# Stephen Crowder, Top 5 AR-15 myths...banning them is a Trojan Horse...



## 2aguy (Feb 21, 2018)

Crowder nails it....

He demonstrates the rate of fire with a .357 lever action rifle.....he shows a semi auto shotgun....

The anti gunners want them too....


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben (Feb 21, 2018)

Steven Crowder doesn't have to tell anyone with half a brain who understands the creep of legislation. AR-15's today and everything else tomorrow.
NEVER give a GD inch!


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 21, 2018)

2aguy said:


> Crowder nails it....
> 
> He demonstrates the rate of fire with a .357 lever action rifle.....he shows a semi auto shotgun....
> .
> The anti gunners want them too....


Charles Whitman didn't have an AR-15. He used an M-1 carbine. People give the AR-15 too much credit.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 21, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Crowder nails it....
> ...



So why did the US military pick the fully auto version of the AR to be their goto combat weapon? The AR and the M16 are identical other than the full auto capability. ARs weren't even built until the M16 patent ran out.


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 21, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


AR-15 was the prototype to the M-16. The AR-15 didn't have a forward assist assembly and the Army wouldn't buy it. A forward assist assembly was added, the Army bought it and the AR-15 was re-designated M-16 because Army weapons have an M preceding the number. I was issued one of the first M-16s in July 1965.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 22, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Bottom line, the AR15 is the same design as an M16 with the multiple fire disabled. The US military chose that design as it's goto combat weapon. If it's just like any other semiauto, why did the military pick that particular design over any other simiauto?


----------



## Crixus (Feb 22, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...






Well, take two folks. Let’s say for modern times so we have one adult woman and one adult male of a rage fitness. 


So the task is to arm these folks with a mass produced weapon that they can learn to shoot and maintain With a minimum amount of training. The M16 is a dummy’s weapon. Recoil is a huge issue. Weight, and ease and cost of production was part of it to. 


It’s always been the trend in America that the rifle the military issues end up being population civilian sporting weapons. This was the case when muskets were issued just like now.


We have a people problem,  not a a gun problem.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 22, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...




That will probably make sense to a gun nut, but not so much for gun owners with common sense.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 22, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




But see? That’s where you miss it. Responsible gun owners with common sense  compleatly get it. They are the ones who own the AR15. Maybe because that was the first rifle they got acquainted with when they did ROTC or joined the military? It’s those who are not responsible and lack common sense who cause all the trouble. 20 years ago it was AK’s. That was the monster under the bed waiting to jump out and eat a litter of deep fried pit bull puppies. There is nothing common sensical about how this conversation is happening.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 22, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




If they don't have the full auto, and I don't even think the M4 has that anymore, then they aren't identical......you are  such a doofus.

AR-15s are civilian rifles also used by police, they are the most common rifle in the country and so are the most obvious rifle protected by our 2nd Amendment....

You guys want all the rifles and all the pistols......we know this, and we are going to fight you all the way...


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 22, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Dip shit.....a semi auto rifle takes a magazine, and fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger without having to manually reload after every single shot.......every single semi auto rifle......the AR-15 is no different from any of those other rifles...which is why you want to ban it...if you get the AR-15 that gives you the momentum to go after every other rifle and pistol that also takes a magazine and fires one bullet for each pull of the trigger...and that is your goal.....

The AR-15 is a civilian rifle, that the police also use....it is no different than any other rifle that is also a semi auto rifle....or a semi auto pistol.....

They picked the look of the rifle because it was the cheapest contract......the government bought it......you are such a doofus...


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 22, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. The AR couldn't have even been built until the M16 patents ran out.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 22, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



If it is no different, why are you so adamant that it is needed?  The AR is a slightly modified clone of the M16. It's not the same as any other simi.


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 22, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




HISTORY

INVENTIONS
Q:
*Who invented the M16 rifle?*
A:
*QUICK ANSWER*

*Eugene Morrison Stoner is credited with inventing the American M16 while working as chief engineer for ArmaLite.* The M16 became the standard-issue assault rifle of the U.S. military in 1963.

CONTINUE READING
*KEEP LEARNING*

*Who invented the rifle?*
*Who invented the repeating rifle?*
*Who invented the first bolt-action rifle?*

[paste:font size="4"]*LEARN MORE ABOUT INVENTIONS
Sources:

nytimes.com

en.wikipedia.org*


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 22, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Bottom line the AR i5 is exactly the same as any other semiautomatic rifle but for the materials of the stock and a couple of accessories


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 22, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Moron...you know it is exactly the same thing as any other semi auto rifle......the exact same mechanism.....which is why you need to get it banned......then you can come back and state the other rifles need to go too......and the pistols......

You morons have already stated on various threads that you want all semi auto weapons banned....you let the truth out.....we already knew it, but the uninformed didn't know....


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 22, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified
AR 15 Rifle - A Brief History & Historical Time Line


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 22, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Then why did the military pick a slightly modified version of that design for the M16? It's not the same as any other simiauto.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 22, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Liar. Post a link to me saying all semiautomatic  rifles should be banned, or admit you are full of shit.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




If you want to ban the AR-15 you want to ban them all, since there is no difference between the semi auto AR-15 and any other semi auto rifle or pistol......once you get the AR-15, you will take the next one on the list.......


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


 It is the same.

The firing mechanism of an AR works exactly the same as any other semiautomatic rifle.

The only differences between an AR  frame or clone and any other semiauto available to civilians are the materials used for the stock and the frame


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




It is not a military rifle and has never been used in war....

6 shot revolvers are actual war weapons.

Lever action rifles are actual war weapons.

Pump action shot guns are currently war weapons.

Bolt action rifles are currently war weapons.....

The AR-15 has never been used by the military and has never been used in war......kinda hard to call it a weapon of war when it has never been used by the military or been used in a war......you are such......


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


And you do not see the stupidity of banning a .223 caliber semiautomatic rifle for cosmetic reasons alone?

There is no difference between the AR 15 and any other semiautomatic .223 rifle other than cosmetics


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Did the military pick that design for strictly cosmetic reasons?


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



No, the M-16 was picked for practical reasons. It is shorter than the M-1 by 4'' (better for going thru jungle) and lighter by 3-4 pounds. ( better for being in hot climate) plus carrying more ammo.)


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Yes,those are 2  of the reasons it is a more effective killing tool than other rifles.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Who's "We"? You gotta mouse in your pocket?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



No, that's not a mouse, but I didn't expect you to be staring at my crotch anyway. We is the citizens of the US.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



No, it's just and your non-common-sense opinion. Dismissed!


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...




QU Poll Release Detail
Support for universal background checks is itself almost universal, 97 - 2 percent, including 97 - 3 percent among gun owners. Support for gun control on other questions is at its highest level since the Quinnipiac University Poll began focusing on this issue in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre:


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




The Poll that Matters: Hillary Clinton 97%, Donald Trump 6%

Oh the polls, yep.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



Yep. She did get 3 million more votes.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Sure.


----------



## hadit (Feb 23, 2018)

Ban the AR-15. Are the children any safer in school? Be honest.

If you can't honestly say they would be safer, why ban the gun?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The military model is a different gun.

I don't know how many times you have to be told that.  What does it matter that a civilian .223 semiautomatic rifle has a plastic stock instead of a wood stock?  No civilian rifle performs like a military rifle.

Now why don't you tell me what makes this gun





any different from this gun






Other than how they look.  Both are civilian semiautomatic rifles chambered for .223.  Both have comparable accuracy.  Both fire the same one round per trigger pull.

There is absolutely no functional difference between the 2 rifles.

If you knew anything about the subject you would know this


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


It is not a more effective killing tool than any other .223 semiauto


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 23, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



I disagree. The Mini-14 is plagued with accuracy issues.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 23, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



IMO, the M14 is a superior killing tool.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 23, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The newer ones have greatly improved


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 23, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


The 7.62 round definitely more deadly


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




You post that poll as if it is important.....the people who said yes have no idea what they are saying yes too........the pollster lies to the uninformed and gets that number....try telling them the truth and then tell us what that number is.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




It is the exact same thing as all other semi auto rifles......lying about it simply proves to us you asshats can never be trusted.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



You should ask the military that question. They are the ones that chose it to be a combat assault weapon in 1963, and  designated it as the M16.

AR 15 Rifle - A Brief History & Historical Time Line


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 23, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



The military thinks it is.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 23, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



You can tell yourself that if it makes you feel better.


----------



## OnePercenter (Feb 23, 2018)

2aguy said:


> Crowder nails it....
> 
> He demonstrates the rate of fire with a .357 lever action rifle.....he shows a semi auto shotgun....
> 
> The anti gunners want them too....



Paddock would have been able to kill and injure the same amount of people with an automatic shotgun? 

Here is the REAL gun issue in the US:


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 23, 2018)

OnePercenter said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Crowder nails it....
> ...


You have to take in consideration of the root of the problem which is the angle of the dangle. Solved that real quick.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


I'm asking you.

A gun that capable of automatic fire is NOT the same as a gun that is not capable of automatic fire

That is about as simply as I can explain it to you.

If you cannot understand that don't bother me anymore because I don't argue with the mentally retarded


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



SO I could have a semiautomatic rifle that fires a larger more powerful round like the 6.8 as this rifle does





and that just fine because it doesn't look like an M16


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Wrong...the AR-15 never saw combat...the select fire version...the M-16 has, and the M4 Carbine, but the AR-15 has never been used in war...it is not a war weapon...it is not a select fire weapon.....you can keep lying all you want, you just keep showing us why we can never trust anti gunners...


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Thank you.   This is hysteria brought on by a very few horrific tragedies.  And the guns used LOOK scary.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Very often that is the case.

In a similar discussion on another board, I posted a pics of my M1A and a pic of an AR.  People were far more concerned with the AR.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 24, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Crowder nails it....
> ...




indeed it is basically a supped up 22 

maybe this is a good thing that is over rated 

the whackos think this is the gun of choice 

when there are far more lethal  firearms out there


----------



## Crixus (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




M1A and M1 Garand are good excamples, and them converted trapdoor Springfield’s In 45/70 (some in 50/90) are STILL sold as MIL.SURP.!


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




The anti gunners know, though.  That is why they are now calling for banning all semi automatic rifles...as we heard at the CNN hate rally this week......and also why they are using the term "weapons of war,"  Since they know they can get to the rest of our rifles if they can only get the AR-15 banned ...since the all operate with the same action....


----------



## Crixus (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




 Meh, so I super clue the collapsible stock and cut off the flash hider. They can make fun owning suck, but the left will always have mass shootings to celebrate.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




Yes, that is a difference, but automatic fire is not the only reason that design was chosen as the military's goto weapon. They could have had AF with any number of other guns. Yes the design has been slightly modified to bypass the AF, but all the other qualities that convinced the military that that particular design would be the best tool for killing as many people as possible in as short of time as possible are still present.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Perhaps you care to give a few specs on that gun? I'm far from an expert, but I know there are lots more reasons than caliber for why a rifle might be effective for a particular purpose.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Of course it didn't. When the military bought it, they designated it as the M16. The newly named (at that time) M16 design has had no substantial changes since then.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




And they didn't use the AR-15 they turned it into a different rifle, the M-16.....a select fire weapon with a full auto  selection...dumb ass........they did not use the AR-15.....it wasn't used in combat.......they changed the internal mechanism making it a different rifle..... 

6 shot revolvers....actually used in war.

lever action rifles...actually used in war.

Bolt action rifles...actually used in war, currently used in war.    They were the rifle that conquered Europe and Asia during World War 2.....

pump action shotguns....used in war in the past, currently used in war....

AR-15...never used in war....


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Again with the " *They're coming to get all our guns!!!!!!!* " craziness. Grow up dummy.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Yeah...after the CNN town hall where they all shouted they wanted to ban all semi auto guns....you no longer have the ability to make posts like that..................


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Yes...they want to repeal the Lawful commerce in arms act....to sue gun makers out of existence on phony gun lawsuits, and they are using the courts to pass laws that violate both the 2nd Amendment and settled Supreme Court decisions.......


----------



## toobfreak (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> Crowder nails it....
> 
> He demonstrates the rate of fire with a .357 lever action rifle.....he shows a semi auto shotgun....
> 
> The anti gunners want them too....




Liberal anti-gunners are not about facts or reality.  They are only about one thing:  well-trained sheeple ready to disarm their country out of fear against a faux-foe in the assistance of an all-powerful government to the creation of an inevitable police state.  Then the government will be free to disregard the rest of our rights and criminals will live without fear of retaliation from a defenseless populace of victims.

And what will the hapless brainless sheeple do then once they've "solved" our problems for us?  Cringe under their coffee tables calling 911 and waiting for help to arrive in time (it never does).


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



They changed the internal mechanism after they bought the design? Link?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Really? All people who would rather not have their kids killed at school want to ban all semi auto rifles? That's amazing. Did Alex Jones tell you that?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



So people who support reasonable gun control are using the legal routs laid out for them by the constitution to bring the change that the majority of the country wants. How horrible.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified



Who the hell walks around out on the streets with an AR-15?  How are a bunch of gun enthusiasts with AR-15s sitting in a case at home more dangerous than the millions of concealed handguns people walk around with everyday?


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Really? All people who would rather not have their kids killed at school want to ban all semi auto rifles? That's amazing. Did Alex Jones tell you that?



Nobody can shoot up a school with a semi-auto handgun?


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> So people who support reasonable gun control are using the legal routs laid out for them by the constitution to bring the change that the majority of the country wants. How horrible.



Define "reasonable" gun control.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Suing gun makers who have no part in crime or mass shootings is not reasonable.....gun  laws that target law abiding gun owners and do not stop criminals or mass shooters are not reasonable..........laws that violate the 2nd Amendment are not reasonable......


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


It is the only meaningful difference.

The bottom rifle can fire just as fast as the Ar 15.

Composite materials generally stand up to abuse better than natural substances like wood since they are more resistant to moisture, weather and impacts it has nothing to do with the lethality of the weapon


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 24, 2018)




----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The reason the .223 has become the dominant caliber is because the ammo is lighter and in fact less lethal than previous military rifles.  The idea being that by wounding rather than killing enemy soldiers you force them to use more resources.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified
> ...


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Then tell me what is the reason for banning one particular semiautomatic rifle when all other semiautomatic rifles of the same caliber perform exactly the same as the banned rifle.

The only reason to start with one particular rifle is to expand the ban to all other semiautomatic rifles


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



What do you think they did?

File off a little nub and PRESTO a fully automatic rifle!!!


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Really? All people who would rather not have their kids killed at school want to ban all semi auto rifles? That's amazing. Did Alex Jones tell you that?
> ...



Your canned gun nut responses are funny. Which semi-auto handgun can fire as many bullets as fast as the AR is capable of? Which semi-auto hand guns have 30 round magazines? Which semi-automatic handguns are as accurate over a wide range  as a rifle?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > So people who support reasonable gun control are using the legal routs laid out for them by the constitution to bring the change that the majority of the country wants. How horrible.
> ...



Universal background checks would be a start. Trump-0 made it easier for crazies to get guns. It would be nice to reverse that too.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



All semiautomatics fire at the same rate it matters not if it is a handgun, a rifle or a shotgun

ALL semiautomatic firearms fire one round per trigger pull

PERIOD.


----------



## TroglocratsRdumb (Feb 24, 2018)

Lets ban guns in the Democrat states and see if the crime rate goes up


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Sorry, but the Supreme court is a better judge of what is reasonable than you are. I don't always agree with them, but they are certainly better than a gun nut like you.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Background checks didn't stop the piece of shit in FL from getting guns
Didn't stop the piece of shit in Vegas from getting  guns
Didn't stop the pieces of shit in Columbine from getting guns and the federal assault weapon ban didn't prevent the Columbine shooting


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




You got a link to that firing rate? Which one did the military decide would be a better killing device?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Who is opposing the .223?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



All rifles are not the same. As a gun nut, you should know that.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



How can you make an argument when you don't even know the definitions of the relevant terms?

The very definition of a semiautomatic firearm is that it fires one and only one round per trigger pull

Therefore the number of rounds per second or minute that any semiautomatic firearm in existence can fire is completely dependent on the speed the person can pull and release the trigger.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I've posted the modifications needed several times. Either consult that, or do a search for yourself.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I never said they were.

I said ALL semiautomtic rifles _of the same caliber _perform exactly the same


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



Yet different guns advertise different rates of fire capabilities. Why is that?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And those modifications are not ever made to AR 15s .

If they were then every single gang banger in Compton would have a fully automatic AR 15.

And FYI the Fully automatic firing mechanism of the M 16 is not the same as the semiautomatic firing mechanism of the AR 15


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



And DWI laws didn't stop that kid from being run over yesterday. So?


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



50 round magazines for a Glock pistol


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



No they don't.

Why don't you post the ads for 2 .223 semiautomatic rifles and highlight where the difference in the rates of fire are in the ads.

ALL semiautomatics fire at the same rate.

That rate is by definition one round per trigger pull.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



But you seem to think background checks will stop shootings.  

I know that no law prevents anyone from committing a crime but you don't seem to.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Are all semi-auto rifles capable of unlimited rate of fire, and only limited by how fast the trigger is pulled? Are all semi-auto rifles capable of accurate fire for extended periods of time?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




No.


----------



## 80zephyr (Feb 24, 2018)

Who gives a shit about rate of fire? These school shooters are "spraying and praying", they are methodically moving from room to room, acquiring a target, and firing. And thats another reason that size of magazine really makes no difference either.

Mark


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...




Yes, you can find all kinds of outrageous stuff if you look hard enough. Doesn't make it any where near the norm.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



ALL semiautomatics fire one round for each trigger pull.  As you can see that is not an unlimited rate of fire.

Even fully automatic firearms run up against a limit and the mechanics of the automatic firing mechanism and its cycle time is what limits a fully auto firearm.

A semiautomatic is limited to how fast a person can pull the trigger.

You might be able to pull the trigger faster than me you might not.  But over time people tend to fatigue therefore the max rate of trigger pull is not maintained 

And in general if you are pulling the trigger as fast as you can you will have little or no accuracy


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Of course they do.

If they don't why don't you tell me what the AR 15 can do that any other .223 caliber semiauto rifle can't do


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



You got credible proof that all semi-autos are capable of firing at the same rate? I would think a knowledgeable gun nut such as yourself would have that data on the tip of his tongue.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




So all laws are a waste? That's nuts.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

80zephyr said:


> Who gives a shit about rate of fire? These school shooters are "spraying and praying", they are methodically moving from room to room, acquiring a target, and firing. And thats another reason that size of magazine really makes no difference either.
> 
> Mark



Yes, and they generally choose the weapon that is better for that.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



MY fucking God man

Please tell me exactly what you don't understand about the phrase

One round per trigger pull.

Semi-automatic firearm - Wikipedia

A *semi-automatic firearm*, or *self-loading firearm*, is one that not only fires a bullet each time the trigger is pulled, but also performs all steps necessary to prepare it to discharge again—assuming cartridgesremain in the firearm's feed device. Typically, this includes extracting and ejecting the spent cartridge case from the firing chamber, re-cocking the firing mechanism, and loading a new cartridge into the firing chamber. To fire again, the trigger is released and re-pressed.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Where did I say that?

Laws are nothing but a codification of prohibited activities and a statement of the punishments for engaging in those activities and as such are necessary but those laws do not stop anyone from committing a crime


----------



## 80zephyr (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > Who gives a shit about rate of fire? These school shooters are "spraying and praying", they are methodically moving from room to room, acquiring a target, and firing. And thats another reason that size of magazine really makes no difference either.
> ...



Better for what? Any semi auto or pump gun would work fast enough for a methodical shooter. My hope is that with this last shooting, they have at least an audio tape available that would show the rate of fire of the shooter.

Mark


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Yes, and sand can only be loaded one scoop at the time. These pictures are loading sand at the exact same rate, right?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Specifically designed and capable of high rate of fire for extended periods of time.


----------



## 80zephyr (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Yes, the rate is probably the same. The size of the load is different, however.

Mark


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



What's loading got to do with the fact that ALL semiautomatics only fire one round per trigger pull?

To use your sandbox analogy/

Say you pour sand into a funnel that only lets one grain of sand through every time you push a button

Would that sand move though the funnel at a faster rate if the funnel was being filled with a table spoon or a gallon jug?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



no.

My Ruger Mini 14 can fire the exact same round just as fast and for as long as any AR

And tell me how can one .223 rifle that can only fire one round per trigger pull have a higher rate of fire than another .223 rifle that can only fire one round per trigger pull


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



My fucking God gun nut. 
What don't you understand about "capable of high rate of fire for extended periods"? If all rifles had equal capabilities, why do you gun nuts always argue about which one is best?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Where have I ever argued which rife is the best.

And please tell me exactly what is a high rate of fire?

And then tell me how one round per trigger pull meets that definition.

I can't help it if you are utterly incapable of understanding the basics of semiautomatic firearms even though I use the simplest language I can but until you actually educate yourself and learn about the rifles you want to argue about you are just wasting my time.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Got it. Laws are not a detriment to any crime. You know that's nuts, don't you?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



So what criminals have been stopped by a law?

You do understand they people are criminals because the law did not stop them from committing a crime don't you?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Come on gun nut. You know one trigger pull one fire isn't the only relevant issue. Some guns are capable of shorter time between trigger pulls than others. A real gun nut would know that.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Again, you should ask the military why they think that particular gun is better for killing more people in a shorter time than other guns.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...


 
The problem is you only have gun nut knowledge. Anything that doesn't fit the rhetoric that has been tattooed on your brain doesn't exist. That's why you keep repeating that thing about one trigger pull-one shot, as if it was all you had to say to prove your point.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



So we're back to   *"LAWS BAD"*   I guess that is an acceptable belief for a gun nut.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified
> ...



Actually, some of the blame for the fear of ARs can be blamed on the open carry antagonists/mall ninjas who paraded around the streets, malls or wherever with a an AR (dressed with every imaginable aftermarket add-on) just to show they can.







Yes, I know the one on the right is not an AR.    But the point stands.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



The ability to carry more ammo is accurate.  I'm not sure about the "it wounds the soldier so it takes more men out of combat" reason.

One of the biggest was that we were looking to have a common round with our allies.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Because some companies make them with higher quality standards, some guns are made with crappier parts that don't last as long, but none of those points changes the rate of fire relevant to a mass shooting.....you are such a doofus....


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




You are fucking deranged....and a troll........you have been corrected over and over and you still post crap......clearly a troll...


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The ability of a semi auto to fire at a sustained rate has more to do with the individual rifle's barrel than the gun itself.  I owned an AR some years ago.  I bought one setup for accuracy.  It had a heavier barrel that was fluted.  This barrel was able to withstand the heat build up better, and the flutes gave it more surface area for cooling as well.  

A Ruger Mini-14 would achieve the same extended fire rate with the same barrel.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I'd have to see a link to show that.  If it is true, the time difference is miniscule, and of no practical use.

In fact, since a tiny part of the force propelling the bullet down the barrel is bled off to work the action, it has until the bullet leaves the barrel to move the bolt completely to the rear (a spring pushing it back forward).  Once the bullet has left the barrel, the force of the propellant will flow to the path of least resistance (the empty tube that is the barrel).


----------



## OnePercenter (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



Paddock bought an arsonal from multiple States thus avoiding scrutiny.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

2aguy said:


> Crowder nails it....
> 
> He demonstrates the rate of fire with a .357 lever action rifle.....he shows a semi auto shotgun....
> 
> The anti gunners want them too....



Looks like our problem is rate of fire......not trying to ban individual guns

How about we limit rate of fire to 120 rounds per minute?
More than enough for hunting deer or squirrels 

Easier to distinguish which guns are allowed


----------



## OnePercenter (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Gang bangers use easily concealable weapons. 

I was 200 yards south of Mandalay Bay on 1 October.  My first thought was M-16 fire.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Crowder nails it....
> ...



If the 2nd Amendment was written to protect ownership of firearms strictly for hunting, I'd be all for it.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Crowder nails it....
> ...



And to think rate of fire is the only issue ignores the overwhelming majority of murders with guns.

It does not even cover murders with an AR.  John Muhammad and Lee Malvo managed to kill 17 people and wound 10 more with an AR.  Rate of fire and magazine capacity had no bearing on those shootings.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Our second amendment well regulated militias


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



If we want to address the overwhelming number of murders ....we have to address handguns

But we know we can’t dare do that don’t we?

So we are left with regulating rate of fire and magazine capacity that helps mass shooters improve their kills


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



LOL!  Come around to that lie again?  Perhaps you can show me where in the Second Amendment it says, "...the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"?  You can, right?


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Ah, the nervous laughter of a fool who has been caught in a lie.


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Excellent.  You found the dependent clause that provided one justification for the right to exist; but that doesn't change the fact that the right belongs to the PEOPLE, not just a militia.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....




"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
*— George Mason*_, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788_


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



A gun nut by any other name would be just as stupid. (sorry Will)


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



And the rest of it?


----------



## there4eyeM (Feb 24, 2018)

The firearms extremists have made the present 'bed', and now they lie in it.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



And what is your definition of a "gun nut"?


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > A gun nut by any other name would be just as stupid. (sorry Will)
> ...



Anyone who disagrees with him


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...


If they wanted the right nondependent, they just would have said

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed......PERIOD


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.....
> ...


One guys opinion

In practice....Militias had a set structure, organizational ranks, lists of members, set training

You know.....Well regulated


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Yes, it is a small difference, but contrary to most gun nuts claims, it is a difference.  That small difference on top of so many other small differences is why the military chose that particular gun design as their favorite killing tool. Minor modification to disable multi-fire doesn't negate all the other things that makes that gun such an effective killing machine. Other than for killing people, a honest hunter, or gun user of any other kind will tell you that 30 round capability is absurd.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Yeah, one guy who only helped author the Constitution.  Obviously, you're more of a Constitutional scholar than he ever was.


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



That IS the independent clause and exactly what it means.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



A good description would be anyone who agrees with the NRA on all their absurd claims. Someone who is expecting Obama to crawl out from under the bed to take his guns TONIGHT. An exact definition is more than I think I am capable of on such short notice.


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Well regulated meant in good working order.  That's not in dispute, either.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



Mr Mason says nothing to exclude the well regulation of those people......only clarifies who those people would be

A well regulated militia in 1782 had a specific structure, training and organization......it was not a random assembly of people who happened to own arms


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



The need for guns to support a well regulated militia is well established


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



If you'd read Justice Scalia's opinion in the case, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., PETITIONERS v. DICK ANTHONY HELLER: on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit. 2008, you'd know that  " . . . the 'militia' in colonial America consisted of a subset of 'the people'—those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range.".  It says nothing about specific structure, training and organization.  Further, in times of emergency, the militia was often a a random assembly of people who happened to own arms


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


 
And the ownership of firearms was NOT limited to a "well regulated militia."


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Correct, it was the whole of the people just as he said, not a random assembly.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Really?

You say these things as if you know but you are probably the most ignorant person here when it comes to firearms.

How many different semiautomatic rifles have you shot?

I have shot dozens of different semiautomatic rifles of varying caliber and ALL of them are limited to one round per trigger pull and the few milliseconds that might exist in the cycle times of the firing mechanism are irrelevant because a person can only pull the trigger so fast.

There may be some exceptional people who can pull a trigger 4 times per second but the upper end of the speed of a manual trigger pull is 3 times per second and most people would be hard pressed to keep that up for any length of time.

And you are stuck on this rate of fire issue even though 2 minutes of research will tell you that the rate of fire of every single semiautomatic firearm in existence today is one round per trigger pull.

And as I have tried to tell you the differences between semiautomatic rifles of the same caliber are irrelevant because they all fire the exact same round at the exact same rate with comparable accuracy but you seem to think that the AR can magically fire faster but you cannot prove it can you?


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



If you could read you'd see I said laws as such are necessary but don't be disillusioned that a law will stop a person from committing a crime if they choose to do so


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Then why not the 7.62 NATO?


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I have yet to see a link that shows there is a difference in time between trigger pulls.   My comment was based on the "If it is true..." precursor.   And saying that 0.01 seconds is enough difference is silly.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Crowder nails it....
> ...



What's wrong with one round per trigger pull?

Or do you want to have people pull the trigger multiple times for one shot?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



See? You still spout about one trigger pull and one bullet as if that somehow proved your point. Good little gun nut, aren't you?


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



The rifles chambered in 7.62x51mm were a lot heavier.   It became an issue after (or even during) WWII.  The ability to carry more ammo was a huge plus as well.  The lower recoil meant the ability to make the rifles much lighter.  The M14 weighed over 9 lbs empty.  The M16 weight just over 6 lbs.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...


States can do as they wish


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


If you can pull the trigger over 120 times in a minute, you are shooting at too high a rate

We saw the rates of fire of “one round per trigger pull”
In Las Vegas.......too fucking fast


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




OK. set that one characteristic aside for a while. We can come back to it later if you want to. It wasn't the only deciding factor in the military's  choice to use that design anyway. Why do you think that gun was picked? Auto fire was a given, no matter which design was chosen, so what other things made that particular gun the obvious choice to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible.? Doesn't the current AR15 have those same things?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


I hate to tell you thos but that is a FACT and not something pulled out of thin air as what you post seems to be.

So tell me how much faster can an AR fire than any other .223 caliber semiauto on the market?

You tell me that the AR can fire faster than any other semiauto rifle of the same caliber so prove it


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The fact is most people do not shoot that fast because it's not only innaccurate but wasteful and does nothing to improve skill


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



As long as their laws do not conflict with Federal Law.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



There are a number of reasons for the military picking the M16.   The caliber was one factor.  The ammo is much lighter, so the infantry soldier can carry more rounds.  Also, the gun was much lighter than previous US military arms.  The M14, that it replaced, weighs 9.3 lbs empty.  The M16 weighs only 6.37 lbs empty.   The smaller caliber made the lighter rifle work well.   

The full auto capability was a critical part of the rifle being chosen.  It would not even have been tested had it not been capable of that.

The .223/5.56mm cartridge was the result of a search by the US Continental Army Command to replace the 7.62x51mm cartridge.

The criteria were as follows:

22 Caliber
Bullet exceeding supersonic speed at 500 yards [4] [5]
Rifle weight 6 lbs
Magazine capacity of 20 rounds
Select fire for both semi-automatic and fully automatic use
Penetration of US Steel helmet one side, at 500 yards
Penetration of .135" steel plate at 500 yards
Accuracy and ballistics equal to M2 Ball ammunition
Wounding ability equal to the M1 Carbine.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



I asked for a link to back up that claim.  Have yet to see one.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



So all the things listed were given, and a necessary requirement for which ever gun was chosen. Obviously there is something about that particular design that makes it a better human killing tool than all the other candidates. I don't think they flipped a coin to decide. Doesn't that prove the gun nut claim that all other guns of that caliber are just the same is bullshit? I trust the military's judgment that they chose the best gun for combat.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Here is a quick link to show there is a difference in practical rate of fire between guns, and all semi-autos are not  essentially unlimited in rate of fire, or only limited in how fast your finger is.. I'm sure I could find a more detailed link if I cared to take the time, but this one is enough to prove my claim.


http://www.guncite.com/assausup.txt
  PRACTICAL RATE
    OF FIRE:       With weapons such as the military 5.56mm m16A1
                   rifle and the 7.62mm AKM rifle the maximum rates
                   of fire for a well trained shooter are as follows:

                                                M16A1               AKM

              semiautomatic:      45/65 s.p.m.        40 s.p.m.
              automatic:          100/150 s.p.m.      100 s.p.m.


----------



## hadit (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Yes. Answered honestly, this question reveals it. If you ban the AR-15, Are the kids safer in school? If you can't honestly answer yes, then banning the AR-15 Is just a measure designed to make some feel warm and fuzzy because they got one over on the gun owners.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

hadit said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



There would be no reason if that were the case. Unfortunately, it is not.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




Two reasons, 

The recoil of the .30-06 round caused soldiers to tense up prior to firing, so they needed a far less powerful round. Secondly they wanted a "civilized" round that would pass through cleanly. This was due to the horror of WWII


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Yes, .22 caliber was a requirement. All possible choices met that requirement.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...





But what gun isn’t built to kill ? Every gun on the planet from the hand gone from the days of yore to the most technologically advanced wsmall arm in production today is built for killing. The first repeating firearm was likely a martial weapon. Muskets were martial weapons. The news and charvelle (spelled wrong) were the AK47 and M16 of the age and the bayonet was what made them fearsome. In this country as long as we have had a military, civilians wanted them to. That said, had Cruze never had that rifle he could have done his deed with a bolt gun. Or a musket with a bayonet.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



So if the criteria are listed, and the rifle fits all of them, they take the gun into field trials.   These involve extensive testing of the weapons in many conditions.  The selection is up to a committee.   I am sure politics (and probably some well placed money) have a part in the selection.

Perhaps if you would stop calling shooters "gun nuts" they would be more conducive to a dialogue.   I have owned 3 semi-auto rifles in .223 in my life.  One was an AR.   Other than the looks, I'd say there wasn't much difference in them.  With the exception of the Ruger Mini-14.  That rifle was simply not accurate enough for what I wanted.  Even in a gun vise, the rifle couldn't do better than 5" groups at 100 yards.

You'll have to find someone specific who says the guns are different.  I see all the .223 semi autos as much the same.  Some companies build a higher quality gun.  But the AR has no magic killing capabilities.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Good point

So they should have no problem with guns with lower firing rates 
They don’t need high rate semi autos


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2018)

hadit said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Ask the kids at Parkland

Or the security guards who did not want to go up against an AR 15


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 24, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


There is no higher or lower rate of semi-automatic fire. Rate of fire is dependent on how slow or how fast the trigger is pulled for each and every round. You can pull the trigger to fire a hundred rounds a minute or one round every 4 hours.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



All true. it's not a matter of the gun's intention. It's a matter of the gun's capability. Even if we don't stop all mass shootings, we can reduce the number of people killed in each event. Don't you think that is worthwhile?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Bottom line, the military chose that gun as the most effective combat weapon over all the others. 

I don't call shooters gun nuts. There is a big difference. I have guns, and have enjoyed them since I was a kid trying to be still and quiet while I watched my dad shoot squirrels. A gun nut generally spouts nothing but NRA propaganda, and equates reasonable gun safety with being enslaved. Gun Nuts aren't conductive to discussion any more than RWNJs. I learned that long ago, and it was only reinforced when I was called unpatriotic, communist, etc, because I didn't support Bush's lies. No that's not an attack on Bush, it's just an example of how long people on the right, including gun nuts have been ----well----nuts.

I never said it was magic. I've already supplied credible links to show guns are different. You are entitled to your opinion, but facts is facts. The military chose that design for their goto killing tool. I'll take their judgement over some some Ted Nugent like gun nut. I appreciate your less than "hair on fire" discussion.


----------



## Hossfly (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Exactly what is the NRA propaganda? Have you ever read the NRAs Mission Statement? Read it and point out the propaganda.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Yes,  Public statements aren't always accurate. The NRA was once a great organization. I was a member for years until they changed to a representative of gun manufacturers, and whose only goal is the sale of more guns no matter how much they have to lie, or how many more children die.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Actually they went to a .308 initially.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 24, 2018)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Uncensored2008 said:
> ...



Interesting, but not relevant.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 24, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Your claim was that semi auto rifles of the same caliber have different rates of fire.   I'm reading your link on my phone, so I must have missed that comparison.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Ok.  Two weapons with identical caliber
M4 / M4A1 5.56mm Carbine - Specifications
*M4A1 Carbine
Weight (Without Magazine) 6.36 pounds
Length (Buttstock Closed) 29.75 inches
Length (Buttstock Open) 33 inches
Muzzle Velocity 2970 feet per second
Rate of Fire (Cyclic) 700-970 rounds per minute
Maximum Effective Range (Point Target) 500 meters
Maximum Effective Range (Area Targets) 600 meters
Maximum Range 3600 meters

M16 5.56mm Rifle Specifications
Specifications
M16
Manufacturers Armalite, Colt Manufacturing
Length 39.625 inches
Weight (without magazine and sling) 6.35 pounds
Weight (with loaded 30 round magazine and sling) 7.76 pounds
Bore Diameter 5.56mm (.233 inches)
Rifling Right-hand twist, 6 grooves, 1 turn in 12 inches
Maximum Range 2,653 meters
Maximum Effective Range 460 meters
Muzzle Velocity 3,250 feet per second
Rate of Fire (Cyclic) 800 rounds per minute
Rate of Fire (Sustained) 12-15 rounds per minute
Rate of Fire (Semiautomatic) 45-65 rounds per minute
Rate of Fire (Automatic) 150-200 rounds per minute
*


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Now you're just projecting. You have no way of knowing what that guard knew was in the building or what he didn't want to face.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Not a matter of the guns capibility at all. A dude shot a president with a bolt gun, pretty crappy one to. A slew of gun regulations came after that, why was it a President was shot again? Then you had Bobby Kennedy. He also got shot after all the new gun laws, then Regan. Columbine happened and it happened like 7 years after Clinton made it law. All the rules and regulations you want had been inplace yet the shooting happened. Not a guns capability at all.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...


Exactly
The guards had no idea how many shooters were there and where they were.......but were expected to charge in armed only with a sidearm

And now our President expects a teacher to do it


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



That's one of the goofiest things I ever heard. We wear seat belts, but people still die in car wrecks. Does that mean seat belts aren't a good idea?


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




people still die in car wrecks yet no call to ban them


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Seat belt laws add stupid and misguided. Last night a man was killed in a car wreck up the road. He hit a tree and was killed . He had a seat belt on. The law was feel good legislation nothing more. You hit anothe car, airbag or not, seat belt or not you stand a great chance of getting dead. That’s all. Far as it being goofy, you have a position that was in effective for seven years that contained every thing you advocate and yet none of it worked. Diddnt even slow down street crime. I’ll challange you to be honest and take a look at this wiki list of mass shootings. See if you can find a commonality among shooters BESIDES guns.


List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

2018, February 14 - Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school shootings - (17 deaths)
2017, November 14 - Rancho Tehama Reserve shootings - (6 deaths)
2015, October 1 - Umpqua Community College shooting - (10 deaths)
2014, October 24 - Marysville Pilchuck High School shooting - (5 deaths)
2013, June 7 - 2013 Santa Monica shooting - (6 deaths)
2013, January 15 - (3 deaths) [10]
2012, December 14 - Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings - (28 deaths)
2012, April 2 - Oikos University shooting - (7 deaths)
2012, February 27 - Chardon High School shooting - (3 deaths)
2010, February 12 - University of Alabama in Huntsville shooting - (3 deaths)
2008, February 14 - Northern Illinois University shooting - (6 deaths)
2007, April 6 - Virginia Tech massacre - (33 deaths)
2006, October 2 - West Nickel Mines School shooting - (6 deaths)
2005, March 21 - Red Lake shootings - (10 deaths)
2002, January 16 - Appalachian School of Law shooting - (3 deaths)
1999, April 20 - Columbine High School massacre - (15 deaths)
1998, May 21 - Thurston High School shooting - (4 deaths)
1998, March 24 - Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden - (5 deaths)
1997, December 1 - Heath High School shooting - (3 deaths)
1996, August 15 - San Diego State University shooting - (3 deaths)
1996, February 2 - Frontier Middle School shooting - (3 deaths)
1992, May 1 - Lindhurst High School shooting - (3 deaths)
1991, November 1 - University of Iowa shooting - (6 deaths)
1989, January 17 - Stockton schoolyard shooting - (6 deaths)[11]
1976, July 12 - California State University, Fullerton massacre - (7 deaths)
1974, December 30 - Olean High School shooting - (3 deaths)
1970, May 4 - Kent State shootings - (4 deaths)
1966, November 12 - Mesa, Arizona - (5 deaths) [12]
1966, August 1 - University of Texas tower shooting - (17 deaths)
1940, May 6 - Pasadena - (5 deaths) [4][13][14][7]
1898, December 13 - Charleston - (6 deaths) [8]
1893, March 26 - Plain Dealing high school - (4 deaths) [9]
1868, December 22 - (3 deaths) [15][16]
1764, July 26 - Enoch Brown - (10 deaths)


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



A car is not designed and built for only one purpose. To kill.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Not even a valid response. The comparisons is pointlessly to. Thing about a car is, it does what I want it to. And cars are perfect weapons. Just ask these guys. And aside from some being religious nuts, the ones who did The ramming attacks also have one big thing in common. Do alittle digging and you will see it. Hint, it reallocate is t an issue till the 80’s or so. When mass killings really took off.


Vehicle-ramming attack - Wikipedia


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Got it. You think seat belts are bad. You'r some kind of genius, aren't you?


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...





See, now this is an attempt at deflecting and it’s weak. From about 1972 to the present, what one thing do all the mass SHOOTERS have in common.  By every name is I link to a source off the WIKI. It only takes two minutes to see what they all have in common. Now, aside from the guns, what do all the shooters have in common? It’s one thing.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Grabbing at straws there, aren't you buddy?


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



And why were they expected to only have a sidearm? Because anything else is scary in certain quarters. Regardless, they didn't do their jobs. 

As for the teachers, no, you don't require them to be armed, but the ones that have CC permits and want to have a fighting chance if they are the last line of defense for the kids SHOULD be allowed to carry.

If you're going to rant, at least do it honestly.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



No deflection. You made your opinion of seat belts clear, and I commented on that. Your other point about the lack of biological fathers causing mass shootings was just too dumb to comment on.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Nope. But it’s kind of sad. Aside from the weapons used, what was the one commonality among all these mass killers? I’m sticking to guns and mass killings here. Not seat belts.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Fastest sustained fire I've seen was a man with a single shot shotgun. He had an apron full of shells and could pop them in at an astounding rate.

The attacks on  the AR-15 are;

a: stupid
b: a prelude to wider attacks on civil rights


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Right, and a short  CC course qualifies them to engage in a combat situation. You bet.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Stick to what ever you want to. That is just too goofy to discuss.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...








 


Now, what one thing aside from guns did all of these guys have in common? Hint, it wasn’t seat belts.



2018, February 14 - Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school shootings - (17 deaths)
2017, November 14 - Rancho Tehama Reserve shootings - (6 deaths)
2015, October 1 - Umpqua Community College shooting - (10 deaths)
2014, October 24 - Marysville Pilchuck High School shooting - (5 deaths)
2013, June 7 - 2013 Santa Monica shooting - (6 deaths)
2013, January 15 - (3 deaths) [10]
2012, December 14 - Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings - (28 deaths)
2012, April 2 - Oikos University shooting - (7 deaths)
2012, February 27 - Chardon High School shooting - (3 deaths)
2010, February 12 - University of Alabama in Huntsville shooting - (3 deaths)
2008, February 14 - Northern Illinois University shooting - (6 deaths)
2007, April 6 - Virginia Tech massacre - (33 deaths)
2006, October 2 - West Nickel Mines School shooting - (6 deaths)
2005, March 21 - Red Lake shootings - (10 deaths)
2002, January 16 - Appalachian School of Law shooting - (3 deaths)
1999, April 20 - Columbine High School massacre - (15 deaths)
1998, May 21 - Thurston High School shooting - (4 deaths)
1998, March 24 - Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden - (5 deaths)
1997, December 1 - Heath High School shooting - (3 deaths)
1996, August 15 - San Diego State University shooting - (3 deaths)
1996, February 2 - Frontier Middle School shooting - (3 deaths)
1992, May 1 - Lindhurst High School shooting - (3 deaths)
1991, November 1 - University of Iowa shooting - (6 deaths)
1989, January 17 - Stockton schoolyard shooting - (6 deaths)[11]
1976, July 12 - California State University, Fullerton massacre - (7 deaths)
1974, December 30 - Olean High School shooting - (3 deaths)
1970, May 4 - Kent State shootings - (4 deaths)
1966, November 12 - Mesa, Arizona - (5 deaths) [12]
1966, August 1 - University of Texas tower shooting - (17 deaths)
1940, May 6 - Pasadena - (5 deaths) [4][13][14][7]
1898, December 13 - Charleston - (6 deaths) [8]
1893, March 26 - Plain Dealing high school - (4 deaths) [9]
1868, December 22 - (3 deaths) [15][16]
1764, July 26 - Enoch Brown - (10 deaths)


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...





Since you know what it is, but won’t say, from the 70’s on all these shooters were on meds for being crazy, or were surrounded by people who said they needed them. Another common thing among them? People KNEW they were up to something. In all cases, some of which the regulations you are calling for were in place, and had been in place for years, yet they did nothing to stop any of them. You people have to stop with this “my team needs to win) crap if you want it fixed.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



It kills no better than any other semiautomatic of the same caliber
I already told you why the military prefers composite materials over natural materials that's the design features the military like


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


There is no such thing as a "high rate" semiauto.

ALL semiautomatics fire at the same rate and that rate is one round per trigger pull

I really don't understand why you people have such a hard time understanding that

Now tell me how do you make a gun fire at a 2 round per second limit without making it a fully automatic rifle with a .5 second cycle of the firing mechanism or having multiple trigger pulls to fire one round?

Civilians have had access to semiautomatic rifles for over 100 years in all all that time those rifles have contributed less to the murder rate than dozens of other weapons

As I said before most people can at maximum pull a trigger 3 times per second for a short period of time but that is not sustainable for long and the vast majority of people who shoot don't shoot like that even though the rifle might be capable of it just like the vast majority of drivers don't drive double the speed limit even though most cars can easily go that fast


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...


Yeah ask the coward why he didn't do his job


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

You know, now that I dig some,especially if I look at the mass killings that happened at schools in the 1800’s, where students shot The places up, makes a sad case for gun free schools as well. Seems like kids been shooting  folks at schools since the birth of the country. Now except for the Indians who raided a school house, all the folks who did the shooting had folks around them who SAID they would do something crazy, and or depending on where in history the shooting happened were being treated for mental illness, or needed it.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And the AR is not capable of fully automatic fire is it?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


you don't even know what a semiautomatic rifle is and you expect us to believe you were a member of the NRA?

That's fucking hilarious


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Gee all these years I guess I have been using my firearms incorrectly because I have never killed anyone


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...




Hmm.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Really, and what makes you think that?  Because I list the gun's firing rate(cyclic) as the same for semi or full? That's the way it is measured dumb ass.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...





Did you know, every mass shooter since the 1800’s telegraphed their future actions?


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

Cyclic rates are another deflection. Kids killing a bunch of other kids is.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



All that cyclic measurement is how fast the carrier cycles and it make absolutely no difference in semiautomatic fire because a person is not capable of pulling the trigger fast enough for it to matter

All semiautomatic fire is limited by how fast a person can pull the trigger and NOT how fast the firing mechanism cycles 

I know this stuff is completely beyond your intellectual capacity but go to a range and rent some rifles and tell me how fast you can fire them


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




You don't read the stories of actual people defending themselves....sometimes with even less training than than you need to get a cc permit..........you are talking out of your ass.....and again, the point is to make the school not a target...and you do that by telling mass shooters they will be engaged by armed people.....instead of being a gun free killing playground for the mass shooters....

Again, they are not looking for a gun fight, they are looking to murder unarmed people....

We know that mass shooters choose gun free zones because the ones captured tell us this, and the notes of the dead ones tell us this...

All of the mass shooters who weren't muslim terrorists suicided before the cops got to them, surrendered to people who had guns, or ran away, like the last guy....

They did not shoot it out with the victims who were armed or the police when they finally arrived after the killer was done killing...


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...




They all have this in common.....even when they used guns....they murdered less people than the muslim terrorist in Nice, France did with a rental truck......

The muslim terrorist in Nice, France murdered 86 people in 5 minutes......look at the totals of mass shootings from the list.....

Rental trucks are deadlier than guns...


----------



## cwise76 (Feb 25, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


“All the rifles and all the pistols” what a load of horse shit


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




too fucking bad neither is a firearm

knives kill more people then rifles 

yet no call for a ban hypocrite


----------



## Crixus (Feb 25, 2018)

That’s it right there. The left has nothing to say when you peel back the layers and LOOK at shit. Both sides of this argument are toattaly missing the point. Forget the guns for a minute and LOOK at whats common in all these shootings and that’s prescribed drugs, mental illness, a tumor I believe in the ATM tower and the fact that people around them knew or suspected something was up, except for the one case where Indians assaulted the school, killed and scalped all the woman and children. People need to stop the emotional, political bullshit and fix it.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 25, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...


Will teachers be cowards too?


----------



## DrLove (Feb 25, 2018)

Louder Crowder is an annoying loon - no surprise you would post his excrement.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...




cars accidentally kill more people than rifles or all guns.......they kill more children than guns do every single day......


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

cwise76 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




You can't hide it anymore.....the CNN town hall, 2 minutes of Orwell hate brought out the truth.....thanks for that enlightening moment...


----------



## DrLove (Feb 25, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Did the military pick that design for strictly cosmetic reasons?
> ...



Other than how they look? Nope - The AR is also FAR easier to conceal than the .223. My neighbor has two of them. He showed me how easy the stock pops on and off. Once removed, it literally fit neat as ya please inside his jacket. 

My neighbor is a great guy but a bit of a Prepper - fears something akin to a zombie apocalypse


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




You have no idea what you are talking about.....the AR comes in .223....you moron....it can also fire different size rounds depending on the action.......you can fit most rifles in a bag for baseball bats and you could simply cut off the wood stock if you wanted if you plan on shooting people at close range....like in a school.....

Please, think before you post...


----------



## DrLove (Feb 25, 2018)

OnePercenter said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Crowder nails it....
> ...


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




*The AR is also FAR easier to conceal than the .223.*

--LOL


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




The guy is an idiot.......a troll.....and this is why we can't negotiate with them, they do not understand the concept of "Good Faith" they just understand getting what they want by any means necessary...


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

2aguy said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...




i know that is why i could not help but laugh


----------



## DrLove (Feb 25, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > I've done a bit of research on the AR15 today. Some of the things I thought were wrong. However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed. We don't need military assault rifles on the street. even those that are slightly modified
> ...



Tons of people in Texas - Hell, you can do it in Idaho too with no training and no license even if concealed.


----------



## DrLove (Feb 25, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...



Time we ban anything over 20. Can a kook still change magazines? Sure - but that gives bystanders a chance to tackle.


----------



## DrLove (Feb 25, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Laugh away loon! Maybe you could get a room with this guy?


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




No it doesn't....actual research shows you don't know what you are talking about.......

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary  Kleck :: SSRN


News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.


 There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.


*In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change. *

*Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.*

*--------*





We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

 LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

 Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


 For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1). 

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

 Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011. 

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

 Specifically, we searched for 

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession, 

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine, 

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident, 

(4) the types of guns possessed, 

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident, 

(6) the number of rounds fired,

 (7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter. 

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

 We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


 Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper. 

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013. 

-----

How Often Have Bystanders Intervened While a Mass Shooter Was Trying to Reload?

 First, we consider the issue of how many times people have disrupted a mass shooting while the shooter was trying to load a detachable magazine into a semiautomatic gun.

 Note that 16 it is irrelevant whether interveners have stopped a shooter while trying to reload some other type of gun, using other kinds of magazines, since we are addressing the potential significance of restrictions on the capacity of detachable magazines which are used only with semiautomatic firearms. 

Thus, bystander intervention directed at shooters using other types of guns that take much longer to reload than a semiautomatic gun using detachable magazines could not provide any guidance as to the likelihood of bystander intervention when the shooter was using a semiautomatic gun equipped with detachable magazines that can be reloaded very quickly.

 Prospective interveners would presumably be more likely to tackle a shooter who took a long time to reload than one who took only 2-4 seconds to do so. 

Likewise, bystander interventions that occurred at a time when the shooter was not reloading (e.g., when he was struggling with a defective gun or magazine) are irrelevant, since that kind of intervention could occur regardless of what kinds of magazines or firearms the shooter was using. 


It is the need to reload detachable magazines sooner and more often that differentiates shooters using smaller detachable magazines from those using larger ones. 

For the period 1994-2013 inclusive, we identified three mass shooting incidents in which it was claimed that interveners disrupted the shooting by tackling the shooter while he was trying to reload. 

In only one of the three cases, however, did interveners actually tackle the shooter while he may have been reloading a semiautomatic firearm.

 In one of the incidents, the weapon in question was a shotgun that had to be reloaded by inserting one shotshell at a time into the weapon (Knoxville News Sentinel “Takedown of Alleged Shooter Recounted” July 29, 2008, regarding a shooting in Knoxville, TN on July 27, 2008), and so the incident is irrelevant to the effects of detachable LCMs.


 In another incident, occurring in Springfield, Oregon on May 21, 1998, the shooter, Kip Kinkel, was using a semiautomatic gun, and he was tackled by bystanders, but not while he was reloading.

 After exhausting the ammunition in one gun, the shooter started 17 firing another loaded gun, one of three firearms he had with him.

 The first intervener was shot in the hand in the course of wresting this still-loaded gun away from the shooter (The (Portland) Oregonian, May 23, 1998). 


The final case occurred in Tucson, AZ on January 8, 2011. 

This is the shooting in which Jared Loughner attempted to assassinate Representative Gabrielle Giffords.

 The shooter was using a semiautomatic firearm and was tackled by bystanders, purportedly while trying to reload a detachable magazine. 

Even in this case, however, there were important uncertainties. 

According to one news account, one bystander “grabbed a full magazine” that the shooter dropped, and two others helped subdue him (Associated Press, January 9, 2011). 

It is not, however, clear whether this bystander intervention was facilitated because

 (1) the shooter was reloading, or because 

(2) the shooter stopping firing when his gun or magazine failed to function properly. 

Eyewitness testimony, including that of the interveners, was inconsistent as to exactly why or how the intervention transpired in Giffords shooting.

 One intervener insisted that he was sure the shooter had exhausted the ammunition in the first magazine (and thus was about to reload) because he saw the gun’s slide locked back – a condition he believed could only occur with this particular firearm after the last round is fired. 

In fact, this can also happen when the guns jams, i.e. fails to chamber the next round (Salzgeber 2014; Morrill 2014).

 Complicating matters further, the New York Times reported that the spring on the second magazine was broken, presumably rendering it incapable of functioning. 

Their story’s headline and text characterized this mechanical failure as “perhaps the only fortunate event of the day” (New York Times “A Single, Terrifying Moment: Shots, Scuffle, Some Luck,” January 10, 2011, p. A1)

. If the New York Times account was accurate, the shooter would not have been able to continue shooting with that magazine even if no one had stopped him from loading it into his gun. 

Detachable magazines of any size can malfunction, which would at least temporarily stop a prospective mass shooter from firing, and thereby provide an opportunity for bystanders to stop the shooter. 
It is possible that the bystander intervention in the Tucson case could have occurred regardless of what size magazines the shooter possessed, since a shooter struggling with a defective small-capacity magazine would be just as vulnerable to disruption as one struggling with a defective large-capacity magazine. Thus, it remains unclear whether the shooter was reloading when the bystanders tackled him.
-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds. 

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents. 

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines. 

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents. 

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children. 

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded. 

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

 If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

 On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading. 

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----

In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading. 

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




And they aren't shooting up schools are they...in fact, no one is shooting at them either...are they?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



DOn't know do you?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The AR is a .223


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



That was part of a specific demonstration going on around the country.  It is not a regular occurrence.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




obviously you still do not know how stupid you came across


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Not all guns are designed to kill, either. Shooting competition guns are designed solely to be as accurate as possible, not to kill.


----------



## DrLove (Feb 25, 2018)

2aguy said:


> cars accidentally kill more people than rifles or all guns.......they kill more children than guns do every single day......



Incorrect barrel stroker

Gun Deaths Have Now Surpassed Motor Vehicle Deaths In 21 States (And Counting)


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cars accidentally kill more people than rifles or all guns.......they kill more children than guns do every single day......
> ...




still cant tell the truth can ya 

sub group of drunk driving deaths is more then the total "motor vehicle deaths"

Feb 25, 2018 (4:27:27 PM)

Drunk Driving  5158

murder by gun 1753


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cars accidentally kill more people than rifles or all guns.......they kill more children than guns do every single day......
> ...




Wrong...that is a lie.....they include suicides to get that number and that is a lie.  Japan, China, Korea, all have extreme gun control.....only criminals and cops can have guns in those countries....and their suicide rates are higher than ours......so no...that statistic is a lie....

When you compare gun accidents to car accidents......actual apples to apples....it isn't even close....

Fatal Injury Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

*2016*

Gun.....495

Car.......38,748

Even gun murder doesn't come close to car deaths...

*Gun murder.....2016*



FBI....11,004 

Expanded Homicide Data Table 4


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cars accidentally kill more people than rifles or all guns.......they kill more children than guns do every single day......
> ...




As to suicide...which the Violence Policy Center uses to lie about gun deaths v. car deaths......?  

Fact Check, Gun Control and Suicide



*There is no relation between suicide rate and gun ownership rates around the world.  *

According to the 2016 World Health Statistics report, (2) suicide rates in the four countries cited as having restrictive gun control laws have suicide rates that are comparable to that in the U. S.:  Australia, 11.6, Canada, 11.4, France, 15.8, UK, 7.0, and USA 13.7 suicides/100,000.  By comparison, Japan has among the highest suicide rates in the world, 23.1/100,000, but gun ownership is extremely rare, 0.6 guns/100 people.   

Suicide is a mental health issue.  If guns are not available other means are used.  Poisoning, in fact, is the most common method of suicide for U. S. females according to the _Washington Post_ (34 % of suicides), and suffocation the second most common method for males (27%). 

Secondly, gun ownership rates in France and Canada are not low, as is implied in the _Post _article.  The rate of gun ownership in the U. S. is indeed high at 88.8 guns/100 residents, but gun ownership rates are also among the world’s highest in the other countries cited.  Gun ownership rates in these countries are are as follows:  Australia, 15, Canada, 30.8, France, 31.2, and UK 6.2 per 100 residents. (3,4) Gun ownership rates in Saudia Arabia are comparable to that in Canada and France, with 37.8 guns per 100 Saudi residents, yet the lowest suicide rate in the world is in Saudia Arabia (0.3 suicides per 100,000).

Third, recent statistics in the state of Florida show that nearly one third of the guns used in suicides are obtained illegally, putting these firearm deaths beyond control through gun laws.(5)

Fourth, the primary factors affecting suicide rates are personal stresses, cultural, economic, religious factors and demographics.  According to the WHO statistics, the highest rates of suicide in the world are in the Republic of Korea, with 36.8 suicides per 100,000, but India, Japan, Russia, and Hungary all have rates above 20 per 100,000; roughly twice as high as the U.S. and the four countries that are the basis for the _Post_’s calculation that gun control would reduce U.S. suicide rates by 20 to 38 percent.  Lebanon, Oman, and Iraq all have suicide rates below 1.1 per 100,000 people--less than 1/10 the suicide rate in the U. S., and Afghanistan, Algeria, Jamaica, Haiti, and Egypt have low suicide rates that are below 4 per 100,000 in contrast to 13.7 suicides/100,000 in the U. S.


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



What is not the case?


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Some might, others not. I would want the kids to have a chance when the killer walks through the door of their classroom. Do you?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

2aguy said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



tl;dr


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Tiny niche market.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



--LOL 

not even close to the truth


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




And teachers around the country are already carrying guns without additional training........you guys don't know what you are talking about...

How Texas is a model for Trump's gun-toting teachers

Texas already was one of a handful of states that allow districts to choose whether to let teachers carry guns at school, even without the intensive training that comes along with the school marshals program. Lawmakers in at least a half-dozen other states — including Florida — are considering legislation this year that would ease restrictions on firearms on campus.

----

In addition, Texas districts have long been allowed to let school staff carry guns, with or without the marshal training.


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Still accurate.


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there.  You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it?  You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter.  Are you?


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...




Are you kidding....dead kids are gold to the anti gun movement...if we end gun free zones by putting armed guards and arming staff and teachers into schools...where will they get dead kids to push for gun control?


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

2aguy said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


It's sick that they insist we focus on guns instead of school safety.  If banning the AR-15 doesn't result in safer kids, what have we accomplished?  Nothing more than letting a few feel warm and fuzzy because they got one over on the "gun nuts".


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...




it is hardly a niche 

this is 09 and it has only grown from there 

The first comprehensive survey to look at ownership and use of modern sporting rifles reveals that 8.9 million Americans went target shooting with AR-style rifles in 2009 and that participants using this type of rifle were the most active among all types of sport shooters.

Target shooting grows in popularity


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

*"New High for Overall Participation—34.4 Million Shooters"*

hardly a niche


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



So now you're trying to say the AR was designed for target shooting. You know that's goofy, right?


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


That's why you don't require all of them to do it.  You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom.  IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door.  You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science.  There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom.  An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point.  An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise?  Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth.  Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 25, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



You seem to think a day of training takes you almost to the point of being ready for combat. It's not. At best, it slightly reduces the chance of you shooting yourself.


----------



## ThunderKiss1965 (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Wrong Colt bought the patient for the AR-15 from  Armilight and the first commercially available AR-15 hit the market in 1964 the same year that the M16 was adopted by the US Military.


----------



## hadit (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


And you seem to think that a teacher guarding the door to his/her classroom is the equivalent of a squad of Marines working through Falujah.  Stop working the extremes.  You have to admit that an armed teacher at least has a fighting chance when a shooter attempts to enter his classroom, whereas an unarmed one has none.  I want the kids to have that last line of defense if the teacher is willing to provide it.  Don't you?


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 25, 2018)

DrLove said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > cars accidentally kill more people than rifles or all guns.......they kill more children than guns do every single day......
> ...



Just wanted to remind you per our agreement that if General Kelly is still on the job in three days that you are to take a one month sabbatical from this forum. Have you any plans for the month of March?


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




And yet.....several states are already doing this.......for years.....


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 25, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...




you are goofy 

there is a big market for match grade ar-15s 

either you are trying to look ignorant 

or are you seriously lack that basic knowledge 

Rainier Arms AR-15 Precision Match Grade BCG - Nitride

The Rainier Arms Precision Match Grade Phosphate BCG - 5.56 Nitride is machined and finished to a higher standard to meet and exceed all Mil Spec. ... We are so confident in our Rainier Arms BCG we offer them with a limited lifetime warranty. So if at anytime your Rainier Arms BCG


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

ThunderKiss1965 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Actually, the Air Force bought them in 63
AR 15 Rifle - A Brief History & Historical Time Line


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Working the extremes? In case you haven't figured it out yet, a combat situation such as all those school shootings is extreme.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Are you trying to say that gun was specifically designed and sold to the military as a target competition gun, or are you just trying to muddle the discussion?


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



False flags and psy-ops, Bulldawg.....


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Bulldawg, if the mandate ever comes down that AR-15s are now illegal and everyone must turn them in and that a "door to door" search will be performed in order to insure compliance? Put your fat ass out in front of those searches and 
"impress" me. I bet you will hide just like the sheriff sissies of Broward coward county.......


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Right Dale. All those dead kids and grieving parents are just actors being paid to act a part. I'm guessing you got that info from that brain implant the space men put in you at the behest of the big foot.,


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



People die in false flag events and some are simply staged where no one dies........all to further the communist globalist agenda. I know more than you.........infinitely more.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



No way for you to tell anyway. You're to scared to meet a little old lady. I know you're scared to come check on me.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Of course you know lots more than me, and if it wasn't all crazy made up conspiracy shit, you would be really smart.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You can eat shit and die for all I care......I am simply saying that if you want AR-15 confiscation and total compliance? Put your ass out there on the front line. As far as Buttecea goes? I will be in San Diego on MY time table and I will not being going there to prove anything to that liberal POS........capiche'?


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You are a political infant........unaware, uneducated and you can't argue even the most simple of points as it pertains to leftardism.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Got it. You're scared.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Scared of what????????????


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



I should spend a few thousand hours studying at the feet of Alex Jones and other kings of conspiracy theories like you did.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



I'm guessing black helicopters and FEMA prisons.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



No fan of Alex Jones, dipshit.........but you hide behind him....sucks to be you.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...


Most people who own AR frame rifles use them exclusively for target shooting only a fraction of a percent of killers use the AR for murder so if it indeed is the best killing tool out, as you claim it is, there more people would be using it to commit murders


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



LoL - thanks for the reminder Dale. You just may have me on that one. I've put a rubber band around my schween. ;-)


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Oh I see - we don't get to count the traffic fatalities not involving drunk driving?


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

2aguy said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



So what - people commit suicide by driving off cliffs too. My statement has been backed up. Within a year or two, gun deaths will surpass traffic fatalities. 

You can thank that evil REGULATION (started by Ralph Nader) for the safety improvements to cars. Perhaps we could do the same with guns?

Worth a thought anyway .. Amiright?


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You're avoiding the question. I want the kids to have that last line of defense. Do you?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



That gun design was chosen as the best possible weapon for our soldiers. I guess it could be used as a target shooting gun as well, but I doubt it gets more use that way than the use by the military.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



I prefer greatly reducing their need for defense, and any need for defense beyond that be something that won't make things worse. Giving each of the kids a knife and a baseball bat makes as much sense as what you are proposing.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 26, 2018)

DrLove said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...




sure we can why not retard 

then add another 20982 as Feb 26, 2018 (6:58:49 AM)


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



This is 2014 - old .. Graph at bottom shows projections - not sure if 2017 data is in. 
Firearms deaths are up and traffic fatalities are down in past 3-4 years. 

And with that? Doc Love drops the mic 
FastStats

*Motor vehicle traffic deaths*

Number of deaths: 33,736
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.6
*All firearm deaths*

Number of deaths: 33,594
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.5


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 26, 2018)

DrLove said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...



hey stupid the numbers i have posted are real time not a yearly round up 

2018 Real Time Death Statistics in America


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And I've told you why and that reason has nothing to do with the fact that it is the most deadly rifle.

It is no more deadly than any other.223 caliber semiautomatic.  It's the composite materials that make it the choice of the military and not the caliber as those materials make the weapon more resistant excessive moisture and impacts etc.

If the military really wanted the most lethal .223 they'd be using hollow point ammo not full metal jacket


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Got it. The military didn't really care about which rifle would be the better combat weapon. Thanks for the info. Where did you come up with that story?


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 26, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...



Dude, I am not going to hold you to it......just chiding ya a little. ;o)


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I already said the composite materials mattered to the military.

In that sense composite rifles are "better" because they hold up to environmental extremes and impacts better than a rifle with a wood stock but don't kid yourself by saying the AR is a better killing weapon than any other semiauto of the same caliber because the facts disagree with you.

The firing rate of an AR 15 is exactly the same as any other commercially available .223 semiautomatic rifle.  The muzzle velocity is virtually the same but can have some differences that are caused by barrel length.

The M16 in semiauto mode is not more deadly than any other commercially available .223 semiautomatic rifle.  However in select fire or full auto modes it will be because in those 2 firing modes there is no way to compare the M 16 to a commercially available rifle


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Right  Get an M16, and any bargain shelf .223 and fire them both in single fire as fast and as long as you can. Which one will melt down first?


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



I'm a man of my word Dale - A bet's a bet.

Gotta give ya something - how about 2 weeks?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



So you finally admit the M16 is NOT the same as any commercially available .223 semiautomatic rifle


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



I always said it was slightly modified, but still essentially the same gun.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


No you have been saying the AR 15 is exactly the same as the M 16 

But now you have obviously realized your error


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Exactly the same in all ways pertinent to our discussion. Go back and reread what was said.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I don't have to.  You have said the AR 15 is a "more deadly" .223.  It isn't
You have said it is the same as an M 16.  It isn't

Now you demonstrate that they are not the same by implying that a comparison between an M 16 and any other bargain .223 will have the M 16 come out on top


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



You are the one who said it as the same as ANY other .223


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Yes the AR 15 is the same as any other commercially available .223 semiautomatic.  I have never said the M 16 was the same as any commercially available .223 semiautomatic nor have I ever said the AR 15 was more deadly than any other commercially available .223 semiautomatic rifle.  That was all you


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




No....not exactly the same in any way pertinent to the discussion....the M-16 has full auto capability.....the AR-15 does not, that makes them two completely different rifles......you guys are lying to uninformed Americans by implying that the AR-15 fires fully automatic ........ the uninformed believe you which is why you hear so much ignorant  commentary in this discussion......and that is why we don't trust you.......you know if you get the AR-15 you can then come back and say, all those other rifles shoot the same as the AR-15 so you have to let us ban those too...including semi auto pistols....


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 26, 2018)

DrLove said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...




Then Dr. Love needs to pick up the mic because he isn't comparing car accidental deaths to gun accidental deaths, he is comparing gun murder and gun suicide to accidental car deaths....apples to oranges....

Because Dr. Love knows that apples to apples....accidental death to accidental death shows he is an idiot and a liar...

The actual comparison...

Fatal Injury Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

*2016  Accidental Death...

Gun.....495

Car.......38,748*

poisoning......58,335

falling.......34,673

suffocation...6,610

drowning......3,786



*Gun murder.....2016*

FBI....11,004 

Expanded Homicide Data Table 4

*Gun Suicide.....22,938*


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




No...it wasn't chosen as the best possible weapon for our soldiers.....it was the cheapest rifle out of all the other companies that bid on the weapon selection process....just like any other government contract.......you are such a doofus...


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



You're confused.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Prove it.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Yes.that is the modification I mentioned at the first of the conversation. The AR15 and the M16 are essentially the same when both are fired in single mode. In fact, the AR15 was select fire and had it's designation changed to the then new M16 designation when the military bought the design. The modification was made to allow non select fire sale to the public.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Nope.......you kept lying...implying that the AR-15 is the exact same rifle as the M-16 and you even keep calling the AR-15 an "Assault Rifle" even after you were told they the two rifles are completely different.

All semi auto firing weapons work the same way, including semi auto pistols and 5-6 shot revolvers.....one bullet per pull of the trigger, no manual reload.....you know this, and you kept lying....

The AR-15 is a civilian rifle that has never been used in war...the police use it...and there are 8 million AR-15s in private hands making it the single most popular rifle in the country....and calling to ban it just shows it is your gateway gun....you will use it to call for a ban on all semi auto weapons.....as the crowd at the CNN 2 minutes of hate called for in their chants...


----------



## Flash (Feb 26, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...




The Air Force bought a shitload of Colt model 604s, that didn't have the forward assist.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You're Wrong. They aren't completely different. You should know that.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



OK Here we go

these are all your quotes in this thread

The AR and the M16 are identical other than the full auto capability.

The AR is a slightly modified clone of the M16. It's not the same as any other simi.

 However, the fact that the AR 15 is a slightly modified clone of the military M16 assault rifle has not changed.

 It's not the same as any other simiauto.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You deny over and over again that the AR but for cosmetics is exactly the same as any other commercially available .223 Semiauto

You say it can fore faster but you cannot prove it


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



And?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Yes, I deny that cosmetics are the only difference.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


And then you ask a question that implies that the M16 is different from any other bargain .223 on the commercial marker which includes the AR

So they either are identical or they are  not


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And you have yet to prove that the performance of the AR is any different than the performance of any other commercially available .223 semi auto


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



From the first of this conversation I have referred to the M16 and AR15 as essentially interchangeable, other than the select fire feature.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




A=B
A>C
Therefore 
B>C


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Until you ask the question about an M 16 vs any other "Bargain" .223.

You do realize that any AR frame rifle is included in that latter category so there is no way you can believe they are identical


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The AR does not perform better than any other commercially available .223 and you certainly have not posted any data whatsoever that proves it does


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




Of course I have. The .223 is available in lots of different designed guns. They are not all the same silly. You haven't proven they are the same.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



They all shoot the same round at the same rate with virtually the same accuracy so yes they all perform the same I have been consistent that the only differences are cosmetic

And you have not proven otherwise


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Yes, I heard that the first dozen times you said it. Still doesn't prove your point.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And you haven't proven that the AR is vastly superior than any other commercially available .223 semiauto have you?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Your claim was that it was identical.That's what started the discussion.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



No your claim that the AR was identical to the M 16 started the discussion.

See Post #4


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



You mean this one? As I said. I have been claiming the auto / select fire capability was the only difference all along. You were the doofus who said all 223 rifles were the same. I as wrong about which came first though. The AR designation as changed to M16 for military use.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



All .223 semiautomatic rifles are FUNCTIONALLY the same.

Yes it is true and you cannot tell me how the AR 15 is FUNCTIONALLY different from any other .223 semiautomatic rifle or you would have by now

'Assault' weapons vs. sporting weapons: What's the difference?


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




One can fire fully automatic the other can't....completely different weapons....you are lying...since you were just pushing the AR-15 as "Assault Riflt" until you were called out on that lie.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Such as-? In that case, I recommend you go bear hunting with .22 short shotshells.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

OnePercenter said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...





WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Well, you know..some rounds are slower ...

For instance .22 WMR semiauto has a slower rate of fire than .22LR.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

DrLove said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...





^Thinks Hollywood movies are documentaries.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



That would be kinda silly wouldn't it? I wouldn't use a 6.8 for squirrels either. You ever use a .223 for ducks? What is the effective firing rate on that gun? Bolt type? Cycle rate? I expect you will try to say that cosmetics and caliber are the only differences in any gun, like so many others here have, but we both know it just ain't so.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




I bet you don't know what a 6.8 is.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 26, 2018)

DrLove said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...


--LOL nice work sock --LOL


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 26, 2018)

2aguy said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...


dr sock got his ass whooped again --LOL


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You hunt ducks with a rifle?

Wow


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


And yet you cannot prove that the AR 15 actually fires faster or is "more deadly" than any other similarly chambered semiauto can you?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I said there was no difference in the FUNCTIONALITY

you say there is

So besides cosmetics what is different between the AR 15 and any other commercially available .223 semiauto rifle.  Do they shoot different ammo?  Does one fire more than one bullet per trigger pull, what?  You say there are all these differences besides the way a .223 rifle looks so what are they?

You have yet to answer that question.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



I'm sure you bet on a lot of stuff. Care to make a bet that cosmetics are the only thing that makes the AR15 different from any other .223 rifle?  Why is the effective firing rate on an AR15 45 rpm, and the firing rate on that mini14 in the picture above in .223 caliber only 40rpm? Does that sound identical to you?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Please post links to those firing rates,

I can tell you that I can fire more than 40 rounds in one minute with a Ruger Mini 14 as can anyone else who owns one


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



That would be as dumb as the suggestion to go bear hunting with rat shot.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Those numbers sound kinda low, I could do 45 with an Enfield mark III, and that isn't a smooth action. (Provided I had mags)

In other news: Nobody cares.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And yet you ask if people use the .223 for ducks,

Why ask such stupid questions yet you can't show me the data on how an Ar 15 is functionally different from a Mini 14?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



It does have a higher effective firing rate than a mini14. If that ain't proof of a difference, what is?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



No dumbass. You said all 223 rifles fired at the exact same rate. You said there was only cosmetic differences.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Where is the DATA.

And what is an effective firing rate?  That is not listed in any spec I can find so where did you get it and how is it defined


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Yes ALL SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES FIRE ONE ROUND PER TRIGGER PULL.

That is the rate.  If you can pull the trigger faster than another person you can fire the gun faster but the RATE of fire is and always will be ONE ROUND PER TRIGGER PULL

Now where is the data on this stat of effective rate of fire?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Dumb assed question.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



That's not DATA that is an advertising claim and a suggested use by the manufacturer

WHERE IS THE DATA?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Because you have no data to prove it.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



That how you're going to try to weasel out?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



If you don't want to accept the manufacturers specs I don't know what to tell you.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


I've been asking you for data you know PROOF ?

I can put up a video of a guy firing a mini 14 at a far greater rate than 45 rounds per minute  

And that rate is still one shot per trigger pull.

So in one video I can prove you wrong

Start counting when he says rapid fire and tell me how many rounds per minute he was firing


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


That's not a spec that is a suggested use you know kind of like a car manufacturer suggest you never drive over 65 even though in real life the care will do 120 mph


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Your video isn't factory specs.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



What was different?

The grip?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



So now you're going to be dumber than usual. Manufacturers don't put out suggestions and call them specs.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Really then how come people can fire the AR 15 faster than 45 rounds per minute?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Dumb ass.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Can't answer the question.

Got it.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Ruger Mini 14 Tactical Rifle

Ruger® Mini-14® Tactical Rifle Autoloading Rifle Model 5846

Tell me where in the specs does it say 40 rounds per minute


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle

Ruger® Mini-14® Ranch Rifle Autoloading Rifle Model 5816

Tell me where in the specs is says 40 rounds per minute


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Here is a PDF of the manual that cam with my Mini 14

https://ruger-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/_manuals/mini.pdf

Please read it and tell me where it says the "effective" firing rte is 40 rounds per minute


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Find a page with the complete list of specs dumb ass. That one doesn't have them all.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



I didn't take you to raise dumb ass. I already showed you the specs. If that's not good enough for you then fuck you.


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And we all hope and pray that a shooter never gets into a classroom. But we're not talking hypothetically here, because shooters DO get into classrooms, and when they do, the teacher is the last defense the kids have. Do you deny that?

It's very simple. I want that teacher to have whatever defensive measures he/she is comfortable with/capable of using effectively. How can you object to that?

Obviously, you believe that teacher should have no defensive measures beyond what YOU are comfortable with them having access to.

The shooter comes into the room. Do we see him run away because he gets return fire, fall because he's hit, or do we see the children fall one by one and the shooter move on to the next room because there's no defense for them?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You mean the one from the Ruger web site?

Why don't you post your source and we can debate which source is better


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


All I saw was the page where you said the  rate of fire was 45 rounds per minute for the AR 15

Which every person who has even owned or shot an AR 15 knows is complete bullshit

I post an entire manual for the Mini 14 that was written by Ruger and there is not one single mention that the rate of fire is 40 rounds per minute

Not a single one.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Colt Ar 15 Spec Sheet published by Colt Firearms

https://www.colt.com/Portals/0/Specs/2016/AR15A4.pdf

Please show me where it says effective rate of fire is 45 rounds per minute


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...



Nothing pleases me more than declarations of victory on the right when all hope is lost.
Trump trained you well!


----------



## DrLove (Feb 26, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > OnePercenter said:
> ...



^ ^ ^ Thinks Hollywood has no influence


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



That seriously defies common sense.

Here's 39 rounds in the Mad Minute with a semi-auto .06 with an 8-round mag.


This is a "Weapon of war".


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



In that case, then arm all the little kiddies too. I guess they would have to put the taller ones in the back so everyone would get an equal chance at making a kill shot.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Shut up you big baby. I gave you a credible source for the info. Not my fault if you don't want to accept factory specs.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Read the page dumb ass.


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Are you TRYING to be stupid?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



You'll have to talk to the manufacturer about that. I'm pretty sure they know at what rate and amount of fire. their guns are subject to melt down, and when they are able to continue firing without melt down..


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



That is the direction you were headed.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Them silly "Iraqveteran" crackers do meltdowns all the time.

Yes, I think they're silly crackers.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



Don't know about that. I do know what the manufacturers say about their products though.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You really don't know much about much, do ya?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



So educate me with credible evidence. We both know all guns aren't the same, and "because I say so" isn't a credible source.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Buy one and test it for yourself with a stopwatch while videoing it. Do give us an accuracy report as well.

"The mad minute" is supposed to be done on a target @ 300 yards.



Lesson #1 for you: An assault rifle is a select-fire weapon, and requires a class III tax stamp.

After you learn that one, we'll move on to other things.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



Got it. You have nothing credible to offer.  I'm not the one that claimed all rifles were the same and equally suited for a combat attack situation like a mass shooting. Come back if you ever come up with something.


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Oh, no.  You do not get to put up a straw man and pretend I was trying to make that argument.  No sir, not at all.  I've said all along that teachers who are willing to be trained, have CC permits, and want the responsibility to be the last line of defense for the kids should be allowed to do so.  NOWHERE have I said ANYTHING about children being armed.  That is all you, not me.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...




leftards lie so it isnt surprising to see such claims made by them


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Forgive me. I must not have made myself clear. I didn't mean that you were headed toward arming children. I meant you were headed toward stupid.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Interesting that you just assume shit that you might misunderstand, and pretend it's true.


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


I wasn't headed there either.  You proposed arming the children, I did not.  Therefore, a sane observer would certainly hand you a stupid stamp long before me.  Now, I've made two statements you have ignored, so I'll make them again.  Refute them if you can.  If not, they'll stand as the defining difference between your approach to classroom security and mine.  At one point you said that you want to prevent the shooter from ever getting to the classroom.  Great, I'd love it if no teacher ever had to pull a weapon, but we know from reality that shooters do indeed gain access to classrooms.  Thus, this reality cannot be ignored.

It's very simple. I want that teacher to have whatever defensive measures he/she is comfortable with/capable of using effectively. 
Obviously, you believe that teacher should have no defensive measures beyond what YOU are comfortable with them having access to.​


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Lots of things to do short of turning Miss Carter into Dirty Harry. Limited entrance doors with a camera, metal detector, and perhaps an attendant to push  the button to let someone in the building would be a good start.  I have a few other ideas that might or might not be practical and effective, but fortunately, I'm not responsible to make the safety plan. There are experts who are well qualified to devise a security plan for the buildings where our children are taught.  It would make more sense to consult them before we pass out fire arms with those little cartons of milk.


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


And there you go again.  You just can't help leaping to the extremes, can you?  We ALL want shooters unable to access class rooms, and advocate measures making it more difficult to do so.  Minus your insane first sentence (complete with yet another straw man), you were doing fine.

Now, where you go off the rails is here:  "before we pass out fire arms with those little cartons of milk".  No one can take you seriously when you say stupid stuff like that.  No one, and I mean no one, has advocated any such thing, yet you continue to act as if they have.  I certainly have not, and you have yet to even address what I've said, which is to allow qualified teachers to carry if they want the responsibility.  Nowhere have I even advocated we supply the weapons.  Instead, you substitute a straw man, then proceed to pummel it and think you're making a point.  You are not.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Are you sure about that?  I listen to Hannity and Tucker Carlson, and a few other fox idiots a good bit, and that seems to work quite well for all of them.


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Are they your gold standard?  They're not mine.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



They are the Trumpbot standard.


----------



## hadit (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And yours as well, as you cited them approvingly.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 26, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Just because I am aware of their tactics doesn't mean I approve of their actions


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 26, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...




fuck you  leftards falsely claim that 2nd Amendment supporters want to arm the children


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And I gave you info from the actual manufacturers of both the Mini 14 and the Colt Ar 15

Now tell me do you think that any school shooter only fires one round every 1.33 seconds?

Saying that the AR is more dangerous because it has an "effective rate of fire" of 5 rounds per minute which is more than any other semiauto because none of them can fire as fast just once again highlights your ignorance about the subject of firearms


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Are you really trying to say that shooting an Ar 15 at 46 rounds per minute will cause the barrel to melt down?

Now I know you are either trying to be stupid or are just plain stupid

I'm leaning towards the latter.

In 30 + years of shooting rifles I have never seen any rifle melt a barrel because of firing too fast.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


SO again do you really think in combat soldiers only shoot one round every 1.33 seconds?


----------



## hadit (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



So now we're backtracking to where I was pointing out why you can't be taken seriously.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 27, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...


*
once again highlights your ignorance about the subject of firearms*

it is on purpose


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Tissue?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



My entire point from the first of this discussion is that all guns are not the same. Some are more capable of extended combat like fire than others. The Ar15 is more suited for that than most. I have proven that.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



As I have said many times, It is more capable of combat type firing than most. You can nibble around the edges and say "but what if" all you want, but you can't change that fact.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



I guess that's your choice to make.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


It is a meaningless distinction in the discussion

No commercially available semiautomatic is going to melt down in a school shooting.

You have to fire thousands of rounds very quickly to get a barrel that hot

Thousands not 50 or 60 or 100 thousands

So for all practical purposes there is no difference between the AR 15 , the Mini 14 or any other .223 semiauto rifle on the market today


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



It's a distinction without a difference.  And since you have no experience with these type of rifles you can't understand that


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



This gun:



Has killed more people than this gun:







I imagine you just wet yourself.


----------



## hadit (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Actually, it's yours, as how you are perceived has everything to do with what you write. Insist on leaping to extremes on every subject to avoid substantive discussion and hurling juvenile insults, and you're not taken seriously.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 27, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



fuck you liar


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




Meaningless? It's one of the top gun nuts claims.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Not real sure how you would have any idea of what experience I might have in anything.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



So all guns aren't the same after all. Glad you finally admit that.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 27, 2018)

jon_berzerk said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



OK, but you need to wipe that  nasty ass  of yours first.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 27, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> [
> Will teachers be cowards too?



Some, others will be brave.

You however, will always be a pile of shit.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 27, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Louder Crowder is an annoying loon - no surprise you would post his excrement.




What the fuck would you know about facts, commie bastard?

Another Stalinist who thinks genocide is a scientific principle to be furthered....


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




cant face the truth you leftists lie about the NRA wanting to arm the children 

so no matter what you say fuck you


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



That the barrel won't melt down?

Cut the shit


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Your posts tell me all I need to know.

You didn't know that the single most important defining attribute of a semiautomatic firearm is that it only fires one round per trigger pull


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



There is no functional difference between any semiautomatic rifle chambered in the same caliber

NONE ZERO ZIP NADA


----------



## DrLove (Feb 28, 2018)

Uncensored2008 said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > Louder Crowder is an annoying loon - no surprise you would post his excrement.
> ...



Nothing gives me a bigger smile than when you PUTIN enablers call those on the left commies and then Stalinists in the space of two short sentences.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



That all guns are exactly the same.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Link?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


I never said all guns are exactly the same obviously there are differences in caliber, is the firing mechanics and in materials

I said that there is no FUNCTIONAL difference between any semiautomatic rifle of the same caliber as all fire the same round at the same rate and with comparable accuracy


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


So now you deny questioning the FACT that ALL semiautomatics fire only one round per trigger pull?

You said that semiautos advertise different rates of fire but you haven't posted any of those advertisements have you?


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



Only in your mind dumb ass. You spouted that several times as if you thought it could prove your point. Now go away. ou were wrong. All guns are not exactly the same.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The largest market for guns is either self defense or hunting.  In both cases, being designed to kill is desirable.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



That was kinda my point.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


So I was wrong to say that a semiauto


BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



All right no quote where I said that.

I sad all semiautomatics of the same caliber perform  the same

They all fire the same round at about the same velocity at the same rate of one round er trigger pull 

You deny that a semiauto fires one round er trigger pull you don't post anything that proves that do you ?


----------



## Crixus (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Not really. Go back and read. You said the only thing an AR 15 can do is kill people. Fine, they was the idea when Eugene Stoner designed it. What you Fail to recognize is that ever since the us has been a country civilians typically used the exact same gun. For excample, the tommy gun not to mention the old bolt action Springfield’s, the M1 Garand the M1A (M15) the Krag Jurgenson the trap door Springfield conversion, not to mention a shit ton of hand guns and so on. You kind of changed what your implication was it seems which is that the AR15 is only a people killer.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



You're adding words to my remarks. I said killing is the reason that gun was designed. Misrepresenting my words is the same as lying. Quit it.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And neither is a bad thing.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 28, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Nothing gives me a bigger smile than when you PUTIN enablers call those on the left commies and then Stalinists in the space of two short sentences.



Good point. It was really shameful the way we colluded with the Kremlin in cooking up that Dossier in an attempt to rig the election, the way we rigged our primary. Then the way we used the DOJ and the FBI to commit treason by spying on the opposition campaign.  Then the way we were so arrogant that we didn't even cover our tracks, so certain were we that the fix was in and it was "in the bag."

You Stalinists sure are smart....


----------



## Crixus (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Wasn’t trying to put words In your mouth. My bad, that shit is worse then lying.Point is, guns are obviously used solely for killing. And from the fist gun ever made to what we have now, every single gun ever made was designed to kill other people. 


EVEN the AR15. But it is no more deadly then a Remington 700 in any caliber. It just ain’t.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

Crixus said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Any gun will kill. Some are just more suited to killing as many as possible in as short a time as possible than others. Our military decided that the AR15/M16 format was the most effective for that. I trust their judgement.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



It also depends on the shooter.  A larger caliber will do the same things, only better.  But the weapons are heavier and have more recoil.

Our military also takes manufacturing capabilities into account.  And the insisted on it being manufactured in the US.   When the M14 was adopted, a specific US Army officer fought hard to get it adopted.  Despite the fact that the FL-LAR was found to be a better, more suitable rifle by those doing the testing.

You seem to be under the impression that since the military selected the M16, that the AR is far more capable of killing.  That is not true.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Lie....the AR-15 is not a military weapon.....keep lying, we will keep correcting you....the AR-15 is a semi automatic, civilian and police rifle.....it was not a military weapon and has not been used in a war.....

The same is not true of these weapons...

The 6 shot revolver.....war weapon.

Lever action rifle....war weapon.

Bolt action rifle, current weapon of war.

Pump action shotgun....current weapon of war.

AR-15.....civiliain and police rifle, not a weapon of war.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Th AR15 was designed for the military, and slightly modified for civilian sales. As a gun nut, you should know that.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




And yet the AR-15 is not a military weapon and has never been used in war.......every time you say the opposite you are lying.....the truth stands...the AR-15 is a civilian and police rifle, used for self defense, hunting, competition and collecting.....the 6 shot revolver was an actual war weapon.......and yes, you want to ban that too....


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Armalite designated their new version of the Stoner design as the AR-15.   It was a selective fire rifle, as the military specifications required.  Armalite then sold the design to Colt, who produced the semi-auto version and designated it the AR-15.   The two rifles are different enough to not be the same gun.   The simple difference of one being capable of full auto fire, and the other is not, is difference enough.

The AR-15 being discussed is NOT capable of full-auto.  That was a basic requirement of the military.  So the AR-15, in this context, has never been used in a war.


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 28, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




Thank you.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



There is more that makes that platform better suited for combat than auto fire. An M16 used in semi mode still a military assault weapon, and essentially identical to an AR15.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



But the fact that the M16 CAN fire full auto makes it a different rifle.  Period.  When Eugene Stoner designed the rifle for military use, it was designed as a selective fire rifle.  Producing one, even if identical in every other way, that is only capable of semi-auto fire makes it a different rifle.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 28, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



And no Stoner designed rifle that is not capable of full auto has ever been used by our military in a war.  None.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Is a M16 less of a weapon in semi mode? Only an idiot would only use auto mode and run out of ammo that quickly.


----------



## BULLDOG (Feb 28, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Again, Is a M16 less of a weapon in semi mode?


----------



## Crixus (Mar 1, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Mmm, Don’t know about that. Maybe not as a typical issue type weapon, but even now, sniper platforms are not suited to full auto and many sniper rifles are built semi auto. Maybe not back in the day but to be honest, an AR15 is not but an M16, just without a giggle switch. All the same parts just one more click foward. Hair splitting aside, It don’t matter. Hell, had Cruze had full auto he would probably have killed less people


----------



## hadit (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Yet you don't ever define what it is about that format that the military favors.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Why don't you ask them? They chose it as the goto military weapon. I trust their judgement.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


No they decided that in the trade off of combat where weight, durability, and many other variables come into play that a the M 16 was the best compromise  for the rifle soldiers would carry into battle

No one and I mean no one thinks that an M 16 is a better killing weapon than the M2.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



An M16 is specifically a selective fire rifle.  The US military has never used a semi-auto version in war.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



If you don't think a mass shooting is combat, you're nuts.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


It's not combat when no one is firing back at you


----------



## Crixus (Mar 1, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...




Yeah, it’s just the Illuminati who forces the US military to use the substandard puny mouse gun. But you are right. No one THINKS it is, they KNOW it will kill as fast as whatever an “M2” is, just not at two miles away . Apples and pumpkin comparison. But you do bring up a good point. .50 BMG is a good killing round and many civilians own and shoot them. Wonder why no one has shot up a school with one yet?


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Come on. You really think the M16 is ONLY used in full auto mode? That would be just nuts. The military emphasizes good management of ammo. Wouldn't do much good to run out of ammo in the first minute or two.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 1, 2018)

Crixus said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The M 16 will kill as fast as the M2

Dismissed


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I don't think full auto is good for much of anything except cover fire.   But that is not the point.   If I buy an old GTO with a big V8, I can drive it slowly and get decent gas mileage.  That does not make it a Prius.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



True. Has nothing to do with this, but I like those old cars too.

M16 in semi mode = military grade combat weapon
AR15 = M16in semi mode
therefore
AR15 = military grade combat weapon.  

The bigger question is whether all rifles are the same. They are not.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



An M16 is capable of full auto fire.  That is a fundamental part of its design.  Anything that cannot fire full auto is not an M16, no matter how similar they are.  The US Military has never carried an AR into war.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Your comparison of the M16 and the AR15 is not the point?  Cool.

No, all rifles are not the same.   I don't think anyone has said that they are.  In fact, you are the one trying to argue that an M16 and an AR are the same.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



You are certainly allowed to have your opinion, but

*Is the AR-15 a ‘Weapon of War’?*
Is the AR-15 a ‘Weapon of War’?
Most of the time, the distinction is of little practical importance: these semiautomatic rifles are ubiquitous, widely available for sale in gun shops across much of America. But on Tuesday, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, came down squarely one side of this debate, with big implications for how states regulate assault weapons. In a 10-4 decision, the federal court upheld Maryland’s 2013 assault weapons ban, finding that guns like the AR-15 are weapons of war, and thus American civilians don’t have an unfettered right to buy and own them under the Second Amendment.


----------



## hadit (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You've been saying they chose it because it was the best at killing the most people, but you really don't know why they chose it, do you?


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

hadit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



I know lots of reasons why they did. The fact that they did is all that matters. If you disagree with their choice, I suggest you contact them.


----------



## DrLove (Mar 1, 2018)

Uncensored2008 said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing gives me a bigger smile than when you PUTIN enablers call those on the left commies and then Stalinists in the space of two short sentences.
> ...



Uncensored and 2aguy dine in a Parallel Universe


----------



## 2aguy (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




And your argument changes now that you have been called out by a fairly neutral party...WinterBorn......now full auto mode is not that important when it was the feature you lied about to say the AR-15 was an "Assault Weapon."


----------



## 2aguy (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




All Semi Auto weapons function the same way as the AR-15 which is why you are so desperate to establish the precedent of banning AR-15s.....if you can ban the AR-15 for how it fires......there is no argument against banning all other semi auto weapons.....your dream come true...........

And yet the Supreme Court protects these weapons with decision after decision........and you guys ignore them every single time...


----------



## 2aguy (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




As Winterborn pointed out....several times...the AR-15 is not a military weapon, has never been used by the military........

it is not a weapon of war.....

6 shot revolvers are weapons of war, and were used, you will one day say...in the genocide of native Americans

lever action rifles are weapons of war, and were used, you will one day say, in the genocide of native Americans

muzzle loading rifles were weapons of war.

Bolt action rifles are current weapons of war.

pump action shot guns are weapons of war......

The AR-15 is not a weapon of war...


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



No. Actually I said the AR15 was slightly modified to disable the full auto capability from the first. I had already proven the M16 and AR15 were essentially the same gun, other that full auto, and that all guns are not the same. I saw no need to repeat that again.


----------



## 2aguy (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Yes......the 4th ignored every Supreme Court Precedent that came before and needs to be slapped down.......Weapons of war....are actually protected by the 2nd Amendment.....the majority on that court are clinton and obama appointees...

This is why Clayton won't address this issue.....he knows that with all of his preaching about Precedent and the courts...the left wing anti gunners are ignoring all of it...


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



If you say so. Of course, I never said they all function the same way. That is your claim. When the Supreme court over rules the federal court of appeals, and says the AR15 is constitutionally protected, you might have something. Until then, you're just flapping your jaws.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > hadit said:
> ...



Won't do you a bit of good to convince me. I have no authority. You should be trying to convince the courts.


----------



## DrLove (Mar 1, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Well Dale - the day has come. Just Googled John Kelly and it's touch and go, but he made it past midnight  So I'm out for two weeks my friend as we compromised. Thanks for being a gentleman and see y'all on the 15th.

Assuming of course, Trump doesn't have us into an international incident of some sort and gets trigger happy  After all, with Hope gone and Little Jared on the sidelines, he's liable to blow his top. And if Kelly goes (with my luck today or tomorrow ;-) LOOK OUT.

Now - it would appear that JK is warring with Ivanka .. pissed of course that he kneecapped the hubby - But that's not all - and wait, there's MORE! .....

White House chief of staff John Kelly is growing increasingly frustrated with Ivanka Trump, CNN reported Tuesday.

The frustration comes on the heels of the first daughter's part diplomatic, part ceremonial trip to South Korea, where she met with South Korean President Moon Jae In and led the US delegation into Sunday's closing ceremony marking the end of the 2018 Winter Olympics.

In private conversations with other White House officials, Kelly has reportedly criticized Ivanka's shifting roles of presidential adviser and first daughter, and accused her of "playing government" when it suits her, per the CNN report.

Kelly was also reportedly one of a number of senior officials who felt uncomfortable with the decision to send Ivanka to South Korea, suggesting that Ivanka's presence trivialized the tension between the US and North Korea.​


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



That's nice. I'm glad you understand.


----------



## Dale Smith (Mar 1, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...



It is your decision being that I wasn't interested in "collecting" as it were..... and no one could give you any flack about it. You can change your mind any time you wish. Good on ya.


----------



## DrLove (Mar 1, 2018)

Dale Smith said:


> DrLove said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



I'm cheating a bit this morning due to that delicious post about "red lights for gun free zones" by Owl - out shortly!


----------



## 2aguy (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




They already did, it was Called Heller.....and Caetano, and Miller......


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



I am a "fairly neutral party"?    I think that may be one of the best compliments I have received on this forum.   Well, except for one time someone told me I was cute.  That was a great compliment.  At least until I found out it was a guy.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You should tell that court of appeals. I don't think they know that.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



So your goal, or what you want to see is an outright ban on the AR15?  No civilians can buy or own one?


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



I never said that, and it wasn't my intention at the beginning of the previous conversation. I was just calling bullshit on the claim that all semi auto guns are exactly the same.  I do believe there should be more regulation on who can buy that particular gun, as well as all guns. Maybe even more for the AR15.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



I should have been more explicit. I was in Ft Benning in 1964 when the AR-15 was brought for demonstration. It was a fully automatic rifle with a selector switch. It had a muzzle velocity of over 4800 FPS.  The Special Forces had them in Vietnam. The SF had complained  the bolt would not fully seat after it got hot from long periods of firing and carbon buildup. Also in thick jungle and bushes the bullets would not penetrate the foliage without disintegrating into small pieces (because of the high muzzle velocity and was deemed not suitable for jungle operations. The Army said they needed one with less muzzle velocity and something to seat the bolt. The AR 15 was designed for  for military combat use only and civilians couldn't buy one.  When the modifications were made the AR-15 had the MV reduced and automatic capability disabled and *then and only then* could a civilian buy them. When modifications were made the Army bought the design and re-designated it as M-16. That's the story of the progression and there is no other explanation. 
 The M-16 had one more fatal flaw that caused the Marines to distrust and hate it but as usual the Army infantrymen fixed the problem and all was OK from then on. But that's a story for another time. 

One more thing about auto fire. It's futile to outlaw the bump stock because I or any other knowledgeable person can make the AR15 fully automatic in less than 30 minutes.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



They are easily converted.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



No no Bullfrog has told us that the AR 15 can fire 45 rounds per minute and that if you did that with any other commercially available .223 the barrel would melt so that's why the AR 15 is the most dangerous rifle ever


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Yeah so easily that it's done all the time and every criminal has a fully auto AR 15



oh wait no they don't


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 1, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Who was it who claimed the AR could fire 800 rounds a minute?  That was one huge laugh in these recent threads.


----------



## hunarcy (Mar 1, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Then Bullfrog needs to be on ignore with the other ignorant trolls.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Mar 1, 2018)

hunarcy said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...




willful ignorance that is


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Here's an AR15 doing 600 rpm with a bump stock. The gun is capable of exactly the same as an M16. 750 to 900.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

Skull Pilot said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Not surprising that you would misrepresent what I said. You are a gun nut after all.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



That is a flat out lie, as you well know.


----------



## thanatos144 (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Dummy a M-16 has full auto capabilities a AR-15 does not. You really think the way it looks makes a difference dont you? LMAO


----------



## Crixus (Mar 1, 2018)

Samantics. Pointless arguments all. Just remember, when Trump signed off on Clinton crime bill 2.0 and does amnesty I’ll have a shit ton of 30 round mags at only a slightly inflated price.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 1, 2018)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



My post #496 should have cleared it up for Bulldog.


----------



## 2aguy (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




Boy...you really are stupid...one magazine...and then you multiplied......it won't fire 600 rounds before it malfunctions...moron, so it won't fire 600 rounds per minute...you are such a doofus...

With 30 round magazines, it would require 20 magazine changes to do 600 rounds......at 2-3 seconds a change you are not even getting close to the 600 rounds in an actual, real world setting....if you can even do it in a controlled environment.....you are such a doofus....


----------



## Crixus (Mar 1, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Sadly, I’m thinking it don’t matter. Hopefully voters get it. I hope they do.


----------



## thanatos144 (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Wow how fast is a finger that can shoot ten rounds per second 60 times in a row? LMAO I am sure he would be a ladies man to no end.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Mar 1, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...



You really are dumb as a fucking brick.


----------



## Crixus (Mar 1, 2018)

thanatos144 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Only if he could do it with his tongue.


----------



## Muhammed (Mar 1, 2018)

How many guys are going to try to rape a girl who is carrying an AR-15?


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

WinterBorn said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You'll note that the claim of 900rpm is accredited to the bump stock only. The firing mechanism has not been changed in any way. The gun is capable of that rate of fire from the factory.
http://www.slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/why-not-arm-all-teachers.html


----------



## thanatos144 (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...


Amazing seeing as the picture is showing a rifle without a fucking bump stock on it.... Are you really that gullible?


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 1, 2018)

Muhammed said:


> How many guys are going to try to rape a girl who is carrying an AR-15?


Probably none.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 1, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> > How many guys are going to try to rape a girl who is carrying an AR-15?
> ...



Especially if she's in the IDF.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 1, 2018)

2aguy said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Yes.That's how rate of fire works.


----------



## hadit (Mar 1, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



What reasons?


----------



## Dale Smith (Mar 2, 2018)

DrLove said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > DrLove said:
> ...



I am just saying that your exile is self-imposed because I wiped the ledger clean and only I could do that....no one else can give you any shit....the deal was between us.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 2, 2018)

hunarcy said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


And miss out on the constant source of entertainment?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 2, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



No misrepresentation at all you have been harping on the 45 rounds a minute and melting gun barrels 

You even deny that ALL semiautos fire one round per trigger pull


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 2, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


 only on paper

it would be impossible to fire any rifle 600 times a minute in the real world

but you have never shot a semiautomatic rifle so you wouldn't know that


----------



## mudwhistle (Mar 2, 2018)

BULLDOG said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


The military wanted a full auto weapon which was later changed to 3 round bursts to save ammo. The M-16A1 was full auto. The M-16A2 had a different hand grip and used to be full-auto but was changed to only fire 3 round bursts or single round semi-auto.


----------



## Geaux4it (Mar 2, 2018)

Hossfly said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



I used to drag around the M-16 and it was a jamamatic with the slightest grain of sand on the bolt. Gunny used to say all you now son is a 7.5 pound club

-Geaux


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Mar 6, 2018)

I could have sworn there was a gun forum here but don't see it now. If its right under my nose and I missed it, my apologies, and if mods want to move this fine. 

In the wake of the horrendous accusations made against the  Florida shooting survivors, that they're crisis actors and how that conspiracy started. Also been reading about Sandy Hook, particularly about Emilie Parker's death and the proven lies that she's still alive. 

Anyway - about AR15s - Its obvious that they have only one purpose. Imagine being the parent or family member of AR15 murders. 

Why the AR-15 Is So Lethal

Nearly a century before American troops were ordered into Vietnam, weapons designers had made a discovery in the science of “wound ballistics.” The discovery was that a small, fast-traveling bullet often did a great deal more damage than a larger round when fired into human or (for the experiments) animal flesh [Google dogs, goats, pigs, hung in slings and shot at.] . A large artillery round might pass straight through a human body, but a small bullet could act like a gouge. During the early stages of the congressional hearing, [Representative Richard] Ichord asked Eugene Stoner, the designer of the original version of the M-16, to explain the apparent paradox of a small bullet’s destructive power. The answer emerged in the following grisly exchange.

“ICHORD: One army boy told me that he had shot a Vietcong near the eye with an M-14 [which uses a substantially heavier bullet] and the bullet did not make too large a hole on exit, but he shot a Vietcong under similar circumstances in the same place with an M-16 and his whole head was reduced to pulp. This would not appear to make sense. You have greater velocity but the bullet is lighter.”

“STONER: There is the advantage that a small or light bullet has over a heavy one when it comes to wound ballistics. … What it amounts to is the fact that bullets are stabilized to fly through the air, and not through water, or a body, which is approximately the same density as the water. And they are stable as long as they are in the air. When they hit something, they immediately go unstable. … If you are talking about .30-caliber [like a bullet used in the Army’s previous M-14], this might remain stable through a human body. … While a little bullet, being it has a low mass, it senses an instability situation faster and reacts much faster. … this is what makes a little bullet pay off so much in wound ballistics.”

AND
What I Saw Treating the Victims From Parkland Should Change the Debate on Guns

In a typical handgun injury, which I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ such as the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, gray bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the mass-shooting victims from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, and was bleeding extensively. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The reaction in the emergency room was the same. One of the trauma surgeons opened a young victim in the operating room, and found only shreds of the organ that had been hit by a bullet from an AR-15, a semiautomatic rifle that delivers a devastatingly lethal, high-velocity bullet to the victim. Nothing was left to repair—and utterly, devastatingly, nothing could be done to fix the problem. The injury was fatal.

A year ago, when a gunman opened fire at the Fort Lauderdale airport with a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun, hitting 11 people in 90 seconds, I was also on call. It was not until I had diagnosed the third of the six victims who were transported to the trauma center that I realized something out of the ordinary must have happened. The gunshot wounds were the same low-velocity handgun injuries that I diagnose every day; only their rapid succession set them apart. And all six of the victims who arrived at the hospital that day survived.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Mar 6, 2018)

Luddly Neddite said:


> I could have sworn there was a gun forum here but don't see it now. If its right under my nose and I missed it, my apologies, and if mods want to move this fine.
> 
> In the wake of the horrendous accusations made against the  Florida shooting survivors, that they're crisis actors and how that conspiracy started. Also been reading about Sandy Hook, particularly about Emilie Parker's death and the proven lies that she's still alive.
> 
> ...





Luddly Neddite said:


> Anyway - about AR15s - Its obvious that they have only one purpose.



Really?

and what purpose is that?


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Mar 6, 2018)

My husband has two...neither of them has killed anyone, they have however helped him bond with his children, rid our area of a few coyotes and really other than that they are well behaved AR 15s.


----------



## flacaltenn (Mar 6, 2018)

bump to find it in the listings.


----------



## defcon4 (Mar 6, 2018)

Luddly Neddite said:


> I could have sworn there was a gun forum here but don't see it now. If its right under my nose and I missed it, my apologies, and if mods want to move this fine.
> 
> In the wake of the horrendous accusations made against the  Florida shooting survivors, that they're crisis actors and how that conspiracy started. Also been reading about Sandy Hook, particularly about Emilie Parker's death and the proven lies that she's still alive.
> 
> ...


Not lethal enough, moron. That's why the U.S. military is developing a new cartridge with larger caliber. Don't meddle with shit you have no idea about.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Mar 6, 2018)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > I could have sworn there was a gun forum here but don't see it now. If its right under my nose and I missed it, my apologies, and if mods want to move this fine.
> ...




Read the posts.






SassyIrishLass said:


> My husband has two...neither of them has killed anyone, they have however helped him bond with his children, rid our area of a few coyotes and really other than that they are well behaved AR 15s.




So he's a lousy shot too.




flacaltenn said:


> bump to find it in the listings.




Anyone have a clue what this is about?


----------



## Hugo Furst (Mar 6, 2018)

Luddly Neddite said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...





WillHaftawaite said:


> Really?
> 
> and what purpose is that?



Can you answer the question?


----------



## 2aguy (Mar 6, 2018)

Luddly Neddite said:


> I could have sworn there was a gun forum here but don't see it now. If its right under my nose and I missed it, my apologies, and if mods want to move this fine.
> 
> In the wake of the horrendous accusations made against the  Florida shooting survivors, that they're crisis actors and how that conspiracy started. Also been reading about Sandy Hook, particularly about Emilie Parker's death and the proven lies that she's still alive.
> 
> ...




Moron....any rifle at close range is going to do more damage.....moron.......and he killed 17 people with that rifle....the Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 with 2 pistols.....


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Mar 6, 2018)

Luddly Neddite said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



What are you trolling about now, Lugnut? You really  are an annoying asshole


----------

