[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/k/ - Weapons



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: LongRhino-copy.jpg (47 KB, 550x550)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
Hey guys, friendly fa/tg/uy here to ask some potentially dumb as shit questions. Feel free to call me a retard, lets get this train rolling.

Question 1: I live in the UK and want to have a chance to use some guns, whats a sensible way to do this?

Question 2: What determines that damage output of a gun? Is it the bullet or the gun itself?

Question 3: Are autorevolers, or any form of revolver in general, a weapon thats likely to have some military/ police use in the foreseeable future?

Also, if anyone interested I can talk a little bit about early medieval weaponry. Just a little though.
>>
File: gambeson.jpg (70 KB, 540x720)
70 KB
70 KB JPG
>>35473214
Will bump with facts about medieval armour in the mean time.

The gambeson (a jacket padded with many layers of off cuts, wool, linen or horsehair) was one of the most ubiquitous pieces of armor in medieval europe. It acted as a base layer of shock absorbtion with a suprising high resistant to cuts. Gambesons stayed in heavy use till the introduction of the pike and shot formation. Where pikes piercing focus and matchlock muskets penetrative power made them obsolete
>>
>>35473214
1. Don't know. Maybe you can rent or try one at a range? Don't know if you guys have such a system.

2. It's a mix of things. Powder charge of the bullet itself, and length of the barrel (which allows the powder charge to push the bullet harder/more/faster before it leaves the barrel). Size of the bullet also matters somewhat.

But really, where you get hit is just as, if not more important than what you were hit with and what fired it.

3. Not really.
>>
>>35473214
1)Getting out of the uk as I've heard it's a bitch to get long guns unless you want to take the time to get a license and join a club

2) guns don't necessarily have a "damage output" it's more that rounds the gun fire have a certain mass and travel around a certain speed. Some hit harder than others, usually larger bore.

3) military used to use revolvers, not really any likelihood they'll goal back with the constant that is magazine fed handguns. Revolvers take more time.to load and aren't really beneficial unless you're going for a giant caliber like 44magnum or 454 casull for animal defense.
>>
>>35473214
1) Move to the US
2) speed, size, weight, and shape of the bullet
3) Absolutely not
4) you must be 18 to post here, newfriend.
>>
>>35473248
Thanks for info. Videogames and such seem to make calliber out to be an extreamly important factor, as well as the infamous trope of revolver being hi-damage weapons. Is there any truth behind this and if so why?
>>
>>35473256
I misread use as own. Go to a club.
>>
>>35473214
1) get a cheap flight to the US not on either coast and you can go rent whatever you want on one of our many gun ranges.
2) mass and velocity of the bullet can be used to calculate how many J it will deliver. Usually determined by a combination of the cartridge type, particular powder load in the cartridge and barrel length of gun. Google “ballistics by the inch” for some real world data.
3) The MR-73 is still used in France. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manurhin_MR_73
>>
>>35473265
What sort of things are important to look out for in telling if a club is any good?

Medieval armour fact 2: Variation in armour has a lot to do with the rapidly developing world of blacksmithing and mining. The mass adoption of maille had alot to do with the likelyhood of high quality metal in small rings being much higher, aswell as ease of maintenance and cost to repair damage. As metallurgy improved, it became more practical to use large plates of armour, as the materials and techniques where there to fix rents easily.
>>
>>35473263
In games I would suggest that it is primarily a game balance issue: revolvers are slower to load, lower capacity, etc, and the balancing factor is more damage.

As another anon alluded to, there are a number of revolvers chambered in this or that high-powered gimmick round but those don't have a lot of practical irl application beyond shooting bears.
>>
>>35473274
Thanks for the sources
>>
>>35473284
Ive always had a bit of a thing for revolvers (so damn pretty). Ive heard it something to do with 'magnum rounds' but that seems like it might just be hand waving.

Medieval weapon fact: During an argument between two scholars the point arose that if they had the tools, materials and concepts, they must have built it. The other scholar annoyed by the density of his peer, went off and crafted a fully functional AK-47 using tools, material quality and techniques from the war of the roses.
>>
>>35473326
I'm from the opposite end of the aesthetic spectrum, never really liked the look or cachet of revolvers. Early semi-autos get me all kinds of hard though.

Anyway, from a personal defense standpoint, the more compact the model of gun you intend to use, the less difference there is between a semi and a revolver, since caliber/barrel length/capacity are going to be similar just due to size constraints.

Magnum rounds are a thing, though the name is somewhat of a gimmick. They're not revolver-only, necessarily. There's a .44 mag version of the Desert Eagle, for instance. The only reason you usually see them in revolvers is because many of that sort of caliber has a rimmed casing. Rimmed casings can be somewhat unreliable in magazines because they don't stack well, but they are suited to revolver cylinders.
>>
>>35473360
thanks for the info, early semi-autos are beautiful things. What does a mag round actually do differently?
>>
>>35473407
Nothing. It’s just a name for a large round with a lot of powder.
>>
>>35473407
Nothing. It just has a longer casing, meaning more powder and thus velocity. Also, holy fuck are they loud.
>>
>>35473416
so sort of a not totally accurate descriptor roughly meaning: 'big boom pistol bullet'?
>>
>>35473428
>>35473416
Thanks for the info guys

New quesitons:
1)What factors are considered desirable in a military rifle nowadays?

2)What new developments are on the way? Are railguns gonna actually happen?

3) Ballistic armor/sheilds, how good are they?

3)
>>
>>35473214
1: get a ticket to the US; you can rent guns at ranges. Then, if you like them enough, apply for a license over in britistan.

2: there is no true formula for "killing power", but a good judge of things without knowing exactly where you hit a person is gonna be the mass of the bullet times the velocity.

It turns out that faster smaller bullets are going to do the same damage as heavier slower bullets but with more rounds in a mag.

3: absolutely not, sadly. As someone completely fascinated by such things as autorevolvers and short recoil rifles, they're pretty much dead as a doorknob.
>>
I'd like to add to what others have said here: along with mass, velocity and bullet shape there are a few other characteristics that can affect the intrinsic lethality of a round such as expansion for hollow point or soft tip ammo, fragmentation where the bullet is intended to break apart and cause many small wounds, or tumbling where the bullet is designed to have an off-center mass of lead in the back that makes it tumble and yaw on impact causing larger unpredictable wounding.
>>
>>35473449
>>35473274
Is there any particular place/ COmpany specialising in getting new people started properly with a good education. (always been scared of getting sold bad info and then doing something horrendously unsafe)
>>
>>35473449
what about autorevolvers makes them DOA?
>>
>>35473434
>Military rifle
Light weight
Modularity
Compactness
Since we're talking about the government, Cost.
>Railguns
Ship based? Yes, probably gonna see them soon as extreme range artillery.
Man portable? Not in our lifetime, for the same reason Lasers won't: they just take too much power.
>Armor
Depends on the armor. A pistol rated soft vest is not going for to stop 5.56. Your trade-off is generally weight vs protection, so only absolutely vital organs get armored.

Getting shot still sucks ass, and it's probably going to break ribs. The energy of a bullet doesn't magically dissipate because it hit something. That said, it's better than having it go through you.

Shields are pretty much that, cranked up to eleven. Huge solid block of cover in front of you, at the cost of being heavy as sin.
>>
>>35473434
1. Low cost, reliability, low weight, modularity, intermediate cartridge size (so troops can carry a lot)

2. This is highly speculative but if there is any real development it will be in guided rounds. Yes, railguns will probably happen on an artillery level.

3. I know less about this myself beyond generalities, but I'll say that people wear plates because they work, at least if the bullet hits them. Shields, no clue how useable they are against bullets. I'd suggest they're far more useful against thrown chunks of pavement.
>>
>>35473481
Autorevolvers are the answer to a question nobody asked.

Semi-autos are cheap and reliable, and if you want higher capacity you can always slap a 'stendo on one.

Autorevolvers, on the other hand, inherit all the bad traits of revolvers. Difficult to reload, low capacity (that can't be modified), gas leaking out of the cylinder, and so on. Their only claim to fame is cocking themselves, which semi autos do with none of the other drawbacks.
>>
>>35473513
>>35473495
Thanks, anywhere I could look up the latest in railgun stuff, another avenue that really interests me.
>>
>>35473516
Thanks, what are the actualy advantages of revolvers? Last time I tried to find out I came up with this list, tell me how buttfuck retarded it is:
>Ergonomic grip as no ammo inside
>Reliable when it comes to dirt and long term wear and tear
>First shot accurate
>High damage per shot (although this one has been debunked as not that important in this thread)
>>
>>35473532
What are you basing "first shot accurate" on and why would it not apply equally to a semi-auto?

I'll add one for you: can't push slide out of battery. Like most revolver advantages, it's kind of a marginal issue though.
>>
>>35473543
I think the idea was tied to the ergonomic handle, but honestly I cant remember.

Whats pushing slide out of battery and why is it an issue
>>
>>35473532
They're very durable weapons that require next to no maintenance. You could throw one in your nightstand, take it out 30 years later when someone breaks into your house, and it would still work.

Another advantage is that, because of the design (not having a magazine that has to fit through the grip) you can chamber a revolver in some truly monstrous rounds.

These aren't useful for a service weapon, but If you want a home defense gun or to hunt bears, it works.
>>
Damage is completely and entirely based on placement, putting the bullet in a place it'll do damage
Beyond that, it really all comes down to the bullet itself, although weird shit can happen like hollow points not expanding if the bullet isn't travelling fast enough
>>
>>35473552
On semi-autos, if the slide is pushed back, opening the chamber (out of battery), usually the gun cannot fire. This can happen if you have the barrel pressed against something such as a person, or perhaps the edge of a ballistic shield you're sheltered behind (this is the supposed reason that revolvers are sometimes still used in France). I guess in theory it could be pushed out of battery if two people were struggling over the gun, but you'd have a similar issue if someone managed to get their fist around a revolver's cylinder.
>>
>>35473574
>>35473553
Thanks guys. As a UK resident revolvers are off the table for me but just for the hell of it. If I where to get a revolver, what would be a good one to get.
>>
File: 38-vs-357-1.jpg (116 KB, 1200x629)
116 KB
116 KB JPG
>>35473429
Pictures say more than words.
You'll likely have heard of .357 Magnum revolvers, like the Colt Python.

A Colt Python can shoot both .38 special and .357 magnum, because both bullets have the same diameter/calibre. Magnum just means it has more powder (and is thus longer) than the basic round.

A .38 revolver however cannot shoot .357 Magnum rounds, since the shells are too long for the drum and the increased pressure from the magnum could damage the revolver.
>>
>>35473601
Thanks, helps alot
>>
>>35473592
Really? I thought you guys could still own those crazy long buntline style revolvers.

>"Long-barrelled revolvers" and "long-barrelled pistols" meeting specified criteria are not classified as small, and hence prohibited, firearms; it is legal, with a Firearm Certificate, to possess them. The barrel must be at least 30 cm (12 in) long, and the firearm at least 60 cm (24 in) long, which can be achieved by having a permanently attached extension to the grip or butt of the firearm. Long-barrelled single-shot firearms of any calibre, and semi-automatic pistols of .22 rimfire calibres, are permitted with FAC.

But I understand if you want something not bizarrely designed for the purposes of meeting strict firearm laws.

I'm the guy that's not big on revolvers, but if I was to purchase one, I'd get an 1851 Navy converted for cartridges because muh spaghetti westerns. Or I'd get a Rhino. I recently handled one and it was cooler than I thought it'd be.
>>
File: IMG_20170613_101551.jpg (2.65 MB, 4160x3120)
2.65 MB
2.65 MB JPG
>>35473592
I own a Rhino 50DS. It's a fun meme-gun. If you want over the top compensation a Colt Python is always there.

Get what you want, really.... We're, daydream about what you want.

Question: why did your country ban revolvers of all things?
>>
>>35473626
Can't have that boot stamping on a human face forever if the potential stomping target is armed, y'know.
>>
>>35473608
Railguns are cool
The latest info: the Navy has officially decided that energy weapons are a thing that is happening and are fast tracking their placement on warships now that the technology has matured enough that we don't need to replace the barrel after every round.
Latest news: some mad scientists in the desert somewhere have built an autoloading railgun with a massive capacitor cooling system that can pop a shot off every 10 or 20 seconds. They're currently working it up to 32 MJ, which is the equivalent of getting stoned out of your mind on some dank kush
>>
>>35473214
I cant talk about Q1 because i dont know your laws.

>Q2

The characteristics of the bullet do effect the "damage", but both the gun and the bullet together have an effect.

Think of bullets as doing "damage" on a spectrum between penetration and cavitation. A bullet that penetrates well, likely is very stable and wont cause good cavitation. A bullet that tends to cause cavitation likely wont penetrate well.
You want a bullet that ideally penetrates whatever youre shooting to an adequate depth, and cavitates at that depth before exiting the target.

What effects where on the spectrum you fall is:

>bullet weight
>bullet loading
>bullet shape
>bullet material composition
>barrel length
>barrel twist rate

All of these factors combine. So, a hard, hot-loaded, pointy bullet fired from a long barrel with an adequate twist will tend to penetrate but not cavitate.

penetration determines how hard of a target you can kill. Cavitation determines how much "damage" is done once adequate penetration is acheived.

Also, another way the gun can effect bullet performance: certain actions can only fire rounds of a given loading before getting unwieldy. For instance, compare a PPK to a highpoint 45. both are blowback, but the PPK is a reasonable size. The highpoint isnt. Reason being: .380 is a much lighter load than .45.

This sorts leads us into our next question.

>Q3

Probably not for militaries, no. The biggest advantage revolvers have is that they can handle ridiculously hot loads without being overengineered shit.

example: compare a .44 mag revolver's size to a .44 mag desert eagle. Hell, the DE has to employ a gas system to even be able to handle such a round, but the revolver can be much more compact and mechanically simple.

This makes them good as hunting/animal defense guns against animals that require deep penetration to be killed, like bears and boars.
>>
>>35473626
Had a bit of a nasty mass shooting in the country side. Lots of small villages and town close to eachother, dude just pulled out the pistol, shot a few people. Got back in his car and went to the next town. So all handguns that can be easily hidden are banned, unless they are black powder or as >>35473618
said, super long barrel.

I dont mind strict gun laws, but its nice to day dream.

BTW in terms of what we can have mostly shotgun and rifles that are pump, breach of bolt action
>>
>>35473214
>Question 1: I live in the UK and want to have a chance to use some guns, whats a sensible way to do this?
Your fucked up island records "intentional" homicides by gun. I'll bet that never includes lib dem shits that murder people getting too close to child sex trafficking.
>Question 2: What determines that damage output of a gun? Is it the bullet or the gun itself?
It's a combination of both. Go look up ballisticsbytheinch.com to get a feel for how barrel length can affect speed. It's simple physics at that point. A mass at a certain speed produces a certain energy. To simplify your life, 9mm is sufficient self defense round. .410 magnum shotguns rounds will put a hurtin on a fool too.
>Question 3: Are autorevolers, or any form of revolver in general, a weapon thats likely to have some military/ police use in the foreseeable future?
Autorevolvers? Go back to bed.
>>
>>35473263
>caliber being important

Its important, but not too many videogames model ballistic wounds accurately enough to be realistic for comparison.

>high damage revolvers

Revolvers can handle hotter loads than auto-loaders, but the caliber being used has to be considered.

For example, 10mm auto will likely do more "damage" than a .38spcl revolver. A .44 revolver would be better than a 9mm.

Revolvers can handle significantly hotter rounds than auto loading actions, though, so you can build shit like .45-70 revolvers, while this would be impossible in an autoloader without making the action ridiculously large.
>>
>>35473655
Thanks! something about the idea of having a pistol that can fuck up bears makes me feel warm inside.
>>
>>35473689
>>35473655
What does 'hot load' mean? Im guessing more powder in the shot?
>>
>>35473698
Yes, a high powder charge. you need more powder to propel

>big bullets
>small, fast bullets (think: rifle rounds)
>>
>>35473214
Still trying to maintain that stiff British upper lip?
Unless you are willing to continuously protest in the 10's of thousands, you and your way of life are lost.
Get a fucking clue and grow a pair.
Protest until you get your gun rights back from the false flag Dunblane massacre.
Enjoy your knifings and acid attacks until then!
>>
>>35473802
Just here to ask about guns dude. Plenty of shotguns and rifles available anyway
>>
>>35473802
I think OP is well aware of the state his rights are in. He came asking for the only weapon he can carry: knowledge. No need to shit the place up.
>>
>>35473831
Yet the retard asked about autorevolvers.
>>35473838
>I think OP is aware
You are either a mind reader (kek) or you are OP pretending to answer not as OP. In either case, fuck off.
>>
>>35473831
Don't try to second guess a 4chaner, bub. Everyone knows how globaly knowledgable they are, they can give you up to date coverage of everything going on in any European nation, special emphasis on Muslim immigration, gun restrictions, etc. Disregaurd the fact they only leave the basement for Mountain Dew and hot pocket runs.
>>
>>35473838
on the subject of questions, here are my next few, might be a bit more opinion-y these ones

1) What are considered some of the 'best' civilian guns nowadays. What really common?

2)What ranges does combat happen at nowadays? It seems to be pretty damn far

>>35473861
I think he just read context clues buddy, Yeah I wish gun laws were more open here, but I also think they should be a little less open in america, but thats not what im here for. I just wanna have some actually solid knowledge on guns.
>>
>>35473898
1. There are a ton of different polymer-frame handguns, the archetype being 9mm Glock variants. For rifle, probably AR-15 variants. These meet a lot of low cost/high reliability/modularity/usefulness needs for the civilian market.

2. Can't answer without you specifying the type of combat. Open field? Home defense? Urban/house clearing? The answer is gonna vary widely.
>>
>>35473214

>I live in the UK and want to have a chance to use some guns, whats a sensible way to do this?

Join a Home office approved shooting club and apply for a license. If you just want to shoot travel to an EU country like the Czech republic and wander into a range and much cheaper to travel to than the US
>>
>>35473927
would it be possible to get an answer for each type?
>>
>>35473802
>>35473831


What's really sad on gun rights is that once something goes and the next generations aren't exposed to them, they'll never come back. Fewer are going to protest to get something they dont know about back especially when they know it's dangerous. Look at us with suppressors and full auto, we here know we should have them but the common gun owner doesn't understand that it's not as dangerous as the gun grabbers claim.
>>
>>35473214

Buy a shotgun or .22lr rifle. It's not that hard.

As for gun questions, write down all of your questions and Google them. Wikipedia is your friend. Go general and get specific. Due to the nature of the board, post size limits, and crossover, that's a better route. Browse real gun forums and read wikis and you will soon be a much smarter man.
>>
>>35473968
Another anon here, in the US. It's tough to do that because guns of the same model will have different variants tailored to different purposes and people. If you watch threads here there's a dozen or more different competitor brands for each niche a firearm can fill.

Rifles: an AR15 varient for defense, fun, and maybe varmint hunting. A 22lr rifle for plinking cheap and varmint, normally a ruger 10/22. A high caliber bolt action rifle from one of a dozen brands for big game hunting, a popular model are Remington 700.

Shotgun: a couple different routes here

A long barrel pump action or single shot break barrel for budget hunters. Plus side is that these are normally the most reliable functioning guns despite their price. Richer hunters will use automatics and gucci double barrel shotguns

Some people will use a short barreled pump or automatic for self defense over an AR, it's personal preference. The main difference here is that these shotguns will have shorter barrels and an open choke to spread your pellets further apart. These shotguns are bad for bird hunting because the spread kills their range.

Pistols: couple different routes here

An automatic pistol is normally a self defense gun, a small one is best suited for concealed carrying but larger ones are okay. The glock 19 is very popular for both carry and defense because it's light, reliable, and has good capacity for its size. The 1911 has a cult following but is a good defense pistol too.

Revolvers are most commonly chambered for magnum calibers and used for defense against dangerous animals but are used by some people primarily for self defense. Do not assume a revolver is automatically a big caliber gun, some are small and are sold for people who just like revolvers over autos. The ruger Blackhawk, s&w 686, and gp100 are some common revolvers.
>>
>>35473520
the info that anon gave on ballistic shields is fucking wrong. in real life they only block pistol rounds but are far lighter then they look
>>
>>35473690
>pistols recommended for bears:
.44 Magnum
10mm
>pistols you can use against bears
Everything more powerful than 9mm, including 9mm, if you're a crazy sonvabitch with that perfect combination of luck and skill, and more of either than sense
>>
>>35474095

Your answers were okay, but ya need some learnin'
>>
>>35474116

One of Alaska's most famous best guides has switched over to 9mm recently for controllability and more ROT.

Then again, he's an Alaskan bear guide and as you said, is a crazy SOB. He took one last year with at using seven rounds during the charge. Crazy motherfucker was probably harder than Chinese algebra afterward.
>>
>>35474149

*most famous bear guides
>>
>>35474149
what round is he using? buffalo bore?
>>
>>35474187

Probably. I think it's some flavor of 124gr or 147gr FMJFN loaded angry.
>>
>>35474211
not to keep bothering you, but I'm guessing its out of glock right? if capacity is the concern unless he wants something heavier to keep it on target maybe a CZ or M9
>>
>>35473214

1: can't help you there

2: mostly a function of the cartridge and to a marginal degree barrel length

3: lolno
>>
>>35473214
>Question 3: Are autorevolers, or any form of revolver in general, a weapon thats likely to have some military/ police use in the foreseeable future?

absolutely assuming you see a massive increase in the population of android gorilla ass "foreseeable"
>>
>>35474256
the Doom Patrol would use an autorevolver wouldn't they
>>
Alright guys thanks for all the answers I have one more, potentially retarded question left.

Explosive bullets, can they be a thing?
>>
>>35474281
The trauma inflicted by something traveling at bullet velocity (which may also fragment inside the body) is such that putting a bomb on it is kind of superfluous. If you're talking about something like a 40k bolter.
>>
>>35473898
1. in the uk? mostly 12ga shotguns made by beretta, fabarm and remmington
2. most military combat on the open field takes place in the 300m-500m range
>>
>>35474281
can they, yeah its what 40mm grenades are. but out of normal rifles its a no
>>
>>35474281

They are a thing but only for HMGs and cannons. It's exceedingly difficult to stuff an explosive charge into anything smaller than .50 BMG
>>
>>35474226

I honestly don't remember. I think Glocks tend to be favored up there for reliability.
>>
>>35473214
Damage is all about 2 things
1.Kinetic Energy delivered
2.Wound chanel
Wound chanel might be the most important, because as long as a round can inflict enough trauma or damage a vital organ, it will kill.
>>
>>35474127

What's wrong with it? It gave a description of the main popular niches without shaming anyones choices
>>
>>35474281
how big are we talking about here?
>>
>>35474281

Even in small arms? Yeah, I think the Chinese made an explosive AK round but they suck, it costs a lot, you end up making an unbalanced bullet that's less accurate, and often you lose penetration. Basically, unless it's out of something cannon sized, you can't pack enough explosive in a bullet to matter.

Fragmenting rounds are more accurate, reliable, and give a similar effect
>>
In ww1 English pilots used a mix of incendiary and explosive bullets to down zeppelins. Had a ball bearing set off nitroglycerin once it hit.
>>
>>35474469
Aren't fragmenting rounds banned under the Geneva convention? I know expanding rounds are
>>35474549
Nitro tip bullets sound like bullshit when they had regular incendiary rounds
>>
>>35473214
1: Travel to US or any other country that would permit it. Any experience you get in the UK is gonna be jacked up
2: Since you're /tg/ I'll lay out some guidelines. Calculate it all off of joules. Essentially pick the most common weight and speed of rounds and calculate the energy they deliver. Translate that energy into damage. It's the easiest and broadest way to encompass. You can then just add in things like hollow points which might add a certain percent to damage, but a penalty against armor. You can also further nuance weapons by barrel length since that can determine velocity of rounds which in terms impacts energy. You can also account for distance. If you tried to apply realistic weapon shit to a table top game it wouldn't move anywhere and the game master would have a massive headache.
>Question 3: Are autorevolers, or any form of revolver in general, a weapon thats likely to have some military/ police use in the foreseeable future?
Autorevolvers are a no. Revolvers still see limited service with military and still enjoy a decent police service
>>
>>35475654
Grey area
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/17/us-army-wants-hollow-point-ammo-for-new-pistol-not-for-the-m9.html
As understanding of these projectiles have increased it seems there is more of push to make their restriction in war more lax
>>
>>35473214
1. holiday to US. I went shooting while I was over there with some randoms, was fucking great.
Otherwise you're shit out of luck. If you happen to be a student then you can look and see if you have a rifle or skeet club, or you can look for clay pigeon shooting clubs nearby, but it's wank, a weekend in the US will be a thousand times better.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.