|
|
Post by demonnachos on Jul 1, 2016 20:54:46 GMT
I ponder what he would have thought if you have a sword or axe.
|
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Jul 2, 2016 6:05:52 GMT
I can't imagine how I would effectively use a sword or axe in the confines of my car. Maybe if I had a convertible. Or better yet, a motorcycle. Actually, that would be totally bad ass to be riding around on a steel horse with a sword on your side. If I don't have a gun available I always have a knife. My favorite carry knife is my CRKT Obake.  It's essentially a glorified shiv. It has a clever carry system that allows it to be completely out of sight but quickly accessible. We're not allowed to carry a weapon at work but I've been carrying this one for a year and nobody has ever noticed. It's not huge, but it's big enough and sharp enough to mess someone up pretty bad. If I only had this that night I might have had to use it. |
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Jul 2, 2016 6:41:24 GMT
You can stab with a sword, you know that right?  Doesn't need to be a something like a nodachi, a gladius is a sword too after all. |
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Jul 2, 2016 8:53:06 GMT
I'm not sure I'd want to be trying to stab at someone trying to grab me through the window with a sword. First it's hard to unlimber a sword in the confines of a car, even a gladius, and second that puts the blade awfully close to your face and neck as you try to poke him with it. There would be a greater danger of self inflicted injury.
|
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Jul 2, 2016 20:25:28 GMT
Not really, unless you are the wrong kind of goof. Tis no harder than punching him, but a lot shinier.
|
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Jul 2, 2016 21:17:35 GMT
I want to get an Indian next year;  The fact that I can't legally carry a loaded M1A1 paratrooper carbine in a scabbard on one of the forks is just shameful. What if I needed to put down a wounded deer? Fend off dangerous wildlife? Go all Road Warrior on some dumbass who nearly put me in the rhubarb? Those are all valid reasons to have an M1 on your bike. I agree with Word, I wouldn't want to have to fuck around with a sword if a gun was an option. Right now I've got a Mauser bayonet next to my shifter, but I've got an M5A1 Garand bayonet on the way that'll probably take it's place, and if a firearm was an option I'd take a 9mm over any knife. |
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Jul 2, 2016 21:29:03 GMT
I would prefer a sword, because I am a real man and stabbing things is what real men do (only artificial cybernetic androids prefer shooting things).
|
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Jul 2, 2016 21:50:56 GMT
Swords don't go "Ping!" after they fire 8 rounds, and no one, man or woman, can seriously say that that's not the greatest thing in the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Jul 2, 2016 21:59:45 GMT
Punching people out a care window isn't easy either. But honestly, these people are idiots. You've got a fucking car. A car! That's at least as dangerous!
|
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Jul 2, 2016 23:12:39 GMT
Having just mimicked the motion of an in-car sword jab I can assure you it isn't very difficult, for non-robots that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Jul 3, 2016 1:28:20 GMT
You have to reach out your window, hoping your sword doesn't catch on the wheel or anything else, and stab in what will almost certainly be an ineffectual fashion. Unless they're on the passenger's side, which is just more distance to cover.
|
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Jul 3, 2016 3:06:44 GMT
Throwing a sword stab is just like throwing a punch, and when you know how to do both you can generate power quite effectively even while limited in terms of space. Key is to have the point already towards the target, makes things a lot easier. americanmilitarynews.com/2016/07/california-gov-signs-flurry-of-gunpocalypse-gun-control-bills/?utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=alt&utm_source=asmdss"The bills will: — Outlaw assault rifles with a feature known as a bullet button, which allows shooters to use a small tool to quickly change magazines — Mandate background checks when a gun is loaned to someone other than a close relative of the owner — Boost penalties for filing false reports of stolen guns, a measure targeting straw purchasers who buy weapons on behalf of people prohibited from doing so — Create regulations for ammunition, including requirements that ammo sellers get a license and that purchases be screened — Ban possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, requiring people who already own them to turn them in to authorities" Had to look up "bullet button" because that just sound cartoonishly silly, and it is. It basically makes the mag release require a thin thing to push (like the reset button on older electronics), something added to bypass the ban on detachable magazines. Essentially he just made sure you can only have a fixed mag on your rifle (not sure how the M1 Garand fits into this though). You now need a background check to let your friend shoot a few rounds through your shotgun at the range apparently. No clue about that third one. You need a BG check to buy bullets now, which means anyone who isn't that far from a border will have even more incentive to just drive to Nevada and buy ammo there. So you can't even own standard AR mags anymore. I ponder how this works with fixed mags like the tub magazine of a lever-action. |
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Jul 3, 2016 3:23:11 GMT
I don't imagine the M1 would be affected, since it's limited to 8 and the magazine is fixed, it jut uses a removable en bloc clip. For things that normally use a detachable magazine and can't be reloaded through the ejection port, you'll now be fucked. It seems like it's hard enough trying to own an AR in California, but if you somehow were able to live with the ridiculous legislation and own one, now I guess you'll have to crack the receiver halves apart every time you want to reload it.
How do they want to screen ammunition purchases? Does this mean you'd have to have a background check and wait for approval every time you want to buy ammunition? Honestly, that's just shutting the gate after the horse has bolted, if someone is buying ammunition and the state doesn't want them to have it, more likely than not they already have a weapon to use it in, and they can just drive out of state to buy ammunition.
California seems to be the home of brain dead firearm legislation.
|
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Jul 3, 2016 3:27:52 GMT
I really am curious how 15 round Winchester repeater rifles fit into all this bollocks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Jul 3, 2016 3:42:17 GMT
Good question, that doesn't seem to specifically target "assault weapons", so even my Henry .22cal would probably be covered by that since it can hold 15-21rnds. It says that mags of a larger capacity have to be turned in, so I wouldn't really be surprised if that means people have to turn in magazines for lever guns that are larger than 10rnds, because I really wouldn't be surprised if they refused to correct that. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if they clarified that the 10rnd capacity only applies to vaguely defined "assault rifles". But God forbid you have an 1877 Evans Repeating Rifle, those could hold 28rnds, which is admittedly tamer than the older, rarer (and less powerful) "old model", which held 34;  |
|
Doesn't need to be a something like a nodachi, a gladius is a sword too after all.
