# Lifestyles & Discussion > Personal Security & Defense >  This sub-forum needs education

## voortrekker

Hello Everyone,

I venture to this sub-forum from time to time maybe once a week.

The posts and threads are positve for the most part, but reasoning really stands to be seen.

It really, really disappoints me to see people buying this or that firearm and they are all fired up about it.  They buy "something" and they could have bought more with their Federal Reserve Notes.

I've been there.  Learn from someone who has spent his money and learned is lessons.

My advice, the ABSOLUTE first purchase should be to buy this $28.00 book :

"Boston's Gun Bible"

by Boston T. Party


This book is ABSOLUTELY indespensible.

http://www.amazon.com/Bostons-Gun-Bi...2093166&sr=1-1


My recommendation depends on where you live.

If you live in the city, I would have at least, a shotgun loaded with buck-shot, a pistol at 9mm up to .45 ACP, *and ESPECIALLY a RIFLE*, AR-15, AK-47 semi-auto variant, or the SKS.

If you don't have alot of money right now, buy an SKS.  You will get one for $200 and they are very reliable and will out shoot the AK-47 semi-auto variants.

Buy your rifle first, then buy a pistol for home or to fight your way back to your rifle.

Shotguns are the BEST for defending your home while you are IN YOUR home.


If you live in the country, I would recommend something that reaches out more.  Here we are thinking 300yds and greater.

Pick rifles in the .308 or 30-06 caliber, why these calibers? They are VERY common calibers, one can find rounds to buy almost anywhere.

If you live in the country, first I would get a M1A...M1 Garand....or a FAL.  They are semi-auto and time proven.

A good old fashion deer rifle would be my second choice.

THEN, buy a shot-gun for home defense, then buy a reliable pistol.

Let's not forget ammo, I would buy at least 200 to 300 rounds of ammo for my rifle at ABSOLUTE minimum to have at home during any time.

The shot-gun 20 rds, buck-shot.

The pistol 50 rds.

Rembember, you need to practice shooting.  It does no good to own these tools of LIBERTY unless you know how to use them.  You need to go out at least every two months and practice.

Another really GREAT tip, you almost ALWAYS get your best price at a gunshow.

I hope this helps, remember what I was saying about that book, please get it, it will help you make the best decision and save you money.


"Boston's Gun Bible"

by Boston T. Party

http://www.amazon.com/Bostons-Gun-Bi...2093166&sr=1-1




Respectfully and Sincerely,

Brett

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Shotguns are the BEST for defending your home while you are IN YOUR home....The shot-gun 20 rds, buck-shot.


I wouldn't recommend buckshot if you have children or you live in an apartment building.

Buckshot will easily penetrate walls in the average home or apartment. Thus you might accidentally shoot one of your kids in their bedroom, or one of your neighbors in an adjoining apartment.

In a home defense situation, I'd recommend a 12-gauge loaded with standard 2-3/4-inch #4 birdshot. At the short ranges involved in these types of situations, that's more than enough stopping power for even the biggest and most deranged assailants.

I'd also recommend that the shotgun be specifically designed for defense, with the barrel length right at the 18-inch legal limit. Hunting shotguns have longer barrels that are harder to maneuver in tight spaces, and are easier for perpetrators to grab.

I'd also have a good semi-auto handgun close by for backup, in no less than 9mm caliber. 

If you're going to be outside or traveling in your vehicle, I would recommend a standard 2-3/4-inch #4 BUCKSHOT load in your 12-gauge. Don't forget your handgun backup!

----------


## pcosmar

I have read some articles By Boston T. Party, though not that one. I have heard it recommended before.
This sub forum does need Education. There are a lot of Non shooters and new gun owners, and a lot of misinformation.

Speaking of misinformation. This is very BAD advice.



> I wouldn't recommend buckshot if you have children or you live in an apartment building.
> 
> Buckshot will easily penetrate walls in the average home or apartment. Thus you might accidentally shoot one of your kids in their bedroom, or one of your neighbors in an adjoining apartment.
> 
> In a home defense situation, I'd recommend a 12-gauge loaded with standard 2-3/4-inch #4 birdshot. At the short ranges involved in these types of situations, that's more than enough stopping power for even the biggest and most deranged assailants.


Anything that will penetrate a Bad Guy will penetrate a wall. Use the most effective means of stopping an intruder.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3.htm



> Birdshot as a Defense Load
> I have had a lot of questions, summed up as follows: How effective is birdshot (#4, #6, #8, etc.) as a defense load?
> 
> We have done tests with various birdshot loads. Birdshot penetrated through two pieces of drywall (representing one wall) and was stopped in the paper on the front of the second wall. The problem with birdshot is that it does not penetrate enough to be effective as a defense round. Birdshot is designed to bring down little birds.





> In fact, tests have shown that even #4 Buckshot lacks the necessary penetration to reach the vital organs. Only 0 Buck, 00 Buck, and 000 Buck penetrate enough to reach the vital organs.
> 
> Unless you expect to be attacked by little birds, do not use birdshot. Use 00 Buck. It will do the job.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Speaking of misinformation. This is very BAD advice. Anything that will penetrate a Bad Guy will penetrate a wall. Use the most effective means of stopping an intruder.


You're the only one peddling misinformation and bad advice, and your statement that anything that will penetrate a bad guy will penetrate a wall is blatantly false.

*"Although birdshot is not as lethal as buckshot, even at close range, it may make sense for home or apartment defense where the opportunity exists to injure or kill innocent people behind thin walls in adjacent rooms....At close range, birdshot can destroy a great deal of tissue, producing a gruesome wound."*

http://www.internetarmory.com/shotgun_ammo.htm

----------


## Conservative Christian

From Guns & Ammo magazine:

*"At "inside the house" ranges, 10 to 12 yards is a long shot, and shot size isn't critical. Even No. 8 birdshot will pattern into a six- to eight-inch circle at these distances. And it'll do plenty of damage, too."*

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/long_guns/def_090105/

----------


## pcosmar

> You're the only one peddling misinformation and bad advice, and your statement that anything that will penetrate a bad guy will penetrate a wall is blatantly false.
> 
> *"Although birdshot is not as lethal as buckshot, even at close range, it may make sense for home or apartment defense where the opportunity exists to injure or kill innocent people behind thin walls in adjacent rooms....At close range, birdshot can destroy a great deal of tissue, producing a gruesome wound."*
> 
> http://www.internetarmory.com/shotgun_ammo.htm


Try to find a real source. that appears to be a gamers site.
I have had real world experience including being shot.
I know people that use bird shot to train dogs, peppering a dogs butt will give negative reinforcement without killing the dog. I don't recommend this kind of training, but I have seen it used. 
Bird shot is widely discouraged as a self defense load. NOBODY of any credibility will recommend Bird shot as a good for anything but birds and small game.
Bird shot is for birds. Period.
At 10 yards it would be no worse than road rash, and would not penetrate my leather jacket.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Try to find a real source. that appears to be a gamers site.
> I have had real world experience including being shot.
> I know people that use bird shot to train dogs, peppering a dogs butt will give negative reinforcement without killing the dog. I don't recommend this kind of training, but I have seen it used. 
> Bird shot is widely discouraged as a self defense load. NOBODY of any credibility will recommend Bird shot as a good for anything but birds and small game.
> Bird shot is for birds. Period.
> At 10 yards it would be no worse than road rash, and would not penetrate my leather jacket.


The internationally respected Guns & Ammo magazine isn't a "real source"?!

From Guns & Ammo magazine:

*"At "inside the house" ranges, 10 to 12 yards is a long shot, and shot size isn't critical. Even No. 8 birdshot will pattern into a six- to eight-inch circle at these distances. And it'll do plenty of damage, too."*

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/long_guns/def_090105/

----------


## Conservative Christian

*"Birdshot is your typical field load. The load packages a multitude of very small pellets into one shell. At close contact distances (<20 feet) birdshot will behave exactly like buckshot or slugs, as the birdshot will still be locked into the shot cup -- try patterning birdshot at twenty feet and you'll get one large ragged hole. For this reason, some apartment dwellers like to use birdshot as their defense load -- at close distances (such as those found within apartments) it still packs the punch of buckshot or slugs, but it doesn't have as much overpenetration power once the shot string moves a decent distance from the muzzle....In my opinion, buckshot and slugs can be horribly overpenetrative, depending on the distance from the muzzle. Obviously, slugs are the worst and birdshot is the best when it comes to losing energy over distance. Remember that buck and birdshot will lose energy faster over distance due to their poor aerodynamics, when compared to slugs. 

Choose your defense load based on your surroundings and the structure of your home. If you live out in the boondocks where it's ten miles between you and your nearest neighbor, slugs and buckshot will do just fine. If you live in a crowded apartment building, birdshot may be more to your liking. But remember, be aware of what's beyond your target, even if it is ten miles to your neighbor's house -- it might be your spouse or child beyond the next wall."*

http://members.tripod.com/~jth8260/shotgun.html

----------


## pcosmar

More on the subject.
http://www.shadonet.com/2008/01/25/c...-home-defense/



> Conclusion:
> 
> Bird shot is for birds, not people people!
> 
> Even the #4 heavy bird shot load at 3 yards did not penetrate sufficiently to reliably stop an attacker, remember the FBI defines minimum acceptable penetration as 12 inches with 18 inches preferred.
> 
> Bird shot should never be used for a home defense load, all bird shot loads lack both the momentum and penetration required to reliably stop a human attacker. This really shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone because bird shot is designed for lightweight game, if the pellets were capable of stopping a human it would devastate the small animal and not leave much to eat.
> 
> While the intentions of people who recommend bird shot are usually good they usually lack a fundamental understanding of terminal ballistics and unintentionally give horrible advice. They often site examples of bad guys being shot with bird shot breaking off an attack, the important thing to realize is that in almost all cases the attacker chose to stop the attack, he was not forced to stop.
> ...


The effects of birdshot.


And More.
    * Range: 3 yards
    * Shotgun: 18 inch barreled Remington 870 Marine Magnumn
    * Round: 12 gauge 2� Remington Heavy Dove 1-1/8 oz #4 Birdshot
    * Gelatin: 9'x9'x19' 10% ordinance gelatin block
    * Measured Average Permenant Cavity: 6.5 inches (16.5 cm)
    * Temporary Stretch Cavity: 0.0 to 6.0 inches (0.0 to 15.2 cm)
    * Calibration BB Velocity: 624 fps
    * Calibration BB Penetration: 12.3 cm 





> Small sized birdshot such as this #4 heavy dove load is a poor choice for deployment with a tactical shotgun. Wounds inflicted from birdshot tend to be gruesome yet shallow as they lack the penetration required to reach vital cardiovascular or central nervous system structures.


Except at extreme close range it is not an effective load.

----------


## Conservative Christian

*"This is a guide to help you select the best ammunition for your defensive firearm. Most of these opinions are based upon the work of Massad Ayoob, Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow, police officers who have extensively studied the issue of firearms, ammunition and stopping power. I refer all interested parties to the excellent series by Ayoob ('In the Gravest Extreme,''Stressfire,' 'The Semi-Automatic Pistol in Police Service and Self-Defense', 'Stressfire II: Advanced Combat Shotgun') and the comprehensive book 'Stopping Power' by Marshall and Sanow....

...Two things to keep in mind about birdshot. The first is that birdshot is as lethal as buckshot at close range. Don't believe for a second that you can just wound someone with birdshot and he'll go on to live another day. If you aren't justified in killing a man, you aren't justified in wounding him, either. Never "shoot to wound." I once again direct you to read Ayoob's 'In the Gravest Extreme' and learn the truth.

The second thing is that birdshot makes a lot of sense for home defense. I keep my home-defense 12 gauge loaded with two #4 birdshot rounds followed by 00 buck. Birdshot is much less likely to penetrate thin interior walls and kill innocent people on the other side, and has lower recoil than buckshot for faster follow-up shots (I live in a thin-walled apartment house, however - if I lived in a solid house with a lot of land around, I would definitely choose buckshot instead). 

The stopping power of birdshot should not be under-estimated: at ranges out to thirty feet or so, birdshot is virtually a solid column of lead. Choose any #4 or BB high brass lead hunting load. I like the Federal "Classic Lead Hi-Brass" #4 birdshot (HI26-4) and Winchester "Super-X" #4 high brass birdshot (X12-4), but there is little difference between the various choices. Buy whichever you please. If you're a bird hunter, use your favorite hunting shells as long as they are #6 or larger."*

http://www.chuckhawks.com/ammo_by_anonymous.htm

----------


## pcosmar

> *"This is a guide to help you select the best ammunition for your defensive firearm. Most of these opinions are based upon the work of Massad Ayoob, Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow, police officers who have extensively studied the issue of firearms, ammunition and stopping power. I refer all interested parties to the excellent series by Ayoob ('In the Gravest Extreme,''Stressfire,' 'The Semi-Automatic Pistol in Police Service and Self-Defense', 'Stressfire II: Advanced Combat Shotgun') and the comprehensive book 'Stopping Power' by Marshall and Sanow....
> 
> ...Two things to keep in mind about birdshot. The first is that birdshot is as lethal as buckshot at close range. Don't believe for a second that you can just wound someone with birdshot and he'll go on to live another day. If you aren't justified in killing a man, you aren't justified in wounding him, either. Never "shoot to wound." I once again direct you to read Ayoob's 'In the Gravest Extreme' and learn the truth.
> 
> The second thing is that birdshot makes a lot of sense for home defense. I keep my home-defense 12 gauge loaded with two #4 birdshot rounds followed by 00 buck. Birdshot is much less likely to penetrate thin interior walls and kill innocent people on the other side, and has lower recoil than buckshot for faster follow-up shots (I live in a thin-walled apartment house, however - if I lived in a solid house with a lot of land around, I would definitely choose buckshot instead). 
> 
> The stopping power of birdshot should not be under-estimated: at ranges out to thirty feet or so, birdshot is virtually a solid column of lead. Choose any #4 or BB high brass lead hunting load. I like the Federal "Classic Lead Hi-Brass" #4 birdshot (HI26-4) and Winchester "Super-X" #4 high brass birdshot (X12-4), but there is little difference between the various choices. Buy whichever you please. If you're a bird hunter, use your favorite hunting shells as long as they are #6 or larger."*
> 
> http://www.chuckhawks.com/ammo_by_anonymous.htm


Did you read that whole piece?



> Shotguns
> 
> Use buckshot. Slugs and birdshot are useful in some limited and uncommon situations.

----------


## OddballAZ

Bostons Gun Bible is an absolutely GREAT book. I also highly recommend it! If I could only have one book (other than the real Bible) I'd pick this one.

I'm in the middle of reading one of Boston T Party's other books, "Molon Labe". So far it's a very good book. But it's a story and not an information book. I think all Ron Paul supporters would enjoy this book, not just gun owners.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Did you read that whole piece?


Sure did. His reference to using buckshot was for GENERAL defensive purposes.

However, home defense where you're in an apartment or your own children are in an adjoining room, is one of the "limited" situations where he says birdshot makes "a lot of sense".

If you were able to read better, you would realize that he clearly stated that he uses BIRDSHOT for HIS OWN home defense shotgun! 

That's powerful enough testimony for me right there. You also apparently didn't comprehend his statement that birdshot is just as effective as buckshot at home defense ranges.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Except at extreme close range it is not an effective load.


It's effective at ANY range within your home. 

Your source's statement that it's not a good round for tactical deployment is utterly irrelevant.

Tactical deployment means police, SWAT and military use.

We're talking home defense here, where your wife and children may be in the next room or standing in the line of fire behind the assailant.

So your apples and oranges comparison doesn't hold any water. 

And while we're at it, why don't you give us your source's credentials as a firearms expert. I'm skeptical of anybody named "Shado Walker". That name might sound cool to a ten year old, but he sounds like just another self-proclaimed "internet expert" to me.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> The effects of birdshot.


Your photo would only convince somebody who is completely ignorant of the Cheney hunting accident.

Cheney was using a 28-gauge shotgun, and the victim was about NINETY FEET away.

A 12-gauge shotgun loaded with #4 birdshot at a typical home defense range of 15 to 20 feet, would be devastating.

If Cheney had gotten a solid upper torso hit on him with a 12-gauge with #4 birdshot at 20 feet, the guy would've been in critical condition or the morgue.

----------


## pcosmar

OK use what ever you want.
A .22 can kill but that does not make it a good self defense choice.
I guess 40 some years of experience and Infantry Qualifications with every weapon available to the Infantry in the 70s just don't count.
I don't worry about walls. I don't shoot walls.

Use enough gun.

----------


## CountryboyRonPaul

General Redneck rule of thumb:

If it'll kill a deer, it'll kill a person.

If I were in a home defense situation, I would much rather be using any buckshot than #4 birdshot.

----------


## madengr

You need to pattern your buckshot with *your* shotgun before relying on it.  For example the Winchester 00 I have handy is about 1"/yard spread in my 870 Marine Magnum.  So I know down the length of my hallway I can contain all the shot to the perps center of mass, or take his face off should he have my kid at chest level.  The Winchester 00 is actually the backup ammo.  I keep Hornaday TAP loaded.  This stuff is amazing, more like 0.1"/yard spread.

I like "Boston on Guns and Courage".  Great cover:

----------


## Jim_Karr

> Small sized birdshot such as this #4 heavy dove load is a poor choice for deployment with a tactical shotgun. Wounds inflicted from birdshot tend to be gruesome yet shallow as they lack the penetration required to reach vital cardiovascular or central nervous system structures.


I don't know any hunter who hunts doves with no.4 shot. Turkey yes. Other game birds,not hardly.  The best way is to get out there and try different loads. I for one knows that any shotgun fired within 12 feet will do major damage to its target no matter what size shot is used or if it 2 3/4  up to 3 1/2 magnum loads. It is going to punch thru walls completly. Old double plank houses maybe not the 2 3/4 inch but the 3 and 4 inch magnums will even go thru these walls. Walls are constructed of dry wall and you can punch thru it with your fist. No matter what shot you use, You are going to shoot thru that wall .
No ifs or buts about it.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> OK use what ever you want.
> A .22 can kill but that does not make it a good self defense choice.
> I guess 40 some years of experience and Infantry Qualifications with every weapon available to the Infantry in the 70s just don't count.
> I don't worry about walls. I don't shoot walls. Use enough gun.


If you don't know the power difference between a 12-gauge shotgun and a .22, there's not much I can say that'll change your mind.

I never advocated using a .22. In fact in another thread in this very forum, I advised NOT to use one, except as a temporary "learner's" gun for women and newbies who are intimidated by larger guns.

I don't shoot walls either, but in a confined space buckshot will go through the walls of the typical house or apartment like a hot knife through butter. I wouldn't want to end up with a dead child or neighbor, simply because I was too stupid to realize that buckshot has too much penetration for certain home defense situations.

If you live alone in a single family home, buckshot is fine and dandy. I'm not saying not to use it at all, I simply said you shouldn't use it under the conditions I've already described.

Another advantage to birdshot in a home defense situation is the significantly lower recoil. You'll get off a noticeably quicker second shot with birdshot than you will with a heavy recoil buckshot load. 

Being able to get a second shot off quicker is very important if you happen to miss with your first shot, or there are multiple assailants. With birdshot, you can fire faster and with more control, which is crucial in a self-defense situation.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Buy your rifle first, then buy a pistol for home or to fight your way back to your rifle.


I would strongly advise everybody to buy a handgun first, especially if they live in the city and/or are on a tight budget.

You can keep it in your home, vehicle or on your person virtually at all times, if necessary. That way you'll have ready protection immediately, where ever you go.

Get a concealed carry permit if they're available in your state. The typical course usually lasts only a few hours, and will set you back maybe 100-150 bucks. It's worth every cent to be able to carry your handgun legally in most places.

If you buy a rifle first, it'll be pretty much worthless except in your home. You can't carry it with you most places. It's not concealable on your person. Nor is it concealable in most motor vehicles, except in the trunk. However, it's not going to do much good if you need to get to it in a hurry, and it's locked in a trunk.

You won't be able to carry a rifle around with you in the city. Just try walking into a store or gas station toting an SKS. You'll be in the slam before you can say "I should've bought a handgun first."

----------


## Cowlesy

On .22's...I just have to say I killed my first 3 deer as a youngster with a .22 Hornet (yeah not exactly a .22) between probably 60 and 80 yards.  

A .22 can and is lethal.

Learning how to shoot SAFELY and accurately is the first item.  Then learning how to shoot in distressed situations will keep you extra safe.

----------


## Doktor_Jeep

I can also recommend Boston's book.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

> I wouldn't recommend buckshot if you have children or you live in an apartment building.
> 
> Buckshot will easily penetrate walls in the average home or apartment. Thus you might accidentally shoot one of your kids in their bedroom, or one of your neighbors in an adjoining apartment.
> 
> In a home defense situation, I'd recommend a 12-gauge loaded with standard 2-3/4-inch #4 birdshot.



check out: www.theboxotruth.com

you will find that "penetration" is a much more interesting study than people would have you think.



I'm really not busting on you C_C, you just post salient points i choose to address.

----------


## Tugboat1988

I encourage everyone to read Boston's books. Why not, you might pick up some good information while entertaining yourself. To tell the truth, I haven't read any of them because, as far as I know, he never gave my shooting buddy credit for bringing the knowledge of "Molon labe" to the shooting public. Brian "Beach Boys" Wilson did when he hosted talk radio. Here is one of George's articles: 
http://www.brianwilson.net/pages/molon.html

----------


## Tugboat1988

Drats: The email address at the bottom of George's article is an old one and no longer in use.

----------


## Doktor_Jeep

Hear hear!
That is a very good book.

----------


## Hawk45

First off folks are mistakenly identifying #4 'BUCKSHOT' with Number 4 birdshot.  These are two completely different animals.  The birdshot is good for turkeys and the like and inside the average home with the distance limited to about 20 feet.  At 20 feet or less it hits almost like a slug as it has not had time or the distance to open up yet.

As to the BUCKSHOT I will take the 27 pellets of #4 Buckshot over the 9-12 pellets of 00 Buckshot every time.  #4 buckshot will penatrate every much as the 00 will.

As to how I know this I carried it in COMBAT, but I didn't like it as much as my rifle.  Too heavy to carry over the extra rounds the rifle carried for the same weight.


As to what to buy, it is a matter of what they are going to ban first.  First would be the 'assault rifles' and followed closely by the high cap pistols.  Buy these FIRST with the magazines they will need as they will be banned with the guns first.  Minimum recommendation is 10 high capacity magazines per rifle and at least 5 per pistol.  If I was serious though I would DOUBLE this amount as they are already going up in price NOW as most older gun owners are already seeing the writing on the wall.  I am already seeing magazines that were going for $10 each just 3 months ago already going for $25 each NOW.

People always ask me what 'precious metals' I am investing in.  They get really strange looks on their faces when I say steel and aluminum.  I am buying ALL the magazines I can afford right now!  Last time I did this I made OVER 1000% profit from my iniatial investment.  Lets see silver coins or gold bullion do that and still be able to defend me or feed me in the mean time.

----------


## Doktor_Jeep

Even I get lost on the types of shotgun ammo.

----------


## american.swan

Instead of arguing over whether it will go through dry wall or not.   Which makes me laugh.  

Why not argue over whether it will go through the vest of the ATF agent in SWAT gear about to shoot you for thumbing the constitution to everyone you know?

Guess you could always try and get Mythbusters to prove your point.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

american.swan, i again refer you to www.theboxotruth.com, specifically: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot16.htm

----------


## AisA1787

> Instead of arguing over whether it will go through dry wall or not.   Which makes me laugh.  
> 
> Why not argue over whether it will go through the vest of the ATF agent in SWAT gear about to shoot you for thumbing the constitution to everyone you know?
> 
> Guess you could always try and get Mythbusters to prove your point.


Have you really only read six and a half books?  That's sad.  But it explains a lot.   You're right though -- an ATF agent showed up at my door yesterday and said "I'm about to shoot you for thumbing the constitution to everyone you know."  And then I woke up.

Seriously though, why not argue over the fact that you haven't presented anything resembling a point?  And why in the world is an ATF agent wearing SWAT gear?  If you're in the ATF, you're not in SWAT.  And if you're in SWAT, you're not in the ATF.

edit:  The ATF has SWAT units.  I apologize to swan and pcosmar.  my bad.

----------


## pcosmar

> Seriously though, why not argue over the fact that you haven't presented anything resembling a point?  And why in the world is an ATF agent wearing SWAT gear?  If you're in the ATF, you're not in SWAT.  And if you're in SWAT, you're not in the ATF.


You are truly ignorant.
The ATF generally uses local resources,but not always.
*SWAT*  stands for "*S*pecial *W*eapons *A*nd *T*actics".
You should really educate yourself before dumping on someone.

----------


## pcosmar

> Have you really only read six and a half books?  That's sad.  But it explains a lot.   You're right though -- an ATF agent showed up at my door yesterday and said "I'm about to shoot you for thumbing the constitution to everyone you know."  And then I woke up.
> 
> Seriously though, why not argue over the fact that you haven't presented anything resembling a point?  And why in the world is an ATF agent wearing SWAT gear?  If you're in the ATF, you're not in SWAT.  And if you're in SWAT, you're not in the ATF.


This forum really does need education.
Are you really that uninformed?
Here is some help.
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007...rorist-threat/
http://web.archive.org/web/200601100...-gov_grps.html



> Anti-government groups usually believe:
> 
>     *
> 
>       Gun Control = Enslavement
>     *
> 
>       Constitution has been subverted
>     *
> ...


Do you really believe these Masked Gunmen are your friends?


Police acting as thugs in Canada at the SPP. Caught and exposed.








You might also check out the Rise of Botched Raids.
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

----------


## AisA1787

cool off pcosmar, I'm not on "their" (ATF, police, et al.) side.  I'm on your side.  Nobody wants repeats of Waco, Ruby Ridge, the Elian Gonzalez case, or the numerous other less well-known offenses by law enforcement agencies.  I simply get tired of arguments that loosely bandy around acronyms in an attempt to make an emotional argument.  Not to mention arguments that rely heavily on disturbing images, such as yours.  These types of arguments _do not_ educate people -- they only alienate them.  If that's what you want, keep doing it.

p.s. that's a good homegrown terrorist article.  thanks.

----------


## Cowlesy

> check out: www.theboxotruth.com
> 
> you will find that "penetration" is a much more interesting study than people would have you think.



Very cool site -- thanks for the post!

----------


## Doktor_Jeep

The police are so federalized now that there is little difference between ATF and SWAT. They all go to the same schools and get almost the same equipment. They all enforce the same laws too - though local police were previously not so big on federal laws. 

Of course most local cops will not ask an illegal about his immigration status (federal law) but if he thinks the barrel on your shotgun is too short (federal law) you will likely go down. 

As for penetration of body armor, this is a sticky subject and everybody who knows ballistics knows what the limitations are. I would not recommend people openly discuss that topic because it can be used against you and they can attach any level of "intent" to a post that they want.

That being written however, it everyone possessed arms that denied a total garuntee in armor protection (even some pistols do that - look up .38 Super), the Leviathan state would be very nervous about the whole thing and print yet more money to make sure their minions got better armor. Considering that no regime that prints money ever lasted long, the subject of defeating state armor is one avenue of beating them without having to fire a shot, even if that is one heck of a shot. The more capable the peasants are, the more the state will have to spend on equipment, training, and insurance. The state can be bled to death through it's own monetary policy by using it's own fear against it. That is, if every intended tax slave was well equiped and trained, the state would print more money to get more equipment and training for its minions. Keep in mind that the state's minions are trained like attack dogs. And ask a dog trainer and you will be told that they never let a dog lose in training. To do so makes for an ineffective attack dog. For the state to continue on the current course towards total tyranny, they need their "dogs" to be able to carry out their order without fear of getting killed. If they did fear, then it's not likely they will want to carry out the dirty deeds of the state. All the world knows force and when the chances of death are raised for a state operator, then it's likely that the elites and politicians will be told "You want to take their guns/property/relocate them? Then do it yourself!"

----------


## Doktor_Jeep

By the way...

This thread was about "education". Notably there are two kinds of education in this realm. 

There is a difference between the two.

Never confuse knowing all about the politics and social aspects of the subject and knowing about actual handling of the steel. I know gun right advocates who can site gun laws and every case, deal a conversational smack down to any detractors on the subject, and know everything there is to know about guns...

and they couldn't shoot their own foot even if you taped the rifle to their leg.

The other education is all about shooting and how to to it, requiring a knowledge in ballistics and limitations. In the end it matters not how much you know about everything, but instead whether you can hit that target at 600 meters. I know people who know very little about things and will not waste their time on such matters but will hit anything they aim at.

----------


## Cowlesy

> By the way...
> 
> This thread was about "education". Notably there are two kinds of education in this realm. 
> 
> There is a difference between the two.
> 
> Never confuse knowing all about the politics and social aspects of the subject and knowing about actual handling of the steel. I know gun right advocates who can site gun laws and every case, deal a conversational smack down to any detractors on the subject, and know everything there is to know about guns...
> 
> and they couldn't shoot their own foot even if you taped the rifle to their leg.
> ...


I totally agree -- thanks for the post!

----------


## pcosmar

> cool off pcosmar, I'm not on "their" (ATF, police, et al.) side.  I'm on your side.  Nobody wants repeats of Waco, Ruby Ridge, the Elian Gonzalez case, or the numerous other less well-known offenses by law enforcement agencies.  I simply get tired of arguments that loosely bandy around acronyms in an attempt to make an emotional argument.  Not to mention arguments that rely heavily on disturbing images, such as yours.  These types of arguments _do not_ educate people -- they only alienate them.  If that's what you want, keep doing it.
> 
> p.s. that's a good homegrown terrorist article.  thanks.


My post was meant to be educational. 
Some folks need to be shaken from their slumber. No one was "loosely bandying" anything. Someone made a comment about ATF SWAT units. Then a comment that contained misinformation followed.



> And why in the world is an ATF agent wearing SWAT gear? If you're in the ATF, you're not in SWAT. And if you're in SWAT, you're not in the ATF.


There are, in fact, SWAT units in every law enforcement  arm, from Federal down to small podunk towns.
The pictures (disturbing?) were to prove that point. They show ATF Agents in SWAT Gear.
They are hardly the most disturbing pictures I could find, in fact they are quite common. There are many more disturbing photos available.
In fact the one photo of the Cop in the bandanna, is both educational and disturbing. 
 

For those that are gathering to protest or to Rally in Washington. This was a Agent provocateur. There were a few at the SPP protest in Canada. They were trying to provoke violence  at a peaceful protest, but they were caught and photographed.
It is a tactic to be aware of.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=95c_1188228555

----------


## AisA1787

> For those that are gathering to protest or to Rally in Washington. This was a Agent provocateur. There were a few at the SPP protest in Canada. They were trying to provoke violence  at a peaceful protest, but they were caught and photographed.
> It is a tactic to be aware of.
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow
> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=95c_1188228555


interesting info, I didn't get that the first time you posted the picture.  thanks again.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

> My post was meant to be educational. 
>  Someone made a comment about ATF SWAT units.


and then you showed a bunch of irrelevant (yeah. _irrelevant._ look it up) pictures of random guys wearing black and carrying guns, like you were some kind of person who knows things and who we should believe.


i can post pictures of guys wearing black and carrying guns all day. i won't even say they're canadian communist agent provocateurs ... you'll have to believe me. because i said so in a commanding voice. with pictures. really. pictures. they are  facts. they don't lie, because they are pictures.


you were probably the kid in high school with the "canadian girlfriend" weren't you???


come on man. seriously. you're not even making me work to make fun of you here. that is disappointing. 


and for the record, duh, i am rude. but i am right. deal.

----------


## Doktor_Jeep

Evidently teaching each other how to spot agents gets a rise out of the COINTELPRO.

We need a thread on how to ID them and find out where they are stationed (which base or precinct).

Tit for tat you know.

----------


## pcosmar

> and then you showed a bunch of irrelevant (yeah. _irrelevant._ look it up) pictures of random guys wearing black and carrying guns, like you were some kind of person who knows things and who we should believe.
> 
> 
> i can post pictures of guys wearing black and carrying guns all day. i won't even say they're canadian communist agent provocateurs ... you'll have to believe me. because i said so in a commanding voice. with pictures. really. pictures. they are  facts. they don't lie, because they are pictures.
> 
> 
> you were probably the kid in high school with the "canadian girlfriend" weren't you???
> 
> 
> ...


STFU
THIS statement was made.



> And why in the world is an ATF agent wearing SWAT gear? If you're in the ATF, you're not in SWAT. And if you're in SWAT, you're not in the ATF.


The "random" photos show this to be a FALSE (and ignorant) statement.

As to the agents in Canada. That Canadian police have since *admitted* that they were officers.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/249291

BTW,, I live on the Canadian border, I do not have a Canadian Girlfriend. I have Canadian Cousins, My mother was Canadian. (naturalized US citizen now)

----------


## ryanmkeisling

> ...I don't worry about walls. I don't shoot walls...


lol

----------


## the_british_are_coming

Did i hurt your little communist feelings? so sad... sorry...

just because you say something doesn't make it true, and btw...


STF You. Bitch. Canadian Bitch. Little, dirty canandian communist bitch.



Now that we're even._ (doesn't give you a happy feeling, does it?? so don't do it to other people.)_


Post more pictures, tell me they are things. So canada doesn't trust it's citizens. Ok, so next time tell me something that might be news.

I will believe you, respect you, and want to have your children, because you are a man who can post a link to an article. yay.


grow up, _retire the rude, or get it  back in your face every time_.

oh, one last thing.


When you PM a mod to have them ban me, tell them I asked you to.





> STFU
> THIS statement was made.
> 
> The "random" photos show this to be a FALSE (and ignorant) statement.
> 
> As to the agents in Canada. That Canadian police have since *admitted* that they were officers.
> http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/249291
> 
> BTW,, I live on the Canadian border, I do not have a Canadian Girlfriend. I have Canadian Cousins, My mother was Canadian. (naturalized US citizen now)

----------


## pcosmar

> Did i hurt your little communist feelings? so sad... sorry...
> 
> just because you say something doesn't make it true, and btw...
> 
> 
> STF You. Bitch. Canadian Bitch. Little, dirty canandian communist bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your ignorance is impressive.
You really shouldn't post DRUNK.

----------


## Spirit of '76

Keep the punches above the belt, please.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> Did i hurt your little communist feelings? so sad... sorry...
> 
> just because you say something doesn't make it true, and btw...
> 
> 
> STF You. Bitch. Canadian Bitch. Little, dirty canandian communist bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Um.  If I'm not mistaken, Mr Linux has completely proven that he was right in the first place.  Your reaction was not the adult, "Oh my, turns out you were correct, sorry old man!" but the juvenile, "Oh yeah?  well your momma wears combat boots!"

Now, since over the course of this thread, that fact is quite apparent and obvious, don't be surprised to discover that your integrity capitol has dipped below zero.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

like i said before.


this is not about anything but his rude "STFU" comment.  Would just one of you address the fact that I was very specific about that? please?

that "STFU" totally uncalled for, and if my "drunk post" (nice comment, idiot) calling him out for it is misinterpreted by a group of idiots, too bad for me. i'll probably cry myself to sleep, because someone on an internet forum doesn't completely agree with everything i think.


and if one article "completely proves" that random pics of guys in mismatching black outfits are a canadian death squad, then *my integrity capitol* on this forum is worth just about *your mom's combat boots.*

----------


## pcosmar

*Agent provocateur*



> a·gent pro·vo·ca·teur (ă-zhäN' prô-vô'kä-tœr') pronunciation
> n., pl. a·gents pro·vo·ca·teurs (ă-zhäN' prô-vô'kä-tœr').
> 
> A person employed to associate with suspected individuals or groups with the purpose of inciting them to commit acts that will make them liable to punishment.
> 
> [French : agent, agent + provocateur, instigator.]


Though there have been many instances where Government Forces have been suspected of using this tactic over the years, this is the first one that has been caught on video and proved. The Police have admitted that they were Officers,though they deny their purpose.
The authorities have been known to infiltrate any organization that is working for change over the years, the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement and, the Patriot movement.
Proving it has always been difficult, as they don't investigate themselves.
http://www.nowpublic.com/spp-agent-p...ncite-violence
www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=95c_1188228555
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?...rder=0&thold=0
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/st...ce-070822.html
This is good info
http://www.trackedinamerica.org/time..._rights/intro/
And much more
http://www.oilempire.us/cointelpro.html
*Be aware*.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

way to avoid the question, chief...

----------


## pcosmar

*the_british_are_coming * 

They are already here.



> The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the American Branch of a society which originated in England  (and)  believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.
> 
> Carroll Quigley, member of Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), mentor to Bill Clinton, quote from Tragedy and Hope, 1966


The "society" he was referring to is the Fabian Society. This is a British Socalist Group that infiltrated the United Stated in the early 1900s.
From the Wiki,  (though there are many other sources, this is basic)



> The Fabian Society is a British socialist movement, whose purpose is to advance the socialist cause by gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary means. It is best known for its initial ground-breaking work beginning late in the Nineteenth century and continuing up to World War I. The society laid many of the foundations of the Labour Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging from the Decolonisation of the British Empire, especially India. The society is still in existence today and forms a vanguard of the centre-left New Labour movement.


These are the same core group of the CFR and their goals and methods are the same.
Their symbol is a Wolf in sheep's clothing.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

i would just like to remind everyone that pcosmar is a plant. a little, question avoiding, re-directing, avoiding the fact that he is the COINTELPRO snitch (thanks DokJeep...).

And also a great argument for the revocation of any naturalized citizenship granted in, say, the last 200 years.


Oh, if you haven't guessed, i'm not here to make friends. i'm here to express opinions. which the constitution of my country expressly grants me the freedom to do.

feel free to express your opinion back! we could form a club! the "opinion expressors!"

and we could all hate each other!

----------


## the_british_are_coming

> *the_british_are_coming * 
> 
> They are already here.


and they are you.  i mean, really. someone from MICHIGAN telling me about freedom? and America?

Who's your governor, again???


right... that's what i thought.

----------


## pcosmar

> and they are you.  i mean, really. someone from MICHIGAN telling me about freedom? and America?
> 
> Who's your governor, again???
> 
> 
> right... that's what i thought.


There are a good many here that are disgusted by Granholm and are working to change that.

Where do you get any idea that I am British? or that I am not a natural born citizen?
You really need to get your facts straight , kid.




> i would just like to remind everyone that pcosmar is a plant. a little, question avoiding, re-directing, avoiding the fact that he is the COINTELPRO snitch (thanks DokJeep...).
> 
> And also a great argument for the revocation of any naturalized citizenship granted in, say, the last 200 years.
> 
> 
> Oh, if you haven't guessed, i'm not here to make friends. i'm here to express opinions. which the constitution of my country expressly grants me the freedom to do.
> 
> feel free to express your opinion back! we could form a club! the "opinion expressors!"
> 
> and we could all hate each other!


Your ignorance is almost humorous, if it was not for stinking up threads with your spew.

FYI, My real name is posted on the web, as is my birth certificate, my address and some of my history.
If you want more history, pay the money for a background check. I know who I am.
When I say I know I am on Government lists, *I know it.*
They have my DNA and my prints, (in several states and agencies) and the have my records on file. I traveled this country for 7 years , on an alias, with warrants. I turned myself in, and got my name back.
I have served my full sentence, and am now free, but they know that I am NOT sheep.

You keep up your ignorant game, I will keep defending the Constitution.
I will keep working for Freedom and Liberty, I know what the cage feels like.

----------


## Expatriate

> When you PM a mod to have them ban me, tell them I asked you to.


No, actually I would prefer you weren't banned. Your unprecedented level of asshattery reminds me why I am participating in this forum to begin with.

If I send any PM, it will be asking the mods to please NOT ban you.

If you mean to piss us all off, maybe you should remember that political activists only work harder when they're pissed off. So in a way, you are defeating your own purpose. Kind of like insulting someone's mom as they're kicking your ass. It just earns you a harder beating in the end.

Thanks for keeping us pissed off. Keep up the excellent work!

----------


## the_british_are_coming

> There are a good many here that are disgusted by Granholm and are working to change that.
> 
> Where do you get any idea that I am British? or that I am not a natural born citizen?
> You really need to get your facts straight , kid.
> 
> 
> 
> Your ignorance is almost humorous, if it was not for stinking up threads with your spew.
> 
> ...


where do i get the idea that you are british, and not a naturalized citizen???


do i really need to re-direct to the post you are referring to??? *I* need to get my facts straight? you are the one who had warrants out, and traveled illegally... and served what should be federal time... if you are to be believed...  that makes me take you so much more seriously. (and after that, you want freedom???)

the bull$#@! about checking you out is a nice little effort at grandstanding... if you weren't to stupid to *get the original statement*, though, why should i address that,  either... seems like granholm cut funds to michigan schools too...


you think you are defending the constitution, and i am not??? ok. thanks.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

Expat...

not trying to piss you off. not trying to remind you of anything...

don't actually care what (or whether) you think at all.

i just say what i feel. in public.

since i have that right.

you also have the right to tell me i'm a dumbass.

i also have the right to rebuttal.


i just prefer we deal with facts. that's all.

so, thanks, really.

(and really, isn't 'asshattery' a fun word? c'mon!)

----------


## pcosmar

> where do i get the idea that you are british, and not a naturalized citizen???
> 
> 
> do i really need to re-direct to the post you are referring to???


*YES*, I think you can go back to where you thought I was  Canadian and I corrected you.
My Mother was naturalized in the late 40s, and long before my birth.




> *I* need to get my facts straight? you are the one who had warrants out, and traveled illegally... and served what should be federal time... if you are to be believed...  that makes me take you so much more seriously. (and after that, you want freedom???)


YUP, and more than that in my youth. I never said that I never made any stupid decisions, only that I have gotten past them and learned some on the way.
I have also served my time for those offenses. I have had my rights restored,and am now a LEGAL citizen.
I have a number of "life experiences" to draw from.
Being locked up in a Maximum Security Penitentiary has increased my love for freedom. I KNOW what it is like without it. I have had that unfortunate experience.
I am also old enough to have had a few more experiences and  observations of where this country was and where it is heading.

----------


## the_british_are_coming

pcosmar.... seriously? this again???


you want to know when i called you canadian? i really wish you would go back to that. then i would know you at least READ MY REPLY... damn...

i "called you canadian" (which YOU chose to take as an insult, mind you) DIRECTLY after you said:


"STFU"



YOU sir, started the $hit. You.   I reacted negatively, of course. but you earned it.

When your mother was naturalized is irrelevant. she didn't insult me... so... doesn't matter. she's probably very nice. she didn't tell me to STFU, so that's points for her.


if you're "old enough" to have had experiences, and to tell where we're going as a country...

why aren't you old enough to read posts before you react to them?

and maybe old enough to respond to words posted in a post?

----------


## pcosmar

*You Again?*



> and then you showed a bunch of irrelevant (yeah. _irrelevant._ look it up) pictures of random guys wearing black and carrying guns, like you were some kind of person who knows things and who we should believe.
> 
> 
> i can post pictures of guys wearing black and carrying guns all day. i won't even say they're canadian communist agent provocateurs ... you'll have to believe me. because i said so in a commanding voice. with pictures. really. pictures. they are  facts. they don't lie, because they are pictures.
> 
> 
> you were probably the kid in high school with the "canadian girlfriend" weren't you???
> 
> 
> ...


This was your response to a relevant news story that I had posted.
It was not only incorrect but was a personal attack, which is against forum rules.
Rather than report the post, I left it with STFU.
Others reading the thread, also pointed out your ignorance.




> Did i hurt your little communist feelings? so sad... sorry...
> 
> just because you say something doesn't make it true, and btw...
> 
> 
> STF You. Bitch. Canadian Bitch. Little, dirty canandian communist bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And this is where your Canadian fixation started.
You are still ignorant and incorrect.
So STFU.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> i just say what i feel. in public.
> 
> since i have that right.


This looks like a good place to remind you that this is not a public forum.  It is a privately-owned forum.  As such, we have forum guidelines, which by the way you are breaking every time you so freely toss around insults towards forum members.

Please review the forum guidelines:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=22

Thank you.

----------


## BillyDkid

> Your photo would only convince somebody who is completely ignorant of the Cheney hunting accident.
> 
> Cheney was using a 28-gauge shotgun, and the victim was about NINETY FEET away.
> 
> A 12-gauge shotgun loaded with #4 birdshot at a typical home defense range of 15 to 20 feet, would be devastating.
> 
> If Cheney had gotten a solid upper torso hit on him with a 12-gauge with #4 birdshot at 20 feet, the guy would've been in critical condition or the morgue.


You are so right - at ranges up to 50 feet bird shoot can certainly be deadly.  I knew a guy once who wasn't big on hunting rules and when he was out rabbit hunting or grouse hunting, if he came across deer he would likely shoot it as not.  I know of several deer he killed this way.  Even if you were a hundred feet away and someone shoots you with a 12 gauge with #4 shot it's going to do some damage and even if it didn't kill you, it could easily blind you.  Plenty of people have been killed at close range even with blanks.  At close range even the wadding alone could kill you.  I once killed a racoon up 40 feet in a tree with #8 shot - which is pretty damn dinky.

----------


## pcosmar

Yeah, and I know a guy that killed a bear with birdshot, out of a double barrel 12 ga.
He put 8 shells into its face, and it dropped at his feet. That is reloading and firing as it came at him.
That still does* not* make birdshot a good choice for bear.

----------


## Richard in Austin

Interesting website: http://www.theboxotruth.com/ wherein many inanimate objects are shot at.

----------


## BillyDkid

> Interesting website: http://www.theboxotruth.com/ wherein many inanimate objects are shot at.


Wow, I learned some stuff.  I guess I was wrong - though the guy I knew did kill deer with birdshot.  It's hard to imagine how after reading this.  Still, I wouldn't want to be shot with it.  I also have to think that there is a psychological effect on anyone from being shot with anything that can't be discounted - unlike animal who don't have a clue what is happening to them.

----------

