Air pistol help!

[situgrrl]

For reasons I won't go into right now, there is an air pistol with a pellet in it's breech that I can't clear because the gun has not been used in years and is leaking air on compression.  Does anyone know either how to clear the breech on a Gamo Compact?  Alternatively, does anyone know how to access/change what I assume is the main seal?  

Sorry for totally OT but I'm out of ideas and don't like having loaded guns lying around - hell, I don't like having any guns lying around!

[peteh]

Open the breech and run a small wooden dowel or rod down the front of the barrel.Careful you don't snap it off in the barrel !!!

[Jonathan Wienke]

If you go to your local sporting goods store, they may have a .17 caliber cleaning kit. The cleaning rod and handle would be the perfect thing to push the pellet out of the barrel.

[peteh]

I was going to say that.But.....I thought the dowel would be more readily found.

[David Hufford]

For reasons I won't go into right now, there is an air pistol with a pellet in it's breech that I can't clear because the gun has not been used in years and is leaking air on compression.  Does anyone know either how to clear the breech on a Gamo Compact?  Alternatively, does anyone know how to access/change what I assume is the main seal?  

Sorry for totally OT but I'm out of ideas and don't like having loaded guns lying around - hell, I don't like having any guns lying around!

As an alternative, though you need to be VERY careful as not to damage the rifling, is to use a carefully straightened section of clothes hanger (with any sharp edges filed/ground off on the tip). I used to use these as emergency cleaning rods when .17 caliber rods were near impossible to find. A real cleaning rod is best, of course. The dowel idea might work if you can find one.

As this is a pneumatic, it can be a bit complex to change seals. A schematic is here: http://www.aceros-de-hispania.com/airguns-...pact-airgun.htm. Have you tried a few drops of silicone-based oil on the seals? The manual should have the points to lube and the type of oil needed. (Regular gun or other oil can damage seals.)

[Rob C]

[quote name='situgrrl' date='May 22 2009, 11:04 PM' post='285867']
For reasons I won't go into right now, there is an air pistol with a pellet in it's breech that I can't clear because the gun has not been used in years and is leaking air on compression.  Does anyone know either how to clear the breech on a Gamo Compact?  Alternatively, does anyone know how to access/change what I assume is the main seal?  

Sorry for totally OT but I'm out of ideas and don't like having loaded guns lying around - hell, I don't like having any guns lying around!
[/quote




This is one of the most intriguing posts in a long time! Thank you for lifting my mood.

Once you´ve fixed it, the gun, come over to Spain with it and shoot the crap out of the zillion pigeons that nest in our roofs and cause drain blockages and annual cleaning bills and, worse, repair bills for the water damage that said blockages create!

They don´t allow shooting of any sort in built-up areas, just the stabbing of bulls in a stadium... I promise not to disclose your presence and mission just as long as you get the job done! A contract?

Rob C

[DarkPenguin]

This is one of the most intriguing posts in a long time! Thank you for lifting my mood.

Once you´ve fixed it, the gun, come over to Spain with it and shoot the crap out of the zillion pigeons that nest in our roofs and cause drain blockages and annual cleaning bills and, worse, repair bills for the water damage that said blockages create!

They don´t allow shooting of any sort in built-up areas, just the stabbing of bulls in a stadium... I promise not to disclose your presence and mission just as long as you get the job done! A contract?

Rob C

They're allowing conceal carry in national parks now.  This should be great.  Now if you run across a bear or a hiker you no longer have to rely on pepper spray.

[Rob C]

They're allowing conceal carry in national parks now.  This should be great.  Now if you run across a bear or a hiker you no longer have to rely on pepper spray.

Who said politics is non-progressive?

Rob C

[situgrrl]

I've cleared it but now the trigger is jammed!

I'm vegetarian so blowing the head off a bunny with two broken back legs was one of the least enjoyable experiences in my life.  I could have shot my cat more easily though!

[Rob C]

I've cleared it but now the trigger is jammed!

I'm vegetarian so blowing the head off a bunny with two broken back legs was one of the least enjoyable experiences in my life.  I could have shot my cat more easily though!

Well look, why not just send the cat over here and we can put it up on the roof and it can live off pigeon for the rest of its natural life? That way, the pigeons get controlled and the cat allowed to do what cats do best: kill.

How can you blow the head off a rabbit with a 0.177 airgun?

Rob C

[DarkPenguin]

How can you blow the head off a rabbit with a 0.177 airgun?

That would take some time.  I can see why it would be unpleasant.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I wonder what raw processor gives the best results with an 0.177 airgun. ACR? C1? DxO? Or can I just process my cats and rabbits in LR? 

[Justan]

They're allowing conceal carry in national parks now.  This should be great.  Now if you run across a bear or a hiker you no longer have to rely on pepper spray.

My apology in for the thread drift, but, while i like the guy for the most part, I rank O’s decision to permit guns in National Parks as the single most idiotic decision of his administration. I know the idea to permit guns in the national parks started most recently under B2 and was recently rejected prior to O bundling it in with the bill to change credit card related fees.

I live next to a national park. As it is, the area is akin to a shooting gallery during warm weather months (read that March through October). Give people guns and the sense of open space and they behave like idiots most of the time. By permitting guns in the national parks it is only a matter of time before visitors to the parks start getting shot. Our local park endures an estimated 2 million people per year. If only 1% starts bringing in loaded weapons, that is 20,000 more guns in this park each year. How many of these scared, gun carrying people will start plinking because they are too ignorant or just stupid to realize other people are around?

Throughout most of the history of the National Parks, guns have not been permitted. The reason is that it’s an obvious formula for repeated disaster.

[Rob C]

Throughout most of the history of the National Parks, guns have not been permitted. The reason is that it’s an obvious formula for repeated disaster.

But you have to consider the alternative disaster: an unarmed human running into an incensed bear that has either had its honey stolen or has simply stood on a large thorn.

Of course, you could always send in the cats - they´d keep them bears honest!

There is a the better option, which is to ban the human species from all parks. I used to live in Scotland at one time, and you know how fabulous the scenery is there, on the one day per year when it isn´t raining. As a photographer, I used to feel this sense of responsibility towards both business and clients to do some scouting around for locations where I could continue selling the myth in perpetuity - except that mostly I couldn´t dump the car. Large swathes of Argyle were simply fenced off and much of Perthshire offered no parking space either. One of the most lovely spots I knew was Loch Tay, which has two roads running alongside it: a well-paved one on the western, Ben Lawers side and a much nicer, narrow one on the opposite. The challenge, should you care to rise to it, is to find a parking space on the eastern one. You could be seduced into thinking you´d got one, but would then realise you´d just stumbled into a passing spot... that´s why some of the denizens of those parts have this unjustified reputation for being backwards - it´s just that they spend much time driving that way. So really, some places are better off without us. Think of the tripod holes it would save!

Rob C

[Justan]

Thanks, I didn’t want this to digress to a political issue.

I long for the alternative disaster. Bears and big cats don’t shoot blindly through the woods.

There are motions to ban private vehicles from some of the national parks. I think it’s already happened at least partially in Glacier. No cars means that the majority don’t trek very far. Reducing cars in the parks will be an easy “green” target and will reduce many of the problems created by legal posession of firearms in the area.

Scotland sounds a lot like this area – lots of rain and just enough sun to threaten the webbing that grows between the fingers and toes.  We get lots of snow too.

But..............did they really ban people in Scottish parks or just make the parking highly restricted?

[Rob C]

Scotland sounds a lot like this area – lots of rain and just enough sun to threaten the webbing that grows between the fingers and toes.  We get lots of snow too.

But..............did they really ban people in Scottish parks or just make the parking highly restricted?

Scotland doesn´t generally get much snow; there have been expensive attempts to get skiing off the ground, but these have often ended in company failures. It just seems to lie within latitudes where no sort of continuity of winter conditions can be expected for periods regular and long enough to make viable returns.

Regarding parking: the areas to which I referred are not, or were not when I lived near there, designated as parks, though I think the Trossachs might have been; they were just attractive areas with lakes - sorry, little lochs - which would have made jewels of backgrounds for fashion pics that I wanted to shoot. I did find a very good spot up at Balmaha, on the eastern side of Loch Lomond, where you could dump the wheels beside an old pier and climb up the hill behind it to a great spot just open enough to provide working space. But in general, everywhere was fenced and even were it not, no stopping places existed.

I can understand this. If I were the landowner I wouldn´t relish the thought of any old sod - photographer or not - trogging across my territory, camping, making fires and leaving crap behind... the cows make enough of that! Then, I suppose if somebody were to drown on an open stretch of private water, there would be a great opportunity for a lawsuit. What a society we breed: I remember visiting a little hotel down in the south of the country - Dumfries - that used to have a small pool; the last time I passed it had been filled in because the law required that the proprietor provide a permanent guard... what on Earth happened to the idea of being responsible for your own behaviour and safety or that of your children?

Rob C

[Justan]

Okay, so it appears you are saying that these lochs and surrounding property were privately owned. That partially explains the fences. The other part is due to a concept, often called a doctrine, which is called an “attractive nuisance.” This is broadly defined as anything on one’s property that might attract people (often but not limited to children) into danger or harm.

In the US the concept of the attractive nuisance has lead to many laws being construed to require protecting against this possibility. Putting a 6’ high fence around pools is one example. The doctrines can be extreme, but the goal is to protect the unwary and often this doctrine figures into building codes, park design and many elements dealing with public and not so public spaces.

It is sad that the areas of beauty you describe should be closed off to the public. Does Scotland have the equivalent of national parks or designated wilderness areas?

[Rob C]

Okay, so it appears you are saying that these lochs and surrounding property were privately owned. That partially explains the fences. The other part is due to a concept, often called a doctrine, which is called an “attractive nuisance.” This is broadly defined as anything on one’s property that might attract people (often but not limited to children) into danger or harm.

In the US the concept of the attractive nuisance has lead to many laws being construed to require protecting against this possibility. Putting a 6’ high fence around pools is one example. The doctrines can be extreme, but the goal is to protect the unwary and often this doctrine figures into building codes, park design and many elements dealing with public and not so public spaces.

It is sad that the areas of beauty you describe should be closed off to the public. Does Scotland have the equivalent of national parks or designated wilderness areas?

The concept, often called a doctrine...

I loved that! So 1984 and politically correct and right back into the realm of father knows best! You see it very clearly.

Regarding national parks and designated wilderness areas in Scotland - yes, I believe they exist there too, but nature protects them all by herself, as she does in parts of Canada, where the natural winged warriors provided by nature drive Man out, all by themselves. I have a cousin who is a painter and lives up there in the Highlands: he tells me that the midges are so powerful and dangerous that he needs a form of medication to prepare himself to deal with nature there, on her terms, when the drive, the compulsion takes him over and he has to go out and paint! Mabe that´s why many painters carry cameras today - notebooks for when they have to retreat to safer territory! Who needs bear or crocodile when a simple insect can do the trick!

I suppose that the truth I think I see is that Man spoils everything by the time he has finished with it; far better that he be confined to less and less of this world. And I include myself in this blanket emotion.

Rob C

[Robert Roaldi]

Allowing concealed weapons to protect against bear attacks seems a little off to me, but I live in Canada so you'll have to forgive me. Why conceal the weapons? Does it fool the bears?

But it should not be too difficult to sort this one out. They probably already have statistics on bear maulings that have occurred in the last five years. (I am not an expert, but it's probably a minuscule number.) Let's just see how many park visitors shoot each other in the next five years and then we'll know which is more dangerous to public health, guns or bears.

[DarkPenguin]

Allowing concealed weapons to protect against bear attacks seems a little off to me, but I live in Canada so you'll have to forgive me. Why conceal the weapons? Does it fool the bears?

Sometimes.  Not at Jellystone, tho.  Those bears are smarter than the average bear.

But it should not be too difficult to sort this one out. They probably already have statistics on bear maulings that have occurred in the last five years. (I am not an expert, but it's probably a minuscule number.)

Oh, it's low.  But it will be lower when we start shooting those bastards in the face.

Let's just see how many park visitors shoot each other in the next five years and then we'll know which is more dangerous to public health, guns or bears.

You have to break some eggs to make an omelet.