View Full Version : Which cartridge caliber do you prefer?
CosPetia
06-23-2014, 12:45
Hi friends,
I would like to ask you which cartridge caliber do you prefer when shooting for pleasure? I personally prefer to use 9x19mm. or 38SP. I also use Makarov pistol as well as Smith & Wesson revolver.
.22LR, it's cheap and available. Searching for 9mm around here is it's own little scavenger hunt. ~:rolleyes:
ICantSpellDawg
06-25-2014, 14:04
9mm or multiple potatos
https://i.imgur.com/GGRpxN0.jpg
Guns are bad.
You should not use them.
The Lurker Below
06-26-2014, 18:02
12 gauge
Only have a bb-gun. It's fun to shoot at bottles. Like shooting with my awesome recurve bow. It shoots HARD, and I can hit anything within 20 meters.
ICantSpellDawg
06-28-2014, 12:22
Frag, you would love the US I feel
Frag, you would love the US I feel
Already love the mindset of the Americans, I think I will one day end up there. I may have been born in Europe but I don't really ought to be here. The Netherlands may look like a free country because there are some civil liberties that don't exist anywhere else, but the reality is a patronising intrusive government. A false feminine smile. Oddly enough. I want to go to Detroit. That city fascinates me.
ICantSpellDawg
06-28-2014, 12:51
Please do. Detroit can use some wargaming libertarianesque people.
https://i.imgur.com/GGRpxN0.jpg
Hahahaha
Guns are bad.
You should not use them.
you're one heck of a killjoy...
anyways: well, if I used any firearms, I'd go with whatever it is that is guaranteed to drop a guy from 500 yards or more. always been a fan of high powered rifles: love the design, the power, all that. bit loud though.
you're one heck of a killjoy...
anyways: well, if I used any firearms, I'd go with whatever it is that is guaranteed to drop a guy from 500 yards or more. always been a fan of high powered rifles: love the design, the power, all that. bit loud though.
You should not consider guns as being able to offer joy.
They are lethal, not joyful.
The Lurker Below
07-01-2014, 18:30
You should not consider guns as being able to offer joy.
They are lethal, not joyful.
In my most peaceful and serene moments there is a shotgun on my shoulder as I walk through a harvested field of beans on a cool winter morning, watching my dogs work back and forth, going on point when they evidence a bird. Had I not the gun and the ability to bring the bird out of the air, it would never happen.
Also in my top ten favorite things to do is simply to shoot clay pigeons. Safe, relaxing, enjoyable, and then it's all about the gun.
In my most peaceful and serene moments there is a shotgun on my shoulder as I walk through a harvested field of beans on a cool winter morning, watching my dogs work back and forth, going on point when they evidence a bird. Had I not the gun and the ability to bring the bird out of the air, it would never happen.
Also in my top ten favorite things to do is simply to shoot clay pigeons. Safe, relaxing, enjoyable, and then it's all about the gun.
My most beautiful moment was when we stole a couple of corns, together with my granny, in the marshy fields of Drama. Stealing, although illegal, could be enjoyable, especially if your chances of success are high, but beheading bean-eating birds?!
Today it's the clay pegions, tommorow it'll be our known, fat pigeons and in a year... Oh, only god knows what.
You should not consider guns as being able to offer joy.
They are lethal, not joyful.
My recurve bow is also very lethal, it will shoot right through you with a razorhead. Still regarded as sport, not a weapon. Shooting is fun.
You should not consider guns as being able to offer joy.
yes God...
I mean, seriously?
anyways, if you want to talk politics, go to the backroom. PM the moderators if you're that desperate to pontificate, to let you in. or just go to the mudpit at the twcenter. don't just tell us what you think we ought to do--you have no divine powers.
They are lethal, not joyful.
it is only lethal when it kills someone or something, and is not necessarily mutually exclusive (or while we're at it, inclusive) with being joyful/enjoyable--and whether the two mixing is appropriate or not depends on the circumstances. this can also be said about hammers, knives, swords (since you know, "designed to kill", right?), your bare hands, etc, etc.
but again, this is for the backroom, not the frontroom.
if any moderators want to take this digression elsewhere, be my guest.
Exactement. Candar, an arrow in your heart will probably kill you in 20 seconds, liver is going to take a little longer, but you will absolutily die. I can easily make a shot like that from a reasonable distance. But I am not aiming at anything that is alive, I would never hurt anything. It's a joy to place your target and hit it with extreme accuracy, you are like a watchmaker when an arrow hits axectly the place you had in mind. Shooting a pistol is not easy, it's pretty damn hard, give it a try.
yes God...
I mean, seriously?
anyways, if you want to talk politics, go to the backroom. PM the moderators if you're that desperate to pontificate, to let you in. or just go to the mudpit at the twcenter. don't just tell us what you think we ought to do--you have no divine powers.
Since my first post, I have access to the Backroom (already contributed), but rather unfortunately that's not the case for the Mudpit.
it is only lethal when it kills someone or something, and is not necessarily mutually exclusive (or while we're at it, inclusive) with being joyful/enjoyable--and whether the two mixing is appropriate or not depends on the circumstances. this can also be said about hammers, knives, swords (since you know, "designed to kill", right?), your bare hands, etc, etc.
but again, this is for the backroom, not the frontroom.
if any moderators want to take this digression elsewhere, be my guest.
Well, considering that swords, guns and bows were initially and excusively designed to kill, sports like archery, shooting and fencing (as well as wrestling, since its intention is to harm your human opponent) are barbaric and ought to be despised, based on our modern, moral standards.
Weapons might be appropriate for decoration, as examples of a family heirloom, but that's it, I am afraid...
Exactement. Candar, an arrow in your heart will probably kill you in 20 seconds, liver is going to take a little longer, but you will absolutily die. I can easily make a shot like that from a reasonable distance. But I am not aiming at anything that is alive, I would never hurt anything. It's a joy to place your target and hit it with extreme accuracy, you are like a watchmaker when an arrow hits axectly the place you had in mind. Shooting a pistol is not easy, it's pretty damn hard, give it a try.
A possible way for the humanity to vehiculate her murderous insticts could be the video-games. Disposing of a blood-thirsty dremora with a sneak attack might save a human life, in the near future.
There is no bloodthirstiness. I also do kichboxing, it's not nasty at all, quite the opposite. You don't want to harm anybody, it's a sport. it may look like people are hurting eachother but (almost) nobody does that intentionally. I had worse injuries riding pony's.
There is no bloodthirstiness. I also do kichboxing, it's not nasty at all, quite the opposite. You don't want to harm anybody, it's a sport. it may look like people are hurting eachother but (almost) nobody does that intentionally. I had worse injuries riding pony's.
With the "bloodthirsty" comment, I was referring to the servants of Mehrunes Dagon, not the athletes. Of course, massacring hordes of these vicious creatures, as an attempt to limit similar urges seems a bit ironic, doesn't it?
What I find ironic is the word 'urges' because I play violent sports while you play games where thousands are killed. How would you explain that without losing the credibility of your argument. I play the same games, but I am not a violent person at all. Why do you play these games, I could ask that, but I am pretty sure I can assume your reasons are perfectly harmless. Would I turn the argument against you, you have a lot more to explain. You conquer countries and whipe out entire armies after all. They never asked to be killed or conquered. I fight people who fight voluntary, and we always stop when it gets messy. On a scale of one to ten, how far do think your argument will hold.
I only play Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.
There, you only throw spells to overly-aggressive snails which just make them a little dizzy.
Well, once, I unthoughtfully threw a gnome into a canyon, but it was an accident and, after all, its body was never recovered, so theoritically it is just missing, not necessarily dead.
You should play that game, too. Relaxing, peaceful and surprisingly not boring, even for the excited youth.
I am 37, hardly excited youth. Just don't see a problem in shooting at cards. A gun can kill someone, yeah. But you have to shoot at someone with the intention to kill, and I would never want to do that. I sometimes shoot with firearms at a mate, great fun. It's in the middle of nowhere it's perfectly safe. It's nice to feel the recoil when firing a bullet, it's fun to watch a bottle explode. It can be toys if you only use it as toys. Dangerous toys sure, no arguing that. But if you don't point it at anyone it's not going to harm anyone.
I am 37, hardly excited youth. Just don't see a problem in shooting at cards. A gun can kill someone, yeah. But you have to shoot at someone with the intention to kill, and I would never want to do that. I sometimes shoot with firearms at a mate, great fun. It's in the middle of nowhere it's perfectly safe. It's nice to feel the recoil when firing a bullet, it's fun to watch a bottle explode. It can be toys if you only use it as toys. Dangerous toys sure, no arguing that. But if you don't point it at anyone it's not going to harm anyone.
That looks very strange after the previous sentence.... ~;)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.