ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1hr ago
Any idiot with a CNC can do AR-15 stuff, and outside of maybe the Stoner 63 (which Robinson did in aluminum, that’s what the XCR is) it’s unique in that regard.
You’d have to do design work to transpose any other rifle and, if you have the tooling, it’s not worth it (especially with AKs, but the G3 as well). Modern guns come out of extenders nowdays and you need serious capital and production numbers for that (plastic or aluminum), but not the AR.
It’s lucky that the AR had a flat top that lent itself to optics basically by mistake but it is legitimately a great rifle in a cartridge that is almost as cheap as surplus used to be.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1hr ago
Even lower-volume competition shooters can expect their guns to last a lifetime. 5000 rounds a year over 20 years is 100,000 rounds, and that’s not unrealistic for guns to be able to reach.
S&W revolver designs start breaking down closer to 50K rounds (they start going out of time), AKs crack at the trunnion after about 100K, ARs break uppers at the barrel threads if they even break at all, and most modern extruded aluminum rifles are likely capable of a million especially those with replaceable high-wear surfaces (the SIG MCX being a good example of that). The barrel will be shot out, and the bolt might break lugs, but that’s not usually a gun-ender so long as you can still buy the part.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1hr ago
Actually, yeah, I think you’re right. I thought the Carbines were both extruded but looking at them again I’m pretty sure they’re largely billet aluminum with cast bolts (one being its own thing, and one being an obvious conversion of their handguns).
Honestly I’m kind of surprised they never bothered to make an LC Carbine in 9mm but I guess that would cannibalize PC sales, which were probably not that great to begin with.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
11hr ago
With apologies to Stevie Wonder:
>But what it is, though old, so new
>To fill your heart like no three words could ever do
>I just called to say 'the N-word'
>I just called to say how much I care
>I just called to say 'the N-word'
>And I mean it from the bottom of my heart
Remember when people used to do that for "the F-word"? I guess nothing really ever changes, does it.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
16hr ago
Body positivity is paramount; I, for one, would definitely never call someone a 'bigger'.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
19hr ago
Ruger is a weird company.
Ruger is an investment casting company that just happens to make guns. Now, casting is a fine way to make a firearm, particularly when it comes to pistols (especially revolvers because they have to be metal, but any semi-auto with a metal frame benefits) and stuff that has been designed with casting in mind (10/22, Mini-14).
Which explains literally everything about what was, yesterday, their product catalogue. But, if doing literally anything else with their casting lines is more profitable than the revolvers, then the revolvers are going to go. The 10/22 requires a minimum of machining to make, and the Mini-14 has such a fat profit margin (especially where they're the only legal option), that there's still room for those.
Or maybe they need the cash to pay for some new in-house aluminum extrusion capacity. I'm not convinced most of their new guns (the PC and LC Carbines in particular) aren't subcontracted to a different manufacturer and 9mm rifles never really sold that well to begin with (and even if the de facto nullification of the NFA does result in an uptick of 9mm rifle sales the PC Carbine was never even that great a rifle in the first place; yes, it's still legal in most states, but increased foreign competition of far better rifles will likely end up with Ruger competing with itself just like it does with the revolvers).
Remington, Colt, Winchester etc. are all dead and buried. Name brands for the banks to fight over.
As it turns out, not really.
Remington was broken up and most gun companies in the US took a piece of it (Ruger bought Marlin).
It's the Colt CZ group now.
Winchester ceased to be an independent gun-making entity in 1935; they were acquired by Olin, an ammunition company naturally seeking commoditization of their compliment.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1d ago
Non-combatants of a belligerent really like the pretense that only its soldiers will die.
Break that illusion and they'll double down, just like a Palestinian. And at that point your solution to the existence of that people has to be final; generally this would consist of nuclear annihilation, but the problem other nations have with that is that 'making clear that you will genocide your enemies' may cause them to pre-emptively strike you with the same weapons.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
Honestly the part I felt cheated by had more to do with the "oh, so we're just going to make the protagonist basically blameless" thing than anything else.
It would have been more interesting had the killer bees been delivered as a gift more than the chug jug ointment beforehand.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
I'll add I think gay marriage was actually more important than people credit: post-Obergefell a lot of liberals decided that conservative opinions they had previously countenanced were actually too bigoted to tolerate at all.
2005-2015 was, statistically, when the last of the last generation (one hopes) to ever experience hunger in a Western country died (75-85 years if born in 1930, also the generation that came of age during WW2).
I do believe that Obergefell did have something to do with this- that the Christians vs. Atheists fight centered around 2010 was finally won (and the 'atheist' revolution proceeded to turn on itself in the form of International SJWery)- but on an institutional level those people were the last of the "you'd better keep that [X] around, you might need it some day", where X is [in hindsight, to me] 'standards of civility'.
Now that nobody remembers a time when the next meal could be threatened by (in some cases, literal) partisan sniping, it will intensify until it does threaten it, simply because that's how human beings work.
There's a really big difference between peace achieved by suppressing your violent desires and inner peace with no violent desires to suppress at all.
It's difficult to personally evaluate which is which.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
The naive people are indirectly responsible for the costs caused by insufficient security measures.
However, the converse also applies: the most cynical (who demand others pay more for security) impose costs when they want too much security.
This is how progressives can [correctly] accuse everyone else of imposing too many costs on the community by impeding the immigration they want, and how everyone else [correctly] can accuse progressives of imposing too many costs through failing to ensure immigrants behave themselves.
There's a meme in software about "move fast and break things". Same thing- you can either have more software faster and cheaper but having more security issues [which create cost indirectly], or you can have no software and have systems that are extremely expensive [which create cost directly].
Either one fundamentally creates a cost, but it's asymmetrically enforced, as humankind hasn't figured out how to measure much less begin to force the people who argue conservatism in a particular area to pay the opportunity cost that creates beyond "move to a land of plenty such that conservatism doesn't work".
but no matter how cynical they are there's nothing they can do to prevent the security costs and friction forced upon them by the scumbags
Sure there is- you organize meanness to degrade their capabilities. Typically this requires grouping people by class- sex, race, age, nationality [Irish need not apply], social standing, g, whatever- and forcing them to pay for "being scumbags".
And the ways you might force them to pay are many- you can levy fines, imprison them (which is more a fine on their time), disenfranchise them, physically injure them, and deploy various means of scumbag-icide (from assassinations of key figures to whatever prefix for -cide you wish).
On the other hand, of course, "being scumbag" is sometimes not something one can avoid. Perhaps one is born stupid, or with some trait that make their existence untenable (including relative statuses, since human beings work that way), so either they themselves, or those with whom they can co-ordinate, will seek to take away what you have because there's no particularly attractive alternative.
The thing that complicates this analysis is the fact that "people that just want to watch the world burn" (as in this case) are always a net positive to kill, but it's not possible to ensure the social machinery that kills those people is never turned in their direction.
A stuck in defrost wouldn't necessarily cause short cycling (although depending on the control setup there might be some)
A CMMG banshee 9mm AR with FRT and suppressor is up there on the list
If you want something actually transformative, build a vz. 61 with a lower that you can put an FRT into, then suppress it. If you must go Banshee, get the fixed ejector upgrade if you can (ejection is a weak point of this design), or go with the MEAN Arms roller-delayed system (it isn't an issue there). Or buy a parts kit and print an MP5.
it's hard to see why it's worth going to the manual actions or single-shots when semi-autos are so cheap
Pistol caliber semi-autos have always been cheaper simply because they require no locking system to function safely. That's why manual-action guns in these calibers are so rare (with the exception of magnum-length revolver calibers).
(Same reason why there are barely any straight-pull bolt-action rifles- you're >95% of the way to a semi-auto. The Heym SR-30, simplest of the straight-pulls, is mechanically/operationally identical to an HK SL-7 without an action spring and appropriate "locking" piece.)
more engineering would be needed to make it magazine-fed
If you can get the "donor" gun in question to take a normal magazine, just use Endomags (or Exomags if you want a 10-rounder for something closer to flush-fitting). Bolt guns with plunger ejectors might cause you some grief, but these magazines are available with ejectors mounted on them should you require that (though it's a compromise as they can get damaged, like they can on the 10/22, which also does this).
Or maybe see what you could do with a high-point 9mm carbine; those guns are actually cheap cheap
Extar's plastic 9mm is arguably a better value simply by virtue of needing fewer magazines (and you can put an FRT in that too).
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
I honestly felt cheated by the movie [and have the impression the book was similar] simply because Dankness Evermeme (or whatever her name is) was mostly just getting lucky with conditions suitable for environmental kills (with maybe an excusable reflex shooting to make that one guy rue the day he dared set foot in the arena). If there was manipulation to place those convenient weapons right in her way, it wasn't clearly stated.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
I'd figure a character-driven description of another character would be more relevant than the third person. Or maybe I just appreciate characters who would describe a certain movement as "breasted boobily".
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
I can't get anyone to directly defend why it's morally right for the group to vote on who to eat for dinner (that is, why a democratic state has the moral right to kill anyone) because nobody will debate at all and they leave before the web of «but it do be like that though» and «what about the roads / safety» is slashed through.
Maybe all of our high-decouplers left? Though at this point I've kind of settled for "this is how the average low-decoupler with a given set of beliefs behaves -> here are strategies for dealing with them" than anything else; while that is still valuable, it's not something that makes me much better at this point.
If all I can get are upvotes (or downvotes, I guess) but no actual engagement I consider that a failure, and at that point any such comment was nothing more than evidence of intellectual masturbation.
Or maybe I'm just not paying that much attention to find the ones that are like that, since I didn't really notice that one. But then again the only way I'm going to be able to properly your question is simply to deny the premise that objective morality is something that even exists in the first place.
Then again, I've also kind of already said that, void of any other engagement.
(Especially from the Christian angle, where most Christians seem to think God actually cares about morality, even though actively seeking it is generally orthogonal to what Christians are 'supposed' to be doing- but then again, "may God have mercy on your soul" is just a cool phrase you say to someone coincident with having sentenced them to death with no further implications or tacit acknowledgement of the fact the person you are about to kill might have been more aligned with God's will than you, right?
The only conventional 'morality' God seems to care about is sexual, but I get the distinct impression that, because sex and idolatry can have a lot to do with each other [which is something most people know internally, and something Christians are more likely to be bothered by for reasons beyond the fact idolatry is something they're not supposed to do], that this is a lot more a problem of muddying the waters [and social cohesion, contra homosexuality and effeminacy in men] when it comes to observers than anything else [and compounded by the fact that human beings, unlike idols or other magic sky daddies, are observably real], which is probably why 1 Cor 7 is immediately followed by 1 Cor 8 and why those 1600s-1900s US East Coast Christian sex "cults", as far as I'm aware, tended to cloister themselves somewhat.
I also think the problem of evil is a lot easier to swallow once you give up objective morality, too: if I'm powerful enough to create life de novo, I can do and prioritize whatever I like. If there is any duty here, it's the duty not to destroy those in alignment with the reason that creation occurred in the first place... a point very clearly made, coincidentally I'm sure, in the first 11 chapters of Genesis.)
I guess I could just keep every scattered thought I had as part of the response, and really don't have an answer for why that wouldn't be right here beyond it not feeling like the right thing to do. Though I guess I might as well test that theory here.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
and what activity there is in increasingly self-referential or just retreading old ground
Or in other words, thoughts are not getting any more refined. My first comment here and my last comment here will likely be the exact same.
I still browse the threads as a time-sink and to properly order social dynamics I've been fixated on thinking about, but as for actually novel insights I'm still wholly dependent on others to make the top-level posts.
most of which are still on the site
/r/blockedandreported is basically just Motte Lite.
Being Motte Lite, it's also pretty stupid most of the time, yet the stupider the subreddit the more offense they tend to generate to outsiders.
(Honestly the only thing I've learned from that place is that being able to clearly think about things that make most people really mad is actually pretty rare, and I get the impression that the flood of Substacks are from people who want to monetize that scarce resource.)
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
and what activity there is in increasingly self-referential or just retreading old ground
Or rather, what people generally come to this place to do is, for the most part, a solved problem. At this point I think I could train an chatbot to do the kind of analysis I already do and it'd be no different materially to 90% of what I usually say, outside of the benefits of actually having to think about it.
There are a few crucial insights that are generated in that process, and rehashing of everything else, but the number of those per week I will agree has decreased, and I should probably find something else to do. Maybe it's just a more boring time; 2018-2022 were a significantly more interesting time period (and not for very good reasons).
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
3d ago
Has the ICC been captured by organised crime?
Governments are organized crime.
The ICCs mandate is rather narrow, mostly involving war crimes and crimes against humanity
That's just a fancy way to say "losing wars while being on the side the EU doesn't support". Progressives will tell you that disagreeing with a woman is a crime against humanity so the definition is worthless.
The fact the ICC draws most of its legitimacy from Nuremberg (which was, basically, to legitimize killing off a bunch of German elites) remains relevant; that's where the temptation and cultural pull to use the ICC for "anti-Nazi" purposes come from.
Conveniently, all of their opponents are Nazis.
Of course, arresting him while bypassing the US court system would be tricky.
I already outlined a way this can (and indeed, does) happen. For everyone else, there's your standard black-bagging- foreign intelligence services, if they want to stay on the US' good side, can launder the US' unlawful requests just like they do now with SIGINT.
Yes, it's obviously a degradation to sovereignty, but if you only care about sovereignty in the supranational sense (again, so you can avoid passing politically-costly laws- immigration being the easiest example) why would that concern you?
the SCOTUS will very much not let them
What legions will they send to stop them?
What additional value does an extrajudicial kangaroo court in Europe have in enforcing our laws.
It provides value when certain factions want is prohibited by your laws. You might have the right to free speech domestically, but if your political opponents gain power and decide that criticizing your political opponents is a hate crime, and pack you off to a foreign country extraordinarily render you to face foreign "justice", then that doesn't matter.
It's the same kind of thing Charles I (and some king of Spain in the early 1800s) did by simply asking a foreign State to invade in return for economic promises. It's an act of civil war, obviously, but to what degree will the populace care?
One imagines a deal that the EU will keep the US dissident-free, while the US will keep the EU tariff-free into US markets.
The Trump administration realizes quite correctly that the next Democrat regime could use the ICC to harass its domestic enemies while sidestepping Constitutional concerns
This has kind of already happened; European countries (and US companies that would like to continue to do business in Europe, most notably payment processors) have already fought a few US companies for blasphemy (or "hate speech", as they prefer to call it). Which is kind of why the US needs to put its foot down and make sure that if the Europeans want their own firewall, they build it themselves (which would result in so much money -> political power changing hands that European gerontocracies would get turfed anyway).
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
4d ago
No, but "just [retroactively] ban ones that didn't go through the process" will generally work because gun owners and being autistically law-abiding have something to do with each other. (Permitting illegal stuff to be used on range properties tends to create liability for them.)
The new school of gun owners is a bit less, uh, 'cucked', but they aren't in political power yet.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
4d ago
Oh no, I mean the West too. Most of the women complaining about it also have their hand down their pants at the same time, and the only people that don’t understand that are, naturally, men in their teens.
I think my revolver has jammed more times than my semi-autos at this point (and that’s something requiring disassembly to fix), but it’s also somehow ridiculously accurate despite having a 12-pound trigger (that is sometimes 20 if it’s in a bad mood).
You require no other hand strength to unload the gun, as soon as the cylinder leaves the gun it can’t fire even if the user pulls the trigger (for leverage, I guess), and you get a set trigger if you need one by pulling the hammer back.
It’s honestly a type of pistol that you could use offensively if you needed to (as in, not exactly 7 yards and in, especially in .357 where it’s not dropping 3” at 50 yards) if you put an optic on it, which is probably why the French adopted one.
I think the decline in metallic silhouette, or the fact it didn’t evolve as a shooting game, has a lot to do with why the casual for-recreation owner doesn’t seem to bother. Not like indoor ranges have the space for it anyway.
More options
Context Copy link