Where Do You Stand On Gun Control/Second Amendment?

[Randy]

And that is how they are basically the same. Some people just assume the that a semi-automatic rifle IS actually fully automatic. Neither are fully automatic

Ah, the "people have no right to complain about firearms because they don't know anything about them" angle. I was wondering when you'd show up.

 

[Unslaved]

But who is more wrong?

The person who thinks that the firing rate of handguns and rifles is the same because they are both considered semi-automatic, or the person who thinks that the firing rate of semi-automatic rifles is greater than that of handguns?

Trick question. You're both wrong, just about different things.

I can't see how we can have a nuanced argument when you just don't know what you're talking about.

From the advantages of stocked/gripped guns over handguns, local laws, federal laws, the history and use of certain firearms, you've been consistently wrong while bemoaning how little others know about firearms.

Just stop. You're making yourself look silly. The rhetoric is even more transparent when it's coming from a position of ignorance.

That has nothing to do with the fact that on both guns, a round isn't fired until you pull the trigger. And only one round per pull. It doesnt get any more clear cut and dry than that when definining what a semi automatic gun is.

Lets have a nuanced argument about the breakdown of society, since that is the true cause of the problem. Since the invention of the handgun, most people had at least on in their home. Most boys of those fathers knew how to use them properly, they knew where the guns were in the house. But you didnt see them grabbing those guns and shooting up their school. The availability was always there, but that didnt equal more gun crime.

So again, what has changed? Why weren't kids shooting up schools then? I'll wait for someone to answer.

 

[Unslaved]

Ah, the "people have no right to complain about firearms because they don't know anything about them" angle. I was wondering when you'd show up.

Um no. Why is CNN intentional misleading people about guns. Im still waiting for that answer too

 

[narad]

Ah, the "people have no right to complain about firearms because they don't know anything about them" angle. I was wondering when you'd show up.

It's quite a weird one. Also the slant of like, "Most people don't even understand the difference between semi-automatic and fully-automatic weapons, and now they're just blindly trying to legislate things they don't understand!!" -- like, if there are many school shootings that involve gun X, maybe gun X should be harder to obtain. I don't care if it's an assault rifle, a handgun, has a 5 round clip or a 50 round clip, etc. -- the need to control it is obvious from its role as the gun of choice in mass shootings.

Surprisingly I can't identify different types of opioids either or list them by name, but by simply looking at the near-exponential growth in the rate of opioid-related deaths to say, hey, we probably need some additional restrictions here.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

That has nothing to do with the fact that on both guns, a round isn't fired until you pull the trigger. And only one round per pull. It doesnt get any more clear cut and dry than that when definining what a semi automatic gun is.

Lets have a nuanced argument about the breakdown of society, since that is the true cause of the problem. Since the invention of the handgun, most people had at least on in their home. Most boys of those fathers knew how to use them properly, they knew where the guns were in the house. But you didnt see them grabbing those guns and shooting up their school. The availability was always there, but that didnt equal more gun crime.

So again, what has changed? Why weren't kids shooting up schools then? I'll wait for someone to answer.

The first documented school shooting by a student took place in Virginia in 1840.

Does your phone only get Sevenstring.org and nra.org? You can't even do a quick search before you post something wrong?

 

[narad]

Lets have a nuanced argument about the breakdown of society, since that is the true cause of the problem.

How about your idea of what realistic policy change would create a society where there less frequent mass shootings?

 

[Randy]

Um no. Why is CNN intentional misleading people about guns. Im still waiting for that answer too

Because CNN are gaslighters that only care about ratings. See, I solved your riddle Rumplestiltskin, now you can move on to something else.

 

[Yul Brynner]

Yes I know the .223 round tumbles.

I'm glad you brought this up. I made a really long edit about this in a previous post but I didn't make it before the time limit.

The .223 will tumble as much as any other. There is a myth that keeps being spread by ignorant drill sergeants about the "super special magic 5.56 tumbling" bullet that was specially designed by the government to go in your toe and bounce around inside your body and come out your ear shredding your insides into a fleshy milkshake. It is 1000% laughable horseshit.

When the XM-15 and 16 were first being field tested in Vietnam by special forces units, they reported cases of the 5.56 taking off arms. This extreme damage was caused by the bullet tumbling. The weapon had a 1 in 15 inch twist rifling and a 55 grain bullet. The bullet was not stable in the air causing the tumbling, larger wounds, poor long range accuracy, poor penetration. The rifling was changed to a 1 in 7 inch twist and the bullet to a heavier 62 grain. This increased long range accuracy and penetration. It did away with the tumbling and tearing off limbs.

The whole point of the 5.56 was based on the idea of a smaller projectile with a much higher velocity. The smaller projectile itself doesn't cause much damage. The idea is that the smaller projectile will penetrate deep because of the higher velocity. Also because of the high velocity it will be dragging behind it a large shockwave of air. This comes into the wound channel behind the bullet and temporarily opens a massive wound channel through the body that causes shock and trauma. It's the same idea behind the M1 Abram's sabot rounds. The actual projectile is tiny and drills through the armored hull and the massive shockwave pulled in behind it is what destroys the enemy tank. This is a concept that has been taken farther along since the 1880s. It started with the Europeans using smaller caliber Spitzer shaped bullets on top of bottleneck cases like the classic 7x57/8x57 Mauser, 6.5x55 Swedish, .303 British, 7.62x54R and so on. America was last to catch up with that one as well. The idea was brought along further with the 5.56 NATO and 5.45x39 Soviet rounds. It has been taken even further now with the FN series of pistols and submachine guns firing the 5.7x28 armor piercing rounds.

With that in mind, there is absolutely no reason anyone apart from a big game hunter needs these high powered rifles of any kind. A rifle is the worst choice for home defense. For home defense you want something that will go inside the body of the intruder and stay there instead of going through him and the wall potentially causing harm to someone you want to protect.

And honestly big game hunters got on fine for years with the .45-70 and similar calibers in single shot and lever action rifles.

 

[Unslaved]

My point is that it looks increasingly ignorant when you:

A. Claim a forum member who served a long time in combat knows nothing about guns, yet you seem to think smoke bombs are illegal and that an AR-15 is "the same damn thing" as a handgun, only with a longer range.
B. Make several claims about Swiss culture, when you display no knowledge whatever of actual Swiss culture.
C. When someone calls you out for your rant about how everyone should look and act the same as sounding "just a little bit xenophobic," you say the person is just dropping a buzzword.

I started to think we could have some interesting debate when you started getting some of your points together several posts back, but then you followed it up with several posts that really didn't make any sense to me.

Im literally responding to everyones post i can this has already taken uo the better part of an hour. So even though im just wastinf my time because at the end of the day people are just going to believe what they want, ill take a little more time yet to address your misunderstanding.

A. Where did I saybthat said member knew nothing about guns? How can we have a productive discussion when your putting words in my mouth.

B. I dont have to live in Switzerland to know anything about their culture. And I dont need to relay to you what I've read about it either. Go do some of your own reading

C. Mentioning the fact that people look and act the same in said country doesnt = I dont like or am fearful of people from other countries. Not sure how you put those 2 and 2 together

 

[Unslaved]

It's quite a weird one. Also the slant of like, "Most people don't even understand the difference between semi-automatic and fully-automatic weapons, and now they're just blindly trying to legislate things they don't understand!!" -- like, if there are many school shootings that involve gun X, maybe gun X should be harder to obtain. I don't care if it's an assault rifle, a handgun, has a 5 round clip or a 50 round clip, etc. -- the need to control it is obvious from its role as the gun of choice in mass shootings.

Surprisingly I can't identify different types of opioids either or list them by name, but by simply looking at the near-exponential growth in the rate of opioid-related deaths to say, hey, we probably need some additional restrictions here.

According to Randy, unless you've taken opiods, you dont know anything about them and cannot speak about them

 

[Unslaved]

The first documented school shooting by a student took place in Virginia in 1840.

Does your phone only get Sevenstring.org and nra.org? You can't even do a quick search before you post something wrong?

Stop being silly please you know damn well what I mean.

 

[Unslaved]

Because CNN are gaslighters that only care about ratings. See, I solved your riddle Rumplestiltskin, now you can move on to something else.

That was tough for you to say that wasn't it

 

[Unslaved]

I'm glad you brought this up. I made a really long edit about this in a previous post but I didn't make it before the time limit.

The .223 will tumble as much as any other. There is a myth that keeps being spread by ignorant drill sergeants about the "super special magic 5.56 tumbling" bullet that was specially designed by the government to go in your toe and bounce around inside your body and come out your ear shredding your insides into a fleshy milkshake. It is 1000% laughable horseshit.

When the XM-15 and 16 were first being field tested in Vietnam by special forces units, they reported cases of the 5.56 taking off arms. This extreme damage was caused by the bullet tumbling. The weapon had a 1 in 15 inch twist rifling and a 55 grain bullet. The bullet was not stable in the air causing the tumbling, larger wounds, poor long range accuracy, poor penetration. The rifling was changed to a 1 in 7 inch twist and the bullet to a heavier 62 grain. This increased long range accuracy and penetration. It did away with the tumbling and tearing off limbs.

The whole point of the 5.56 was based on the idea of a smaller projectile with a much higher velocity. The smaller projectile itself doesn't cause much damage. The idea is that the smaller projectile will penetrate deep because of the higher velocity. Also because of the high velocity it will be dragging behind it a large shockwave of air. This comes into the wound channel behind the bullet and temporarily opens a massive wound channel through the body that causes shock and trauma. It's the same idea behind the M1 Abram's sabot rounds. The actual projectile is tiny and drills through the armored hull and the massive shockwave pulled in behind it is what destroys the enemy tank. This is a concept that has been taken farther along since the 1880s. It started with the Europeans using smaller caliber Spitzer shaped bullets on top of bottleneck cases like the classic 7x57/8x57 Mauser, 6.5x55 Swedish, .303 British, 7.62x54R and so on. America was last to catch up with that one as well. The idea was brought along further with the 5.56 NATO and 5.45x39 Soviet rounds. It has been taken even further now with the FN series of pistols and submachine guns firing the 5.7x28 armor piercing rounds.

With that in mind, there is absolutely no reason anyone apart from a big game hunter needs these high powered rifles of any kind. A rifle is the worst choice for home defense. For home defense you want something that will go inside the body of the intruder and stay there instead of going through him and the wall potentially causing harm to someone you want to protect.

And honestly big game hunters got on fine for years with the .45-70 and similar calibers in single shot and lever action rifles.

Very interesting, what is your take on shotguns for home defense?

 

[Yul Brynner]

And that is how they are basically the same. Some people just assume the that a semi-automatic rifle IS actually fully automatic. Neither are fully automatic

And what does it have to do with anything at all?

The one and only use for the full automatic setting is to spray in a general direction without actually aiming for anything to keep the enemy down so someone else can move. Or making a cool looking scene when the news camera is filming you spraying rounds out of your AK at nothing in particular just so they can say they are filming in a "hot" war zone. It's a waste of ammo. If you ever fired a rifle on full auto or even burst you would know it's so uncontrollable to the point where it's just not accurate. Using "full semi automatic mode" is the best way to take down multiple targets quickly and efficiently.

 

[narad]

B. I dont have to live in Switzerland to know anything about their culture. And I dont need to relay to you what I've read about it either. Go do some of your own reading

Again, actual Swiss person next to me, saying you don't know anything about Swiss culture.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Stop being silly please you know damn well what I mean.

Yeah society is crumbling yadda yadda yadda, and one of your key examples is the rise of school shootings...which is wrong, factually.

You and facts don't seem to have a healthy relationship.

 

[Yul Brynner]

Very interesting, thank you. What is your take on shotguns for home defense?

A shotgun can be good for anything. If you are prepping for the end of the world and you can only have one gun take a shotgun. With different types of shells it can be used for anything. Smaller pellets for birds and rabbit types. Larger pellets for deer. Slugs or sabot rounds for large game. Perfect for home defense. In the close quarters inside rooms the pellets won't spread far so it will devastate an intruder without passing through him/her or walls (as long as you aren't using penetration rounds like slugs or sabots).

 

[Unslaved]

Again, actual Swiss person next to me, saying you don't know anything about Swiss culture.

Is that swiss person actual in Switzerland? If i have a Turkish person right next to me, here in america, does that necessarily mean they know anything about turkey? I dont see your point

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Let me ask you, have you ever owned a gun? Shot one? Hell, id bet you never even touched a gun before. I bet your terrified of them. People are scared of what they don't know.

A. Where did I saybthat said member knew nothing about guns? How can we have a productive discussion when your putting words in my mouth.

Right there.

 

[Unslaved]

Right there.

Touche. But it was rhetorical.