Gun Legislation

[mike]

Hey, Mad - a lot of ads for the Newtown/AR-15 type rifle refers to it as "tactical." Since it's only a cosmetic enhancement of the Ruger 10/22, but sells for more than twice as much - maybe three times as much - are you sure it's just because people think it has a cool look to it? And what does "tactical" in the ads mean?

It can be outfitted to kill 20 plus people.
Great marketing gimmick.

And, it looks cool.

http://blueridgedebate.com/phpBB3/viewt ... 550#p16550

The NRA adherents love this stuff ... one never knows when 30 rounds are enough necessary to fend off an intruder, or kill a coyote, or shoot a deer ...

... or a fox ...

We need MOAR!!!!

[Mad American]

Hey, Mad - a lot of ads for the Newtown/AR-15 type rifle refers to it as "tactical." Since it's only a cosmetic enhancement of the Ruger 10/22, but sells for more than twice as much - maybe three times as much - are you sure it's just because people think it has a cool look to it? And what does "tactical" in the ads mean?

The AR-15 platform is not a cosmetic enhancement of the Ruger 10/22. I used the example of the 10/22 to show that a perfectly "normal looking" 22 rifle can be made to look like a military style machine gun. However, NONE of the mechanical workings of the rifle have changed in any way and it is still just a Ruger 10/22. Yet one would be banned and one would not.

The AR-15 platform is just another model of semi-automatic modern sporting arm, just like the Browning BAR, or Remington 750. You are also correct in that the AR-15 is smaller, lighter, and accurate which are some more selling points, especially among women and for use among youth hunters. Just like the example of the 10/22, the AR is nothing more than short barreled semi-automatic sporting rifle. The mechanical workings are the same as any other semi-auto on the market. It just looks scarey to the uneducated.

[Mad American]

The NRA adherents love this stuff ... one never knows when 30 rounds are enough necessary to fend off an intruder, or kill a coyote, or shoot a deer ...

A magazine swap can be accomplished in less than one second. So tell us, what is the difference between a 30 round magazine and three 10 round magazines?

[Dryer Vent]

The NRA adherents love this stuff ... one never knows when 30 rounds are enough necessary to fend off an intruder, or kill a coyote, or shoot a deer ...

A magazine swap can be accomplished in less than one second. So tell us, what is the difference between a 30 round magazine and three 10 round magazines?

I'd like to see that. One second? Bullshit.

[Mad American]

The NRA adherents love this stuff ... one never knows when 30 rounds are enough necessary to fend off an intruder, or kill a coyote, or shoot a deer ...

A magazine swap can be accomplished in less than one second. So tell us, what is the difference between a 30 round magazine and three 10 round magazines?

I'd like to see that. One second? Bullshit.

Pay extra close attention from about the 3:50 mark on. Then I'll be accepting that apology.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C-CLsMRcA0

Or maybe here if you like handguns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X94nfgvP8Ks

Or here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAFxgQmxbGI

Is three enough or do you need more??

[Mad American]

"three 10 round clips" take longer to fire than one 30 round clip...

You obviously did not watch the posted youtube links. Perhaps you should. Firing 30 rounds from three 10 round magazine would require 2 swaps and would add about one second to the firing time. Big difference Now tell us how you are going to use that half of a second twice to save the day

Yes, you win, with a stupid, dishonest definition of "operational". The scope and tripod improve accuracy, the high capacity magazine increases rate of fire and the pistol grip offers enhanced versatility for different firing environments - obviously all of these increase operational effectiveness depending on the situation, and vastly increase it for the sub-expert. That's why people use them, because there's a tangible gain, idiot.

Otherwise, you're actually arguing that they are no different than adding daisy appliques. Now, we all know that you are that foolish but you really take the cake in thinking that you can get away with it after being busted here so many times. Even the more temperate, veteran, and armed, O Really is laughing at you.

Scopes and tripods do not improve accuracy. The rifles accuracy is based on vibration patterns in the barrel, bullet jump, bullet speed, neck tension, and a myriad of other factors but it is not a scope or tripod. A scope or a tripod can AID the shooter but has no effect on the weapon itself. I've already proven that magazine capacity is of very little consequence and a magazine swap can be accomplished in tenths of a second. A pistol grip is nothing more than a piece of plastic that allows for a different hand position when firing and does not enhance "versatility" in any way. Really, vrede you should at least know a little something about guns before attempting to argue your idiotic ideas about them.....especially with someone who is well versed in them. Your pitiful attempts to best me in the subject is becoming embarassing for you.

[Mad American]

childish pathetic insults

My you get hostile when you are being proven an idiot.

I'm no expert and I can change magazines in less than 2 seconds so again tell us how you are going to use those 2 seconds twice to save the day

Scopes are simply another sighting mechanism just like iron or peep sights. They merely AID the shooter, they do not effect the weapons accuracy. A tripod is simply a rest such as a knee or an elbow propped on a table. Again a shooters aid and no effect on the weapons accuracy. In addition both are ineffective and not needed in close range mobile situations.

Magazine swap time has already been proven. No need to rehash that.

Again, a pistol grip only offers the shooter a different hand position. It does not increase the weapons versatility. Furthernore, once mounted the pistol grip is the only grip and therefore must be used....there is no versatility?

Then why don't you shut the fuck up vrede and let o'really argue his own points? Unlike you, o'really is capable of a more civil discourse, doesn't claim to be a know it all, and is willing to learn the things that he does not know. Now run off deflect, accuse me of being a hypocrite, and show the insults I've thrown back at you. I can give as good as I get. Don't like my tone, then change yours with me. I am capable and more than willing to use a more civil tone. I'm not so sure about you.

[Mad American]

Keep yakking vrede. All you are doing is digging a deeper hole for yourself and proving yourself more and more an idiot on the subject of firearms. What you don't understand is that I have you figured out.....you have been proven a moronic ass on the subject and are now trying to bury those posts under more of your moronic ramblings. In addition you are also hoping that I will simply disengage from your insults and that this conversation will die.....aint happening this time. You want this conversation to die? This time you are going to "run away" as you so like to call it. I can sit here and play your game just as well as you can with your taunts and jeers. So how does it feel to be on the other side of your game and be proven an idiot?

The weapon's accuracy has very little variable. A world champion shooter can not make an inacurate weapon shoot accurately. I've said all along that scopes and tripods aid the shooter but have no effect on the weapon. I'm sorry that you were to stupid to realize the difference between weapon accuracy and shooter proficiency

Again vrede even a non proficient shooter can swap mags in around 2 seconds. You still haven't offered how you are going to use those 2 seconds to save the day.

Can't help but notice you are still speaking for o'really. Can't shut that big yap of yours and let him speak can you? So, you just keep digging. I'll be here all week

[Mad American]

Yes, you are more obsessed with and know more about the mechanics of guns than I do. The thing is that you are completely incapable of applying that to logical argument. Instead, you constantly spew data that has no relevance to the point being discussed.

Your lack of knowledge of guns makes your opinion on relevance irrelevant.

You're fantasizing again, stay or go, either is fine with me. What we can all see is that you disengage from the actual subject when you're floundering. For example, you spent page after page raising foolish irrelevancies when the only issue at hand was the undeniable fact that no data management is 100% perfect and citizens are indeed incapable of assisting it. Only when you made a complete fool of yourself by misunderstanding such a simple word as "catch" did you run away from the tangent entirely. Brave American.

All you had to do was answer a simple question. Again your alligator mouth overrode your jaybird ass and you were proven an idiotic moron spouting off about something that you had no knowledge of.

Wow, you're still too stupid to realize that if a so-called "cosmetic" improvement enhances "shooter proficiency" then it's not a merely "cosmetic" improvement at all. Good luck with that, it doesn't get much more illiterate and illogical.

YOU made the claim that a scope enhanced the weapons accuracy. Why are you trying to lie your way our of it now. I claimed all along that scopes and tripods gave AID to the shooter...liar

Hey, if you're really resting your case on the notion that gun nuts like you are idiots because they wasted their money on high-capacity mags that confer no benefit, who am I to argue? You know your kind better than I do.

I'm resting my case on their right to chose to spend their money on magazines if they want. Unlike liberal idiots like yourself who think that they know what is best for everyone and try to shove it down their throats

I'm not speaking for o'really (sic). It's not my problem if I can see that his several posts about your "cosmetic" wingnuttery are laughing at you and you can't. We're used to you not being able to admit the truth even to yourself.

Your fantasy meter just ticked up again. O'really's last post was a legitimate question that I answered and explained. I haven't heard back from him since. Unlike you who just keeps running that mouth

We can all see what this rant of yours is really about. You posted several total lies about what I've posted, got caught, and just aren't man enough to take responsibility and never have been. That's why you need your compensatory guns, deep down you know how weak you are. No wonder you fancy yourself the victor - you can't understand what I do post, so you lie about it and then "defeat" that figment of your imagination.

Keep dreaming vrede.....we can all see what your little rant is about too. You have been proven time and again an uneducated idiotic moron when it comes to guns. That is why you post incessantly, deep down you know you are an idiot and feel if you bloviate enough then you can impress those who don't know any better. Your problem is those of us who see you as you really are. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still just a pig!

[Mad American]

(long wimpy dodge, as usual)

The clueless one is you vrede. You have had your pansy ass handed to you on a silver platter in regard to guns and gun knowledge. Keep digging though the entertainment is priceless.

Glad to see you finally admit that a gun is an inanimate object and is incapable of doing anything without a PERSON operating it. Gonna throw a wrench in the "guns are bad, must be banned" liberal argument now aint it? Still don't change the fact that you are so firearms ignorant you don't know the difference between accuracy and proficiency.

Love how you call allowing people to be free to choose a "wussy dodge". Says tons about your mindset in regard to freedom.

Your assumptions regarding me are incorrect and make you out to be a paranoid liar. While I do have a CCP I rarely carry and only in specific circumstances.

Still can't just shut your cum dumpster and let O'really speak for himself can you. Just gotta keep on. Thats OK.....I'm enjoying watching you implode. Please continue.

[Mad American]

The clueless one is you vrede. You have had your pansy ass handed to you on a silver platter in regard to guns and gun knowledge. Keep digging though the entertainment is priceless.

That is your fantasy based on your repeated, foolish and irrelevant diversions, plus your lies about what I've actually posted.

Nope...it is based in your dumbass replies where you thought you knew what you were talking about. Nice try though.

Glad to see you finally admit that a gun is an inanimate object and is incapable of doing anything without a PERSON operating it.

Another lie, I've never said otherwise.

Gonna throw a wrench in the "guns are bad, must be banned" liberal argument now aint it?

Another lie, banning guns is not being proposed and I've never argued for it

Might want to look up Feinsteins idea there numbnuts. You claim I'm lying and do not even no about that??? Yep you are reaching

Still don't change the fact that you are so firearms ignorant you don't know the difference between accuracy and proficiency.

Yes, you keep trying that stupid and dishonest diversion. The issue at hand is your goofy lie that modifications that improve either are merely "cosmetic".

You can keep trying to sell that bullshit but aint gonna fly. You stuck your foot in you big assed mouth when you proved you didn't know the difference.

Love how you call allowing people to be free to choose a "wussy dodge". Says tons about your mindset in regard to freedom.

Another lie, I just called your diversion about freedom what it was, you running away from the point that people get high capacity magazines for a tangible reason.

Yes, that tangible reason being because they WANT to and because they CAN. I could care less if they do or don't. However, I am not going to attempt to mandate whether they can or can't. It is called freedom and liberal fools like you can't stand it.

Your assumptions regarding me are incorrect and make you out to be a paranoid liar. While I do have a CCP I rarely carry and only in specific circumstances.

If true, but we know how dishonest you are, then you are not nascarfan88 and you are not quite the complete wimp he is. Again, if true, sorry.

See how easy that is? You should try it sometime with your proven fallacies.

Apology accepted but you should really seek therapy for your obsession

Still can't just shut your cum dumpster

Childish vulgarity, as usual.

Whats the matter striking to close to home?

and let O'really speak for himself can you.

Another lie, I posted his words verbatim. We can all see that you can't understand or don't have the spine to admit that he, a gun proficient veteran, has made the exact same points I've been making and that you say are ignorant because I'm not as aroused by guns as you are. He's just more more gentle about it.

I'll answer o'really's questions when they are posed by o'really. Until then you are trying to hide your own ignorance behind him, and again at least he can engage in civil debate. Something that you have proven time and again unable to do.
Just gotta keep on. Thats OK.....I'm enjoying watching you implode.

You have a rich fantasy life.

Keep dreaming! However, plese keep trying to convince yourself otherwise by posting the entertainment value grows with each post

Please continue.

Childish vulgarity, as usual.

4 new lies, plus the predicted running away from all the prior ones.

With such cowardly irresponsibility you make a better case for controlling the gun freaks like you than I could ever hope to.

Oh...ouch....the pain how many more times you gonna trot out that tired old line? With such ignorance you make a better case for abortion AND mandatory sterilization than any libtard could.

[Wneglia]

"Cosmetic"? Cosmetic might be a black synthetic stock instead of a wooden one. But changing operational aspects of a weapon can also change the way it is used, and subsequently the purpose(s) for which it is used. Take a generic 12 gauge shotgun, for example. It's fired from the shoulder, and can be used for sporting clays. Make a "cosmetic" change and replace the standard stock with a pistol grip to make a "cruiser" and you've got an entirely different weapon. Different way to fire it, different purposes to use it, easier to carry in a car or under your coat. Really good for clearing out a room; worthless for sporting clays.

Link
Hitting 6 out of 7 clays on the first time out with a pistol grip shotgun isn't exactly worthless. I haven't taken my Benelli M2 tactical pistol grip to the skeet shooting range yet, but I hope I do as well.

[Mad American]

Can't forget the ol' trusty basic Remington 1100 either:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGuL-p7zz3g

[O Really]

"Cosmetic"? Cosmetic might be a black synthetic stock instead of a wooden one. But changing operational aspects of a weapon can also change the way it is used, and subsequently the purpose(s) for which it is used. Take a generic 12 gauge shotgun, for example. It's fired from the shoulder, and can be used for sporting clays. Make a "cosmetic" change and replace the standard stock with a pistol grip to make a "cruiser" and you've got an entirely different weapon. Different way to fire it, different purposes to use it, easier to carry in a car or under your coat. Really good for clearing out a room; worthless for sporting clays.

Link
Hitting 6 out of 7 clays on the first time out with a pistol grip shotgun isn't exactly worthless. I haven't taken my Benelli M2 tactical pistol grip to the skeet shooting range yet, but I hope I do as well.

Umm, Doc - it had a pistol grip, but it was still shoulder fired. I was referring to a "cruiser."

[Wneglia]

"Cosmetic"? Cosmetic might be a black synthetic stock instead of a wooden one. But changing operational aspects of a weapon can also change the way it is used, and subsequently the purpose(s) for which it is used. Take a generic 12 gauge shotgun, for example. It's fired from the shoulder, and can be used for sporting clays. Make a "cosmetic" change and replace the standard stock with a pistol grip to make a "cruiser" and you've got an entirely different weapon. Different way to fire it, different purposes to use it, easier to carry in a car or under your coat. Really good for clearing out a room; worthless for sporting clays.

Link
Hitting 6 out of 7 clays on the first time out with a pistol grip shotgun isn't exactly worthless. I haven't taken my Benelli M2 tactical pistol grip to the skeet shooting range yet, but I hope I do as well.

Umm, Doc - it had a pistol grip, but it was still shoulder fired. I was referring to a "cruiser."

The Mossberg .410 cruiser supposedly is good for sporting clays, but I wouldn't know.

[O Really]

"Cosmetic"? Cosmetic might be a black synthetic stock instead of a wooden one. But changing operational aspects of a weapon can also change the way it is used, and subsequently the purpose(s) for which it is used. Take a generic 12 gauge shotgun, for example. It's fired from the shoulder, and can be used for sporting clays. Make a "cosmetic" change and replace the standard stock with a pistol grip to make a "cruiser" and you've got an entirely different weapon. Different way to fire it, different purposes to use it, easier to carry in a car or under your coat. Really good for clearing out a room; worthless for sporting clays.

Link
Hitting 6 out of 7 clays on the first time out with a pistol grip shotgun isn't exactly worthless. I haven't taken my Benelli M2 tactical pistol grip to the skeet shooting range yet, but I hope I do as well.

Umm, Doc - it had a pistol grip, but it was still shoulder fired. I was referring to a "cruiser."

The Mossberg .410 cruiser supposedly is good for sporting clays, but I wouldn't know.

Depends on what you mean by "good for." A .410 is inherently more difficult to hit clays with, and a cruiser more difficult still. It's because you have no shoulder pivot point with the cruiser, and generally can't aim from a shoulder perspective. Cruisers are generally fired from the waist or chest-level. Sure, you can shoot clays with them, but my original point was that if you change the "cosmetics" of a weapon, you can change its usefulness as well as ease of use or lack thereof.

[rstrong]

The Mossberg .410 cruiser supposedly is good for sporting clays, but I wouldn't know.

So is an Aegis missile cruiser, especially with larger clays and at longer range.

[O Really]

I can relate to the "cosmetic" differences in the Ruger 10/22 and the Newtown type AR-15. It occurred to me that a Ping G-25 driver http://www.ping.com/clubs/drivers.aspx has only "cosmetic" differences from the wooden clubs from 1900. There's really no functional difference in the current NFL helmet and leather helmets. It looks also like only "cosmetic" changes have been made in the Gen-6 NASCAR vehicle and the original Hudson Hornets run back in 1950 or so. They're both gasoline engined, four-wheeled, front-wheel drive vehicles, yes? No significant differences in TV's either, as far as I can tell. Just cosmetics in the shape, definition, and electronics, but it still just plays a sound and picture off the air or cable, just like in 1955. So sure - if I'm choosing a weapon to use in a Newtown attack, I could take along the Ruger 10/22 or the cosmetically enhanced AR-15, which happens to be lighter, smaller, more accurate, easier to conceal, and - as a bonus - looks "scary" to those I'll be attacking.

[rstrong]

Doonesbury has some perspective: (Link)

[O Really]

I can relate to the "cosmetic" differences in the Ruger 10/22 and the Newtown type AR-15. It occurred to me that a Ping G-25 driver http://www.ping.com/clubs/drivers.aspx has only "cosmetic" differences from the wooden clubs from 1900. There's really no functional difference in the current NFL helmet and leather helmets. It looks also like only "cosmetic" changes have been made in the Gen-6 NASCAR vehicle and the original Hudson Hornets run back in 1950 or so. They're both gasoline engined, four-wheeled, front-wheel drive vehicles, yes? No significant differences in TV's either, as far as I can tell. Just cosmetics in the shape, definition, and electronics, but it still just plays a sound and picture off the air or cable, just like in 1955. So sure - if I'm choosing a weapon to use in a Newtown attack, I could take along the Ruger 10/22 or the cosmetically enhanced AR-15, which happens to be lighter, smaller, more accurate, easier to conceal, and - as a bonus - looks "scary" to those I'll be attacking.

Opps. Too late to edit. Of course the NASCAR cars and the Hornets are rear wheel drive. Go ahead and ridicule and get it over with.