Capbyrd
-
Posts
4,823 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
28 -
Feedback
100%
Content Type
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Posts posted by Capbyrd
-
-
3 minutes ago, crc4 said:
Gun owners should take a wide view of the Baldwin case, what happened, and the ramifications going into the future.
Mishandling of firearms resulting in injury or death are considered criminal negligence, subject to criminal charges and civil suits, will be extremely costly financially, emotionally, and socially, and the future for the shooter isn't bright.
Whether Baldwin goes to jail or not is not the issue to be concerned with as that's not in your control.
Your concern should be 'what if my firearm negligence caused injury or death?" and how can I work to make sure it doesn't happen to me. That is in your control.This should have been a concern for you from the time you started handling firearms. You shouldn’t need this case to teach that lesson.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Erik88 said:
How much of a pain is the Form 1? I've never looked into it.
It’s really not. Only slightly more paperwork than a current 4473.
-
12 minutes ago, turkeydad said:
It may not go “ my way” but I’m not just going to eat it and say I like it. Those letters being addressed to SB Tactical have no more value to SB Tactical now as they do to me. So I really don’t get the point with with that.
I never thought the bump stock ban would be successfully challenged yet here we are.
Nope. They don’t. But they did at one time. They never had value to you. Which was my point when I brought them up.
I must be out of the loop because I haven’t seen a successful challenge to the bump stock ban. Unless you are talking about the lower court ruling. But I wouldn’t call that a successful challenge. That’s semantics though. For me a successful challenge is a case before SCOTUS. Anything in a lower court, to me, is just a step.
but hey, if you are happy, I’m happy for you.
-
3 minutes ago, turkeydad said:
Well of course the letters are not addressed to me. But what would be the difference if they were? Let’s take a guess and go with there would be no difference. Whether the letters were addressed to me or SB Tactical they stated the ATFs position was that adding a brace did not make the gun subject to the NFA and that shouldering the weapon did not change that. Now after the fact that millions of law abiding Americans invested in these now they change their minds. I’m sure that’s just fine to you but myself…not so much.
It’s well known that ATF letters carry no weight with the exception of to whom they are addressed.
And for the record, no this isn’t fine to me. It’s not okay at all. But it didn’t take Cleo to see this was coming and I warned everyone from day one.
I know several people in here have hope that some lawsuit is about to change everything but I wouldn’t hold my breath. I don’t care what the recent SCOTUS rulings were. This isn’t going your way.
-
On 1/19/2023 at 8:20 PM, willki said:
Just saw a YouTube video that mentions one (probably of many) legal trap in the new rule:
IF your background check takes longer than 88 days you will be automatically denied. With upto 40 million new background checks to do, many will not be done in 88 days or less. So therefore it seems like many of these applications will be automatically denied. As soon as your form is denied, you are instantly in possession of a NFA item with no approved stamp and therefore are a felon.
This is just typical NRA fear mongering. Fine print is important.
it’s not 88 days from the time you send the form or even from the day they open the envelope. It’s 88 days from the day they start the background check. I don’t have the numbers but that’s very very few denials. They aren’t going to open the flood gates on day one and hold all the background checks just to deny someone. They have much easier ways of dealing with us than that.-
1
-
-
On 1/17/2023 at 3:52 PM, turkeydad said:
As I have the letter saying the brace is ATF approved and a copy of the letter stating shouldering a brace is not a violation as well.
Are either of those letters specifically addressed to you? If not, they are more worthless now than they were when they were written.
-
Bump again. Im open to trades. Surely someone needs or wants this.
-
1 hour ago, Grayfox54 said:
All indications are that this whole production was a total mess from the get go. Lots of safety violations. Mostly due to cutting corners and being cheap. I hear that special effects are expensive. The camera shot in question was supposed to show the muzzle pointed directly at the camera. Seemed simple enough.
A camera is an inanimate object and does not currently require an operator behind it.
yes some special effects are expensive. But for a muzzle flash from a single action, high school kids can do that.
-
35 minutes ago, Erik88 said:
I know someone who works as an assistant director. He was telling me that there is really no need to use real guns anymore. They can add in muzzle flashes if needed.
this is YouTube in 2011. Next to no budget using airsoft pneumatic guns. If they can do this, no reason big budget (or even low budget) productions can’t make do.
-
2
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Chucktshoes said:
There’s also the fact that that they make all sorts of fake and replica guns that can appear to function correctly on screen by gas operation and such.
Like I said, absolutely no reason to ever point a gun at someone. Stupidity
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, monkeylizard said:
This has me wondering about other movie stunts that are inherently dangerous. If actor A throws actor B off a roof as part of the script and the safety harness or crash bag fails, would we be talking about how actor A is responsible? A stunt coordinator was supposed to setup the equipment properly. Why would we expect actor A to be knowledgeable about inspecting the safety gear? That's what the stunt coordinator is for. Or if actor A is handed a real knife instead of a collapsible prop knife and stabs actor B. Is actor A supposed to check the knife to be sure the spring works? Again, someone upstream is supposed to be getting all that stuff right so the actor can, you know, "act".
Other than having different procedures for a gun vs. a prop knife vs. a fall harness, what makes an accidental shooting different from an accidental stabbing or fall for the actor? I get the negligence issues for the armorer and producer (and whoever brought the live ammo onto the set).Yeah, we all here on TGO know the proper safety steps with a firearm, but in that sense we're closer to being the stunt coordinators/armorers than we are being the actors. It seems that as an actor it's a stretch to charge him.
In that situation, even if someone hands him a revolver on a set and says "cold gun" AND he checks it and see shells in the cylinders, I can see where he might still think they're dummy rounds so the gun doesn't look empty. The cylinders need to have "bullets" in them or we'd be the first ones pointing at the screen saying "stupid liberal! his gun's empty!" He may not have the gun knowledge to make that determination and as an actor he shouldn't be expected to.
I don’t buy this at all. Camera tricks have existed for decades that negate the need to ever point a gun at someone. There is no reason that anyone on that set should ever need to point a gun anyone else.
-
2
-
-
10 hours ago, Luckyforward said:
And the pop stars.
-
1
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, Jeb48 said:
The fact that it brought you here.
-
1
-
3
-
-
This is very sad news. Another great American success story sold to a foreign entity.
-
4
-
-
8 hours ago, Luckyforward said:
if they fill the bag or decrease the bag size, you’ll just have crumbs. The current system is fine.
also. One of these is a potato product and the other is not.
-
On 1/14/2023 at 5:01 PM, Erik88 said:
Should I rent a jig saw?
my personal opinion is that if the tool is under 200 or so, it’s more valuable to own the tool than to rent it.
also, an oscillating tool probably would have been a good choice for this job from start to finish as well. I know it’s too late now, but consider one in the future.
7 hours ago, Hozzie said:If you have room to nail you could always use a couple of straps and space them a foot or so apart. They are used all of the time for these type of ducts.
I was gonna say the same. My entire ductwork in my attic is strapped up. Ain’t gonna hurt a thing.
-
4
-
-
2 hours ago, Jeb48 said:
Not sure what to say about this one.
You’ll shoot your teeth out mid.
-
1
-
-
I’m a big fan of the clinch pick.
-
1
-
-
What’s the weight like. I’ve been curious about that since these dropped. I can read numbers but im more curious how it feels. I have the Long Range Target (big brother to the Hunter) and it’s heavy.
-
1 hour ago, papa61 said:
took a while
Now I’m curious why the driver of the dash cam car is putting his pants back on.
-
3
-
-
Just now, crc4 said:
That would be an interesting test see if firearms get magnetized, how strong is that magnetic field in firearms, how long it lasts, does it attract metallic particles into actions, etc.
I'm not disagreeing with you as I don't know, but testing would help resolve some questions.
I know I generally see it in regards to firing pins and having to do with primers and other debris around firing pin channels and the parts below them. For me personally, it’s a risk I’d rather not take. My gun in my holster on my person.
-
1
-
-
My latest acquisition.
-
1
-
-
I generally don’t recommend magnetizing your firearm. It can (does not mean will) attract debris into vital parts and cause stoppages. This is a reason that some people check for magnetism and demagnetize firearms during assembly.
Also, magnets aren’t a holster.
-
2
-
-
12 hours ago, FUJIMO said:
Typical of a Toyota frame from the era.
-
1
-
Beretta 92xi SAO
in Handguns
Posted
The only gun from SHOT show that really has me interested. Can’t wait to check one out.
https://www.beretta.com/en-us/92xi-sao-launch-edition/