"Jim Wilkins" on Tue, 31 Jul 2012 06:13:30
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
m...
... Thanks, very interesting. It seems that as time went by and
firearms improved as well as the quantity of ammunition available,
the "spray-n-pray" method became more prevalent.

The real goal of armies is to conquer territory. Chasing the enemy
away is as effective for that as killing them.

As me Dad would say "It isn't over till some tired private plops
down in the middle of the village square, says 'my feet hurt, when do
we eat, is there any mail, and where the heck am I?'." I'll take his
word for it.

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

"John B." wrote in message ...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 16:16:00 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


It's commonly called a "clip" because it "clips" into place...

Hardly. It is called a clip because that was a device used to load a
rifle up through WW II and out of date terms are frequently used long
after they have been replaced by more accurate or descriptive terms.


Your ability to recall arkane trivia that is unlikely to prove useful for anything other than demonstrating your ability to recall useless trivia on usenet is truly amazing.

The term "magazine" in and of itself does not necessarily imply something that can be quickly separated from the rifle for reloading...for instance, instead of having a clip; pump shotguns, lever action and most bolt action-type rifles generally will have a tubular type magazine which, for all practical purposes; is permanently attached..

And FWIW, when *I* was in the military, range officers used the term "clip" almost exclusively.

So? I was in the Service for a while and heard people using terms that
were incorrect - bullet for cartridge, motor for engine, six-by for
truck, Tug for tractor (used to tow airplanes), "Leg" or "Straight
Leg" for common infantry, and on and on. Hardly proof that any of the
terms were correct.


Except, I never made any claims about the "techinical correctness" of the term "clip" either way...

http://thesaurus.com/browse/liberal

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:31:05 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"


Maybe. I read it and Clausewitz a long time ago.

It never hurts to reread the classics now and then. It helps with
the
here and now.
Seriously
Gunner

Then you might like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Rifleman-Went-.../dp/B00086LXDE
He was the berserker raiding German trenches at midnight for fun, the
only ground soldier I've heard of who enjoyed fighting WW1.

jsw

Promptly followed by by a short Sargeant, making
some choice comments in crude language?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
...

The real goal of armies is to conquer territory. Chasing the enemy
away is as effective for that as killing them.

As me Dad would say "It isn't over till some tired private plops
down in the middle of the village square, says 'my feet hurt, when do
we eat, is there any mail, and where the heck am I?'." I'll take his
word for it.

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

"Jim Wilkins" on Tue, 31 Jul 2012 18:35:31
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:31:05 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"


Maybe. I read it and Clausewitz a long time ago.

It never hurts to reread the classics now and then. It helps with
the
here and now.
Seriously
Gunner

Then you might like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Rifleman-Went-.../dp/B00086LXDE
He was the berserker raiding German trenches at midnight for fun, the
only ground soldier I've heard of who enjoyed fighting WW1.

Might as well enjoy life, you're not getting out of it.

McBride was one of those people who recognized that there is no
"virtue" in just pussyfooting around, when it comes to war. The whole
idea is to kill them and break their stuff. Or break enough of their
stuff to make them quit.
There's a bunch of them in every war.

tschuspyotr
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

On 7/31/2012 10:27 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 06:45:56 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


"technomaNge" wrote in message
...
I used "Don't call me Sergeant, my parents were married!"

That automatically disqualifies you from the Marine Corps.

And thank God for those *******s of ours!


But their uniforms are too scarey!

On 7/31/2012 2:18 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article , says...

On 7/30/2012 4:24 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article , says...

On 7/28/2012 12:27 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 7/28/2012 1:18 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

That was obvious when he said 'the barrel would get warm' in response
to 'what would a burst of 100 rounds do to a rifle barrel'.


Since he never knows what he's blithering about, you'd think he could
Google a few things as not to look like a total idiot ALL the time. But
nope...he's even too stupid to do that.


Firing short bursts was the first thing drilled into you in the
military, so you didn't damage the barrel. Idiots see Hollywood special
effects with hundreds of rounds being fired, non stop from one weapon
and think it's real.


Have you EVER heard a real gun owner use the word "clip" for a box
magazine? THAT'S the true mark of a non gun owner. So, we all KNOW how
full of **** he is about this topic too. Typical lying libtard!

I've heard plenty of "real gun owners" use "clip" for "box magazine".
I've even heard a US Army gunnery sergeant use it.

But maybe you classify "real gun owner" as something other than "person
who owns a real gun".



Clips ARE used by the military, most rifle ammunition is packed and
shipped on clips. Maybe you herd the term used correctly. Plenty of
military people in my family and none would make the mistake of using
the term interchangeably . You can stick up for the idiot, your choice.
There are plenty of other clues that he is a liar, he trips up in
almost every thing he posts.

The sergeant was telling me not to put the box magazine in a .22 at the
time that he called it a clip, so, no, it was not a stripper clip. The
simple fact is that real experts are often far less pedantic about
nomenclature than online wannabees.



As an NRA Certified instructor, we are not allowed to use the wrong
terms, it's confusing to our students. The NRA will often have plants
in classes to evaluate instructors. In the years that I have been
teaching CCW, Basic Pistol, Basic Rifle, Basic Shotgun, In-Home Defense,
Out of home Defense, Metallic Cartridge reloading, Shotshell Reloading
and Range Officer Certification, I haven't been aware of an NRA plant
but I don't take chances with sloppy, incorrect nomenclature. I believe
your experience is an aberration, AND you should know better.

On 7/31/2012 2:57 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks on Mon, 30 Jul 2012 21:40:19 -0400 typed in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 7/30/2012 12:36 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
Have you heard of incidents where cops discharge huge numbers of
rounds with only a small percentage of hits?

"Suppressive Fire".

This shows the caualty rate per whole day when lines of standing
soldiers blasted away at each other at close range:
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/gabrmetz/table1.gif

In the American Civil War many of the weapons were as or more accurate
than modern pistols.

Thanks, very interesting. It seems that as time went by and firearms
improved as well as the quantity of ammunition available, the
"spray-n-pray" method became more prevalent.

They weren't suppose to "spray and pray", but "service the
target".
The theory is that volume of accurately delivered rifle fire is
what counts, hence the development of the box magazine and bolt
action. The Automatic Self-loading Rifle (M-1 etc) meant that
non-rifle men (the majority of soldiers) could provide that
"accurately delivered rifle fire" with less need to spend lots of time
drilling bolt manipulation into their heads.
Full auto - more of the same.

Given the necessary skills, and the time for development to their
peak, I could use a 22 short derringer pistol, because I could put
both shorts in their eye sockets. Or I could use an M-4 "carbine" and
put 3 in the center of mass, and spend my time pitching woo, or some
other way of investing my time.

--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.



Didn't Patton say that the M-1 Garrand was the best battle weapon ever
invented...or was it only in the movie?

In article , Mars@Tacks
says...

On 7/31/2012 2:18 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article , says...

On 7/30/2012 4:24 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article , says...

On 7/28/2012 12:27 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 7/28/2012 1:18 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

That was obvious when he said 'the barrel would get warm' in response
to 'what would a burst of 100 rounds do to a rifle barrel'.


Since he never knows what he's blithering about, you'd think he could
Google a few things as not to look like a total idiot ALL the time. But
nope...he's even too stupid to do that.


Firing short bursts was the first thing drilled into you in the
military, so you didn't damage the barrel. Idiots see Hollywood special
effects with hundreds of rounds being fired, non stop from one weapon
and think it's real.


Have you EVER heard a real gun owner use the word "clip" for a box
magazine? THAT'S the true mark of a non gun owner. So, we all KNOW how
full of **** he is about this topic too. Typical lying libtard!

I've heard plenty of "real gun owners" use "clip" for "box magazine".
I've even heard a US Army gunnery sergeant use it.

But maybe you classify "real gun owner" as something other than "person
who owns a real gun".



Clips ARE used by the military, most rifle ammunition is packed and
shipped on clips. Maybe you herd the term used correctly. Plenty of
military people in my family and none would make the mistake of using
the term interchangeably . You can stick up for the idiot, your choice.
There are plenty of other clues that he is a liar, he trips up in
almost every thing he posts.

The sergeant was telling me not to put the box magazine in a .22 at the
time that he called it a clip, so, no, it was not a stripper clip. The
simple fact is that real experts are often far less pedantic about
nomenclature than online wannabees.



As an NRA Certified instructor, we are not allowed to use the wrong
terms, it's confusing to our students. The NRA will often have plants
in classes to evaluate instructors. In the years that I have been
teaching CCW, Basic Pistol, Basic Rifle, Basic Shotgun, In-Home Defense,
Out of home Defense, Metallic Cartridge reloading, Shotshell Reloading
and Range Officer Certification, I haven't been aware of an NRA plant
but I don't take chances with sloppy, incorrect nomenclature. I believe
your experience is an aberration, AND you should know better.

Believe whatever you want to, it's free country.

Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks on Wed, 01 Aug 2012 13:01:11 -0400 typed in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 7/31/2012 2:57 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks on Mon, 30 Jul 2012 21:40:19 -0400 typed in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 7/30/2012 12:36 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
Have you heard of incidents where cops discharge huge numbers of
rounds with only a small percentage of hits?

"Suppressive Fire".

This shows the caualty rate per whole day when lines of standing
soldiers blasted away at each other at close range:
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/gabrmetz/table1.gif

In the American Civil War many of the weapons were as or more accurate
than modern pistols.

Thanks, very interesting. It seems that as time went by and firearms
improved as well as the quantity of ammunition available, the
"spray-n-pray" method became more prevalent.

They weren't suppose to "spray and pray", but "service the
target".
The theory is that volume of accurately delivered rifle fire is
what counts, hence the development of the box magazine and bolt
action. The Automatic Self-loading Rifle (M-1 etc) meant that
non-rifle men (the majority of soldiers) could provide that
"accurately delivered rifle fire" with less need to spend lots of time
drilling bolt manipulation into their heads.
Full auto - more of the same.

Given the necessary skills, and the time for development to their
peak, I could use a 22 short derringer pistol, because I could put
both shorts in their eye sockets. Or I could use an M-4 "carbine" and
put 3 in the center of mass, and spend my time pitching woo, or some
other way of investing my time.



Didn't Patton say that the M-1 Garrand was the best battle weapon ever
invented...or was it only in the movie?

That he did.

It was of WW1 that it was said, if Memory serves, that the Germans
brought the best target rifle, the Americans the best hunting rifle,
but the Brits the best battle rifle.



--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

"Michael A. Terrell" on Sat, 28 Jul 2012
18:21:44 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Yes. But when the overhead is what I want, I don't want to look
at the storefront. Which is the default _assumption_ that if I am
"flying" at ten feet, I must ergo want to read street numbers or
something.


That storefront was the only way I could center the map on that
intersection.

Sorry, it wasn't your situation specifically, just that Google
seems to assume that if you zoom in, you must want "street view" - but
then you can't "zoom out" just wander aimlessly on that setting.
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
...

It was of WW1 that it was said, if Memory serves, that the Germans
brought the best target rifle, the Americans the best hunting rifle,
but the Brits the best battle rifle.

The British dissed the others because their rifles looked like a
jumble of spare truck parts in comparison.
http://www.dublin-fusiliers.com/weap...ield-mkIII.gif

In article ,
says...

"Michael A. Terrell" on Sat, 28 Jul 2012
18:21:44 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Yes. But when the overhead is what I want, I don't want to look
at the storefront. Which is the default _assumption_ that if I am
"flying" at ten feet, I must ergo want to read street numbers or
something.


That storefront was the only way I could center the map on that
intersection.

Sorry, it wasn't your situation specifically, just that Google
seems to assume that if you zoom in, you must want "street view" - but
then you can't "zoom out" just wander aimlessly on that setting.

FWIW, if in Google Earth you go to "Tools/Options/Navigation you'll find
three buttons in a box headed "Navigation". One of those should set it
to work the way you want. Once you've set it it will remember the
setting.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 07:34:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"

wrote:

The British dissed the others because their rifles looked like a
jumble of spare truck parts in comparison.
http://www.dublin-fusiliers.com/weap...ield-mkIII.gif

On the other hand..if it absolutely positively needs to work each
and
every time, under just about any conditions....the Smellie does the
job
just fine....
Gunner

How many can you get off in a "Mad Minute"?

Gunner Asch on Thu, 02 Aug 2012 06:06:36 -0700
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 07:34:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
. ..

It was of WW1 that it was said, if Memory serves, that the Germans
brought the best target rifle, the Americans the best hunting rifle,
but the Brits the best battle rifle.

The British dissed the others because their rifles looked like a
jumble of spare truck parts in comparison.
http://www.dublin-fusiliers.com/weap...ield-mkIII.gif



On the other hand..if it absolutely positively needs to work each and
every time, under just about any conditions....the Smellie does the job
just fine.

Which is why I keep one tucked away in the truck at all times. I can
use it for a pry bar, or to bash a tire back on the rim, or impromtu
body work, or shoot at decent range at a target...10 times before
reloading.

While its not a hip slick and cool neato battle rifle of nylon and
stainless with aerospace parts and an over $1k price tag...it does the
job quite nicely.

Cut down the wood work, a $5 bedding job and a bit of string and one has
a superlative utility rifle that will work each time..everytime.

For less than $150 at most.

Hmmm, maybe I should look for one.

I want something I can leaved secured in the vehicle, for "just
because" reasons. Because it is part of my cultural heritage.

--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.