Comments for Gun Pr0n

Gun Pr0n

2005-03-02T13:27:52Z

I'm busy, got something working I may get to later, depending on how work goes!

In the meantime, to tide you over. Gun Pr0n. The STEN Mark II, product of Messrs Smith and Turpin, at ENfield. Cheap, easy to make, simple, and remarkably reliable sub-machingun the Brits and Commonwealth forces used during WWII and beyond. I've fired both a STEN and all the major versions of Thompson guns - while I prefer the .45 cartridge to the 9mm, I vastly prefer the STEN as a weapon for ease of carry and use. So - given my predjudices on caliber, it's not surprising that I am such a fan of the US M3 Grease Gun.

Click the picture for hi-res. This shows the weapon with bolt forward.

Cocked.

Safe.

Comment from Sgt. B. on 2005-03-03

2005-03-03T19:27:22Z

There's a special place in Hell for blokes who try to pass off "garage hack-jobs" for the mil-spec modifications, and an even hotter place when they try to convince you that they are historically accurate...

Comment from cw4billt on 2005-03-03

2005-03-03T12:55:55Z

Had a guy who wanted to sell me a "tanker" Garand (shorty) for what would have been a good price. It was a badly-cut-down plain vanilla M-1, and it looked like he'd hacksawed into the gas cylinder, too. Idiot.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-03-03

2005-03-03T12:27:53Z

I *do* like the Sterling, as well. Fun to shoot, though I *did* pinch myself folding the stock once. The Owen is also an interestingly ugly spud of a subgun.

Comment from Justthisguy on 2005-03-02

2005-03-03T05:27:03Z

Sterling? Ha! Just another wire-spring wonder! What I wanna know, is how much will I have to pay for a working Lanchester? Phosphor Bronze and Forged Steel! Fit for Sea Service! (or living in a closet in Southern Florida)

Comment from J.M. Heinrichs on 2005-03-02

2005-03-03T04:11:39Z

And then there is the Sterling, lovely piece of kit. And you weren't expected to qualify on the "Fling at Target" relay. Cheers JMH

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T23:38:11Z

What's interesting is - the deacts you can own in Canada have greater functionality than the ones we can own down here... but, in the right places, we can own fully functional ones. You can't own an arguably historically significant Luger, because it has less than a 4" barrel... but I can - unless I live in NYC... (cue Twilight Zone Music)

Comment from Nicholas on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T22:34:13Z

I don't collect firearms, of either description, because it's not legal for me to do so without much bowing and scraping to assorted national, provincial, and local authorities. I used to know folks who could get me whatever I wanted on short notice (for cash only) but I haven't been hanging with that bunch for a long time now. I'm sure they, or their analogues, still exist, even up here in the gun-free world of Soviet Canuckistan.

Comment from Sgt. B. on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T20:55:37Z

In the meantime, if ye could keep a weather eye out for said DEWATs and de-mills, I'd sure like to hear about 'em...

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T20:31:45Z

Woo-woo! I'm down wit dat!

Comment from Sgt. B. on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T19:38:28Z

No worries here, your reputation is intact, for it is the knowlege of the firearms that is important. I am harvesting resources for DEWAT and de-milled guns pertaining to WW2 to present... The list of LIVE "pieces" are limited to an M-1 Garand, an M-14, an AR-15A2, and something in the small frame .45cal semiauto... .50 cals will happen when I win the lotto, and, should that happen, I'll pay for all denizens to gather at the "Turkey Knob" shoot for a weekend of cap-busting!

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T19:25:28Z

I live in Kansas - all of my stuff *is* demilled or dummy or DEWAT. That's a dummy STEN, built to a very specific, ATF-approved design that allows a moving bolt (clever eyes will note there is no extractor) because it cannot be disassembled without cutting it up, and the bolt is incomplete so it won't strip a round (though you can't tell from this angle) and the barrel is fusion welded shut at the breech and welded to the trunnion so that it can't be swapped out. It was built exactly for re-enactors to carry around, without having to be concerned about safe storage and liability issues. I don't own a shootable NFA weapon. If I lived 1.5 miles east, in Missouri, where I could own them... I would have a *much* smaller collection. A dummy Vickers goes for about $1500. I don't know if there are any registered DEWAT Vickers. One of the 12 or so registered shooters goes for $25K or better. Even a semi-auto Vickers goes for $4-5K. But it's obviously time to post a Periodic Disclaimer and cause people to go "Aw, I thought that sh*t was real, what a loser!" *and* for the ATF guys to go, "Damn, I thought we had an easy score there!" I'll opt for disappointing the ATF guys over making purists happy... as bass-ackwards as that may seem on first read.

Comment from cw4billt on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T19:21:54Z

I saw what was adverted as a STEN de-mil at a gun shop in south Jersey about five years back; turned out to be a replica (and a bad one, at that).

Comment from Sgt. B. on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T17:27:04Z

I bow to those who successfully collect "live" weapon systems... As a "Living Historian", I place a great deal of emphasis on protecting the public form itself. When I display weapons with my military vehicles, I use plastic replicas (should they be stolen, I sleep well knowing that nobody is going to do much damage with a little blue plastic BB, as opposed to a 5.56 NATO FMJ round...) Towards that aim, I am always interested in finding the de-milled and replica versions of what John displays. I heard, at one point, that there were de-milled STENs out there at pretty good prices. Any word on this? Thanks for the continual education, PapaBlog!

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T14:50:07Z

Though it is in all probability a Chinese Type 50 - though the Chinese usually used the box magazine, so...

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T14:46:39Z

Far as I know, the STEN was pretty reliable in all conditions. The PPSh *has* been seen in the Sandbox this time around. In the hands of Marines.

Comment from cw4billt on 2005-03-02

2005-03-02T14:10:42Z

Interesting. The STEN and the PPSh were about the only two weapons I didn't see anybody carrying as a "personal protection device" in the Land of the Great Practical Exercise. The large expanse of sand trap might have had something to do with it, although I've seen pictures of Legionnaires (ca 1953-1954) carrying them through the elephant grass.