artsprite
Contributor
That's better! Amen brother!
scuba and handguns
- Thread starter blacknet
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
neilstewart
Contributor
Artsprite/Blacknet
I take your point on inate object having no life of there own and retract my desciption "weapons of death".
My uncle moved from the UK some 20 years ago and now lives in Houston. I recently visited for my cousins wedding Feb 00 and I know he has a handgun. My uncle has no interest in sport shooting and this gun is solely for household defence and he told me he would have no problem in shooting an intruder. I see that this is the norm. Over here you would likely go to jail for that.
What I find scary is that if guns are so readily available and anyone can get one is the criminal who robs your premises or perpetrates a mugging or another criminal activity is more than likely going to have a firearm as well.
I believe that the majority of people who commit crime do so out of some sort of neccessity, unemployment, drug habit or many other reasons that push their mental state to lawlessness. If both parties are armed this makes every situation potentially lethal.
I take your point on the deterant effect and have no doubt that you will be subject to less, let me call it young person (lets do for the thrill) oportunistic robbery that we have here however your trade off against that is the increased chance that in a confrontational situation you may get shot.
A year ago in Bedford a friend and I saw a group of 15/16 years olds being generally nasty to a young girl with her infant, we were able to confront them and stop it. In the UK before doing something like this you have to consider do these people have a knife and weigh up whether you think you could take it away if they became aggressive, if that consideration was I wonder if they have a gun you would most likely just walk on by.
I understand that it would be unfeasible to make everyone just hand in the guns and start afresh without them, of course the hardcore criminals and I suspect many others would not do so.
At the end of the day it's the culture that each of us are used to.
I still don't have an answer to what possible use an underwater handgun would be put.
Neil
I take your point on inate object having no life of there own and retract my desciption "weapons of death".
My uncle moved from the UK some 20 years ago and now lives in Houston. I recently visited for my cousins wedding Feb 00 and I know he has a handgun. My uncle has no interest in sport shooting and this gun is solely for household defence and he told me he would have no problem in shooting an intruder. I see that this is the norm. Over here you would likely go to jail for that.
What I find scary is that if guns are so readily available and anyone can get one is the criminal who robs your premises or perpetrates a mugging or another criminal activity is more than likely going to have a firearm as well.
I believe that the majority of people who commit crime do so out of some sort of neccessity, unemployment, drug habit or many other reasons that push their mental state to lawlessness. If both parties are armed this makes every situation potentially lethal.
I take your point on the deterant effect and have no doubt that you will be subject to less, let me call it young person (lets do for the thrill) oportunistic robbery that we have here however your trade off against that is the increased chance that in a confrontational situation you may get shot.
A year ago in Bedford a friend and I saw a group of 15/16 years olds being generally nasty to a young girl with her infant, we were able to confront them and stop it. In the UK before doing something like this you have to consider do these people have a knife and weigh up whether you think you could take it away if they became aggressive, if that consideration was I wonder if they have a gun you would most likely just walk on by.
I understand that it would be unfeasible to make everyone just hand in the guns and start afresh without them, of course the hardcore criminals and I suspect many others would not do so.
At the end of the day it's the culture that each of us are used to.
I still don't have an answer to what possible use an underwater handgun would be put.
Neil
OP
blacknet
Contributor
neilstewart,
Here's the way it plays out. Just because you can purchase a weapon does NOT mean that the criminals will purchase legal weapons. They will STILL purchase illegal weapons (i.e. black market, stolen, unregistered) and use them instead. Studies have proven time and time again when the citizens are armed then crime against them is reduced.
When a rape victim pulls a gun she/he has a 50% chance of walking away with out a scratch. This is higher if she/he didn't pull the weapon. I think Id rather have 50/50 odds vs. 100% odds.
Citizens who peruse legal purchase/registration of weapons are given better treatment simply because they went the extra mile to make it legal. Studies have proven time and time again this type of person will help the law enforcement community in times of need. I.e. stop the rape from happening and waiting till the cops arrives, they will even kill the scumbags if pressed and help the community as a whole. Not saying that these people are vigilantes but upstanding citizens who take their freedom very seriously.
Again what you perceive is the truth and what is actually is different. To truly understand it you first must learn/understand the concept of 'life liberty and the American way'
Ed
Here's the way it plays out. Just because you can purchase a weapon does NOT mean that the criminals will purchase legal weapons. They will STILL purchase illegal weapons (i.e. black market, stolen, unregistered) and use them instead. Studies have proven time and time again when the citizens are armed then crime against them is reduced.
When a rape victim pulls a gun she/he has a 50% chance of walking away with out a scratch. This is higher if she/he didn't pull the weapon. I think Id rather have 50/50 odds vs. 100% odds.
Citizens who peruse legal purchase/registration of weapons are given better treatment simply because they went the extra mile to make it legal. Studies have proven time and time again this type of person will help the law enforcement community in times of need. I.e. stop the rape from happening and waiting till the cops arrives, they will even kill the scumbags if pressed and help the community as a whole. Not saying that these people are vigilantes but upstanding citizens who take their freedom very seriously.
Again what you perceive is the truth and what is actually is different. To truly understand it you first must learn/understand the concept of 'life liberty and the American way'
Ed
Lost Yooper
Guest
Well put Ed. Although the only thing about diving we probably agree about is that it beats working, I couldn't agree more with you and Patty on the subject of gun rights. 
Criminality (or evil for that matter) has nothing to with guns (or any other material object), or their availability to law abiding citizens.
Mike
Criminality (or evil for that matter) has nothing to with guns (or any other material object), or their availability to law abiding citizens.
Mike
artsprite
Contributor
This thread has no real basis for reality for using guns in the water. It is just a source of entertainment like so many other threads on this board. Like we are really considering buying the ex-Coast Guard ship that was for sale. That thread was just for fun as well.
But, it is the media in this country, and I would guess in your country as well which gives guns a bad name. The press doesn't report on the many times that guns are used legitimately to prevent crime. They want to sensationalize the criminal element and their use of guns for the crimes they commit. The true stories of homeowners stopping intruders without firing a shot, honest people preventing robberies in stores, bystanders stopping rapes and holding the perpetrator until police can arrive don't make it to the front page of the newspapers or on the nightly news. The media doesn't want you to hear about them. They either get buried on the back page of the small town paper, or they are ommitted all together. These stories are, however, printed in publications from the NRA. In Texas there has been research about just how many times a person with a concealed carry permit has used a gun out of anger, or in an otherwise illegal manner, (not in the legal defense of property or person) and you could count the times on your fingers. This is out of hundreds of thousands of armed citizens. The statistics are real. You have to take classes in managing anger in confrontations, and in the appropriate use of lethal force. It is not something that people take lightly. I had my application for a couple of years thinking about the consequences before I actually took the class. These are responsible people and not people out looking for an excuse to use their weapon. Of course, those people who are in favor of gun control will not want you to know things like that. The woman who was the head of the Million Mom March in the US, which is an organization started by Rosie O'Donnell to push gun control, was herself convicted of shooting someone with a gun. That is quite hypocrytical isn't it? The press actually got some people to consider her the victim in the case, because she was so distraught over what this person had done to her family that she was "forced" to use violence to get back at him. Violence with guns (murder, accidental shootings, death of children due to guns) has actually decreased in Texas over the past few years. The news about guns is good. But you won't hear that from the media. I just thought I would let you in on some of the truth about gun ownership.
Now, I don't want to make too many people mad, and I've been on my soapbox about this enough, so I'm not going to spout my politics any more. I just hope that we've given you something to consider. If you want to e-mail me with your address, I can send you a publication that has some of these types of stories in it. I don't know if you would like it, or believe it, but I am offering it to you.
Please don't anyone get upset with me about this. It is my own opinion, and obviously not everyone will agree with me. That's ok with me. I'm only speaking for myself.
But, it is the media in this country, and I would guess in your country as well which gives guns a bad name. The press doesn't report on the many times that guns are used legitimately to prevent crime. They want to sensationalize the criminal element and their use of guns for the crimes they commit. The true stories of homeowners stopping intruders without firing a shot, honest people preventing robberies in stores, bystanders stopping rapes and holding the perpetrator until police can arrive don't make it to the front page of the newspapers or on the nightly news. The media doesn't want you to hear about them. They either get buried on the back page of the small town paper, or they are ommitted all together. These stories are, however, printed in publications from the NRA. In Texas there has been research about just how many times a person with a concealed carry permit has used a gun out of anger, or in an otherwise illegal manner, (not in the legal defense of property or person) and you could count the times on your fingers. This is out of hundreds of thousands of armed citizens. The statistics are real. You have to take classes in managing anger in confrontations, and in the appropriate use of lethal force. It is not something that people take lightly. I had my application for a couple of years thinking about the consequences before I actually took the class. These are responsible people and not people out looking for an excuse to use their weapon. Of course, those people who are in favor of gun control will not want you to know things like that. The woman who was the head of the Million Mom March in the US, which is an organization started by Rosie O'Donnell to push gun control, was herself convicted of shooting someone with a gun. That is quite hypocrytical isn't it? The press actually got some people to consider her the victim in the case, because she was so distraught over what this person had done to her family that she was "forced" to use violence to get back at him. Violence with guns (murder, accidental shootings, death of children due to guns) has actually decreased in Texas over the past few years. The news about guns is good. But you won't hear that from the media. I just thought I would let you in on some of the truth about gun ownership.
Now, I don't want to make too many people mad, and I've been on my soapbox about this enough, so I'm not going to spout my politics any more. I just hope that we've given you something to consider. If you want to e-mail me with your address, I can send you a publication that has some of these types of stories in it. I don't know if you would like it, or believe it, but I am offering it to you.
Please don't anyone get upset with me about this. It is my own opinion, and obviously not everyone will agree with me. That's ok with me. I'm only speaking for myself.
miked
Contributor
Ed, I tend to agree with your logic re: guns, but I lost your meaning in the following paragraph :
"When a rape victim pulls a gun she/he has a 50% chance of walking away with out a scratch. This is higher if she/he didn't pull the weapon. I think Id rather have 50/50 odds vs. 100% odds. "
First sentence: no problem-I was not aware of that statistic.
Second sentence: do you mean the 50% is higher than if she/he didn't pull the gun, ....or the chance of being injury free would be higher than 50% if she/he didn't pull the gun...
(Iother words do the stats show the weapon increases or decreases the risk of injuryto the victim ?)
Third sentence: the "50/50 vs 100%" ... the 100% refers to 100% chance of ???(injury?; being raped?)
Could you pleses clarify. Sorry if I missed your point.
Thanks,
MikeD
"When a rape victim pulls a gun she/he has a 50% chance of walking away with out a scratch. This is higher if she/he didn't pull the weapon. I think Id rather have 50/50 odds vs. 100% odds. "
First sentence: no problem-I was not aware of that statistic.
Second sentence: do you mean the 50% is higher than if she/he didn't pull the gun, ....or the chance of being injury free would be higher than 50% if she/he didn't pull the gun...
(Iother words do the stats show the weapon increases or decreases the risk of injuryto the victim ?)
Third sentence: the "50/50 vs 100%" ... the 100% refers to 100% chance of ???(injury?; being raped?)
Could you pleses clarify. Sorry if I missed your point.
Thanks,
MikeD
OP
blacknet
Contributor
Hello,
Ok here's some clarity.
Say a rape is attempted. The victim does nothing and has 100% chances of the rape happening.
Say the same rape attempt happens. The victim pulls out a gun. 50% of the time the assailant will flee. Now the NRA does state 2/3's of cases involving weapons pulled out by the victim in defense results in the assailant fleeing, but they say for rape it's 50/50. However they did not say what percentage resulted in the victim discharging the weapon.
You also have the rare case where the weapon is taken away and used against the victim.
Which odds would you rather have? Personally Id opt for the 50/50 odds.
Ed
Ok here's some clarity.
Say a rape is attempted. The victim does nothing and has 100% chances of the rape happening.
Say the same rape attempt happens. The victim pulls out a gun. 50% of the time the assailant will flee. Now the NRA does state 2/3's of cases involving weapons pulled out by the victim in defense results in the assailant fleeing, but they say for rape it's 50/50. However they did not say what percentage resulted in the victim discharging the weapon.
You also have the rare case where the weapon is taken away and used against the victim.
Which odds would you rather have? Personally Id opt for the 50/50 odds.
Ed
scottieme1234
New
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
i will try to address several of the questions posted in the thread about firearms and their use underwater. First off, yes a glock CAN be used underwater safely and reliably. The ONLY caliber that can do this safely this the 9mm( glock,17,19, or 26) and the ammunition MUST be subsonic nato spec. ammo.
HOWEVER in order to do this a few modifications need to be made. In order to guarantee reliability the following upgrades are recomended.
marine cups( not necessary but they help a little)
high torque firing pin spring( this is probibly the most important thing you need to prevent lite strikes on the primer)
12 lb ny trigger ( a stock 8 lb trigger will do but a heaver trigger will help guarantee safety in the water)
UNDER or - power recoil spring (a stock recoil spring is 17 lbs, replace it with a 15 or 13 lb one i recommend the 15 this will help to compensate for the use of subsonic ammunition and the added hydrolic pressure to ensure the gun will cycle reliably)
stainless steel barrel(this is a stronger barrel than stock and it is corrosion resistant)
replace steel internal parts with titanium parts, slide release,trigger assembily,firing pin,firingpin safety,recoil spring guide rod( this upgrade is STRICTLY to make the firearm more corrosion resistant)
total cost
glock $500-650
recoil spring $12-25
stainless barrel $85-250
marine cups $4-15
firing pin spring $3-12
ny trigger $30-50
titanium parts $200-300 (NOT necessary and they DONT affect the reliability)
NO gun manufacturer that i have EVER seen will warranty or guarante a gun for underwater use UNLESS the firearm is designed specifically for the purpose( the russian " aps underwater" being the most noted)and unless you are in law enforcement (swat,srt,federal)NOT a street cop or specialised military applications you have almost no chance of getting one legaly.
Any gun will fire underwater (once) the trick is to be able to do it safely and reliably.
glock 17 underwater firing specs.( subject to change due to ammo and environmental
changes)
12-14 feet it will penetrate 1/2 inch of plywood
4 meters the concussion will mame or KILL
12 meters the concussion will stun
out to around 25 meters it will scare most anything in the water
RULES required for safe underwater firing
you must purge the gun of ALL air (lock the slide back and with it submerged shake it around till all the air is out of it)
when firing you need to make sure that everything you DONT want to hurt is clear (clear a 240 degree area from the muzzle)most of the concussion is directed foreward however some of it bleeds to the sides and can cause harm.I cannot stress enough how strong the concussion will be in the direction you are firing, you dont have to hit it to kill it.
King Neptune posted "Or you could buy a REAL gun" in refrence to owning "GLOCKS"
My answer to you is simple. You have no idea what you are talking about.
I have been a gunsmith for 13 years dealing EXCLUSIVLY with the law enforcement
community.Simple FACTS about glock pistols since you dont seem to have any.
60% of the WORLDS law enforcement use glocks (over 80% in the USA )
the following USA agencies issue glock as a STANDARD sidearm N.Y. pd, Miami pd and the L.A pd just to name a couple:05:
30 coutrys use glocks EXCLUSIVLY for their military (including Australia,Hungry,germany,and the "new" iraq is being issued them BY the USA)
It has been rated number 1 production pistol in the world for the past 7 years based off a rating system that compares reliability,versitility,cost,and customer support
There are 2 reasons why the USA military is using beretta 92 series and not glock
1. (this is the main reason)when the military started taking bids for a new combat pistol glock didnt put a bid in due to some confusion (see reason 2)
2. part of the mandate the military set required that the pistol have an external safety(this has now been revised due to the fact that it has now been proven that a gun doesnt have to have an external safety to be safe)
The second thing you said, and this is what leads me to believe that you have NO idea what you are talking about.
You made a refrence about a "wet"silencer.
When a silencer is refered to as a wet/dry silencer it has NOTHING to to with water.
Wetting a silencer is when you coat the wipes in a lite layer of oil to aid in suppression.
Most SUPPERSSORS (silencer is slang, suppressor is the propper term) are designed to withstand water HOWEVER they will NOT work underwater (due to the fact that they require AIR space to catch the expanding gasses)
There are 3 things that make sound when you fire a gun.
1.sonic boom (bullet breaking the speed of sound, subsonic ammo fixes this)
2. expanding gasses (this is what a suppressor HELPS to quiet down)
3.mechanical noise (the hammer or firing pin striking the primer,and the gun cycling
, some firearms try to quiet this noise , for example the h&k usp has an option that locks the slide so when fired the slide wont move)
If you are going to say something please make sure you know what you are saying and you have FACTS to back it up.
Im not sure if links are aloud in this forum so i didnt post any ( if i find out i can ill post alot in refrence to glocks and other diver friendly firearms)
questions or comments email at tsparks72001@yahoo.com no spam please(not that i get any
Hope this helps with your question,
scott
HOWEVER in order to do this a few modifications need to be made. In order to guarantee reliability the following upgrades are recomended.
marine cups( not necessary but they help a little)
high torque firing pin spring( this is probibly the most important thing you need to prevent lite strikes on the primer)
12 lb ny trigger ( a stock 8 lb trigger will do but a heaver trigger will help guarantee safety in the water)
UNDER or - power recoil spring (a stock recoil spring is 17 lbs, replace it with a 15 or 13 lb one i recommend the 15 this will help to compensate for the use of subsonic ammunition and the added hydrolic pressure to ensure the gun will cycle reliably)
stainless steel barrel(this is a stronger barrel than stock and it is corrosion resistant)
replace steel internal parts with titanium parts, slide release,trigger assembily,firing pin,firingpin safety,recoil spring guide rod( this upgrade is STRICTLY to make the firearm more corrosion resistant)
total cost
glock $500-650
recoil spring $12-25
stainless barrel $85-250
marine cups $4-15
firing pin spring $3-12
ny trigger $30-50
titanium parts $200-300 (NOT necessary and they DONT affect the reliability)
NO gun manufacturer that i have EVER seen will warranty or guarante a gun for underwater use UNLESS the firearm is designed specifically for the purpose( the russian " aps underwater" being the most noted)and unless you are in law enforcement (swat,srt,federal)NOT a street cop or specialised military applications you have almost no chance of getting one legaly.
Any gun will fire underwater (once) the trick is to be able to do it safely and reliably.
glock 17 underwater firing specs.( subject to change due to ammo and environmental
changes)
12-14 feet it will penetrate 1/2 inch of plywood
4 meters the concussion will mame or KILL
12 meters the concussion will stun
out to around 25 meters it will scare most anything in the water
RULES required for safe underwater firing
you must purge the gun of ALL air (lock the slide back and with it submerged shake it around till all the air is out of it)
when firing you need to make sure that everything you DONT want to hurt is clear (clear a 240 degree area from the muzzle)most of the concussion is directed foreward however some of it bleeds to the sides and can cause harm.I cannot stress enough how strong the concussion will be in the direction you are firing, you dont have to hit it to kill it.
King Neptune posted "Or you could buy a REAL gun" in refrence to owning "GLOCKS"
My answer to you is simple. You have no idea what you are talking about.
I have been a gunsmith for 13 years dealing EXCLUSIVLY with the law enforcement
community.Simple FACTS about glock pistols since you dont seem to have any.
60% of the WORLDS law enforcement use glocks (over 80% in the USA )
the following USA agencies issue glock as a STANDARD sidearm N.Y. pd, Miami pd and the L.A pd just to name a couple:05:
30 coutrys use glocks EXCLUSIVLY for their military (including Australia,Hungry,germany,and the "new" iraq is being issued them BY the USA)
It has been rated number 1 production pistol in the world for the past 7 years based off a rating system that compares reliability,versitility,cost,and customer support
There are 2 reasons why the USA military is using beretta 92 series and not glock
1. (this is the main reason)when the military started taking bids for a new combat pistol glock didnt put a bid in due to some confusion (see reason 2)
2. part of the mandate the military set required that the pistol have an external safety(this has now been revised due to the fact that it has now been proven that a gun doesnt have to have an external safety to be safe)
The second thing you said, and this is what leads me to believe that you have NO idea what you are talking about.
You made a refrence about a "wet"silencer.
When a silencer is refered to as a wet/dry silencer it has NOTHING to to with water.
Wetting a silencer is when you coat the wipes in a lite layer of oil to aid in suppression.
Most SUPPERSSORS (silencer is slang, suppressor is the propper term) are designed to withstand water HOWEVER they will NOT work underwater (due to the fact that they require AIR space to catch the expanding gasses)
There are 3 things that make sound when you fire a gun.
1.sonic boom (bullet breaking the speed of sound, subsonic ammo fixes this)
2. expanding gasses (this is what a suppressor HELPS to quiet down)
3.mechanical noise (the hammer or firing pin striking the primer,and the gun cycling
, some firearms try to quiet this noise , for example the h&k usp has an option that locks the slide so when fired the slide wont move)
If you are going to say something please make sure you know what you are saying and you have FACTS to back it up.
Im not sure if links are aloud in this forum so i didnt post any ( if i find out i can ill post alot in refrence to glocks and other diver friendly firearms)
questions or comments email at tsparks72001@yahoo.com no spam please(not that i get any
Hope this helps with your question,
scott
Lightning Fish
Contributor
Are there any rewards for resurrecting the oldest threads?
Don Burke
Contributor
I doubt this one is ranked lower than number three.Lightning Fish:
Similar threads
