Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #54225 > unrolled thread
| Started by | William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-01-01 23:30 +0000 |
| Last post | 2014-01-06 12:12 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 301 — 35 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-01 23:30 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-01 18:41 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-01 23:48 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-01-01 21:31 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-01-01 19:16 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-02 18:08 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 09:18 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-02 10:30 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-01-02 09:55 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 16:50 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-02 16:52 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 16:59 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-02 17:23 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-02 11:54 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-03 13:43 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-04 23:36 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-04 19:07 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X william-wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-05 00:29 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-05 13:29 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-01-04 17:54 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-05 16:32 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Barry OGrady <atheist@hotmail.com.au> - 2014-01-05 16:09 +1100
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-05 19:20 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 01:33 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-05 10:21 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 04:08 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-05 13:16 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 04:36 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-05 13:43 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-01-05 09:44 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-05 13:55 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-01-05 09:45 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-05 15:42 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 13:54 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-05 14:59 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-05 22:15 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-05 15:20 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-05 22:28 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-05 18:24 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-05 22:19 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-05 08:45 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-05 16:28 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 08:44 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-05 15:28 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 08:53 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2014-01-05 13:13 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-05 15:25 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 13:39 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-01-05 09:40 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-05 15:33 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-05 15:17 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X bill van <billvan@delete.shaw.ca> - 2014-01-05 14:45 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-05 18:32 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X bill van <billvan@delete.shaw.ca> - 2014-01-05 17:10 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-05 19:48 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X bill van <billvan@delete.shaw.ca> - 2014-01-05 17:09 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2014-01-05 22:06 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-06 04:49 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-05 21:57 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-01-16 13:02 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-16 14:22 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-17 08:38 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 08:26 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 08:19 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 09:22 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 10:26 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 12:24 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-17 21:29 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-18 06:43 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 08:09 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 07:44 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-18 10:56 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 08:43 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-18 12:12 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2014-01-18 16:24 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-18 10:10 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 14:22 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-01-24 22:56 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2014-01-18 16:23 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-18 10:09 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-19 02:58 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-18 10:40 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 06:37 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 07:42 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-19 04:15 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-01-24 22:55 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-24 16:23 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-24 23:37 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-24 22:52 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-18 10:42 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 08:27 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-18 09:01 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-18 15:50 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-18 13:08 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-18 15:10 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-19 01:45 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 10:28 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-19 08:56 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 12:18 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-19 10:36 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-19 10:08 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-19 21:38 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-19 22:29 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-20 10:01 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 09:16 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-20 20:43 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 13:29 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-21 10:35 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-20 19:33 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-21 10:37 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-19 21:36 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2014-01-19 15:46 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 19:37 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X "William Wright" <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-22 09:11 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 08:49 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-25 01:37 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-26 09:41 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-28 11:43 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-29 09:37 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2014-01-28 16:37 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-28 12:52 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-29 15:57 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-29 08:28 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-29 08:51 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-29 09:06 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-29 14:36 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-29 11:39 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-29 14:53 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-30 09:26 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-29 16:43 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-30 13:20 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-01 16:24 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-02-02 11:25 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-01 17:54 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-02-02 12:18 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-01 18:21 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-02-02 12:47 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-02 09:20 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-02-03 09:00 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-02 15:06 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-02-02 14:58 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-30 13:09 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-28 20:40 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-29 08:27 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-29 16:45 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-29 21:59 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-29 17:22 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-29 22:54 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-29 18:49 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-30 13:10 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-30 14:58 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-30 13:21 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-30 10:02 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-30 23:04 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-30 23:14 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-31 02:20 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-31 01:17 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-31 13:22 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X The 29th Earl of Grimsby <earl-of-grimsby@jwright20.plus.com> - 2014-01-31 23:29 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-18 12:11 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 10:11 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 14:32 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 10:17 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-19 09:43 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 13:31 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 14:25 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 10:33 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-17 16:36 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 09:27 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 12:16 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-17 19:36 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 11:44 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 13:21 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 13:25 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2014-01-17 16:46 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-17 22:47 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-01-17 18:04 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 15:20 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-17 23:28 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 16:16 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-18 16:44 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 15:20 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-01-17 18:29 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 16:15 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2014-01-18 16:27 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 15:00 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-01-18 18:18 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 16:27 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 16:26 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 17:01 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 16:15 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 17:24 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 16:32 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-18 02:26 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 18:45 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 20:05 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-18 03:39 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 20:27 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-19 01:38 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 20:29 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-19 04:18 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 10:52 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-19 09:51 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 12:01 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-19 10:36 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 13:16 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-19 10:14 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 13:35 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-19 11:29 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-19 14:29 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-20 09:05 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-19 12:52 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-19 22:36 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-29 16:47 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-19 18:06 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 19:36 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-19 20:05 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-20 09:58 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-20 18:15 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-19 17:38 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-20 13:24 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-19 20:09 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-20 16:36 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-17 23:35 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-17 20:51 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-17 22:39 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-18 10:51 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-18 10:50 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-18 10:47 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-17 22:30 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-18 09:57 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-18 08:51 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-18 12:18 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 14:36 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 14:32 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 16:24 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-18 19:45 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-19 03:00 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 09:22 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-18 15:15 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 14:38 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2014-01-18 16:20 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 15:14 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-19 04:16 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-18 14:56 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-18 14:35 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-18 17:43 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-17 15:27 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-18 10:00 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-19 14:34 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-06 04:32 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Paul Magnussen <magiconinc@earthlink.net> - 2014-01-06 12:26 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-06 16:22 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-07 13:09 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-04 22:10 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-01-02 11:43 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 16:59 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 16:59 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 16:59 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 16:59 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-02 12:43 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 19:09 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-01-02 11:46 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-02 11:48 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-02 20:48 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-02 12:11 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-02 21:14 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X Imaginary <spamproof@nowhere.invalid> - 2014-01-02 19:46 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-01-02 12:41 -0600
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-02 09:24 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-02 13:26 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2014-01-02 12:27 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-02 11:44 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2014-01-03 12:09 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-03 10:42 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2014-01-04 14:17 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X William Wright <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-04 23:39 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-04 19:58 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2014-01-05 13:15 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 10:22 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-02 13:14 +1300
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-02 11:46 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-01 17:15 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-01 20:36 -0700
Re: Big problem with OS X Laszlo Lebrun <lazlo_lebrun@googlemail.com> - 2014-01-02 06:25 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-02 10:09 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-02 09:08 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-02 10:12 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2014-01-05 01:00 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 08:53 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-05 13:40 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-05 18:17 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> - 2014-01-06 07:55 +0000
Re: Big problem with OS X J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-06 04:33 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-06 03:15 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-06 13:59 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-06 11:45 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-06 15:33 -0500
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-06 03:20 -0800
Re: Big problem with OS X android <here@there.was> - 2014-01-06 20:18 +0100
Re: Big problem with OS X williamwright.orsk@gmail.com - 2014-01-06 12:12 -0800
Page 5 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 16 Next page →
| From | williamwright.orsk@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 02:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dea313d7-f2bb-4d8b-8468-0333637c037c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54874 |
On Saturday, 18 January 2014 16:09:27 UTC, George Kerby wrote:
> On 1/18/14 8:43 AM, in article
>
> daff798f-0d56-43ee-8d5e-c5dd2ea23ca5@googlegroups.com,
>
> "williamwright.orsk@gmail.com" <williamwright.orsk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Friday, 17 January 2014 18:26:27 UTC, Savageduck wrote:
>
> >> On 2014-01-17 16:22:20 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>> In article <2014011708190514484-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>
> >>
>
> >>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> Then there are those of us who are somewhere in the spectrum between
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> those extremes. The reason that I don't own a firearm is that I'd
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> rather spend my money on other things, but if I ever do buy one, it
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> will probably be this one:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> <http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_7
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> 50051_765955_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>> A good choice. You can't go too far wrong with a S&W wheel gun.
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >>> For financial reasons, I might opt for the seven- or even six-round
>
> >>
>
> >>> version instead of this eight-round one.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Six rounds are more than enough, though you wouldn't be saving that
>
> >>
>
> >> much if you went to something like the M686.
>
> >>
>
> >> <
>
> >>
>
> >> http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_
>
> >> 764964_-1_757769_757767_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>> I'd shoot .38 at the range to keep in practice, but use .357 magnum for
>
> >>
>
> >>> home protection.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Shooting 38 for practice and using +P or magnum rounds for carry makes
>
> >>
>
> >> sense. However, when I think of home protection, I know that I might
>
> >>
>
> >> have to fire the weapon indoors and I concern myself with over
>
> >>
>
> >> penetration along with the possibility of injuring or killing a
>
> >>
>
> >> bystander or neighbor. So I suggest considering frangible rounds such
>
> >>
>
> >> as a Glaser Safety or MagSafe. It is also worth considering using the
>
> >>
>
> >> frangible round as a carry round as their stopping power is very good
>
> >>
>
> >> and the potential liability which results from a missed shot, ricochet,
>
> >>
>
> >> or over penetration is minimized.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> < http://www.corbon.com/safety-slug/general/glaser-safety-slug >
>
> >>
>
> >> < http://magsafeonline.com/magnum_performance.html >
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Also those damn magnums are LOUD!
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> My standard home protection set up for my 45 ACP is 6 rounds of Glaser
>
> >>
>
> >> on top of 2 Federal 185 grain Hydra-Shok (+P) along with a spare
>
> >>
>
> >> magazine with 8 more of the Hydra-Shok rounds.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Your best home defense weapon is still going to be a 12 or 20 gauge
>
> >>
>
> >> shotgun, my recommendation in no particular order, Mossberg 500 or 590,
>
> >>
>
> >> Remington 870, or Winchester SXP (or a used 1200 if you can find one).
>
> >>
>
> >> Nothing gets somebody out of your house without firing a shot, quicker
>
> >>
>
> >> than the sound of a pump gun being racked.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> --
>
> >>
>
> >> Regards,
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Savageduck
>
> >
>
> > And I thought this was a Mac Newsgroup....
>
>
>
> And I thought you might get a REAL newsreader...
And I thought that this was a Mac Newsgroup... Not a newsreader bashing one....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 10:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #54796 |
In message <170120140922201873%michelle@michelle.org>
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <2014011708190514484-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> > Then there are those of us who are somewhere in the spectrum between
>> > those extremes. The reason that I don't own a firearm is that I'd
>> > rather spend my money on other things, but if I ever do buy one, it
>> > will probably be this one:
>> >
>> > <http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_7
>> > 50051_765955_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y>
>>
>> A good choice. You can't go too far wrong with a S&W wheel gun.
> For financial reasons, I might opt for the seven- or even six-round
> version instead of this eight-round one.
> I'd shoot .38 at the range to keep in practice, but use .357 magnum for
> home protection.
If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a
couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget,
possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice.
I am much closer to the anti-gun wackos than the pro gun wackos in most
respects. I think large capacity magazines should be illegal and I think
there should be restrictions on who can buy guns and how many. I support
restrictions on ammunition types. No one needs to own an AR-15 or AK-47.
I think the NRA Gun Lobby is an embarrassment to the human race, and
their fanatical stance is disgusting.
--
'Charity ain't giving people what you wants to give, it's giving people
what they need to get.'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 06:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <180120140637161838%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #54857 |
In article <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a > couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget, > possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice. I've tried three different models of 9mm pistols and with each one, the mechanism jammed when the expended shell casing did not fully eject. The range monitor told me that I have a weak wrist which takes too much of the recoil, not leaving enough for the firearm to operate. So I opted for a revolver instead. I'm not going to get into the politics of it, though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 07:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2014011807420990364-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #54862 |
On 2014-01-18 13:37:16 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said: > In article <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis > <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > >> If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a >> couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget, >> possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice. > > I've tried three different models of 9mm pistols and with each one, the > mechanism jammed when the expended shell casing did not fully eject. > The range monitor told me that I have a weak wrist which takes too much > of the recoil, not leaving enough for the firearm to operate. So I > opted for a revolver instead. > > I'm not going to get into the politics of it, though. The big problem is those folks who buy a firearm for defense/protection and then never use it. If you own a firearm you have a responsibility to train and maintain a proficiency with that weapon. There is little point in owning a fire arm for what might be a single life threatening event and not being able to actually use it to protect yourself. Therefore it stands to reason, if you choose to own a firearm you should should select one you are comfortable shooting and are prepared to train with so that you have control of the weapon in a stressful situation. You cannot beat a good revolver for reliability and functionality, but it should be a quality firearm and quality can be costly. As I have said, there isn't much better for home defense than a shotgun. There is also the old adage for defense and combat shooting, "You use your pistol to get to your long gun." I have never owned a 9mm My favorite defense/carry weapon is a Kimber CDP custom, which is a 1911 type .45 ACP. My other carry weapon is a .40 S&W Glock M23. I am proficient with both. However, compared with the Kimber and other handguns I own, it is simple and crude, with a not particularly good trigger, but it will work under the most adverse conditions. I also own several target handguns two of which I have owned for some 50+ years. As a retired peace officer I have an opportunity to shoot regularly and maintain my qualifications with my carry weapons. (not that they get out of the house these days other than going to the range, or on a road trip.) So, here is some of my little handgun collection and some of what they are capable of in trained hands. < https://db.tt/hScSCe9b > < https://db.tt/ajLw4Zm4 > < https://db.tt/ZGNPoEQm > < https://db.tt/EWa41QAM > < https://db.tt/zLZHSeOX > -- Regards, Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 04:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnldmkag.saj.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #54866 |
In message <2014011807420990364-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2014-01-18 13:37:16 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:
>> In article <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>> If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a
>>> couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget,
>>> possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice.
>>
>> I've tried three different models of 9mm pistols and with each one, the
>> mechanism jammed when the expended shell casing did not fully eject.
>> The range monitor told me that I have a weak wrist which takes too much
>> of the recoil, not leaving enough for the firearm to operate. So I
>> opted for a revolver instead.
>>
>> I'm not going to get into the politics of it, though.
> The big problem is those folks who buy a firearm for defense/protection
> and then never use it. If you own a firearm you have a responsibility
> to train and maintain a proficiency with that weapon.
Yep, that's exactly why I don't own a gun.
--
He glanced cautiously at the dancing shapes, which made weird and
worrying shapes on the far wall - strange biped animals, eldritch
underground things... Carrot sighed. 'Stop making shadow pictures,
Detritus.'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John <Man@the.keyboard> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-24 22:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <h8r5e91u56p2sbdd1cgumv077oeq212rme@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #54862 |
On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 06:37:16 -0700, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>In article <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
><g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>> If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a
>> couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget,
>> possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice.
>
>I've tried three different models of 9mm pistols and with each one, the
>mechanism jammed when the expended shell casing did not fully eject.
>The range monitor told me that I have a weak wrist which takes too much
>of the recoil, not leaving enough for the firearm to operate. So I
>opted for a revolver instead.
Worth a try?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25727080
J.
>
>I'm not going to get into the politics of it, though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-24 16:23 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2014012416233555150-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #55296 |
On 2014-01-24 22:55:12 +0000, John <Man@the.keyboard> said: > On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 06:37:16 -0700, Michelle Steiner > <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > >> In article <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis >> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> >>> If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a >>> couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget, >>> possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice. >> >> I've tried three different models of 9mm pistols and with each one, the >> mechanism jammed when the expended shell casing did not fully eject. >> The range monitor told me that I have a weak wrist which takes too much >> of the recoil, not leaving enough for the firearm to operate. So I >> opted for a revolver instead. > > Worth a try? > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25727080 > J. Damn! That is one ugly piece! ...and a .32 to boot. I would hate to have any woman I know put their trust in that very obvious POS revolver. If they are looking for a lightweight handgun a woman might be comfortable with, and with the reliability of a revolver, I would strongly recommend looking at one of the small J-frame S&W 38 Specials. < http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CompareProductsDisplay?storeId=750001&catalogId=750051&langId=-1&categoryId=757912&top=&catentryId=764961&catentryId=765779&catentryId=766184&catentryId=766351> or < http://tinyurl.com/nk6pur9 > Another option would be any of the Taurus small frame revolvers. < http://www.taurususa.com/gun-selector-results.cfm?name=Small%20Frame%20Revolvers&page=1 > Including this one which is a very tempting home defense weapon. < http://www.taurususa.com/product-details.cfm?id=693&category=Revolver&toggle=&breadcrumbseries= > > >> >> I'm not going to get into the politics of it, though. > > -- Regards, Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-24 23:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <240120142337350503%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #55296 |
In article <h8r5e91u56p2sbdd1cgumv077oeq212rme@4ax.com>, John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 06:37:16 -0700, Michelle Steiner > <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > >In article <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis > ><g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > > >> If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a > >> couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget, > >> possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice. > > > >I've tried three different models of 9mm pistols and with each one, the > >mechanism jammed when the expended shell casing did not fully eject. > >The range monitor told me that I have a weak wrist which takes too much > >of the recoil, not leaving enough for the firearm to operate. So I > >opted for a revolver instead. > > Worth a try? > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25727080 Why should I? It's a .32 caliber revolver, and I can handle a .357 magnum revolver.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-24 22:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2014012422521781914-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #55316 |
On 2014-01-25 06:37:35 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said: > In article <h8r5e91u56p2sbdd1cgumv077oeq212rme@4ax.com>, John > <Man@the.keyboard> wrote: > >> On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 06:37:16 -0700, Michelle Steiner >> <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> >>> In article <slrnldkmh1.p5q.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis >>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>> >>>> If I bought a gun, I would probably by a 9mm Beretta, I've shot one a >>>> couple of times and quite liked it. A friend has a... damn, I forget, >>>> possibly a Glock 9mm that was also quite nice. >>> >>> I've tried three different models of 9mm pistols and with each one, the >>> mechanism jammed when the expended shell casing did not fully eject. >>> The range monitor told me that I have a weak wrist which takes too much >>> of the recoil, not leaving enough for the firearm to operate. So I >>> opted for a revolver instead. >> >> Worth a try? >> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25727080 > > Why should I? It's a .32 caliber revolver, and I can handle a .357 > magnum revolver. It's also a piece of crap. -- Regards, Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 10:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <x7Odnea6Xu5jPUfPnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #54796 |
On 2014.01.17, 11:22 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <2014011708190514484-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>>> Then there are those of us who are somewhere in the spectrum between
>>> those extremes. The reason that I don't own a firearm is that I'd
>>> rather spend my money on other things, but if I ever do buy one, it
>>> will probably be this one:
>>>
>>> <http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_7
>>> 50051_765955_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y>
>>
>> A good choice. You can't go too far wrong with a S&W wheel gun.
>
> For financial reasons, I might opt for the seven- or even six-round
> version instead of this eight-round one.
>
> I'd shoot .38 at the range to keep in practice, but use .357 magnum for
> home protection.
You can shoot .38 through your .357 for practice (though you should
shoot some practice .357's as well).
But for home defense you might be better off with a 9mm or 10mm that you
can control with more ammo in the mag than a revolver.
--
“Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.”
- Mike Tyson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 08:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2014011808271844445-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #54867 |
On 2014-01-18 15:42:53 +0000, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:
> On 2014.01.17, 11:22 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
>> In article <2014011708190514484-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Then there are those of us who are somewhere in the spectrum between
>>>> those extremes. The reason that I don't own a firearm is that I'd
>>>> rather spend my money on other things, but if I ever do buy one, it
>>>> will probably be this one:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_75000
> 1_7
>>>> 50051_765955_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y>
>>>
>>> A good choice. You can't go too far wrong with a S&W wheel gun.
>>
>> For financial reasons, I might opt for the seven- or even six-round
>> version instead of this eight-round one.
>>
>> I'd shoot .38 at the range to keep in practice, but use .357 magnum for
>
>> home protection.
>
> You can shoot .38 through your .357 for practice (though you should
> shoot some practice .357's as well).
>
> But for home defense you might be better off with a 9mm or 10mm that you
> can control with more ammo in the mag than a revolver.
10mm is a harsh round to fire, double taps are not easy and there is a
tendency for over penetration. That isn't a good thing inside a home.
The FBI looked to the 10mm to replace the .38 Special as their official
weapon after a notorious Florida shootout which resulted in several
agents being killed and disabled. They subsequently found it was not a
practical combat round and have pretty much gone to the .40 S&W, and
the good old .45 ACP.
Our agency went from .38 Special +P. to 9mm, to .40 S&W which is now
the standard.
For home defense a consideration should always be potential over
penetration indoors, and the .357 mag, 9mm, & 10mm all have that
potential. I will stick with my "flying ashtray" the .45 ACP and/or a
shot gun.
If the gun is a 357/38sp I would use either Glaser Safety slugs, or
MagSafe rounds for home defense, not FMJ or JHP ammo.
As far as needing more ammo goes, if you can't get it done with 6 shots
you are in trouble, and a good double action revolver can remove some
of the issues related to operator foul up under stress to be found with
automatics. Like not having a round in the chamber, safety on, no
magazine in the gun, all of which does happen.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 09:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lbec0m$p9v$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54876 |
In article <2014011808271844445-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> If the gun is a 357/38sp I would use either Glaser Safety slugs, or
> MagSafe rounds for home defense, not FMJ or JHP ammo.
> As far as needing more ammo goes, if you can't get it done with 6 shots
> you are in trouble,
Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before the
first shot was fired.
> and a good double action revolver can remove some
> of the issues related to operator foul up under stress to be found with
> automatics. Like not having a round in the chamber, safety on, no
> magazine in the gun, all of which does happen.
And again, the Amen corner pipes up.
There's wisdom behind the "six for certain" mindset. MUCH wisdom.
--
Security provided by Mssrs Smith and/or Wesson. Brought to you by the letter Q
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 15:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <52dae907$0$61353$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #54880 |
On 14-01-18 12:01, Don Bruder wrote: > Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before the > first shot was fired. Excuse me but, since most uses of guns at home are to kill the wife in a uncontrollable rise of rage because she keeps nagging you to take the garbage out, why do you need to reload ? And if it is to defend youself against an intruder/thief, again, do you need multiple rounds ? If with 6 bullets you can't hit the one thief, should you have the right to own a gun in the first place ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 13:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lbeqg0$n1s$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54897 |
In article <52dae907$0$61353$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-01-18 12:01, Don Bruder wrote: > > > Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before the > > first shot was fired. > > > Excuse me but, since most uses of guns at home are to kill the wife in a > uncontrollable rise of rage because she keeps nagging you to take the > garbage out, why do you need to reload ? > > And if it is to defend youself against an intruder/thief, again, do you > need multiple rounds ? If with 6 bullets you can't hit the one thief, > should you have the right to own a gun in the first place ? Clearly you have zero knowledge of guns aside from what you've seen on the TV or movie screen (Hint: Despite what the movies and TV show you, just because you point a gun and pull the trigger doesn't mean the bad guy will stop coming, or even be hit - a gun isn't a magic wand), or the ravings of gun-phobic idiots in the press. When you've got more substantial knowledge than that, I'll be more than happy to have a discussion with you. Until then, well, some old advice about the perils of trying to teach a goat to sing comes to mind. -- Security provided by Mssrs Smith and/or Wesson. Brought to you by the letter Q
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-18 15:10 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <CF0049F1.A67B1%ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
| In reply to | #54897 |
On 1/18/14 2:50 PM, in article 52dae907$0$61353$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-01-18 12:01, Don Bruder wrote: > >> Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before the >> first shot was fired. > > > Excuse me but, since most uses of guns at home are to kill the wife in a > uncontrollable rise of rage because she keeps nagging you to take the > garbage out, why do you need to reload ? > > And if it is to defend youself against an intruder/thief, again, do you > need multiple rounds ? If with 6 bullets you can't hit the one thief, > should you have the right to own a gun in the first place ? > Who said "one"?!? Or, do you not have Home Invasions regularly in your neck 'o the woods. In these parts, it takes place daily where three or four thugs knock on the door and when the resident answers, they overpower the whole household, either incapacitate or kill them, while they proceed load up the waiting drivers vehicle with all of the homeowners' belongings and take off.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 01:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bk0p21F65qsU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #54897 |
On 2014-01-18, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-01-18 12:01, Don Bruder wrote: > >> Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before the >> first shot was fired. > > Excuse me but, since most uses of guns at home are to kill the wife in a > uncontrollable rise of rage because she keeps nagging you to take the > garbage out, why do you need to reload ? > > And if it is to defend youself against an intruder/thief, again, do you > need multiple rounds ? If with 6 bullets you can't hit the one thief, > should you have the right to own a gun in the first place ? What a simplistic view you have. Intruders are very sneaky, and surprise is a huge factor. Can you wake up from a slumber and hit a target every time? Doubt that. Use your imagination a little more. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 10:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <LbWdnfj0SIuwckbPnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #54897 |
On 2014.01.18, 15:50 , JF Mezei wrote:
> On 14-01-18 12:01, Don Bruder wrote:
>
>> Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before the
>> first shot was fired.
>
>
> Excuse me but, since most uses of guns at home are to kill the wife in a
> uncontrollable rise of rage because she keeps nagging you to take the
> garbage out, why do you need to reload ?
>
> And if it is to defend youself against an intruder/thief, again, do you
> need multiple rounds ? If with 6 bullets you can't hit the one thief,
> should you have the right to own a gun in the first place ?
Shooting real people doesn't happen to many people at all. And when it
does, that other person usually doesn't want to be shot. If you scare
them off, you've done as much as is actually needed. If they keep
coming it's easier and easier to hit as they get closer - assuming you
haven't sprayed all your clip away and you don't panic.
CW is the defender has the odds-on advantage, but reality is that most
people are never ready when it actually happens.
--
“Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.”
- Mike Tyson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 08:56 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2014011908565575892-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #54957 |
On 2014-01-19 15:28:44 +0000, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said: > On 2014.01.18, 15:50 , JF Mezei wrote: >> On 14-01-18 12:01, Don Bruder wrote: >> >>> Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before t > he >>> first shot was fired. >> >> >> Excuse me but, since most uses of guns at home are to kill the wife in > a >> uncontrollable rise of rage because she keeps nagging you to take the >> garbage out, why do you need to reload ? >> >> And if it is to defend youself against an intruder/thief, again, do you > >> need multiple rounds ? If with 6 bullets you can't hit the one thief, >> should you have the right to own a gun in the first place ? > > Shooting real people doesn't happen to many people at all. Correct. There are only a handful of Law Enforcement officers who are compelled to fire their duty weapons while on the job for other than punching paper when going through annual & quarterly qualifying. Firing for any reason when not on the range is unusual and has to be explained (in California anyway) as a use of force. That is for just firing the weapon. If you actually hit somebody with one of your bullets there is a completely different level of scrutiny. After 25+ years in Law enforcement I have never had to fire my duty weapon at another person. I have used my duty weapon to euthanize 2 deer, one wild pig, one raccoon badly injured by vehicles. I personally know of 7 of those I worked with who have had to shoot a person while on duty, two of those were fatal shootings. It is a much rarer event than some folks might believe. Of course just drawing your weapon to secure a situation, provide coverage during an incident, or effecting an arrest happens much more frequently. > And when it does, that other person usually doesn't want to be shot. > If you scare them off, you've done as much as is actually needed. That is why verbal commands are considered part of the escalation of "use of force". It is also why the racking sound of a pump shotgun has stopped and cleared many situations. > If they keep coming it's easier and easier to hit as they get closer > - assuming you haven't sprayed all your clip away and you don't panic. It is never easy. Adrenaline plays a big part. Training and discipline are key for all gun owners. BTW: never say you just fired a warning shot. When it comes to justification for firing a weapon and escalating to a use of deadly force, you shoot to stop a threat or attack which a reasonable person would believe would result in death or serious injury. Hit a bystander or anybody, and say that you "just fired a warning shot" it is time for you to find a criminal defense attorney. > CW is the defender has the odds-on advantage, but reality is that most > people are never ready when it actually happens. Never. That brings us back to the gun owner's responsibility to train. -- Regards, Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 12:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ds2dndeRvYRplUHPnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #54965 |
On 2014.01.19, 11:56 , Savageduck wrote:
> On 2014-01-19 15:28:44 +0000, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:
>
>> On 2014.01.18, 15:50 , JF Mezei wrote:
>>> On 14-01-18 12:01, Don Bruder wrote:
>>>
>>>> Amen to that... If you need a reload, you were probably hosed before t
>> he
>>>> first shot was fired.
>>>
>>>
>>> Excuse me but, since most uses of guns at home are to kill the wife in
>> a
>>> uncontrollable rise of rage because she keeps nagging you to take the
>>> garbage out, why do you need to reload ?
>>>
>>> And if it is to defend youself against an intruder/thief, again, do you
>>
>>> need multiple rounds ? If with 6 bullets you can't hit the one thief,
>>> should you have the right to own a gun in the first place ?
>>
>> Shooting real people doesn't happen to many people at all.
>
> Correct. There are only a handful of Law Enforcement officers who are
> compelled to fire their duty weapons while on the job for other than
> punching paper when going through annual & quarterly qualifying.
>
> Firing for any reason when not on the range is unusual and has to be
> explained (in California anyway) as a use of force. That is for just
> firing the weapon. If you actually hit somebody with one of your bullets
> there is a completely different level of scrutiny. After 25+ years in
> Law enforcement I have never had to fire my duty weapon at another
> person. I have used my duty weapon to euthanize 2 deer, one wild pig,
> one raccoon badly injured by vehicles. I personally know of 7 of those I
> worked with who have had to shoot a person while on duty, two of those
> were fatal shootings.
>
> It is a much rarer event than some folks might believe. Of course just
> drawing your weapon to secure a situation, provide coverage during an
> incident, or effecting an arrest happens much more frequently.
>
>> And when it does, that other person usually doesn't want to be shot.
>> If you scare them off, you've done as much as is actually needed.
>
> That is why verbal commands are considered part of the escalation of
> "use of force". It is also why the racking sound of a pump shotgun has
> stopped and cleared many situations.
>> If they keep coming it's easier and easier to hit as they get closer
>> - assuming you haven't sprayed all your clip away and you don't panic.
>
> It is never easy. Adrenaline plays a big part. Training and discipline
> are key for all gun owners.
>
> BTW: never say you just fired a warning shot. When it comes to
> justification for firing a weapon and escalating to a use of deadly
> force, you shoot to stop a threat or attack which a reasonable person
> would believe would result in death or serious injury.
> Hit a bystander or anybody, and say that you "just fired a warning shot"
> it is time for you to find a criminal defense attorney.
I've heard justice department people here say that if you're going to
fire only shoot kill shots. The civil case that results if you wound an
assailant is not worth merely wounding them.
>> CW is the defender has the odds-on advantage, but reality is that most
>> people are never ready when it actually happens.
>
> Never. That brings us back to the gun owner's responsibility to train.
Ah crap! We're in violent agreement again.
--
“Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.”
- Mike Tyson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 10:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <190120141036236897%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #54967 |
In article <ds2dndeRvYRplUHPnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote: > I've heard justice department people here say that if you're going to > fire only shoot kill shots. The civil case that results if you wound an > assailant is not worth merely wounding them. There are at least two other concerns/problems with shooting to wound. You have to be a damned good shot to wound a person deliberately. Most firearms owners just aren't that good of a shot. Even if you do wound someone, he's usually still able to shoot back.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web