Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Akkula

Gun Control (please don't read if it is too soon for you)

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, jackmormon said:

I have guns. I know how loud they are. I use ear plugs when sighting in my .270, skeet shooting, or plinking with my .44 special.

Not all guns are super sonic. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of pistols are not.

in addition, after doing some brief reading on the subject, most of the noise that a gun makes comes from the muzzle blast, not the bullet speed. You can also buy subsonic ammo, which loses knock down power at long ranges, but is still lethal, and some people do use it for big game hunting.

Given the choice between your anecdotal stories and the research done by the Myth Buster folks, guess who has more credibility with me?

You  have guns like you have rentals with no maintenance for 20 years.  Like there are only 9 women beat up in a city of 100K each year.  Yeah you are credible with your "i have guns"! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jackmormon said:

I have guns. I know how loud they are. I use ear plugs when sighting in my .270, skeet shooting, or plinking with my .44 special.

Not all guns are super sonic. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of pistols are not.

in addition, after doing some brief reading on the subject, most of the noise that a gun makes comes from the muzzle blast, not the bullet speed. You can also buy subsonic ammo, which loses knock down power at long ranges, but is still lethal, and some people do use it for big game hunting.

Given the choice between your anecdotal stories and the research done by the Myth Buster folks, guess who has more credibility with me?

Your guns are more special than my guns, I guess.  I think you should surrender your special guns.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pokebball said:

Your guns are more special than my guns, I guess.  I think you should surrender your special guns.

I don't recall saying anything about anyone surrendering guns. This is just a pissing match uncle blue started by saying suppressors don't suppress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

You  have guns like you have rentals with no maintenance for 20 years.  Like there are only 9 women beat up in a city of 100K each year.  Yeah you are credible with your "i have guns"! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

 

WindyFickleFlyingfish-small.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/7/2017 at 7:25 PM, jackmormon said:

A .45 and a 9mm are real honest to God guns.

Here is a vid that shows a silencer used on different guns including a .223 with a bump fire stock. Very similar or the same as the LV shooter used. There is a BIG difference in the amount of sound produced.

 

Yeah, from the barrel. But jack, nobody buys subsonic rounds for anything bigger than a .22. Those can come subsonic because they are already so slow and light they often go subsonic mid-flight, which is part of why they are so inaccurate after about 75 yards. When the bullet passes from super to subsonic it tumbles. 

It's fairly easy to say "well I don't want my .22LR to be supersonic so instead of 1180 f/sec we'll have it go 1050 fps". To do the same thing for a bullet leaving the barrel at 2500 fps is a totally different story. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 6:23 PM, bluerules009 said:

I was at a weapons of mass destruction and mass shooting training in Reno which is mandatory for all firefighters to take 2 weeks ago.  That is still the training they are doing in Nevada and it hasn't changed in decades.

I hope change is coming and you are right.

Just to expound, Metro's Sheriff had the following to say on response...

 

Unlike police departments in some other mass shootings, Metro opted not to surround Paddock and wait for tactical teams. “I will not disparage another police department’s response, but I will tell you we quite often learn from what other people do,” Lombardo said. “As a result, what occurred in Columbine, what occurred in Sacramento, what occurred in Boston, what occurred at the Pulse nightclub, police responses changed. So we’ve found it’s better, instead of securing the perimeter and hoping the person doesn’t continue to do acts of carnage … that even a small police response will stop the suspect’s actions.”

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2017/oct/09/breaking-down-las-vegas-crisis-response-shooting/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, happycamper said:

Yeah, from the barrel. But jack, nobody buys subsonic rounds for anything bigger than a .22. Those can come subsonic because they are already so slow and light they often go subsonic mid-flight, which is part of why they are so inaccurate after about 75 yards. When the bullet passes from super to subsonic it tumbles. 

It's fairly easy to say "well I don't want my .22LR to be supersonic so instead of 1180 f/sec we'll have it go 1050 fps". To do the same thing for a bullet leaving the barrel at 2500 fps is a totally different story. 

I've never had any interest in suppressors or subsonic ammo until people here said they didn't work. So I decided to do some reading. I wasn't even the one to bring it up.

They make subsonic ammo in .223 and .308, so someone must be buying them. Like I said earlier, I've read they lose power at long range, which would make them ineffective in a situation like the LV shooting. 

It seems the rational for legalizing silencers is for hunting, which seems silly to me.

Pistols on the other hand, most of which are already subsonic, it looks like the suppressors work pretty well with regular ammo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jackmormon said:

I've never had any interest in suppressors or subsonic ammo until people here said they didn't work. So I decided to do some reading. I wasn't even the one to bring it up.

They make subsonic ammo in .223 and .308, so someone must be buying them. Like I said earlier, I've read they lose power at long range, which would make them ineffective in a situation like the LV shooting. 

It seems the rational for legalizing silencers is for hunting, which seems silly to me.

Pistols on the other hand, most of which are already subsonic, it looks like the suppressors work pretty well with regular ammo.

Of course we were talking about rifles.

There is no subsonic rifle ammunition and no reason to have it.  Only a total idiot would suggest such a thing.

Even subsonic rounds though a silencer are very loud.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/9/2017 at 12:21 AM, jackmormon said:

I have guns. I know how loud they are. I use ear plugs when sighting in my .270, skeet shooting, or plinking with my .44 special.

Not all guns are super sonic. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of pistols are not.

in addition, after doing some brief reading on the subject, most of the noise that a gun makes comes from the muzzle blast, not the bullet speed. You can also buy subsonic ammo, which loses knock down power at long ranges, but is still lethal, and some people do use it for big game hunting.

Given the choice between your anecdotal stories and the research done by the Myth Buster folks, guess who has more credibility with me?

The DNC is rapidly adding new terms, phrases, and responses to their talking point manual. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IanforHeisman said:

Easier access to suppressors would be the dumbest thing America can do.. In big cities with high gun crime they use shot spotters that can identify the exact address the shots were fired. Even south side Chicago murder conviction rates hover around 20 percent. 

Why don't you give us a percentage breakdown of how many homicides in Chicago are committed by legal gun owners? I'd really love to see those statistics because my assumption is that it's fairly close to the number of "legal meth users." 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, SFtoVA said:

 

hmm...

Will not cycle in Semi-Auto

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2017 at 1:26 AM, bluerules009 said:

You obviously haven't been around one.

I’ve been to Iraq twice. I’ve fired suppressors with and without correct ammunition dozens of times. Without correct ammunition it’s a quick crack, not meant to conceal all sound, just meant to make it more difficult to track your position. 

 

With correct ammo there is no crack. You wouldn’t hear a sound across the street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, happycamper said:

 

hmm...

 

 

Yeah, that's why I checked as I didn't think it would work.... I guess the idea is that it will not cycle a semi-auto effectively making it a bolt action (sorry if that's wrong terminology), but that's the trade off.

They also do list a 5.56 that will cycle with their (proprietary?) upper receiver.

None-the-less, it's an rifle round that is manufactured apparently...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/7/2017 at 7:57 AM, Akkula said:

I knew those words would trigger you people.  :pitchforks:  If it wasn't then Marbury Vs. Madison would be invalid according to the you textualists. 

You people are really extremists in how you interpret everything.  Gone are well reasoned and balanced interpretations that take in a lot of factors and law by well reasoned and educated people.  The right uses the same justification used in Madrasas when they interpret strict Sharia law based on the word of Muhammad as understood at that time.  No women drivers and guns for all!

The whole point of Marbury vs Madison was to review legislation for any conflicts with the Constitution. Marbury vs Madison certainly did not give Federal Courts power to change the meaning of the constitution as society changes.

The more you talk on these subject the more you show yourself to be completely ignorant on multiple subjects.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...