Indeed it is.geardog32 wrote:eww... California is a bad place to be a gun owner.
Replace "bull barrel" with "integral suppressor"D_Hall wrote:Nothing more exciting than a Ruger MkII w/ bull barrel and better than stock grips.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
Spoken like one of the video game age.twizi wrote:i am disapointed and u dont have a 50 cal sniper or 50 cal desert eagle.
To be fair, there was a brief period wherein I was considering getting into unlimited class 50 BMG shooting. We've got some 50 cals at the office that were misbehaving and I got tasked with figuring out WTF was wrong with them. As a result of that, I got interested in extreme accuracy....But that's when California started making noises about making 50 BMG illegal. I figured there wouldn't be any point if I couldn't buy ammo (and saved myself a buttload of money in the process).Ragnarok wrote:The .50 rifles are perhaps more interesting, because they do have practical uses, namely their range. Still, if you don't have a use for one...
Well, if you've got a reason to own one, then there's no issue - but I can't agree with twizi who seems to think that that someone should have a .50 rifle just for the sake of owning one.D_Hall wrote:To be fair, there was a brief period wherein I was considering getting into unlimited class 50 BMG shooting.
well then you don't know gun people. guns are collectors items and good investments too. i go to a lot of gunshows and dont see many desert eagles. there is a sense of rarity and they are very expensive also. another handgun up there is the smith and wesson 500, its huge but the grips on it are much more manageable and fit in your hand quite well. but any way guns are collectors items like anything else, and the cool thing is if you kinda have a heads up on what the government doesnt want you to have, you can buy one or more and the value goes through the roof when its outlawed.Ragnarok wrote: Well, if you've got a reason to own one, then there's no issue - but I can't agree with twizi who seems to think that that someone should have a .50 rifle just for the sake of owning one.
They're expensive, large and heavy - not things you should lumber yourself with if you don't need it.
To be honest, that would be reason enough for me to purchase oneRagnarok wrote:Well, if you've got a reason to own one, then there's no issue - but I can't agree with twizi who seems to think that that someone should have a .50 rifle just for the sake of owning one.
pride of ownership goes beyond any practical use one might have. Let's face it, unless you're a hunter or living in a tough neighbourhood and concerned about home defence, why would you actually need to own a firearm?hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
Unsurprising, given where I live. The UK, if it will allow you to buy firearms at all, demands a justification for each and every one.geardog32 wrote:Well then you don't know gun people.
Yes, but from my perspective, buying a .50 rifle just for the sake of owning a .50 rifle is madness.*Guns are collectors items and good investments too.
Couldn't have said it better myself.jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:To be honest, that would be reason enough for me to purchase one
Generally I would agree with you, but for example I have a night vision sight which I certainly have no actual need for, and only used once to try it out. It was a not inconsiderably investment, but still worth it in my book. Depends on what you've spent vis a vis available resources I suppose.Ragnarok wrote:But I don't believe in owning something for the reason of being able to say you own one.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
