On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 6:19:35 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 1:16:25 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:40:11 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:19:11 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 11:10:14 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 12:39:02 AM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 11:29:11 AM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > > > > > > On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a 12 gauge
> > > > > > > > shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded with "buck shot"
> > > > > > > > as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever, more people
> > > > > > > > per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
> > > > > > > And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for home defense
> > > > > > > - not that I need either for that purpose.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > - Frank Krygowski
> > > > > > The Remington 870 pump shotgun ONLY allows a maximum of about 9 shells on a special model. 5 or 6 shells on most pump shotguns. Rambo would have had to spend half the movie reloading his shotgun instead of killing an endless line of people. If he was using a shotgun. And if you only have 5 or 6 shells in your pump shotgun, how are you going to kill the 7th killer breaking into your house to kill you? With an AR-15 you can get 20 or 30 round magazines. And everyone knows its far far far far far more likely that 7 people will come to kill you than it is for 21 or 31 people to come kill you.
> > > > > https://www.kygunco.com/product/typhoon-defense-f121301s-f12-12ga-ceracamo-w-long-forend
> > > > >
> > > > > That is a 10 round clip fed 12 gauge with an open bore to fire .00 buckshot. The clips may be changed in seconds. Why don't you tell us all about your view of Rambo?
> > > > Tommy, I do wonder if you have reading comprehension problems. In my post I wrote "The Remington 870 pump shotgun". Your website is not a Remington 870 pump shotgun.
> > > Why did you chose that specific shotgun? Because you could use it as some sort of support for your ill mind. Sorry Russell, you imagination doesn't hold up to reality but then that is exactly what you are.
> > Tommy boy, you ask why I chose the Remington 870 pump shotgun for my example. Very easy Tommy boy. The Remington 870 is the most widely sold shotgun in the USA. Probably the entire world. It is the "Coke" of shotguns.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_870
> > "The 870 was a commercial success. Remington sold two million guns by 1973 (ten times the number of Model 31 shotguns it replaced). As of 1983, the 870 held the record for the best-selling shotgun in history, with three million sold. By 1996, spurred by sales of the basic "Express" models, which were added as a lower-cost alternative to the original Wingmaster line, sales topped seven million guns. On April 13, 2009, the ten millionth Model 870 was produced."
> >
> > The ten millionth Remington 870 was sold in 2009. Its now 13 years later. We may be up to 15 or 20 million Remington 870 shotguns sold today. The 870 is the best selling, most prolific shotgun ever sold in the history of the world. Therefore, people, me, mention it when discussing shotguns. Kind of like mentioning the Ford pickup when talking about pickups. Its been the highest selling pickup every year for about 50 years now.
> >
> > Tommy, you really need to seek out a mental health professional. Now obviously they will not be as genius as you. According to you. But you do need to let them try to help you solve your mental thinking problems.
> Sorry little Russy, you chose it because you wanted a visual image of people loading a 12 gauge one round at a time when that isn't what they do anymore for military weapons. You wanted to pretend that the 870 was used by the military. Again, the man that knows absolutely nothing about guns loves to talk about them. You and Frank have a whole lot in common. You'd piss your panties if someone was holding a gun at a gun range but you'll talk fake news about them all day.

Huh??????
"Police Magnum – The law enforcement version of the Model 870, the Police Magnum, is chambered in 12 gauge 3" magnum."..."and have a standard magazine tube capacity of four rounds. They can be ordered with a two or three round extended magazine tube from the factory"
Now I will admit a model called "Police Magnum" does not automatically mean they were used by the police. And police is not military. But I think the Remington 870 was used by the police and military.

At the end of this Wikipedia article on the Remington 870 they indicate it was/is used by lots and lots of militaries and police and government agencies all over the world. Including the USA military, border patrol, secret service, IRS, FBI, Marshals service, and CHIPs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_870

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_shotgun
"The most common type of shotgun used for this purpose is the manually operated, slide-action/pump-action type like the Remington M870 or Mossberg 590A1. The latter is currently the pump-action of choice for US armed forces, and both have seen service with other militaries."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individual_weapons_of_the_U.S._Armed_Forces#Shotguns
Shows the Remington 870 still has limited use today in the USA military.

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:02:16 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> > On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > > On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> > >> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > >>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> > >>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > >>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> > >>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
> >> > >>>>>>> 12 gauge
> >> > >>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
> >> > >>>>>>> with
> >> > >>>>>>> "buck shot"
> >> > >>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
> >> > >>>>>>> more people
> >> > >>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
> >> > >>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
> >> > >>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
> >> > >>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
> >> > >>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
> >> > >>>> "really makes you feel cool."
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
> >> > >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
> >> > >>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
> >> > >> silhouettes!
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > > Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
> >> > > Perhaps undead humans be better?
> >> > > http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
> >> > Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
> >> > optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
> >> > play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
> >> > of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
> >> > guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
> >> > mentality.
> >> >
> >> > You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
> >> >
> >> > But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
> >> > stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
> >> > Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
> >> > and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
> >> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
> >
> >Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the military
> >used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
> I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
> that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
> with the military.
>
> The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
> automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
> and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
> was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
> and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
> I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
> thumb cock the gun for every shot.

OK. I will give you that you do state "large caliber" and "large bore". But John Browning invented many semi automatic pistols in 25, 32, 38 before the 1911 model. For Colt and FN. The Colt pocket pistols were very popular. John Browning also invented the Browning Hi-Power 9mm pistol a decade or so later. FN made them for Belgian military. The Luger was also created around 1900 and used by numerous militaries. But maybe 9mm is not considered large caliber or large bore.

>
> As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
> unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
> the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
> "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
> version.
>
> But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
> 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
> number is less then 1%.
>
> Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
> childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
> course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
> to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
> better to play solder???
>
> This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
> play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
> the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
> it be?
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

Sylvester Stallone Rambo movies. Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. Back in the 1950s Audie Murphy made several war movies. A Congressional Medal of Honor winner. And there was a movie with Gary Cooper in 1941 about Sergeant Alvin York. Congressional Medal of Honor winner. And today there are gun shooting competitions where the participants dress up as cowboys and use Colt single action revolvers and Winchester 1873 lever action rifles to shoot up fake old west towns and targets. I doubt too many of the participants were around 150 years ago in the 1870s. But cocking the hammer on your pistol and swinging the lever on your rifle is manly man stuff. Today the Vietnam was is the most recent major war. So today men want to own an M-16 rifle (AR-15). And join a militia. And wear camo clothing. And paint that black and green makeup on their faces so they disappear into the jungle.

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:26:54 PM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/21/2022 8:02 PM, John B. wrote:
> >
> > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
> > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
> > number is less then 1%.
> >
> > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
> > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
> > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
> > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
> > better to play solder???
> >
> > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
> > play solder...
>
> Or pretend they are as tough as a soldier. Or that they could have been
> really effective as a soldier. Or that they can still react as well as a
> trained soldier if "other people" suddenly mount an attack on their
> little suburban castle.
>
> It's funny that my family members and close friends who actually
> enlisted or were drafted, and _especially_ the ones who actually saw
> combat, have absolutely no interest in combat-style rifles, even if they
> do shoot targets and hunt.
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

My Dad served in the Army during the 1950s. He always made it a point with us sons that he did not want any of us to go to the military. But there are many families, particularly in the south, who have a long lineage of fathers, grandfathers, sons, great grandfathers serving in the military. So........

I do not know and don't know of any studies where they looked at combat veterans who saw actual combat service and whether their children served later.. That would be a revealing study I think.

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:47:57 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/21/2022 7:02 PM, John B. wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> > <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
> >>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
> >>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
> >>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
> >>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
> >>>>>>>>>>> more people
> >>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
> >>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
> >>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
> >>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
> >>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
> >>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
> >>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
> >>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
> >>>>>> silhouettes!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
> >>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
> >>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
> >>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
> >>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
> >>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
> >>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
> >>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
> >>>> mentality.
> >>>>
> >>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
> >>>>
> >>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
> >>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
> >>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
> >>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
> >>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
> >>
> >> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun.. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the militar
> y
> >> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
> >
> > I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
> > that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
> > with the military.
> >
> > The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
> > automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
> > and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
> > was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
> > and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
> > I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
> > thumb cock the gun for every shot.
> >
> > As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
> > unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
> > the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
> > "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
> > version.
> >
> > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
> > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
> > number is less then 1%.
> >
> > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
> > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
> > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
> > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
> > better to play solder???
> >
> > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
> > play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
> > the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
> > it be?
> >
> Uh, the Luger folding link 9mm pistol predates the Browning
> M1911A1 by a few years and both are still made.
>
> https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/ItemImages/000479/20035050_1_lg.jpeg
>
> I don't know about elsewhere but here in USA the 1911 is
> only recently being displaced by smaller lighter 9mm and .40
> 'compacts' generally striker type
>
> http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CZ_P-10_C_Compact_Striker-Fired_9mm_Combat_Tactical_Pistol_SHOT_Show_2017_David_Crane_DefenseReview.com_DR_3.jpg
>
> And regarding the Springfield 1903 reference I assume you
> meant the CMP surplus rifle program:
> https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/
>
> Currently they're offering WWII surplus M1 Garands.
>
> I see a very wide spectrum of Americans at ranges; fathers
> with daughters, pals after work, all ages, incomes and
> flavors. What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:14:15 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 2/21/2022 3:29 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
>>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
>>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
>>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
>>>>>>>>>>> more people
>>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
>>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
>>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
>>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
>>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
>>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
>>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
>>>>>> silhouettes!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
>>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
>>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
>>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
>>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
>>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
>>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
>>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
>>>> mentality.
>>>>
>>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
>>>>
>>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
>>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
>>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
>>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
>>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
>>
>> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the military
> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
>>
>
>Same with other popular platforms.
>
>The iconic AK-47 in its many and varied civilian models
>(also, as you note, made by just everyone) are semi, not
>full auto. The much better designed AK-74 and AR-10 clones
>are also semi for civilian models. Even the space-age NATO
>FN 5.7 has a civilian analog PS-90 in semi. Which are
>significant differences and well reflected in the disparate
>volumes of popular 'civilian' vs the rare NFA-licensed full
>auto versions.

And, it might be added, that U.S. made semi-automatic rifles have been
made and openly sold, in the U.S., since 1905.
For those with short fingers that is 117 years (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:19:31 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 1:16:25 PM UTC-8, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:40:11 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:19:11 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 11:10:14 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 12:39:02 AM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > > > > On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 11:29:11 AM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> > > > > > On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a 12 gauge
>> > > > > > > shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded with "buck shot"
>> > > > > > > as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever, more people
>> > > > > > > per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
>> > > > > > And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for home defense
>> > > > > > - not that I need either for that purpose.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > - Frank Krygowski
>> > > > > The Remington 870 pump shotgun ONLY allows a maximum of about 9 shells on a special model. 5 or 6 shells on most pump shotguns. Rambo would have had to spend half the movie reloading his shotgun instead of killing an endless line of people. If he was using a shotgun. And if you only have 5 or 6 shells in your pump shotgun, how are you going to kill the 7th killer breaking into your house to kill you? With an AR-15 you can get 20 or 30 round magazines. And everyone knows its far far far far far more likely that 7 people will come to kill you than it is for 21 or 31 people to come kill you.
>> > > > https://www.kygunco.com/product/typhoon-defense-f121301s-f12-12ga-ceracamo-w-long-forend
>> > > >
>> > > > That is a 10 round clip fed 12 gauge with an open bore to fire .00 buckshot. The clips may be changed in seconds. Why don't you tell us all about your view of Rambo?
>> > > Tommy, I do wonder if you have reading comprehension problems. In my post I wrote "The Remington 870 pump shotgun". Your website is not a Remington 870 pump shotgun.
>> > Why did you chose that specific shotgun? Because you could use it as some sort of support for your ill mind. Sorry Russell, you imagination doesn't hold up to reality but then that is exactly what you are.
>> Tommy boy, you ask why I chose the Remington 870 pump shotgun for my example. Very easy Tommy boy. The Remington 870 is the most widely sold shotgun in the USA. Probably the entire world. It is the "Coke" of shotguns.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_870
>> "The 870 was a commercial success. Remington sold two million guns by 1973 (ten times the number of Model 31 shotguns it replaced). As of 1983, the 870 held the record for the best-selling shotgun in history, with three million sold. By 1996, spurred by sales of the basic "Express" models, which were added as a lower-cost alternative to the original Wingmaster line, sales topped seven million guns. On April 13, 2009, the ten millionth Model 870 was produced."
>>
>> The ten millionth Remington 870 was sold in 2009. Its now 13 years later. We may be up to 15 or 20 million Remington 870 shotguns sold today. The 870 is the best selling, most prolific shotgun ever sold in the history of the world. Therefore, people, me, mention it when discussing shotguns. Kind of like mentioning the Ford pickup when talking about pickups. Its been the highest selling pickup every year for about 50 years now.
>>
>> Tommy, you really need to seek out a mental health professional. Now obviously they will not be as genius as you. According to you. But you do need to let them try to help you solve your mental thinking problems.
>Sorry little Russy, you chose it because you wanted a visual image of people loading a 12 gauge one round at a time when that isn't what they do anymore for military weapons. You wanted to pretend that the 870 was used by the military. Again, the man that knows absolutely nothing about guns loves to talk about them. You and Frank have a whole lot in common. You'd piss your panties if someone was holding a gun at a gun range but you'll talk fake news about them all day.

"You wanted to pretend that the 870 was used by the military"

Well, one thing about Old Tommy, He is consistent. Yup, he got it
wrong again (:-)
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/milsurp-u-s-military-remington-model-870-shotguns/
https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Remington_870
https://www.americanspecialops.com/special-ops-weapons/remington-870-shotgun.php
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 19:47:52 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 2/21/2022 7:02 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
>> <ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
>>>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
>>>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
>>>>>>>>>>>> more people
>>>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
>>>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
>>>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
>>>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
>>>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
>>>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
>>>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
>>>>>>> silhouettes!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
>>>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
>>>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
>>>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
>>>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
>>>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
>>>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
>>>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
>>>>> mentality.
>>>>>
>>>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
>>>>>
>>>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
>>>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
>>>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
>>>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
>>>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
>>>
>>> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the militar
>y
>>> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
>>
>> I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
>> that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
>> with the military.
>>
>> The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
>> automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
>> and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
>> was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
>> and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
>> I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
>> thumb cock the gun for every shot.
>>
>> As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
>> unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
>> the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
>> "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
>> version.
>>
>> But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
>> 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
>> number is less then 1%.
>>
>> Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
>> childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
>> course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
>> to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
>> better to play solder???
>>
>> This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
>> play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
>> the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
>> it be?
>>
>
>Uh, the Luger folding link 9mm pistol predates the Browning
>M1911A1 by a few years and both are still made.
>
>https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/ItemImages/000479/20035050_1_lg.jpeg

Yes, but... a 9mm is hardly a "large caliber". In fact, at least in
NRA pistol shooting it falls in the middle - "any center fire" of the
classifications. I would also comment that while I have never fired a
9mm pistol I have shot a lot of .38 guns with similar ballistics and I
can assure you that there is a considerable difference between them
and a 1911 colt.

>I don't know about elsewhere but here in USA the 1911 is
>only recently being displaced by smaller lighter 9mm and .40
>'compacts' generally striker type
>
>http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CZ_P-10_C_Compact_Striker-Fired_9mm_Combat_Tactical_Pistol_SHOT_Show_2017_David_Crane_DefenseReview.com_DR_3.jpg

Yes again. Back in the old days Cops carried .38 revolvers and today
they carry 9mm automatics.

>
>And regarding the Springfield 1903 reference I assume you
>meant the CMP surplus rifle program:
>https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/

Yup, my father bought one and initially cut the stock down to a sort
of "sporter" and used it for deer hunting but later bought a Savage
lever action in one of the .30 Savage calibers as it was lighter and
easier to carry and the 30-06 was really overkill for New England
white tail deer.

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 6:09:49 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 10:30:16 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 2/21/2022 12:42 AM, John B. wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> People do tend to rationalize, or make excuses, for, things which they
> >> prefer not to believe, or to accept.
> >
> >That's true. I've read posts from a guy who implies that a murder is no
> >worse than a death by natural causes or by accidental causes. He uses
> >that to make excuses for mass murders and other killings by gun users.
> >
> >That's an astonishing rationalization, a view universally rejected by
> >society, but its a foundation of his arguments.
> >
> >Personally, I believe his tone would change if his wife or kid were
> >murdered.
> I assume that you are referring to my recent post in which I said that
> dead was dead and one is "no more dead if shot by a gun or less dad if
> killed in a bicycle crash".
>
> So tell us Frank, or even better, give us some actual proof, that
> someone shot by a gun is somehow more dead then if killed in a bicycle
> cash.
>
> Or perhaps you would argue that if killed by a gun you would grieve
> more then if killed on a bicycle? Which certainly defines you as a
> person I would not care to be associated.
>
> I can imagine Frank prancing down the road laughing and joking, "Ha!
> Ha! Oh yes my wife died in a bike crash! How Lucky I am!"
>
> Frank, you ARE despicable!

No less despicable than someone who "can imagine Frank prancing down the road laughing and joking, "Ha! Ha! Oh yes my wife died in a bike crash! How Lucky I am!" " or posit the AR-15s have " magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses". I guess mass murder is an acceptable risk in order for those with fragile egos to keep their macho toys. Nice company you're aligning yourself with there John.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:17:12 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:02:16 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >> > On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > > On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >> > >> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > >>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >> > >>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > >>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >> > >>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >> > >>>>>>>
>> >> > >>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
>> >> > >>>>>>> 12 gauge
>> >> > >>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
>> >> > >>>>>>> with
>> >> > >>>>>>> "buck shot"
>> >> > >>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
>> >> > >>>>>>> more people
>> >> > >>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
>> >> > >>>>>>
>> >> > >>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
>> >> > >>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
>> >> > >>>>>>
>> >> > >>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
>> >> > >>>>>>
>> >> > >>>>>>
>> >> > >>>>>
>> >> > >>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
>> >> > >>>>
>> >> > >>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
>> >> > >>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
>> >> > >>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
>> >> > >>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
>> >> > >>>> "really makes you feel cool."
>> >> > >>>>
>> >> > >>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
>> >> > >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
>> >> > >>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
>> >> > >>>>
>> >> > >>>>
>> >> > >>>>
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
>> >> > >> silhouettes!
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
>> >> > > Perhaps undead humans be better?
>> >> > > http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
>> >> > Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
>> >> > optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
>> >> > play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
>> >> > of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
>> >> > guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
>> >> > mentality.
>> >> >
>> >> > You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
>> >> >
>> >> > But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
>> >> > stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
>> >> > Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
>> >> > and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
>> >> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
>> >
>> >Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the military
>> >used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
>> I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
>> that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
>> with the military.
>>
>> The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
>> automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
>> and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
>> was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
>> and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
>> I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
>> thumb cock the gun for every shot.
>
>OK. I will give you that you do state "large caliber" and "large bore". But John Browning invented many semi automatic pistols in 25, 32, 38 before the 1911 model. For Colt and FN. The Colt pocket pistols were very popular. John Browning also invented the Browning Hi-Power 9mm pistol a decade or so later. FN made them for Belgian military. The Luger was also created around 1900 and used by numerous militaries. But maybe 9mm is not considered large caliber or large bore.

Certainly true but the NRA pistol matches are for .22 caliber, or "Any
center fire" or .45 caliber. Thus, at least for NRA matches the 9mm is
a middle size, "any center fore" caliber.

>
>>
>> As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
>> unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
>> the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
>> "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
>> version.
>>
>> But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
>> 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
>> number is less then 1%.
>>
>> Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
>> childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
>> course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
>> to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
>> better to play solder???
>>
>> This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
>> play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
>> the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
>> it be?
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>
>Sylvester Stallone Rambo movies. Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. Back in the 1950s Audie Murphy made several war movies. A Congressional Medal of Honor winner. And there was a movie with Gary Cooper in 1941 about Sergeant Alvin York. Congressional Medal of Honor winner. And today there are gun shooting competitions where the participants dress up as cowboys and use Colt single action revolvers and Winchester 1873 lever action rifles to shoot up fake old west towns and targets. I doubt too many of the participants were around 150 years ago in the 1870s. But cocking the hammer on your pistol and swinging the lever on your rifle is manly man stuff. Today the Vietnam was is the most recent major war. So today men want to own an M-16 rifle (AR-15). And join a militia. And wear camo clothing. And paint that black and green makeup on their faces so they disappear into the jungle.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:21:27 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:26:54 PM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 2/21/2022 8:02 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >
>> > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
>> > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
>> > number is less then 1%.
>> >
>> > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
>> > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
>> > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
>> > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
>> > better to play solder???
>> >
>> > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
>> > play solder...
>>
>> Or pretend they are as tough as a soldier. Or that they could have been
>> really effective as a soldier. Or that they can still react as well as a
>> trained soldier if "other people" suddenly mount an attack on their
>> little suburban castle.
>>
>> It's funny that my family members and close friends who actually
>> enlisted or were drafted, and _especially_ the ones who actually saw
>> combat, have absolutely no interest in combat-style rifles, even if they
>> do shoot targets and hunt.
>>
>> --
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
>My Dad served in the Army during the 1950s. He always made it a point with us sons that he did not want any of us to go to the military. But there are many families, particularly in the south, who have a long lineage of fathers, grandfathers, sons, great grandfathers serving in the military. So.......
>
From my own experiences there is a lot of difference between both the
branch of service and your job in the service. An Infantryman crawling
through the mud and a Navy Chief Petty Officer managing, say the
engine room on a ship.

I enlisted in the Air Force to avoid being drafted, After about 1 year
the Air force sent me to Japan to work on Bombers at the tail end of
the Korean War. I liked it so well I stayed 8 years. I came back and a
few years later they shipped me off to Vietnam and I liked it and
would have staid longer if they had let me, I came back and a year or
so later they shipped me off to Thailand, and I liked that too and
stayed a while. More then half of my 20 years I spent overseas and
liked every bit of it. And all the while there are guys bitching and
complaining about being "Here". Wherever "here" happened to be.

>I do not know and don't know of any studies where they looked at combat veterans who saw actual combat service and whether their children served later. That would be a revealing study I think.

Well there are certainly examples of officers who are second or more
generation servicemen. General Douglas MacArthur was the son of a
serving Army Captain and two of his mother's brothers fought for the
South in the Civil war.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:30:36 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:47:57 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/21/2022 7:02 PM, John B. wrote:
>> > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>> > <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> >>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> >>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
>> >>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
>> >>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
>> >>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
>> >>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> more people
>> >>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
>> >>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
>> >>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
>> >>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
>> >>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
>> >>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
>> >>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
>> >>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
>> >>>>>> silhouettes!
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
>> >>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
>> >>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
>> >>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
>> >>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
>> >>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
>> >>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
>> >>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
>> >>>> mentality.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
>> >>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
>> >>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
>> >>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
>> >>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
>> >>
>> >> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the militar
>> y
>> >> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
>> >
>> > I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
>> > that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
>> > with the military.
>> >
>> > The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
>> > automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
>> > and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
>> > was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
>> > and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
>> > I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
>> > thumb cock the gun for every shot.
>> >
>> > As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
>> > unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
>> > the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
>> > "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
>> > version.
>> >
>> > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
>> > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
>> > number is less then 1%.
>> >
>> > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
>> > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
>> > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
>> > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
>> > better to play solder???
>> >
>> > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
>> > play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
>> > the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
>> > it be?
>> >
>> Uh, the Luger folding link 9mm pistol predates the Browning
>> M1911A1 by a few years and both are still made.
>>
>> https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/ItemImages/000479/20035050_1_lg.jpeg
>>
>> I don't know about elsewhere but here in USA the 1911 is
>> only recently being displaced by smaller lighter 9mm and .40
>> 'compacts' generally striker type
>>
>> http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CZ_P-10_C_Compact_Striker-Fired_9mm_Combat_Tactical_Pistol_SHOT_Show_2017_David_Crane_DefenseReview.com_DR_3.jpg
>>
>> And regarding the Springfield 1903 reference I assume you
>> meant the CMP surplus rifle program:
>> https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/
>>
>> Currently they're offering WWII surplus M1 Garands.
>>
>> I see a very wide spectrum of Americans at ranges; fathers
>> with daughters, pals after work, all ages, incomes and
>> flavors. What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
>https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/photos-pro-trump-supporters-breach-the-capitol-building/2531640/
>Second picture down. I'd say they are trying to look soldier to me. Kind of desert storm fatigues with tan sand colored clothing. Eighth picture has a guy in wood camouflage clothes. Hunting, not war. But still kind of soldier looking. There are pictures on this webpage of actual Capitol Police SWAT team members and official real police members too. They are all in full uniforms. No pretend with them.

On 2/21/2022 8:30 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:47:57 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/21/2022 7:02 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>>> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
>>>>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more people
>>>>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
>>>>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
>>>>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
>>>>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
>>>>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
>>>>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
>>>>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
>>>>>>>> silhouettes!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
>>>>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
>>>>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
>>>>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
>>>>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
>>>>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
>>>>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
>>>>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
>>>>>> mentality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
>>>>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
>>>>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
>>>>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
>>>>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
>>>>
>>>> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the militar
>> y
>>>> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
>>>
>>> I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
>>> that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
>>> with the military.
>>>
>>> The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
>>> automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
>>> and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
>>> was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
>>> and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
>>> I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
>>> thumb cock the gun for every shot.
>>>
>>> As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
>>> unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
>>> the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
>>> "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
>>> version.
>>>
>>> But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
>>> 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
>>> number is less then 1%.
>>>
>>> Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
>>> childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
>>> course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
>>> to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
>>> better to play solder???
>>>
>>> This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
>>> play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
>>> the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
>>> it be?
>>>
>> Uh, the Luger folding link 9mm pistol predates the Browning
>> M1911A1 by a few years and both are still made.
>>
>> https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/ItemImages/000479/20035050_1_lg.jpeg
>>
>> I don't know about elsewhere but here in USA the 1911 is
>> only recently being displaced by smaller lighter 9mm and .40
>> 'compacts' generally striker type
>>
>> http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CZ_P-10_C_Compact_Striker-Fired_9mm_Combat_Tactical_Pistol_SHOT_Show_2017_David_Crane_DefenseReview.com_DR_3.jpg
>>
>> And regarding the Springfield 1903 reference I assume you
>> meant the CMP surplus rifle program:
>> https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/
>>
>> Currently they're offering WWII surplus M1 Garands.
>>
>> I see a very wide spectrum of Americans at ranges; fathers
>> with daughters, pals after work, all ages, incomes and
>> flavors. What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
> https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/photos-pro-trump-supporters-breach-the-capitol-building/2531640/
> Second picture down. I'd say they are trying to look soldier to me. Kind of desert storm fatigues with tan sand colored clothing. Eighth picture has a guy in wood camouflage clothes. Hunting, not war. But still kind of soldier looking. There are pictures on this webpage of actual Capitol Police SWAT team members and official real police members too. They are all in full uniforms. No pretend with them.
>

On 2/22/2022 4:58 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 8:47:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
>
> Denial isn't a river in egypt:
> https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/410/2020/12/oathkeepers2a.png
>
Oath Keepers are all ex-military or ex-LE. A definite
selection in their subgroup.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 6:30:40 PM UTC-8, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:47:57 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 2/21/2022 7:02 PM, John B. wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> > > <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
> > >>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
> > >>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
> > >>>>>>>>>>> with
> > >>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
> > >>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
> > >>>>>>>>>>> more people
> > >>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
> > >>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
> > >>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
> > >>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
> > >>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
> > >>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
> > >>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
> > >>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
> > >>>>>> silhouettes!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
> > >>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
> > >>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
> > >>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
> > >>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
> > >>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
> > >>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
> > >>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
> > >>>> mentality.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
> > >>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
> > >>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
> > >>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
> > >>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
> > >>
> > >> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the militar
> > y
> > >> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
> > >
> > > I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
> > > that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
> > > with the military.
> > >
> > > The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
> > > automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
> > > and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
> > > was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
> > > and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
> > > I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
> > > thumb cock the gun for every shot.
> > >
> > > As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
> > > unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
> > > the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
> > > "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
> > > version.
> > >
> > > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
> > > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
> > > number is less then 1%.
> > >
> > > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
> > > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
> > > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
> > > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
> > > better to play solder???
> > >
> > > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
> > > play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
> > > the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
> > > it be?
> > >
> > Uh, the Luger folding link 9mm pistol predates the Browning
> > M1911A1 by a few years and both are still made.
> >
> > https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/ItemImages/000479/20035050_1_lg.jpeg
> >
> > I don't know about elsewhere but here in USA the 1911 is
> > only recently being displaced by smaller lighter 9mm and .40
> > 'compacts' generally striker type
> >
> > http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CZ_P-10_C_Compact_Striker-Fired_9mm_Combat_Tactical_Pistol_SHOT_Show_2017_David_Crane_DefenseReview.com_DR_3.jpg
> >
> > And regarding the Springfield 1903 reference I assume you
> > meant the CMP surplus rifle program:
> > https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/
> >
> > Currently they're offering WWII surplus M1 Garands.
> >
> > I see a very wide spectrum of Americans at ranges; fathers
> > with daughters, pals after work, all ages, incomes and
> > flavors. What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
> > --
> > Andrew Muzi
> > <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> > Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/photos-pro-trump-supporters-breach-the-capitol-building/2531640/
> Second picture down. I'd say they are trying to look soldier to me. Kind of desert storm fatigues with tan sand colored clothing. Eighth picture has a guy in wood camouflage clothes. Hunting, not war. But still kind of soldier looking. There are pictures on this webpage of actual Capitol Police SWAT team members and official real police members too. They are all in full uniforms. No pretend with them.

On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 6:12:06 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/22/2022 4:58 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 8:47:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >>
> >> What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
> >
> > Denial isn't a river in egypt:
> > https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/410/2020/12/oathkeepers2a.png
> >
> Oath Keepers are all ex-military or ex-LE. A definite
> selection in their subgroup.

Reading the comments of these guys is like looking at the comments of children. Russell pretending that a modern day Rambo would be pushing shells into a shotgun rather than pushing in a magazine. Even John is aghast at their comments. Imagine wearing cargo pants in camouflage colors that make you stand out in white marble buildings like a bright light is "trying to look like a soldier"! I guess these guys actually believe that "clothes make the man".

On 2/22/2022 9:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/22/2022 4:58 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 8:47:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
>>
>> Denial isn't a river in egypt:
>> https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/410/2020/12/oathkeepers2a.png
>>
> Oath Keepers are all ex-military or ex-LE. A definite selection in their
> subgroup.

I have a best friend who is both ex-military and ex-law-enforcement. I
have family members who are ex military. None of them walk around in
fatigues. None of them own rifles with combat optimized features.

The ex cop still owns his old revolver as a sort of memento, but keeps
it locked away unloaded. He never once fired it on duty, and is quick to
use his ex military language to say "I hate *&#@% guns."

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 8:35:20 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/22/2022 9:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 2/22/2022 4:58 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 8:47:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>
> >>> What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
> >>
> >> Denial isn't a river in egypt:
> >> https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/410/2020/12/oathkeepers2a.png
> >>
> > Oath Keepers are all ex-military or ex-LE. A definite selection in their
> > subgroup.
> I have a best friend who is both ex-military and ex-law-enforcement. I
> have family members who are ex military. None of them walk around in
> fatigues. None of them own rifles with combat optimized features.
>
> The ex cop still owns his old revolver as a sort of memento, but keeps
> it locked away unloaded. He never once fired it on duty, and is quick to
> use his ex military language to say "I hate *&#@% guns."

Tell us all Frank, what is "combat optimized features"? Inquiring minds want to know.

On 2/22/2022 11:57 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 8:35:20 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 2/22/2022 9:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/22/2022 4:58 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 8:47:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
>>>>
>>>> Denial isn't a river in egypt:
>>>> https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/410/2020/12/oathkeepers2a.png
>>>>
>>> Oath Keepers are all ex-military or ex-LE. A definite selection in their
>>> subgroup.
>> I have a best friend who is both ex-military and ex-law-enforcement. I
>> have family members who are ex military. None of them walk around in
>> fatigues. None of them own rifles with combat optimized features.
>>
>> The ex cop still owns his old revolver as a sort of memento, but keeps
>> it locked away unloaded. He never once fired it on duty, and is quick to
>> use his ex military language to say "I hate *&#@% guns."
>
> Tell us all Frank, what is "combat optimized features"? Inquiring minds want to know.

Check your notes. I know you may not "remember" but I've already
explained this multiple times.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 5:15:39 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:21:27 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:26:54 PM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 2/21/2022 8:02 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> >
> >> > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
> >> > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
> >> > number is less then 1%.
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
> >> > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
> >> > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
> >> > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
> >> > better to play solder???
> >> >
> >> > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
> >> > play solder...
> >>
> >> Or pretend they are as tough as a soldier. Or that they could have been
> >> really effective as a soldier. Or that they can still react as well as a
> >> trained soldier if "other people" suddenly mount an attack on their
> >> little suburban castle.
> >>
> >> It's funny that my family members and close friends who actually
> >> enlisted or were drafted, and _especially_ the ones who actually saw
> >> combat, have absolutely no interest in combat-style rifles, even if they
> >> do shoot targets and hunt.
> >>
> >> --
> >> - Frank Krygowski
> >
> >My Dad served in the Army during the 1950s. He always made it a point with us sons that he did not want any of us to go to the military. But there are many families, particularly in the south, who have a long lineage of fathers, grandfathers, sons, great grandfathers serving in the military. So........
> >
> From my own experiences there is a lot of difference between both the
> branch of service and your job in the service. An Infantryman crawling
> through the mud and a Navy Chief Petty Officer managing, say the
> engine room on a ship.
>
> I enlisted in the Air Force to avoid being drafted, After about 1 year
> the Air force sent me to Japan to work on Bombers at the tail end of
> the Korean War. I liked it so well I stayed 8 years. I came back and a
> few years later they shipped me off to Vietnam and I liked it and
> would have staid longer if they had let me, I came back and a year or
> so later they shipped me off to Thailand, and I liked that too and
> stayed a while. More then half of my 20 years I spent overseas and
> liked every bit of it. And all the while there are guys bitching and
> complaining about being "Here". Wherever "here" happened to be.
> >I do not know and don't know of any studies where they looked at combat veterans who saw actual combat service and whether their children served later. That would be a revealing study I think.
> Well there are certainly examples of officers who are second or more
> generation servicemen. General Douglas MacArthur was the son of a
> serving Army Captain and two of his mother's brothers fought for the
> South in the Civil war.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

I think you missed my main point. I was referring to infantry men. Men who saw combat up front. Who were on the administering and receiving end of death, gunfire. Whether the progeny of those men had a favorable opinion of military service. I am not referring to officers in command. Officer and infantry shooting and being shot at in the mud are not exactly comparable..

On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 5:19:32 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:30:36 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:47:57 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 2/21/2022 7:02 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> >> > <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> >>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> >>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> >>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> >>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> more people
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
> >> >>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
> >> >>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
> >> >>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
> >> >>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
> >> >>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
> >> >>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
> >> >>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
> >> >>>>>> silhouettes!
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
> >> >>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
> >> >>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
> >> >>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
> >> >>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
> >> >>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
> >> >>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
> >> >>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
> >> >>>> mentality.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
> >> >>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
> >> >>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
> >> >>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
> >> >>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
> >> >>
> >> >> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the militar
> >> y
> >> >> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck.. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
> >> >
> >> > I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
> >> > that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
> >> > with the military.
> >> >
> >> > The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
> >> > automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
> >> > and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
> >> > was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
> >> > and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
> >> > I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
> >> > thumb cock the gun for every shot.
> >> >
> >> > As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
> >> > unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
> >> > the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
> >> > "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
> >> > version.
> >> >
> >> > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
> >> > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
> >> > number is less then 1%.
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
> >> > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
> >> > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
> >> > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
> >> > better to play solder???
> >> >
> >> > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
> >> > play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
> >> > the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
> >> > it be?
> >> >
> >> Uh, the Luger folding link 9mm pistol predates the Browning
> >> M1911A1 by a few years and both are still made.
> >>
> >> https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/ItemImages/000479/20035050_1_lg.jpeg
> >>
> >> I don't know about elsewhere but here in USA the 1911 is
> >> only recently being displaced by smaller lighter 9mm and .40
> >> 'compacts' generally striker type
> >>
> >> http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CZ_P-10_C_Compact_Striker-Fired_9mm_Combat_Tactical_Pistol_SHOT_Show_2017_David_Crane_DefenseReview.com_DR_3.jpg
> >>
> >> And regarding the Springfield 1903 reference I assume you
> >> meant the CMP surplus rifle program:
> >> https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/
> >>
> >> Currently they're offering WWII surplus M1 Garands.
> >>
> >> I see a very wide spectrum of Americans at ranges; fathers
> >> with daughters, pals after work, all ages, incomes and
> >> flavors. What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
> >> --
> >> Andrew Muzi
> >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >
> >https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/photos-pro-trump-supporters-breach-the-capitol-building/2531640/
> >Second picture down. I'd say they are trying to look soldier to me. Kind of desert storm fatigues with tan sand colored clothing. Eighth picture has a guy in wood camouflage clothes. Hunting, not war. But still kind of soldier looking. There are pictures on this webpage of actual Capitol Police SWAT team members and official real police members too. They are all in full uniforms. No pretend with them.
> Try
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=U.S.+serviceman&iax=images&ia=images
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 9:14:02 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/22/2022 11:57 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 8:35:20 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 2/22/2022 9:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>> On 2/22/2022 4:58 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 8:47:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
> >>>>
> >>>> Denial isn't a river in egypt:
> >>>> https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/410/2020/12/oathkeepers2a.png
> >>>>
> >>> Oath Keepers are all ex-military or ex-LE. A definite selection in their
> >>> subgroup.
> >> I have a best friend who is both ex-military and ex-law-enforcement. I
> >> have family members who are ex military. None of them walk around in
> >> fatigues. None of them own rifles with combat optimized features.
> >>
> >> The ex cop still owns his old revolver as a sort of memento, but keeps
> >> it locked away unloaded. He never once fired it on duty, and is quick to
> >> use his ex military language to say "I hate *&#@% guns."
> >
> > Tell us all Frank, what is "combat optimized features"? Inquiring minds want to know.
> Check your notes. I know you may not "remember" but I've already
> explained this multiple times.

Humor me and explain what you think "militarized" means.

On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 1:07:06 PM UTC-8, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 5:19:32 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:30:36 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> > <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:47:57 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> On 2/21/2022 7:02 PM, John B. wrote:
> > >> > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:29:59 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> > >> > <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:48:20 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> >>> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:06:18 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> >>>> On 2/20/2022 2:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> >>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> >>>>>> On 2/20/2022 11:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 6:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2022 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2022 9:03 PM, John B. wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Disregarding the ".22 caliber", my own choice would be a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> 12 gauge
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> shotgun, either pump or automatic and probably loaded
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> with
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> "buck shot"
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as I believe that I can injure, incapacitate, whatever,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> more people
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> per round fired then is possible with an AR-whatever.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> And I agree. A shotgun is much more logical than an AR for
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> home defense - not that I need either for that purpose.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> But shotguns don't make a guy feel like Rambo.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> How do you know what other men feel?
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> I talk to them, Andrew. I have friends who have invited me
> > >> >>>>>>>> to machine gun shoots, who bragged about doing things there
> > >> >>>>>>>> like blowing up junk cars and refrigerators. I have a
> > >> >>>>>>>> non-gun-nut friend who talked about how shooting an AR
> > >> >>>>>>>> "really makes you feel cool."
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> What's this pot-bellied dude
> > >> >>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW1LZKJmtbw
> > >> >>>>>>>> doing at 0:50 to 0:55 and 3:10 to 3:16 if not playing Rambo?
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Oh, full auto. I thought we were discussing AR-15.
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3gf_5MR4tE
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Unassisted. And how charming that he's choosing human
> > >> >>>>>> silhouettes!
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Really? Standard target shapes trigger you?
> > >> >>>>> Perhaps undead humans be better?
> > >> >>>>> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/rangnat.jpg
> > >> >>>> Let's review. I said that whatever their other uses, AR rifles are
> > >> >>>> optimized for combat; that was the essence of the design. And AR guys
> > >> >>>> play at being Rambo. They imagine themselves in combat. I gave examples
> > >> >>>> of guys I know well, and I linked a video of an out of shape middle aged
> > >> >>>> guy doing precisely that. The use of a human silhouette confirms the
> > >> >>>> mentality.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> You implied it didn't count because he was on full auto.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> But some guys can shoot very fast without full auto. They can fit bump
> > >> >>>> stocks, or just spend hours developing a really fast finger. Pot bellied
> > >> >>>> Rambos can feel good about themselves as long as their gun looks tough
> > >> >>>> and they can pretend to be blasting bad guys.
> > >> >>> What is sold as an AR15 to the public are not actually the militarized guns so why do you keep insisting they are? Is your position that lying about something is acceptable to maintain your position?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Correct. And no one on this forum has said they are the exact same gun. But everyone who has an education, also knows the AR-15 was developed during the 1950s as a military gun. And it was later adopted as the M-16 rifle by the USA military. And many other countries around the world use it too. And to capitalize on that military contract and success, many companies have since sold a civilian version of the AR-15 to the public. And done very well monetarily. Just like every gun manufacturer makes a Colt model 1911 pistol. Just like the original military version adopted back around WW1.. Money to be made with the connection to the military. And remember the Humvee? Made by AM General. They also made a civilian model of the Humvee. And later called it the Hummer. It was not the same as the military Humvees. They looked the same. But had different motors and transmissions and axles and driveshafts and interiors. They were in reality 99% different than what the militar
> > >> y
> > >> >> used. But everyone could still say they had a military Humvee truck. Just like the Army Commandos used. Grunt grunt.
> > >> >
> > >> > I think I would have to argue a bit about your (apparent) assumption
> > >> > that some firearms are accepted largely because they are associated
> > >> > with the military.
> > >> >
> > >> > The Colt 1911, for example is, or was, the only large caliber,
> > >> > automatic, well semi-automatic to be exact, pistol available for years
> > >> > and years. So if one wanted an "automatic", large bore pistol, there
> > >> > was only one choice. NRA pistol shooting was for .22, Any center fire,
> > >> > and .45, pistols only and yes you could shoot a .45 caliber revolver -
> > >> > I had a shooting buddy that did - but with the handicap of having to
> > >> > thumb cock the gun for every shot.
> > >> >
> > >> > As for long guns, the NRA sold the 1903 Springfield rifle for some
> > >> > unimaginably small sum but I don't remember people marching about with
> > >> > the military version. The action and barrel used for the basis of a
> > >> > "civilian" gun, yes, but not the full stock with sling, military
> > >> > version.
> > >> >
> > >> > But, perhaps it is some sort of desire to be a "Soldier". I read that
> > >> > 18% of U.S. adults were in, or were veterans, in 1980, while today the
> > >> > number is less then 1%.
> > >> >
> > >> > Perhaps, possibly, not having actually served, there is some sort of
> > >> > childish desire, in U.S. males, to "Be a Soldier". One could, of
> > >> > course, enlist and actually BE a solder but then one would likely have
> > >> > to travel to some strange and foreign land to be shot at. No! Far
> > >> > better to play solder???
> > >> >
> > >> > This, of course, is Frank's assertion, that American Males want to
> > >> > play solder, and Andrew tells us that some 20 million - about 14% of
> > >> > the U.S. male population over 10 years old - have AR type rifles. Can
> > >> > it be?
> > >> >
> > >> Uh, the Luger folding link 9mm pistol predates the Browning
> > >> M1911A1 by a few years and both are still made.
> > >>
> > >> https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/ItemImages/000479/20035050_1_lg.jpeg
> > >>
> > >> I don't know about elsewhere but here in USA the 1911 is
> > >> only recently being displaced by smaller lighter 9mm and .40
> > >> 'compacts' generally striker type
> > >>
> > >> http://www.defensereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CZ_P-10_C_Compact_Striker-Fired_9mm_Combat_Tactical_Pistol_SHOT_Show_2017_David_Crane_DefenseReview.com_DR_3.jpg
> > >>
> > >> And regarding the Springfield 1903 reference I assume you
> > >> meant the CMP surplus rifle program:
> > >> https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/
> > >>
> > >> Currently they're offering WWII surplus M1 Garands.
> > >>
> > >> I see a very wide spectrum of Americans at ranges; fathers
> > >> with daughters, pals after work, all ages, incomes and
> > >> flavors. What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
> > >> --
> > >> Andrew Muzi
> > >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> > >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> > >
> > >https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/photos-pro-trump-supporters-breach-the-capitol-building/2531640/
> > >Second picture down. I'd say they are trying to look soldier to me. Kind of desert storm fatigues with tan sand colored clothing. Eighth picture has a guy in wood camouflage clothes. Hunting, not war. But still kind of soldier looking. There are pictures on this webpage of actual Capitol Police SWAT team members and official real police members too. They are all in full uniforms. No pretend with them.
> > Try
> > https://duckduckgo.com/?q=U.S.+serviceman&iax=images&ia=images
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > John B.
> Andy asked about "playing soldier". And my link was about people dressing up in fake uniform military looking clothes and playing they were soldiers.. YOUR link was pictures of REAL people wearing real uniforms. Your pictures were not "playing soldier". They were soldiers. Play and real are very different.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 02:47:58 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 6:09:49 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 10:30:16 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On 2/21/2022 12:42 AM, John B. wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> People do tend to rationalize, or make excuses, for, things which they
>> >> prefer not to believe, or to accept.
>> >
>> >That's true. I've read posts from a guy who implies that a murder is no
>> >worse than a death by natural causes or by accidental causes. He uses
>> >that to make excuses for mass murders and other killings by gun users.
>> >
>> >That's an astonishing rationalization, a view universally rejected by
>> >society, but its a foundation of his arguments.
>> >
>> >Personally, I believe his tone would change if his wife or kid were
>> >murdered.
>> I assume that you are referring to my recent post in which I said that
>> dead was dead and one is "no more dead if shot by a gun or less dad if
>> killed in a bicycle crash".
>>
>> So tell us Frank, or even better, give us some actual proof, that
>> someone shot by a gun is somehow more dead then if killed in a bicycle
>> cash.
>>
>> Or perhaps you would argue that if killed by a gun you would grieve
>> more then if killed on a bicycle? Which certainly defines you as a
>> person I would not care to be associated.
>>
>> I can imagine Frank prancing down the road laughing and joking, "Ha!
>> Ha! Oh yes my wife died in a bike crash! How Lucky I am!"
>>
>> Frank, you ARE despicable!
>
>No less despicable than someone who "can imagine Frank prancing down the road laughing and joking, "Ha! Ha! Oh yes my wife died in a bike crash! How Lucky I am!" " or posit the AR-15s have " magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses". I guess mass murder is an acceptable risk in order for those with fragile egos to keep their macho toys. Nice company you're aligning yourself with there John.

Well, of course I was ridiculing Franks assertion, at least as I
understood him, that somehow one would be more, or less, stricken by
grief depending on the cause of death.

And as both myself and my wife are "getting on in years" yes I have
given thought to my wife "passing on" as the saying goes, and frankly
I can't even begin to imagine how unhappy I would be. Regardless of
the cause.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 08:12:02 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 2/22/2022 4:58 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 8:47:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> What I don't see are guys in fatigues playing soldier.
>>
>> Denial isn't a river in egypt:
>> https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/410/2020/12/oathkeepers2a.png
>>
>Oath Keepers are all ex-military or ex-LE. A definite
>selection in their subgroup.

Re the picture of the Oath Keepers... They state that they will "fight
a bloody civil war and revolution against the Biden/Harris
administration.

When will they start the war? The post seems to be dated 2 years ago,
and no insurrection yet.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 2/22/2022 8:31 PM, John B. wrote:
>
> Well, of course I was ridiculing Franks assertion, at least as I
> understood him, that somehow one would be more, or less, stricken by
> grief depending on the cause of death.

You're being totally unrealistic, in a foolish attempt to pursue a
nonsense argument.

Neither individuals nor society treat all deaths as equal, nor have
identical feelings about all deaths.

The death of an elderly person who has lived a full life is one thing.
Perhaps it is regrettable depending on conditions, but often people
remark "Well, it was time" or something similar.

The death from natural causes of a middle aged or younger person is
generally treated as a bit more regrettable. A similar death of a child
even more so.

An accidental death of those people triggers yet more regret, and may
lead to anger at how such a thing could be allowed to happen.

The murder of a person rightfully triggers outrage and criminal
prosecution.

The murder of a child, even more outrage.

The killing of 20 children sitting in school is considered truly
heinous. At least, by people who are not avid fans of the weapon used.

--
- Frank Krygowski