Archived threads in /k/ - Weapons - 653. page

File: revkimar-competitive[1].jpg (18KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 600x450px

>tfw europoor

File: 1485823469287.jpg (48KB, 450x796px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 450x796px

I have been arguing with a friend about 9mm vs 45mm. He says that the 9mm would be superior for CCing due to higher capacity than 45mm. He also claimed that most 9mms are lighter weight than a 45mm. I pointed out that 45mm has far superior terminal ballistics and is likely to shred what it hits into tiny pieces from the fragmentation. His rebuttal was that the FBI had proven that all handgun cartridges have similar performance and that capacity and shot placement are more important.

Which of us is correct?

No one could survive being hit by a 45mm could they?

File: 1488527348562.jpg (322KB, 652x922px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 652x922px

My noguns/antiguns friends recently found out that I carry a CCW. It led to a discussion of them wanting to know how I would handle various situations where a ccw would come in handy. In most general one-on-one self defense situations they agreed with me but they hated my answers for anything that involved being in a group or public area with many people.

For instance:
>Them: Hey anon, what would you do if someone walked in to a packed movie theater or super market and started threatening everyone?
>Me: I would try to sneak away to an area out of sight/ear shot and call the police. Other people are not my concern and I would be held liable for any potential collateral damage if I intervened.
>Them: What's the point of carrying a gun if you aren't at least going to try to save people?

Anyway it got me thinking, do we as good Samaritan gun owners have an obligation to be a hero in that kind of situation.
Personally I think no. I think intervening while out in the open may end up being as bad as suicide.
What say you /k/?

File: 9.jpg (502KB, 2304x1536px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 2304x1536px

You're walking on the sidewalk when you see a man charging at you with a big knife. What handgun would you want in your holster?

File: 671546aef1f15223b436b55c25cba3ff96b44998782d9ab9ded830732665f0f8.jpg (181KB, 1936x1936px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1936x1936px

What if nukes had never been invented. Say they never exist at all.

What would have happened after 1945?

File: Screenshot 2017-07-14 at 7.20.12 PM.png (518KB, 1364x766px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 1364x766px

I don't have a full power bolt action rifle that I can put a scope on currently, so I am thinking about getting one in the near future. I was looking for something I could use for hunting/long range stuff, probably .308, but since I am going to need to take up reloading sooner or later, could go 6.5 creed.

Want to keep it under $500, less would be preferable but I don't want a $200 nigger tier savage axis either.

Whittaker has had $300 Howa 1500 lightning's on special recently in 6.5mememore.

The howa 1500's is essentially the same as the
weatherby vanguard besides different cosmetic things. There are bottom metal conversion pieces (ironically polymer) for $50ish and allow it to take 10 round magazines that are fairly reasonable at $40ish each.

Not too sure what the difference between a standard 1500 vs the 1500 lightning, I think it has a different stock, not sure of what else

>best girl to attract attention.

File: 1486357943192.jpg (117KB, 605x412px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 605x412px

I have a buddy who has been saying for years that when you get buy a transferable machine gun you waiver you right to the fourth admendment.

He says when you fill out the paper work and get a full auto the goverment can then walk into your house anytime they want and search it.

is that true?

File: 20170423_145921_HDR.jpg (3MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x2340px

How many people have you introduced to shooting, /k/?

File: image.jpg (329KB, 825x464px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 825x464px

Has anyone else seen this movie? What did you think? Do you think it would have been possible for apes to hold out against humans so long? Do you think there is any possibility that any humans could have survived the virus and still be holding out against the apes?

File: Capture.png (86KB, 230x258px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 230x258px

>when you don't understand a word of french but you are Ouiaboo

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qFAWsqdP14

File: Tomahawk Sub Launch.jpg (186KB, 500x570px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 500x570px

>The question is not whether Tomahawk cruise missiles are useful but whether their usefulness is sufficient to justify the expenditure of ship’s volume, the concomitant increase in cost and the resulting decrease in number of submarines built? The volume and money dedicated to a submarine cruise missile capability could go to other ship’s functions and to building more subs. In other words, there is an opportunity cost associated with submarine launched cruise missiles.

>Tomahawk missiles add size and cost to submarines. The size increase is 20% or so, depending on the specific sub class and version. The cost increase is harder to determine but one solid data point is the Virginia Payload Module (VPM) scheduled to be installed on the newest Virginias. The cost increase is estimated to be around $500M which is a 20% increase over the base cost of around $2.5B. By leaving out the VPM, we could build one extra Virginia class sub for every five subs built. Are the added Tomahawks worth losing one extra sub for every five built? To answer that, we need to recall the submarine’s mission(s).

>In war, a submarine’s most important mission is anti-submarine warfare according to US Navy doctrine since the Cold War – I’m talking about attack subs, SSN’s, not ballistic missile submarines. The main job of our submarines is to eliminate the enemy’s submarines. A close second mission, but still second, is anti-surface warfare. Every mission after that is extraneous, in a sense. If, by eliminating all the other missions – Tomahawk capability, in this case – we could build an extra submarine for every five we now build, would this be worth the loss of 12-40 Tomahawks (we’re talking about Virginia class subs, now)? I suggest it would be and would be well worth it.


http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/2017/07/does-every-sub-need-tomahawks.html

File: Killdozer.png (505KB, 933x438px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 933x438px

how would /k/ improve the killdozer?
current specs
armor: 30cm/1foot thick steel plates and concrete composite
visibility: video cameras protecters by 76mm/3 inch of bullet resistant plastic hooked up to monitors inside so that there are no gaps in the armor
arms: gun ports fitted with a 13mm/0.5 thick steel plate .50 caliber sniper rifle, a .308 semi-automatic, and a .22 long rifle
misc: aircon and fan because the things a fucking oven on tracks

File: [heavy huffing and wheezing].jpg (3KB, 160x160px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 160x160px

What the fuck is with edgy teenagers, hicks, and tryhards' spergboner for the Punisher logo within the past few years? Is it the new moldy labia?

File: 1911.jpg (178KB, 1000x644px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1000x644px

Name a pistol objectively better than the 1911. You can't.
>muh capacity
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of a pistol. A pistol is a conceptually defensive weapon. It's not meant as a substitute for a rifle for storming buildings. It's meant to repel a close range ambush. If you have more than 7 rounds, you reach a point of diminishing marginal returns. Having a pistol with 15 rounds in its butt is like having a car with a 50 gallon gas tank.
>fudd
A fudd is someone who is opposed to using guns for fighting. Fudds therefore hate all pistols.
>outdated
Appeal to novelty fallacy. Newer is not necessarily better.
>I don't like the safety
So leave the safety off if it bothers you so much.

File: 1499385621259.jpg (79KB, 727x1024px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 727x1024px

/k/ books? What are some good recommendations, any and all subjects