Do Guns Kill People or Do People Kill People?

Hmm, looks like it's based off a Makarov design - what round is it, 9mm short?

ES

 

Interesting choice. Why did you originally choose it?

It's interesting because the "Makarov clones" use a unique caliber, which is relatively scarce in the US. This is changing with the import of surplus ammuntion from East Europe, but you have to be careful, because the former Warsaw Pact ammunition is going to be corrosive and requires diligent maintenance.

The PA will definately teach you to be a more effective shooter with other models, as long as you're able to get the trigger control/nasty recoil down pat.

Even the Chinese, I think the last hold outs with the 9x18mm caliber are switching to standard 9mm, so they can readily produce/procure ammunition.

EDIT:what round is it, 9mm short?

Actually, the Makarov was designed back when NATO/ Warsaw Pact were still concerned with enemy soldiers using their own ammo against them, so the Makarov clones all use a distinct caliber. It's 1mm longer, and slightly wider than the 9mm short.

 

Guns scare me.

 

Yes its a Markov varient and uses the 9x18 mm rounds. While the ammunition may be out of production, it is the price is not bad (I believe it is comparable to 9mm--I just bought 150 rounds for about $27)

The two reasons I decided to buy it where the way it fit into my hand (most other pistols I've shot have tended to be too big to fit comfortably) and the cheap price (~$150).

I figure I'll be able to shoot with this for a while--and if I decide to make a habit of shooting--upgrade to something nicer.

 

Yeah, just be aware of the potentially corrosive primer of the ammo. (corrosive meaning that the primer has some sort of salt compound that causes pitting in gun barrels if not cleaned)

Western ammo is non-corrosive, and generally, modern ammo from the former Pact countries is now as well. Nornico, a Chinese manufacturer, is well known for still producing corrosive 9x18mm ammo.

For a smaller pistol, there is always the definitive Walther PPK in true .380 caliber (9mm short) The new Smith and Wesson M&P compact has outstanding ergonomics, and just about any standard revolver will fit better in the hand due to the fact that the bullets aren't held where one has to grip. Of course, we could always discuss the differences between single stack and double stack magazines and the like, but that would probably bore everyone else to death.

Your pistol certainly has a reputation of having snappy recoil, but I've never fired one. Obviously it wasn't too harsh...

 

Oh that's right, wasn't that round actually just called 9mm Makarov?

Didn't the PPK/S come in .22 for a while as well? Would be far cheaper to shoot .22 for a while then upgrade, IMO.

Heh, typing this thread evoked the memory of the smell of cordite...

E_S

EDIT: Single stacked FTW. I've held a Browning HP. Ugh.

 

I believe it did, and it also came in that distinctly British caliber of 7.65mm (.32 caliber to us Americans)

Wasn't James Bond's first pistol a .32 Beretta, and he had to upgrade to a 9mm short? These days, 9mm short isn't even considered to be a defensive caliber.

Single stacked FTW. I've held a Browning HP. Ugh.

I love the High Power! There is a reason why it's endured as the standard sidearm for the Commonwealth for all of these years. The Browning also used to be the standard pistol of the FBI's hostage rescue team.

 

.32? He wishes!

His first gun was a .25 Beretta. It jammed in From Russia, With Love, allowing Rosa Klebb to kick him with her poison shoes. He spends months in hospital; M irritably forces him to take the 7.65mm PPK from Maj Boothroyd.

.32! Luxury!

E_S

 

.25--->.32

Holy crap, that's even more of an anachronism than I thought.. Besides the movie, didn't the novel go into more detail about Bond's love of his Beretta, and how he tried to sneak-keep using it..

 

Didn't the PPK/S come in .22 for a while as well? Would be far cheaper to shoot .22 for a while then upgrade, IMO.

.22s feel like pea shooters.

My younger brother (he would fit the profile of your gun right's fanatic, ES) has the meanest looking .22 rifle you've ever seen (it can fire 30 rounds in 10 seconds, as fast as you can pull the trigger, really) but it has virtually no kick.

When I shoot my pistol, I want to know I successfully pulled the trigger.

 

Typically a shell flying out the top and the slide raking back and forth can achieve that effect, Flyer.

My main point was the .22, or .22M, ammunition is cheap.

Mr44, he was still using it against orders up until Dr No, when it was confiscated.

E_S

 

Bond: Cold War relic

 

Hey, look, an American guy who feels the same way about it, as me.

His name's Longwalker, he's a chief of the Dakota.

And the people say
Man, they laugh at that
And I say
Laugh if you want, but, listen...
While you're making fun, open one ear
To reality.
Let the other one be happy, and destructive.
[...]
So how can Man not save our own brothers
With creation?
We are just one massive cell
With so much energy and beauty
That the short time on the physical form
It's such a sin, a waste to tie it up in all the destruction

 

Although the posting was slightly random, it might be more effective to look at such quotes in their entirety.

If you're refering to Chief Ernie Longwalker, he's also been heavily criticized for his anti-semitic views, and is a ardent anti-capitalist.

My point is that such a quote wasn't made in reference to any kind of gun ownership, and in fact, Longwalker himself has advocated the breaking away of a large portion of the US and having it return to a purer state along racial lines. I don't think he's ever advocated that his goals be brought about by forceful change, but he isn't considered to be any kind of pacifist.

 

Random posting... schmandom posting.
'Destruction' is a frame of mind.

 

Give a man a gun, and he can kill a person.
Take the gun away, and he can STILL kill a person.

 

...but not as easily. And not everyone is physically fit/ built enough to do so without a lot of help. And not at a distance. And not as many. And maybe some people would find the visceral reality of hand-to-hand too much to handle and not kill if there were no guns. Take away guns, and you do in fact stop the ability to kill in a lot of situations.

 

yes, you'd stop a woman from killing a rapist,
a store owner from killing a robber.
etc.

 

Use an ax. Or a hammer. Or a garrote. Or a knife.

Use a spear or a bow & arrow. Drop something on a person from the top of a building.

Use a car bomb. Or crash an airplane into a building. Or work at a restaurant and put poison in the food.

Or maybe they won't.

Unless you magically can remove every gun in existance, all you do is take guns away from law abiding citizens with gun control.

 

Offhand, I'm reminded of the people in the Korean community that went down with guns to defend stores when the LAPD wasn't doing so in the LA riots

 

Not to mention the fact that the police are not legally obligated to come when you call 911 . . .

You've got to look after yourselves people.

 

That's not exactly the case, and it's interesting that you would make it, considering your self-claimed background.

 

The courts say differently.

 

Forgot Castle Rock v. Gonzales which explicitey stated there is no constitutional right to police protection and no right to sue when they don't show up when called.

 

Surfer, there is a difference between listing a bunch of court cases, and actually understanding what they mean.

I don't have time right at this second, but later tonight, we'll go over each of those cases, and you'll see a set of guidelines which emerge.

Or did they not teach this at the "10mm Super Cool Academy?"