Ten manliest firearms

[tattedupboy]

I just could not help myself with this one. I mostly agree with this list. What changes would you guys make to it?

http://arthurshall.com/x_2007_manly_firearms.shtml

[Bill Warnock]

I'd add the Sig Sauer P220 .45 ACP with CCI Lawman 200 grain Jacketed Hollow Point.
Enjoy the day,
Bill

[NRM_Oz]

What about the Uzi and MP5 ?

Very good selection and good to see the mixture of rifles and pistols with the 1911 still holding a place 100 years on.

[OccamsRazor]

I disagree with some on that list, and can't, for the life of me, understand why the Taurus PP25NG wasn't included???

http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=456&category=Pistol

Hell, my wife has one!

[Lawson]

How in the hell does glock make it on there and not HK?

[OccamsRazor]

How in the hell does glock make it on there and not HK?

This was the 'manliest' firearms listing, not the 'overpriced but still perfectly adequate' firearms listings.

[FireEMSPolice]

My Sig Sauer P226 .40 is missing off the list.

[EMTGuard]

Haha...I saw this posted a couple of days ago in the Hamsexy forums. I guess my pistols, most of them 9mm, would not be considered manly. Oh well. Let the viking have his opinion.

[Rooney]

I agree with Mr. Warnock. The P220 is a great weapon. I haven't put mine through as much as that Glock has gone through, but almost.
Truthfully I was surprised that the AK was #6. I would've figured 2 or 3. I know a few soldiers that wish they had thier AK's in the sandbox instead of the M16 varients. Although I have both, under fire I would prefer my AK.

[bpdblue]

the garand

[publicsafetyred]

This was the 'manliest' firearms listing, not the 'overpriced but still perfectly adequate' firearms listings.

I snorted milk out my nose when I read that... thanks.

[Curtis Baillie]

Manly enough for you????

In Vietnam I carried a 50 cal. machine gun up and down the mountains. Maximun effective range 3200 yards. Actually it was better that that.

[bpdblue]

M 14

The M 14, looks as good as it is potent. There is a reason it is still being used in our military.

[Chucky]

In Vietnam I carried a 50 cal. machine gun up and down the mountains. Maximun effective range 3200 yards. Actually it was better that that.

I have to agree that carrying a 50 tripod mount more than you have to could break a persons spirit. I had a team to help transport mine. This for the bang for the buck was not a feasible plan as it took 3 to 4 men to lug it. One carried the tripod and a box of ammo the other lugged the spare barrel and ammo and I carried the receiver with barrel. We opt for high ground and a fixed position as long as possible. You just have to love the 90 day wonders. Ours was a second Lt that had his guys build his little command bunker 10 feet within our field of fire. Rather than admit he screwed up he had us lock the pivot to the right 2 feet shot of his bunker.

(bdbblue Congrats on your 100 post.) When I first got to Nam we had M-14s for the first few months till issued the AR models. The problem we had with the 14s were that for Jungle fighting at close range they were to powerful. In a lot of cases the exit wound should be a lot bigger than the entrance hole but were not. So the 14s have found a home as a med use sniper rifle. The ARs used a smaller shell that tumbled inside the target causing more damage. We had lots of problems with the mechanical workings of that gun at first. Jams etc.

[SecTrainer]

In my experience, authors of such phallic-laced swill are usually compensating for certain...ummm...shortcomings, shall we say? His interest in Camel-smoking sperms made me a little nervous.

The deprecating comment concerning .25's and Berettas suggests that this a man who knows nothing about the world's best intelligence operatives, who carry such weapons among others, and any of whom would gobble his lunch and then stuff the empty sack down his throat, with the empty pudding cup and the banana peel. (Intelligence operatives like to be tidy.)

And since he is alive (corpses don't fart, do they?), although seemingly barely conscious, we also know that he certainly is not a man who has ever been shot properly with a .25 (or .22, for that matter) by someone who knows what ammunition to carry and how to use the weapon.

More's the pity. It's an experience he - and everyone like him - should have if they want to claim to have lived an interesting life. I understand it just sort of tickles a little bit when that little "unmanly" bullet ricochets around and fragments inside your cranium, rearranging all your ideas, hopes and dreams. I myself have never yearned for life to be quite that interesting, so I can't say personally and most who have inside knowledge of the sensation have declined to say much about it afterwards. You could just see that they were tickled to death, though. I myself have had occasion to visit several homicide scenes in which the most prominent occupant was someone who had been tickled to death by such girlie weapons, in fact. They couldn't stop laughing.

Now, our author proposed that he be allowed to shoot you at 500 yards with an AR-15 to prove the mettle of that firearm, in case you doubt its manliness. (Why did he insist on being allowed to shoot first, I wonder?). The thing is, so few of us need to plunk folks at 500 yards. Seven yards and less is where we'll likely be engaged. So...should our author volunteer to be shot at 5 yards or so with a .25 (I will even handicap myself further by using the Beretta he mocks), and assuming that I get to select the ammunition, he can be accommodated. Perhaps he'll tell us how much it tickles.

Everything is relative when it comes to these stupid "mine is bigger than yours" debates. Manly guns? Someone should warn this bohunkus to watch out for "la femme fatale". She comes in the disguise of .22, .25 and .32 calibers, and if you show her the least disrespect she is quite capable of wiping the smile off your "manly" face forever. Never doubt the capability of "small", or as our author would have it, "unmanly" guns.