Recruiting Forum Off-Topic Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
#2,603
#2,603
delfonic said:
This issue goes beyond rounds per minute.

What about recoil? Can you control a Glock 19's recoil as well as you can an AR-15?

Furthermore, if you're discussing lethality... what about muzzle velocity and the amount of energy delivered by a 9mm round vs. .223? What about how smaller caliber bullets tumble when they strike flesh leading to larger and deadlier wounds?

This is a more nuanced argument than either side will admit.
Click to expand...

Umm, 50 cal doesn't tumble, causes much more damage ...
 
#2,605
#2,605
delfonic said:
This issue goes beyond rounds per minute.

What about recoil? Can you control a Glock 19's recoil as well as you can an AR-15?

Furthermore, if you're discussing lethality... what about muzzle velocity and the amount of energy delivered by a 9mm round vs. .223? What about how smaller caliber bullets tumble when they strike flesh leading to larger and deadlier wounds?

This is a more nuanced argument than either side will admit.
Click to expand...

I'll take that .223 round all day long. I've had the good fortune to carry both at the same time. M-16 in my hands and 9 mm on my side. Here is something I can tell you from experience. Firing the M-16 means the enemy is more than likely at a distance. When you're firing the 9 mm, it means they are close....and you may be screwed. If you are using your K-Bar....you've probably already sh** your pants a couple of times.

Little fatherly wisdom free of charge. :hi:
 
#2,607
#2,607
Just Gathering thoughts. So what does everybody think about the news report that the inventor of AR-15 never intended for civilians to possess it according to his family?
 
#2,608
#2,608
chargervol said:
Just Gathering thoughts. So what does everybody think about the news report that the inventor of AR-15 never intended for civilians to possess it according to his family?
Click to expand...

I don't know what it was designed for. It's not effective as a battle field weapon. It's not used in any military that I know of.
 
#2,610
#2,610
chargervol said:
No I don't know either. Like I said I'm just wondering what everyone thinks about it. But they were very clear.
Click to expand...

We're hearing this second hand. Not sure of the motives of the family. Maybe he felt that way, maybe he didn't. The AR phenomenon is fairly new. Not sure why it would have even come up.
 
#2,611
#2,611
Skullbone said:
Info wars? Really? No sir. I can beat you with real facts. Fact number one: you admitted Obama has called for an assault"weapon" ban. Almost all Democrats do. Obama probably can't get it done, but if Hillary is elected she will get a leftist majority on the Supreme Court. If that happens you can kiss them goodbye and God knows what else. That's a fact. If you want one you had better buy it now. Fact two: Bringing up gun control and even Donald Trump immediately after the tragedy in his first speech is the definition of political. He's the President and it's disgraceful. And third: I see moral equivalence every time people like Obama start twisting themselves in pretzels to explain how Islam has little to do with what's happening and how its actually our fault for having military bases or because we use their oil or because we have the Bill of Rights most specifically the Second Amendment thus basically suggesting that we're no better than the Islamo Nazis and Commies and have little right to be outraged at anything but ourselves when people are killed.
Click to expand...

Not really seeing as many facts beyond the call to ban assault rifles. Trump was never mentioned by name and your opinion of why it was brought up is not a definitive example. Trump launching an anti-muslim platform, declaring he predicted the event and directly assigning blame to his political opponent is a better example of politicizing the event.
The intelligence community broadly supports the President when he says that ideas like, I don't know, forcing Muslims to register in a national database, can help in ISIS's recruiting. I personally think it is the president's responsibility, not political opportunity, to tell Trump to stfu. But that isn't a fact. It's my interpretation. And you have yours.
Moral equivalence In this context would be the President saying that ISIS, not Islam, has some justification in their actions. And I have to admit that you lost none on the last part. Were you just cutting pasting random lines from the comments from the Breitbart website?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#2,612
#2,612
bignewt said:
Thats rhe problem the growing number of nuts with mini arsenals at their disposal.
Click to expand...

May be true. May not. How do you identify who is a nut and who is not? Is it by skin color, hair color, pot bellies, language, beer choices - just how do you identify them? Which is the point.

What is a .22 Ruger Rimfire?

For many years it has been a bolt action, chambered rifle. People love it because it is highly accurate and low maintenance along with rarely jamming. IT uses LR 22 ammo. If you've got a fox problem, a wild hog problem, nuisance squirrel, beaver dams, etc. - set up, wait, drop it when it comes around.

But, you would probably call it an assault rifle in its semi-automatic form without the bolt action - right? Still used for the same purposes and capable of getting off shots faster in taking down the intended target.

So just say you are against all semi-automatic rifles. Simple as that.
 
#2,613
#2,613
Well let's just see what's going on in the off topic thread.
bQSbkyg.gif

Nope. Nope. Nothing good gonna happen in there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,615
#2,615
Vols4us said:
May be true. May not. How do you identify who is a nut and who is not? Is it by skin color, hair color, pot bellies, language, beer choices - just how do you identify them? Which is the point.

What is a .22 Ruger Rimfire?

For many years it has been a bolt action, chambered rifle. People love it because it is highly accurate and low maintenance along with rarely jamming. IT uses LR 22 ammo. If you've got a fox problem, a wild hog problem, nuisance squirrel, beaver dams, etc. - set up, wait, drop it when it comes around.

But, you would probably call it an assault rifle in its semi-automatic form without the bolt action - right? Still used for the same purposes and capable of getting off shots faster in taking down the intended target.

So just say you are against all semi-automatic rifles. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

If you try to shoot a hog with a .22, I hope you have a tree picked out first. :eek:hmy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,616
#2,616
American_PitVol said:
If you try to shoot a hog with a .22, I hope you have a tree picked out first. :eek:hmy:
Click to expand...

I used to hunt hogs for a living. I was with a guy who unloaded a 9 millimeter clip from 10 feet away and didn't slow the pig down.
I used a 30.30 at times but I definitely made sure I had enough distance to put about three or four rounds through the pig..
 
#2,618
#2,618
Vols4us said:
I have, and what you say is not true unless you are shooting the fat of the pig. Maybe I'm a better shot than you.
Click to expand...

Because every single pig in the entire world is the exact same in every variable that determines how slowly they'll drop when shot by a 22.

Come on man, you're better than that.
 
#2,619
#2,619
Vols4us said:
May be true. May not. How do you identify who is a nut and who is not? Is it by skin color, hair color, pot bellies, language, beer choices - just how do you identify them? Which is the point.

What is a .22 Ruger Rimfire?

For many years it has been a bolt action, chambered rifle. People love it because it is highly accurate and low maintenance along with rarely jamming. IT uses LR 22 ammo. If you've got a fox problem, a wild hog problem, nuisance squirrel, beaver dams, etc. - set up, wait, drop it when it comes around.

But, you would probably call it an assault rifle in its semi-automatic form without the bolt action - right? Still used for the same purposes and capable of getting off shots faster in taking down the intended target.

So just say you are against all semi-automatic rifles. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

I'm not against any gun, as a Libertarian I believe in a person's right to have what they want. I'm not trying to classify guns either but logic dictates that certain weapons have been designed primarily to kill quickly and in large numbers. Now how do I define a nut? Pretty simple someone that is armed to the teeth and wants to kill a lot of innocent people all at once.
How do we curtail this obvious trend? That is the million dollar question. One way we can start is to take away the fanatics emotional ammo. Get the hell out of the Middle East and bring our troops home and worry about this country.
Other than that I don't see many viable answers. You can try and ban certain weapons but I doubt it would help if anything it probably spurs on more violence. I personally do not need an Armalite rifle but hey those wild boars gotta die so go get 'em.
All in all people suck and mindless violence is nothing new, the tools have just gotten better.
 
#2,620
#2,620
Guyute said:
Not really seeing as many facts beyond the call to ban assault rifles. Trump was never mentioned by name and your opinion of why it was brought up is not a definitive example. Trump launching an anti-muslim platform, declaring he predicted the event and directly assigning blame to his political opponent is a better example of politicizing the event.
The intelligence community broadly supports the President when he says that ideas like, I don't know, forcing Muslims to register in a national database, can help in ISIS's recruiting. I personally think it is the president's responsibility, not political opportunity, to tell Trump to stfu. But that isn't a fact. It's my interpretation. And you have yours.
Moral equivalence In this context would be the President saying that ISIS, not Islam, has some justification in their actions. And I have to admit that you lost none on the last part. Were you just cutting pasting random lines from the comments from the Breitbart website?
Click to expand...

I don't read Breitbart. But if I did that would be okay because they're a hell of a lot more informed than you or me on a lot of things. What are you reading, Media Matters? I'm also not a Trump fan, but at least he's willing to tell the truth about what's happening. That's really more important for Americans and the rest of the free world to hear than the Islamo Nazis. Contrary to public belief the Islamo Nazis don't care about what we say. They don't hate us and wage war against everyone because we hurt their feelings. They hate us because we're infidels. You people must stop projecting your American cultural values and characteristics on people living in most Muslim countries. They laugh at our attempts to apply PC to them. Tiptoeing around the truth in hopes of not driving another islamo nazi to reveal him or herself as an Islamo Nazi is just not my preferred policy.
 
#2,621
#2,621
Thinking about buying a shotgun. I don't need a $1k gun, just an entry shotgun for my first. Any thoughts on makers? I know Mossberg is really good.
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top