Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 0
Comments 97
'Apache' revolver used by French gangsters, pre-WW1
  • Well your quote is saying it was common to leave an empty chamber under the hammer, so that's about as safe as it gets.

    It wasn't/isn't even uncommon to carry a revolver in one's pocket fully loaded (with a round under the uncocked hammer), but generally there would be a trigger guard to help prevent the trigger being pressed through one's clothes or by other contents in the pocket. But these would also generally be double-action revolvers with very heavy triggers.

  • Scientists find desert moss ‘that can survive on Mars’
  • Well firstly, I appreciate your earnest reply.

    If you are not familiar, I highly recommend checking out "egoism," and Max Stirner.

    Your perspective sounds like a place of self and economic -awareness I was in, where I then was able to recognize that the "free market" is actually predicated on "might makes right," and that the Darwinian "survival of the fittest" has been, and continues to be, artificially forced as the salient concept of human evolution, and used to perpetuate domination of the "weak" by the "strong" as a natural, even moral, eventuality.

    If you are not familiar with "Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution," I highly suggest it, and Kropotkin.

    I believe that you are wary of abuse by people claiming to operate in your best interest. I am, too. I also believe there are people and forces who do not have our best interests in mind, and it is in their best interest to make us think that working together is bad for us, individually, and that competing with one another is natural and good.

    The truth, as I see it, is that working together is natural, and that when there are forces of domination - hierarchy, oppression - fundamentally opposed to our individually thriving, working together is safer, too. I would really appreciate it if you would look into anarchism (not anarchy), with the level head you brought to this discussion.

    I am firmly anti-capitalism, but I don't believe in any of the conceptual alternatives of "taking away economic consent" etc. that you mentioned. Capitalism, including "free-market," is a system of control regardless of nomenclature. I encourage broadly looking into "anticapitalism" while trying to leave biases about "failed states" that occurred in history (crushed by capitalism) at the door; again, the identity politics is a wedge keeping us from sharing perspectives.

    Can't write more now, feel free to message me.

  • Hammer and firing pin
  • How a gun "works" is that a thick-walled chamber houses the cartridge, so that as the powder ignited within rapidly expands (deflagration) there is nowhere for it to go besides violently propelling the projectile into the barrel. If there is no chamber, the thin walls of the cartidge are the path of least resistence, and the bullet likely stays put as the gases escape from cracks in the casing.

    So no, while this wouldn't be "safe" (eye damage comes to mind), there would not be enough energy to significantly wound a human by striking a round's primer without a chamber.