|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Oct 26, 2014 22:15:38 GMT 1
Well I made and assumption and an ass out of myself...
|
|
|
Post by Lily Ariel Linders on Oct 26, 2014 22:22:12 GMT 1
Aw, that's OK... I have to admit, I'm not sure what the US version of our Members of Parliament would be - would the US equivalent of Canada's MPs be the US Senators? So I might have made the same mistake if I was in your position - especially since you are in the US Military, so when you hear the initials MP, your first thought is probably Military Police...
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Oct 26, 2014 23:15:24 GMT 1
Well I made and assumption and an ass out of myself... We've all been there. I doubt Military Police would be present on the Hill. It's not a base after all. I will say that the Sergeant at Arms is not armed in his day to day, but as he is usually in his office when not performing his ceremonial role so his sidearm was very close at hand. A separate article I had read indicated that this was the first time he had fired his sidearm in the line of duty. I believe the Prime Minister's security detail was actually absent from that room as he was conducting a private meeting with his party and his security was not invited. After this close brush I seriously doubt he will see that kind of privacy again. He likes his secrets but that simply cannot be allowed. I actually thought it was fairly badass that these mostly older and middle age civilian representatives were arming themselves as best they could against an unknown threat.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Oct 27, 2014 0:32:52 GMT 1
In that light, I agree. It takes serious courage to do that kind of thing.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Nov 26, 2014 1:50:49 GMT 1
Just gently checking. I never know in this part of the site. No real sign at least that the attack was an organized. the attacker (there was only one after all) was pissed that he was being denied a passport to fly to Syria (presumably to fight for ISIS)got one of the very worst types of rifles for a modern gunfight (a Remington 30.30) and went apeshit in our nation's capital until he was put down. No big plan, no big agenda, no sense and no expectation of survival. Sadly a soldier died. Just as bad, it looks like this will be used as an excuse to degrade our privacy rights even further in Canada. There is little enough here stopping them from monitoring us, now there will be less. Heil Harper. Bit of a necropost, but a lever-action .30-30 is one hell of a general purpose rifle, even in the modern age. The ammunition is ballistically similar to the 7.32x39 Soviet round used in the AK-47 and a bit of practice yields results similar to this: Now the shooter in the video is using .45 Long Colt rounds which are weaker than a .30-30 (they're the same round used in the old Colt Peacemaker revolvers) and he probably downloaded the powder charge so that they would have just enough oomph to ring the steel targets, but the mechanics are the same. If shooting past 100 meters or so isn't a concern of mine and semi-automatic weapons aren't available, I'd feel more than adequately armed with a .30-30 lever action rifle. ETA: the way he's shooting the shotgun and wheelguns are anachronistic. In real life, that shotgun would have been fully loaded and fed from the tube magazine instead of that single fire (not allowed under the rules of that sport and pump action shotguns didn't exist until the very end of the cowboy days) and the Colt Peacemaker was designed for shooting one-handed. The grip of the Peacemaker was designed to roll in the hand during recoil to allow the shooting hand thumb easier access to cock the hammer for the next round.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Nov 26, 2014 2:14:50 GMT 1
While the above is true, I need to point out that the gun is not something for a novice. A failure to fully engage the lever can result in the next shell not loading at best, or a jam at worst. The need to reload one shell at a time makes it necessary to have strong cover and someone watching your ass as well. It is a popular choice for hunting in the bush, I would not want it for anything more serious.
Getting hit in the torso by one of those rounds is pretty much a death sentence though so I won't argue it's deadliness.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Nov 26, 2014 2:46:04 GMT 1
Yeah, a lever gun has its weaknesses and newer weapons technology make it obsolete, but it's still more than workable. Also consider that modern lever guns can be chambered in the .45-70 Springfield round (standard issue for the US Army from the Civil War until the Spanish-American war. I know several professional game guides (men and women who take people on chartered hunts) in grizzly bear and moose territory; most of them use a .45-70 lever gun with a few who use the .375 H&H in a bolt action which is the bare minimum for African Dangerous Game hunts (rhino, elephant, etc, and yes those hunts are still legal but VERY tightly restricted for many reasons). Also, in several parts of the U.S. (like California or New York), a lever gun is more socially acceptable. Since I don't have too much control as to where I'll be stationed, I made it a point to learn how to work a lever gun and a pump action shotgun to a modicum of proficiency along with revolvers (quitting before I get too far into the gun politics realm). I won't disagree that older style actions have been surpassed by technology, but one shouldn't discount the effectiveness of any repeating arm (or even a musket-style weapon which I'm also familiar with and can reliably make 3-4 shots in a minute on an 8 inch target at 150 meters with such a firearm) when it comes to how deadly they are: the main factor that changes is one's tactics. An unscientific test of .45-70 (scroll to the end). www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-4-miscellaneous-rounds-meet-the-box-o-truth/ETA: one other consideration is a serviceable lever or pump gun is much less expensive than a semi-auto which makes them more common in the hands of the average firearms owner.
|
|