Oh, he's gonna catch some flak for that one.

I'm trying to find a holster for that thing.

Schmandra told the paper that police were not planning to prosecute most of the weapon owners. "From what we can tell, they are all collectors who got in touch online.

Wow, such an efficient use of police resources.

But there is still a danger from these weapons. Someone could get a hold of them,

I could get hit by bus when I leave the house to go to work. The weapons isn't dangerous you PC eurowenie. It's the person that wields it that determines what it is used for. Most the illegal guns you have anyway are more modern ones that are smuggled in and not some WWII collector piece.

or unused ammunition could be dangerous in the case of a house fire,"

BS. The worst that ammo does in a fire is pop like firecrackers. It won't explode, just burn. A firefighters protective clothing is more than enough to stop any fragments of the casing.

15,000 rounds of ammunition.

He needs to stock up more. I have more than that just in 22 rimfire. (It's been appreciating quite well too thanks to rising prices.)

one kilogramme of explosives

TFA didn't way what type. For all we know it was black powder. (BP is classified as an explosive.)

The anti-aircraft cannon was resting where a car would normally park.

Thanks for that bit of info. I thought he had it on the roof.

Having the police solve REAL crimes would be expecting too much of them I guess.

"Do NOT drop a clip of four 40mm shells into the loading rollers; do NOT then engage the chamber loading lever, and return it to the "fire" position; and above all, do NOT then depress the firing pedal."

Sgt. Frank Tree.

20mm Flak 30 or 38, I can't tell which.

Crosshair
Thanks for that piece by piece dissection of that article, and pointing out that everyone should have their own arsenal at their disposal. Because we all know that Western Europe is a crime hotbed since they have weapons controls, unlike every major US city. Right?

GAT_00

Was the man hurting anyone? Was he threatening anyone?

In case you haven't noticed, the weapon bans that most large US cities and some states have are dismal failures that only affect the law abiding. Of course when police DO enforce these weapons laws they often only go after the low hanging fruit, otherwise law abiding people who happen to have a hobby.

Rusty Shackleford: "Do NOT drop a clip of four 40mm shells into the loading rollers; do NOT then engage the chamber loading lever, and return it to the "fire" position; and above all, do NOT then depress the firing pedal."

Sgt. Frank Tree.


Classic!

/"Horrywood!"

I'm all for the right to bear arms, but no civilian needs an anti-aircraft gun. Also, you guys need to chill out. This was in Germany.

One word:
WANT!

Crosshair: Why don't you pray for more guns? After all, buses are only used to transport people to and from work, but guns say "I LOVE JESUS!"
Woohoo!!! Guns guns guns!! Mah cock as bigger than mah guuuuns!!!

GAT_00: Because we all know that Western Europe is a crime hotbed since they have weapons controls, unlike every major US city. Right?

Yeah, speaking of, how's that firearms ban in Washington DC working out? They completely outlawed firearms...what's the crime rate down to?

You know who else...

I bet no B-17s have flown over his house in *years*.

danaganooc: I'm all for the right to bear arms, but no civilian needs an anti-aircraft gun. Also, you guys need to chill out. This was in Germany.

So now people are only allowed to have what they need? And who determines what is a need?

A de-milled AA cannon isn't going to hurt anyone.

"1941" was right up there with "Caddyshack" in terms of "Funny movies that were actually funny".

sigh.

I miss those.

danaganooc: I'm all for the right to bear arms, but no civilian needs an anti-aircraft gun. Also, you guys need to chill out. This was in Germany.

Why SHOULDN'T he have it? Who is it going to hurt? It's demilitarized - the most damage it'll do to somebody is if it falls on them.

FightDirector: Why SHOULDN'T he have it?

Why shouldn't he have an IED, or massive amounts of ammonium nitrate?

Personal responsibility, right?

So is the take away from this "I can't Have an Anti Arcraft gun in my garage" I'm confused...

What's the fuss, it's demilitarized and it's not exactly like he'll be using it to commit armed robbery...

It was not a de-militarized weapon. The article specifically states that the AA cannon did not work, but could be easily repaired.

De-militarized (new window) means that the weapon in question has been rendered permanently inoperative.

/see this link (new window) for a good definition of "de-militarized"
//i would expect Fark's gun advocates to know the difference between "de-milled" and "doesn't work."
///incoming!

Just how does one say "Get off my lawn!" in German anyway?

/adds one to the Christmas list

Quantum Apostrophe: Crosshair: Why don't you pray for more guns? After all, buses are only used to transport people to and from work, but guns say "I LOVE JESUS!"
Woohoo!!! Guns guns guns!! Mah cock as bigger than mah guuuuns!!!

You really don't seem to have any idea what you are talking about, do you?

CBob: Just how does one say "Get off my lawn!" in German anyway?

'Runter von meinem Rasen (I think that's it; should at least do until a native speaker gets here)

Dawnrazor: It was not a de-militarized weapon. The article specifically states that the AA cannon did not work, but could be easily repaired.

Does it really matter? Does anyone seriously think that he or anyone else was going to put it on a flatbed and go driving next to the airport shooting at aircraft?

This thing isn't a death ray. It's an obsolete light anti-aircraft gun.

Quantum Apostrophe: Crosshair: Why don't you pray for more guns? After all, buses are only used to transport people to and from work, but guns say "I LOVE JESUS!"
Woohoo!!! Guns guns guns!! Mah cock as bigger than mah guuuuns!!!

Considering it is the weekend, I'm going to assume that you are intoxicated in some form. That's OK though. As long as you aren't directly harming someone else I really don't mind.

A bus and a gun are both inanimate objects. It is the person that wields them that determines how they are used. I like to watch those "Police Videos" shows on Court TV. I have seen quite a few chases that involve buses, 18 wheelers, large trucks, etc. had these people wanted to, they could have harmed farm more people that they really did.

What if one of them had a tanker truck and some road flares? We can play the "What if" game all day. But it is actions that should put people in jail, not "What ifs".

I'd like to mount that sucker on a flatbed pickup and go squirrel hunting!

gehen Sie von meinem Rasen weg

(get off my lawn - grass...)

/jetzt!

Crosshair: Does it really matter? Does anyone seriously think that he or anyone else was going to put it on a flatbed and go driving next to the airport shooting at aircraft?

This thing isn't a death ray. It's an obsolete light anti-aircraft gun.

It's definitely a fantastic collector's item, and would be an impressive addition to any museum's collection. However, even obsolete, it is still a weapon that -- with repairs -- could be extremely dangerous, especially if handled by someone with little or no knowledge of its proper operation

This took place in Germany, and the German government (apparently, with the approval of the the German people) has passed laws that forbid the private ownership of these types of firearms. Germany doesn't have any sort of 2nd Amendment protections regarding private ownership of firearms, so the police were well within their authority to seize these weapons.

Also, the article mentioned that charges against these collectors will most likely not be filed.

Personally, I hope that this AA cannon is not destroyed, but is donated to a museum, and the former owner is given some sort of compensation.

historymike: gehen Sie von meinem Rasen weg

(get off my lawn - grass...)

/jetzt!

Why is it that every phrase in German sounds like the command to invade Poland?

/Ich muss einen Poop nehmen!

You don't realize the peculiarities of your own language until you forget the peculiarities and assume that "poops" are "taken" in every language.

If you say "Ich muss einen Poop nehmen" in Germany, a German's going to ask you what a poop is and where you plan to take it.

George Carlin said something about this years ago, I think...

One question: I know more about the German language than about ballistics, so why the flared blunderbuss-style end on the AA barrel?

historymike: gehen Sie von meinem Rasen weg

(get off my lawn - grass...)

/jetzt!

Hast du eine Zwiebel aus deinem Gürtel? Wie die Stil?

/Free Translation picking up the slack on this one

The founding fathers clearly wrote the second amendment with the intention of every day citizens owning assault rifles, anti-tank weapons, armor piercing ammunition, and anti-aircraft cannons. It's every American's right.

Dawnrazor: It's definitely a fantastic collector's item, and would be an impressive addition to any museum's collection. However, even obsolete, it is still a weapon that -- with repairs -- could be extremely dangerous, especially if handled by someone with little or no knowledge of its proper operation

You then punish people for being stupid with such things. I'd be more worried about some idiot with a cylinder of acetylene than an idiot with an AA gun. Again, the proper thing to do in a free society is to punish people for the things that they DO, not what they MIGHT DO.

If the police can provide probable cause that the guy is gonna go nuts with it, then by all means arrest him and take it away.

I have quite an extensive firearm collection. If I'm stupid with them and cause damage/injury to someone or their property I fully expect to be punished in some way. Thus I am very careful with them and have thus far only caused damage to my own self and property. (Nothing serious.)

McSplanky: It's a flash suppressor, meant to reduce muzzle flash to allow the gunner to better track targets. My old .303 Enfield No.5 Jungle Carbine had a similar setup....worked pretty well considering the barrel was a measly 20" (standard rifle version had a 26" barrel, no flash cone). Short barrel gave it a vicious recoil, and ye gods was it LOUD, but muzzle flash was about the same.

Hard to tell just what it is from the camera angle....probably a 20mm like vossiewulf says based on the carriage design, but if I'm not mistaken the 37mm used a similar one. Anyone have an idea?

Link (new window)

Get your own

Did anyone see the link for "Wax Hitler causes Outrage?"

If I had a flak cannon, I'd be picking off 737's as they pop over Point Loma. It'd be like "Duck Hunt."

CBob

Just how does one say "Get off my lawn!" in German anyway?

"sieg heil".

McSplanky: One question: I know more about the German language than about ballistics, so why the flared blunderbuss-style end on the AA barrel?

flash suppressor. mgs have em too, see the ww1 version of the maxim gun.

i'd translate get off my lawn as "weg vom Rasen du arschkrampe!"

(coz this guy is in Anhalt, so he'd have a Saechsisch akzent..)

Lerne Ostdeutsch.

NanashiKnight: The founding fathers clearly wrote the second amendment with the intention of every day citizens owning assault rifles, anti-tank weapons, armor piercing ammunition, and anti-aircraft cannons. It's every American's right.

If you talk to most cops, they think that the 2nd Amendment is for hunting only. "Assault Weapons" as they call them are not necessary for the public to have.

I just tell them the 2nd amendment is not about hunting, and its not about self defense.

That said this was Germany and it involved internet postings and such.

Our gun laws are for the most part among the best in the world.

approves and hopes the guy from TFA gets a few ideas...

CBob: Just how does one say "Get off my lawn!" in German anyway?

If you have an anti-aircraft cannon in the garage, words are superfluous.

danaganooc: I'm all for the right to bear arms, but no civilian needs an anti-aircraft gun. Also, you guys need to chill out. This was in Germany.

I am active in WW2 re-enacting and Living History and a civilian. i know several people with both Axis and Allied AAA guns.

/Our group has a Sherman tank amongst other vehicles/weapons.

Even if the AA gun was repaired, did he have ammo for it? TFA mentioned 15k rounds of ammo but not whether any were for the AA gun. It's not like you could go to you nearest gun shop an buy some.

Crosshair:
The anti-aircraft cannon was resting where a car would normally park.

Thanks for that bit of info. I thought he had it on the roof.


You. new keyboard, etc.

Crosshair: You then punish people for being stupid with such things. I'd be more worried about some idiot with a cylinder of acetylene than an idiot with an AA gun. Again, the proper thing to do in a free society is to punish people for the things that they DO, not what they MIGHT DO.

Ideally, that would be the case. However, this is not a .22 rimfire. This is a cannon that was designed to knock aircraft out of the sky. An accidental firing of this particular type of weapon has the extremely high potential of causing significant damage to the surrounding area, and grave injury to any people that may be in the vicinity.

In this case, the safety of the populace outweighs this gentleman's need to own an anti-aircraft cannon. The police acted properly to safeguard the populace.

Also, remember that he is most likely not going to be charged with any crime. He may (probably will) permanently lose his AA cannon, in which case, I would hope there would be some renumeration, but he is not going to be punished.

If the police can provide probable cause that the guy is gonna go nuts with it, then by all means arrest him and take it away.

Again, in this particular case, we are not talking about a weapon that you would typically find being owned or operated by a private citizen. This is a cannon designed to cause as much damage as possible in the hopes of destroying flying aircraft. The potential for significant, perhaps catastrophic, damage and injury caused by this gun is exceptional.

This strikes me as a case of balancing the needs of the individual against the needs of the populace. In this particular case, the needs of the individual to own an AA cannon are outweighed by the needs of the populace to remain safe from a highly-destructive weapon that could easily be repaired and operated in an unsafe manner, even if that is not the owner's intentions.

I have quite an extensive firearm collection. If I'm stupid with them and cause damage/injury to someone or their property I fully expect to be punished in some way. Thus I am very careful with them and have thus far only caused damage to my own self and property. (Nothing serious.)

I'm glad to hear that your injuries have not been serious. I have two firearms myself, and so far, the most extensive injury I've sustained was when a bit of hot brass found its way into my shirt. I did some pretty fancy dancing that day!

Just was with translation to any language from our own (unspecific) English, above is an approximation.

You could have just as easily used the terms Grass, Lawn, Yard, Land, Property (as in get off....)

How about this one?

Wir brauchen mehr Land zum Osten

That would arouse anxiety in Poles, Russians, etc. Especially as he drags that one out of the garage....

/the more you know
//translation services
///schrägstrich-ies

OK, thats pretty sweet...

Definitely WANT

Dawnrazor: Germany doesn't have any sort of 2nd Amendment protections regarding private ownership of firearms, so the police were well within their authority to seize these weapons.

They may not have a 2nd amendment, but the right to self-defense is guaranteed in more than one internationally agreed upon convention on human rights, and to outlaw the most effective self-defense weapon but still claim to support self defense is just absurd.

Of course this doesn't include AA guns, but that's just a matter of one's opinion on whether or not citizens are allowed to own things they don't explicitly need.

INTERTRON: They may not have a 2nd amendment, but the right to self-defense is guaranteed in more than one internationally agreed upon convention on human rights, and to outlaw the most effective self-defense weapon but still claim to support self defense is just absurd.

I strongly doubt that the international conventions on human rights would have considered an AA cannon to be a weapon intended for the self-defense of an individual.

INTERTRON: Of course this doesn't include AA guns, but that's just a matter of one's opinion on whether or not citizens are allowed to own things they don't explicitly need.

In this case, I don't believe it's a matter of explicit need, but more the matter that German law (and U.S. law, for that matter) doesn't permit private ownership of an AA cannon.