Bert Robbins wrote:

Wrong, you have said numerous times that you will shoot first and ask
questions later if some of the righties appear at your door.


Sounds like a sound policy.

Harry,
I can see why you don't allow your posts to be archived. it does make it
easier for you to change your story.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
Just like his buddy Carl Rowen, the now deceased pundit, that was
vocally anti-gun. But, when those kids came around late in the evening
to swim in his pool the first thing he did was to pull out his
illegally owned gun and started to shoot rather than call the police.

Harry is no different in that he belives that the rules and laws do not
apply to him.


"Lord Reginald Smithers" Ask me about my driveway leading up to my
manor. wrote in message ...
LOL, this is so funny watching Harry being a supporter of using
handguns for self defense.



Sorry, Bertbrain and buddy, but:

1. I don't own any illegal weapons, or even weapons I illegally
obtained.
2. I don't advocate using handguns for home defense.
3. I don't carry firearms on my person when I leave my home.
4. I shoot *rented* handguns at ranges, and the handguns of friends
on their private property.

If, however, you insist on using a handgun for home defense, then, yes,
I think a semi-auto is a better choice.






So, what you have posited is just more simple-minded, right-wing idiocy.

Wrong, you have said numerous times that you will shoot first and ask
questions later if some of the righties appear at your door.

Sorry, one-volt brain, but what I said was that if Tuuk forced his way
into my house uninvited, I would view that as a home invasion, as he had
publicly threatened to do me harm, and I would act accordingly. That's
not "some" of the righties, that's a particular rightie. And it's no
different than I would treat any other home invader.

You and several of your buddies here should really visit the wizard and
trade in that straw between your ears.

--
God bless our troops; God forgive George W. Bush.

Harry,
Nah I really don't, but I do have a strong double bolt on my door leading
up from the basement. The double bolt is long enough to slide into the 2x4
frame.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Lord Reginald Smithers" The fastest and most accurate Gun in the World
wrote in message ...
Doug,
My post was made in jest. I don't own a gun and don't plan on buying
one.

Maybe I should just buy a laser light and attach it to a broom handle.
Opps correction, make that a tactical light attached to a broom handle.

I like the idea of fortified basement windows, which, according to the
police, is the preferred entry point for the vast majority of intruders.
I also have deadbolts on the basement door, although they're not
laser-assisted.


I'm betting Smithers already has a laser light on a broomstick.

--
I'm proud of my country, but appalled by my government.

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:

Wrong, you have said numerous times that you will shoot first and ask
questions later if some of the righties appear at your door.
Sounds like a sound policy.

Well, come on over Don, I'm sure Harry can give you my address

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
k.net...

Second (following your post) - This is insane. You think you have time
to select a particular spot on your target (the intruder)? How does a
laser sight keep you from exposing your head while taking aim? You can
buy a laser pointer if you really think this stunt will be effective.

I wonder why these things are true.

1) The two largest handgun makers on the planet don't offer models with
laser anything installed, nor do they even sell them as accessories for
users to install themselves. Instead, they offer tritium night sights.

2) In NRA and IDPA tournaments, there are people who shoot so well, they
seem like machines. They don't use laser sights.

3) Every book I've ever read, by instructors like Massad Ayoob, Chuck
Taylor and Gabe Suarez, say best shooting results are obtained when you
force yourself to drop the target out of focus, and bring the gun's
sights into focus.

4) Pistols set up for hunting virtually never include laser sights.

Strange, isn't it?

Laser sights are a terrific thing for rifle use in some situations, but
for anything else, they're just a security blanket.


My understanding is that the laser dot is supposed to improve your ability
to isolate your target, once you are sure you have a target, in near
darkness. I wouldn't shoot at anything I couldn't see clearly and
recognize *as* my target. If I have a perp in my house and he's coming at
me, I'm going to blast him with a 12-gauge and stop him, not play around
with a little red light.

I doubt Skipper has any firearms. He might have a flashlight.

To me, "isolate your target" means to differentiate it from other people or
things. A laser dot does no such thing.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dan Krueger wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Skipper wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

Skipper wrote:

So, which is the better *defensive* handgun, a S&W .357 mag
fitted with
laser grips or a Glock auto?
.357 mag revolver or a .44 mag revolver.
Simple, effective and never break down.
"I know what you're thinkin', punk. You're thinkin', did he fire
six
shots or only five? And to tell you the truth, I forgot myself in
all
this excitement. But bein' this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful
handgun in the world, and it'll blow your head clean off, you could
ask
yourself a question. Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

- Harry Callahan

--
Skipper
Great line, great delivery, but inaccurate. The .454 Casull, for
one. was and is "more powerful."
Not sure, but I don't think that load existed at the time the movie
was made.

Dick Casull developed the .454 Casull in 1957 and announced it in 1959
in Guns and Ammo magazine. If I'm on your "holiday shopping list," I'd
like a 454 wheelgun from Freedom Arms.

Can you afford to shoot it? What is it now, $3.50 per shot?
About a buck and a half, I think. I looked it up once in the Natchez
catalog. Just for grins.

It's a silly caliber, unless you're out in the woods somewhere, and you
run across a hungry, large bear.

Have you seen the new piece offered by Ruger? 5 shot .454, 3" barrel. A
last resort gun for people who spend lots of time in serious bear
country. Just read a review where the guy said is "wasn't so bad to
shoot". Right. And I'm the king of Denmark.

Is that the Ruger Alaskan? I saw one up at the Bass Pro Shops, or at least
I *think* I saw one there, in a display case, along with the S&W .500. But
it was a "six-shooter," not a "five-shooter," so maybe it was a different
piece. It was a .454, though. Just what you need for those Maryland
hunting expeditions for the dangerous critters in our woods.

(Note to right-wing droolers: that was a bit of sarcasm. Yes, I know we
have bears, albeit small ones, in our woods. Now, go back to sleep, boys.)

Oh yeah...it is 6. I read wrong.

Harry Krause wrote:

No whoosh. It is too powerful for a home defense weapon. You want a
round that will stop a human, and not blow a car engine apart. You want
to kill the next door neighbor, plus the person walking down street a
block away? Plus you want a weapon that is able to be fired more than
once every 10 seconds. the 500 / 454 would be sor far up in the air from
recoil, that you are going to waste a lot of time reaiming.

I was being facetious. It's a cannon. That's why the "whoosh."

Nice try at a recovery but, it didn't work.

Sure it did. The problem is, I keep forgetting how utterly stupid some
of you righties are.

And once again Krause demonstrates his use of the HK Canard as his best
defensive weapon.

--
Skipper

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:56:16 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
k.net...

Second (following your post) - This is insane. You think you have time
to
select a particular spot on your target (the intruder)? How does a
laser
sight keep you from exposing your head while taking aim? You can buy a
laser pointer if you really think this stunt will be effective.

I wonder why these things are true.

1) The two largest handgun makers on the planet don't offer models with
laser anything installed, nor do they even sell them as accessories for
users to install themselves. Instead, they offer tritium night sights.

2) In NRA and IDPA tournaments, there are people who shoot so well, they
seem like machines. They don't use laser sights.

3) Every book I've ever read, by instructors like Massad Ayoob, Chuck
Taylor
and Gabe Suarez, say best shooting results are obtained when you force
yourself to drop the target out of focus, and bring the gun's sights
into
focus.

4) Pistols set up for hunting virtually never include laser sights.

Strange, isn't it?

Laser sights are a terrific thing for rifle use in some situations, but
for
anything else, they're just a security blanket.




My understanding is that the laser dot is supposed to improve your
ability to isolate your target, once you are sure you have a target, in
near darkness. I wouldn't shoot at anything I couldn't see clearly and
recognize *as* my target. If I have a perp in my house and he's coming
at me, I'm going to blast him with a 12-gauge and stop him, not play
around with a little red light.

I doubt Skipper has any firearms. He might have a flashlight.

I have a laser on my .45 Ruger and I think it is just a waste of
money. In a serious social situation it might actually give the other
guy a better place to aim at.


Which .45 Ruger do you have? I'm pondering an upgrade.

Doug Kanter wrote:

Every book I've ever read, by instructors like Massad Ayoob, Chuck Taylor
and Gabe Suarez, say best shooting results are obtained when you force
yourself to drop the target out of focus, and bring the gun's sights into
focus.

Total bunk! Nonsense!! Most home intrusions occur at night, and under
minimal light conditions. Same can be said of most assaults. Advising
the focusing of ones attention on sights at night and under stressful
adrenaline pumped minimal light conditions is insane...AND it ain't
going to happen.

Pistols set up for hunting virtually never include laser sights.

Just not true, Doug. Laser grips are not a substitute for iron sights,
they are an alternative for low light conditions for hunting pistols.
Many hunters employ laser grips on their handguns...more all the time.
They *are* an improvement over iron sights in poor light conditions.

Laser sight technology is still new, and this discussion is much like
one I had with Krause a few years back where he advocated using a
sextant for coastal nav over a GPS. Given time, even the slower wits
come around.

Strange, isn't it?

Not at all.

--
Skipper

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:56:16 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
k.net...

Second (following your post) - This is insane. You think you have
time to
select a particular spot on your target (the intruder)? How does a
laser
sight keep you from exposing your head while taking aim? You can buy
a
laser pointer if you really think this stunt will be effective.
I wonder why these things are true.

1) The two largest handgun makers on the planet don't offer models
with
laser anything installed, nor do they even sell them as accessories
for
users to install themselves. Instead, they offer tritium night sights.

2) In NRA and IDPA tournaments, there are people who shoot so well,
they
seem like machines. They don't use laser sights.

3) Every book I've ever read, by instructors like Massad Ayoob, Chuck
Taylor
and Gabe Suarez, say best shooting results are obtained when you force
yourself to drop the target out of focus, and bring the gun's sights
into
focus.

4) Pistols set up for hunting virtually never include laser sights.

Strange, isn't it?

Laser sights are a terrific thing for rifle use in some situations,
but for
anything else, they're just a security blanket.



My understanding is that the laser dot is supposed to improve your
ability to isolate your target, once you are sure you have a target, in
near darkness. I wouldn't shoot at anything I couldn't see clearly and
recognize *as* my target. If I have a perp in my house and he's coming
at me, I'm going to blast him with a 12-gauge and stop him, not play
around with a little red light.

I doubt Skipper has any firearms. He might have a flashlight.
I have a laser on my .45 Ruger and I think it is just a waste of
money. In a serious social situation it might actually give the other
guy a better place to aim at.


Which .45 Ruger do you have? I'm pondering an upgrade.
Have you tried a G37, or are you set on a wheel gun?

I'm thinking of getting rid of a wheelgun - S&W 25-2 (.45 long colt). Too
expensive to shoot, and I don't want to get involved with handloading. I'm
thinking about a Ruger P90.