knows more than Anonymous.
>> Anonymous
>>68293
Disregard that. I suck cocks.
>> Anonymous
meplat is an overhyped shit-for-brains redneck.

It's faggots like that that fuck up good boards like /k/. Thank fucking god that dense pathetic waste of life is gone.
>> Anonymous
that weapon is not worth the metal it is made over, the size over round is fires kills rats, that is why that particular model is the varmit killer....dumbass
>> Anonymous
>>68231

> what is the model number of that .410 Taurus?

The entire 4410 series. They're designed to chamber and fire .410 shot shells as well as .45 Long Colt.

If you get one, promise you're not going to put a scope on it.
>> Teg
I solemnly promise never to scope a handgun. Seriously.

The only handgun that I am very proficient with is actually just an old P7-PSP in 9mm. There's just something about it; between the weight, the fixed barrel, and the 'squeeze-cock' mechanism its just extremely accurate, almost as if it shoots where I'm thinking.
>> Anonymous
>>68247

> Nobody hunts with high caliber pistols...

Not saying that. Clearly, there are some people who hunt with large caliber pistols.

There are also people who smoke while filling the gas tank on their car or engage in anonymous gay sex without using condoms.

If your purpose in hunting is to get meat, then you use a long gun. If your purpose is to prove how "manly" and large your penis is (isn't), then by all means head out into the bush and fuck around with handguns, or black powder, or bows, or pointy sticks, or whatever.

Also, like I tried to point out before, there's a difference between a high caliber cartridge and a "penis envy" cartridge. Many high caliber cartridges are designed big because they need the increased mass or charge to achieve a ballistic goal (be it accuracy, or range, or whatever). These are simply high caliber cartridges.

But other large caliber cartridges are designed big simply for the purpose of being big, often to their ballistic detriment. These are "penis envy" cartidges. Most are very young designs, and I strongly suspect that they will be _very_ hard to shop for in ten years time (once the fad is over and the next uselessly big cartridge has caught the small dicked consumer's attention).
>> Anonymous
I find it funny when people try to justify their ownership of a gun.

Your weapons are phallic-- ALL OF THEM.
>> Anonymous
>>68362

> an old P7-PSP in 9mm

What a coincidence. I have one too, and it's my preferred "carry" weapon.

I love the squeeze cocker - it forces me to apply the correct hand pressure while aiming it. And that causes me to shoot very accurately with it indeed. Who needs a large bullet when you can put out their eye (or at least centerpunch their nose area) at 10 yards?

My only complaint is that the frame tends to get hot at the range and burns the top of my poor little trigger finger. That and the thing is a goddamn cuckoo clock inside making disassembly and maintenance a pain in the ass.
>> Anonymous
>>68365

Clearly, you are a complete ignorant fucktard.

My older sister was raped and nearly murdered by a six foot thug with a knife. I decided the same thing would never happen to me.

If the bastard wanted to do the same to me (they never caught him), he wouldn't need a gun to do it. He probably wouldn't even have needed the knife; I'm only four foot eleven. However, my gun makes sure he can't no matter how big he is.

THAT'S how I justify owning a gun. For me, it's not about compensating for not having a penis between my legs. Rather, IT'S ALL ABOUT MAKING SURE I DECIDE WHEN, WHERE, AND WHO GET'S TO PUT THEIRS THERE.

Now why don't you take your supercilious little fucktard prejudices back to /b/ where they belong.
>> Anonymous
>>68368
Move away from Iran, you paranoid bitch.
And don't wear cockteasing slut clothes at first dates, that will help.
>> Anonymous
>>68365
Heh. I sure love this argument. I guess we'll fight wars by pushing rectangles at one another or something. Fact is, you can't have a weapon which is aerodynamic, aimable, or able to efficiently cut without having one dimension being longer than the other, i.e. it'd be longer than it is wide. Show me a gun with a barrel wider than it is long that can still shoot accurately. Go to /k/ and spout your bullshit unless you can think of even one feasible weapon that you wouldn't denegrate as "phallic."

But whatever. I think you're troubled sexually because you type with fingers and walk with legs. Appendages are phallic amirite?
>> Anonymous
>>68163
Who the fuck puts a scope on a gun?
>> Cache
>>68368
Good for you! I hope you're never in a situation that makes it necessary for you to use it, but it's good to know you have some protection. Don't listen to the clods--your protection is not something up for debate.
>> Anonymous
is this gun anything more than a toy for rednecks?
>> Anonymous
>>68408

Having a gun and not needing it is infinitely better than needing a gun and not having it.

And I'm not too concerned about the fucktards here. They'll come around the first time they get mugged. It's just a pity that they're too stupid to think ahead, but will have to learn their lesson the hard way.

The statistics don't lie. Women who own and shoot firearms simply do NOT get raped. Or abused by their husbands / boyfriends etc. And they're better looking. So I'll be keeping my pistol. And wearing whatever the fuck I damn well please.
>> Anonymous
>>68415

> toy for rednecks?

Hardly.

It's far too expensive. It's more a toy for city idiots with more money than brains.

Besides, I don't think this thing was built with a sufficient quantity of duck tape and 2x4s to count as a toy for rednecks.
>> Anonymous
>>68294
>>68293
>>68291
>>68283
>>68278
>>68277
>>68272
Same person.

I personally like the S&W model 500. XD
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
     File :-(, x)
Bullets, guns, grenades, hurray!
>> Anonymous
i leave /hr/ for FIVE minutes and it turns into a /k/b/ hybrid

heaps good
>> Anonymous
>>Having a gun and not needing it is infinitely better than needing a gun and not having it.

possibly the gayest ever attempt to support gun ownership
>> Anonymous
>>68415
as far as i heard it's required in order to carry a mullet.

>>68310It's faggots like that that fuck up good boards like /k/.

that's really funny. with meplat gone, /k/ is redneck central right now, funny "I HAS A GUN!" threads everywhere, only thing missing is a mullet comparison thread.
>> Anonymous
>>68495

That is a much more appealing situation that meplats nazi faschist reign of gayness.

Meplat just eats cock, deal with it. Fuck.
>> Anonymous
I love when people try to act like you need a reason to own a gun. Why do you need an MP3 player or a PS2? The answer is you don’t, but who fucking cares? I want guns, MP3 players, and PS2. And if the Jack Thomson’s and Chuck Schumer’s of the world don’t like it they can go cram it up their ass.
>> Anonymous
The country with the highest percentage of gun owners also happens to be one of the most dangerous countries to live in. Coincidence?

"If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns" is a retarded argument, so please don't bring it up. Other countries get by with strict enforcements on who gets guns, and they're usually a lot safer.
>> Anonymous
>>68163
Huge barrel for small caliber.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>68530
If anything, why target weapons specifically? Why not couple it as part of a larger campaign to rein in the problem at the source, by improving societal cohesiveness, education levels, promoting harmonious living, and quality of life?

>Other countries get by with strict enforcements on who gets guns, and they're usually a lot safer.
Our cultures are also distinctly different, placing greater value on humanity in general. To put it bluntly, the people of crime-laden countries are... broken.
>> Anonymous
>>68530

> The country with the highest percentage of gun owners also happens to be one of the most dangerous countries to live in.

That's just more misleading dishonest anti-gun bullshit. In other words, a lie.

In the future, do us all the service of doing some fucking research before wasting our precious internets with your ignorant bullshit.

But, in case you are just too fucking lazy to actually do your own research, but prefer to simply parrot what is spoon fed to you (like most gun control advocates), I'll give you some real figures.

According to the Dutch Ministry of Justice, here are the violent crime rates for various industrial countries (which doesn't include all the much more dangerous third world nations):

Australia: 4.1%. England: 3.6%. Scotland: 3.4%. Canada: 3.4%. Finland: 3.2%. Poland: 2.8%. North Ireland: 2.4%. Denmark: 2.3%. France: 2.2%. Sweden: 2.2%. Switzerland: 2.1%. Netherlands: 2.0%. USA: 1.9%. Belgium: 1.8%. Spain: 1.5%. Portugal: 1.4%. Japan - 0.4%.

Funny, despite your claim, the US isn't even in the top five for violent crimes. It's in the bottom five. And yet the US has the second highest per capita rate of gun ownership (Switzerland is highest).
>> Anonymous
>>68541

pwned
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
The only two questions that need to be answered for someone to own an item of property are 1. Is that person qualified to own that item of property and 2. Is that person capable of using that item of property in a responsible manner?

If a person is both qualified and responsible there is no reason why that person should be prevented from owning that item of property.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>68541


I'm not brilliant at this, but don't different countries have different considerations of what is "violent" crime?

In the US, there are 5 "violent" crimes : murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault.

On the other hand, France has over 30 crimes (violent crimes are not a differenciated legal group), as does Spain, Italy and many other European countries.

So, that could be a factor that may skew the number of "violent crimes" per 1000 inhabitants.

However, the figures you seem to raise are percentages of total crimes that are considered "violent crimes". As such, it is interesting to know the number of crimes that form 100%, no?

Well :
United States 23,677,800
>> Anonymous
>>68551
This doesnt matter. Its all nigra's doing the violent criming.
>> Anonymous
>>68551

The USA also has ~5 times as many people as the UK, but not 5 times the crime.
>> Anonymous
>>68554

Trying to use logic and reason on a European? Sorry, it’s just a colossal waste of time.

Europeans are taught from day one that their respective country is near perfect and all that really matters in the world. Everyone else (particularly the US) is living is a vastly inferior society. And anytime they see information contrary to what they are taught they will ignore it, or try to convince themselves it must be all wrong.
>> Anonymous
>>Trying to use logic and reason on an American? Sorry, it’s just a colossal waste of time.

>>Americans are taught from day one that the US is near perfect and all that really matters in the world. Everyone else (particularly Europe) is living is a vastly inferior society. And anytime they see information contrary to what they are taught they will ignore it, or try to convince themselves it must be all wrong.

Fixed.
>> Anonymous
>>68555
>>68556
As exhibit A that all human cultures are ignorant, fucked up, and proud of it, I present 4chan. now stufu.
>> Anonymous
>>68556

The best you could do was change Europe to America to discredit my point?

I think you just proved it instead. You are not even willing to accept the possibility that Europe is not a near perfect society. How sad is that?
>> Anonymous
>>68393
"Ah, looks like a baby's arm holding an apple."
>> Anonymous
>>68558

A lot of europeans wrongly consider themselves better than the rest of the world, but it also applies to a lot of american people.

There are stupid and ignorant people on the two sides, not just in the other one.
>> Anonymous
>>68551

> don't different countries have different considerations of what is "violent" crime?

Which is why the numbers quoted above are from the Dutch Ministry of Justice because they are the only such body that has done a study of the raw crime data to compare "apples to apples" in their comparitive crime statistics. I don't know why it took the Dutch to actually do so, but it probably has something to do with them not having a stake in artificially lowering their crime statistics (unlike England, Australia, the US, etc).

> However, the figures you seem to raise are percentages of total crimes that are considered "violent crimes".

No, they are a percentage of the population that was the vitcim of a crime of violence of any kind - shot, stabbed, assaulted, etc.

> "Safer", you say?

Yes. Much safer.

The numbers you quote come originally from the British Home Office and the US DOJ. They are not comparing "apples to apples". For one thing, the BHO only counts crimes for which they achieve a conviction. This artificially lowers their crime figures. That is why the Dutch study is the only valid one because it is based on the raw statistics for reported crimes, not on the cooked numbers served up by the ministries of the various countries.
>> Anonymous
I don't care how any of you justify possesing a gun.
guns are NOT cool.
>> WalterPeck !JCF1er.yTg
     File :-(, x)
This thread needs less gay /n/ and more /hr/ guns.
>> Anonymous
>>68686

Wrong.

I'll tell you what's not cool.

Getting mugged, raped, or murdered because you were unable to defend yourself because some ignorant fucktards have decided to disarm you because they hold to some idiotic and incorrect philosophy such as "guns are not cool" is not cool.
>> Anonymous
>>68368
To paraphrase Bruce Lee, you have one shot, bitch. Make it count.

Ever seen a person get shot? Here's a hint - Hollywood lies. Unless you've got a headshot, and even half the time then, you didn't kill the person. You just pissed him off. And now you've guarenteed your death. He was just going to rape you. Now, he's going to kill you.
>> Anonymous
>>68704

Which is why you double-tap.

And if guns aren't as lethal as you suggest, this raises two questions:

1. Why bother with banning them?
2. Why don't you prove it, by taking a high velocity, 9mm slug of metal in the chest?
>> Anonymous
Regardless of the legality of guns, criminals will always have access to them. When you illegalize guns, you guarantee criminals that it's safe to break into your house, rape your wife, and kill your children, because nobody inside will have a gun with which to defend themselves. The greatest risk a criminal faces is that he'll shoot someone if he breaks in. He doesn't have to worry about anyone he rapes having a gun. Sure, I might keep some mace in my house or even a machete, but if I draw either on an intruder, he will shoot me and slay my family if he so chooses. I'll tell you with certainty that I'd rather blow this asshole's head off his shoulders than let him come within twenty feet of my family. And as a citizen of Michigan, I thank God that I'll never have to worry about this worthless shit suing me; once he enters my home with malicious intent, I will fuck him up if he does so much as raise his fists. While it's true that the world might be a safer place if nobody had guns at all, the fact remains that if there's a will, there's a way for even the most heinous people to obtain firearms. If you outlaw guns, the only ones with guns will be outlaws. Don't like it? Good. I don't want people who hate self-defense to like me.
>> Anonymous
What I don't like about guns is this feeling of mortal fear that eventually pushes everyone to get one. It's like: "I know my neighbor has one, so I guess I better get one too, y'know just in case." In the end, everyone will end up with one because we're all so afraid of each other, and I don't really want to live in that kind of world. I see a lot of pro-gun people who're all like: "This world ain't no walk in the park, buddy! If you want to survive, you better strap yourself up, lest the rapists, the muggers and the terrorists get you!" I know what you’re saying. If you ban guns it won’t affect the criminals, since they know how to get them in other ways. That is exactly why I prefer my own country, since there was no guns in k-mart right from the start. I guess it might be true what someone said before me, about that it’s the mentality and not the laws that are the real problem here. To be completely honest though, I my country guns are more common precentage-wise than in the US largely due to people getting themselves a hunting rifle for, well hunting. I myself was rather suprised when I learned of this, I have to admit. You see, I haven’t seen a single gun in public in my entire life. (continued next post)
>> Anonymous
(continued from last post) Anyways, moving on you’re not allowed to fire a gun against another person here, even in self-defense. Also, we keep to hunting. No assault rifles or even handguns here. I’m sure someone could smuggle something in though, but in my lifetime (about 19 years) I’ve only heard of two shootings in the city that I live in (it’s the capital city). I don’t know what to make of it, as I’ve never been in the US, but I just have to say that it seems a bit strange to allow guns such as assault rifles to be sold to the public, because they’re obviously meant for killing humans and not for hunting. You could of course say that you need them for self-defense, but then again I’d have to refer to my first issue (the one about fear). Another thing is that if you’re packing, a criminal has no choice but to kill you if you threaten him with a gun and he has got one too. It’s you or him. Personally, I would prefer giving him the cash I got on me as opposed to risk my life by reaching for my gun. My life is more precious than any amount of cash I got on me.

Finally, since I sensed some aggression against europeans back there and since I happen to live in europe, I’d just to point out that I’m not saying that my country is perfect. Far from it. We have problems just like everyone else. The only reason I replied was to share an europeans view on the matter in a not-too-aggressive manner. I’m sure I’ve made a lot of errors though. Feel free to point them out and explain to me why I’m completely and utterly mistaken. ?
>> Anonymous
Pls motherfucker, go back to blogspot.
>> Anonymous
>>68717
Oh fucking noes, text to scroll past.

>>68715
It's a miracle that another person on 4chan is ready to have a serious discussion. I am the poster of>>68713.

I would only condone the ownership of a gun for people who hope they will never have to rely on it. You might think of a gun like a seat belt in that regard. Even someone who never gets mixed up with criminals can still be attacked and then he will need to defend himself or risk the consequences. I would like to think that most good people who own guns don't do it out of fear, but rather to empower themselves to defend their families. For me, a gun is something that belongs under my bed, never to be used unless someone breaks in to attack me.

It's my fundamental belief that when a criminal violates my rights by entering my home with malicious intent, his rights must end. When options are taken away from victims, criminals get the upper hand, and I don't think anyone wants to err on the side of a rapist. So with all due respect, guns are in my view a necessary evil.
>> Anonymous
shut up.. I still the chris rock's solution, though funny, is also the best solution.

Make bullets cost $5000 through all civillian outlets through artificial means such as sales tax.

People who need to defend themselves have the capacity, while idiots are much less likely to expend a round to end a verbal dispute, or leave their guns where their kids could destroy a $5000 bullet by killing themselves.
>> Anonymous
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE

THIS THREAD DOES
>> Anonymous
Less talk, more guns.
>> Anonymous
>>68719a serious discussion

...........stfu retard, lurk moar..
>> Anonymous
>>68772
Read the whole thread.
The one thing you need for a level-headed debate is respect. There's so little of it that it makes my brain hurt. This thread is just typical 4chan.
>> Anonymous
Meplat is a faggot.
>> Anonymous
>>68792For someone who hasnt been here in months, he must have assraped you good and hard.
So was it good for you? Has the bleeding stopped yet?

"Faggot". Go back to eigth grade.
>> Anonymous
here's a whole site with nothing but high res gun pics.

http://www.praxagora.com/lunde/firearms.html

no need to thank me, just make the gun haters stfu
>> Anonymous
HAY
GUYS
/hr/ is not for discussion and flame wars
/hr/ is for leeching quality shit
take discussion elseware kthnx