BoatBanter.com - Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - Picked up the Sig Sauer P250 (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/155570-picked-up-sig-sauer-p250.html)

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

On 4/1/13 12:10 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:56:06 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/1/13 11:40 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:21:52 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/1/13 10:56 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:42:46 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 9:37 PM, Tim wrote:
On Mar 31, 5:51 pm, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 3/31/13 5:02 PM, J Herring wrote:

On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:53:47 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 3:13 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 10:33:44 -0400, "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

Both of my revolvers are S&W, both are double or single action, and neither have a safety.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

Which has nothing to do with the point.

My goodness, Foaesad, just what is your point? How would you treat a pistol with a safety
differently from one without?

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

The point is that despite your "career" in the Army, you don't know
jack**** about pistols.

Harry, I'd say he knows a lot more about the M101A1and M144 than
anybody else here. Not counting M41's and 48's

Heck, Harry, there's people who have retired from the armed services
who never picked up a pistol in their entire career. My dad served in
the Philippines in ww2 and never carried a pistol. He sure shot a lot
of rounds though an M1 carbine, and an M3 'grease gun' though.

The subject under discussion here was pistols, not howitzers or assault
rifles, and, more specifically, the safeties or lack of same on those
pistols. Surely Herring was issued a sidearm and training for it during
his time in our war against the people of Vietnam.

How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without?

And, it's about time, given your support for it, that you start referring to the Vietnam conflict as
'our war'.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

That war was not "my" war, it was the War of the Government of the
United States Against the People of Vietnam.

You're the one who used the phrase 'our war', and you supported the war effort. Thanks.

How I treat semi-auto pistols is *not* how you would treat them, so what
I do with mine to stay safe is not relevant.

ESAD, you've expounded several times on your wealth of pistol knowledge. You've several times
commented on the lack of 'safeties' on the P250 and earlier on the M&P. Here's your chance to
demonstrate some of that knowledge - or you could just say, "I don't know."

How would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without?

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

What's the point in enlightening you? It'll be more interesting to see
what happens because of your ignorance.

Tough question, huh?

Perhaps "I don't know" should be your response, as it's obvious you can't answer a simple question.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

No, not at all. My answer is, I have no interest either in enlightening
you or in playing this moronic game of yours. I can answer, I simply
choose not to do so. You'll have success pulling your ignorant son
PsychoSnotty's strings.

Have nice day.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

On 4/1/2013 10:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 4/1/13 9:13 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:51:22 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 5:02 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:53:47 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 3:13 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 10:33:44 -0400, "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

Both of my revolvers are S&W, both are double or single action,
and neither have a safety.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

Which has nothing to do with the point.

My goodness, Foaesad, just what is your point? How would you treat a
pistol with a safety
differently from one without?

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

The point is that despite your "career" in the Army, you don't know
jack**** about pistols.

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

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

It is clear I know a hell of a lot more about semi-auto pistols than you
do, and your arrogance will keep you ignorant.

It isn't clear at all. The only thing you demonstrated was your ability
to Google features of various weapons.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

On 4/1/2013 11:00 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:55:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/1/13 9:13 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:51:22 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 5:02 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:53:47 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 3:13 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 10:33:44 -0400, "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

Both of my revolvers are S&W, both are double or single action, and neither have a safety.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

Which has nothing to do with the point.

My goodness, Foaesad, just what is your point? How would you treat a pistol with a safety
differently from one without?

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

The point is that despite your "career" in the Army, you don't know
jack**** about pistols.

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

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

It is clear I know a hell of a lot more about semi-auto pistols than you
do, and your arrogance will keep you ignorant.

Then answer the question:

Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without?

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

You might have to give him some hints.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

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.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

On 4/1/2013 12:05 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 4/1/13 11:56 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/30/2013 5:54 PM, Hank© wrote:
On 3/30/2013 5:22 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/30/13 5:07 PM, Eisboch wrote:

"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...

On 3/30/13 4:45 PM, Eisboch wrote:

Have you ever tried any of the sub-sonic ammo? I haven't and am
curious how much they diminish the "crack" when they are fired.

It's a noticeable difference, but they're still pretty loud rounds.
I've
seen demos of suppressors with subsonic rounds, and on a .22LR, the
sound is still there, but it's very soft and does not sound anything
like a firearm.

----------------------------------------

I bought a Ruger Air Magnum Pellet rifle a couple of months ago
thinking
I could use it for target practice on my property. The nearest
neighbor's house is about 400 feet from where I'd be shooting and in
the
opposite direction of where I'd be aiming, so I figured it wouldn't
be a
bother to him.

Boy, was I surprised. The damn thing is louder than the Marlin .22
lever action I have. Muzzle velocity is actually higher. 1200 fps
for
the standard lead pellets and 1400 fps for the light, alloy pellets.
Very accurate, but it weighs a ton.

http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/airgundepot_2254_185840498

Aging minds think alike. I'm interested in the suppressor because
there's an area, a dry creek bed, on our property that is legally
distant enough from neighboring properties, to be used as a target
range. The creek bed is 15 to 20 feet deep where I'd like to set up a
range, and it curves where the backstop would be. Ideal. Except...I
don't want to disturb the neighbors and...the snakes...I am sure are
down there somewhere. :) A suppressor would allow me to use my .22lr
pistol and rifle down there.

If it's not on an authorized range you are not allowed to fire a gun in
Maryland. I suppose hunting is illegal in Maryland as well.

It's a liberal thing.. as long as you don't think it will bother
anybody, you can break the law in Maryland I guess.

Poor PsychoSnotty: mentally unbalanced and dumb enough to believe
FlaJim/Hank/Mired, who only posts here to get a rise out of morons
like...PsychoSnotty.

Firing a gun on private property in Maryland is under the purview of
local law, not state law, and the laws vary fairly widely. Calvert
County is still mostly rural.

"Code of Calvert County
Title 15, subtitle 1.
15-102. Permission required.
(a)Except for a law enforcement officer in the line of duty or as
provided in Subsection (b) of this section, a person may not discharge a
firearm:
(1)Within 150 yards of a building which can be used as a residence,
whether occupied or vacant; or
(2)On any property owned by another person or by Calvert County without
evidence of permission on his person."

The part of the dry creek bed I'd like to use as an informal range is
more than 150 yards from any neighbor's house.

That rules your little 3/4 acre out.
You still need written permission from the property owner.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

On 4/1/13 12:53 PM, True North wrote:
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.

Agreed. Nothing good will come of this. If I cared about Herring, I'd
have a feeling of foreboding, but, since it's Herring, I don't give a ****.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 12:47:47 -0400, Hank© wrote:

On 4/1/2013 11:00 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:55:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/1/13 9:13 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:51:22 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 5:02 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:53:47 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/31/13 3:13 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 10:33:44 -0400, "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

Both of my revolvers are S&W, both are double or single action, and neither have a safety.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

Which has nothing to do with the point.

My goodness, Foaesad, just what is your point? How would you treat a pistol with a safety
differently from one without?

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

The point is that despite your "career" in the Army, you don't know
jack**** about pistols.

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

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

It is clear I know a hell of a lot more about semi-auto pistols than you
do, and your arrogance will keep you ignorant.

Then answer the question:

Now, how would you treat a pistol with a safety differently from one without?

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

You might have to give him some hints.

It's a pretty simple question, with a pretty simple answer.

Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:02:06 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/1/13 12:53 PM, True North wrote:
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.

Agreed. Nothing good will come of this. If I cared about Herring, I'd
have a feeling of foreboding, but, since it's Herring, I don't give a ****.

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

On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 16:25:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , says...

...yesterday at Gander Mountain. Haven't fired it yet, but it sure is a nice feeling pistol. My wife
loves the size.

While there I noticed one of these in the cabinet: http://tinyurl.com/cpkd7td

Over priced for a .45 ACP. You need to buy a Colt they are cheaper.

Now I'm drooling. I don't have a .45, but think I need one for protection in case a grisly bear
decides to break into the house.

Everyone needs a .45.

Held to your head.

Picked up the Sig Sauer P250