57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 06:55 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:
No serious-minded person would raise any argument to that.

On the contrary, I am quite serious.


snood wrote:
Why else would a weapon be designed to repeatedly fire a bullet as fast as one can pull the trigger?

Hunting and self defense.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 06:56 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
I submit that semi-autos are designed to inflict mas uman casualties as well.

You'd be wrong. Semi-autos don't deliver aimed fire all that much faster than a pump or lever action.


MontereyJack wrote:
One shoter, its hard to kep track there are so many, killed or wounded 36 people in 33 seconds with an at-15 type before he was taen down by cops who providentially were near. That's slightly more than one per second, and certainly about the least time a shooter would have in the real world.

That was because he had a 100 round magazine.


MontereyJack wrote:
Plent y of vids on outube of people changing magazines on at-15 types. Takes between about two and about five seconds, depending on whether youtoure holding mags or ned to pick them up. So a shoter with ab assault style rifle, anda regular capacity magazine, cal it ten shots, can still kill or wound about 30 people in about 30 seconds. I don't know about oralloy but that qualifies as a mass killing in my book and it is wel within the legal paramaters gun rights activists would allow and it's all standard equipment. and it's lethal.

Before you convinced me of the necessity for blocking all gun reform and letting the massacres continue unabated, I was expressing my openness to letting all detachable rifle magazines greater than 5 rounds be regulated just as tightly as sawed-off shotguns are regulated.


MontereyJack wrote:
That's why we need stricter gun laws, as the nation strongly favors. Stop violations of people's civil rights by gun violence.

First stop violating people's civil liberties for fun. Second pay compensation to all of your victims. Then we can talk about what new gun laws are acceptable.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 06:58 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
Lets put the AR-15 is not an assault weapon meme to death right now.

Assault weapons are capable of full-auto or burst-fire.

No semi-auto-only weapon is an assault weapon.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
The only argument that makes even a little sense its not marketed as an assault weapon.

There is also the actual fact that it is not an assault weapon.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
Then why does it use the same ammunition,

The .223 Remington is a varmint round. Lots of varmint guns use it.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
and why can kits to make it full auto are available legally?

Probably for repairing legally owned full-autos.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 07:24 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
AR-15 inventor's family: "Meant to be a military weapon." "He'd have been horrified and sickened."
AR-15 Inventor's Family: This Was Meant to Be a Military Weapon

Stoner's military weapon was capable of full-auto.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 07:33 pm
@snood,
What does 700–950 rounds/min cyclic sustained fire on a 20 or 30 round clip mean vs 45–60 rounds/min semi-automatic, theoretically up to 90 - 120 rounds with a double action trigger kit?. How may clips a can a man carry and how fast can they be replenished on a firing line vs. skirmishing or advancing?

Not exactly sure what we are "arguing" about in that a standard 45–60 rounds/min semi-automatic is still way too fast particularly when used on defenseless civilians.

The argument that Baldino and oralloy are making is that AR-15s are not assault weapons because they aren't full automatic and the facts are that auto or semi auto, they most certainly are assault weapon and in fact the M-16 can be fired auto or semi doesn't nean that an M-16 is only an assault weapon when its full rock and roll. And in fact legally and illegally obtained kits and alterations make AR-15s fully automatic and can at least double the specification semiautomatic firing rate.

I won't argue with you mainly because I happen to agree with you and I feel my posts tend to support your arguments and supplement them. I'm not sure what you're correcting in my statements.
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 07:36 pm
@oralloy,
That would be the equivalent of featuring one turd in a big pile of chickenshit.

Admit it. You don't believe one word of your blather, you're just here trying to play a big joke on everybody by contradicting any all thing anyone else says.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 07:38 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Your inability to point out anything that I am wrong about speaks for itself.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 07:43 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
a standard 45–60 rounds/min semi-automatic is still way too fast particularly when used on defenseless civilians.

Not too fast at all. Semi-auto rifles do not produce aimed fire much faster than pump- or lever-action rifles.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
the facts are that auto or semi auto, they most certainly are assault weapon

That is incorrect. Assault weapons have full-auto or burst-fire capability.

Semi-auto-only guns are not assault weapons.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 08:07 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

I’ve fired weapons in both modes - automatic and semi-automatic. There is no comparison in speeds. A weapon firing in automatic spits out bullets very rapidly. Think of any movie you’ve seen with people firing “machine guns”. A semi-automatic’s speed depends on how rapidly you can keep pulling a trigger.

I’ve not fired any weapon with a “kit” that allows a bullet to be fired twice with a trigger push/pull, but my guess would be that even that wouldn’t match the speed of a weapon firing in fully automatic mode.


Thumb's up Snood. Many do not realize that.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  4  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 08:19 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
Btw, I don't think Oralloy will be moved by a 17 month old toddler with chest injuries, he's not equipped for such feelings.

Spare me the virtue signalling. It's just silly.
[/quote]


You are correct, he's not. He thinks only silly people care about children.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 08:44 pm
@glitterbag,
No. I think that only silly people engage in virtue signalling.
snood
 
  6  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 10:26 pm
@oralloy,
Well then let me just ask you this: Does it elicit any feelings in you at all when you hear that as a result of the latest mass shooting, a 17-month old child got her lower jaw shot off and has shrapnel lodged in her chest?
glitterbag
 
  6  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 10:37 pm
@snood,
He thinks you are virtue signaling.........think of it this way, he thinks you should relax, that baby should have been packing and she still has her upper jaw right?

oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 11:09 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:
Well then let me just ask you this: Does it elicit any feelings in you at all when you hear that as a result of the latest mass shooting, a 17-month old child got her lower jaw shot off and has shrapnel lodged in her chest?

Sorry. I'm just not into virtue signalling.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 11:10 pm
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:
He thinks you are virtue signaling

Yes.


glitterbag wrote:
.........think of it this way, he thinks you should relax,

No. Relaxation (or lack thereof) is not relevant.


glitterbag wrote:
that baby should have been packing and she still has her upper jaw right?

No.

But the parents or whoever was in charge of the child surely should have been carrying a gun.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  5  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 11:30 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy says:
Quote:

First stop violating people's civil liberties for fun. Second pay compensation to all of your victims. Then we can talk about what new gun laws are acceptable

No. First, gun rights activists and the NRA must stop violating civil rights by condoning gun violence. Second, gun rights activists and the NRA must compensate victims of gun violence and their families the $150 billon dollars calculated that they owe them. Then gun rights activists and the NRA will have, monetarily at least, made some atonement for the harm to society they are causing.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 2 Sep, 2019 11:42 pm
@MontereyJack,
Sorry, but you don't get to set the conditions for me to resume my support of new gun laws.

You are however free to attempt these gun laws without the support of moderates like me. Good luck with that.
glitterbag
 
  4  
Reply Tue 3 Sep, 2019 12:13 am
@MontereyJack,
Wouldn't it be great if a few members of the NRA actually thought of a few ways to minimize the damage done by irresponsible gun owners? I guess I'm being silly, those people are scared to death that any safety measures might piss off the lemmings.
izzythepush
 
  6  
Reply Tue 3 Sep, 2019 12:20 am
@oralloy,
What you call virtue signalling is what human beings call empathy. It's isn't something an inhuman sociopath would understand or comprehend.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 3 Sep, 2019 12:24 am
@izzythepush,
Very Happy
Virtue signalling is funny.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 11/27/2024 at 09:12:54