Comments on: Update II: 'The Most Fun You Can Have With Your Clothes On'

By: EN

EN — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:14:09 +0000

“This RUGER 10/22 seems a very sweet toy for a girl (not remotely guy-like) who wants to do damage to an advancing target, in a confined situation.”

When I recommended an AR in 5.56 I was thinking in feminine terms. I don’t, and won’t, own one. It lacks power and lethality but seems good enough for a close range defense weapon.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:14:28 +0000

In the earlier century, like 1915-1920, there were two ‘feminine’ pistols- the 32 (Semi-auto) and the ‘chief’s special 38’ (revolver) because they fit inside a purse very well. The ‘Chief’ had an enclosed hammer so that it did not ‘catch’ in the purse when my lady brought it forth to defend her honor. It had the same advantage with pockets, if she wore trousers. I have never understood the concept of female avoidance of violence as femininity. In the animal kingdom the female is just as willing as a male to defend itself and normally carries the weapons to do so. Those that don’t are extinct. I think the Victorian Age was a plot against women, and modern society is little better. In regard to ‘Editrix’s question, No, a 10/22 is only used for targets, rabbits and squirrels. Varmints like prairie dogs and coyotes fit with the 243 caliber. Deer, moose, elk- require a 357 or above pistol or 7mm, 8mm rifle, though some still use the 30-06 or 308. Bear, don’t even think about it. In well populated areas, hunters use a shotgun exclusively, birdshot for birds, buckshot for self defense, rabbits etc, slugs for bigger game.

By: The Editrix

The Editrix — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:03:16 +0000

"OMG! That was serious misspelling!" [I am told that Germany is one of the few Western welfare states, this includes the US, to still have a rigorous public education system in place. Maybe your spelling reflects this. ;-)] Well, not really. Just two superfluous letters. ;-) Maybe it was BECAUSE I am a non-native speaker that the meaning was obvious to me. To return to the topic: I hope to soon be able to buy a real dream of a rifle for a woman, a Mannlicher M72 with direct trigger and a telescopic sight with an illuminating sighting device. (I hope this description make sense. I had to google for it starting from the German terms.) My question to the hunters here: Is an automatic rifle like the Ruger 10/22 alright for hunting purposes at your end? Here in Germany, one is restricted to one bullet in the chamber and two in the magazine. It is frowned upon if you need more than two shots to kill wildlife and those matters of hunting etiquette have found their way into the legal framework long ago. The standard calibre for all sorts of indigenous wildlife here is 7x64, of course it comes in many different loads depending on the prey. I guess here we have another one of those insurmountable cultural gaps. But now really back to the core topic: The freedom to carry firearms is one of the most underestimated, yet at the same time most important symptoms for the freedom of a society. It is a sadly little known fact that one of the first things the Nazis did was to disarm the German Jews.

By: John Danforth

John Danforth — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:12:17 +0000

“Wait! Are those M-16’s the populace totes around only semi-auto?” — M.B. Moon

I’m not sure if that was tongue-in-cheek or not. If I’m not mistaken, the M-16 is the full-auto military version, the civilian semi-automatic is designated AR-15.

I could go on way too long and probably already have. I will say this, though — I am really looking forward to those pictures! Maybe my imagination is getting away with me, though.

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:48:37 +0000

“[Full auto is not-kosher, I believe.]”

Wait! Are those M-16’s the populace totes around only semi-auto? Chapter and verse in the Torah, if so.

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:03:04 +0000

“For inside the house, though, my own preference is 12 gauge, for a lot of reasons.” John Danforth

Yes, and it might just blow an armored head clean off without needing to penetrate the armor.

I believe in a balance of power, it keeps violence down and cowards need not apply. Thus the police should not be better armed or armored than the population.

By: haym

haym — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:53:36 +0000

I’m always looking for some fun, and I don’t necessarily want to take my clothes off, so I’ll look into this Ruger-fun. But I am not sure this is legal in my State of New Jersey?!

[Full auto is not-kosher, I believe.]

By: John Danforth

John Danforth — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:41:42 +0000

I sure didn’t mean to demean anyone’s choice of personal defense weapon (the best one is the one you can hit your target with in a panic), so I’ll clarify:

What I meant was that full auto is of questionable tactical value.

Full auto might be fun, but (besides requiring a special tax permit) it runs out of ammo very quickly, and that can adversely affect practical utility if it needs to be used under extreme duress.

I love and use 22’s regularly myself, and the 10/22 is a legendary favorite.

For inside the house, though, my own preference is 12 gauge, for a lot of reasons.

Anyone looking to penetrate vests is going to need something that is inappropriate for inside-the-home defense for people with neighbors.

Almost any off-the-shelf gun can have its accuracy improved with a few simple operations and testing to find which ammo the gun likes.

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 21:35:41 +0000

OMG! That was serious misspelling! Thanks, The Editrix. Poor eyesight is only partly to blame. You are correct, I meant to say “accuratized”.

I need an editor or at least better eyes.

By: The Editrix

The Editrix — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 19:09:31 +0000

I am not a native English speaker, but I’d wager that M.B. Moon meant to say “accuratized” which I’d define, taking the context into consideration, as “finely tuned”.