Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

A firearm question for you LeftiesFollow

#352 Jan 18 2013 at 7:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
*****
19,477 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Should just get an armed guard for every citizen. I mean Obama gets 24/7 armed guarding. It would be hypocritical of him to deny that to the rest of America.


If every US citizen deserves a guard, then who guards the guards? Are we gonna have to hire more Mexicans for this?
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and the League of Extraordinary Crafters
#353 Jan 19 2013 at 4:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
National Memo wrote:
An armed guard hired to protect a Michigan school in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting committed a “breach in security protocol” when he accidentally left his gun in a student restroom.

Clark Arnold, a retired Lapeer County Sheriff’s Department firearms instructor, was hired last week in reaction to the Newtown shooting.
[...]
Just a week into his tenure at the job, Young admitted to the Flint Journal that Arnold left an unloaded weapon in a restroom “for a few moments.”

“The school has put additional security procedures in place that follow local law enforcement practices and guidelines,” Young said in a statement. “At no time was any student involved in this breach of protocol. We will continue to work on improving school security.”

Young insisted that no children were exposed to the handgun, and declined to comment further on the incident.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#354 Jan 19 2013 at 4:40 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,009 posts
Listening to local news, I heard that there were a couple bills being brought in front of lawmakers here in Michigan to make any Federal gun controls law invalid for guns and ammunition manufactured and sold inside Michigan.

Edit:
My high school had a uniformed police officer on campus who carried a gun. And that was 10-14 years ago.

We had one crazy kid my senior year. It happened to be right around the time of that Planetary alignment in 2002 (I think it was around May, right?). Rumor got around that he was planning on killing people during the alignment, which was right near graduation. He was obsessed with the "power" it would give him. School officials found out and they suspended the kid. I don't know what happened to him after that but I don't think he was present during graduation.

Edited, Jan 19th 2013 5:49pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#355 Jan 19 2013 at 4:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
TirithRR wrote:
Listening to local news, I heard that there were a couple bills being brought in front of lawmakers here in Michigan to make any Federal gun controls law invalid for guns and ammunition manufactured and sold inside Michigan.

It must make you sad to know that the lawmakers in MI have no idea how our tiered legislative system works.

Edited, Jan 19th 2013 4:58pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#356 Jan 19 2013 at 5:21 PM Rating: Decent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,528 posts
Jophiel wrote:
National Memo wrote:
An armed guard hired to protect a Michigan school in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting committed a “breach in security protocol” when he accidentally left his gun in a student restroom.

Okay, no worries, there's a solution for this: armed cyborgs. No longer will we let unchecked shitting endanger our children.

And hey, if you don't trust the artifical intelligence, it could just be controlled remotely. Imagine this: a predator drone patrolling the hallways. I feel safer already.


Edited, Jan 19th 2013 5:21pm by trickybeck
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#357 Jan 19 2013 at 5:51 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,009 posts
Jophiel wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Listening to local news, I heard that there were a couple bills being brought in front of lawmakers here in Michigan to make any Federal gun controls law invalid for guns and ammunition manufactured and sold inside Michigan.

It must make you sad to know that the lawmakers in MI have no idea how our tiered legislative system works.


Kind of.

Michigan-made guns and ammo exempt from federal regulations bill.

Quote:
The Michigan firearms freedom act is similar to laws passed in eight states and introduced in several others, according to firearmsfreedomact.com.

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has issued letters to states that have passed the laws, stating that federal law supersedes the state laws, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act continue to apply.


And the other one is a reaction to the NY papers releasing registration lists:
Pistol Sales and Permit Records not subject to FOIA requests.


I did enjoy Wednesday's Daily Show. At least the first act.

Edited, Jan 19th 2013 7:04pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#358 Jan 19 2013 at 8:54 PM Rating: Excellent
******
41,246 posts
Jophiel wrote:
National Memo wrote:
“The school has put additional security procedures in place that follow local law enforcement practices and guidelines,”
So the cops in Michigan walk around with their weapons unloaded? And how did Clark just leave his weapon? Was it unholstered? Was he carrying it unholstered? What kind of Barney Fife operation is this?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#359 Jan 20 2013 at 8:05 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,798 posts
catwho wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
Should just get an armed guard for every citizen. I mean Obama gets 24/7 armed guarding. It would be hypocritical of him to deny that to the rest of America.


If every US citizen deserves a guard, then who guards the guards? Are we gonna have to hire more Mexicans for this?

They would have to be illegal, so there aren't required to have a bodyguard as well. However, that would for surely put the "minority" as the new "majority". I'm not sure the right-wing would like that very much... Looks like we're at a dilemma.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#360 Jan 20 2013 at 8:10 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,009 posts
Almalieque wrote:
catwho wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
Should just get an armed guard for every citizen. I mean Obama gets 24/7 armed guarding. It would be hypocritical of him to deny that to the rest of America.


If every US citizen deserves a guard, then who guards the guards? Are we gonna have to hire more Mexicans for this?

They would have to be illegal, so there aren't required to have a bodyguard as well. However, that would for surely put the "minority" as the new "majority". I'm not sure the right-wing would like that very much... Looks like we're at a dilemma.


No, they could be Americans.

Every American gets there own personal guard. Then the American being guarded just gets armed and guards their guard. Solves the job problem too, now everyone gets paid to be a security guard for everyone else. No more need for the job creators.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#361 Jan 20 2013 at 1:09 PM Rating: Default
******
21,715 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Every American gets there own personal guard. Then the American being guarded just gets armed and guards their guard. Solves the job problem too, now everyone gets paid to be a security guard for everyone else. No more need for the job creators.


Everybody hold a friend's hand. Now, never let your friend leave your side. Welcome to the buddy system!
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#362 Jan 20 2013 at 1:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,528 posts
#363 Jan 20 2013 at 1:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I assume a million people have beat me to the obvious "If only more people there had guns this could have been prevented!" joke.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#364 Jan 20 2013 at 1:23 PM Rating: Decent
******
41,246 posts
We'd be much better off if we regulated morons, and just leave the firearms alone.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#365 Jan 20 2013 at 1:25 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
We'd be much better off if we regulated morons, and just leave the firearms alone.


Darwin was doing an excellent job until we stepped in and started saving said people.
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#366 Jan 20 2013 at 4:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,246 posts

That's hilarious.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#367 Jan 20 2013 at 4:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
466 posts
#368 Jan 20 2013 at 4:40 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Less hilarious: Teenager kills two adults, three children with AR-15 in New Mexico.

Just the cost of those precious 2nd Amendment liberties. Five more cashed checks to throw into the corpse pile.

Edited, Jan 20th 2013 4:41pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#369 Jan 20 2013 at 5:15 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Jeeze Jophiel, way to be a buzz killington. Smiley: glare
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#370 Jan 20 2013 at 5:49 PM Rating: Good
****
7,785 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Less hilarious: Teenager kills two adults, three children with AR-15 in New Mexico.

Just the cost of those precious 2nd Amendment liberties. Five more cashed checks to throw into the corpse pile.

Edited, Jan 20th 2013 4:41pm by Jophiel

Nothing in that article indicates that the AR-15 was used.
The article wrote:
Investigators also were trying to determine who owned several guns that were found at the home, one of which was a semi-automatic military-style rifle.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#371 Jan 20 2013 at 5:52 PM Rating: Excellent
****
7,785 posts

Prime example of why some people shouldn't own a firearm.

Rule #1: Treat every firearm as if it were loaded.

Rule #2: Even if you know the firearm isn't loaded, refer to Rule #1.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#372 Jan 20 2013 at 6:04 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Kastigir wrote:
Nothing in that article indicates that the AR-15 was used.

A different article said it.

KOB News wrote:
Police believe the teenager used an AR-15 semi automatic rifle in the shooting. Multiple weapons were retrieved from the house.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#373 Jan 20 2013 at 7:19 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,798 posts
This is definitely not looking good for the pro-gun folk.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#374 Jan 20 2013 at 7:54 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Turns out the people who are pro-gun are shooting themselves in the foot, figuratively and literally.
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#375 Jan 21 2013 at 9:59 AM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,690 posts
Can someone explain to me why handguns, shotguns and hunting rifles aren't dangerous? Smiley: confused
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#376 Jan 21 2013 at 10:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Who said they're not?

If you're asking about the focus on one particular class, it's about trying to at least mitigate the damage potential one person/weapon has by restricting its ammo capacity, rate of fire, whatever. I'm sure you can understand that someone with a single-shot bolt action rifle is going to be slower at killing people than the same person with a semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round clip.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#377 Jan 21 2013 at 10:22 AM Rating: Good
******
41,246 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I'm sure you can understand that someone with a single-shot bolt action rifle is going to be slower at killing people than the same person with a semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round clip.
Not if he's any good.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#378 Jan 21 2013 at 10:22 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,877 posts
They are all dangerous but people love to hunt here in America so it would be completely unfeasible to ban a tool people use to get food. Handguns are there so people have the illusion of being protected plus their potential for mass murder is much smaller than other weapons.

____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#379 Jan 21 2013 at 10:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
Not if he's any good.

Rather than debate that point, I'll just note that the people involved in the last 12 month's worth of shootings haven't exactly been super-soldiers.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#380 Jan 21 2013 at 10:47 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
8,798 posts
Criminy wrote:
They are all dangerous but people love to hunt here in America so it would be completely unfeasible to ban a tool people use to get food. Handguns are there so people have the illusion of being protected plus their potential for mass murder is much smaller than other weapons.



Who hunts for food? Besides, no one is arguing for a total ban anyway.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#381 Jan 21 2013 at 11:31 AM Rating: Decent
******
21,715 posts
Jophiel wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Not if he's any good.

Rather than debate that point, I'll just note that the people involved in the last 12 month's worth of shootings haven't exactly been super-soldiers.

Not to mention the counter argument is pretty simple. If the shooter has to reload, that's time for someone to counter his action. Whether someone in the area is capable of doing so is irrelevant. The argument for reducing magazine capacity is about shooter stamina and speed. More reloads = less shots fired over time, regardless of the accuracy of said shots.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#382 Jan 21 2013 at 11:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Almalieque wrote:
Criminy wrote:
They are all dangerous but people love to hunt here in America so it would be completely unfeasible to ban a tool people use to get food. Handguns are there so people have the illusion of being protected plus their potential for mass murder is much smaller than other weapons.



Who hunts for food? Besides, no one is arguing for a total ban anyway.

Do you mean, who depends on hunting for food? Because there are lots of people who hunt for food.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#383 Jan 21 2013 at 11:35 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,798 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Not if he's any good.

Rather than debate that point, I'll just note that the people involved in the last 12 month's worth of shootings haven't exactly been super-soldiers.

Not to mention the counter argument is pretty simple. If the shooter has to reload, that's time for someone to counter his action. Whether someone in the area is capable of doing so is irrelevant. The argument for reducing magazine capacity is about shooter stamina and speed. More reloads = less shots fired over time, regardless of the accuracy of said shots.


I would argue that it has less to do with the necessity to reload, but more with the simplicity of having the said amount of ammunition at one given time.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#384 Jan 21 2013 at 11:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Do you mean, who depends on hunting for food? Because there are lots of people who hunt for food.

I was hunting for food in my kitchen the other day. Flushed out a package of Ramen and took it down with a .22
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#385 Jan 21 2013 at 11:51 AM Rating: Good
******
41,246 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
If the shooter has to reload, that's time for someone to counter his action.
Maybe you should learn about the weapons before stating how simple your solution is? For one, bolt action rifles have magazine wells so reloading isn't some hardship you're making it out to be. The difference between the two rifles is rate of fire, since you have to chamber a round with each trigger pull with the bolt action as opposed to the semi-automatic doing it, well, automatically.

Here you have to also take into account that the bolt action chambers much more reliably since it is manual, better range, higher caliber rounds, and the better accuracy you mentioned.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#386 Jan 21 2013 at 11:56 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,798 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
If the shooter has to reload, that's time for someone to counter his action.
Maybe you should learn about the weapons before stating how simple your solution is? For one, bolt action rifles have magazine wells so reloading isn't some hardship you're making it out to be. The difference between the two rifles is rate of fire, since you have to chamber a round with each trigger pull with the bolt action as opposed to the semi-automatic doing it, well, automatically.

Here you have to also take into account that the bolt action chambers much more reliably since it is manual, better range, higher caliber rounds, and the better accuracy you mentioned.


That is why I don't pretend to know anything about firearms. I hit my 26 and move out. As an MP, I assume that you have more trips to the range. I suck at shooting, but as soon as I get the feel of it and hit the min., I get pushed off the range and don't shoot again for months later.

Edited, Jan 21st 2013 7:57pm by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#387 Jan 21 2013 at 12:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'll happily admit to error in communication on my part. I blithely said "bolt action" thinking of the single-shot rifles I've fired. Shoot, eject, manually chamber a new round, shoot, rinse and repeat. There are obviously bolt action rifles with magazines (I could name the M1 off the top of my head and I'm not a gun person) and while I'd still make an argument on why I'd rather have an AR-15 than an M1 for my garden variety mass murdering purposes, I was meaning to compare the former "bolt action" rather than the latter.

The confusion was my own doing.

Edited, Jan 21st 2013 12:26pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#388 Jan 21 2013 at 12:26 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,690 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Who said they're not?

If you're asking about the focus on one particular class, it's about trying to at least mitigate the damage potential one person/weapon has by restricting its ammo capacity, rate of fire, whatever. I'm sure you can understand that someone with a single-shot bolt action rifle is going to be slower at killing people than the same person with a semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round clip.


Yes, the rate of fire is reduced if people are limited to hunting rifles and handguns, but the guy at Sandy Hook fired 50-100 shots, killing 26 people at the school in the 10-12 minutes it took the police to arrive. That's an average of 6.8 shots per minute and 2.3 deaths per minute. So the question is: Can a not-exactly-super-soldier guy fire off 7 shots a minute with a single-shot bolt action hunting rifle, and can he kill 2 people every minute with said rifle?

Also, are they banning certain handguns that might be similar to assault rifles? I'm thinking of the full-auto Glock 18 with a 33-round magazine.

Edit: Not to mention the various semiautomatic hunting rifles out there, like the Remington 750 and the Benelli R1. What about the Browning BAR? It's an assault rifle (says so in the name), but it's also used for hunting. Weapons are completely banned here (except with permits), so I'm merely curious why some people want their guns so badly. It's not a mentality I can relate to.

Edited, Jan 21st 2013 7:31pm by Mazra
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#389 Jan 21 2013 at 12:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Mazra wrote:
Yes, the rate of fire is reduced if people are limited to hunting rifles and handguns, but the guy at Sandy Hook fired 50-100 shots, killing 26 people at the school in the 10-12 minutes it took the police to arrive. That's an average of 6.8 shots per minute and 2.3 deaths per minute.

Given that we have no idea how much of that time was spent shooting or walking or talking or whatever, it seems misguided to start making direct comparisons with that as our metric.

Quote:
Also, are they banning certain handguns that might be similar to assault rifles? I'm thinking about a full-auto Glock 18 with a 33-round magazine.

Given that there's no legislation on the table nor even a skeleton of one yet, I couldn't answer that. Assuming the "full auto" Glock is indeed fully automatic (and I'm not going to pretend to be familiar with it), I would assume it's restricted for most people to own anyway without special permits.

Quote:
Edit: Not to mention the various semiautomatic hunting rifles out there, like the Remington 750 and the Benelli R1. What about the Browning BAR? It's an assault rifle (says so in the name), but it's also used for hunting. Weapons are completely banned here (except with permits), so I'm merely curious why some people want their guns so badly. It's not a mentality I can relate to.

Me neither really and the little meme pictures of two guns with "They're just as deadly even though this one looks scarier, haha got you!" really just make me think "Ok, so maybe we should have neither". As I said earlier in the thread, I'd be more in favor of legislating what's allowed versus chasing the ephemeral tail of "What's an assault weapon?". It's not likely to happen (read: not ever) and much the shame for it but I think it'd be a better direction to go.


Edited, Jan 21st 2013 12:37pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#390 Jan 21 2013 at 12:42 PM Rating: Good
******
41,246 posts
Well, yeah if you're going to compare an AR to an M1, I'd take the AR as well. If we're going to go generic and say bolt action vs. semi-automatic though, I'd take the M24 SWS over any semi-automatic every time and twice on Sunday. My point is just to point out that the SA isn't a more lethal weapon, and an argument could be made where it is less so.

I'm all for reduced magazine sizes for civilian use, and I think I was the first (though at this point I don't remember) to say I'm for stricter security checks, registration, and required annual qualifications as well. I'm just against the "ban one type of weapon" argument because it's pretty dumb to me. Neither model is inherently safer than the other, and there's an infinite number of arguments for either's lethality.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#391 Jan 21 2013 at 12:50 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,690 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Given that we have no idea how much of that time was spent shooting or walking or talking or whatever, it seems misguided to start making direction comparisons with that as our metric.


You're right, silly averages are silly. I just used it to show that 50-100 shots in 10 minutes isn't a whole lot when you think about it. It's not like the guy put it on full-auto and sprayed bullets everywhere for 10 minutes straight. He also reloaded often, sometimes after just firing 15 shots of the 30 in the clip, and he shot one kid 11 times, which would likely not have happened with the bolt action rifle, meaning the shots per kill would be lower with the bolt action rifle.

Now, I'm not trying to debunk your earlier statement. Like you said, it's silly math. And we both agree that the ideal solution would be to ban firearms completely (or at least more than this). It's a start, I guess. Soon it'll almost be like you're Europeans. Scary, huh? Smiley: tongue
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#392 Jan 21 2013 at 12:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Yeah, the whole "assault weapon" thing gets bogged down into minutiae over "what's an assault weapon, I could assault you with a spoon hur hur". I'd rather just see a blanket conversation on what sort of capabilities we want in civilian hands and work towards that. I don't really give a shit if it's a pistol, 'assault' rifle, one of Gbaji's famed "long rifles" or whatever.

And I'll readily admit I'm not the person qualified to lead such a conversation and I'm not going to spend a bunch of time defending details because it'd be a foolish way to spend my energy. But I'd spend the energy pushing for the conversation to happen with qualified people working on it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#393 Jan 21 2013 at 1:07 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,715 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
If the shooter has to reload, that's time for someone to counter his action.
Maybe you should learn about the weapons before stating how simple your solution is? For one, bolt action rifles have magazine wells so reloading isn't some hardship you're making it out to be. The difference between the two rifles is rate of fire, since you have to chamber a round with each trigger pull with the bolt action as opposed to the semi-automatic doing it, well, automatically.

Here you have to also take into account that the bolt action chambers much more reliably since it is manual, better range, higher caliber rounds, and the better accuracy you mentioned.


What Joph said. For my part, I'm all for banning higher capacity magazines, which is what I took this argument to be about. Semi-auto vs bolt action with the same magazine size is irrelevant to my argument, so take it with a graint of salt.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#394 Jan 21 2013 at 1:09 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
25,535 posts
Social healthcare, gay marriage, legal weed and now gun control? Soon America won't be America anymore, it'll be Europe2.0
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#395 Jan 21 2013 at 1:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Huh, I noticed I did say "single shot" originally but I don't know if there was a better term I could have used to describe what I was thinking about.

Obviously, instead of issuing mea cuplas, I should be doubling down and insisting that all my gun-owning friends use the same term and all of them know exactly what it means and anyone who says otherwise is wrong.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#396 Jan 21 2013 at 1:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Social healthcare, gay marriage, legal weed and now gun control? Soon America won't be America anymore, it'll be Europe2.0

I'm thinking we'll need a king. Not a queen like England has because that's just lame. But maybe a big guy draped in furs and wearing a coonskin cap and waving an axe and a musket around. Or a musket with an axe at the end.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#397 Jan 21 2013 at 1:47 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,622 posts
Jophiel wrote:

I'm thinking we'll need a king. Not a queen like England has because that's just lame. But maybe a big guy draped in furs and wearing a coonskin cap and waving an axe and a musket around. Or a musket with an axe at the end.



How about a big gay guy who likes to dress in drag? Then we can have a King and a Queen all in one! It's like hose nifty shampoo and conditioner bottles. Or those jars of peanutbutter and jelly in one!
____________________________
Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007) wrote:
I am eternally grateful.. for my knack of finding in great books, some of them very funny books, reason enough to feel honored to be alive, no matter what else might be going on.
#398 Jan 21 2013 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
******
41,246 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Huh, I noticed I did say "single shot" originally but I don't know if there was a better term I could have used to describe what I was thinking about.
I was being pretty glib with my comment towards it, I just took exception to the follow up of how the "simple counter" was about reloading. It's not simple, and I personally don't believe the type of weapon is the issue itself. It's a real shame that there's more regulation and oversight to own a car than there is for firearms. That's where I say the problem really is.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#399 Jan 21 2013 at 2:20 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
25,535 posts
Belkira wrote:
Jophiel wrote:

I'm thinking we'll need a king. Not a queen like England has because that's just lame. But maybe a big guy draped in furs and wearing a coonskin cap and waving an axe and a musket around. Or a musket with an axe at the end.



How about a big gay guy who likes to dress in drag? Then we can have a King and a Queen all in one! It's like hose nifty shampoo and conditioner bottles. Or those jars of peanutbutter and jelly in one!
Only if they're introduced as King and Queen of America.


Edited, Jan 21st 2013 9:20pm by Aethien
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#400 Jan 21 2013 at 2:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Belkira wrote:
How about a big gay guy who likes to dress in drag?

Screenshot
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#401 Jan 21 2013 at 2:36 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,715 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
It's a real shame that there's more regulation and oversight to own a car than there is for firearms. That's where I say the problem really is.


Obviously we should just hand out driver's licenses willy nilly to equalize the playing field.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 55 All times are in CDT
Aethien, Allegory, Debalic, Jophiel, lolgaxe, Nadenu, Samira, Anonymous Guests (48)