The popularity of the AR 15. Side effects of gun control.

Hard to explain what it's like to be that close, seeing them move with speed, no barrier, being amazed, and body fluids on a hair trigger and visions of being bear scat.... guns don't seem all that much protection. You do hope the salmon keep coming.

 

Can it be explained how the muzzle report of a round being discharged does not have the ability to disorient or otherwise startle a wild animal, and cause it to break off its approach?

 

It's hard for some people to comprehend that in certain parts of the country, Alaska especially, it's like ringing a dinner bell. Most human hunters disembowel the animal leaving a gut pile for scavengers...but it also means a free meal...bear, wolves, wolverines are the 3 that most concern me.

 

The above is not understood. The muzzle report of a firearm being discharged is at least one hundred and forty decibels, putting it in the range of causing bodily damage when experienced. How does such not disorient an animal that is close by, or otherwise startle them, and cause them to leave an area?

 

Because the damaging report doesn't extend far from the place of the shooting. Yes, a closeby animal will be startled, but it's like a dinner bell to some predators--like bears and other scavengers.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/24/gps-study-tracks-grizzlies-as-follow-hunters.html

 

I think you're confusing close proximity for a human with that of an animal....bear and wolves have incredible senses of smell. They can smell blood for miles,, and when aroused by that smell, they are incredibly fast and even more dangerous...you do not want to get between a bear and it's meal. And it does consider it as its own, after all, in the animal kingdom we are pretty pathetic...no claws, useless teeth....yes we have firearms. They don't save you when the predator attacks before you are even aware they are there.

 

No, I am talking about .30-30 chambered Winchesters. Yes, the first 1894s were chambered in .32-40 and .38-55, and the first models shipped were in these two calibers. However, the claims of Wikipedia notwithstanding, I have actually held, in my hands, a Winchester 1894 (barrel marked .30 WCF, which was the original name of the cartridge, BTW) that officially shipped from the factory in October of 1894, not 1895. I have seen numerous online resources that claim the first .30-30s didn't ship until 1895, but as I said, I have personally held the evidence disproving that assertion in my hands.

 

The original cartridge name was most likely 30 Winchester followed by Winchester 30 Smokeless shortly thereafter. The smokeless cartridges were head stamped WCF but this did not become the designation till later. If you had an original 94 manufactured in that year and chambered for the cartridge that's what it would have proofed for. WCF would not appear on the weapon. WCF was only on the head stamp of the case. If the 30.30 case was used it was for a compressed black powder load, not smokeless. It was common for the period. The 303 was that way too. I'm pretty sure the smokeless cartridge wasn't ready till 1895.

 

Actually, the designation WCF meant Winchester Central Fire and did appear on the weapon's barrel; same as it meant on the classic .44 WCF, later designated as the ".44-40". I had a 1920's era Winchester that still bore the .30 WCF stamping on the barrel. Interestingly enough, the designation ".44-40" came out because of Marlin. They didn't want to put anything that denoted "Winchester" on their firearms, so they came up with the stamping ".44-40" to denote a .44 caliber bullet on top of .40 grains of black powder. Ultimately it became a more popular term than ".44 Winchester".

 

It really couldn't have, not for an 1894 manufactured 30.30. It was certainly not a production weapon and it would not have been proofed with WCF. Otherwise it's a fake. Unfortunately that happens a lot. Frank Hamer's family tried to pass off one of his rifles as being used during the Bonny and Clyde chase and recently a Thompson was actually sold at auction stating it was used by Clyde Barrow. There is little doubt it was a fraud.
The 94 was originally designed as a black powder weapon. Only last minute changes led to the 30 Winchester Smokeless. Smokeless powder use only began commonly in the US in late 1893. It's really impossible for a 94 manufactured in 1894 to be proofed with WCF because the cartridge didn't exist is smokeless form till Spring of 95. Even then Winchester didn't list it till its August 95 catalogue. The WCF proofing came later after Frank Olin settled issues with problems using smokeless. Initial powder was probably Indurite, a problem propellant and anything else available in the US would have been picric acid based and required plated cases.

 

There's truth to a lot of what you're saying, but respectfully (and I do mean that) the original cartridge designation was .30 WCF. That was the original cartridge, and all the original Winchester 1894s chambered in the cartridge were stamped .30 WCF. The designation ".30-30" did not come out until later. Yes, you're correct that the original loadings in .30 WCF were black powder, and the availability of .30 WCF in smokeless powder was not widespread until well into 1895, but that .30 WCF chambered rifle is a documented and confirmed Winchester, not a fake.

 

News: The local Rural King now has new flat-top AR-15, 16" and 20", for $479.00
Hooray free-market!