Members BushmasterM4 Posted May 9, 2007 Members Share Posted May 9, 2007 Aim surplus is about an hour drive for me and Ive been meaning to get an SKS for a while. They deal with curio and relics and carry Bushmaster. The got some really nice Enfields also. Below is pic of the Enfield Jungle. They dont have any SKS at the moment but as soon as they get some in I'll be driving to get one http://www.aimsurplus.com/acatalog/New_Rifles_.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Brandenburg Posted May 9, 2007 Members Share Posted May 9, 2007 Aim surplus is about an hour drive for me and Ive been meaning to get an SKS for a while. They deal with curio and relics and carry Bushmaster. The got some really nice Enfields also. Below is pic of the Enfield Jungle. They dont have any SKS at the moment but as soon as they get some in I'll be driving to get one http://www.aimsurplus.com/acatalog/New_Rifles_.htmlI will be able to get my two SKS's out of pawn in approximately 1 week. i cant wait till that happens. I thought I was gunna come close to loosing them , but events happened in such a way that I will be able to get them out.. $75 + 2 months interest per gun and they are mine once again:)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members larryguitar Posted May 9, 2007 Members Share Posted May 9, 2007 Aim surplus is about an hour drive for me and Ive been meaning to get an SKS for a while. They deal with curio and relics and carry Bushmaster. The got some really nice Enfields also. Below is pic of the Enfield Jungle. They dont have any SKS at the moment but as soon as they get some in I'll be driving to get one http://www.aimsurplus.com/acatalog/New_Rifles_.htmlI don't like to be a negative nancy, but you may want to look into the whole Ishapore Enfield thing before touching off a .308 in one of those.My dad's an Enfield geek (as in paying $65 to get the proper magazine for a specific factory's gun ) and he won't touch them. There are very mixed reviews about the Ishapore factory's 'improvements' that allow the Enfield action to handle 7.62. FWIW. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Save The Pine Weasel Posted May 9, 2007 Members Share Posted May 9, 2007 My dad's an Enfield geek (as in paying $65 to get the proper magazine for a specific factory's gun ) and he won't touch them. There are very mixed reviews about the Ishapore factory's 'improvements' that allow the Enfield action to handle 7.62. There was an article in the 1978 (I think) Gun Digest about proof testing at the Ishapore factory. The gist of it was, at some point after 1948, they changed the metallurgy in the rifles. When they started failing proof tests, the solution was to stop conducting proof tests. IMO, the Lee-Enfield action is inadequate for the 7.62 NATO or .308 round. I doubt the rifle will actually blow up, and it may never be a problem. However, there are enough good .308 rifles available that I don't see any reason to spend money for one of those Ishapores. I do own one (an unaltered one, not a butchered Jungle Carbine copy), but it's as a collector piece. I don't shoot it. The workmanship is clearly inferior to other Lee-Enfields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members larryguitar Posted May 9, 2007 Members Share Posted May 9, 2007 There was an article in the 1978 (I think) Gun Digest about proof testing at the Ishapore factory. The gist of it was, at some point after 1948, they changed the metallurgy in the rifles. When they started failing proof tests, the solution was to stop conducting proof tests. IMO, the Lee-Enfield action is inadequate for the 7.62 NATO or .308 round. I doubt the rifle will actually blow up, and it may never be a problem. However, there are enough good .308 rifles available that I don't see any reason to spend money for one of those Ishapores. I do own one (an unaltered one, not a butchered Jungle Carbine copy), but it's as a collector piece. I don't shoot it. The workmanship is clearly inferior to other Lee-Enfields. +1.I always liked how they reinforced the stocks on the grenade launching versions by wrapping them with copper wire-now THAT'S technology, right there.Sorry, Bushmaster. (BTW-my Bushie shorty is my 'go-to' rifle, so you have good taste generally. )Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BushmasterM4 Posted May 9, 2007 Members Share Posted May 9, 2007 Yea I doubt I would ever shoot the Enfield either. Just want one. I have an old Russian Nagant 1895 revolver (mines dated 1945) I got about 4 months ago and Ive never shot it yet. Has a note saying to have a gunsmith check it out before fireing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flaming turd Posted May 10, 2007 Author Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=3149487 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ibanezfoo Posted May 10, 2007 Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=3149487I watched that when it was on TV a few days ago. I couldn't believe my eyes, completely opposite to what the media usually shows regarding firearms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flaming turd Posted May 10, 2007 Author Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 wow. i just got a visit from the atf. someone stupid enough to belive that my guns were automatic had reported this thread to them, and they stopped by to make sure everything was legal. everything was fine, and they left, but that was little weird. they had pics from myspace and everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ibanezfoo Posted May 10, 2007 Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 wow. i just got a visit from the atf. someone stupid enough to belive that my guns were automatic had reported this thread to them, and they stopped by to make sure everything was legal. everything was fine, and they left, but that was little weird. they had pics from myspace and everything. What? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flaming turd Posted May 10, 2007 Author Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 What? Really?yeah. i'm still a little shaken. i mean, everything own is totally legal, but it's still a little scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ibanezfoo Posted May 10, 2007 Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 yeah. i'm still a little shaken. i mean, everything own is totally legal, but it's still a little scary. Did they have a warrant or anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flaming turd Posted May 10, 2007 Author Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 Did they have a warrant or anything?no, but i saw no reason to refuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ibanezfoo Posted May 10, 2007 Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 no, but i saw no reason to refuse. Yeah, probably a good idea.... knowing the way things are these days if you refused they'd label you a terrorist and then come back and kick your door in anyway. These are scary days were are entering... the days when the ignorant get to have their little witch hunts and lynchings. You'd think we would have learned by now............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Brandenburg Posted May 10, 2007 Members Share Posted May 10, 2007 Did they have a warrant or anything? I would of refused them entry with out a warrant.. I refuse cops permission to search my car, my house or have any entry to my house what so ever. This is my constitutional right and I exercise it... I guess my age and the fact that I have had run ins with the law before have slanted my view on the law in general....as for them labeling some one a terrorist because you woulnd allow the access to your guns.. That is possible but then again .. call to ur congressman,newspaper/telivision station,etc.. LOL.. They REALLY love a good story.. Makes them money/publicity .. Fuk em all And yes... I HAVE denied the law inside my house with out a search warrant before and my car for that matter.... Just remember the main people that hate a free society is the law.. Makes their job that much more difficult.. Just my oppinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Save The Pine Weasel Posted May 11, 2007 Members Share Posted May 11, 2007 wow. i just got a visit from the atf. someone stupid enough to belive that my guns were automatic had reported this thread to them, and they stopped by to make sure everything was legal. everything was fine, and they left, but that was little weird. they had pics from myspace and everything. It's a little funny thinking about a couple ATF agent's asking to talk to "Mr. Flaming Turd" about his rifles. It's not so funny that some little bitch who claims to think guns are a horrible problem doesn't have a problem with wasting the ATF's time to call in a phony tip just to harass someone who rubbed them the wrong way on the internet. Whoever called the ATF ought to be made to answer for it. Those agents do have real work to do, and the {censored} who called them on you is interfering with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members larryguitar Posted May 11, 2007 Members Share Posted May 11, 2007 It's a little funny thinking about a couple ATF agent's asking to talk to "Mr. Flaming Turd" about his rifles. It's not so funny that some little bitch who claims to think guns are a horrible problem doesn't have a problem with wasting the ATF's time to call in a phony tip just to harass someone who rubbed them the wrong way on the internet. Whoever called the ATF ought to be made to answer for it. Those agents do have real work to do, and the {censored} who called them on you is interfering with it. Especially since it's stated (correctly) right in this thread that those aren't automatic weapons. I'm guessing there's a federal equivalent of 'filing a false report' and 'unlawful prosecution' laws that could be applied. I imagine inquiring with the BATFE boys will get the whistle-blower in some deep {censored}....And I hope it does. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flaming turd Posted May 11, 2007 Author Members Share Posted May 11, 2007 Especially since it's stated (correctly) right in this thread that those aren't automatic weapons. I'm guessing there's a federal equivalent of 'filing a false report' and 'unlawful prosecution' laws that could be applied. I imagine inquiring with the BATFE boys will get the whistle-blower in some deep {censored}.... And I hope it does. Larry me too. it's not a pleasant experiance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gun-Nut Posted May 12, 2007 Members Share Posted May 12, 2007 No offense to flaming turd, but thats a small collection.If the person that called the ATF is an American, they shouldnt be. Lame. Even if his weapons were full-auto that doesnt automatically make them illegal. The average citizen is allowed to own certain weapons that are full-auto. I wont go into the laws but it just takes more time, paperwork and money.Flaming Turd I think you did ok, considering the situation and this being the first time. OH and BTW I am jealous of your PS90......NICE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flaming turd Posted May 12, 2007 Author Members Share Posted May 12, 2007 No offense to flaming turd, but thats a small collection. If the person that called the ATF is an American, they shouldnt be. Lame. Even if his weapons were full-auto that doesnt automatically make them illegal. The average citizen is allowed to own certain weapons that are full-auto. I wont go into the laws but it just takes more time, paperwork and money. Flaming Turd I think you did ok, considering the situation and this being the first time. OH and BTW I am jealous of your PS90......NICE lol, thanks. and yes, it's actually a very small collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ibanezfoo Posted May 14, 2007 Members Share Posted May 14, 2007 Not to keep kicking this horse, BUT:http://www.wafb.com/global/story.asp...Type=Printable Bystander Fired Deadly Shot, Not Officer Feb 22, 2006 12:54 PM There were two big developments Monday in the case of a motorist who was shot and killed along Greenwell Springs Road Friday after a fight with a police officer. Investigators say an autopsy shows the deadly bullet was fired by a bystander, not the officer. Police also announced that no charges would be filed in the case, either against the police officer involved or the bystander who fired the fatal shot into the head of George Temple. East Baton Rouge Sheriff's spokesman Greg Phares says Officer Brian Harrison was escorting a funeral procession Friday when he pulled Temple over and wrote him a ticket for breaking into the procession. According to Phares, that's when Temple attacked Harrison. Police say Perry Stevens was walking outside of the Auto Zone on Greenwell Springs Road when he heard Harrison yelling for help. Harrison was reportedly on his back with Temple on top of him. That's when Stevens went to his car and grabbed his .45 caliber pistol. According to Col. Greg Phares, "[Mr. Stevens] orders Mr. Temple to stop and get off the officer. The verbal commands are ignored and Mr. Stevens fires four shots, all of which struck Mr. Temple." Perry Stevens fired four shots into Temple's torso. Officer Harrison had already fired one shot into Temple's abdomen. With Temple still struggling with the officer, Perry continued to advance toward the scuffle. "He again orders Mr. Temple to stop what he was doing and get off the officer. Those commands are ignored and he fires a fifth shot and that hits his head. The incident is over with, and as you know, Mr. Temple is dead." Police are calling the shooting death justified. Perry Stevens has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Col. Phares would not give out any more details relating to the shooting. Both Phares and Baton Rouge Police Chief Jeff LeDuff stopped short of crediting Stevens with saving the officer's life. LeDuff says the entire incident is unfortunate. "I spoke with his father at the scene briefly," said LeDuff. "I think this is a tragic situation all around." 9 News is told George Temple has a criminal record, and Officer Harrison was involved in a shooting while employed as a prison guard in East Baton Rouge Parish, where he was suspended for three days back in 1995. Reporter: Jim Shannon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members thefyn Posted May 14, 2007 Members Share Posted May 14, 2007 yeah. i'm still a little shaken. i mean, everything own is totally legal, but it's still a little scary. That is really messed up. I mean its one thing to argue online but its another to snitch. I hate it when online discussion turns to snitching, to bosses, police etc etc etc. I'm sorry about that, good job everything was legit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members thefyn Posted May 14, 2007 Members Share Posted May 14, 2007 orders Mr. Temple to stop and get off the officer. The verbal commands are ignored and Mr. Stevens fires four shots, all of which struck Mr. Temple."Perry Stevens fired four shots into Temple's torso. Officer Harrison had already fired one shot into Temple's abdomen. With Temple still struggling with the officer, Perry continued to advance toward the scuffle."He again orders Mr. Temple to stop what he was doing and get off the officer. Those commands are ignored and he fires a fifth shot and that hits his head. The incident is over with, and as you know, Mr. Temple is dead."Police are calling the shooting death justified. Perry Stevens has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Col. Phares would not give out any more details relating to the shooting. Both Phares and Baton Rouge Police Chief Jeff LeDuff stopped short of crediting Stevens with saving the officer's life. LeDuff says the entire incident is unfortunate."I spoke with his father at the scene briefly," said LeDuff. "I think this is a tragic situation all around."9 News is told George Temple has a criminal record, and Officer Harrison was involved in a shooting while employed as a prison guard in East Baton Rouge Parish, where he was suspended for three days back in 1995.Reporter: Jim Shannon He shot him right in the (mr) temple. I don't think killing a man in a fight is justified at all. Pistol whipped etc would have done the trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members larryguitar Posted May 14, 2007 Members Share Posted May 14, 2007 He shot him right in the (mr) temple. I don't think killing a man in a fight is justified at all. Pistol whipped etc would have done the trick. The problem is that a successful attack on a P/O results in an armed offender. It's always a 'felonious assault'. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Save The Pine Weasel Posted May 14, 2007 Members Share Posted May 14, 2007 I don't think killing a man in a fight is justified at all. Pistol whipped etc would have done the trick. That's easier said than done. Mr. Temple had also already been shot five times before the fatal shot. Do you think you could effectively pistol whip someone who had already taken that and kept fighting? You also run the risk of the dude getting control of either the officer's gun, or yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.