Function
Robb says he prefers function over historical significance. Generally, I am too. Or so I thought. But I was giddy when my dad brought over the Springfield:
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
February 15th, 2010 at 10:36 am
Schweet!
February 15th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
When collecting I generally look for both. I’d really like to be able to shoot the historical guns. Nothing like being able to shoot a gun from every major belligerent from a major war. I can do it for WW1 only, and that is a bunch of guns.
There is definitely something to experience what someone in the past did. In some cases it isn’t so easy, like the civil war/mexican war era. The risk can be too high.
February 15th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
I like Nyarlathotep’s approach. Of course, my tiny collection pales in comparison. I have had my eye on a trapdoor for a while.
February 16th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
If forced to choose, I choose historical over functional. However, because of the genius of most firearms the two are not mutually exclusive. A 100 year old firearm can function as perfectly as it did when brand new.
I have some Russians that have seen hard use and still work perfectly. I would however never own a gun I wouldn’t shoot no matter its history or worth.