Why I Carry a Gun

Small Town Guy · Apr 7, 2013

papadoug said: ↑

What are you talking about? Can you really believe that guns are possessed of demons that make them go around killing people? And I'm not just picking on this one sentence, everything you say seems to point to that single ludicrous doctrine. If this is really your belief then you are in serious need of professional help.

Cars kill more people than guns, should we do away with cars? Oh wait! It isn't really the cars is it? It's the people driving the cars that are responsible for motor vehicle deaths. Just like the bad people with guns. Are the drugs responsible for drug addicts? Are the dealers responsible? Or perhaps could it be the addict who is really responsible? After all it's the addict who decided to take it in the first place isn't it?
If these are true, and they are, then logically it's the bad person who uses the gun illegally that is responsible isn't it?

Criminal:
1) One who has committed a crime.
2) One who has been convicted of a crime.
3) One who becomes and is a criminal by disobeying the law.

Just who or what is responsible for the shooting at Sandy hook Elementary? You? Me? The gun? Or was it Adam Lanza? Who should be held to account, you? Me? All law abiding citizens? The gun? Or maybe Adam Lanza?
When you say things like it's "the instrument" (the gun) you make yourself sound just as insane as politicians like Senator Dianne Feinstein.

In recent days the US Senates action to make criminals more responsible was the right move although Senator Dianne Feinstein and her ilk are still trying to get their socialist gun bans through which have no hope of controlling crime or stopping mass shootings.

While stronger and longer punishments may dissuade the criminal to some degree, sadly nothing will stop the insane mass shooter looking for his 15 minutes of fame. All other countries of the world have learned that despite the level of gun control they may have. The only hope of stopping these types of mass shootings is to better identify those with the requisite mental illness and desires.

Blaming the instrument will accomplish nothing.
Click to expand...

Amen...... And you hit nail on the head...ridiculous doctrine. Look out though...you grammar and sentence structure is next eh? BTW good post

bwk · Apr 7, 2013

allislost said: ↑

bwk said: ↑

No, they are not equal damage. The AR15 would need 15 seconds to do the same damage as the grenade does in 5 seconds. If you have multiple groups of fifteen for each, say three groups (15 people each) for
AR15 and three groups (15 people each) for grenade, then the grenade has taken out 45 people when the AR15 finishes the first group of fifteen people.
Dead is dead but the grenade will kill more quicker.....
Click to expand...

You skipped my example an conveniently went to yours with groups of people. I was using an example of say a line of people standing in front of a movie theater shoulder to shoulder. There still is very little difference in the damage done by both. Again, one is legal ,one is not. You can sugar coat it in your head and conveniently deny the damage both can do, if that's your wish. Whether there is a second or two of difference, doesn't even come close to justifying the legality of one over the other. If you have 8 or 10 people standing in a line side by side versus those same 8 or 10 in a circle side by side, with the AR taking out the line and the grenade taking out the circle, if you're a half decent marksman, the Ar is going to be very very close in doing the same amount of damage as the grenade. And this is how, in the end,the AR freaks will lose the argument about the legitimacy of this weapon. They may win the political battle through money, but the argument itself will never be won.
Click to expand...

Small Town Guy · Apr 7, 2013

bwk said: ↑

allislost said: ↑

You skipped my example an conveniently went to yours with groups of people. I was using an example of say a line of people standing in front of a movie theater shoulder to shoulder. There still is very little difference in the damage done by both. Again, one is legal ,one is not. You can sugar coat it in your head and conveniently deny the damage both can do, if that's your wish. Whether there is a second or two of difference, doesn't even come close to justifying the legality of one over the other. If you have 8 or 10 people standing in a line side by side versus those same 8 or 10 in a circle side by side, with the AR taking out the line and the grenade taking out the circle, if you're a half decent marksman, the Ar is going to be very very close in doing the same amount of damage as the grenade. And this is how, in the end,the AR freaks will lose the argument about the legitimacy of this weapon. They may win the political battle through money, but the argument itself will never be won.
Click to expand...

It already has won the argument eh? You lost because you can't fix stu.....errr uneducated and you are living proof. NEXT!
Click to expand...

allislost · Apr 7, 2013

bwk said: ↑

You skipped my example an conveniently went to yours with groups of people. I was using an example of say a line of people standing in front of a movie theater shoulder to shoulder. There still is very little difference in the damage done by both. Again, one is legal ,one is not. You can sugar coat it in your head and conveniently deny the damage both can do, if that's your wish. Whether there is a second or two of difference, doesn't even come close to justifying the legality of one over the other. If you have 8 or 10 people standing in a line side by side versus those same 8 or 10 in a circle side by side, with the AR taking out the line and the grenade taking out the circle, if you're a half decent marksman, the Ar is going to be very very close in doing the same amount of damage as the grenade. And this is how, in the end,the AR freaks will lose the argument about the legitimacy of this weapon. They may win the political battle through money, but the argument itself will never be won.
Click to expand...

Sigh................

bwk · Apr 7, 2013

Small Town Guy said: ↑

bwk said: ↑

It already has won the argument eh? You lost because you can't fix stu.....errr uneducated and you are living proof. NEXT!
Click to expand...

In your dreams. The majority of the country knows what's going on here. These arguments about the AR/grenades/ background checks are almost elementary. Anyone with any basic knowledge of these weapons knows there capabilities. And then,as we figure that information in and hear of those who would go against reliable background checks for no good reason, sends a great signal of hope. When a minority of people in this country become clouded in their own self interests at the expense of dead children with their own derailed information, lends itself to great hope that this country will see this debate for what it really is. It will eventually be exposed, and the truth will take us down a better path. It is just the start. And Wayne Lapierre is a good place to start; http://youtu.be/udUmnJr5GPE
Click to expand...

allislost · Apr 8, 2013

bwk said: ↑

allislost said: ↑

You skipped my example an conveniently went to yours with groups of people. I was using an example of say a line of people standing in front of a movie theater shoulder to shoulder. There still is very little difference in the damage done by both. Again, one is legal ,one is not. You can sugar coat it in your head and conveniently deny the damage both can do, if that's your wish. Whether there is a second or two of difference, doesn't even come close to justifying the legality of one over the other. If you have 8 or 10 people standing in a line side by side versus those same 8 or 10 in a circle side by side, with the AR taking out the line and the grenade taking out the circle, if you're a half decent marksman, the Ar is going to be very very close in doing the same amount of damage as the grenade. And this is how, in the end,the AR freaks will lose the argument about the legitimacy of this weapon. They may win the political battle through money, but the argument itself will never be won.
Click to expand...

Bwk

Please clear something up for me.
Were you talking about the AR15 or the M16 which is the military version of the AR15.

Gun control advocates are trying to label the AR15 as being the M16.
That is what they are comparing it to…….

There is a difference.

Military version of the AR15 (M16): can fire 700+ rounds per min.

AR15 Civilian version: fires 45 – 60 rounds a min (Semi-auto only, just like all the other hunting rifles that are ok to own and not on the ban list)

You are right, the AR15 can do a lot of damage but not in the same time frame as a gernade or M16.
The AR15 can only shoot one shot per second.

If you compare the AR15 with the grenade, grenade wins.
If you compare the grenade with the M16, now things change. M16 is now the winner.
Click to expand...

Hoosier8 · Apr 8, 2013

allislost said: ↑

bwk said: ↑

Bwk

Please clear something up for me.
Were you talking about the AR15 or the M16 which is the military version of the AR15.

Gun control advocates are trying to label the AR15 as being the M16.
That is what they are comparing it to…….

There is a difference.

Military version of the AR15 (M16): can fire 700+ rounds per min.

AR15 Civilian version: fires 45 – 60 rounds a min (Semi-auto only, just like all the other hunting rifles that are ok to own and not on the ban list)

You are right, the AR15 can do a lot of damage but not in the same time frame as a gernade or M16.
The AR15 can only shoot one shot per second.

If you compare the AR15 with the grenade, grenade wins.
If you compare the grenade with the M16, now things change. M16 is now the winner.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If you want to hit something you still have to aim. If you go full auto, you are out of ammo quite quickly and may not hit what you are pointing at.
Click to expand...

allislost · Apr 8, 2013

Hoosier8 said: ↑

allislost said: ↑

Not necessarily. If you want to hit something you still have to aim. If you go full auto, you are out of ammo quite quickly and may not hit what you are pointing at.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the truth......
Click to expand...

bwk · Apr 8, 2013

allislost said: ↑

bwk said: ↑

Bwk

Please clear something up for me.
Were you talking about the AR15 or the M16 which is the military version of the AR15.

Gun control advocates are trying to label the AR15 as being the M16.
That is what they are comparing it to…….

There is a difference.

Military version of the AR15 (M16): can fire 700+ rounds per min.

AR15 Civilian version: fires 45 – 60 rounds a min (Semi-auto only, just like all the other hunting rifles that are ok to own and not on the ban list)
Click to expand...

Who are you trying to insult here? You, me or the both of us. I have several deer rifles. There is no way I can manage to fire off 45 to 60 rounds a minute. So, they are not like the AR15. An interesting analysis you have there though with the 60 rounds in a minute. If I could fire 60 rounds a minute, I could kill 60 people in a minute with the AR. Wow, what a war you could start with that.

You are right, the AR15 can do a lot of damage but not in the same time frame as a gernade or M16.
The AR15 can only shoot one shot per second.

If you compare the AR15 with the grenade, grenade wins.
If you compare the grenade with the M16, now things change. M16 is now the winner.
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

allislost · Apr 8, 2013

bwk said: ↑

Semi-Automatic rate
The semi-automatic rate is the assault rifle/semi-auto only version on rapid fire. It is the maximum rate that a weapon can fire with any degree of accuracy in semi-auto mode, usually 45-60 rpm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate_of_fire
I’m not trying to insult anyone.
Right or wrong, this is based off of my experience over the last 45 years.
You have your experiences and I have mine and I doubt they are much the same.
I’m not talking about bolt actions or pump-actions.
The semi auto rifles have the capability of 45 60 rpm but mag capacity doesn’t allow. Who would want to anyway?
I am talking about your standard semi-auto rifle. (Remington 742, 7400, 750, Ruger 10/22.)
The AR15 operates the same as these rifles. The biggest difference is the looks and the 30 round magazine. So if you replace the thirty round mag with a five round mag, you just have another semi auto rifle that looks funny and is fun to shoot.
Usually one shot per second and then it depends on skill of shooter and how fast the trigger is pulled.
Most standard semi autos have 5 round box magazines.
Maybe empty a mag in about five seconds. (if you are up to it, I doubt accurately)
I always thought it was a waste of ammo.
My little marlin .22 does about 1 round a second.
I don’t know if you would want to shoot a 30-06 that fast or even try.
Have you ever shot an AR15? If you haven't, try it some time just for the experience.
Click to expand...

bwk · Apr 8, 2013

allislost said: ↑

bwk said: ↑

Semi-Automatic rate
The semi-automatic rate is the assault rifle/semi-auto only version on rapid fire. It is the maximum rate that a weapon can fire with any degree of accuracy in semi-auto mode, usually 45-60 rpm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate_of_fire
I’m not trying to insult anyone.
Right or wrong, this is based off of my experience over the last 45 years.
You have your experiences and I have mine and I doubt they are much the same.
I’m not talking about bolt actions or pump-actions.

The semi auto rifles have the capability of 45 60 rpm but mag capacity doesn’t allow. Who would want to anyway?
Click to expand...

Exactly, that's been my beef the whole time, and that is the main argument from the left. We don't need that many bullets firing from a magazine. An AR15 with a five round magazine, I have no problem with. I have the the semi- auto 30-06 and the Remington 7 mag bolt action. It's never been the gun. It's the magazine capacity I have a problem with, whether it is auto or semi-auto. I've shot the AR. No problem on my end except for extended magazines.
I am talking about your standard semi-auto rifle. (Remington 742, 7400, 750, Ruger 10/22.)
The AR15 operates the same as these rifles. The biggest difference is the looks and the 30 round magazine. So if you replace the thirty round mag with a five round mag, you just have another semi auto rifle that looks funny and is fun to shoot.
Usually one shot per second and then it depends on skill of shooter and how fast the trigger is pulled.
Most standard semi autos have 5 round box magazines.
Maybe empty a mag in about five seconds. (if you are up to it, I doubt accurately)
I always thought it was a waste of ammo.
My little marlin .22 does about 1 round a second.
I don’t know if you would want to shoot a 30-06 that fast or even try.
Have you ever shot an AR15? If you haven't, try it some time just for the experience.
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Why I Carry a Gun

Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

bwk Well-Known Member

Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

allislost Member

bwk Well-Known Member

allislost Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

allislost Member

bwk Well-Known Member

allislost Member

bwk Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Why I Carry a Gun

Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

bwk Well-Known Member

Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

allislost Member

bwk Well-Known Member

allislost Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

allislost Member

bwk Well-Known Member

allislost Member

bwk Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches