Bob, at 08:03 on May 17 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

BG> Standard .22 LR. The Ruger's magazine looks like a 1" square
BG> box, and the cartridges load in a rotary fashion, not unlike
BG> the old Thompson .45. The whole idea is to make it sit flush
BG> with the stock, without protruding. 

BL> Terrific!

It is, actually.  Doesn't catch on the window during drive-bys.  :)

BG> Ruger also make a superb gas-operated .44 magnum SLR which is

BL> .44 Magnum pistol rounds? What a strange calibre. It would be rather 
BL> effective at killing people, but not very good at range. 

It's actually a very useful calibre, especially for short-range work, such
as with pigs.  The muzzle velocity is only 1960fps but it has a massive
amount of muzzle energy at close range, with its heavy 240g projectile.

BL> Rifles are things of great beauty, but so are viruses, and both are 
BL> dangerous on the loose.

Nope.  Just like viruses, guns are harmless without people to carry them.

BG> My Zs are subsonic, 25g at less than 1000fps.

BL> Yair... that's 1/4 the energy. It makes a huge differecne.

BG> Not to cats though, if they're within 25m or so. :)

BL> (grin). At what range would the bullet become harmless... 100m or so?

Hard to say.  I wouldn't really like to be hit with a Z, even from 100m. 
Any bullet with forward motion is dangerous IMO.  :)

BG> Why is that? Given a choice, why wouldn't a drive-by loony
BG> choose the weapon with the greatest killing power and magazine
BG> capacity? I sure would. 

BL> In Los Angeles they like a Uzi, but your average Lebbo hoon can't
BL> get his hands on one here, so they use .22L in semiauto. 

Something for which we can be thankful, I suppose.  I'd sooner be shot at
from a .22 than a fucking 9mm Uzi, or whatever.

BL> It *has* to be semiauto for drive-by, otherwise they only get one shot. 
BL> Full auto would be better.

Give me a ¬" drill and 5 minutes, and I can turn ANY semi into a full
auto, which means that anybody who's really serious can do exactly the same
thing.

BL> All true... except the cost. I don't think a professional hit man
BL> would include ammunition in his contract price.

ROFL!  "Here's your invoice Mr Skase, $100,000 for the hit, and 10c
for the bullet (plus sales tax if applicable)".

BL> and is quite as lethal as a 76mm at a thousand yards.

BG> Sorry Bob, but at 1000m the .22 has used almost all of its
BG> muzzle energy, and is at the extreme end of its maximum range

BL> I know that, but you misread what I wrote.

No, I correctly read what you mistyped.  :)

BL> At close range, a .22 is the weapon of choice for the Mafia,
BL> for instance. The bullet stays in there, and is quite as lethal
BL> as a 7.6mm at a thousand yards.

Very ambiguous, but I take your point now.  :)

BL> I meant the .22 at close range is as lethal as a 7.6mm at a thousand
BL> yards. And it is. English sucks.

Agreed.  Yes.  Absolutely (ask Rod).

BL> Why on earth would I think a .22L was any use at 1000 yards?

Dunno.  For the same reason that you reckon Goldstar weren't making VCRs in
1989 perhaps (they were, BTW) ?  :)

BL> In an urban situation, I think I'd rather face a loony with a
BL> 303 than a hoon with a 22 semiautomatic.

BG> Jeeze, I wouldn't! You could probably take a few .22 hits and survive, but 
BG> a .303 will cause absolutely MASSIVE tissue and bone damage as it passes

BL> I know all that, but a loony with the 303 will only get off one shot
BL> before I'm over the urban horizon, and he'll probably miss.

Whether or not you believe that Oswald killed Kennedy, the Warren
Commission proved beyond any doubt that it was possible for Oswald to
chamber and fire three rounds in five seconds, ALL with extreme accuracy,
from his prehistoric Mannlicher Carcano rifle.  That can logically be
extended to 36 aimed shots per minute, or 360 shots in just 10 minutes. 
Deduct maybe 25% of that total for reloading the 5-shot magazine with clips
(takes about 2 seconds), and it means that even with an old bolt-action
rifle, Bryant could still have killed 35 people in well under 2 minutes. 
And in your example above, you'd get just a few feet before his second shot
put your lights out for good.

BL> The hoon will enpty the entire clip, and as soon as I'm hit and 
BL> immobilised, he'll empty what's left into me. 

Bryant didn't.  With few exceptions, he methodically shot each person just
once, then set about finding another victim.

BL> If you gave me the choice of a 303 or a .22 semiautomatic at Port Arthur, 
BL> being about as good a marksman as the fuckwit with the Armalite, I'd take 
BL> the .22. I wouldn't kill 35, but I'd go close to a dozen. Someone would 
BL> jumnp me while I was working the bolt on the old 303.

Next time you visit the library, have a look at one of the ballistics
manuals, compare the velocity and energy figures between a .22 and a
7.62mm, then come back and tell me that you'd still prefer the .22 for a
mass slaughter.

BG> That actually varies with the terrain. In scrubby country where
BG> visibility is somewhat limited (say 50m or less), a 12g pump
BG> shotgun is the preferred choice (and is what I once
BG> specifically use on pigs), although the professionals out
BG> around St George and Goondiwindi seem to prefer 7.62mm SLRs or
BG> the Ruger .44 magnums (some prefer this calibre as they can use
BG> the same cartridges in both their rifles and revolvers). It's
BG> definitely a regional thing though. 

BL> I went shooting pigs at Mooree in swampy scrub like you said, and
BL> the local publican used an old 303 (in the 60s)

Probably because ex-WWII Lee-Enfield SLMEs were only a couple of quid each
then, and ex-military ammo was dirt cheap too.

BL> plus a 357 you could hardly lift, let alone fire.

Might have been an old Webley, but they were generally .45 calibre.

BL> I stayed well out of it! I reckoned the shooters and their dogs were more 
BL> dangerous than the pigs. No one had a shotgun, but they had everything 
BL> else. It was a funny weekend.   

Sounds hilarious.  :)

BL> But in those days, the FN SLR was military and there were no other
BL> semiautomatics except a Bren. ROFL! I remember fondly the way they
BL> looked at Peter's .343

Presumably you mean the .243 Winchester (round, not rifle).

BL> that was his pride and joy with a 6X scope that cost him a fortune. The 
BL> idea of hunting pigs with a proper hunting rifle had never occurred to 
BL> them. They just let the dogs find the pig, yelled madly, and shot anything 
BL> that wasn't a dog.

Bloody hell, I can just imagine everybody running around yelling "woof".

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20