Eplaya Camp 2005

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:51 pm

sparkletarte wrote:Canadians are not well armed. We are polite.

Back in the day, when guns were brought to BM, there's no! way! I ever would have gone. It's freaky enough going to the US with the amount of people that have guns and all the corner stores that sell them, let alone some big fucking party/camping trip in the desert. Great drunk people and guns in the desert. Why the hell would someone bring or want to bring a gun anyways? Anyone who did? What was your reason?

self protection while traveling alone 2500 each way to the desert was my reason.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:53 pm

paps wrote:girl with bb gun
riding hood hurt (some guy died)
i cried my eyes out

I heard that some guy was shot by a girls' gee-gaws
during critical tits once.

Right in the eye.

He was a Ranger, and everything (they said).

Just like Robbin Hood.

These things are sad.

I suggest we try and get over it, and move on.

cites?

this seems like heresay to me.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:55 pm

Simply Joel wrote:i don't like toy guns.
i don't let children play with guns around me.
i don't let anyone point the muzzle of a gun, toy or otherwise at me.
i will knock a gun out of your hand if within my power, if you point a gun, toy or otherwise at someone.

guns are not playthings.
guns are tools.
all guns are loaded until cleared... and if handing a gun to somebody else, clear it before handing it over, and expect them to check it again.

i'd have a hard time standing still while someone pointed a weapon, toy or otherwise at me.

the pen is mightier than the sword.

i've always found it to be a strange feeling. you know, the statistics about accidental gun deaths whiz through your brain. guns always look different from that angle.

maybe i'm just quirky. when it's someone i'm very close with, i'll tell them to knock it off. if it's someone i like and am not close with, i've told them to shoot. if i know they want to shoot, then it's, well, a crap shoot as far as tactics.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 2:00 pm

See, it's so weird seeing all the gun debates.
Growing up in the desert, you don't really think of it. You walk into someone's living room and if you seen a rifle in the corner- you didn't really think much about it. Everyone had guns, it wasn't a big deal. Did anyone use them against each other? No. Would they? If threatened in their abode, sure.

When you talk to country folks that live on farms (Colorado buddies when I lived there), they didn't think much about guns either. I remember cruising out in the fields with my buddy Jim around 11 yrs old. He would strap a 22 long pistol to his belt before we would hop on the sandrail. Shooting vermin if he seen them.

Then when I starting living in bigger cities, I seen two different versions of 'gun awareness'. The druggie/thuggie kids that couldn't shoot for shit, thinking they were hot shit for having them. And the other side that figures a gun automatically meant dead people falling all around. The first time I heard about drive by shootnigs, I remember thinking "How they hell are you going to hit anyone like that? Why not a couple Molitof cocktails through the windows and 3-4 pump shotguns on both sides of the house for when they come out?"

I see a gun as a tool, harmless until used. And I see an unarmed populace as a defenseless populace against the one group they should be worried most about- their own government.

blyslv · Post by **blyslv** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 3:38 pm

Guns are a tool, a tool that when used as intended kills. To me, that puts them into a category unto themselves. So I don't own one. I've traveled a lot here and abroad, lived in some pretty sketchy city neighborhoods (14 + U and Malcolm X Park in DC) and way out in the boonies. I have never ever felt even remotely that a gun would have made me safer.

YMMV ect ect ect.

But I fear our govt. and their intentions. It is hard to know, however, how even something like a "street sweeper" (which I think is actually illegal) would help against a SWAT team come to arrest me.

In some ways the gun debate is kind of like most debates about religion. THere's a lot of true believers on both sides of the question.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 3:40 pm

Rob the Wop wrote:you didn't really think much about it. Everyone had guns, it wasn't a big deal.

My grandfather was a marksman, shot only for sport. One of his competitons was to line up match-sticks on a log and see who could light the most (requires you to just graze the top without breaking the stick). His other was to see who would be first in driving a nail into a tree without reloading.

He seldom lost.

Rural families are that way, I had my fill of them. Had an uncle who used to be the Deputy under the Sheriff of Oklahoma City... an asshole drunk who was eventually kicked out (beaten out actually) of the family for beating my Aunt.

Unfortunately he was the first to teach me how to shoot somewhere around 10 years old by putting his issued .38 in my hands and just telling me to point and pull the trigger. I am surprised the indention in my forehead healed, he could not stop laughing.

His idea of teaching his son how to swim was throwing him into the deep end and yelling "SWIM!"

To each his own.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 3:57 pm

blyslv wrote: But I fear our govt. and their intentions. It is hard to know, however, how even something like a "street sweeper" (which I think is actually illegal) would help against a SWAT team come to arrest me.

Then simply give up, you can never face our governement and win. If they decide to 'detain' your ethnic group, allow them. If they decide to beat those on your street, make sure to take no action. When they at last come for you, look around and ask why no one will help you.

Never forget that the population outnumbers the goverment. A single individual can be singled out, but any large group could do the same to that individual. We outnumber the armed forces something like 150 to 1. If one bullet in a hundred fired by a citizen worked, we would win. History has proven repeatedly that unarmed populaces are more easily oppressed, it's why laws have been enacted to disarm specific groups before serious oppression starts. Better to have the tool and hope to never use it, than not have the tool when you find out you need it IMO.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:01 pm

Rob the Wop wrote:We outnumber the armed forces something like 150 to 1. If one bullet in a hundred fired by a citizen worked, we would win.

That math usually fails when facing tanks, cluster fragmentation bombs, and Apache assault helicopters.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:04 pm

spectabillis wrote:
Rob the Wop wrote:We outnumber the armed forces something like 150 to 1. If one bullet in a hundred fired by a citizen worked, we would win.
That math usually fails when facing tanks, cluster fragmentation bombs, and Apache assault helicopters.

whatcha talkin' about, spectabillis?
AK47s are so effective!

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:08 pm

spectabillis wrote:
Rob the Wop wrote:We outnumber the armed forces something like 150 to 1. If one bullet in a hundred fired by a citizen worked, we would win.
That math usually fails when facing tanks, cluster fragmentation bombs, and Apache assault helicopters.

The logistics usually fail when you attack your own supply lines and fire on your own citizenry. And how effective have these been on Iraqi insurgents? Hint: Our founding fathers were guerrilla fighters.

Again, its personal choice. Are you advocating simply giving up if our government descends into tyranny, or making an effort to fight?

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:11 pm

Rob the Wop wrote: Are you advocating simply giving up if our government descends into tyranny, or making an effort to fight?

Nah... I just excite others to sacrifice themselves while I smoke a fatty on a deserted beach.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:14 pm

spectabillis wrote:
Rob the Wop wrote: Are you advocating simply giving up if our government descends into tyranny, or making an effort to fight?
Nah... I just excite others to sacrifice themselves while I smoke a fatty on a deserted beach.

Ahhh, I see you served with our president.

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:14 pm

Two things:

Simply Joel wrote:
i don't like toy guns.
i don't let children play with guns around me.
i don't let anyone point the muzzle of a gun, toy or otherwise at me.
i will knock a gun out of your hand if within my power, if you point a gun, toy or otherwise at someone.

guns are not playthings.
guns are tools.
all guns are loaded until cleared... and if handing a gun to somebody else, clear it before handing it over, and expect them to check it again.

i'd have a hard time standing still while someone pointed a weapon, toy or otherwise at me.

the pen is mightier than the sword.

This is me, 100%. Ask my kids...

Another thing:

AK47s are so effective!

Yes they are. Ask anyone who has been in combat against them.

Having said all that, I don't own guns for personal reasons, but I agree with Rob, and I think that we should stock up on anything that will make us just as powerful as the Government Thugs

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:16 pm

Rob the Wop wrote: Ahhh, I see you served with our president.

Hey now, no reason to insult pa.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:17 pm

against human flesh, sure the AK is effective. against anything armoured it really doesn't seem to be. plus, maybe i'm just making this up (?) but i seem to remember hearing they are less accurate than, say an m16.

they are cheaper than m16s, also, but the bullets are more expenisve, meaning that for most who would have need of an AK47, they cannot waste shot.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:18 pm

samtzu wrote:
AK47s are so effective!
Yes they are. Ask anyone who has been in combat against them.

Russian trash... mine jammed when trying to pick off a couple of marines last week.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:22 pm

Rian Jackson wrote:against human flesh, sure the AK is effective. against anything armoured it really doesn't seem to be. plus, maybe i'm just making this up (?) but i seem to remember hearing they are less accurate than, say an m16.

they are cheaper than m16s, also, but the bullets are more expenisve, meaning that for most who would have need of an AK47, they cannot waste shot.

Are there laws against Palestinians owning firearms? Its a pretty standard tactic and I was wondering if Isreal had applied it. If so, that's another fucked up thing to tag onto the Isrealis.

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:25 pm

spectabillis wrote:
samtzu wrote:
AK47s are so effective!
Yes they are. Ask anyone who has been in combat against them.
Russian trash... mine jammed when trying to pick off a couple of marines last week.

Try the Czech's, they're better. And the Chinese make a great version, too.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:29 pm

Rob the Wop wrote:
Rian Jackson wrote:against human flesh, sure the AK is effective. against anything armoured it really doesn't seem to be. plus, maybe i'm just making this up (?) but i seem to remember hearing they are less accurate than, say an m16.

they are cheaper than m16s, also, but the bullets are more expenisve, meaning that for most who would have need of an AK47, they cannot waste shot.
Are there laws against Palestinians owning firearms? Its a pretty standard tactic and I was wondering if Isreal had applied it. If so, that's another fucked up thing to tag onto the Isrealis.

i prefer, for fucked up things, the requirement that Palestinians get a constitution prior to independence even though israel lacks one because they couldn't reconcile democracy and racism.

i'm not sure the exact rules: i believe at one point they gave/sold/ whatever arms to the security forces. since then they've killed or jailed most of them.

a lot of Palestinian arms came from the black market - buy it off of a soldier for, i believe, 16000 NIS until they made some new laws to stop this from happening.

really though, they fidn you with a firearm you'll be killed or jailed. no matter what the law is, that's sort of the defacto reality...

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 5:24 pm

if our government descends into tyranny

if?

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:24 pm

"The purpose and function of government is not to preside over change but to
prevent change. By political methods when unavoidable, by violence when
convenient." --Edward Abbey

sparkletarte · Post by **sparkletarte** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:49 pm

I have no problem with people having guns when used for hunting or as part of their job. I do have a problem with people carrying them around 'just because' or 'just in case they have to threaten or kill a person'. I also enjoy my cap gun quite a bit and had fun shooting people on Hallowe'en.

And do you really think that 'if' the government descends in tyranny your shot gun or pistol is going to be very effective against what the army packs? Doubt it. If you think you need to protect yourself from your government, well, what the hell are you electing them for?

Silver 2 · Post by **Silver 2** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:55 pm

No one has made armor that any standard issue weapon can take out in over 60 years. At the beginning of WWII just about all the tanks had thin side armor that a .50 cal (or mm equivilent) could penertrate and the Russians made 'tank killing' rifles, not sure about the Germans or US.

So yes, AK's are worthless against armor.

A note, much of what we see and call AK47's are not, they are AK-74's. The AK-47's fired a 7.62 mm round and the 74's fire a 5.45 mm round. The 5.45 is pretty much the same size as the M-16 round. As for cost, here in the US there may be a penny's worth of difference in cost per round, the older ak-47 rounds when bought in bulk can be up to several cents cheaper than the .223 or 5.45. My guess is that on the world market 7.62 and 5.45's are a lot cheaper than .223 rounds.

Accuracy, AK's were designed to be made cheaply and fast and there are a lot of knock-offs out there, this does nothing for accuracy. I know of several people who have made minor alterations on their AK's and say that the accuracy with them is as good as the M-16. Neither of these weapons match the bolt action Springfield or, even older, the 30-40 Krag.

I grew up around weapons, they don't bother me one way or the other. To quote DMX from a movie my son made me see "Guns don't kill people; stupid motherfuckers with guns kill people".

I will end with this, someone who owns a handgun for home defense is a stupid motherfucker. Get a nice short .410 and load it with #4 shot.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:42 pm

sparkletarte wrote:And do you really think that 'if' the government descends in tyranny your shot gun or pistol is going to be very effective against what the army packs? Doubt it. If you think you need to protect yourself from your government, well, what the hell are you electing them for?

Yes. My 300 Winchester Magnum thinks so too. Do you know what a sniper is? Who do you think is in an Army? I was in the Navy and I can probably name off a least a dozen other posters that have military experience. If you think I am utterly incapable of effectively fighting back simply because they have a newer set of cammies and an M-16, you're sadly mistaken.

No government has lasted the test of time. And they don't elect people in a tyranny, last time I checked. If a government is taken over, and elections become a sham- what will you do? Are you trying to tell me that in this day and age, governments aren't taken over? Or look through past history and say we won't make those mistakes anymore?

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:24 pm

samtzu wrote:... And the Chinese make a great version, too.

I heard those only work against Tibetans.

Post by **AntiM** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:25 am

silver 2 wrote:

I will end with this, someone who owns a handgun for home defense is a stupid motherfucker. Get a nice short .410 and load it with #4 shot.

A few years ago, I kept a loaded shotgun under the bed. I'm often alone in the house and my niece's meth-crazed ex kept coming by the house to look for her. This was a low and viscious man who had done many evil things to many people, I honetsly feared him.

Death upsets me, especiall ystupid, useless death, and I asked myself the hard question: could I really kill someone? The firghtening answer, in this instance, was that yes, yes I could kill this guy. Not a pleasant conversation to have with oneself.

tonytohono · Post by **tonytohono** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:39 am

where the hell did all this talk of guns come up?

and on that note a change of avatar is in order.

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:47 am

How about this place for a Pre-compression?
http://www.angelfire.com/rock3/michael/Bonnieplaya.html
Only 10 miles from heli's house. And 55 minutes from the SHS.

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:57 am

sparkletarte wrote:Okay, I know this is going way of OP, but aside from a job or going hunting or target practice, which I understand, what kind of place would you take a gun that you think you might need it? Like you're going out somewhere are just might need that gun to make a point, or something ... ??? That whole train of thought completely loses me.

When on earth, just hanging out on a regular day, might you need to threaten or kill someone if you aren't a cop, security guard, ranger, etc. ? Because what are guns for if not to kill something or someone?

A few years back (in the 90s) a couple of National Forest rangers--or maybe just employees--were killed by some sort of anti-govment type in Arizona. Helitack is law enforcement and might be percieved a threat. It's tricky.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:05 am

AntiM wrote:silver 2 wrote:
I will end with this, someone who owns a handgun for home defense is a stupid motherfucker. Get a nice short .410 and load it with #4 shot.
A few years ago, I kept a loaded shotgun under the bed. I'm often alone in the house and my niece's meth-crazed ex kept coming by the house to look for her. This was a low and viscious man who had done many evil things to many people, I honetsly feared him.

Death upsets me, especiall ystupid, useless death, and I asked myself the hard question: could I really kill someone? The firghtening answer, in this instance, was that yes, yes I could kill this guy. Not a pleasant conversation to have with oneself.

i have had similar very difficult convos with myself and come to the same conclusion. i think we all have it in us. and it's important to face those questions...

mwah!