Does not follow...
- HTRN
- Posts: 12401
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:05 am
Re: Does not follow...
Its actually cheaper to get a rebarrell on of the Browning 71s to 50 Alaskan..
HTRN, I would tell you that you are an evil fucker, but you probably get that a lot ~ Netpackrat
Describing what HTRN does as "antics" is like describing the wreck of the Titanic as "a minor boating incident" ~ First Shirt
Describing what HTRN does as "antics" is like describing the wreck of the Titanic as "a minor boating incident" ~ First Shirt
- Netpackrat
- Posts: 13987
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:04 pm
Re: Does not follow...
They didn't mention it in the video, but it seems to also be an additional argument in favor of wearing some sort of body armor at the range. Even the lowest rated armor would have made it a non-injury event.Cobar wrote:Yup, that is a good one. I need to take their advice.Netpackrat wrote:Just watched Ian and Karl's latest video, and I would recommend everybody else do so as well...
Dangerous Things Are Dangerous
Cognosce teipsum et disce pati
"People come and go in our lives, especially the online ones. Some leave a fond memory, and some a bad taste." -Aesop
"People come and go in our lives, especially the online ones. Some leave a fond memory, and some a bad taste." -Aesop
- Jericho941
- Posts: 5180
- Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:30 am
Re: Does not follow...
Something a lot of Americans don’t realize when talking about Russia is that they’ve never had a conception of private property. In Tsarist times, all the property in the Empire belonged, personally to the Tsar, who would distribute it as he or she saw fit. The nobility’s money was measured not in land, but in souls. The Russian peasantry, going back to Prechristian times, ran communal farms known as mir that became the standard farming unit in Tsarist times. Private property didn’t exist in full in Russia until 2001. So when people talk about Russia in the 1990′s as “adapting to Capitalism for the first time”, they’re not talking about “for the first time since 1917.” They mean, quite literally, that Russia transitioned from feudal slavery to Communism, with a minor break to a hybrid Feudalistic-Capitalistic system that existed for roughly 40 years.
- Vonz90
- Posts: 4731
- Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm
Re: Does not follow...
This is factually incorrect. The idea of owning serfs was true but not since 1861 when Alexander II freed them. The part of the Tsar owning all of the land is also incorrec and was forver going back to the powerful boyers who were at one time very powerful and obviously controlled their own properties. My own family had estates in several provinces, my great grandfather's estate having been purchased by him shortly before the war (he was a younger son so would not have inherited his father's). Likewise there were corporate interests that owned factories and other businesses. This goes back to at least Peter the Great.Jericho941 wrote:Something a lot of Americans don’t realize when talking about Russia is that they’ve never had a conception of private property. In Tsarist times, all the property in the Empire belonged, personally to the Tsar, who would distribute it as he or she saw fit. The nobility’s money was measured not in land, but in souls. The Russian peasantry, going back to Prechristian times, ran communal farms known as mir that became the standard farming unit in Tsarist times. Private property didn’t exist in full in Russia until 2001. So when people talk about Russia in the 1990′s as “adapting to Capitalism for the first time”, they’re not talking about “for the first time since 1917.” They mean, quite literally, that Russia transitioned from feudal slavery to Communism, with a minor break to a hybrid Feudalistic-Capitalistic system that existed for roughly 40 years.
The whole deal with the kulaks was that they were peasants who owned their own land.
The state was ususally corrupt, overly powerful and overly centralized and owned a buch of stuff they had no business in, but saying that there there was no private property in Tsarist Russia is just wrong.
- Jered
- Posts: 7859
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:30 am
Re: Does not follow...
I just won a Barrett M82A1 in .50 BMG on gunbroker.
*laughs in Freedom*
*laughs in Freedom*
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.
- First Shirt
- Posts: 4378
- Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:32 pm
Re: Does not follow...
Apparently the "3 boxes per customer" rule for .22 LR at Walmart has gone away. I bought 4 boxes of Federal Auto-Match for $16.99 per 325-round box. Just over a nickle per round, and no limit.
But there ain't many troubles that a man caint fix, with seven hundred dollars and a thirty ought six."
Lindy Cooper Wisdom
Lindy Cooper Wisdom
- Odahi
- Posts: 700
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:21 am
Re: Does not follow...
Today has been interesting. I took the day off work, and had my knees x-rayed. I've had some pain in the right one from time to time, sort of like there was a little heat and light at Nagasaki. Then it started happening in the right knee too. My guess is the x-rays will look like the inside of a bag of gravel and broken glass. On the plus side, the radiology tech was a very attractive woman, tall and slender, with long auburn hair. "The name of the place is, I Like It Like That."
Birds gotta swim, fish gotta fly, assholes gotta ass, until the day they die.
"Common sense" is an oxymoron.
"Common sense" is an oxymoron.
-
- Posts: 1698
- Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:14 pm
Re: Does not follow...
Vonz: Did the Kulaks actually have a freehold, or just a tenancy?
Were there corporations, etc owned by people other than the aristocracy?
I realize there had to be some form of property rights, as the courts of Peter I, and Catherine attracted people from all over Europe.
Were there corporations, etc owned by people other than the aristocracy?
I realize there had to be some form of property rights, as the courts of Peter I, and Catherine attracted people from all over Europe.
- Vonz90
- Posts: 4731
- Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm
Re: Does not follow...
Yes, and yes. Even American and European companies owned factories etc. in Czarist Russia.BDK wrote:Vonz: Did the Kulaks actually have a freehold, or just a tenancy?
Were there corporations, etc owned by people other than the aristocracy?
I realize there had to be some form of property rights, as the courts of Peter I, and Catherine attracted people from all over Europe.
http://www.singersewinginfo.co.uk/podolsk/
- Jericho941
- Posts: 5180
- Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:30 am
Re: Does not follow...
My understanding is that Kulaks are what the guy was talking about with the "hybrid Feudalistic-Capitalistic system that existed for roughly 40 years" and that boyars owned the facilities, but not the land they were on. They didn't have the power of European aristocracy.Vonz90 wrote:This is factually incorrect. The idea of owning serfs was true but not since 1861 when Alexander II freed them. The part of the Tsar owning all of the land is also incorrec and was forver going back to the powerful boyers who were at one time very powerful and obviously controlled their own properties. My own family had estates in several provinces, my great grandfather's estate having been purchased by him shortly before the war (he was a younger son so would not have inherited his father's). Likewise there were corporate interests that owned factories and other businesses. This goes back to at least Peter the Great.Jericho941 wrote:Something a lot of Americans don’t realize when talking about Russia is that they’ve never had a conception of private property. In Tsarist times, all the property in the Empire belonged, personally to the Tsar, who would distribute it as he or she saw fit. The nobility’s money was measured not in land, but in souls. The Russian peasantry, going back to Prechristian times, ran communal farms known as mir that became the standard farming unit in Tsarist times. Private property didn’t exist in full in Russia until 2001. So when people talk about Russia in the 1990′s as “adapting to Capitalism for the first time”, they’re not talking about “for the first time since 1917.” They mean, quite literally, that Russia transitioned from feudal slavery to Communism, with a minor break to a hybrid Feudalistic-Capitalistic system that existed for roughly 40 years.
The whole deal with the kulaks was that they were peasants who owned their own land.
The state was ususally corrupt, overly powerful and overly centralized and owned a buch of stuff they had no business in, but saying that there there was no private property in Tsarist Russia is just wrong.