The Gun Fight in Washington. Your opinons?

@parados,

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Fill the pipe completely with match heads, and stop up the ends of the pipe (allow a fuse through to ignite the match heads).

That's it. Bomb complete. It should be about as lethal as a hand grenade.

No, it won't be. And clearly you don't understand why since you never addressed my examples.

I disagree.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Only if they get too ambitious, and then don't test their bombs to make sure they work.

Now you have to test it? Hmmm.... it's getting more and more complicated because now you have to find a place to test it.

Testing helps, especially if you are getting ambitions with your design.

I don't think it is too hard to find a place out in the middle of nowhere.

0 Replies

"Just a fly in the ointment, Hans. The monkey in the wrench. The pain in the ass."

Bruce Willis against new gun control laws...

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Uh, no. Don't think so. Match heads burn, but have nowhere near the explosive force that a grenade does. They don't combust fast enough to produce an explosion of any real size.

The explosion is not based on the match heads burning fast. It is based on pressure building inside the pipe until it bursts.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Don't believe the various anarchist cookbooks you've gotten this idea from...

I've never read any Anarchist Cookbook.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

we did this exact experiment in one of my college chemistry classes and the explosions were underwhelming to say the least. And that was with POWDERED match heads!

Cycloptichorn

How is it that the Unibomber was able to do damage with his bombs then?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Doesn't matter. Thicker is probably better. And the more securely you stop up the ends the better. But it doesn't really matter.

Your answer shows how unlikely it is for people to make working bombs.

It DOES matter. If the ends are a lot weaker than the pipe then only the ends will blow off making it a very ineffective grenade. If you stop up one end and not the other then you have made a gun that only shoots what was at the end of the pipe.

Quote:

parados wrote:

A schedule 80 pipe where you stop up the ends with cotton cloth won't have nearly the effect of other ways of building it.

It should work though.

Except it won't. There will be no shrapnel. It will be no more effective than shooting someone with a shotgun shell that has all the shot removed from it. At a close enough range, you might get powder burns or you might kill them if you actually put it against their head but you aren't going to do much damage from 3' away.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
It doesn't matter. Any pipe will go boom. One type might be more effective than another, but any pipe will work.

No, not really. In one case you have only made a gun that will shoot the wadding out the end. In another case the pipe itself will shatter and do as you seem to think all will in all cases.

It must be quite a pipe if it can resist the all that pressure without bursting.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

I have 4 studies that show gun availability does affect homicide rates.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/

Not the quacks again. Didn't they fly south for the winter?

parados wrote:

Where are your studies published in science journals that show it doesn't?

There are no reputable studies of the issue published in science journals.

But as you well know, there are good studies of the subject available online.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

How is it that the Unibomber was able to do damage with his bombs then?

His bombs weren't a bunch of match heads stuck in a pipe, is how.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

we did this exact experiment in one of my college chemistry classes and the explosions were underwhelming to say the least. And that was with POWDERED match heads!

You should have used the propellant from a hundred shells Cyclo. It can't be all that difficult to get out.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

It DOES matter. If the ends are a lot weaker than the pipe then only the ends will blow off making it a very ineffective grenade. If you stop up one end and not the other then you have made a gun that only shoots what was at the end of the pipe.

Actually, you can make the pipe explode without stopping up the ends at all. Just make the pipe a bit longer.

The pressure will build up in the middle faster than it can dissipate out the ends, and... boom.

Stopping up the ends helps however. So it should be done at least crudely.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

oralloy wrote:
How is it that the Unibomber was able to do damage with his bombs then?

His bombs weren't a bunch of match heads stuck in a pipe, is how.

Cycloptichorn

Wrong. All his bombs were fueled entirely with match heads burning inside an enclosed container.

He used wood containers instead of traditional metal pipes, in order to prevent the bombs from showing up on X-ray scans. That made his bombs weaker than they would have been had he used pipes. But they still worked.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
oralloy wrote:
How is it that the Unibomber was able to do damage with his bombs then?

His bombs weren't a bunch of match heads stuck in a pipe, is how.

Cycloptichorn

Wrong. All his bombs were fueled entirely with match heads burning inside an enclosed container.

Incorrect. He often used match heads as starters, but the propellant in his bombs wasn't made of solid or ground-up match heads; it was 'smokeless explosive powders.' That's the opposite of a match-head.

Quote:

He used wood containers instead of traditional metal pipes, in order to prevent the bombs from showing up on X-ray scans. That made his bombs weaker than they would have been had he used pipes. But they still worked.

Also wrong. He used metal pipes with wooden caps on them.

Why do you comment on **** you know nothing about? Can't you look stuff up before writing?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

Really? A 5' woman can kill a 6'3 man with a baseball bat easier than she can with a gun? What planet do you live on Bill?

Go to the headline news channel that is now covering the murder trial of a very small woman who killed her very large Mormon boyfriend with a knife not a gun.

She did also shot him once however at that point he was already dead from her knife attack.

In fact if I remember correctly her boyfriend/victim was 6'3''.

I live on a planet that most adults men or women can kill other adults with knives and such weapons as baseball bats with no firearm needed.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

If your argument is that it's just as easy to kill someone or defend yourself with a knife or blunt object, surely you have no problem with guns being banned, then?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Guns shine at more then point blank range by people who know how to used them however a complete ban on guns would not stop anyone from murdering anyone else by one means or another.

An then disarming law abiding citizens and leaving the criminals fully armed is likely to greatly increase the murder rate that is now at a 50 years low point.

What is to gain by turning the public into helpless victims of criminals unless you happen to be a criminal?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

It must be quite a pipe if it can resist the all that pressure without bursting.

Which is why it matters very much what you use to stop up the ends. Pressure tends to find the weak spot. If the ends are weak, they will fail first and the pipe will not be harmed in any way.

It also matters what the pressure rating on the pipe is.
A pipe that bursts at 200 psi won't be very effective since it will burst before much pressure builds up and one that bursts at 20,000 psi won't be effective if only 15,000 psi builds up.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Baseball bats are now knives?

Quick.... look over there. Bill just changed the subject again.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

As long as you have access to knives and sticks, you're not going to be a victim, as they are equally effective, in your opinion. Remember?

Or, perhaps, maybe, your arguments are simply full of ****? The idea that a gun is less effective than a knife or a stick is a joke. Training to use a handgun properly and hit someone from less than 10 feet takes all of 10 minutes. From 5 feet it takes no time at all.

Guns wear out over time - stop producing new ones to replace the old ones, and the problem goes away on it's own.

Cycloptichorn

3 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

As long as you have access to knives and sticks, you're not going to be a victim, as they are equally effective, in your opinion. Remember?

Where did I stated that my friend the nearest I came to saying any such things is that at a few feet a knife can be as deadly as a gun.

You can not however killed someone at 2000 yards or even killed someone at 10 yards with a knife or a club.

Quote:

uns wear out over time - stop producing new ones to replace the old ones, and the problem goes away on it's own.

In a couple of hundreds years of so..........LOL.

Hell I myself have a gun over a hundred years old that would killed someone with the same ease as when it where band new.

An anyone with metal working tools can produce more or do any needed repair work on the existing guns.

Then you deal with the little problem that with a demand firearms would be shipped illegally into the country as drugs are now shipped into the country.

2 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Baseball bats are now knives?

Baseball bats and knives are similar close quarter weapons that would allow a small person to killed a larger person and neither have anything to do with firearms.

0 Replies

The Gun Fight in Washington. Your opinons?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know