Are you into modern or classic guns?
Both, as long as they arent retarded
>>33989263
Both
sort of related
>>33989280
>two rifles from the 1940s
slavaboos, everyone
>>33989263
I appreciate the older guns, but I buy new.
Both, although most of my "old" guns aside from milsurps are reproductions.
What I mean is that I don't own any original flintlocks or blackpowder firearms. This is mostly because their value is increased by their age and rarity, and I'd rather have a cheaper, newer copy that I can shoot as much as I want without worry.
>>33989348
I'd say that counts. The designs are still old. Hell This Rossi is from the 70s-80s... of the 20th century.
>>33990127
The future is now old man.
>>33989263
As many have already stated, both. I just love guns.
lol poorfag
>>33989263
both, natch. but if a gun was held against my head, I would gravitate towards classic.
Possibly the most fun guns are my black powder Traditions Pennsylvania .50 or Pietta 1858 Remington.
Even soccer moms clean out their sandy vaginas when I light them up during 4th of July at dusk. I don't have a Nugget to do a cone of fire. Alas.
Both
>>33989263
Classic. There's something appealing about a 1777 Charleville musket with a bayonet. I really like the Napoleonic Wars period: firearms and melee weapons both.
Yes
>>33989280
I see two deprecated carbines
Both but certainly prefer modern firearms due to pragmatism
The classics are timeless however and I hope we don't totally convert to soulless, plastic wunderguns
>>33990593
post pics? I'd like to get a musket some day
Mid-Cold War is the best combination of practicality and a e s t h e t i c.
>>33990828
Post gats of that era that you own
>oh wait