Is spudgunning getting too much dangerous?

[Ragnarok]

A proper gun isn't dangerous

Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!

Save for restricted velocity paintball or airsoft guns, a gun should always be treated as if it's dangerous (regardless of whether it's safetied, loaded or otherwise), and must be considered capable of killing, wounding, maiming, damaging or destroying anything - and everything - it's pointed at.

And even with the paintball/airsoft guns, your target needs to be willing and wearing goggles.

[DYI]

Mushi knows what he's doing, and you can see that in the video. There is danger everywhere, all the time, and you can't get rid of it. All you can do is lower it to an acceptable level. Now, whether that acceptable level means gloves and goggles, a bomb disposal suit, or remote triggering from 20 miles away depends on what you're doing, but, contrary to what some would have us believe, almost anything can be made relatively "safe", if the proper precautions are taken in its handling and use.

Thus, spudgunning can NEVER go too far. And if you think incendiary rounds are dangerous, you should see the new ammo I'm working on...

[nivekatoz]

I think that viedo is COOL!!!!! Sure it might be a tad over board ,but it looks like they have it under control. :violent3:

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

I agree with DYI, spudgunning can never go too far.

Again, the same applies to almost anything in life. If we as a species had ever stopped doing anything because it possibly maybe could potentially be dangerous, where on earth would humanity be today?

It's not about removing the risks, it's about taking calculated risks

[MrCrowley]

It's not about removing the risks, it's about taking calculated risks

Was that Eastern European hooker one of those calculated risks?




I just watched the video and there's no need for alarm, I'm planning something similar myself.

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

Was that Eastern European hooker one of those calculated risks?

Which one?



You're talking to someone who cycles to work on a highway every morning wearing a balaclava - because of the cold - and a rucksack in a country where these people are a problem

[Ragnarok]

It's not about removing the risks, it's about taking calculated risks

I know if I play Russian Roulette, I have a one in six chance of dying.

There, I've calculated the risks.
I'm still not going to take them, even with my knack for surviving or avoiding injury.

Now, here's an odd point. I am significantly more likely to have an accident building or using a spudgun (and have) than I am on let's say, a rollercoaster... but because I have vertigo, I'm far more worried about the rollercoaster. Just goes to show that the mind isn't very rational.

You're talking to someone who cycles to work on a highway every morning wearing a balaclava - because of the cold

Ah, he's in Siberia!
(It's a joke guys, so avoid the random guessing!)

Actually, I tend to do those kinds of things myself. Balaclavas are excellent in the cold. Particularly because they manage to redirect warm breath up around the ears, which have a habit of getting very cold.

They're also very amusing for wearing all black clothing and then visiting my old school stage. Wait there in the half darkness for someone to arrive on the stage and turn on the lights... nearly given five people heart attacks this year.

[Hotwired]

There's only danger if there isn't enough control on the situation.

The petrol won't burn without oxygen and it won't get enough to turn into a fireball until the container gets ruptured out in the open.

Chemical projectiles can be more destructive than simple high kinetic energy ones but if you can ensure no harm to others or their property as well as staying safe yourself you could be chucking megajoules without any concern from me.


As for the OT topic: Nothing like a holiday in the Pyrenees with a very informative guide book to learn more about Basques and ETA.

[SpudFarm]

mushi is one knowledged Norwegian GROWN UP man, i know that because i have talked loads of hours with him up in the times. i have even got parts from him.
so to the people ranting on him, stop doing it. he does take safety up to a higher level than most other spudders.

well, on topic. gas/air will never beat the danger of high explosive driven guns, and a well built gun that runs on HE is pretty safe to. the 120psi in a combustion gun does not make it really deadly when it comes to failures (misunderstand me right) it will not throw shrapnel around itself at mach2, and the low mass of the mostly used PVC has to have some decent speed to kill/injure someone in a serious way.
i can think that a hybrid out of steel on a 50x mix can perforate you but it wont happend with a well built PVC gun running on safety margins.

a side note: if you are smart enough to make those fire bombs you are smart enough to fire them out of a safe gun with safety clothes and all the protection you have. if you are dumb enough to make a gun that fails then you are not smart enough to make a projectile that ignites on impact with something.

sorry for wasting the time it took to read this, i am bored, quit spudding and thinking of another hobby so i voice my last opinions on THIS forum.

[hi]

its only dangerous when you get hurt.

[Ragnarok]

well, on topic. gas/air will never beat the danger of high explosive driven guns

There are no guns of any type that use high explosives as propellant. All propellants (save of course purely pneumatic ones) are low explosives.

And actually, if anyone (read: probably Larda ) ever tries the 325x butane/propane mix hybrid I suggested a while back, the difference between gas/air performance and solid propellants will actually be pretty moot.

[SpudFarm]

you are wrong ragnarok

SB15 made a AP gun:P and it DID blow up/fail

[sniper hero]

ragnarok : what I meant by that is that if a person is careful with a gun it is quite dangerous (mostly for the person it self) but if some person has bad ideas for what to do with a gun it's extremely dangerous and very common to have accidents or even wounding on purpose
(of other person(s)).

[Ragnarok]

you are wrong ragnarok
SB15 made a AP gun:P and it DID blow up/fail

Fine... no-one in their right mind would make a gun that used high explosives as propellants, 'cos it wouldn't be very safe, and it wouldn't last very long.

Put it this way - no commercial firearm that I know of uses high explosives, and I can't see any reason why anyone would want to do it.

Oh and yes, back to your original quote:

well, on topic. gas/air will never beat the danger of high explosive driven guns, and a well built gun that runs on HE is pretty safe to.

Yes, there is no way a gas/air cannon could be more dangerous than one using high explosives.

*Boom*

ragnarok : what I meant by that is that if a person is careful with a gun it is quite dangerous, but if some person has bad ideas for what to do with a gun it's extremely dangerous.

That sounds a little bit like you're using a twisted version of the "guns aren't evil, people are evil" line.

Put it this way. In the UK, two toddlers have been shot by airguns in relatively recent weeks - one of the two died - because their parents didn't respect that they could still be dangerous, and didn't take the required precautions.

Any gun must be considered dangerous, and must be treated, stored and used in such a way as to reduce any and all risks to their minimum.

[MrCrowley]

Put it this way. In the UK, two toddlers have been shot by airguns in relatively recent weeks - one of the two died - because their parents didn't respect that they could still be dangerous, and didn't take the required precautions.

Any gun must be considered dangerous, and must be treated, stored and used in such a way as to reduce any and all risks to their minimum.

Just to add to that, last week two NZ police officers were shot during a covert operation, one of the officers died. They were shot by a .22cal air rifle.