No comments about Historische Bestecke II: Historic Cutlery II.

1 comments about Antique American Switchblades.

1. best source that I have found so far lots of pics and info.

No comments about Arms Makers of Colonial America.

No comments about The World Encyclopedia of Pistols, Revolvers & Submachine Guns: An Illustrated Historical Reference To Over 500 Military, Law Enforcement And Antique Firearms ... From Around The World (World Encyclopedia).

4 comments about The gun: A "biography" of the gun that killed John F. Kennedy (A Bantam Book).

1. Once upon a time, a JFK conspiracy theorist asked the following question:
   
   >>> "If someone steals my rifle and then kills someone, my fingerprints are on it, but does that prove that I was the killer?" <<<
   
   To which I now reply.....
   
   If a rifle YOU own is used in a crime, the odds are certainly in favor of YOU, the owner of said weapon, being the killer. You're certainly the #1 prime suspect, that's for sure. Why wouldn't you be?
   
   Mere ownership of a rifle doesn't prove you killed a person with said weapon, true. But nobody can possibly deny that the sheer ODDS are in favor of you (the weapon's rightful owner) being the actual killer.
   
   And you'll need to do a lot more work to establish the FACT that your rifle was stolen. An accused killer saying to the cops (or to a jury) that he thinks his rifle was stolen by some unknown person or persons isn't gonna cut it. And I think the "Stolen Rifle" defense is even a tougher road to hoe in the JFK murder case than most conspiracy theorists seem to want to admit.
   
   The known storage location of Lee Harvey Oswald's one and only rifle in the weeks leading up to President Kennedy's assassination on 11/22/63 was Ruth Paine's garage in Irving. There were no signs of any "theft" or "break in" at the Paine house at any time in the weeks prior to Nov. 22.
   
   Now, I suppose it's true that some clever thief could have slipped in and out of Mrs. Paine's garage, totally undetected, and made off with the rifle. But there is absolutely no hard evidence at all to indicate that such a theft took place at the Paine house in late 1963.
   
   The totality of circumstantial "rifle" evidence in the JFK case certainly does not indicate a "theft" carried out by conspirators wishing to frame Oswald -- but, instead, this evidence tells a reasonable person that Lee Oswald, himself, took that rifle from a rolled-up blanket in the Paine garage either on the night of Nov. 21 or the early morning of Nov. 22.
   
   Oswald's OWN LIES that he told later about the "package" and his rifle-ownership status are telling a reasonable person that Oswald desired to distance himself from any "long, bulky package" and ANY "rifle" that he owned whenever he was questioned about those items by the authorities.
   
   And why would Oswald NEED to "distance" himself from EITHER of those items if he merely was hauling innocent "curtain rods" to work on the morning of Nov. 22nd (as he twice told fellow Book Depository worker Wesley Frazier)?
   
   The answer is, of course, quite an obvious one.
   
   Heck, Oswald himself didn't even bother to use the "Somebody Stole My Rifle" alibi....which actually would have been a far better alibi for him to try to use instead of denying ownership of a weapon that he has got to KNOW will be traced to him very quickly. For Pete's sake, he knows he had the gun shipped to a P.O. Box where he received mail.
   
   But, instead, Oswald denied having owned ANY rifle, ever...and he denied telling Frazier anything about curtain rods...and claimed the only "package" he carried to work on Nov. 22 was his "lunch".
   
   On top of these lies, we know that Oswald killed policeman J.D. Tippit without a sliver of a doubt, which is devastating evidence that tells a reasonable person that LHO also killed JFK less than one hour earlier -- due to the fact that JFK just happened to be killed while driving by the place where Tippit's killer worked, and which was also a building that contained scads of "Oswald Was Here At 12:30 Shooting At The President" type of evidence (not even counting the eyewitnesses who placed an Oswald-like shooter on the sixth floor of the TSBD).
   
   For example:
   
   1.) Oswald's gun was found on the 6th Floor.
   
   2.) Bullet shells from LHO's gun were found in the Sniper's Nest.
   
   3.) Oswald's fingerprints and palmprints were found on multiple boxes DEEP WITHIN the Sniper's Nest.
   
   4.) An empty paper bag with Oswald's prints on it was found near the sniper's window....including a right palmprint of LHO's on the closed end of the bag which perfectly aligns with the testimony given by Wes Frazier about how Oswald carried a bag that day. If that bag was a "plant" and was "manufactured" after the fact by the police, then those cops deserve an award for such outstanding work, given that perfect job of "planting" that RIGHT PALMPRINT OF LEE OSWALD'S ON THE CLOSED END OF THE BAG.
   
   Plus -- Oswald leaves the Book Depository just minutes after all the commotion has just begun around his workplace. And LHO lies about why he left. He and Bill Shelley never talked after the shooting. This was just one of dozens of post-12:30 lies that LHO told the police. Another being his "I had lunch with Junior" alibi attempt.
   
   Plus -- There is Oswald's not being the least bit surprised or startled or scared when confronted in the 2nd-Floor lunchroom at gunpoint by policeman Marrion Baker (per Baker's and Roy Truly's testimony re. Oswald's behavior).
   
   And there's a logical "He's Guilty" reason for this non-reaction of Oswald's too (IMO) -- i.e., he no doubt EXPECTED the building to be filled with cops very shortly after he fired three highly-audible rifle shots from an open window that he knew would be heard by a lot of people in Dealey Plaza.
   
   How could Oswald NOT have expected the police to race into that very building within minutes of the shooting? Of course he expected that to happen. Hence, his rush to get off of the "Floor Of Death" (Floor #6) and at least down to a lower floor where the shooting did not occur. Unfortunately for him, he had to peel off at the 2nd Floor when he no doubt heard the heavy bootsteps of Baker (plus Truly too) coming up the stairs.
   
   But fortunately for Oswald, he worked there, and was cleared by Truly as just another employee of the TSBD. If Lee had not been employed there, J.D. Tippit would probably still be alive, because Oswald would have likely been detained by Officer Baker due to his "unknown" status in the eyes of Superintendent Roy Truly.
   
   After the Baker encounter, Oswald can no doubt breathe a tad easier....because he's just passed a major hurdle in slipping through any early post-shooting dragnet. So, he pauses at the Coke machine for just a moment or two and purchases a soft drink.*
   
   * = Whether it was a "Coca-Cola" (in the trademark "hourglass"-shaped bottle) or Oswald's favorite soft drink, Dr. Pepper, is something that I do not believe has ever been officially established.
   
   But, regardless of flavor, LHO buys a soft drink and walks through the Depository's second-floor offices, where Mrs. Robert A. Reid sees Oswald and even speaks to him, telling him "The President has been shot, but maybe they didn't hit him".
   
   Oswald then exhibits another perfectly-reasonable reaction from his own point-of-view, seeing as how he already KNOWS the information being told to him by Mrs. Reid -- that reaction being (like with Officer Baker) another "non-reaction" for the most part, as he brushes by Reid without saying anything that Reid could understand (she said he "mumbled something to me"), and without displaying the slightest bit of shock, surprise, or concern. According to Mrs. Reid, Oswald was "very calm".**
   
   ** = A grain of salt needs to be taken here re. Reid's testimony. This salt is needed because we know that Reid herself was somewhat upset about the President being shot and she would have had no particular reason at all to pay very much attention to Lee Oswald as he passed by her, a trip which took no more than a few fleeting seconds, quite obviously.
   
   Mrs. Reid said to the Warren Commission that a major reason why she recalls seeing LHO that day is due to the fact that it was somewhat unusual to see any of the "warehouse boys" in the office area except when they needed change for the soda machine. But since Reid could see that Oswald already had a "full" bottle of a soft drink, she knew he probably wasn't in the office to get change.
   
   Oswald then departs the TSBD at approx. 12:33 PM and goes home in a very unusual way (for him)....via bus AND taxicab. Being the miser that he was, the 95-cent cab ride ($1.00 including the tip for driver William Whaley) was definitely out of character for the frugal Mr. Oswald.
   
   So, a logical question needs to be asked here as well -- Why doesn't Oswald just take the bus home (like usual), instead of asking for a bus transfer from driver Cecil McWatters and then walking to the Greyhound taxi stand to get into a cab? Why is Oswald in such a hurry to get to his roominghouse at 1026 N. Beckley Avenue on this particular November day....only minutes after a U.S. President has been shot from right in front of the building that Oswald just vacated?
   
   Another question that needs to be asked is -- Why does Oswald leave work at midday in the first place if he was totally innocent of any wrong-doing that day?
   
   That last question is a valid one, since we KNOW that Oswald lied when he gave his own explanation for leaving work when he did on Nov. 22. That lie being: He said that he assumed there would be "no more work" done that day due to the fact the President had been shot.
   
   Via at least one official Dallas Police account of Oswald's story, LHO said he had confirmed with his boss, Bill Shelley, that he (LHO) could leave the building and knock off for the rest of the day. That was positively a lie, and here's why (via the Warren Commission witness transcripts).....
   
   MR. BALL -- "Did you, at any time after the President was shot, tell Oswald to go home?"
   
   MR. SHELLEY -- "No, sir."
   
   ~~~~~~~
   
   So, when all of the above things are assembled together, a pretty clear picture begins to form. There's so much evidence to show that Lee Oswald is a double-murderer, it's staggering. There is so much, in fact, that the idea that ALL of this stuff (including impossible-to-control circumstantial evidence) could possibly have been manipulated so perfectly and so swiftly (by the DPD, the FBI, or whoever) is a foolhardy conspiratorial belief.
   
   There's just too much stuff here....stuff that couldn't have been perfectly "controlled" by anyone attempting to frame Oswald for two murders. And the biggest reason to know that this is true is by taking a look at Oswald's own incriminating, guilty-like actions after 12:30 on November 22. Does an innocent "patsy" act like Oswald acted in the hours following JFK's murder (a murder that LHO said he had nothing to do with)?
   
   Or, to quote an excellent passage uttered by Larry Sturdivan in his book "The JFK Myths".....
   
   "While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated whole....with superhuman abilities to fake physical evidence, that is in complete agreement with all the other faked evidence." -- Page 246 of "The JFK Myths"
   
   ~~~~~~~
   
   Vincent Bugliosi also provides a good capsule account of assassination events, via the following remarks, spoken in 1986:
   
   "So we KNOW, not just beyond a reasonable doubt, we know beyond ALL doubt that OSWALD'S RIFLE WAS THE MURDER WEAPON!!
   
   And it's obvious that Oswald carried that rifle into the building that day in that large brown paper bag. It couldn't be more obvious. As far as Mr. Frazier's testimony about Oswald carrying the bag under his armpit...he conceded he never paid close attention to just how Oswald was carrying that bag. He didn't have any reason to.
   
   At this point if we had nothing else...nothing else...how much do you need?...if we had NOTHING else...this would be enough to prove Oswald's guilt beyond all REASONABLE doubt." -- V. Bugliosi
   
   ~~~~~~~
   
   Given the facts previously discussed (and several more not touched upon), I'd say, yes, it's a pretty safe bet that the owner of that Mannlicher-Carcano rifle found on the 6th Floor, a Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald (alias "A.J. Hidell"; alias "D.F. Drittal"; alias "O.H. Lee"), was indeed the person who actually used it to shoot and kill John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.



2. The lack of footnotes, references, or a bibliography of any sort is a serious flaw in this book. By appearances, a significant amount of research was required to prepare this book, none of which is offered for the reader to corroborate. The author is obviously a proponent of gun control, so much so that, at times, the book seems to be a rant for gun control written under the guise of a history of Mannlicher Carcano C2766, the gun Lee Harvey Oswald used to kill John F Kennedy.
   Notwithstanding that, there is usefull and interesting information about the rifle, including details of it's trip from Italy to the United States. The reader should be prepared to sort through the author's gun control propaganda to learn the story of C2766.



3. If you are a serious investigator into the JFK-assassination this is the book on the history of the Mannlicher-Carcano rifles. In my work with the rifle of Lee Harvey Oswald, I have used this book a lot. My advice; buy it...



4. This book (once available as hardcover, 1975, and as paperback, 1976) sets out to explore the history of one specific old military rifle: the one Carcano short rifle, Fucile Modello 91/38, in 6,5 x 52 mms, serial number C 2766, that was (according to the Warren Commission and the House Select Committee on Assassinations) used to assassinate US president John F. Kennedy in Dallas, in 1963. Such monographic studies of the history of a single firearms are already rare. But what makes this book unique and worthwhile reading, is that its author succeeds in presenting his (painstakingly collected) information in a much larger coherent framework. We not only learn about the maker back in 1940 (the Italian government state arsenal in Terni, north of Rome), but also about the use of Carcanos in World War II, about the colourful history surplus firearms trade back in the 1950s and 1960s, about trade customs and fraud. We get to know the name and life story of the Italian gunsmith, Luciano Riva, who reworked the Carcano rifles before they were exported, and how he was cheated by his US corporate partners, and went ill and bankrupt over this. Altogether, a gun packed full with historical information, of interest not only to the "JFK assassination buff" (who will learn a great deal about things otherwise not covered by pro- and anti-conspiracy authors), but for everybody interested in the lore and history of military firearms. The book is entertaining and far from dry.

2 comments about 2003 Sporting Knives.

1. An extremely detailed guide to the latest knives. Thousands of photos are scattered throught the book. The book is devided into several sections, including one with articles on general knive topics, listings of all of the best knives of specific class, and company by company guide. Any knive enthuisiast's
   dream.



2. From folding knives and pocket knives to military knives and knives which are small swords, this newly updated and expanded edition of 2003 Sporting Knives provides a clear guide to knives for outdoor enthusiasts who use sporting knives. Knife experts provide articles and reviews of the newest and most useful commercial sporting knives on the market, while catalogs of prices and sources add to the details on their use. An indispensable guide for not only collectors, but outdoorsmen.

2 comments about Handguns 2006 (Handguns).

1. This should be a book-size collection of articles on handguns, ranging from semi-automatics to revolvers. The problem with these annual productions is that it wastes most of the pages with a catalog of available guns (information readily available on the Internet). Also, it wastes even more space on black powder guns, a real ho-hum for most modern handgunners. Finally, only in-production handguns tend to be featured, when many readers have older, but fully functional models that could be compared to today's models as a frame of reference.
   
   Another problem with such books is the influence of gun manufacturers. You won't find the scathing comments that perhaps should be included about guns that have spotty reputations. It's all politely overlooked. Of primary concern is that it's difficult to find any 1911 pistol to be reliable out of the box; most require some "work" to reach a point where someone would want to bet their life on them. In contrast, most newly designed guns for the same price (or even less expensive) are flawlessly reliable right out of the box.
   
   Again, the chief criticism of these annual books is that perhaps half of the book consists of a catalog, which is a waste of space in my view. I'd rather it contain articles from fore to aft.



2. I've found over the last few years that one not need to buy this book if one has purchased Gun Digest 2006. Many of the articles in this book are exact copies found in the Gun Digest book.
   Save your money and buy somthing that is not just a re-run!!!

1 comments about Modern Guns: Identification & Values (Modern Guns).

1. The sixteenth updated edition of MODERN GUNS is a 'must' reference for any serious gun collector, whether it be of pistols, rifles, or shotguns. Such an audience will find the format hasn't changed, but has been redesigned for quicker reference, with each gun receiving in-depth details, the latest values, and pricings in categories ranging from good to very good condition. Add the black and white photos throughout and you have a reference collectors can't be without.
   
   Diane C. Donovan
   California Bookwatch

3 comments about Antique Swords & Daggers.

1. The book is however well formatted and professionally scripted, but full of misleading and inaccurate information. Most swords and daggers can be purchased cheaply at vendors stalls throughout Europe, particularly at car boot sales.
   
   Repeatedly, this author makes major errors in his judgement and evaluations, I believe he is good intentioned but really needs to complete his research.



2. 
   Over the years I have let a number of swords pass through my hands, keeping one or two and letting some of the others go, until I decided to go into it a bit more deeply and borrowed this book to see if I had let a fortune pass through my hands.
   
   This book gave me the answer to most of my questions, particularly as it has a price guide as well (but this soon becomes dated) and I really only used it as a guide because book prices and what you can actually get on the open market are usually two different things.
   
   What did surprise was the number of different kinds of swords there are and the quality and workmanship that goes into some of them, mostly ceremonial swords, with etched blades and god wire woven into the hilt. Wht did come across loud and clear was the price that some of these weapons are now fetching. A swords that you could have picked up for £10-£20 thirty years ago is now in the low hundreds. As an aid to identification the book is a useful tool for the enthusiast, although it is not cheap, but what is these days.



3. Being an avid collector and connoisseur of Islamic and Indonesian Arms and Armor, I picked this book, based off of the cover design. Although the book is fully illustrated and well layed out, I had no confidence in the information after the first couple of pages. The author often, and when I say often, I mean 80% of the time, claims swords and daggers to be at least 19th century. This is not the case. Many of the Daggers featured in this book are recently made for the tourist market in Indonesia and India. You can tell by the style of Koftgari technique fairly easy with just a little bit of knowledge on the subject. This also includes Victorian European swords. The prices are off the charts. I laughed when I saw fairly plain Keris daggers, plain dha swords and beat up talwars estimated at over $1500. Now, the author is not selling these pieces (yet), these are just estimated prices.
   
   Perhaps if a few zeros were taken off the prices, that would be more realistic. I would not recommend this book. In fact, for the first time using amazon, I am sending mine back for a refund. I would however recommend anything by Elgood, Figiel, Robinson etc for Islamic ...and Albert Zonneveld's recent book for Indonesian.

4 comments about Complete Guide to Service Handguns.

1. Gene Gangarosa is one of the comparatively few gun writers with the integrity to call it like he sees it. You will not see Gene rating guns based on how "cool" they may be perceived to be by others. Thus this book reviews guns based on their quality, features, and performance, regardless of who made them. Gangarosa is well qualified to write on this topic, and although all reviews of anything that anyone writes is subjective, including this one, you will find an even-handedness in this book, as well as the companion volume, The Complete Guide to Compact Handguns which is also available on Amazon or from Stoeger Gun Books, the publisher.
   
   First of all, these trade-size paperback books cover defensive handguns. Competition, hunting and plinking guns are not what these books are about. Service Handguns covers revolvers and pistols in the 4" to 5" size, guns which are normally carried in a belt holster. The companion Compact Handguns volume covers shorter and smaller version of defensive handguns. The books are organized into four basic sections, classic revolvers, classic semi-automatic pistols, modern revolvers, and modern pistols. The sheer number of models reviewed is staggering. Guns are all photographed in B&W, and fired for function and accuracy. With gun companies that make multiple versions of the same basic model a representative one or two might be fired, but all are discussed.
   
   I rate these two books a four rather than five just because nothing is perfect. I do have some minor complaints. I would have liked to have seen expanded coverage of the biggest selling handguns such as Glock, Smith & Wesson, and SIG. But it is hard to fault an author for covering all makes equally. Second, function and accuracy varies among individual examples of the same exact model handgun. I would like to have seen that emphasized. Gangarosa is no doubt well aware of this fact, but an unsophisticated reader might get the wrong impression, right or wrong, basing judgments on examples of one. I don't want to hammer this one, as this is a minor complaint in the grand scheme of the book. Finally, I have found one or two minor inaccuracies, which are going to creep into any book. One example that comes to mind is in the section on classic revolvers. In reviewing the Ruger Security-six Gangarosa mentions the Speed-six and calls it slightly smaller. In fact the Speed-six is exactly the same size as the Security-six, using the same exact frame. The only differences in these two guns are that the Sec-six used a square butt grip frame and has adjustable sights while the Speed-six has a round-butt grip frame and fixed sights. Again, these inaccuracies are rare and minor. At the moment I can't even think of another example.
   
   These books are now several years old, and given the dynamism of the handgun world of late, they are going to be slightly out of date. However I don't see that as a drawback. You read gun magazines to get the latest info on new releases, while you buy books as solid reference volumes which you'll refer to again and again. That is the type of books we have here.



2. This book appeals to two groups of people: the nastalgic, who want to read about the pistols of yesterday, and the people who want to know about the latest plastic sidearms. It covers all well known revolvers (Smith and Wesson, Colt, Tarus, etc) and semi-automatics (Colt, Beretta, Glock, Sig, Browning Hi-power, etc), plus numerous less-expensive copies of said guns. It also covers less known guns, like the Nagant, Tunulov, and Broomhandle. The only downside to this book is that some guns (like the Browning) are reviewed several times in the different sections, making it a pain to quickly access information.



3. This is one of the best reference works out there for information about service handguns. It is a great combination of both factual data about subjective, expert opinion about a very large selection of standard handguns. The author gives the history of the weapon, the technical data, and shooting impressions. This is one of the few resources that give all three. The photographs are very good (not glossy but still very good), and the writing is clear and concise without being dry. The information is well organized with an excellent index. Finally, the author includes "classic" service handguns no longer in production as well as current models. Every gun I have been interested in has been in this book. I have read it from cover to cover just for pleasure reading. It is that good. If you are interested in firearms, I highly recommend it. The only downside is that it only comes in paperback, and I had to buy a second copy because I wore out my first one!



4. Gangarosa's book is a good source of information for those who seek reference material on standard-issue service hanguns (Glocks, Sigs and etc.) as well as more exotic, yet highly functional handguns (Astra, FEG and etc.). Complete with very good pictures, the book provides fairly detailed explanations of a very wide variety of handguns. This is definitely a must for those who are interested in handguns other than (or in addition to) the garden-variety found in local sports stores.