Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TP-82: The Gun Cosmonauts Carried On Space Missions

Posted by samzenpus on from the shoot-first dept.

HughPickens.com writes James Simpson has an interesting story about the TP-82 survival pistol that Russian cosmonauts carried into space with them on missions between 1982 and 2006. But calling it a pistol is slightly misleading—the TP-82 was essentially a sawed-off, double-barreled shotgun with a short-barreled rifle added onto it. Having a gun inside a thin-walled spacecraft filled with oxygen sounds crazy, but the Soviets had their reasons. Much of Russia is desolate wilderness. A single mishap during descent could strand cosmonauts in the middle of nowhere. In March 1965, cosmonaut Alexey Leonov landed a mechanically-faulty Voskhod space capsule in the snowy forests of the western Urals 600 miles from his planned landing site. For protection, Leonov had a nine-millimeter pistol. He feared the bears and wolves that prowled the forest—though he never encountered any. But the fear stayed with him. Later in his career, Leonov made sure the Soviet military provided all its cosmonauts with a survival weapon. For the Soviets, the weapon was a case of "better safe than sorry," and from 1986, it was a permanent fixture in the portable survival kits of every Soyuz mission. "Astronauts of all nationalities—including Americans—have trained with the TP-82," writes Simpson. "And still today, before they ride the Soyuz to space, they must complete a Russian survival training course in the Black Sea and the Siberian forest."

116 comments

  1. TP-82, not TI-82... by sureshot007 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Am I the only one that initially misread it as TI-82 and was trying to figure out how to use a calculator as a gun?

    1. Re:TP-82, not TI-82... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I once brought a t TP-82 to a standardized math test. It helped me get a perfect score.

    2. Re:TP-82, not TI-82... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Thinkpad that can also shoot, not just stop, bullets would be a must-have, and the low model numbers were still from IBM, not lenovo

    3. Re:TP-82, not TI-82... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Think of it as a really loud abacus.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  2. There's a name for this kind of gun by Zcar · · Score: 4, Informative

    A gun like this, triple barreled with shotgun and rifle barrels is called a drilling. Most typically they have two shotgun barrels and a rifle barrel, but other combinations are possible, e.g. one shotgun barrel, one larger caliber (e.g. .30-06) rifle barrel, and a small caliber rifle (e.g. .22lr) barrel.

    1. Re:There's a name for this kind of gun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like my JUDGE, just one barrel to deal with.

    2. Re:There's a name for this kind of gun by TWX · · Score: 1

      Also less stopping-power and fewer options.

      Granted, you're not stuck in the middle of undeveloped wilderness in Asia with a very real potential for being killed for food after having crawled out of a now-dead space capsule either.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:There's a name for this kind of gun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer my S&W Governor. Taurus is OK, but S&W also can work with .45ACP using moon rings, although I prefer .45 Colt rounds over semi auto rounds.

      This isn't exactly an EDC weapon, but more of a camping type of sidearm, because where I go camping, coyotes and feral dogs (mainly people from the cities leaving Rover out in the middle of the country because he is too big and not cute anymore, so the pooch joins up and starts lunching on nearby farms with chicken coops), having something like that is important, especially when you have packs. In my experience, just the noise from a .410 round gets them to go find easier prey. Hogs (which are not native, but an invasive species) are nasty as well, and there is a bounty on them (just $5.)

    4. Re:There's a name for this kind of gun by Vrallis · · Score: 1

      Yep, basically a subsistence-living firearm for targets of opportunity. A friend has a Belgian side-by-side with a 16ga on one barrel and .30-30 for the other. If I was in a subsistence scenario I'd like one of those or a drilling.

    5. Re:There's a name for this kind of gun by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Why not just a small guage shotgun with shells of shot and some of slugs? Could be a double barrel for those who'd want the abilty to quicky take advantage of either one at a moments notice

    6. Re:There's a name for this kind of gun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reliability. If there's an issue or malfunction, the remaining barrels are essentially independent firearms. When hunting dangerous animals (or defending yourself from one), you don't have spare seconds to clear a malfunction. The most common configuration IS a double barrel, with a rifle barrel set underneath.

      I'd prefer a regular shotgun myself, but I do get the rational for the drilling.

    7. Re:There's a name for this kind of gun by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      but there are double barrels with two triggers and two hammers, kind of a modern version of the old "coachgun"

  3. What is ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... "Pew pew pew" in Russian?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:What is ... by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Time to reload comrade, or I'm in charge now pheasant.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:What is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Voad-ka-ka.

    3. Re:What is ... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pheasant?

      I think your sig is bleeding over (so to speak) into your comments.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:What is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... "Pew pew pew" in Russian?

      Russians don't pew pew, they Logoffski.

    5. Re:What is ... by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Yea, and my Russian is bad too... ;) Did I mention I cannot spell? Oh you knew that? Sorry.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  4. Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I guess nobody wants to go to space and get killed by a bear upon return. It lowers the experience quality!

    1. Re:Makes sense by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Especially if you encounter space bears! They're worse than moon bats.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    2. Re:Makes sense by Dins · · Score: 4, Funny

      A space bear once bit my sister. No realli!

    3. Re:Makes sense by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Although a 32 gauge shotgun and the 5.24 mm (single shot) bullet would make shooting a bear somewhat problematic.

      You could successfully shoot yourself after being wounded by the bear, but that's about it. Same thing with the 9 mm. A bit on the weak side for a 600 pound + half armored pissed off animal.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:Makes sense by pr0fessor · · Score: 3, Funny

      or if you manage to land safely after a mechanical failure only to be eaten by wolves.

    5. Re:Makes sense by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Best bet with those rounds is shoot in the ground or air and hope to scare it off. Don't piss it off.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am a space bear you insensitive clod!

    7. Re:Makes sense by TWX · · Score: 1

      They did cite in the article that the round chosen was specifically meant to tumble on impact, doing significant internal damage. At least that's the theory. I don't think any bears have had to be shot in one's personal defense by cosmonauts or astronauts on landing.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    8. Re:Makes sense by Immerman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've heard that the recommended way to take down a bear with an underpowered handgun is to wait until it attacks and then shove your hand into its mouth and fire. Not something you want to try except as a last resort, but with luck the bullet(s) will puncture the thinner bone in the roof of the mouth. I used to know a lunatic hunter that claimed the maneuver had once saved his life.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    9. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's well known amongst Russian cosmonauts that even a .22 can stop a bear. You simply shoot your comrade in the knee and run like the dickens.

    10. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've heard

      Don't listen to those people any more. They are stupid and they will get you hurt.

      lunatic hunter

      The operative word there is `lunatic'. It's wasn't a bear. It was a mosquito. And he didn't shoot it in the face. He used a blow torch. This is another person you should not listen to.

    11. Re:Makes sense by Vrallis · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's to shoot your fellow cosmonaut in the knee and run away.

    12. Re:Makes sense by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      A boy scout a few years back did that with a .410 shotgun loaded with birdshot.

      The game warden noted that the only damage was to the upper palette of the mouth, right into the brain, that there were substantial powder burns in the mouth, and that the pellets didn't penetrate the skull even at that range.

      After deliberating all this, he came to the conclusion that the boy had acted in self defense in shooting the bear and was not to be charged.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    13. Re:Makes sense by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Somehow I think if you've got your hand inside a bear's mouth, not getting hurt no longer an option - at that point you're fighting to only be mauled instead of eaten. And no, he absolutely didn't shoot it in the face - that would be stupid. You might put out an eye if you were lucky, but more likely the bullet would just bounce off its skull.

      And yes - lunatic was definitely the operative word, but not in the way you're implying - he was known as *the* go-to man for eliminating problem bears and mountain lions in the region for decades, and sometimes he liked to give them a fighting chance.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    14. Re:Makes sense by avandesande · · Score: 3, Funny

      Make sure you file off the front sight so it doesn't hurt so bad when the bear shoves it up your ass.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    15. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whydidyoushootmyspacebar?

    16. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a space bear you insensitive clod!

      *obligatory chewbacca reference*

    17. Re:Makes sense by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      12.5mm is really slightly smaller than 32 gauge though

    18. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zounds! You mean that they sent men to space and didn't give them ray guns?

    19. Re:Makes sense by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Same round the AK-74 uses, similar to the 5.56x45 NATO stuff the M16 uses.

      Unfortunately while its velocity will be OK (2800fps or so) there isn't a lot of mass to help push through and penetrate something like a big ass bear.

      Now the 32 gauge shotgun, that is real close to 1/2", a "pure" lead round ball would weigh half an ounce... A 350 grain 416 caliber Barnes solid bullet (meant for the 416 rigby - a classic Dangerous Game round) in a sabot, being pushed to about 2000fps would do the job though... assuming the action strength was there.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    20. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It works better if you shove it up the bear's anus.

    21. Re:Makes sense by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      If I am up against any big varmint that walks the face of this planet, I'd choose a Heckler & Koch MP7. Whatever is on the wrong side of the barrel of that . . . doesn't need to be concerned aboutf its retirement fund.

      However, you need to be trained and experienced in using the weapon. Otherwise, when you are trying to plink a burglar in your house, you will end up hitting instead:

      Your wife.
      Your kids.
      Your dog.
      Any members of the Bush family that are considering to run for President of the US.
      Hillary Clinton's granddaughter.
      . . . and Barack Obama, as "The Beaver" . . .

      It's a frighteningly effective weapon, and cops in the US are probably happy that drug gang folks have not discovered it yet.

      Oh, and it has all the three things that the scientist Jared Diamond wrote about in in his book about what makes a successful civilization: Guns, Germans and Steel

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    22. Re:Makes sense by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      You realize that the delayed rollerblock blowback design of the HK 91/93/94/MP5 is just a copy of that from the G3, which was licensed from Spain? And the only reason the Germans did that is that FN in Belgium refused them a license to build their own FN-FALs for some reason (G1 series as issued to German forces, the German Boarder Guard, etc). No German engineering involved...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    23. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No German engineering involved...

      You really need to do some more research on the origins of the CETME/G3

  5. They also put an autocannon on their space station by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Several test stations before Mir were launched with AA guns for "self defense".

  6. Re:In soviet russia by bobbied · · Score: 1

    ...TP-82 trains on you.

    FIFY

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  7. Sharks! by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Shouldn't US astronauts similarly carry shark repellant? If they go off course or have a capsule break-up, they could end up in an ocean storm or with a leak.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Sharks! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, the Apollo capsule carried shark repellant in the survival kit (as well as a .22 cal pistol). Of course, that was in the days prior to lasers. Now they would have to have sunglasses as well.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Sharks! by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So the "gun thing" is not really a "Russian thing", as implied; it's simply old-fashioned boy scouting: "Be Prepared".

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  8. Oh nos - a gun! by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >> in the wake of the past year's tragic violence involving professional astronauts...the open access to such lethal hardware needs reappraisal

    Good thing there's no other way to die on the way to, in or on the way back from space.

  9. Two words.... by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

    Siberian Tiger.

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    1. Re:Two words.... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      There are less than 500 Siberian Tigers in the wild and they are notoriously shy around humans.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  10. Re:Does not make sense by Immerman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Quite so. But as described in the Wikipedia article linked the TP-82 is a triple-barreled weapon featuring two smooth-bore 32-guage shotgun barrels and a rifled barrel for firing 5.45×39mm rounds.

    Basically two shotguns plus one rifle all sharing a single stock. Where's the problem?

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  11. other elements of the training kit. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    Although its not widely discussed, i find many of the other elements of the soviet survival kit fascinating:
    1. PT3: tactical eating potato (1) if bear like potato
    2. V92: Vodka (potato but liquid) for drink in case of bear
    3. LL2: 40 pound brass bust of glorious comrade Lenin (maybe show bear)
    4. C32: Camera, 3 photos for secret picture of bear (can also take picture of potato)
    5. T21: Mikheil Jacks son cassete playing tape for when landing in america. to request bills jean lover can save life (do not show potato, do not play into bear)
    6. PT2: Second potato (removed by secret police, holster only. is no second potato. you are of greed.)

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:other elements of the training kit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Petrograd with all that stuff.

    2. Re:other elements of the training kit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Retrograd with all that stuff.

      FTFY

    3. Re:other elements of the training kit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is the funniest thing I've read all day.

    4. Re:other elements of the training kit. by fdhealy4 · · Score: 1

      All good things to have in Russian Vilderness. Especially #3. The whole post was really funny....

    5. Re:other elements of the training kit. by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      I am Cosmolio! I need TP for my bunghole!

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    6. Re:other elements of the training kit. by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      What, no tyolka for putting into beeg load to ease mind?

    7. Re:other elements of the training kit. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      "Survival kit contents check. In them you'll find:
      - One forty-five caliber automatic
      - Two boxes of ammunition
      - Four days' concentrated emergency rations
      - One drug issue containing antibiotics, morphine, vitamin pills, pep pills, sleeping pills, tranquilizer pills
      - One miniature combination Russian phrase book and Bible
      - One hundred dollars in rubles
      - One hundred dollars in gold
      - Nine packs of chewing gum
      - One issue of prophylactics
      - Three lipsticks
      - Three pair of nylon stockings.

      Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff."

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    8. Re:other elements of the training kit. by VAXcat · · Score: 1

      Shoot, a feller could have himself a pretty good weekend in Moscow with all this stuff.

      --
      There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    9. Re:other elements of the training kit. by bradgoodman · · Score: 1

      lol - mod up!

  12. Thanks for the unreadable link, hugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're only what, slashdot's number four medium.com linkspammer?

  13. Any use in games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Might be kind of fun to pack one of these in Fallout or S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

    1. Re:Any use in games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there was the .223 pistol which was made out to look a lot like Deckard's gun from Blade Runner, which in turn was a two-trigger mashup of somethingorother and Idontknowwhat. So, it's close-ish.

      Still the TP-82 would have been a hoot. A buggy hoot that gets confused about what kind of ammo it wants to load!

    2. Re:Any use in games? by Deadstick · · Score: 0

      If you want to carry a .223 pistol for bear protection, be sure to file off the front sight. That way it doesn't hurt so much when the bear takes it away from you and shoves it up your ass.

  14. Salyut 3 by Tailhook · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Salyut 3, a Soviet military space station, was launched in '74 equipped with an anti-aircraft cannon. The gun was aimed by orienting the whole station. Far more interesting than some survival gun.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    1. Re:Salyut 3 by TWX · · Score: 1

      Well, we'd already convinced the Soviets that Nixon was a lunatic that was so unstable that he could preemptively launch a nuclear strike against them; I'm not entirely surprised that they armed their space station.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Salyut 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who knew space exploration could be so badass. If it weren't for the flag and the occupancy weight limits, I'd call that downright American!

    3. Re:Salyut 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn! That's interesting, I had to look it up on wikipedia but still don't understand if it would've been useful for any application. I mean, how could they target anything with such an impractical method of aiming. Not to mention that being on board when it was fired was deemed too dangerous.

    4. Re:Salyut 3 by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      It was remotely controlled and to prevent docking or close inspection by USA when station was unmanned. No need to aim precisely, just fire at a craft close up for docing manuveurs.

    5. Re:Salyut 3 by mrops · · Score: 1

      Thats why I still love /.

      you get to learn something new everyday.

      No mod points to mark it informative :(

    6. Re:Salyut 3 by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Well, we'd already convinced the Soviets that Nixon was a lunatic that was so unstable that he could preemptively launch a nuclear strike against them; I'm not entirely surprised that they armed their space station.

      Yeah, that autocannon would have been real effective when we launched a nuclear anti-satellite weapon against them. I can't imagine that the way it was deployed that they could have hit the space shuttle coming in to dock with them with marines on board.

  15. Always mandatory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    To be perfectly honest, there should be a mandatory survival gear for at least one persons on board all craft, plane, boat or spacecraft.

    In fact, even long excursions away from home should really have some preparation beforehand to ensure your survival if the worst should happen.
    You never know when a rogue earthquake could shit on society, or perhaps a tidal wave, maybe a horrid snowstorm brings society to a crawl for a few days.
    Always be aware of the areas you are travelling to for added security and peace of mind.
    Ignorance is usually never a good thing, or bliss. (even more so with regards to basic legal information!)

    Hardly an exhaustive list, but water, high density dry food, knife and a heat source goes a very long way to ensuring your survival in moderately bad situations.
    Just stash that in your bag and you are golden.
    A really good rugged multi-tool goes a long way. I've used it many times even for non-emergency stuff when on holiday. Even in hospital!
    Don't get generic crappy ones, get a real solid heavy one since then you know it will be made of hard material and not some crappy aluminium frame. If you hit it off the side of your arm and it doesn't hurt, it is awful, or you weren't meant for the wild.
    Everything else will only make your life easier from there. (first aid kids are always a good thing if you are taking a lot of people somewhere)
    Hardly a hard thing to take stuff like this a long with you wherever you go even on a day-to-day basis. Hell, it is practically half of a typical young persons breakfast, high energy grain breakfast bar and water / coffee / fruit drink or something similar. I sure hope that person also doesn't eat knives and fire. If they do, they should get a job at the circus.

    1. Re:Always mandatory. by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 1

      Hell yes. You never know when your plane might veer off-course, break into pieces, and crash onto a weird island where you encounter polar bears. If you're lucky, however, you might find enough weapons to arm a small 3rd world country.

  16. American version (sorta) by i.r.id10t · · Score: 3, Informative

    The American pilot version - cut down bolt action in 22 Hornet. Since it has a barrel less than 16" and an OAL of less than 26" it falls under NFA purview, so there is a tax stamp associated (and several months wait).

    http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti...

    The other "more common" but still rare is the M6 version which is 22 hornet over a 410 shotgun on a weird skeleton style stock and weirder firing mechanism

    http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti...

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    1. Re:American version (sorta) by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      The American pilot version - cut down bolt action in 22 Hornet. Since it has a barrel less than 16" and an OAL of less than 26" it falls under NFA purview, so there is a tax stamp associated (and several months wait).

      Given that NASA is a government agency, they just use official letterhead when ordering one and there's no problem.

      Also, while it'd end up costing 100x just paying the $200 would, I'm sure they have machine shops that can turn one out quickly and easily enough...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    2. Re:American version (sorta) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any self respecting alien life form would laugh at the .22 . John Crichton from Farscape or Cpt Leo Davidson from Planet of The Apes (2001) could have sure used a nice shotgun like the one Russians were supplying their pilots with.

  17. Re:They also put an autocannon on their space stat by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    Several test stations before Mir were launched with AA guns for "self defense".

    I'm not saying it was aliens....

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  18. Proof of gun safety? by iONiUM · · Score: 2

    This might be the only "place in the world" (it's not exactly a place, and it's definitely not on the earth) with the highest gun ratio per capita. It appears to be 1:1.

    Yet, there have been no murders that I know of by these guns on the space craft, nor any miss-haps.

    1. Re:Proof of gun safety? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Proof that years of astronaut training and astronaut psychological evaluations should be required before purchase for all gun owners. There'd be no more gun accidents or murders.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    2. Re:Proof of gun safety? by Charcharodon · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Along those lines I'd like to apply general aviation training requirements before being allowed to drive a car.

      So after 35 hours of instruction, somewhere around $7000 is costs, able to pass an annual physical and mental evaluation, and speak clearly in English, . You'd be allowed to drive a 50hp, two passenger car up to 45mph, during the day, non-highway roads only, and only when the weather is clear and sunny. This would apply regardless of which country you live in btw.

      If you were ever convicted of reckless behavior or a DUI you'd lose your license forever.

      As far as gun owners needing to be astronauts, that's over-kill. Idiots with guns tends to be a self correcting problem. I thought all liberals preached natural selection. Why do they fight so hard against it?

    3. Re:Proof of gun safety? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Why do they fight so hard against it?

      Because they sometimes also select against the survival of people around them as well.

      Of course, self-driving cars would save far more lives...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:Proof of gun safety? by DaHat · · Score: 1

      As far as gun owners needing to be astronauts, that's over-kill. Idiots with guns tends to be a self correcting problem. I thought all liberals preached natural selection. Why do they fight so hard against it?

      Really? The low murder rate in easy to legally get a gun Plano, Texas and the high murder rate in the hard to legally get a gun city of Detroit beg to differ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

      In fact, oddly enough those places with the highest per-capita murder rates in the US tend to have rather strict gun laws full of more than a few liberal voters... odd that?

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    5. Re:Proof of gun safety? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The criminals in Plano are too weak from decades of heroin use to lift a gun.

    6. Re:Proof of gun safety? by Charcharodon · · Score: 1, Troll
      You misunderstood my point. You are not an idiot just because you have a gun. Just the opposite in most cases. Liberals that think all gun owners are idiots are much larger idiots than even the biggest idiot who happens to have a gun. Idiots tend to kill themselves without help or interference from those around them which takes me to my second point.

      Liberal scream Evolution, Evolution, Evolution, which is nothing more than the effects of natural selection over the long term, but at the same time they scream for protection, aka gov't regulations and laws, from said natural selection from taking it's "natural" course. I guess that is merely to prevent liberalism from being removed from the gene pool.

    7. Re:Proof of gun safety? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      There's much less reason for anyone to be up to no good in Plano. It's a nice respectable middle class suburb. It's not festering urban decay. That means less junkies and less crime.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:Proof of gun safety? by iluvcapra · · Score: 0

      Proof that years of astronaut training and astronaut psychological evaluations should be required before purchase for all gun owners. There'd be no more gun accidents or murders.

      I hate to bring it up but there was the astronaut who went loopy and drove 500 miles in adult diapers to kill her ex-boyfriend. (I forget her name.)

      I went on a few dates with this girl who used to work at NASA, in engineering at Goddard and at Houston, she used to know a bunch of astronauts and she said while none of them were totally nuts, they were all a little weird and totally neurotic about doing anything that might get them bumped from the rotation, particularly when the shuttle program was EOLd and there were no more mission slots forthcoming. The pressure of being an astronaut in space was one thing; the pressure of being selected as an astronaut, but then never going into space was quite another. Layer on that the inevitably weird macho/"Right Stuff"/elite competition stuff...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    9. Re:Proof of gun safety? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You do realise that it's populations, not individuals, which evolve, right? Probably not, hence you vomiting that nonsense for everyone to see, deftly illustrating your knee-jerk reactionism and lack of knowledge backing up your opinions.

      You can bandy about words like liberal and liberalism all you wish, but it just shows you are scared and ill-informed. Remember - the people who read your posts might not be as intellectually hindered as you are, and what might seem like a witty retort to you can (and likely will) look like an absolute joke to others.

    10. Re:Proof of gun safety? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      I certainly would not mind this kind of requirements.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    11. Re:Proof of gun safety? by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      Actually somebody would probably just murder the astronaut and take his gun.

    12. Re:Proof of gun safety? by Charcharodon · · Score: 1
      Let's try this again. Natural selection occurs over the short term. Evolution over the long term. Both effect the population and the individual.

      If the individual cannot survive then the population will not be made up of that individual. With enough pressure from variation and natural selection two populations will drift apart genetically, eventually become incompatible and separate.

      My rant pointed out that while Progressives/Liberals tend to push for evolution in the public education arena, yet they are conversely are horrified by the idea that people should be subjugated to the whims of said evolution, which natural selection is very much a part of, which is why they push for so many laws that restrict behaviors that might be "dangerous".

  19. Middle of nowhere, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A single mishap during descent could strand cosmonauts in the middle of nowhere.

    Like West Texas? I can see how a gun might come in handy.

  20. Why not ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... an AK-47?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Why not ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, A Krinkov might not be a bad alternative.

    2. Re:Why not ... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Rifle, no way? A shotgun with both shot and slug ammo would take be fine for birds, deer, bear, wolves

  21. Re:Didnt see that on Big Bang Theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ZIMBABWE!!!1111

  22. on Occulus Rift. In vomitVision(tm). by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Why no ISS map for S.T.A.L.K.E.R., comrade ?!!!
    Maybe that would be more like Descent.

    I can't quite figure out how zombies got on the space station. Maybe somebody sends them some bath salts - tainted vodka ?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  23. Re:They also put an autocannon on their space stat by TWX · · Score: 2

    Wasn't this in the era when we convinced the Soviets that our president was really insane and could or would launch a preemptive nuclear strike on them?

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  24. "filled with oxygen"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they still use pure oxygen? Did Russia not learn from Apollo 1? (from memory)

  25. Re:They also put an autocannon on their space stat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You keep repeating the tripe whenever someone mentions Soviet weapons in space. The Soviets were perpetually convinced (or at least pretended to be) that they we're under imminent threat by the US. Nixon wasn't special in that regard.

  26. Nowadays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we just 3D print one on the way down!

    Progress!

  27. Not selecting an AK47 by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    Primary reason for not taking an AK would primarily be weight and ease of storage.

    Plus, an AK isn't suitable for hunting birds if it's going to be a week before they can get to you for a rescue.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re:Not selecting an AK47 by drunk_punk · · Score: 1

      After spending a month on a space station your aim is for shit, and you just crash landed your ride. Now is NOT the time to go bird hunting. It is time, however, to break open the vodka and that emergency Fly Rod.

  28. Re:Didnt see that on Big Bang Theory by volcan0 · · Score: 1

    ZIMBABWE!!!1111

    This is not the password field.

  29. No pure oxygen by SysKoll · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having a gun inside a thin-walled spacecraft filled with oxygen sounds crazy,

    Having a spacecraft filled with pure oxygen sounds and is crazy. The Apollo 1 fire (1967) showed just how crazy it is. Which is why they don't do it anymore. Neither ISS nor the Russian capsules have a pure oxygen atmosphere. In fact, the ISS atmosphere is ground-level pressure with 20% oxygen. Only the EVA suits have a low-pressure, high-oxygen breathable mix.

    --

    --
    Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/

  30. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  31. Re:They also put an autocannon on their space stat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it was in the period of 2001-2008 when you convinced the world your president was insane.

  32. Putin's fault! by umghhh · · Score: 1

    What sort of barbaric regime sends weapons into space? Only Ruskies could be so evil. Ohh wait....

  33. What sounds crazy? by CurryCamel · · Score: 1

    Sitting on top of a huge canister of highly combustable stuff, propelling you to orbit, isolated in a thin canister full of pressurized tanks of who knows what. And all this solid Soviet craftsmanship.

    Why does the (safely stowed away) gun sound like the crazy part here?

  34. Re:Does not make sense by fxsoap · · Score: 1

    I would have liked to see what happens when you fire it off in space or it goes off on its own.