imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > Just Guns

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 07-01-2009, 12:53 AM
Excalibur's Avatar
Excalibur Excalibur is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,842
Send a message via AIM to Excalibur Send a message via MSN to Excalibur Send a message via Yahoo to Excalibur
Default

So they tell us. Did you know, it was the Russians that found Hitler and his mistress's body first, and the bodies were also burnt
__________________

"There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life."

Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle
Psalm 144:1

“It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 07-01-2009, 01:12 AM
RedJedRevolver RedJedRevolver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 43
Default

The gunshot actually was succeessful, but it is undetermined if that killed him or if the cyanide killed him. This is because not all headshot deaths are instinanious.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-01-2009, 04:24 AM
Gunmaster45's Avatar
Gunmaster45 Gunmaster45 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Excalibur View Post
Well it's not the weapon that kill people, it's just a tool. Remember that it doesn't kill, but the person holding it. I've seen weapons held by many different people, swords hundreds of years old, held some and I always wonder how many lives this weapon has taken, but you don't admire how many lives were taken by the weapon. You're supposed to admire the craftsmanship, the art of the weapon itself and appreciate that.
I always admire the craftsmanship and the work put into a gun or other weapon, but whether or not it has killed someone is still something to ponder.

Tool or not, I'd still feel strange knowning the Walther P38 I'm holding was used to gun down a Jewish family in Auschwitz in cold blood. Hopefully you understand what I mean.

I despise guns in the hands of criminals. They use them for bad things and make them look bad. Basically, a criminal ("bad guy") used this gun for bad things. Imagine holding the TEC-DC9 Mini used by Harris during the Columbine shooting. Would you admire the craftsmanship or hate knowing what it was used for?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-01-2009, 05:39 AM
Excalibur's Avatar
Excalibur Excalibur is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,842
Send a message via AIM to Excalibur Send a message via MSN to Excalibur Send a message via Yahoo to Excalibur
Default

Personally I think the Tec-DC9 guns are pieces of crap. They weren't even full auto in the shooting. I see no advantages to an ugly gun like the Tec-DC9 or any variant of it. Uzi, Mac-10s, they have a charm to them. A legendary feel about them. But Tec 9s...they look like shit.

People love the AK47 models, but when you hold one up do you think about the thousands to millions killed in Africa from Civil wars? Or the AK47 used to represent the arm of Communism? No, you see an awesome robust weapon that will never fail you, not "the true weapon of mass destruction"
__________________

"There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life."

Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle
Psalm 144:1

“It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-01-2009, 09:13 AM
Gunmaster45's Avatar
Gunmaster45 Gunmaster45 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 1,779
Default

I see both depending on how long I handle the weapon.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-08-2009, 09:53 PM
Nyles Nyles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Default

Got my French Mle. 1892 revolver today, made in 1892 by St. Etienne - little pitted, but mechanically perfect, espescially for a 117-year old gun. The Mle. 1892 in 8mm Lebel revolver was France's sidearm through WW1 and in limited use in WW2. It's a swing out cylinder revolver, except the cylinder swings to the right. This is because it was designed for cavalry troopers, and in 1892 they were expected to shoot with their left hand while using their sabre with their right. Except for being a little underpowered, it worked great and was extremely reliable.



Also, I took the opportunity to snap a picture of my entire handgun collection. Unfortunately it didn't turn out perfectly crisp, but I'm not going back to lay them out again.

Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-08-2009, 11:03 PM
AdAstra2009's Avatar
AdAstra2009 AdAstra2009 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,067
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyles View Post
Is that semiautomatic in the bottom left corner next to the Webley a MAS / MAC mle. 1950 pistol?
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-08-2009, 11:39 PM
Nyles Nyles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Default

Actually, its a MAS Mle. 1935S, which was the precursor to the MAC Mle. 1950. Major difference is that it's in 7.65 x 20mm Longue instead of 9mm Luger, and has a straight instead of humped grip.

Also, if you want to get really technical, the revolvers on either side of it are Enfield No.2s, not Webleys. The Enfield is of course an unashamed copy of the Webley that the British war department got successfully sued over, but when you examine them closely they're actually quite different in the details.

Last edited by Nyles; 07-08-2009 at 11:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-09-2009, 12:45 AM
AdAstra2009's Avatar
AdAstra2009 AdAstra2009 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,067
Default

Beautiful collection.
All in all I wonder how much it's worth.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-09-2009, 02:45 AM
Nyles Nyles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Default

Well, strictly talking about the handguns, I've spent about $13,000 on it, not including accessories (holsters, spare mags, etc). In terms of actual value, significantly more. Value is difficult to peg, mainly because some of them are literally too rare to price. They made less than 1000 Webley & Scott 1910s, I'd be shocked if there were more than 500 left after the Brits lost their handguns. I paid $575 for it from a shop that didn't really know what they had, including it's original holster. I'd feel ripped off if I sold for twice that. That and my .455 1911 are probably the two most valuable. If I had to ballpark it, I'd put it at around 20K for the whole collection, more if I broke it up.

By the same token, the Enfield with the bobbed hammer I doubt would go for $200. The 1895 Nagant is not a rare gun, but it was when I bought it - they didn't make it into Canada until years after the States, when someone finally brought them in I had my order in that evening - I was literally the first. Paid $275 and got a good deal, now they sit in the case for months at $250. To get what I paid I'd probably have to throw in the $100 worth of ammo I have for it.

Last edited by Nyles; 07-09-2009 at 03:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.