Gaze Upon Me Gun Control Proponents, and DESPAIR!

Just get a bigger chunk
Harder lead and or jacketed bullets are fine in smokeless arms for a couple reasons, increased penetration with less bullet deformation and the higher bore pressure of smokeless arms need it, lest you get blowby and excessive leading of the bore, as with soft lead.

It worked fine when I dropped a sow hog @ 100ft.

 

Soft lead has worked on lots dangerous game; I used to build and hunt with black powder and have taken a lot of game with it in my earlier years. However, I have also seen reports of failures of penetration with soft lead, and for that matter of other projectiles when encountering bone mass. As I indicated, I prefer predictability in round performance, and with some applications that means penetration.
BTW, I once witnessed (in major surprise) a failure of .45/70 load hand load (with soft lead) to drop a big sow at 25 or so yards in TX.
There is always a balance in cartridge selection it the system used for the intended application; lots of variables to consider.

 

When a Lewis & Clark hunting party encountered their first grizzly it took twelve balls to bring it down and it nearly caught and killed two men in the process. It was all and more than the Indians said it was.

 

I have shot a lot of game with black powder but always had the luxury of picking my shots and shot placement. But nothing I hunted would I say was of the large game or dangerous game category.
I have traveled to the AK for decades to visit a bush pilot friend and fish while there, sometimes on a river where Grizzlies are fishing in near enough proximity as would make anyone extremely uncomfortable in any other circumstance, but they seem to generally be as absorbed in fishing as we are. We give the fur locomotives their space and R-O-W.
In the early years, walking to the fishing spots I generally carried a Ruger Redhawk in .44mag in a cross chess rig (felt like a BB gun after seeing the size of some of them) and a 12g loaded with both slug and 00 (slug first) in case of a too close encounter on the path, with the RedHawk as a last ditch option when actually fishing. After both seeing how fast they could move and once being challenged where a catch was abandoned and confiscated (with visions of being bear scat), I was never that confident either of being able to get either the shotgun or pistol in action quickly enough if charged, and even then, of retaining the wherewithal to accurately place a threat stopping shot or having the confidence when on the stream in the .44mag regardless of load. Later years, I changed guns, in more recent trips carrying a 45-70 Marlin and my Redhawk (since converted to .480). But...
Knowing a game ranger, I was convinced to augment my guns with bear spray after he told me of the stats that had been accumulated on spray vs gun. It seems bear spray, if deployed effectively, had a near 100% effectiveness while defense by gun in surprise bear encounters resulted in injury as much as 30% of the time even if a bear ultimately died of it’s wounds. This is one sport where ties aren’t ties.
Killing a bear from the comfort of stand off is one thing (I heard report of a fellow that killed one with a 9mm, but he shot from a standoff with the bear moving away), but when one is charging your target view is of the bone mass of the head/shoulders, and you want as much penetration as possible. Most I know up there carry guns loaded with heavy, hard cast bullets. Some of the rangers I know carry 10mm with hard cast loads as secondary to bear spray. Rather than guessing and hoping, I prefer knowing the stats on real world experiences to figure how to prepare.... better yet, I like the retreat option if possible, I prefer a live, let live approach.
Then, there are bears and then there are Moose that can be bigger. Not heard much on bear spray with them, but I did post a photo earlier this year sent me that showed moose remains mixed with a human’s and a shotgun. A tie.
Trust soft lead on these threats? You maybe; not me.

BTW, one of the reasons some of the rangers I encountered carry 10mm (usually loaded with hard cast) side arms (mostly Glocks) is they are light for carrying on a trail, penetrate well with the right loads, and allow fairly rapid follow up shots. With the advent of large bore .454, 460, .480, .500, revolvers, many visitors carry them thinking they are adequate protection. For some they may be, but many people don’t like the punishing practice it takes to well control them, particularly, with recoil recovery and follow up shots. They may feel protected, but...

 

Only big game animal I ever bagged was a sow hog, maybe 130 - 150 pounds. There were two of them, i stalked up behind a slough channel that was about 4 ft high. I got within a hundred ft and raised up and fired twice and missed. Only now did they even move. I knew my gun shot high so I am at the ground under the hogs center mass.

The first one I missed, ran up a ridgline and dissapeared into the woods. Hog #2 ran 15 and dropped, squealed loudly twice and went still. After a couple minutes I approach and put another shot, angling down thru the neck, there was no need as shot #1 did the job. The ball hit kinda high behind the shoulder and pierced both lungs and came to a stop, just under the hide on the far side. It was a broadside shot.

The gun was my 1858 new model army .44
A repro made by Pietta.

My bullet mold is a Lyman .451

I used what i had at the time, wheel weight lead, most of which is somewhat hardened. Not reccomened for cap n ball as it puts more stress on the loading lever to seat the ball.

Anyhow, the only deformation of the ball was the usual, short tablet shape it takes on after being fired. The loading lever essentialy swaging the ball to some degree, to seal the chambers from a chain fire. Only other marks were the grooves etched by the rifling and one mark on the nose of the ball
caused by penetrating a rib bone. I only loaded about 75% of a max powder load (you cant really overload a cap n ball as you can only stuff so much lead and powder in a cylinder) Had I put more powder, it would of gone thru and thru. But there is no need to always load to the max.
135 gr ball moving at probably 900-1,000 FPS.

 

People used to successfully hunt wild boar with bow and spears. But, there are stories of wounded hogs killing hunters as well (a king was once killed by a wounded hog). Some interesting videos of kill fails on You Tube and stories of soft bullets failing to penetrate a male hog’s shoulder shield.
While it is certainly possible to kill large game with well placed shots, there are enough stories of failures where I would prefer more certainty to both avoid losing game to only being wounded or worse, still being able to cause damage.
As I have posted a few times, I one witnessed a fellow shot 8-10 times with a 9mm center chest still manage to reach and kill the shooter. Then again, I once shot a deer through the heart with a .50 cal black powder gun run 100 + yards before dropping. With dangerous game, as I suggested, I prefer a greater margin of confidence. That’s me....I don’t bow hunt larger game nor hunt to test if a particular gun/ammo combination can kill an animal, but when I hunt, I hunt for the purpose of harvesting meat and when I carry for SD, I prefer using something I feel a high level of confidence for the purpose. That’s my thinking applicable to me.

 

You do get that the central of 'Ozymandias' is hubris right?

 

Heck, a Sten was only half a step beyond a zip gun!

 

Sounds like a Dumdum bullet.

 

Yes, that is true. Trickiest part was getting it to feed reliably with the timing of the recoil and the recoil spring/bolt weight variables with a DYI ... lots of trial and error.

 

You take from my posts what you take. If that is how you characterized it... ok by me.

 

I'm all for ending the so-called War on drugs.

 

Yes, but not I think in the way you're supposing.

The hubris is in thinking you will persist in glory throughout time, that you will never age or dim in brightness.
Hence gaze upon me and despair: I was once so high and now am so low. If I can fall, how much farther will you?
The point is look upon something that was once the grandest thing in the world and see how time has ravaged even it. Death comes for us all, its inevitable, unavoidable, inescapable etc. THAT's the point of ozymandius.

Hence: Gaze upon the piss stupid simple tech that is firearms and the commonly available methods of home manufacture, realize you're never getting genie back in the bottle and despair.

 

No, I was just thinking plain old ordinary, garden variety hubris. For example someone claiming with absolute certainty that an outcome in which they have a particular vested interest is so 'inevitable' that their position is beyond challenge.

 

Do explain how you'll put genie back in the bottle then. Tell the class all about how you think you can prevent home manufacturing.

You going to ban possession of metal generally?

 

Is it a matter of hubris? Or is it simply recognizing and acknowledging the facts of the real world for what they ultimately are?

 

And is the true hubris really thinking that they can simply handwave away the ability to make simple machines and chemical compounds?

 

Never said it could be prevented, I just disagreed with the (inductive?) inference behind the argument i.e. that the existence of digital printing means ANY attempt and firearms regulation is futile.

So in no particular order, some reasons why firearm regulation (in general) is still likely to be practical (assuming of course that at some point the citizens of the United States decide it is desirable).

1) Technology - digital printers rely on software to operate and like many modern devices from photocopiers to motor vehicles almost certainly will be programmed to send error and maintenance reports to the manufacturer. This (in theory) gives the manufacturer of the printer the capacity to how often and for what is being manufactured and in what quantities.
(Yes there will be ways to circumvent the programming but it reality its just a continuation of the status quo in global IT).
Printers can also in theory be programmed to automatically 'tag' any item they produce with an ID - and this doesn't have to be a serial number engraved on the surface.

2) Engineering - you can choose to create your own designs for firearms using non standard materials but to do this safely requires a degree of expert knowledge beyond the reach of most people. And using designs downloaded from the internet (or obtained any non-trusted source) carries the same degree of risk that purchasing 'magic' pills on-line does. So any user of non-standard firearms (backed by all the legal and engineering safeguards that come with a normal firearm) will be putting their own and other peoples lives at risk each an every time they use it. Lots of people won't want to take the risk.

3) Logistics and supply chain - you can perhaps print polymer firearms but to print your own copy of say an AR 15 will require access certain specific classes of metal powder. Purchases of which can be tagged and traced through the supply chain.

4) Chemistry - You can currently print objects using a wide range of the materials. Printing chemical compounds however is an entirely different kettle of fish. You want to print your own rifle, go ahead. For your neighbors sake however I hope they aren't home the day you start your production run of 'printed' primers or powder. That means you have to purchase your powder like every other home loader (see supply chain).

5) Legal (Intellectual property) - the owners of the patents on a particular firearm will react to the widespread counterfeit production of 'their' guns in exactly the same way any other owner of intellectual property would. Someday your local mechanic won't have to order that new part for your car, he will simply log into (Ford's?) spare part catalogue, pick the part number he needs and print it up in the workshop. He WILL however have to pay a fee to Ford for the privilege. Theft is theft regardless of the types of property involved, with the same potential civil and criminal legal outcomes. (B) Legal (Criminal) - should States pass laws banning home printed firearms (and is S&W going to object?) every time you walk out your front door with that home printed pistol in your jacket you will be putting yourself in exactly the same legal position as your average street crim walking the streets with a stolen firearm. Who needs the stress.

6) Psychology - just because they can do something doesn't mean everyone will. Example, lots of people like beer, very few home brew (which is a thing over here if not in the US). Lots of people like to shoot. Should the States ban or restrict access to certain firearms it doesn't automatically follow that there will be a mass movement to home printed firearms. Most people will simply chose to modify their shooting choices, pass the qualifications or comply with the regs etc. Same applies to point 5 above -who needs the stress of carrying an (illegal printed gun).

So that's some (but probably not all) of the reasons why I think you reasoning and argument is flawed. Yes a % of people will react to any ban by printing their own versions of whatever gun they want. That's their choice and their risk. It doesn't mean however that any attempt at law reform in the US is doomed to failure. Wanting that to be true doesn't make it true.

 

Constructing a gun from metal, is not that hard. Welder, drill, grinder and files, for the rudimentary. Throw in a milling machine and make your own AK. Hell, even a dremal in patient hands.

 

From what I've read, large bore .454, 460, .480, .500 pistols are kinda a scam. Pistol barrels are too short to burn enough powder to get good power. Those rds will F some S up in a carbine, but a pistol is basiccally just a bigger boom as much of the powder burns after the rnd leaves the barrel.

 

Yes I have a mate who was a qualified metal worker and armorer. He could have, if he wanted to make just about any firearm he wished given access to a template for measurement. The issue I guess is that printed firearms in theory take the personal skill and experience element out the equation. They are to firearm manufacturing what the microwave meal is to the culinary arts. Albeit you average microwaved lasagna isn't going to kill anyone.

 

As for the big bore pistols being scams. It depends. There are a lot of folks that tote them thinking they are adequate for the trains with teeth and hair up in the AK that have do not understand the gun/cartridge combination they carry, do not become proficient with them (punishing to practice), and are over confident of their ability to draw, and get accurate/effective shots on a charging pissed off target coming toward you. So, a self scam? Maybe.
Depending on the load and barrel length, yes, a poor match can result in massive recoil and a muzzle flipping flamethrower. I get some rounds custom made from a smith friend of mine, tested in my Gun that I leave with him. For pistols, particularly, short barrel versions, faster burning powders are needed but a balance must be drawn between the barrel length, bullet weight, powder burn speed, and chamber pressure... and then the loads have to be crimped properly to avoid crimp creep with the recoil (can lock up your cylinder).
The loads my friend makes, have 400gr hard cast bullets using LilGun or h-110 powder. Still, does throw lot of flame but probably pushes velocity btwn 1,100-1,200 FPS if memory serves from the testing.
Periodically, I think of going with a glock 10mm and hard casts ...milder recoil, more rounds, less carry weight.
I can shoot my Ruger Alaskan well, handle the recoil, and spend time at the range behind where I stay every time arrive up there, but do I feel confident it will end a fight with a train headed my way? Well, I hope to never find myself relying on that last ditch contingency over the rifle or shotgun and bear spray I carry hiking to/fro my fishing spots. And then, I probably have more confidence and experience in years of observation that the bear up there are fishing like me, more interested in fishing themselves than me and will leave me be if I give them a wide R-O-W. On the trail, we are noisy, and usually have three to four ready guns... and they seem to be as interested in avoiding us as we are of them.
But, they are awesome to see...and better at better at fishing than me.

 

Thus failing to acknowledge history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sten

The above example of firearm is a very simple design, produced during the period of world war two when there were no computers of printers available, and were designed in such a way that they could easily be produce by anyone with even mild levels of metalworking knowledge, without sophisticated tools or equipment. According to the article, its entire design used only forty seven parts, and could be produced within five hours.

The blueprints are even freely available online with even the most cursory of google searches.

https://thehomegunsmith.com/pdf/Stengunplans.pdf

 

Sorry, I don't see the point??? I was just responding to FatBack' s comment about how you can handcraft firearms if you have the right skill set - and how digital printing takes the 'human' element out of the process.

Nowhere did I suggest digital printing was 'bad' and I don't think the World would be a better if all we still traveled around by horse and buggy. (Although that form of transport does have its merits.) So I'm not sure what 'history' has to do with anything?