BoatBanter.com - Oh deer!

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

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

- - Oh deer! (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/85938-oh-deer.html)

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 23:00:33 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 22:35:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 21:06:01 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:46:04 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:18:52 -0400, HK
wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
Here's a site that gives enough information for people who know
something
about pistols.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger_SP101.htm

Call your local police station and ask whether it's legal to use
google
in
your town. That should help you find the information you need.

Long one of my favorite shooting sites, but you can see the
desperation
in the right's politics...he's endorsed Tired Old Fred, with the
same
ideas that brought us...Iraq.

Actually, Harry, we're not discussing politics at all. We're
discussing
the
frame used for the Ruger SP101.
There is no "we" that includes you until you spend a day or ten
reading.
Otherwise, you can't possibly know what you're talking about. Is
your
public
library open on weekends? Does the "home" have a shuttle bus that'll
bring
you there?

See previous answer to you. And, see answer to JimH. And, see answer
to
Harry. You guys have a lot of words to say, but none have shown
anything
that says the Ruger SP101, a .357 Magnum revolver, was built on a
.38
frame.

I can't believe that of you five people, *none* of you would come up
with
the proof, if it exists, simply to prove me wrong...although I've
not
asserted that it *wasn't* built on a .38 frame.

So, if someone else has knowledge, they are required to dredge up
sources
for you, while you sit on your wet diaper and watch television.

Not a chance.

Doug, I'm thinking there are no sources saying the Ruger SP101, .357
Magnum
revolver, was built on a .38 frame. I've looked at a couple dozen
sites.
I
did find that the SP101 was built as a .22 calibre. So it's possible
to
buy
a Ruger .22 on a .357 Magnum frame, but I could find nothing stating
the
.357 was built on a .38 frame.

Do you reckon Ruger is keeping it hidden from the public.

You're all done with with, John. You are over it. Way over it. If you
want
to continue, go ask the question in rec.guns.

Let's see, first it was countersteering, now it's a .357 Magnum on a .38
frame.

Sounds like you couldn't support your statements. Hell, you didn't even
know what a grip insert was!
Did I or did I not just teach you that you were all done here? Go change
your diaper.

Y'all just can't stand being wrong! Hell, it's no big deal to say,
"Whoops,
I was wrong." But I guess that when you've called someone a god damned guy
and a moron, not to mention the comments you and Harry and JimH manage,
it's pretty tough.

Trust me, Doug, if a site proving your point existed, you'd be shoving it
down my throat!

And no, I'm not all alone. You persist in answering. The others read but
know better than to answer, 'cause they can't find anything either!

Are you always this lazy? This is strange, coming from a guy who used to
bitch about his students being less than wonderful.

I love this line from Herringbrain:

"The others read but
know better than to answer, 'cause they can't find anything either!"

What a flaming ass he is...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 23:00:33 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 22:35:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 21:06:01 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:46:04 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:18:52 -0400, HK
wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
Here's a site that gives enough information for people who
know
something
about pistols.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger_SP101.htm

Call your local police station and ask whether it's legal to
use
google
in
your town. That should help you find the information you need.

Long one of my favorite shooting sites, but you can see the
desperation
in the right's politics...he's endorsed Tired Old Fred, with
the
same
ideas that brought us...Iraq.

Actually, Harry, we're not discussing politics at all. We're
discussing
the
frame used for the Ruger SP101.
There is no "we" that includes you until you spend a day or ten
reading.
Otherwise, you can't possibly know what you're talking about. Is
your
public
library open on weekends? Does the "home" have a shuttle bus
that'll
bring
you there?

See previous answer to you. And, see answer to JimH. And, see
answer
to
Harry. You guys have a lot of words to say, but none have shown
anything
that says the Ruger SP101, a .357 Magnum revolver, was built on a
.38
frame.

I can't believe that of you five people, *none* of you would come
up
with
the proof, if it exists, simply to prove me wrong...although I've
not
asserted that it *wasn't* built on a .38 frame.

So, if someone else has knowledge, they are required to dredge up
sources
for you, while you sit on your wet diaper and watch television.

Not a chance.

Doug, I'm thinking there are no sources saying the Ruger SP101, .357
Magnum
revolver, was built on a .38 frame. I've looked at a couple dozen
sites.
I
did find that the SP101 was built as a .22 calibre. So it's possible
to
buy
a Ruger .22 on a .357 Magnum frame, but I could find nothing stating
the
.357 was built on a .38 frame.

Do you reckon Ruger is keeping it hidden from the public.

You're all done with with, John. You are over it. Way over it. If you
want
to continue, go ask the question in rec.guns.

Let's see, first it was countersteering, now it's a .357 Magnum on a
.38
frame.

Sounds like you couldn't support your statements. Hell, you didn't
even
know what a grip insert was!
Did I or did I not just teach you that you were all done here? Go
change
your diaper.

Y'all just can't stand being wrong! Hell, it's no big deal to say,
"Whoops,
I was wrong." But I guess that when you've called someone a god damned
guy
and a moron, not to mention the comments you and Harry and JimH manage,
it's pretty tough.

Trust me, Doug, if a site proving your point existed, you'd be shoving
it
down my throat!

And no, I'm not all alone. You persist in answering. The others read but
know better than to answer, 'cause they can't find anything either!

Are you always this lazy? This is strange, coming from a guy who used to
bitch about his students being less than wonderful.

I love this line from Herringbrain:

"The others read but
know better than to answer, 'cause they can't find anything either!"

What a flaming ass he is...

He's asking us to do his homework for him. He must've been some teacher.

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=67160&fr=yvmtf

This ought to rile up the mindless inlanders.

Harry, e-mail me something. Anything. Know what I mean? I have a question.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=67160&fr=yvmtf

This ought to rile up the mindless inlanders.

Harry, e-mail me something. Anything. Know what I mean? I have a question.

check your in box

"Scott in Florida" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:18:39 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:05:14 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Careful. You sound like some "folks" who think anyone who reads and
learns
is an elitist.

Hmm. Typical educated cop response.

--Vic

Quota? Nah. I can write as many tickets as I want.

Ahhhhhh

Joey is a cop?

ROFLMAO

NO! Joe is a grocery store clerk.

Did you tell all your buddies here how you lost a HALF MILLION DOLLARS
to me?

--
Scott in Florida

About all I can say for the United States Senate
is that it opens with a prayer and
closes with an investigation.

Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=67160&fr=yvmtf

This ought to rile up the mindless inlanders.

Harry, e-mail me something. Anything. Know what I mean? I have a
question.

check your in box

Harry, when I reply to that email, it fails. I need to ask you a question
via email. Please include the real deal!

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=67160&fr=yvmtf

This ought to rile up the mindless inlanders.

Harry, e-mail me something. Anything. Know what I mean? I have a
question.

check your in box

Harry, when I reply to that email, it fails. I need to ask you a question
via email. Please include the real deal!

Hmmm.

Okay...I sent you another.

On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 11:42:09 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=67160&fr=yvmtf

This ought to rile up the mindless inlanders.

Harry, e-mail me something. Anything. Know what I mean? I have a
question.

check your in box

Harry, when I reply to that email, it fails. I need to ask you a question
via email. Please include the real deal!

Say it ain't so!

Someone does not want to hear from you?

--
Scott in Florida

About all I can say for the United States Senate
is that it opens with a prayer and
closes with an investigation.

Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:55:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

You got the wrong trainer. The dog isn't supposed to chase them into
the water.

In Florida we know how to keep both geese and dogs out of the ponds:

Alligators.

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:08:19 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 17:38:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
m...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:51:59 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
news:2b33e3lt3kbdqa0rm1i7q2nlgqcckbs1r7@4ax. com...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:20:21 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
news:oo13e3h766n56tof420chhq3vmd19jvnk3@4a x.com...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:53:52 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 11:13:29 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:50:24 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 10:46:02 -0500, John H.

wrote:

On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:02:55 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 13:25:54 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in
message
news:u382e3ts8i22s7a6hjrvd4abtcu8s4 ...
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:00:17 -0400,
wrote:

The winner was always an old sargent who took his time and
shot
down
one per round, with a 2" revolver.

I have said for years that the reason is due to 13 round
semi-auto
hand guns.

With a revolver, you only have six - makes you concentrate.

One of my favorite gun technique books suggests taking only 6
rounds
to the
range, no matter what kind of handgun you're shooting. Good
idea.

All my kids were trained that way. In fact, when my youngest
went
to
the Academy in SC, he noticed that the more bullets they were
issues,
the more the used them.

He took his time, minimum shots and did well.

It's the revolver training.

I have a 9mm Glock, but I never carry it unless I'm in the
woods.
For
just carrying purposes, it's a .357 mag on a .38 frame.

Don't you mean that the other way around? My Highway Patrolman
shoots
.38's
but is a .357 magnum frame (and shoots them!).

Nope - just the way I spake it.

Wouldn't a gun with a frame built for .38's be somewhat unsafe
with
a
bunch
of .357 mags going through it?

What part of this is so hard to understand?

The gun is a .357 mag built on a .38 frame.

Ruger SP101

Hello? Anybody home?

You god damned people will agrue about anything.

I'm outa here for a while.

Morons.

No argument exists. I was simply asking a question. I looked for
information on the Ruger SP101, but could find nothing saying the
frame
was
built for .38's.

Look at the top strap, Einstein.

Ah, another name-caller!

Enlighten me, please. I am certainly no expert on pistols. What is a
'top
strap'?

Is there one in this photo?

http://tinyurl.com/lw55

Yes, there is. See the black grip with the silver screw holding it on?
That's actually called the top strap.

Those are grip inserts. I've never heard them called 'top straps'. Do
they
have a stamp on them somewhere saying the frame is a .38 caliber
frame?

No. You just have to know these things. One high-tech way of knowing is
to
read a lot.

Well, here's the site with all the specs and such. Perhaps you could
point
me to where it says the Ruger SP101 pistol is built on a .38 frame. Or,
please point me to anything that says that. I'll admit to not reading a
whole lot about pistols.

Here's a site that gives enough information for people who know something
about pistols.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger_SP101.htm

Call your local police station and ask whether it's legal to use google in
your town. That should help you find the information you need.

Actually, I used Google to find the specs I gave you above. I could find
nothing on the site you provided saying anything about the SP101 being a
.38 frame. I did read that it was designed to be a small, strong .357
Magnum.

Help!

From:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...3/ai_n19313632

The .38 Special was the original chambering when the SP101 was introduced in
1988, and brother shooter Jon had a copy, one of the SPNY models built
expressly for backup, off-duty and detective use to the specifications of
the New York City Police Department.