|
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
In article ,
says... On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait The question that really stumped ME was your question about polymers and alloys. I didn't know there were people that stupid. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/13 4:49 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait The question that really stumped ME was your question about polymers and alloys. I didn't know there were people that stupid. Have you forgotten the questions he asked about the oils to use in his four stroke outboard? |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Me? You mentioned the lack of safeties several times! Little perseverance of your own, eh? So...How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? I wouldn't be surprised if you said, "I don't know!" Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/13 5:03 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Me? You mentioned the lack of safeties several times! Little perseverance of your own, eh? So...How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? I wouldn't be surprised if you said, "I don't know!" Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. I would treat the semi-auto without a safety not at all, Herring. I wouldn't own one. I did for a while, a Glock 34, but its lack of a real safety was the motivating reason for trading it in on on the Sig X-5, which had an ambi safety. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/2013 4:31 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Wow, that's some pretty nasty ****... wonder if you will get chastised by... uh, oh forget it. Dance on man, Welcome to the Hotel California... |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:04:19 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 4/1/13 5:03 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Me? You mentioned the lack of safeties several times! Little perseverance of your own, eh? So...How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? I wouldn't be surprised if you said, "I don't know!" Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. I would treat the semi-auto without a safety not at all, Herring. I wouldn't own one. I did for a while, a Glock 34, but its lack of a real safety was the motivating reason for trading it in on on the Sig X-5, which had an ambi safety. That's a tap dance, ESAD, not an answer! Show us your extensive knowledge - that which you boast of constantly. How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:04:19 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 5:03 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Me? You mentioned the lack of safeties several times! Little perseverance of your own, eh? So...How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? I wouldn't be surprised if you said, "I don't know!" Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. I would treat the semi-auto without a safety not at all, Herring. I wouldn't own one. I did for a while, a Glock 34, but its lack of a real safety was the motivating reason for trading it in on on the Sig X-5, which had an ambi safety. That's a tap dance, ESAD, not an answer! Show us your extensive knowledge - that which you boast of constantly. How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/2013 6:43 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:04:19 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 5:03 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Me? You mentioned the lack of safeties several times! Little perseverance of your own, eh? So...How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? I wouldn't be surprised if you said, "I don't know!" Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. I would treat the semi-auto without a safety not at all, Herring. I wouldn't own one. I did for a while, a Glock 34, but its lack of a real safety was the motivating reason for trading it in on on the Sig X-5, which had an ambi safety. That's a tap dance, ESAD, not an answer! Show us your extensive knowledge - that which you boast of constantly. How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. He has to have safeties on all his guns, but he doesn't know why. Now that's weird. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 19:21:21 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? Perhaps, but does it make it right? |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc It's not difficult to find these articles. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/1/13 6:02 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/1/2013 4:31 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Wow, that's some pretty nasty ****... wonder if you will get chastised by... uh, oh forget it. Dance on man, Welcome to the Hotel California... How's your charge of blackmail working out? |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
In article , says...
In article , says... On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait The question that really stumped ME was your question about polymers and alloys. I didn't know there were people that stupid. What is the difference between alloys and polymers? |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc It's not difficult to find these articles. =================================== Good info. I keep the two pistols I have in the "condition 3" mode in the rare times that I carry. At home I don't even keep a magazine in them. The only gun I keep "ready to fire" is the S&W 38 Special revolver and I don't carry that one. BTW ... referring to another discussion in which I provided a link of "MA Compliant" guns, there were several Glock models on the list. They are listed in error. Currently, there are *no* new Glock models that may be sold to MA residents. The only ones that can be legally sold are to law enforcement personnel and pre-1998 models which are grandfathered. The pre-1998 models must have *always* been owned in MA. In 2004, Glock released some models that were determined to be MA compliant by the MA safety agency (had the NY2 trigger "safety"). They were sold for about a month in the state but then the AG's office determined that they were *not* to be considered MA compliant and ordered Glock to recall them from dealers. The dealers were also required to provide a list of people who bought one during that time frame so they could be contacted to return their gun. Screwed up state. Here's the letter sent out by Glock: http://www.gssfonline.com/hot_topics..._commsales.pdf |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/2/13 3:23 AM, Eisboch wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc It's not difficult to find these articles. =================================== Good info. I keep the two pistols I have in the "condition 3" mode in the rare times that I carry. At home I don't even keep a magazine in them. The only gun I keep "ready to fire" is the S&W 38 Special revolver and I don't carry that one. BTW ... referring to another discussion in which I provided a link of "MA Compliant" guns, there were several Glock models on the list. They are listed in error. Currently, there are *no* new Glock models that may be sold to MA residents. The only ones that can be legally sold are to law enforcement personnel and pre-1998 models which are grandfathered. The pre-1998 models must have *always* been owned in MA. In 2004, Glock released some models that were determined to be MA compliant by the MA safety agency (had the NY2 trigger "safety"). They were sold for about a month in the state but then the AG's office determined that they were *not* to be considered MA compliant and ordered Glock to recall them from dealers. The dealers were also required to provide a list of people who bought one during that time frame so they could be contacted to return their gun. Screwed up state. Here's the letter sent out by Glock: http://www.gssfonline.com/hot_topics..._commsales.pdf Glock has expended a lot of money and effort in order to convince everyone that its "safe action" trigger is "safe," and it certainly has done a lot of convincing with its PR. It is telling, however, that in Europe, you can buy a Glock with a factory installed thumb safety. But not here. Curious. Here's one of several U.S. sites that will retrofit a thumb safety onto a Glock: http://tenring.com/glock-pistol-work-2/ As I mentioned, I had a Glock for awhile, a Model 34 target pistol. It was a little light for my taste, but that was me, not the pistol. Mechanically it was a fine weapon...it never jammed or misfired. But it always made me nervous because of the lack of a safety, so I got rid of it. My next pistol was the all-steel X-5 and I decided after purchasing that one that I had no affinity for polymer pistols. A lot of people do, of course, but I am not among them. If I were considering a polymer pistol again, I'd probably go for one of the Springfield XD's with a thumb safety: http://www.springfield-armory.com/xd.php?version=147 But I really prefer the heavier, SAO semi-auto pistols. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 19:21:21 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. My question is based on his continuous decrying the lack of 'safeties' on various weapons. He also purports to be extremely knowledgeable regarding handguns. Therefore, my question is legitimate. Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
In article ,
says... On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:04:19 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 5:03 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Me? You mentioned the lack of safeties several times! Little perseverance of your own, eh? So...How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? I wouldn't be surprised if you said, "I don't know!" Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. I would treat the semi-auto without a safety not at all, Herring. I wouldn't own one. I did for a while, a Glock 34, but its lack of a real safety was the motivating reason for trading it in on on the Sig X-5, which had an ambi safety. That's a tap dance, ESAD, not an answer! Show us your extensive knowledge - that which you boast of constantly. How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Tap dance about those polymers and alloys, that will get you even. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
|
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
In article ,
says... On 4/1/2013 4:31 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 4/1/13 3:04 PM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:54:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:48 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Monday, 1 April 2013 10:13:29 UTC-3, John H wrote: snip.. It's for damn sure I don't know 2% of what you know about any subject! Your knowledge of everything is simply astonishing. You point that out to us on a daily, nay hourly, basis. Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Salmonbait Johnny, you spent almost your entire Easter.. the most important date in the church calendar, obsessing about handguns. What is wrong with you.... and to make matters worse you now have your wife excited about them. I can't see anything good coming from all this. FOX and the NRA told him he needed guns, of course. Am I the only one who has noticed that John never, EVER mentioned the need nor the desire to have any guns until talk of limiting gun ownership started? What a sheeple. Herring has nothing meaningful to do in his retirement, so he is filling the years between now and his dirt hole with new hobbies. That question really has you stumped, doesn't it ESAFOADD? How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without? Just how valuable are all the 'safeties' to which you keep referring? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. Told ya, John the Racist. Coat the barrel with vaseline, shove it up your ass and pull the trigger. Oh, and get some help for your perseveration problem. Wow, that's some pretty nasty ****... wonder if you will get chastised by... uh, oh forget it. Dance on man, Welcome to the Hotel California... Yes, I agree, almost as low as your nasty, vulgar crap. But at least this one is directly to a poster. Unlike you, who'll stoop so low classed that you say things just as bad or worse about poster's spouses and children. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. No, you've not provided an answer. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. Amen. No need for a safety when there is no round in the chamber. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. As is the case with the P250 I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. When you chamber a round at the range do you then put the pistol aside, or stand around and shoot the ****, such that you need to put the thumb safety on? That would violate your first rule - not ready to fire 'til you're ready to fire. If you've chambered a round, it should be because you're ready to fire - no need to put the safety on, other than to immediately take it off again while aiming. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Exactly. With a safe action or regular trigger (such as on the P250) a chambered round will be fired if the trigger is pulled - whether done with a finger, a Sharpie, a dildo, or a popsicle stick. The moral of that story is to not pull the trigger unless you want the gun to fire. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. So? You have to rack the slide to chamber a round with a thumb safety also. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position? Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the chamber. It's not difficult to find these articles. I'm sure it's not. The bottom line is that you use your thumb safety while on the range after a round has been chambered and you're daydreaming about what to do next. Once you've chambered a round you should be in position to aim and fire the weapon. If and when the RSO calls a 'cease fire', you remove the round from the chamber and remove the magazine, leaving the slide back. Then place your weapon on the stand and move away from it. Surely you're not allowed to simply put the thumb safety on and walk around (unless you're in the woods killing stumps) Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/2/13 11:57 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger. Herring finally figures some of it out...but wait... Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position? ....because something can snag the "safe action" trigger accidentally and fire the weapon. That's why. That kind of **** happens. With a thumb safety, it takes two bites...first, the safety has to be switched off, and then the trigger has to be pulled. And thumb safeties are typically a lot stiffer to operate than a mushy "safe action" trigger, which, after all, has nothing more than a little piece of plastic or metal lever floating on a pin as the "safe" part. Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the chamber. No, the moral of the story is that **** happens. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/2/2013 9:14 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 19:21:21 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. My question is based on his continuous decrying the lack of 'safeties' on various weapons. He also purports to be extremely knowledgeable regarding handguns. Therefore, my question is legitimate. Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. It must be hell sitting around waiting for any illumination from Krausie. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/2/2013 11:57 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. No, you've not provided an answer. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. Amen. No need for a safety when there is no round in the chamber. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. As is the case with the P250 I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. When you chamber a round at the range do you then put the pistol aside, or stand around and shoot the ****, such that you need to put the thumb safety on? That would violate your first rule - not ready to fire 'til you're ready to fire. If you've chambered a round, it should be because you're ready to fire - no need to put the safety on, other than to immediately take it off again while aiming. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Exactly. With a safe action or regular trigger (such as on the P250) a chambered round will be fired if the trigger is pulled - whether done with a finger, a Sharpie, a dildo, or a popsicle stick. The moral of that story is to not pull the trigger unless you want the gun to fire. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. So? You have to rack the slide to chamber a round with a thumb safety also. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position? Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the chamber. It's not difficult to find these articles. I'm sure it's not. The bottom line is that you use your thumb safety while on the range after a round has been chambered and you're daydreaming about what to do next. Once you've chambered a round you should be in position to aim and fire the weapon. If and when the RSO calls a 'cease fire', you remove the round from the chamber and remove the magazine, leaving the slide back. Then place your weapon on the stand and move away from it. Surely you're not allowed to simply put the thumb safety on and walk around (unless you're in the woods killing stumps) Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. John 1 ============== harry 0... LOL! |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On 4/2/13 6:22 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/2/2013 11:57 AM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. No, you've not provided an answer. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. Amen. No need for a safety when there is no round in the chamber. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. As is the case with the P250 I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. When you chamber a round at the range do you then put the pistol aside, or stand around and shoot the ****, such that you need to put the thumb safety on? That would violate your first rule - not ready to fire 'til you're ready to fire. If you've chambered a round, it should be because you're ready to fire - no need to put the safety on, other than to immediately take it off again while aiming. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Exactly. With a safe action or regular trigger (such as on the P250) a chambered round will be fired if the trigger is pulled - whether done with a finger, a Sharpie, a dildo, or a popsicle stick. The moral of that story is to not pull the trigger unless you want the gun to fire. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. So? You have to rack the slide to chamber a round with a thumb safety also. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position? Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the chamber. It's not difficult to find these articles. I'm sure it's not. The bottom line is that you use your thumb safety while on the range after a round has been chambered and you're daydreaming about what to do next. Once you've chambered a round you should be in position to aim and fire the weapon. If and when the RSO calls a 'cease fire', you remove the round from the chamber and remove the magazine, leaving the slide back. Then place your weapon on the stand and move away from it. Surely you're not allowed to simply put the thumb safety on and walk around (unless you're in the woods killing stumps) Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. John 1 ============== harry 0... LOL! Only in the minds of fools like you. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
In article ,
says... On 4/2/2013 11:57 AM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. No, you've not provided an answer. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. Amen. No need for a safety when there is no round in the chamber. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. As is the case with the P250 I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. When you chamber a round at the range do you then put the pistol aside, or stand around and shoot the ****, such that you need to put the thumb safety on? That would violate your first rule - not ready to fire 'til you're ready to fire. If you've chambered a round, it should be because you're ready to fire - no need to put the safety on, other than to immediately take it off again while aiming. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Exactly. With a safe action or regular trigger (such as on the P250) a chambered round will be fired if the trigger is pulled - whether done with a finger, a Sharpie, a dildo, or a popsicle stick. The moral of that story is to not pull the trigger unless you want the gun to fire. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. So? You have to rack the slide to chamber a round with a thumb safety also. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position? Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the chamber. It's not difficult to find these articles. I'm sure it's not. The bottom line is that you use your thumb safety while on the range after a round has been chambered and you're daydreaming about what to do next. Once you've chambered a round you should be in position to aim and fire the weapon. If and when the RSO calls a 'cease fire', you remove the round from the chamber and remove the magazine, leaving the slide back. Then place your weapon on the stand and move away from it. Surely you're not allowed to simply put the thumb safety on and walk around (unless you're in the woods killing stumps) Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. John 1 ============== harry 0... LOL! An alloy and a polymer are the same Harry 1----------- John 0 |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
In article ,
says... On 4/2/13 6:22 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 4/2/2013 11:57 AM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. No, you've not provided an answer. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. Amen. No need for a safety when there is no round in the chamber. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. As is the case with the P250 I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. When you chamber a round at the range do you then put the pistol aside, or stand around and shoot the ****, such that you need to put the thumb safety on? That would violate your first rule - not ready to fire 'til you're ready to fire. If you've chambered a round, it should be because you're ready to fire - no need to put the safety on, other than to immediately take it off again while aiming. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Exactly. With a safe action or regular trigger (such as on the P250) a chambered round will be fired if the trigger is pulled - whether done with a finger, a Sharpie, a dildo, or a popsicle stick. The moral of that story is to not pull the trigger unless you want the gun to fire. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. So? You have to rack the slide to chamber a round with a thumb safety also. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position? Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the chamber. It's not difficult to find these articles. I'm sure it's not. The bottom line is that you use your thumb safety while on the range after a round has been chambered and you're daydreaming about what to do next. Once you've chambered a round you should be in position to aim and fire the weapon. If and when the RSO calls a 'cease fire', you remove the round from the chamber and remove the magazine, leaving the slide back. Then place your weapon on the stand and move away from it. Surely you're not allowed to simply put the thumb safety on and walk around (unless you're in the woods killing stumps) Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. John 1 ============== harry 0... LOL! Only in the minds of fools like you. The little mindless insane low class fool learned a new tactic.... How cute! |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:32:26 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 4/2/13 6:22 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 4/2/2013 11:57 AM, J Herring wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:20:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 7:21 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... You're not too bright. I told you *directly* I was not playing your moronic game. Is that too complex and abstract for you? -------------------------------------------- Isn't his persistent question about the same as repeatedly asking Scott how his "blackmail" thing is going? No. Snotty publicly accused me of perpetrating a blackmail against him, and he repeated that allegation several times and even said there were "others" here he informed and they agreed with him. It was personal. Of course, he never offered his proof here. I've offered Herring an answer, and it makes perfect sense. It isn't the answer he wants, but it is an answer. There are other reasons why I wouldn't own a semi-auto pistol without a real safety. No, you've not provided an answer. My semi-autos are not kept ready to fire unless I am ready to fire. Amen. No need for a safety when there is no round in the chamber. That would be Condition 0, where a bullet is in the chamber, the hammer is cocked and the safety is off. You can easily achieve Condition 0 with a so called "safe action" trigger, which is what Glocks and many other semi-auto pistols have. There is no safety, so if the slide is racked, the pistol is ready to fire. No thumb safety. As is the case with the P250 I also don't keep my pistols in Condition 1, aka "cocked and locked," with a bullet in the chamber, a cocked hammer, and the thumb safety on, unless I am ready to shoot at the range. Then, all I have to do is turn the thumb safety off. Before I do that, I know the gun will not discharge, period. When you chamber a round at the range do you then put the pistol aside, or stand around and shoot the ****, such that you need to put the thumb safety on? That would violate your first rule - not ready to fire 'til you're ready to fire. If you've chambered a round, it should be because you're ready to fire - no need to put the safety on, other than to immediately take it off again while aiming. You can't do that with a "safe action" trigger. If you have that sort of pistol in Condition 1, and there is no safety, a pull on the trigger will fire the weapon. On a pistol with no safety, there is no real Condition 1. You're in Condition 0. Exactly. With a safe action or regular trigger (such as on the P250) a chambered round will be fired if the trigger is pulled - whether done with a finger, a Sharpie, a dildo, or a popsicle stick. The moral of that story is to not pull the trigger unless you want the gun to fire. Pistols with a "safe action" trigger typically are handled in Condition 3, in which the chamber is empty, the hammer or firing pin is down, but there is a charged magazine in the weapon. That's fairly safe, but you have to rack the slide to get a round into the chamber. So? You have to rack the slide to chamber a round with a thumb safety also. I have seen two demonstrations at big-time firing ranges where the range safety officer has shown how a Glock can be fired without a finger on the trigger. A "Sharpie" marking pen can fit in the trigger guard, and press the "safe action" blade in the middle of the trigger and if more pressure is exerted the back part of the "safe action" blade will clear, and the trigger will let the gun fire. I'll bet a small dildo, popsicle stick, or butter knife could do the same thing. How stupid one must be to think that only a 'finger' can pull a trigger. Thus, semi-autos without safeties, like the Glocks, are inherently less safe than weapons with a thumb safety. Why? Unless you run around with a round chambered sticking things in the trigger guard. Do you not think it possible to 'accidentally' put the thumb safety into the fire position? Here's an interesting web page that shows an accidental discharge on a semi-auto with no thumb safety: http://tinyurl.com/brpzttc Moral of the story - don't use old, oil-softened leather holsters when carrying with a round in the chamber. It's not difficult to find these articles. I'm sure it's not. The bottom line is that you use your thumb safety while on the range after a round has been chambered and you're daydreaming about what to do next. Once you've chambered a round you should be in position to aim and fire the weapon. If and when the RSO calls a 'cease fire', you remove the round from the chamber and remove the magazine, leaving the slide back. Then place your weapon on the stand and move away from it. Surely you're not allowed to simply put the thumb safety on and walk around (unless you're in the woods killing stumps) Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort. John 1 ============== harry 0... LOL! Only in the minds of fools like you. I'm still interested in your answer to the question: When you chamber a round at the range do you then put the pistol aside, or stand around and shoot the ****, such that you need to put the thumb safety on? That would violate your first rule - not ready to fire 'til you're ready to fire. If you've chambered a round, it should be because you're ready to fire - no need to put the safety on, other than to immediately take it off again while aiming. Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/31/13 10:19 AM, Eisboch wrote: "Hank©" wrote in message b.com... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 20:01:21 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 3/30/13 7:43 PM, J Herring wrote: On both the Sig and the M&P the trigger is damn near as wide as the trigger guard. I wouldn't want anything any wider, 'cause the safety is the trigger! There is *no* safety on that pistol. Yup, ESAD, compared to your stuff this is a piece of ****. If the bozo did some checking, he'd find that most of the CCW pistols are sans safety levers and rely on internal safetys and long pull stiff double action triggers to prevent accidental firing. ---------------------------------------------------- Except those that are legal to buy in MA. Haven't checked them all, but I think a safety is a requirement to be MA compliant which is why so many semi-automatic pistols are not available up here. The safety button on the Walther is really a de-cocker, but you can't pull the trigger with it in the "safe" position. The Bodyguard also has a safety in addition to a long trigger pull, double action only and no exposed hammer. But revolvers, that are much more available here, don't have a safety. Makes no sense. Lots of semi auto "carry" sized pistols have safeties. I recall handling a Walther PPK that had a traditional safety. All my semi-auto firearms have traditional safeties. My SIG X-5 had a safety. A decocker is not a safety. Here are the specs on the PPK. Aren't most revolvers sold today single action? That means you have to pull the hammer back before you can fire. If the hammer is not pulled back, the trigger won't fire the weapon. Thus, the safety is inherent in the design, as it were. That said, I've seen safeties on some S&W revolvers, and there is a company that makes a retrofit safety for them: http://www.tarnhelm.com/murabito.html The decocker on my S&W 5906 is certainly a safety, expert. Go pay your taxes. |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
Eisboch wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... Here's a little CZ concealed carry pistol with several safety features, including an actual safety: http://www.cz-usa.com/products/view/cz-2075-rami/ ------------------------------------------- I've heard that CZ may be trying to get some of their handguns on the MA compliant list, but as of last month no CZ models are listed: http://www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/chsb/firearms/approvedfirearmsroster03-2013.pdf Nothing from Taurus? Do they have to apply to be included? |
Picked up the Sig Sauer P250
"Earl" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... Here's a little CZ concealed carry pistol with several safety features, including an actual safety: http://www.cz-usa.com/products/view/cz-2075-rami/ ------------------------------------------- I've heard that CZ may be trying to get some of their handguns on the MA compliant list, but as of last month no CZ models are listed: http://www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/chsb/firearms/approvedfirearmsroster03-2013.pdf Nothing from Taurus? Do they have to apply to be included? ---------------------------------------------------------------- From what I've read the gun manufacturers who want to sell in Massachusetts must submit five guns each of every model they want to sell here to the state for various safety checks and certification. They must have certain features, including no more than a 10 round magazine capacity, a minimum of a 10 lb trigger pull, a thumb safety that yields the trigger inoperable and certain other design characteristics. The guns are then basically destroyed by drop testing and subjecting them to other various tests. If the gun model passes all the safety tests and design criteria the application is then submitted to the MA Attorney General's Office for approval. This is where it gets stupid. The AG's office has a history of being inconsistent in how they make their approval or disapproval determinations. I've heard unverified reports for example that a certain popular Ruger model that passed all the safety tests was disapproved simply because the AG's office didn't like where they put the serial number on the gun. Many manufacturers have basically told the state to go screw themselves and don't even bother trying to get their guns on the MA compliant list. That said however, one major dealer in this state has Taurus products listed on their "Guns you cannot buy in Massachusetts" but claims they wouldn't sell them anyway. Their comment is: "We don't like Taurus products due to terrible customer service experiences that we've had. However, it doesn't matter since we can't sell them anyway." http://www.fsguns.com/fsg_information.html |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:01 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com