>Damn.

>Damn. I shall need a replacement weapon.
What do you sell him PrepHole?

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    He had thirty 1 ounce gold coins.
    That's about $53,190 worth of gold.

    Should be enough for a couple boxes of 9mm.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      So one of those coins is worth an ounce of weed? Going by weight?

      • 1 week ago
        stoner

        you are one dumb in funny moron

        I would give him a double 00 chuck and fuck

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I don;t know what an oz of weed icosts but a 1OZ gold coin will cost you over 1800 dollars, the spot market price is just under 1800 but to actually get one you will have to pay 10% more because of the small quantity. Gold is expensive. How do pot heads afford their habit if weed costs so much?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          It doesnt cost much, he is an idiot. An ounce locally goes for about $80-$120.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      goddamn that's almost an entire box of .22

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >FFL sells someone an illegal gun after they get bribed a couple hundred dollars
    This trope pisses me off to no end

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >>FFL sells someone an illegal gun after they get bribed a couple hundred dollars
      >This trope pisses me off to no end
      It is however basically the entire trope near modern antique firearms

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Are you a malfunctioning bot or do you want to try rewording that?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      It was a lot more than a couple hundred dollars.

      He had thirty 1 ounce gold coins.
      That's about $53,190 worth of gold.

      Should be enough for a couple boxes of 9mm.

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Wait so how much is this actually worth?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      lods

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      according to a quick google search, a single1 ounce gold coin is currently worth $1,800 to $2,100. So assuming that there's at a max of 30 gold coins in that pic than the lowest estimate is $54,000 and is maxed at around $63,000

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        It was worth $380 in 1995, adjusted for inflation thats around $780

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Those aren't 1oz coins. Looking up 19th century British gold.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      About tree fiddy

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >autistic screeching

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    He won't be familiar with optics and probably won't trust newfangled self-loading rifles, so either the nicest double-barrel shotgun I have, or something off the milsurp wall.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      He's a sportsman not a boomer. I'm sure the shop owner would gladly assist the gentlemen in getting acquainted with his modern optical enhancement accessories, and I'm certain he would be grateful

  6. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >$53,190 worth of gold
    Holland and Holland Magazine Rifle in 375 H&H

  7. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    FAL. Van Pelt would love a FAL.

  8. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    HCAR

  9. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine trading this magnificent Winchester 1901 for a crummy Daewoo USAS-12. Literally the definition of soulless.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      The Mosin is closer to that than to the SKS

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Taking this into consideration a USAS12 was state of the art Shotgun just as a modified Winchester 1887/01 wouldve been. I liked it when movie armourers cared about their jobs

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      they didnt sell ammo for it

  10. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
  11. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    You know they stopped making these in 1903

  12. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Hey just what you see pal.

  13. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    FG-42

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >Coins get sucked back into the game after Alan wins

    The dealer got scammed by van pelt.

  15. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    A phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range

  16. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      those are big bullets

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        For you.

  17. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Ayo, I hav sum shiet dawg
    >Aye Kaye 47
    >Music Playa 5
    >Cock 19
    Get watchu want, dawg

  18. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I've got a snider if you want something familiar.

  19. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    My dick

  20. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The Annihilator 2000

  21. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >.950 JDJ

  22. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    There you go pal

  23. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    "You're not a Postal worker, are you?"

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >the nonsensical elbow out

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >20th century Englishman
        >knowing anything about firearms

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        do zoomers really take a combat stance and memeclamp while hunting?

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          >a combat stance and memeclamp
          Wtf is wrong with boomers? No wonder you tards need 20x scopes.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >t. retard
        inb4
        >but muh seals do it
        >but muh x guntuber
        Before anyone asks and to educate the willing, let me explain.
        There are multiple recognized ways of holding a gun called stances. I will not be talking about all of them, only the one which you have called nonsensical. So why elbow in? Who does it?
        >The seals do it.
        The army does it cause the seals do it, the airforce does it cause the army does it, civies do it cause the military does it.
        >But why anon? Why do the seals do it?
        Smaller profile target has been said, but that's still not the reason.
        The reason is in cqc elbows tend to hit things when maneuvering. That's it. Unless you are in a building it doesn't make sense. It makes sense for the military (see Fallujah). It does make lowering and raising the gun slightly faster/easier, which you do a lot while working with a team, so there is that advantage but he clearly hunts alone and group hunting "tactics" do not involve ever lowering your gun.
        Elbow out is better for certain people with certain rifles as it is inherently steadier from a standing unsupported position (crouched with elbow just above knee is better) I hold M4s tucked in cause it's how I was taught, and with the stock it comes with it fits nicely like that. I had a savage 308 rifle that I only held elbow out cause the stock would not allow for an effective pocket like an AR stock does, and it was more comfortable to do it elbow out so I could shoot more accurate. A different rifle was comfortable to hold elbow at a 45 so I did just that. Another factor is at what angle is your shooting arm to it, if it is closer to vertical rather than horizontal then elbow out is better as you already have vertical stabilization but little horizontal. Hit typing limit. Anyone want more info?
        >skinny and collapsible stock=elbow down
        >fat stock=elbow out
        >fixed stock=depends on person and gun

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          *non-shooting arm

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >People fired the 44 inch long massive fucking caliber rifles of that era the way people fire the light weight 14 inch barrels of today.

        I bet you think movie makers in the years after WWII, where almost everyone has served, didn't know how to fire guns either because they fire their BARs from the hip on the move.

        But you try firing an automatic weapon with a 24 inch barrel firing .30-06 made of wood and heavy metal, with a design for recoil from 1917 from the shoulder while on the move. Especially when you're a 135lb Depression era kid who has been starving on some horribly hot Pacific Island or in frozen Korea for months.

        Thing is, they still killed plenty of Japs/Krauts/Chinese with it because you don't need to be perfect.

        Firing stance is different because weapons are different. Someone trained on a Springfield 1903 for WWI would think an M4 was a toy gun of the future.

        Even without the way heavier gun and way longer length, here is the larger than what is used today .30 carbine round of the M1 next to the Springfield round used in WW1 and in the Garand.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          This makes me wonder though, what was the recoil on muskets? They're like .60-.85 caliber, right?

          And use a fuck ton of powder out of the horn, but it is also shit powder.

          I have to assume the earliest fire arms were heavy recoil because they fired them staked into the ground, but maybe that's just because they also used to explode commonly?

          I can't imagine how quickly you go deaf in a pike and shot formation with everyone massed shoulder to shoulder, screaming and dumbing almost 1.0 caliber balls into each other from 20 feet away.

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            The shooting sticks were because the rifle was long and heavy as fuck, black powder generally has a shove type of recoil instead of the impact of modern smokeless. So they'd kick in the sense someone grabbed your shoulder and pushed back on it, not terrible after some practice. The weight of the guns also helped with this.

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            They really aren't that bad. My brown Bess fires a 1.1 ounce lead ball on 115 grains of Fg goex and recoil is like a mild shotgun slug. I haven't tried the full military load (165 grains) but its probably quite a bit more. The rifle-muskets were lower powder charge, but far more efficiently sealed.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Guns used to require pulling a bolt to cycle. Crazy, I know.

  24. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    A Zip .22

  25. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    this is the closest to a a fair trade yet for the amount of gold he gives that guy

Your email address will not be published.