Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 27 Jul 2005 12:54:17 -0700, jim rozen wrote:
Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

You should know that the guy who runs thegunzone.com has, well,
let's just say his idea of a cite to back up his site's comments, are to
cite his site's comments.

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

I'd look for someone other than Dean to say that before I believed it.
Ask him for a cite, see what he provides. If past history follows,
it'll be a link to his own statements.

jim rozen wrote:

Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

Jim


We used to ship arms to IRAQ - to hold back IRAN. But it was part
of the cold war - the Soviets were IRAQ then switched to IRAN when
we did the reverse. Things changed after a few years of more issues.

Martin

--
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On 27 Jul 2005 12:54:17 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

Jim

We shipped a few to the Mojahadeen. Along with several thousand
Stinger Anti-Aircraft missiles, which they used to knock down Soviet
helicopters quite handily. A number of the Stingers are still missing
btw, though the US made a very concerted effort to buy most of them
back after the war.

Gunner

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli

In article , Gunner says...

On 27 Jul 2005 12:54:17 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

Jim

We shipped a few to the Mojahadeen. Along with several thousand
Stinger Anti-Aircraft missiles, which they used to knock down Soviet
helicopters quite handily. A number of the Stingers are still missing
btw, though the US made a very concerted effort to buy most of them
back after the war.

Right, but are barrett's claims about that city accurate?

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Gunner
says...

On 27 Jul 2005 12:54:17 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

Jim

We shipped a few to the Mojahadeen. Along with several thousand
Stinger Anti-Aircraft missiles, which they used to knock down Soviet
helicopters quite handily. A number of the Stingers are still missing
btw, though the US made a very concerted effort to buy most of them
back after the war.

Right, but are barrett's claims about that city accurate?

Jim


If you mean about LA . Yes they are true. The rifle he writes about has
since been retrieved by the LA Police, un-repaired. Ronnie has also
wrote that he will not do business with any govt. agency in CA while
this unconstitutional law is in effect.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

In article , Steve W. says...

If you mean about LA . Yes they are true. The rifle he writes about has
since been retrieved by the LA Police, un-repaired. Ronnie has also
wrote that he will not do business with any govt. agency in CA while
this unconstitutional law is in effect.

Maybe some of the pin-heads will see the light. I doubt it though.

Too bad about the folks who worked for the city (and state) who
relied on those firearms.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 28 Jul 2005 11:45:31 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Steve W. says...

If you mean about LA . Yes they are true. The rifle he writes about has
since been retrieved by the LA Police, un-repaired. Ronnie has also
wrote that he will not do business with any govt. agency in CA while
this unconstitutional law is in effect.

Maybe some of the pin-heads will see the light. I doubt it though.

Too bad about the folks who worked for the city (and state) who
relied on those firearms.

Jim
I am pretty liberal. But it seems to me that the 2nd ammendment does
allow ownership of this particular rifle. I support ALL the
ammendments. That said, I still think CA is nuts. Especially since
these types of weapons are not likely to be purchased by the typical
person who would use a gun or rifle in a crime. And if someone was
truly bent on sniping at people there are lots of ways this type of
rifle could be purchased. I have a customer who placed top a couple
times in the last couple years shooting a 50 caliber custom rifle at
1000 yards. He and his other competitors certainly have no trouble
buying their big fancy guns.
ERS

snip
That said, I still think CA is nuts. Especially since
these types of weapons are not likely to be purchased by the typical
person who would use a gun or rifle in a crime.
snip
first we get the mean loooking guns banned [AKA assault rifles]
then we get the big guns banned ... first 0.500 the 0.490, etc.
then we get the small guns banned ...
for an Amerika as safe as Australia and England

In article , Eric R Snow says...

Too bad about the folks who worked for the city (and state) who
relied on those firearms.

I am pretty liberal. But it seems to me that the 2nd ammendment does
allow ownership of this particular rifle. I support ALL the
ammendments. That said, I still think CA is nuts. Especially since
these types of weapons are not likely to be purchased by the typical
person who would use a gun or rifle in a crime. And if someone was
truly bent on sniping at people there are lots of ways this type of
rifle could be purchased. I have a customer who placed top a couple
times in the last couple years shooting a 50 caliber custom rifle at
1000 yards. He and his other competitors certainly have no trouble
buying their big fancy guns.

Gunner puts me at 'slightly to the right of kennedy' on his
liberalometer. The fact that I enjoy shooting is sort of
immaterial on this barrett issue - it just seems dumb to me
that LA should purchase the tools from this guy, and then
turn around and villify him for political brownie points.

He's right to tell them to get stuffed, IMO.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:53:44 -0400, the opaque "Steve W."
clearly wrote:

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

If you mean about LA . Yes they are true. The rifle he writes about has
since been retrieved by the LA Police, un-repaired. Ronnie has also
wrote that he will not do business with any govt. agency in CA while
this unconstitutional law is in effect.

1 Atta Boy goes to Barrett for his stance on that.
And I hope the LA DA perse^H^H^H^Hrosecutes the council members
for their illegal possession of the gun. Instant karma, wot?


--

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things
over and over and over again for the truth to sink in,
to kind of catapult the propaganda."

G.W. Bush
Greece, N.Y., May 24, 2005

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Steve W. says...

If you mean about LA . Yes they are true. The rifle he writes about
has
since been retrieved by the LA Police, un-repaired. Ronnie has also
wrote that he will not do business with any govt. agency in CA while
this unconstitutional law is in effect.

Maybe some of the pin-heads will see the light. I doubt it though.

Too bad about the folks who worked for the city (and state) who
relied on those firearms.

Jim



I don't feel bad for them at all. It was the LA police chief and thier
officers who pushed for the ban and were interviewed about how "bad"
these guns are. Real dumb to bite the hand that feeds you. I don't think
any of them will see the light, The LA chief has been asked repeatedly
about it and he states that the law is a "good thing because it will
keep these destructive rifles out of the hands of terrorists". The
problem is terrorists don't use them. They tend to use AKs and other
already illegal FULL-AUTO weapons. Those have been covered by federal
law since the 60s. And by other laws since the 30s.

The things I really love it the crap about how the .50 can be used to
shoot down airplanes. They then bring out some armor and show just how
"bad" the .50 is without mentioning that a 22 can penetrate the aluminum
skin on a plane. Or the fact that they would have to hit an engine or
kill the flight crew to actually cause a problem. Even then the plane
can still fly and land because of the redundant systems.

Steve W.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

In article , jim rozen says...

Gunner puts me at 'slightly to the right of kennedy' on his
liberalometer.

Sorry, that should have been 'left' there.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 28 Jul 2005 07:35:37 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

On 27 Jul 2005 12:54:17 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

Jim

We shipped a few to the Mojahadeen. Along with several thousand
Stinger Anti-Aircraft missiles, which they used to knock down Soviet
helicopters quite handily. A number of the Stingers are still missing
btw, though the US made a very concerted effort to buy most of them
back after the war.

Right, but are barrett's claims about that city accurate?

Jim

About LA? Yes, indeed. Very accurate.

Gunner

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli

On 28 Jul 2005 14:13:48 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Eric R Snow says...

Too bad about the folks who worked for the city (and state) who
relied on those firearms.

I am pretty liberal. But it seems to me that the 2nd ammendment does
allow ownership of this particular rifle. I support ALL the
ammendments. That said, I still think CA is nuts. Especially since
these types of weapons are not likely to be purchased by the typical
person who would use a gun or rifle in a crime. And if someone was
truly bent on sniping at people there are lots of ways this type of
rifle could be purchased. I have a customer who placed top a couple
times in the last couple years shooting a 50 caliber custom rifle at
1000 yards. He and his other competitors certainly have no trouble
buying their big fancy guns.

Gunner puts me at 'slightly to the right of kennedy' on his
liberalometer.

Joe or JFK? Yu are way to the right of Teddy the K.


The fact that I enjoy shooting is sort of
immaterial on this barrett issue - it just seems dumb to me
that LA should purchase the tools from this guy, and then
turn around and villify him for political brownie points.

Welcome to Liberal Politics.

He's right to tell them to get stuffed, IMO.

Jim

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli

Here is the model that the Canadian forces are using. There was a piece
on a CBC news program of a team in Afganistan picking off targets at
over a mile.
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-tac50.htm

jim rozen wrote:
Interesting link.

http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.

Jim

In article , Gunner says...

Welcome to Liberal Politics.

There is no requirement that brains be checked at the door.
I prefer to think this is an example of stupid politics
rather than liberal politics. Sounds to me like the
cheif was handed a 'script' and told that his job depended
on how convincingly he read the lines.

A more ethical person would have tossed the script in the
trash.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:39:49 +0100, Peter Wiley
wrote:

In article , F. George
McDuffee wrote:

snip
That said, I still think CA is nuts. Especially since
these types of weapons are not likely to be purchased by the typical
person who would use a gun or rifle in a crime.
snip
first we get the mean loooking guns banned [AKA assault rifles]
then we get the big guns banned ... first 0.500 the 0.490, etc.
then we get the small guns banned ...
for an Amerika as safe as Australia and England

................. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia. Ooooops, there's that ignorance factor again.

PDW

So what happened to all the self loaders, the lever actions and the
pump guns? And the handguns?


"The entire population of Great Britain has been declared insane by
their government. It is believed that should any one of them come in
possession of a firearm, he will immediately start to foam at the
mouth and begin kiling children at the nearest school. The proof of
their insanity is that they actually believe this."
-- someone in misc.survivalism

jim rozen wrote:
: Interesting link.

: http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

: I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.
--Well the good news there is that it's been out-evolved by the
new 20mm rifles, heh.

--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Just another fart in
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : the Elevator of Life...
http://www.nmpproducts.com/intro.htm
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---

Peter Wiley wrote:

.. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia.

For now, until the next nutcase shoots some more kids with a
old Stevens .22RF singleshot.

Then watch those get turned over and turned to rebar just like
the pump and autoloaders were- and no more of those nasty
rifles out there to hurt people. Then everyone would be safe.

Whoops!

I'd then watch out for a 'pointed stick' licensing scheme.

Too bad, leaves more of these
http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles/rifles_82A1.htm

For us non-Australian and Californians to buy.

**
mike
**

In article , F. George
McDuffee wrote:

snip
That said, I still think CA is nuts. Especially since
these types of weapons are not likely to be purchased by the typical
person who would use a gun or rifle in a crime.
snip
first we get the mean loooking guns banned [AKA assault rifles]
then we get the big guns banned ... first 0.500 the 0.490, etc.
then we get the small guns banned ...
for an Amerika as safe as Australia and England

.................. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia. Ooooops, there's that ignorance factor again.

PDW

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , F. George
McDuffee wrote:

snip
That said, I still think CA is nuts. Especially since
these types of weapons are not likely to be purchased by the
typical
person who would use a gun or rifle in a crime.
snip
first we get the mean loooking guns banned [AKA assault rifles]
then we get the big guns banned ... first 0.500 the 0.490, etc.
then we get the small guns banned ...
for an Amerika as safe as Australia and England

................. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia. Ooooops, there's that ignorance factor
again.

PDW

And I have no problems buying ANY firearm type in the US. NO
restrictions in action type.
Ignorance isn't a factor, Truth is however.





----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles/rifles_95.htm

Is my toy...

Sits next to 3 ARs, 1 Mini-14, one Rem 700 in 30.06, 1 Rem X in .308
1 Century G3 clone. (nice gun so far), 1 Rem 597, 1 Ruger 10-22 with all
the toys
3 Garands (one original all numbers matching ,2 shooters) and a few
different Mausers.
2 SKS and two AK clones.
Plus a few handguns and other accessories. Plus at least 500 rounds for
each.

--
Steve W.


"mike" wrote in message
oups.com...
Peter Wiley wrote:

.. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia.

For now, until the next nutcase shoots some more kids with a
old Stevens .22RF singleshot.

Then watch those get turned over and turned to rebar just like
the pump and autoloaders were- and no more of those nasty
rifles out there to hurt people. Then everyone would be safe.

Whoops!

I'd then watch out for a 'pointed stick' licensing scheme.

Too bad, leaves more of these
http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles/rifles_82A1.htm

For us non-Australian and Californians to buy.

**
mike
**





----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:05:02 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles/rifles_95.htm

Is my toy...

Sits next to 3 ARs, 1 Mini-14, one Rem 700 in 30.06, 1 Rem X in .308
1 Century G3 clone. (nice gun so far), 1 Rem 597, 1 Ruger 10-22 with all
the toys
3 Garands (one original all numbers matching ,2 shooters) and a few
different Mausers.
2 SKS and two AK clones.
Plus a few handguns and other accessories. Plus at least 500 rounds for
each.


Not bad for an amateur.

Gunner

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:56:09 GMT, steamer wrote:

jim rozen wrote:
: Interesting link.

: http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

: I was unaware that our government supplied them to AQ btw.
--Well the good news there is that it's been out-evolved by the
new 20mm rifles, heh.

Which have been illegal since 1968

Gunner

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli

..

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:05:02 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles/rifles_95.htm

Is my toy...

Sits next to 3 ARs, 1 Mini-14, one Rem 700 in 30.06, 1 Rem X in .308
1 Century G3 clone. (nice gun so far), 1 Rem 597, 1 Ruger 10-22 with
all
the toys
3 Garands (one original all numbers matching ,2 shooters) and a few
different Mausers.
2 SKS and two AK clones.
Plus a few handguns and other accessories. Plus at least 500 rounds
for
each.


Not bad for an amateur.

Gunner

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli


That is just the ones stored in the bedroom locker....
Plan on going out for some more range play tomorrow. Have some old ammo
that I want to reload...


Steve W.

Pacifism - The theory that if they'd fed
Jeffrey Dahmer enough human flesh,
he'd have become a vegan.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:39:49 +0100, Peter Wiley wrote:

................. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia. Ooooops, there's that ignorance factor again.

Not in Victoria I hope, th elatest proposal there is to ban an rifle, of
any sort that *potentially* could take a large magazine. This would include
the venerable Lee Enfield, of which there are a few left in Oz.
As I understand the rules there now, you also can't own a gun unless you
have somewhere to shoot it, with written owners permission when you get
your license. Can't just have a gun to go shooting with mates or on a
farmers land.
I could earn more money in Oz than here, but it is one of the main reasons
I am staying in New Zealand with my un-PC collection of baby-killers.
Geoff

On 30 Jul 2005 05:03:13 -0500, Geoff M
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:39:49 +0100, Peter Wiley wrote:

................. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia. Ooooops, there's that ignorance factor again.

Not in Victoria I hope, th elatest proposal there is to ban an rifle, of
any sort that *potentially* could take a large magazine. This would include
the venerable Lee Enfield, of which there are a few left in Oz.
As I understand the rules there now, you also can't own a gun unless you
have somewhere to shoot it, with written owners permission when you get
your license. Can't just have a gun to go shooting with mates or on a
farmers land.
I could earn more money in Oz than here, but it is one of the main reasons
I am staying in New Zealand with my un-PC collection of baby-killers.
Geoff

As I recall..silencers are legal in NZ too.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

Fortunately these days I live in Tasmania. I could tell you some of the
loopholes in the laws here, but why bother...

Broadly correct about needing a place to shoot, tho a rifle range will
do provided you do 6 (IIRC) attendances per year. I think the laws are
stupid and completely unproductive but when has that ever deterred
politicians? If it doesn't work, you double the dose and try again.
Since I own a 600 acre property I'm relatively unaffected regardless.

Gunner, some 200K AK-type guns alone were imported into Australia by
one distributor. There were a total of approx 500K firearms of all
types surrendered, mostly shotguns & 22RF semiautos. Certainly nothing
like 200K AK-type semiautos surrendered, leaving aside all those other
seimauto Rugers and the like. Not real hard to do the math and come to
the conclusion that there's a hell of a lot of firearms unaccounted
for. Real sad, that.

As to the poster who said he could own anything he liked - you can't.
You can own a wider range of firearms without restriction, but that's
not the same thing. And that's the end of my interest in this thread.

PDW

In article , Geoff M
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:39:49 +0100, Peter Wiley wrote:

................. except I don't have any problems getting bolt action
rifles here in Australia. Ooooops, there's that ignorance factor again.

Not in Victoria I hope, th elatest proposal there is to ban an rifle, of
any sort that *potentially* could take a large magazine. This would include
the venerable Lee Enfield, of which there are a few left in Oz.
As I understand the rules there now, you also can't own a gun unless you
have somewhere to shoot it, with written owners permission when you get
your license. Can't just have a gun to go shooting with mates or on a
farmers land.
I could earn more money in Oz than here, but it is one of the main reasons
I am staying in New Zealand with my un-PC collection of baby-killers.
Geoff