Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 72 users online :: 4 registered, 0 hidden and 68 guests


Most users ever online was 218 on Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:58 pm

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

Ugh, more bad press "potato gun" kills 21 year old

A place to ask general spud cannon related questions.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Unread postAuthor: mike1010 » Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:53 pm

the fact is this guy is a moron im sorry he died but really gunpowder any type of powder really the gasses in a gun get to 2000+ psi after the powder is lit what did he think would hapen and that cop sounds like the real authority...
  • 0

User avatar
mike1010
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:38 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Hubb » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:15 pm

spud yeti wrote:
Um, because you can't really murder yourself...

"-cide" means murder, for example fratracide: the killing of a father. Therefore suicide: "sui-" meaning self, and "-cide" meaning murder, gives you "self murder". The definition of murder is the unlawful taking of a human life, and suicide is illegal. Therefore you can murder yourself, its just commonly known as suicide.


And the penalty is death!
  • 0

User avatar
Hubb
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 2390
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 8:39 am
Location: South Georgia
Reputation: 2

Unread postAuthor: PCGUY » Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:33 pm

Wow, I wish I would have got to this thread sooner!

I have received numerous PM's about this issue. I would like to state some things.

#1, send them emails if you wish. Remember to be professional, but send them emails, link them to SpudFiles if you wish. Why? Because everywhere on here we encourage safety, if something is posting about doing something that is not safe, someone tells them quickly! There is no way SpudFiles could get bad media, even if someone specifically said on the news that "SpudFiles is an evil website that tells people how to construct weapons", people would look and realize that it is NOT!

#2, which is in fact more important than #1 is that <b>this man did NOT build a potato gun! he built an illegal firearm!</b> We still have the papers from the ATF stating that a typical compressed air/combustion cannon IS fully legal, and is NOT a firearm. It also states that if you use a solid propellant such as this man did, then it IS a firearm!

http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/viewtop ... 3324#13324

Write letters if you wish, if anyone knows the family or the police officer let us know. I could write a letter and actually mail it, however I doubt they are going to do any sort of retraction.
  • 0

Yes, I am the guy that owns & operates SpudFiles (along with our extremely helpful moderators).
User avatar
PCGUY
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1576
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:54 pm
Location: Illinois
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 19

Unread postAuthor: joannaardway » Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:54 am

PCGUY wrote:There is no way SpudFiles could get bad media, even if someone specifically said on the news that "SpudFiles is an evil website that tells people how to construct weapons", people would look and realize that it is NOT!

Actually, I reckon 99% or more of people would just take the TV's word for it. TV is most people's "infallible source of information", just ahead of Wikipedia.

But I am still going to try to get in contact with the news station. Maybe if they get battered with enough e-mails, they'll go back to it with a short "update".
  • 0

Novacastrian: How about use whatever the heck you can get your hands on?
frankrede: Well then I guess it won't matter when you decide to drink bleach because your out of kool-aid.
...I'm sorry, but that made my year.
User avatar
joannaardway
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: SW Hertfordshire, England, UK.
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: paaiyan » Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:29 am

joannaardway wrote:
PCGUY wrote:There is no way SpudFiles could get bad media, even if someone specifically said on the news that "SpudFiles is an evil website that tells people how to construct weapons", people would look and realize that it is NOT!

Actually, I reckon 99% or more of people would just take the TV's word for it. TV is most people's "infallible source of information", just ahead of Wikipedia.

But I am still going to try to get in contact with the news station. Maybe if they get battered with enough e-mails, they'll go back to it with a short "update".


That's why I was saying not to link to the site at first. But if it's cool with PCGUY... I was just thinking like joanna, most people will believe whatever the media tells them about the site, which will most likely be something like, spudfiles.com is a website with lots of instructions on how to make these dangerous devices. Even though we do talk about safety, there's really not much chance of the media believing it, because their so-called expert said they're dangerous no matter what. I'm all for defending the hobby, I'm just saying we aren't much of a match against the media.
  • 0

"Who ever said the pen was mightier than the sword, obviously, never encountered automatic weapons."
-General Douglass MacArthur

Read my dog's blog - Life of Kilo
User avatar
paaiyan
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:03 pm
Location: Central Oklahoma
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 1

Unread postAuthor: goathunter » Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:32 am

Actually, I reckon 99% or more of people would just take the TV's word for it. TV is most people's "infallible source of information", just ahead of Wikipedia.


Yes it is sad isn't it?That so many people put the trust of world events in the hands of people who are more than happy to tell you that they play up "doom and gloom" stories and slant reporting to there own personal agendas.Given the current state of "sheeple" in the world it isn't all that suprising that the masses can be stirred to rash decisions based on purely exaggerated stories.

Most common sense people would understand that if you are going to put gunpowder or some other powdered explosive in a PLASTIC pipe things aren't going to be good,but alas,common sense seems to be an ever lacking commodity in the world today.And when somebody screws up and the stuff does hit the fan everyone wants to blame it on someone else.No personal responsibility.The news line should have read "21 yr. old kills himself with lack of potato gun awareness".

The family wants to raise awareness about potato guns fine.Let them, but at the same time advocate the need to do your homework first.Learn the proper safety precautions first then go build it.Just as you are supposed to know how to drive a car before you buy one, you should first know how to operate a spud gun then go build it.Safety is the responsibility of the user.Machinery has no brain.The thinking is left up to the operator,if you aren't smarter than the machine then you will get hurt.

My 2cents
  • 0

"Some people wonder all their lives if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem"-Ronald Reagan

"KA BLAAM! Elimination! Lack of education."-Big Mama, Fox and the Hound, Disney

goathunter
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:20 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: paaiyan » Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:12 am

Well I sent an e-mail... A long one. Hopefully someone will actually read the whole thing.
  • 0

"Who ever said the pen was mightier than the sword, obviously, never encountered automatic weapons."
-General Douglass MacArthur

Read my dog's blog - Life of Kilo
User avatar
paaiyan
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:03 pm
Location: Central Oklahoma
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 1

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Draft of e-mail.

Unread postAuthor: joannaardway » Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:35 am

I'm in the middle of drafting an email to the site... I imagine it needs a lot of corrections, so any suggestions for improvement?

I'll send it later after the changes.

To the reader,

I start by expressing my deepest sympathies to the bereaved, but I felt I must contact you about several inaccuracies in your report on this tragic event.

The term "Potato gun" is at best used at a large stretch here. There are no potato guns, by the ATF's own definition, that use solid propellants for fuel. They use either:
- a combustible gas mixture, such as butane, hairspray or deodorant
- pre-compressed air

The use of "explosive powder" or solid propellant would in a large majority of countries qualify the device as a firearm. Although it is fairly likely that Ryan Meerdink's device was muzzle loaded (your report made no mention of this), which exempts it from being a full firearm within the US, the ATF's report into potato guns defines them as "using aerosol hair spray, propane, compressed air, etc."
By this definition, Ryan Meerdink's device was NOT a potato gun. It would be most accurately described as a "muzzle loaded firearm", even if the projectile that was to be used was a potato.

Although I do not wish to be disrepectful to Division Chief Jim Sideras, describing him as "a local expert" is far from accurate. True spudgun experts are very few and far between.
As someone that could reasonably be described as an expert in the field, I am therefore making a counter point to the following incorrect statements made both by your reporters and the Division Chief:

>"When something goes wrong with a potato gun, it goes very wrong".

Having built many potato guns, I can assure you that this point is an inaccurate generalisation which displays a very minor proportion of events as the majority situation. Well over 99% of cases of things going wrong with a potato gun are minor issues, like an air leak, or failed ignitor.

However, in fairness to Jim Sideras, I would imagine that when he hears about potato gun failure, it is because of it resulting in injury or fatality, but he is looking at a limited cross section of incidents which results in this distorted view.

>"When you see them being shot it looks fun, but just because of the nature of what involved they're very dangerous."

A real potato gun, constructed out of the correct materials with sensible propellant, used in a sensible fashion is not in anyway dangerous to the users or people surrounding them.

>"The problem can be if something gets plugged up, too much propellant, it will actually explode."

This only ever applies when either solid fuel is used, which then by definition stops the device from being a potato gun.
With a true combustion type potato gun, using too much fuel (be that propane, butane, hairspray, etc) will not destroy the launcher. In fact, quite the opposite, as the potato gun will completely fail to fire.

>"It's very concerning when you see the amount of information on the Internet on how to build them."
>"But no matter much information is available, there is no safe way to make one."

Almost anyone could make a working spudgun WITHOUT instructions - but this is when people make dangerous assumptions and use improper materials, fuels or projectiles that make for unsafe launchers.

But using information off the internet, it becomes more than possible to make a safe potato gun. If information is sourced from a high-profile spudgun site, and preferably also a discussion forum where there is an almost limitless wealth of knowledge and experience on how to make these things, then the launchers that are made are not dangerous to anyone.
Indeed, many hundreds and thousands of people each year safely make and use spudguns because they have been supplied with proper information.

>"If you or your child has a potato gun, its best just to get rid of it. It's not safe. Sooner or later someone's going to get hurt with it and the injuries can be very severe and be life threatening."

That statement could be easily applied to many different things other than potato gun. I could reasonably say that about a car or revolver instead, which figures can/will prove are much more dangerous than spudguns.
If this was a report about a car accident or shooting, a statement of this nature would not be used, so it is deliberately unfair on the minority group that safely enjoy potato launchers.

Thank you for your time.

Ms. Joanna Ardway

I thought it best not to mention hybrids.

Oh, and before you ask why I'm signing "Ms." it's instantly going to get much more attention and respect than "Miss" or no title at all.
And it also makes me sound strong willed and independent which is also a good thing.
  • 0

Novacastrian: How about use whatever the heck you can get your hands on?
frankrede: Well then I guess it won't matter when you decide to drink bleach because your out of kool-aid.
...I'm sorry, but that made my year.
User avatar
joannaardway
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: SW Hertfordshire, England, UK.
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: paaiyan » Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:40 am

Well, I have to say, yours was much better than mine. I'm in class at the moment so i didn't do as good of a job as i should have.

My name is Andy, and I'm writing to your station in regards to the man from Iowa who was killed by the explosion of a so-called potato gun. I am personally a member of a hobbyist community at http://www.spudfiles.com, a website with instructions on how to properly build and fire a potato gun. Many of us at the website read the story and were saddened at the loss of this man's life, but believe that potato guns are not to be blamed for this tragedy.

We wish to let you know that the potato gun community does not in any way advocate the use of any solid propellant in any potato gun. The ATF decided in 2004 that potato guns are not to fall into the category of a firearm, so long as they are made to fire things such as potatoes, expelled most often by the ignition of a gasseous fuel. If you would, please take the time to read over the forum rules at spudfiles.com, and you will notice that the discussion of solid propellants, incendiary projectiles, and the discussion of firing a potato gun at persons/animals is strictly prohibited. This is because we all know that to try any of these is quite dangerous.


We at the spudfiles community do not consider the so-called potato gun in your news story to actually be a potato gun. We consider it to be an illegal firearm, due to the use of an explosive powder. The man in the interview that you called an expert was also mistaken in his statement that if you put in too much fuel, the cannon will explode. A basic knowledge of chemistry will tell you that if there is too much fuel, it will simply not ignite or will ignite weakly, due to the lack of oxygen. We advocate the use of Sch40 PVC due to it's thicker walls. If anything smaller is used, a danger is posed to the user, but with Sch40, no danger is there so long as it is used in a safe manner.

We would all like to extend our sincerest condolences to the family and friends of Ryan Meerdink, but we would like to let everyone know that potato guns are not dangerous so long as certain rules of construction are followed. We are aorry for the loss of the your man, but we do not believe potato guns are to blame for this tragedy. We would like some of the information given here, and on our site to perhaps be published, or at least the misinformation regarding potato guns to be retracted.

Most potato guns listed on our website are made from nothing weaker than Sch40 PVC, and either ignite a gasseous fuel, or release pressurized air in order to propell the projectile from the barrel. It has been proven many times that as long as the pressure of compressed air does not exceed the pressure rating of the weakest pipe fitting used, the gun will be completely safe, assuming it is used in a safe manner. Combustion cannons, those powered by the ignition of a gasseous fuel, are considered safe when used with certain fuels. Any fuel from an aerosol can, propane, and butane are all considered to be completely safe for use in a PVC cannon as long as they are kept at atmospheric pressure, however users are all warned that the use of hydrogen, acetylene, or any other high-power gas is dangerous.

Some users will use those fuels considered dangerous for PVC cannons in a metal cannon, with good results. Some also use fuels such as propane in havey duty cannons known as hybrids. These are cannons that use stoichiometric quantities of propane or another fuel injected into the combustion chamber of the cannon at pressures above atmospheric pressure. These most often have a burst disk between the chamber and barrel. The gasses are ignited and quickly reach very high pressure, the burst disk, however, will rupture at a certain pressure, releasing the combusted gasses into the barrel to send the projectile downrange. The burst disk guarantees that the cannon itself will not explode.

I hope that some of this information has been useful to you, and hope that it will show you that as in any other hobby, so long as certain rules are followed, potato gunning can be a perfectly safe and enjoyable hobby. Once again, our condolences to the family and friends of Ryan Meerdink.


~AndyC.~


After I sent it, I caught a couple grammatical errors, that ticked me off.
  • 0

"Who ever said the pen was mightier than the sword, obviously, never encountered automatic weapons."
-General Douglass MacArthur

Read my dog's blog - Life of Kilo
User avatar
paaiyan
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:03 pm
Location: Central Oklahoma
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 1

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:05 am

paaiyan wrote:Well, I have to say, yours was much better than mine. I'm in class at the moment so i didn't do as good of a job as i should have.


Yours is well written but as you're not an official spokesperson for the commmunity and the letter reflects your personal opinion (albeit a common one on this forum), you should have refrained from using "we".
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: paaiyan » Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:09 am

Meh, like I said, I was in class and trying to pay attention while writing, lol. Hindsight's 20/20 right? Oh well, at least I didn't say anything bad. In the future I'll try to remember that, sorry guys, didn't mean to speak for everyone.
  • 0

"Who ever said the pen was mightier than the sword, obviously, never encountered automatic weapons."
-General Douglass MacArthur

Read my dog's blog - Life of Kilo
User avatar
paaiyan
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:03 pm
Location: Central Oklahoma
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 1

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:19 pm

Paaign,

I know you've sent it but a couple of thoughts.....

a website with instructions on how to properly build and fire a potato gun


Brace yourselves for a wave of Noobs asking for step by step instructions and shopping lists. :D

if you put in too much fuel, the cannon will explode.


Not if he was referring to the solid propellants surely? I'm not a chemist but isn't it the case that you can "overfuel" a cannon that uses a solid propellant? I think you should have clarified that in standard SGs where the fuel is propane etc. that you can't put in too much fuel...

but with Sch40, no danger is there so long as it is used in a safe manner


Eek! Isn't cell core SCH40 extremely dangerous?

as long as the pressure of compressed air does not exceed the pressure rating of the weakest pipe fitting used, the gun will be completely safe


When you talking about the safety of SGs you can't really talk in absolutes. Nothing is "completely safe" there is always the risk of a failure. You should have said that the safety is dramatically increased.


Jo,

Although I do not wish to be disrepectful to Division Chief Jim Sideras, describing him as "a local expert" is far from accurate. True spudgun experts are very few and far between.
As someone that could reasonably be described as an expert in the field, I am therefore making a counter point to the following incorrect statements made both by your reporters and the Division Chief:

>"When something goes wrong with a potato gun, it goes very wrong".

Having built many potato guns, I can assure you that this point is an inaccurate generalisation which displays a very minor proportion of events as the majority situation. Well over 99% of cases of things going wrong with a potato gun are minor issues, like an air leak, or failed ignitor.

However, in fairness to Jim Sideras, I would imagine that when he hears about potato gun failure, it is because of it resulting in injury or fatality, but he is looking at a limited cross section of incidents which results in this distorted view.



Hmmm....I think you need to change it....One minute you saying that what this guy made was a firearm and not Spudgun and the next your saying (to put it very crudely) that they shouldn't have bothered asking him since he's not a SG expert and they should ask someone like you who's an expert.....Yet if it wasn't a SG why should they ask you a SG expert? Perhaps it's just the way you phrased it but that's how it comes accross.....

You might want to turn on the (this is painful to type :D )US English Dictionary. Otherwise they'll think your just some UK member that's poking their nose into US business (although that make work for you if you imply that you've been so insulted by it).

Normally I'd also recommend you sign it as a male...but since the reporter was female that may work in your benefit.....

PCGUY,

I've yet to see any comment from the ATF regarding pneumatics....I thought it was only combustions that they talked about?




Overall the whole thread reminds me of the velocity vs speed argument....

People who want to sell a car will use velocity as it sounds good - yet those in the Physics community start cringing since that's not in their eyes the correct use of the word.

Same here thing here to the average person a potato gun is merely a device that uses a propellant, solid...liquid...gas...whatever to launch a potato or part of.

The member's on here start cringing since in their eyes that's not a Spudgun. I must admit I think if he was firing Spuds then it's a Spudgun regardless of the type of propellant used - yes it is extremely dangerous to use solid propellants but it doesn't mean that it's suddenly not a Spudgun. It's only not a Spudgun in the sense that this forum classes a Spudgun as something that doesn't use powerful propellants but not every one is a member of this forum and since we're not the ATF you can't expect people to follow our rules/regs and definitions.....
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: joannaardway » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:21 pm

Gepard wrote:You might want to turn on the (this is painful to type :D )US English Dictionary. Otherwise they'll think your just some UK member that's poking their nose into US business (although that make work for you if you imply that you've been so insulted by it).

Normally I'd also recommend you sign it as a male...but since the reporter was female that may work in your benefit.....

I could sign it as either. I do have a reserve e-mail address under a male pseudonym, so I could do that.

I'll rescript the section you commented on. The reason I posted it first was to get feedback to avoid messing it up.

PCGUY,

I've yet to see any comment from the ATF regarding pneumatics....I thought it was only combustions that they talked about?

No, the ATF's letter DOES make mention of compressed gas as a propellant, so it does cover pneumatics.

EDIT: New draft, which takes some hints from paaiyan's letter, and takes into account what Gepard said.

To the reader,

I start by expressing my deepest sympathies to the bereaved parents and friends of Ryan Meerdink.
However, your report on this tragic event contained several inaccuracies that I felt compelled to contact you about.

Firstly, the term "Potato gun" your reporters used was incorrect here. There are no potato guns, by the ATF's own definition, that use solid propellants for fuel. They are legally defined as using either:
- a combustible gas mixed with air, such as butane, propane, hairspray or deodorant
- pre-compressed air

The use of "explosive powder" or solid propellant would in a very large majority of countries qualify the device described as a firearm.
Although it is fairly likely that Ryan Meerdink's device was muzzle loaded (your report made no mention of this though, so this is an assumption on my part), which exempts it from being a full firearm within the United States, by the definition of the ATF itself, Ryan Meerdink's device was NOT a potato gun. I personally believe it would be most accurately described as a "muzzle loaded firearm", even if the projectile was a potato.

I would like to add at this point that in a very large majority of online potato gun communities and forums, discussion of solid propellants is forbidden for both legal and safety reasons. It is well known to spudgun users that the combination of explosive powders and plastic pipe is never a good combination, and therefore should not be used.
It is also a common maxim on this sites that “You should only use pressure rated pipe”. The correct use of pressure rated pipe, combined with proper jointing methods and a non-solid propellant will create a safe potato launcher which has next to zero chance of failure.
Some users are sufficiently safety conscious as to make their launchers from metal, rather than plastic, pipe, which is even safer – there are correspondingly fewer cases of accidents with a metal potato launcher

Although I do not wish to be disrespectful to Division Chief Jim Sideras, describing him as "a local expert" with the implied in-depth knowledge of spudguns, is inaccurate. Proper spudgun experts are few and far between.

As someone that could reasonably be described as an “educated enthusiast” in the field of potato guns, I am therefore submitting corrections to the following incorrect statements made about spudguns, both by your reporters and the Division Chief:

>"When something goes wrong with a potato gun, it goes very wrong".

Having built many potato guns, I can assure you that this point is an inaccurate generalisation which displays a very minor proportion of events as the majority situation. Well over 99% of cases of things going wrong with a potato gun are minor issues, like an air leak, or failed ignitor.

However, in fairness to Jim Sideras, I would imagine that when he hears about potato gun failure, it is because of it resulting in injury or fatality, but he is looking at a limited cross section of incidents which results in this distorted view.

>"When you see them being shot it looks fun, but just because of the nature of what involved they're very dangerous."

As I have already said, a real potato gun, constructed out of the correct materials with sensible propellant, used in a sensible fashion is not in anyway dangerous to the users or people surrounding them.

>"The problem can be if something gets plugged up, too much propellant, it will actually explode."

This only ever applies when solid fuel is used, which then by definition stops the device from being a potato gun.
With a true combustion type potato gun, using too much fuel (be that propane, butane, hairspray, etc) will not destroy the launcher. In fact, quite the opposite, as the potato gun will completely fail to fire due to an oversaturated fuel-mixture.

>"It's very concerning when you see the amount of information on the Internet on how to build them."
>"But no matter much information is available, there is no safe way to make one."

Almost anyone could make a working spudgun WITHOUT instructions - but this is when people make dangerous assumptions and use improper materials, fuels or projectiles that make for unsafe launchers.

But using information off the internet, it becomes more than possible to make a safe potato gun. If information is sourced from a high-profile spudgun site, and preferably also a discussion forum where there is an almost limitless wealth of knowledge and experience on how to make these things, then the launchers that are made are not dangerous to anyone.
Indeed, many hundreds and thousands of people each year safely make and use spudguns because they have been supplied with proper information.

>"If you or your child has a potato gun, its best just to get rid of it. It's not safe. Sooner or later someone's going to get hurt with it and the injuries can be very severe and be life threatening."

That statement could be easily applied to many different things other than potato gun. I could reasonably say that about a car or revolver instead, which figures can/will prove are much more dangerous than spudguns.
If this was a report about a car accident or shooting, a statement of this nature would not be used, so it is deliberately unfair on the minority group that safely enjoy potato launchers.

Thank you for your time.


2nd EDIT: Spelt Paaiyan wrong again.
  • 0

Novacastrian: How about use whatever the heck you can get your hands on?
frankrede: Well then I guess it won't matter when you decide to drink bleach because your out of kool-aid.
...I'm sorry, but that made my year.
User avatar
joannaardway
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: SW Hertfordshire, England, UK.
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: iknowmy3tables » Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:48 pm

sorry but this guy almost deserves a darwin award
a)don't put gun powder in PVC unless you intend to make a pipe bomb
b)don't hold any dangerous untested projects such as a hybrid when ignigting, use remote ingition
c)don't hold your gun in a Rtard manner, I think he held it on his stomach cause he got his wound there but i'm not sure

as for the press they blammed spudguns they didn't even blame homemade explosives cause that did the damage and that is illegal, the spud gun alone could not have done such damage
  • 0


iknowmy3tables
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: maryland
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:05 pm

joannaardway wrote:
PCGUY,

I've yet to see any comment from the ATF regarding pneumatics....I thought it was only combustions that they talked about?

No, the ATF's letter DOES make mention of compressed gas as a propellant, so it does cover pneumatics.


Unless I'm reading it wrong - no it doesn't

From Spudtech's page:
We have previously examined that certain muzzle loading devices known as "potato guns." These potato guns are constructed from PVC plastic tubing. They use hair spray or a similar aerosol substance for a propellant, and have some type of spark ignitor. We have determined that these devices, as described, are not firearms provided that they are used solely for launching potatoes for recreational purposes. However, any such devices which are used as weapons or used to launch other forms of projectiles may be firearms and destructive devices as defined.


It does talk about compressed air guns - but not in terms of being legal....

I'll read your 2nd draft later - got some emails to send atm.
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

PreviousNext

Return to General Spud Cannon Related

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'