Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: cyclists attack auto driver
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:35:34 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <v9voo7$2tip9$4@dont-email.me>
References: <v9ldee$10n7m$7@dont-email.me> <v9ldkv$11ai1$2@dont-email.me>
 <uefubjl289nishqcq5eqdeqdj0vj0rt7t6@4ax.com> <v9o65q$1h8t3$1@dont-email.me>
 <0ibvbjtnogf47avmn1v8rj5sf94g9corum@4ax.com> <v9ot76$1kbqe$3@dont-email.me>
 <v9p1b4$1kr20$4@dont-email.me> <r7m2cjtbv5ukduqa852b1o87o9pfh97o8n@4ax.com>
 <v9tf33$2fm0s$4@dont-email.me> <4pk4cjh6lokkmah8hu0dfqu0gq99akff7l@4ax.com>
 <v9u4bv$2is2s$3@dont-email.me> <nns5cjhvfa23vbjhongnv94u0bs1ags6tl@4ax.com>
 <gj06cj1kimofmc8u9kt250diqmchn1pf2d@4ax.com>
Reply-To: frkrygow@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:35:36 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f14cacc75c39336e43ad513de9715800";
	logging-data="3066665"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX193uYpiKNb+MDxiyWGfJqjCG/sZIsaGyLo="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hXwv4ENR3F7XEldrg98a5Bx9uN0=
In-Reply-To: <gj06cj1kimofmc8u9kt250diqmchn1pf2d@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4869

On 8/19/2024 6:27 AM, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 03:42:14 -0400, Catrike Ryder
> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 20:41:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/18/2024 4:19 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 14:38:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/17/2024 11:37 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But as I've mentioned  a number of times my family has had guns for at
>>>>>> least 4 generations, as close as I can calculate 300 years or so, and
>>>>>> never shot anyone. Why does Frankie want to penalize us?
>>>>>
>>>>> My bet is that your family had guns for hunting and pest control. My bet
>>>>> is also that your family never owned a gun that could fire more than,
>>>>> say, six rounds in a minute. After all, that capability is essentially
>>>>> useless for almost all hunting. But it is "useful" if you intend to kill
>>>>> a roomful of kids, or church attendees. That is the gun style's
>>>>> significant detriment.
>>>>>
>>>>> As you _should_ be able to remember, I'm firmly in favor of hunting.
>>>>
>>>> That's nonsense. My dad's old Winchester model 69 (1930s) had an eight
>>>> round mag. My Colt Woodsman had a ten round mag. That didn't count the
>>>> one in the pipe. Counting that, put all the Wichester model 94s at 7
>>>> rds.
>>>
>>> I know those guns exist.
>>
>> No you don't. You never heard of them until I mentioned them.
>>
>>> I'm betting John's family didn't have them.
>>
>> You obviously have no idea how many hunters have had a Winchester 94.
>> I had one years ago. The one I had was a carbine and only had a 6 rd
>> mag. The model 94 rifle produced today has an 8 rd mag.  The 94 stands
>> for 1894, by the way.
>>
>>> And
>>> while I may be wrong, it's certain that the earliest family members he
>>> bragged about did not have them, but probably still hunted successfully.
>>> A competent hunter doesn't need even six quick shots.
>>
>>
>> <LOL>  As if you'd know anything about competent hunting.
> 
> 
> I really can't figure where Frankie is gets his ideas and I can only
> assume that like Tom, just makes then up.
> 
>   Above he writes, "also that your family never owned a gun that could
> fire more than,  say, six rounds in a minute."
> 
> As I've said a number of times my father had a hunting rifle built on
> a Springfield army rifle base. 5 round magazine and one up the spout
> is 6 and I could, with no problems at all fire 6 rounds in a minute
> and if you want to talk about pistols I'm sure that you can fire your
> Colt Woodman even faster.

Ah, John! First, please note that I said "MORE than 6 rounds in a 
minute." You gave _one_ example of _one_ gun your father had, but it did 
not shoot _more_ than 6 in a minute. So, thanks for confirming my guess!

And as I said, that capability is essentially useless for hunting. I'm 
betting you (or your father) never blasted six quick shots at an animal 
while hunting with that rifle.

You could, of course, tell us some of your hunting tales, and let us 
know details of how you actually _used_ those guns. But I suspect you 
won't, because they'll describe one or two careful shots, not a rapid 
blast of shooting.


-- 
- Frank Krygowski