Guns and Ammo Thread

They may have changed it since I took my CHL class then, because I was taught in that class that there was no civil immunity in those cases. I'm glad to hear that there is, but I still hope I never have to worry about it. Just goes to show you that laws change frequently, and it's your responsibility to keep up with them.

 

Why is the Aimpoint considered an inferior optic compared to the EoTech?

 

Battery life, size (the Aimpoint always seemed to be getting hung up on things), dot size, lack of a proper reticle (for close in sight picture adjustment), and eye relief (the EoTech is much more forgiving when it comes to cheek-to-stock weld, which can be important when wearing armor or shooting from odd positions). I've never heard of any reliability problems about either optic, although neither optics handle hard impact well.

 

My grandparents died a few weeks ago and I'm helping my mom clean out their house. I came across three guns today- a .38 police special, a .30 cal carbine, and a .22 cal Colt Woodsman. The two handguns look like they're in good shape but the carbine was covered in dust. I found rounds for all three guns as well. The Colt is a Series One, made between 1915 & 1947, and the two others were probably purchased in the 60's or 70's. Not sure about the ammunition. I'm going to take them to a gun store to make sure they all work before I fire them but I'm wondering two things:

1) Is it safe to use the ammunition given how old it may be? Not sure how old the .22 rounds are but the .38 and .30 boxes were pretty aged looking.
2) Where can I find out about gun transfer laws and what I need to do to get them licensed in my name? We haven't come across my grandfather's licenses yet but I'm sure they're here somewhere. The guns are in VA and I'd be looking to get them licensed in PA.

 

Don't take them to a gun store- often that's like asking a random Home Depot associate with advice on building a house. Go look for a gunsmith in your area- preferably a well-established and reputable one. They will be able to properly inspect them and give you a verdict. However, if they guns were stored well, it's very likely they function almost as well as when they were put away after a bit of cleaning.

Regarding the ammo, well, some people have opened up tins of stuff made during WW1 and it still goes boom.

Careful with the Colt... they can be quite valuable...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/SearchResults.aspx?Keywords=colt+woodsman" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Search ... t+woodsman</a>

 

The passing down of firearms after someone dies is usually one of the few situations where firearms can be transferred across state lines without having to go through a Federal Firearms License holder. Check the state laws for those two states, but all you should have to do is get yourself a PA license if necessary.

 

Thanks for the responses. I'm definitely keeping the Colt- aside from being valuable in a dollars sense and looking cool it was my great-grandfathers before it was my grandfathers, so it will stay in the family. The other two will be split up between my brother and I. Looking at VA & PA laws it appears the only thing I'll need a license for is if I want to get a concealed carry in PA, which I will probably do.

 

I believe this is the right place for this question, though my viewpoint runs counter to most (if not all) of the posters in this thread.

I am curious of the logic and reasoning of those that believe in carrying a gun for personal protection. I certainly respect that some people passionately believe in doing so, but I fail to comprehend the logic/reasoning of it. The typical justification I hear is that if the bad guy has a gun, "then I want one too". This fails to convince me though where in most dangerous incidents (for example a parking lot at night) the gun will be tucked away in the glove compartment/purse/holster, while the bad guy will have his drawn and ready to shot. How is it not safer to have mace on your key chain?

I am not advocating for 2nd Amendment rights to be overturned. I don't like guns, I don't believe they're as helpful as advertised for personal protection, but if you want them, that's your choice. I just want to know why people believe they're the most effective measure of personal protection.

This all stems from my wife's desire for a gun. She's from a small town, and so of course she was raised around guns. I've tried to get her to provide me with the information I'm asking for, but she cannot do so other than to say her bosses say its a good idea to have one. She works with criminals in a law enforcement capacity, so I can understand the need for protection. And I am willing to spend whatever and do whatever to ensure her protection. But I do not see why/how a gun provides greater protection than strong mace or a taser or some other means that could be carried openly. Can anyone provide the reasoning that I am failing to see?

 

there's just too much to address in your post... but generally speaking, life threatening scenarios aren't always surprise scenarios. Carrying a firearm is also about being aware of your surroundings. Everyone should practice being aware of who's where and keep an eye on people approaching, etc. Very rarely can a criminal get a true drop on you. You'll always have a few seconds to put your hand on your pistol, and even draw it if necessary.

There are literally THOUSANDS of scenarios where a firearm can prove life saving. just a few off the top of my little head:
-a shooter is walking through a crowded mall, murdering shoppers (walmart, the bus stop, kohls, school, daycare, you name the place)
-walking your dog and another dog attacks your dog. the owner turns the corner, sees you kicking his dog and charges you
-2 men change direction and begin walking toward you while you and your wife walk through a parking lot
-someone breaks into your home while you're sitting on the couch
etc, etc, etc..

it's not about the times it can't protect you and your family.. it's about the times it CAN

plus, you'll never sleep better in your life knowing you have a pistol laying next to you as you sleep

 

You need to think of a gun as if it was a race car.

If you get into a race car only knowing how to drive stick, you're going to be slow and sloppy around the track, and the true potential of the car will not be realized because you simply don't have the training to know how to operate it properly.

A gun (especially one that is carried for protection) is exactly the same. The gun itself is only one small piece of the puzzle when it comes to protection. The person needs to know how to draw it quickly and effectively, know how to shoot at stationary and moving targets, and know how to shoot from different positions. Without the proper training, the gun may as well be a paperweight that holds bullets, something that would be more effective if thrown than shot.

If your wife is serious about carrying a gun for protection, then she needs to be serious about receiving the proper training. I'm not talking about a pistol certification class, either--any idiot can pass those. I'm talking about a dedicated course in pistol use where they provide her with the necessary knowledge that she'll need to actually protect herself if a serious enough situation presents itself. After she completes that course, then she will become what protects her and the gun is just a tool that helps her do that.

Moral of the story: A person who is properly trained in defensive pistol use will be able to effectively protect themselves. Just carrying the gun isn't enough.

Edit: Tasers and mace are ok, but to be honest, if someone was attacking my wife, I'd want her to put three in their chest and end the situation immediately. Sore eyes and electric shock don't always work. Again, just my opinion.

 

You mention in your post that your wife works with law enforcement and deals with criminals. Depending on the types of criminals she normally encounters, she may be more likely to run into people under the influence of drugs which can make mace or a taser less effective than would normally be the case. A gun also has the advantage of being more intimidating than a taser or can of mace.

It was mentioned by effinshenanigans, but it bears repeating that the most important thing is good training. A taser, can of mace or a pistol will all be useless without proper training.

 

I have the perfect example of this. One of the women I work with is going through a divorce and her constantly strung out husband was trying to stop her from leaving the house. Her mother hit him twice, in the face, with a taser and all he did was stumble back a little. He never hit the ground.

Her father finally arrived and ran him off with the help of a deputy.

 

I want to thank everyone for their replies so far. I am certainly still interested in hearing more people's reasoning on why a gun is a safer means of protection. The issue of someone being resistant to mace or tasers due to being on drugs is one I may not have given enough credence to, so thank you for bringing that to my attention.

I will assure everyone that my wife will be taking a proper class. Her office has arranged for a course with the police department trainer, so I imagine it will be a good one.

Also, if anyone is willing to provide further information, the scenario in my first post of my wife walking to or from her car and having an attacker approach is far and away the most likely scenario in which this gun could prove useful, at least for her. Provided my wife possesses the necessary training and awareness, would she be safer with a gun or one of the other options? Her safety is my #1 priority, and I am willing to get over my discomfort for her safety.

A gun is simply something I refuse to handle and is something that makes me highly uncomfortable. I live in a 1 bedroom apartment, so I can't imagine any scenario where someone would break in and I'd have time to access the gun. I'm much more comfortable with my baseball bat and the fact that I'm a big, strong guy who knows how to handle himself. Granted, shit happens, but my personal opinion is a gun is not going to prove helpful in the majority of the potential situations. I appreciate the opinions of all of you who disagree with me, and I appreciate everyone's willingness to share their reasoning with me.

 

I'm not trying to give you shit or anything, because you're absolutely entitled to your beliefs, but it doesn't matter how strong you are, or how solid your bat is. If a guy on the other side of your apartment shoots you, neither are going to mean anything.

For my part, my planning for any break-in scenario doesn't involve ever thinking, "Well, if I'm fucked, I guess I'm fucked," which is kind of what you're saying when you mentioned that it wouldn't matter what you have since your apartment is a one bedroom. Unless the main door opens directly next to your bed, or Usain Bolt is robbing you, a well placed gun safe and a bit of practice on your part opening it quickly in the dark will have a gun in your hands quicker than you think, and in nearly any scenario, quicker than the intruder can get into your room (again, a bit of training/practice makes all the difference).

These are just my thoughts as a gun owner. And believe me, I've got a bat, too--except mine is a 12 gauge bat. I'm a fan of multipurpose items.

 

a gun isn't a snake ready to strike, a bomb ticking down, or a vietnamese pit trap... it's a tool. A tool that you're in complete control over. Like a car. You're not afraid of a car that you control, so don't be afraid of a firearm.

it's a typical "fear".. but once you shoot one, the fear subsides. Just like anything, familiarity brings confidence and relief.

there's a multitude of gun "rules", but there's really one main one to always keep in mind: "never point a firearm at anything you're not willing to completely and devastatingly destroy" even if it's unloaded or dismantled.

go to a shooting range and rent a pistol, have a buddy or co-worker take you to the shooting range to shoot their pistol, or better; have a friend/family member take you into the woods and show you how to shoot where there's less pressure and where stupid questions are only heard by the trees.

 

A Smith and Wesson beats four aces. Simple as that.

In addition to what others are recommending, I think it would be worth your while to simply take a gun safety course. One issue I believe greatly harms firearms and firearms owners is the stigma that guns are dangerous. Truth is, they're just glorified hunks of metal and wood and plastic and they become dangerous when idiots get their hands on them. Remember, Rosie O'Donnell's spoon didn't make her fat.

Take the gun safety course. You'll learn how to properly handle firearms and be safe with them, and another very important thing- you might lose some of your fear of them. Yeah, they're loud and powerful, but like others have said, in the end they're just tools. Once you learn about them, you might not refuse to handle them and they probably won't make you highly uncomfortable. It doesn't matter if you never touch one again in your life, but it does matter that you aren't afraid of them and internally perpetuate a negative stigma due to misinformation and stereotypes that you believe simply because you don't know any better.

 

If she takes a weapons class, take one with her. You've used the word "comfort" multiple times in your posts, and if you were to have a gun in your home it is something that you would need to be comfortable with as well. People here have said that "it's just a tool", and they're right, but most people don't carry chainsaws in their pants. Firearms certainly require a much higher degree of respect than other tools, but if you know what you are doing, there is nothing to worry about.

As for classes, they are hit and miss. Make sure it concentrates on good fundamentals and what defensive shooting is. If you wife decides to carry a small pistol in her purse, she needs to go to the range once a month and practice drawing that pistol from the purse and making well aimed shots. Another solution (albeit an expensive one) is to buy her a Taser X-26 for her purse and a Glock pistol for practice. Both have very similar ergonomics and 9mm rounds are far cheaper than X-26 cartridges. A couple of rides on the Taser will deter anyone except the extremely large.

For the most part, especially in home defense, a firearm is a fantastic deterrence weapons ranked only behind the light switch. Since your apartment is only one bedroom, the best defense is having the ability to turn on the lights in the rest of your apartment from the bedroom and yelling "Hello?". Beyond that, the incorporation of a firearm into the scenario is as simple as sitting on your bed and waiting for the intruder to come through the door. If he doesn't and just walks off with your TV, that's what insurance is for. If he does, he's threatening you directly, which means he bought himself a ticket for an extended dirt nap. Obviously one needs to be very aware of the local laws with regards to intruders, but I'd rather sit in front of a grand jury than watch my wife get raped.

 

Can anybody recommend a cheap holosight/red dot sight for an AR-15?

I can't really spring for an EoTech or Aimpoint right now. I'm looking for something that's decently rugged and will hold it's zero. I use the gun for mostly playing. I don't hunt with it and it's not my home defense weapon.

Thanks.

 

What makes EoTech's and Aimpoints more expensive is that they are "decently rugged" and hold their zeros, while others do not.

If you use it as a play gun, play with the iron sights until you have enough money to buy the optic you really want later on. I know that's not what you want to hear, but it is the best course of action in my opinion.