Guns, guns and more scary guns

Instapundit wonders if the scary guns in this picture from a Huffington Post post are Airsoft or not.

Firstly, you can't tell by looking because Airsoft guns are replicas all the way down to the manufacturers stamp. It's one reason that they are sometimes used in movies. They look exactly like the real thing. (Other than the law mandatory orange on the muzzle, which can be removed like sofa cushion tags.)

Which comes back to the picture. If real machine guns are illegal to have where that picture was taken *probably* those are toys. But I don't see orange on the muzzles, but that doesn't prove anything either.

Oh what the heck, see what the commentators (I really hate that my spell checker thinks "commentors" is wrong) at Say Uncle have to say about it. (Perhaps it's just me, but wouldn't the "real thing" at a gun expo have a cable on it? Or do they really let people pick up the expensive stuff without supervision? I'd think that the sellers would lose their stock.)

I have an MC51 like this one. (Changing the battery is a bear for this model unless they fixed that since I got mine.)

Comments

Ymarsakar said…

What's that orange tube like thing in the picture? Could it be a cable?

9:17 PM

Synova said…

I was wondering about that too. But what's it connected to?

9:52 PM

Ymarsakar said…

I zoomed in with Microsoft office pic manager, and it seems like it is attached to the right side of the scope mounting. The weapon the guy with the blue hat is holding has some kind of pistol/stabilizer grip forward of his hand, and there is no other piece of that weapon in view that could be connected to the cable thingie. It is neither going over his arm or under it, so it has to connect with the gun in the front.

10:59 PM

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it. This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice. If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

Some times some people.

What Cancel Culture is NOT

Maybe we should talk about what cancel culture isn't. It's not a boycott. It's not deciding to no longer go to a business. It's not giving a bad review for bad service. It generally involves two things. First, the offense is a matter of opinion. Second, secondary or even tertiary targets are threatened. Cancellation does not need to be successful, and often with very famous and wealthy people it is not successful. But it serves as a warning to vulnerable people who are not in a position to weather that kind of attack. The goal is terroristic in that it's about forcing social behavior in people who are not currently the subject of the attack. The message is always, this could happen to you. And the tactic invariably includes seeking out vulnerable people to threaten in order to put pressure on businesses or on the target of the attack. So it works like this: JK Rowling is invulnerable. But they can try, right? So what they do is they find out who works for the pub...

Synova

Search This Blog