@ShawnOL said:
You can't control an armed population. Every communist (and socialist) government has disarmed their people. Followed by oppression and often genocide. Disarm, remove freedoms, jail or kill dissidents.
All's I know is Paul Revere rode to warn the militias that the Redcoats were coming to confiscate their assault muskets.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
@Trykflyr_1 said:
1000 rounds in about 10 minutes. Certainly possible. Sounds like a lot, but really isn’t. The guy would need 34 30-round mags and be changing them every 20 seconds or so. 1.6 rounds a second or thereabouts, so figure 2 shots each second. Barrel’s gonna get toasty but it’s not gonna be glowing. Anyone with a modicum of skill can do that. Given a large enough magazine, that can be done with a plain Jane bolt action. Accuracy obviously wasn’t the goal in this case.
I’ve shot with guys who routinely hit 5 steel plates with 5 shots in less than 5 seconds, including the time it takes to draw from the holster. I’m no where near that fast, but I’ll average around 10 seconds for the same course of fire using my everyday carry 1911. Assault weapon? Not remotely. Practice.
Actually that is very fast, almost makes me think there was more than one shooter. He had multiple ARs fitted with bump stocks. they are such pieces of crap he was set up to throw down the jammed one and pick up another. Even without jamming that is fast shooting.
Also he was pointing into a crowd and firing. Any Vet knows that sustained fire with a M or AR platform riffe makes the gun extremely hot. The other reason for multiple rifles.
The more I think about it, the more I begin to think there might have been more than one shooter. And no I do not wear a tinfoil hat. I just know a bit about the AR platform
Post edited by Diver43 on
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
^^^ I’ll agree with that. I’m thinking multiple rifles at least, possibly another shooter who offed the first guy as a distraction. Those platforms get hot, no doubt; the rate of fire I posted is just an average for illustration purposes on how it’d be possible to go thru 1000 rounds in 10 mins. You gotta figure at least a couple jams in there. I’ve tossed a few thousand downrange with M & AR platforms as well. Gimme bolt or lever guns for reliability any day.
I'm still troubled by what I did for that Klondike bar...
The point never made is any law you pass, only affects law abiding citizens. I've posted before about the felon that stole my guns, got caught and faced no charges. Another individual was caught with one of my pistols and didn't even face charges for possession of stolen property.
The problem they are trying to cure with gun control is the death of the nuclear family.
Don't let the wife know what you spend on guns, ammo or cigars.
Thank you @CalvinAndHobo for reading my content correctly. Obviously, the Vegas shooting strikes my heart strings. To dispell the myths, there was actually only one shooter. He had 10 ARs, had used 2 of them. He had over 7000 rounds in his room and more in his truck.
Now, onto the point of my post:
You gun guys (I'm pretty gun neutral, actually) suffer from the same disease that the anti gun "commies" suffer from. You make up the rules as you go along with little regard for the REAL truth.
The real truth is that the nut in Vegas wounded 441 people from minimum distances of 500 yards, and he did it by purchasing dozens of ARs and bump stocks, plus thousands of rounds including tracers, all under the radar with zero knowledge of the government, and it turned into a bloodbath of CONSERVATIVE concert goers. He carried all this equipment up the stairs and through the elevators and down the hallways at the 7th largest hotel in the world. Some of the bellhops even helped him with his baggage.
The real mathematical truth, if we assume 10 minutes of shooting time, is that he struck 400 concert goers in 10 minutes. That's 40 people a minute, or almost one person per second.
The real mathematical truth and said he got off a thousand rounds into the concert, plus another 200 rounds he was shooting toward a jet fuel tank that he thought he could blow up. That's 120 rounds per minute, or 2 rounds per second.
This is one guy in an unguarded sniper's nest with a really efficient setup shooting into a killing field. Everything was purchased legally, and zero government people knew his name prior to October 1st 2017. He was completely self-trained with no prior law enforcement or military experience. From distances of 500 to 1,000 yards. A thousand yards!
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Meanwhile, gun guys pick apart a post from a non-gun guy because he flubs the vocabulary. Obviously you don't put 10 rounds in a chamber. We harp on that as evidence the argument is flawed. Okay, he messed up vocabulary. Obviously you cannot shoot 800 rounds in one minute with one gun, But again that's not the point.
Also meanwhile, you talk about how many guys die from a van running over them as an argument for you to keep your guns for that the guns are somehow as safe as a van.
Finally, you gun guys talk about how your guns somehow act as the population's consent for the government to govern, And how the threat of vigilanteism somehow keeps politicians in check.
These are all mistakes bro.
The simple mathematical fact is that an untrained guy can legally set up a killing field to take out 441 people in 10 minutes. He can't do it with a van. He can't do it with the flu or was a bottle of booze behind the wheel. He can't do it with a lead pipe or a knife, or with the wrench in the conservatory. He did it with a bunch of legally purchased AR-15s, some accessories, and a shitload of ammo.
The next simple mathematical fact is that there aren't a group of gun toting Patriots who will prevent an illegal takeover of government with their AR-15s. January 6th proved it. In that situation, you had a group of people who thought that there was an illegal election and stormed the capital to do what they thought was right. None of them used guns and if they had, they would have still been defeated, and they would have still been prosecuted. We've also had several others examples of this throughout our history, from Clive Bundy to the Southern uprising. In no case did taking up arms work for them, and it just won't work for you. So what is the exact circumstance where your personally owned small arms will right a governmental injustice? It only exists in theory and can never happen in the modern world. Sorry end of story.
So my biggest problem with you gun guys is that you're not arguing for your side effectively. You're using argumentation that won't sway anyone from the other side, And because you're so passionate about your side you assume that everyone in the world has a side. They don't. I don't.
However, you're losing the silent neutral in droves. The NRA is bankrupt. While it is still the most powerful lobby in Washington, it won't be that way forever. Local governments are placing restrictions that are outside of your area of influence, and the NRA's. Those anti-gun areas are growing, not shrinking. You are losing the war.
You won't admit that guns are made for killing, and specifically, ARs are made for killing humans. They are. You know it. You carry guns for self protection, keep them for home protection. What does that mean? That means you're willing to kill someone. Fine! I'm all for it actually. But you have to admit that you have that gun so that you can kill someone if you need to.
The problem with the AR-15 or other similarly constructed and differently named firearms is that they don't have a practical purpose in society. They're not a sport shooting gun. They're not a hunting gun, even though some rednecks in Arkansas use them to kill wild boars. They're not for personal defense, and they actually make a pretty lousy home defense option. Who are you defending your home from? A platoon of Iraqi invaders? Al-Qaeda? Okay, if Al Qaeda ever invades your home, then go for it.
Are you going to defend the Constitution of the United States with your AR-15? You just had a constitutional crisis of epic proportions according to your leader. Everyone sat on their hands and didn't do a darn thing. When would you do this if you didn't do it in January?
All of this brings me to my final point, argumentation. You're 20, 30 and 100-year-old arguments worked on a society that was not savvy on the topic. But over the last 20 years, they've gotten savvy. They've seen too many dead kindergarteners pulled out of schools in bloody body bags. They've seen too many people in bloody Tim McGraw t-shirts being rushed to the hospital in the back of some random pickup truck. They're tired of it bro.
And yet you still talk about vans running over people, You still chide the unknowing for mistaking a chamber for a magazine, and you talk out of both sides of your mouth when it comes to mental health and registration.
You don't want to register your firearms in a national database because you think that it would become a scarlet letter, and the evil government would know who to kill first in the great zombie war. However, out of the other side of your mouth, you criticize people like me who are against DUI checkpoints and won't allow an officer to search my car during a traffic stop for safety, saying that "if you have nothing to hide, what's your problem with it?"
So are you for privacy or against it? You can't like DUI checkpoints and you can't like TSA at the airport and you can't like cops doing safety searches while still hating a national register of AR-15s and a literal psychological sanity check. That's called a double standard, and the newly savvy silent middle is figuring out that you're playing both sides. They will hold you accountable one day. Mark it down.
Look, I'm not a gun guy. I'm not an anti-gun guy. I've gone long periods of my life owning multiple firearms, and I have gone long periods of my life owning none. Currently I own none. The thing that I don't get about the AR-15 is that it really doesn't have a practical purpose in society. You can tell me it's a good home defense option, but I don't believe it. Not for a single intruder. You can tell me you hunt wild boars with it, and I'll tell you that I shot an 800-lb grizzly with a 300 win mag and put it on its assss instantly. You can tell me that it's fun to shoot and I totally believe it! It looks fun as hell. Cocaine looks fun as hell too, but it's illegal as hell.
Look, I'm not advocating for Pete budegig to knock on your door and take away grandpappy's shotgun. However, I am all for you entering your name and serial number into an electronic database when you purchase a killing machine. You don't mind TSA looking at your giblets or making sure you don't have any colon polyps, but you don't want to enter your name on a web page?
And this is the essence of the flaw of your argument. You have a standard and a moral and a passion and a stance and a virtue that you seemingly randomly apply to situations at your choosing. That makes us in the silent middle think that you don't actually have a standard or a virtue or a passion or a stance or a moral. You just don't want to give up your AR-15 because you simply like them.
Maybe that's not true, but that's what it looks like to the rational apathetic person like me.
Fine if you want to go that way. If you choose to go through with the psychological profile and the national database that is trackable, you protect the AR-15 for the next 50 years...at least. If you continue to dig your heels in, you will lose it in less than 25, and I'll bet forum fiver on that.
I love you all like brothers, even when I disagree with you.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
I had to break it into two because I exceeded the maximum length of a post lol! And for the record, I thumbed all of that out on my phone.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
@VegasFrank said:
Thank you @CalvinAndHobo for reading my content correctly. Obviously, the Vegas shooting strikes my heart strings. To dispell the myths, there was actually only one shooter. He had 10 ARs, had used 2 of them. He had over 7000 rounds in his room and more in his truck.
Now, onto the point of my post:
You gun guys (I'm pretty gun neutral, actually) suffer from the same disease that the anti gun "commies" suffer from. You make up the rules as you go along with little regard for the REAL truth.
The real truth is that the nut in Vegas wounded 441 people from minimum distances of 500 yards, and he did it by purchasing dozens of ARs and bump stocks, plus thousands of rounds including tracers, all under the radar with zero knowledge of the government, and it turned into a bloodbath of CONSERVATIVE concert goers. He carried all this equipment up the stairs and through the elevators and down the hallways at the 7th largest hotel in the world. Some of the bellhops even helped him with his baggage.
The real mathematical truth, if we assume 10 minutes of shooting time, is that he struck 400 concert goers in 10 minutes. That's 40 people a minute, or almost one person per second.
The real mathematical truth and said he got off a thousand rounds into the concert, plus another 200 rounds he was shooting toward a jet fuel tank that he thought he could blow up. That's 120 rounds per minute, or 2 rounds per second.
This is one guy in an unguarded sniper's nest with a really efficient setup shooting into a killing field. Everything was purchased legally, and zero government people knew his name prior to October 1st 2017. He was completely self-trained with no prior law enforcement or military experience. From distances of 500 to 1,000 yards. A thousand yards!
@VegasFrank
Not sure where you received your info, but the **** shooter had 27 guns in the room. Several were ARs with bump stocks, all were found jammed.
The rate of fire of a AR rifle is 45 rounds per minute. The bump stock might double that, maybe if you can get the darn thing to shoot a magazine without jamming.
Anything above a 30 round magazine is a PIA to change. He also used a .308 bolt gun. I know what they say, but, the amount of rounds claimed to have been sent down range would be near impossible for one many to do. He did not use a SAW or M-60 machine gun. It was a horrible deed and I hope anyone involved rots in hell, but i honestly think we have not been told the whole truth. Just my informed opinion, I was not there
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
@VegasFrank said:
Thank you @CalvinAndHobo for reading my content correctly. Obviously, the Vegas shooting strikes my heart strings. To dispell the myths, there was actually only one shooter. He had 10 ARs, had used 2 of them. He had over 7000 rounds in his room and more in his truck.
Now, onto the point of my post:
You gun guys (I'm pretty gun neutral, actually) suffer from the same disease that the anti gun "commies" suffer from. You make up the rules as you go along with little regard for the REAL truth.
The real truth is that the nut in Vegas wounded 441 people from minimum distances of 500 yards, and he did it by purchasing dozens of ARs and bump stocks, plus thousands of rounds including tracers, all under the radar with zero knowledge of the government, and it turned into a bloodbath of CONSERVATIVE concert goers. He carried all this equipment up the stairs and through the elevators and down the hallways at the 7th largest hotel in the world. Some of the bellhops even helped him with his baggage.
The real mathematical truth, if we assume 10 minutes of shooting time, is that he struck 400 concert goers in 10 minutes. That's 40 people a minute, or almost one person per second.
The real mathematical truth and said he got off a thousand rounds into the concert, plus another 200 rounds he was shooting toward a jet fuel tank that he thought he could blow up. That's 120 rounds per minute, or 2 rounds per second.
This is one guy in an unguarded sniper's nest with a really efficient setup shooting into a killing field. Everything was purchased legally, and zero government people knew his name prior to October 1st 2017. He was completely self-trained with no prior law enforcement or military experience. From distances of 500 to 1,000 yards. A thousand yards!
@VegasFrank
Not sure where you received your info, but the **** shooter had 27 guns in the room. Several were ARs with bump stocks, all were found jammed.
The rate of fire of a AR rifle is 45 rounds per minute. The bump stock might double that, maybe if you can get the darn thing to shoot a magazine without jamming.
Anything above a 30 round magazine is a PIA to change. He also used a .308 bolt gun. I know what they say, but, the amount of rounds claimed to have been sent down range would be near impossible for one many to do. He did not use a SAW or M-60 machine gun. It was a horrible deed and I hope anyone involved rots in hell, but i honestly think we have not been told the whole truth. Just my informed opinion, I was not there
Aaaand I swung and missed on my post.
You can believe the conspiracy if you want to, but the point of all of my posts is that gun guys don't focus on the winning argument. Case in point.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Frank your a good guy. But you obviously do not know the subject. the people are told a lot of lies. The Vegas shooter either had help or was qualified to be a field Marksman for the Military
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
I am a very average shooter with less then 500 rounds down range. With my buddy’s AR, bi-pod, and scope I can effectively hit a 12”x4” target at 100m multiple times with a single full magazine. I know that’s probably like a barn door for some of you but It is a scary thought that a stable (semi) guy that has very little vision in my sighting eye can do that and I don’t own a weapon nor practice. I’m just adding my two cents.
@Vision said:
I am a very average shooter with less then 500 rounds down range. With my buddy’s AR, bi-pod, and scope I can effectively hit a 12”x4” target at 100m multiple times with a single full magazine. I know that’s probably like a barn door for some of you but It is a scary thought that a stable (semi) guy that has very little vision in my sighting eye can do that and I don’t own a weapon nor practice. I’m just adding my two cents.
Yup about average. With open sights the Army used to qualify at 300 yards and Marines at 500. 100 yards with any rifle with any caliber off a rest is a chip shot. .223 Remington or 5 56 NATO with an optic 600 yards is easy to shoot MOA groups consistently.
But were getting a bit off topic.
I just really hate the BS the media puts out to scare the public into agreeing with an agenda.
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
@Diver43 said:
Frank your a good guy. But you obviously do not know the subject. the people are told a lot of lies. The Vegas shooter either had help or was qualified to be a field Marksman for the Military
I'll never believe it. Where's the evidence? Not one print, one hair follicle, not anything. No security cameras in the hallway ever showed him with anyone or anyone going in or out of his room. Ghost!
Plus, you don't have to be a marksman to shoot into 8,000 people in a fenced in pen. Aim for the middle.
I know that we don't want to believe that average joe could shoot 400 people, but it happened.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
So I'm kind of curious.
1200 rounds were fired in 10 minutes? Which would mean that either bump stocks or some form of auto modification were done, correct?
If so, was he trained in that weapon, cause not stop shooting of most of those weapons tends to bring the weapon up and unless you are used to it, you have to correct to bring the barrel down.
Having carried a MP5 in the early 80s, rapid fire can become fairly unwieldy, if not ready for it.
How does one maintain any accuracy, unless they had been trained or spent a ton of time on a range with rapid fire?
In Fumo Pax Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy cigars and that's close enough.
@0patience said:
So I'm kind of curious.
1200 rounds were fired in 10 minutes? Which would mean that either bump stocks or some form of auto modification were done, correct?
If so, was he trained in that weapon, cause not stop shooting of most of those weapons tends to bring the weapon up and unless you are used to it, you have to correct to bring the barrel down.
Having carried a MP5 in the early 80s, rapid fire can become fairly unwieldy, if not ready for it.
How does one maintain any accuracy, unless they had been trained or spent a ton of time on a range with rapid fire?
Kind of what I mean. Bump stock keep a gun shooting. But it's not full autonand the darn thing is all over the place. Even using a drum magazine it takes time to reload. Drop the gun and pick up another and he also used a bolt gun. Frank is right, the report says he was alone, but the evidence. Some of it says otherwise. Who trusts Government reports? Anyway anyone that would do that deserves to rot in hell. Once again, its not a gun that did an evil deed. Its people
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
@Vision said:
I am a very average shooter with less then 500 rounds down range. With my buddy’s AR, bi-pod, and scope I can effectively hit a 12”x4” target at 100m multiple times with a single full magazine. I know that’s probably like a barn door for some of you but It is a scary thought that a stable (semi) guy that has very little vision in my sighting eye can do that and I don’t own a weapon nor practice. I’m just adding my two cents.
Yup about average. With open sights the Army used to qualify at 300 yards and Marines at 500. 100 yards with any rifle with any caliber off a rest is a chip shot. .223 Remington or 5 56 NATO with an optic 600 yards is easy to shoot MOA groups consistently.
But were getting a bit off topic.
I just really hate the BS the media puts out to scare the public into agreeing with an agenda.
My point exactly. Thank God the Vegas gunman had no “professional” training.
Frank took his time to make some good points. In the lengthy process, he may have made some poor points. That happens. The problem here is TLTR. Because Frank went so long and steady at it, people will want to grab at low hanging fruit. If you have a prob with his reasoned effort, read it all again, looking for what makes sense, not just for what you can attack. Don't ask how's it wrong; ask does it make some good sense on balance.
The Christian admires the Golden Rule. The atheist thinks that Christian must be an idiot cause he buys every last word of Deuteronomy. It's a long book. There's good and bad in it. Is the world better today for the Christian principles in it?
Myself, I don't think it's any accident that freedom finally rang after a long dark age only after gunpowder enabled any subject to shoot the King's thug right through his tin suit, transforming that subject into a citizen. Not every uprising is righteous. Not every uprising succeeds. Not every success results in something better. Weapons get more lethal. Nevertheless, we know that there's only one way to get there: power to the people.
Ask them in Myanmar.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
Yes all of his guns had bump stocks. Yes he spent crap loads of time on range learning how to use the bump stocks. He had multiple shooting locations from his suite and a pile of guns that were preloaded with big magazines at each station so that he could walk back and forth. The idea was let the barrels cool down.
I'm sure as hell that there was some recoil. I'm sure as hell not every round hit the target. In his first several magazines, he had a tracer in every third or fifth round, I'm guessing it was to judge his accuracy.
But once again. It's time to stop looking for an excuse to account for this guy's mass terrorist act. No he wasn't professionally trained. No he didn't have a cadre of co-conspirators that suddenly disappeared off the face of the Earth. He was a guy. He bought all his s*** legally. Uncle Sam had no idea. He shot 400 people. Would have shot thousands had a bellhop not interrupted him.
We've got to stop that guy in the future. If you don't, you will lose your AR-15s one day soon. That's just the way it works fellas. Not my rules, not even my desire. But as long as you're ostriching this, you're going to lose.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
20 million guns aren't going anywhere. They'll never get 10%, let alone most of them. Yes, they ARE for killing. That's the point. We're not arguing that. I don't carry a gun to target shoot or hunt. I carry a gun to stop a threat. If the threat dies, so be it. What happened in Vegas sucked but it changes nothing. Guns still save lives more than they take innocent life. Actually, the ar-15 makes an excellent defense weapon. Less penetration through walls and such than buckshot or handgun ammo. The ar-15 is the most popular rifle on the market today. Sales are brisk. I plan on getting a few more when money allows. And you can use them for sport shooting. Thousands of people use them in 3gun matches every week. They can also be used for hunting. You can buy ar pattern rifles from 9mm all the way up to 300 winmag. Those are pricey, but available. You can hunt antelope up to moose with the ar pattern type rifle. It's state hunting laws keeping most people from using them for sport hunting.
Trapped in the People's Communist Republic of Massachusetts.
Frank, I read your long posts carefully. I am posting here because I posted before and I'd like to clarify a few things.
First, I don't think you can any longer lay claim to a neutral position on this subject, while you may have once been ambivalent, you have committed to a side. My mistake at this point would be to assume that you're committed to every stance that every other person on this "side" puts forth.
And that is the largest error I see in your position above. So, just to make sure that what I've been saying is taken in proper context I'd like to state some things I do believe, some positions I do hold, which may be contrary to the broad-brush strokes you've painted all "gun guys" with in your conversation.
I'm fine with registration and background checks and waiting periods and required training. On that last, I think that if you've been honorably discharged from the military, you've been trained. The upside of registration, it helps with investigation when a human commits atrocities. The downside, it can be used to take legally owned firearms from responsible owners at the governments discretion. This is historical fact, ask an Australian.
I support the 4th amendment, as well as the 2nd. What's been done to the 4th amendment is what worries me about the future of the 2nd. Unreasonable search is rampant, and no one cares about the 4th. What caused you to make this assumption regarding gun owners? Just curious.
I wasn't talking out both sides of my mouth about the need for mental health services and the perpetuation of cultural norms. Why did you think I was?
I don't understand the fascination with the AR-15. I've put thousands upon thousands of rounds downrange with many military weapons systems. I have no need to own them. A shotgun, a few rifles, a couple revolvers and a 22 semi pistol with a bull barrel for fun. But, NO police organization will ever be at my house in time to help me during a home invasion. Maybe those don't happen in Vegas, but they happen here. F***king meth-heads.
So, no anger on my part, I understand and somewhat agree with much that you said, but not everyone on your side thinks like you do. Just like not everyone on my side thinks like me.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I get that people want this or that.
But there is a fine line to what people are willing to give up.
And before anyone jumps on the "rights" BS, I am not talking about that being given up.
I am talking about the fine line of anything that people are willing to give up.
When laws are just arbitrarily passed, without representation of the people, people tend to get pissy. And rightly so.
Everyone has this grand idea that if you eliminate this or that gun, it will stop things. That is naive.
What? Do away with the 2nd amendment? Make all guns illegal?
Cause that works so well everywhere else.
Eliminate the Bill of Rights?
Go socialist, cause socialized medicine works so well?
I have no answers, but restriction isn't an answer. All it does is create animosity.
In Fumo Pax Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy cigars and that's close enough.
Banning guns will never fully work. People will find a way to hurt/kill each other.
Socialized healthcare - I have a friend in Germany. His dad was diagnosed with cancer a couple years ago, they told him he was past the point that they where allow to use resources towards him. They suggested that if he had the money to go to the US because doctors there would try as long as they got paid.
I'm fairly certain that registration has always been followed by confiscation. Not immediately but eventually,you know that is the end game they are looking at.
Don't let the wife know what you spend on guns, ammo or cigars.
@d_blades said:
I'm fairly certain that registration has always been followed by confiscation. Not immediately but eventually,you know that is the end game they are looking at.
Why else would you have registration? That's the only purpose for it.
Trapped in the People's Communist Republic of Massachusetts.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
This can't be. Time and again I've heard Democratic Leadership say the words: "Nobody wants to take your guns...", so, that must not have happened. NBC News is obviously mistaken.
Pass me that tinfoil, would ya? I need a new hat.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Thank you @webmost and @Amos_Umwhat. Fair replies there. Fair one even by @ShawnOL and @Diver43 and everyone else. Although we disagree on conspiracies or vocabulary or fine points, I appreciate the adult tone of the conversation. All points well taken and understandable.
A couple of clean-ups that I owe you guys:
I am really ambivalent or unemotional about the subject. I really don't care if you have ARs or not. I am against dead kindergarteners and concert goers, but I think you are too.
You want your guns, and people want to take them from you. You have to own a solution that works for the others, or they COULD own a solution that WON'T work for you. Not fair? That's called life.
Why do gas stations and bars enforce sin age restrictions so vigorously? They don't want to loose the income. You should also want to own a solution and police yourselves, so that someone doesn't do it for you.
Registration is merely MY suggestion. i made it from a non emotional position
I neither want your guns nor want you to have them. Your current proposals, which I can only summarize as "now's not the right time to talk about it" and "enforce the (unenforceable) laws on the books" and "second amendment" won't cut it forever. How many amendments does the PATRIOT Act violate? Plenty, in my estimation.
True the government can't pull 100s of millions of guns off the street. True also that if they tried, you could still have them, but you'd be a law breaker and would risk prosecution and incarceration.
They CAN find other ways to restrict guns. They can RFID every piece of ammo produced from today forward. how is that for tracking? They can impose a $10,000 "schp" like tax on each new gun sold. That new 30-06 will only cost $10,399! They can restrict the sale of used guns. They can restrict sales of NEW guns. They can do any horrible thing that you see right now with cigars. Sky's the limit.
I heard some "that'll never happen" right before massachusetts made newports illegal....
Thanks guys!
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
@d_blades said:
I'm fairly certain that registration has always been followed by confiscation. Not immediately but eventually,you know that is the end game they are looking at.
Why else would you have registration? That's the only purpose for it.
Comments
All's I know is Paul Revere rode to warn the militias that the Redcoats were coming to confiscate their assault muskets.
Actually that is very fast, almost makes me think there was more than one shooter. He had multiple ARs fitted with bump stocks. they are such pieces of crap he was set up to throw down the jammed one and pick up another. Even without jamming that is fast shooting.
Also he was pointing into a crowd and firing. Any Vet knows that sustained fire with a M or AR platform riffe makes the gun extremely hot. The other reason for multiple rifles.
The more I think about it, the more I begin to think there might have been more than one shooter. And no I do not wear a tinfoil hat. I just know a bit about the AR platform
^^^ I’ll agree with that. I’m thinking multiple rifles at least, possibly another shooter who offed the first guy as a distraction. Those platforms get hot, no doubt; the rate of fire I posted is just an average for illustration purposes on how it’d be possible to go thru 1000 rounds in 10 mins. You gotta figure at least a couple jams in there. I’ve tossed a few thousand downrange with M & AR platforms as well. Gimme bolt or lever guns for reliability any day.
The point never made is any law you pass, only affects law abiding citizens. I've posted before about the felon that stole my guns, got caught and faced no charges. Another individual was caught with one of my pistols and didn't even face charges for possession of stolen property.
The problem they are trying to cure with gun control is the death of the nuclear family.
Don't let the wife know what you spend on guns, ammo or cigars.
Thank you @CalvinAndHobo for reading my content correctly. Obviously, the Vegas shooting strikes my heart strings. To dispell the myths, there was actually only one shooter. He had 10 ARs, had used 2 of them. He had over 7000 rounds in his room and more in his truck.
Now, onto the point of my post:
You gun guys (I'm pretty gun neutral, actually) suffer from the same disease that the anti gun "commies" suffer from. You make up the rules as you go along with little regard for the REAL truth.
The real truth is that the nut in Vegas wounded 441 people from minimum distances of 500 yards, and he did it by purchasing dozens of ARs and bump stocks, plus thousands of rounds including tracers, all under the radar with zero knowledge of the government, and it turned into a bloodbath of CONSERVATIVE concert goers. He carried all this equipment up the stairs and through the elevators and down the hallways at the 7th largest hotel in the world. Some of the bellhops even helped him with his baggage.
The real mathematical truth, if we assume 10 minutes of shooting time, is that he struck 400 concert goers in 10 minutes. That's 40 people a minute, or almost one person per second.
The real mathematical truth and said he got off a thousand rounds into the concert, plus another 200 rounds he was shooting toward a jet fuel tank that he thought he could blow up. That's 120 rounds per minute, or 2 rounds per second.
This is one guy in an unguarded sniper's nest with a really efficient setup shooting into a killing field. Everything was purchased legally, and zero government people knew his name prior to October 1st 2017. He was completely self-trained with no prior law enforcement or military experience. From distances of 500 to 1,000 yards. A thousand yards!
Meanwhile, gun guys pick apart a post from a non-gun guy because he flubs the vocabulary. Obviously you don't put 10 rounds in a chamber. We harp on that as evidence the argument is flawed. Okay, he messed up vocabulary. Obviously you cannot shoot 800 rounds in one minute with one gun, But again that's not the point.
Also meanwhile, you talk about how many guys die from a van running over them as an argument for you to keep your guns for that the guns are somehow as safe as a van.
Finally, you gun guys talk about how your guns somehow act as the population's consent for the government to govern, And how the threat of vigilanteism somehow keeps politicians in check.
These are all mistakes bro.
The simple mathematical fact is that an untrained guy can legally set up a killing field to take out 441 people in 10 minutes. He can't do it with a van. He can't do it with the flu or was a bottle of booze behind the wheel. He can't do it with a lead pipe or a knife, or with the wrench in the conservatory. He did it with a bunch of legally purchased AR-15s, some accessories, and a shitload of ammo.
The next simple mathematical fact is that there aren't a group of gun toting Patriots who will prevent an illegal takeover of government with their AR-15s. January 6th proved it. In that situation, you had a group of people who thought that there was an illegal election and stormed the capital to do what they thought was right. None of them used guns and if they had, they would have still been defeated, and they would have still been prosecuted. We've also had several others examples of this throughout our history, from Clive Bundy to the Southern uprising. In no case did taking up arms work for them, and it just won't work for you. So what is the exact circumstance where your personally owned small arms will right a governmental injustice? It only exists in theory and can never happen in the modern world. Sorry end of story.
So my biggest problem with you gun guys is that you're not arguing for your side effectively. You're using argumentation that won't sway anyone from the other side, And because you're so passionate about your side you assume that everyone in the world has a side. They don't. I don't.
However, you're losing the silent neutral in droves. The NRA is bankrupt. While it is still the most powerful lobby in Washington, it won't be that way forever. Local governments are placing restrictions that are outside of your area of influence, and the NRA's. Those anti-gun areas are growing, not shrinking. You are losing the war.
You won't admit that guns are made for killing, and specifically, ARs are made for killing humans. They are. You know it. You carry guns for self protection, keep them for home protection. What does that mean? That means you're willing to kill someone. Fine! I'm all for it actually. But you have to admit that you have that gun so that you can kill someone if you need to.
The problem with the AR-15 or other similarly constructed and differently named firearms is that they don't have a practical purpose in society. They're not a sport shooting gun. They're not a hunting gun, even though some rednecks in Arkansas use them to kill wild boars. They're not for personal defense, and they actually make a pretty lousy home defense option. Who are you defending your home from? A platoon of Iraqi invaders? Al-Qaeda? Okay, if Al Qaeda ever invades your home, then go for it.
Are you going to defend the Constitution of the United States with your AR-15? You just had a constitutional crisis of epic proportions according to your leader. Everyone sat on their hands and didn't do a darn thing. When would you do this if you didn't do it in January?
All of this brings me to my final point, argumentation. You're 20, 30 and 100-year-old arguments worked on a society that was not savvy on the topic. But over the last 20 years, they've gotten savvy. They've seen too many dead kindergarteners pulled out of schools in bloody body bags. They've seen too many people in bloody Tim McGraw t-shirts being rushed to the hospital in the back of some random pickup truck. They're tired of it bro.
And yet you still talk about vans running over people, You still chide the unknowing for mistaking a chamber for a magazine, and you talk out of both sides of your mouth when it comes to mental health and registration.
You don't want to register your firearms in a national database because you think that it would become a scarlet letter, and the evil government would know who to kill first in the great zombie war. However, out of the other side of your mouth, you criticize people like me who are against DUI checkpoints and won't allow an officer to search my car during a traffic stop for safety, saying that "if you have nothing to hide, what's your problem with it?"
So are you for privacy or against it? You can't like DUI checkpoints and you can't like TSA at the airport and you can't like cops doing safety searches while still hating a national register of AR-15s and a literal psychological sanity check. That's called a double standard, and the newly savvy silent middle is figuring out that you're playing both sides. They will hold you accountable one day. Mark it down.
Look, I'm not a gun guy. I'm not an anti-gun guy. I've gone long periods of my life owning multiple firearms, and I have gone long periods of my life owning none. Currently I own none. The thing that I don't get about the AR-15 is that it really doesn't have a practical purpose in society. You can tell me it's a good home defense option, but I don't believe it. Not for a single intruder. You can tell me you hunt wild boars with it, and I'll tell you that I shot an 800-lb grizzly with a 300 win mag and put it on its assss instantly. You can tell me that it's fun to shoot and I totally believe it! It looks fun as hell. Cocaine looks fun as hell too, but it's illegal as hell.
Look, I'm not advocating for Pete budegig to knock on your door and take away grandpappy's shotgun. However, I am all for you entering your name and serial number into an electronic database when you purchase a killing machine. You don't mind TSA looking at your giblets or making sure you don't have any colon polyps, but you don't want to enter your name on a web page?
And this is the essence of the flaw of your argument. You have a standard and a moral and a passion and a stance and a virtue that you seemingly randomly apply to situations at your choosing. That makes us in the silent middle think that you don't actually have a standard or a virtue or a passion or a stance or a moral. You just don't want to give up your AR-15 because you simply like them.
Maybe that's not true, but that's what it looks like to the rational apathetic person like me.
Fine if you want to go that way. If you choose to go through with the psychological profile and the national database that is trackable, you protect the AR-15 for the next 50 years...at least. If you continue to dig your heels in, you will lose it in less than 25, and I'll bet forum fiver on that.
I love you all like brothers, even when I disagree with you.
I had to break it into two because I exceeded the maximum length of a post lol! And for the record, I thumbed all of that out on my phone.
@VegasFrank
Not sure where you received your info, but the **** shooter had 27 guns in the room. Several were ARs with bump stocks, all were found jammed.
The rate of fire of a AR rifle is 45 rounds per minute. The bump stock might double that, maybe if you can get the darn thing to shoot a magazine without jamming.
Anything above a 30 round magazine is a PIA to change. He also used a .308 bolt gun. I know what they say, but, the amount of rounds claimed to have been sent down range would be near impossible for one many to do. He did not use a SAW or M-60 machine gun. It was a horrible deed and I hope anyone involved rots in hell, but i honestly think we have not been told the whole truth. Just my informed opinion, I was not there
Aaaand I swung and missed on my post.
You can believe the conspiracy if you want to, but the point of all of my posts is that gun guys don't focus on the winning argument. Case in point.
Frank your a good guy. But you obviously do not know the subject. the people are told a lot of lies. The Vegas shooter either had help or was qualified to be a field Marksman for the Military
I am a very average shooter with less then 500 rounds down range. With my buddy’s AR, bi-pod, and scope I can effectively hit a 12”x4” target at 100m multiple times with a single full magazine. I know that’s probably like a barn door for some of you but It is a scary thought that a stable (semi) guy that has very little vision in my sighting eye can do that and I don’t own a weapon nor practice. I’m just adding my two cents.
Yup about average. With open sights the Army used to qualify at 300 yards and Marines at 500. 100 yards with any rifle with any caliber off a rest is a chip shot. .223 Remington or 5 56 NATO with an optic 600 yards is easy to shoot MOA groups consistently.
But were getting a bit off topic.
I just really hate the BS the media puts out to scare the public into agreeing with an agenda.
I'll never believe it. Where's the evidence? Not one print, one hair follicle, not anything. No security cameras in the hallway ever showed him with anyone or anyone going in or out of his room. Ghost!
Plus, you don't have to be a marksman to shoot into 8,000 people in a fenced in pen. Aim for the middle.
I know that we don't want to believe that average joe could shoot 400 people, but it happened.
So I'm kind of curious.
1200 rounds were fired in 10 minutes? Which would mean that either bump stocks or some form of auto modification were done, correct?
If so, was he trained in that weapon, cause not stop shooting of most of those weapons tends to bring the weapon up and unless you are used to it, you have to correct to bring the barrel down.
Having carried a MP5 in the early 80s, rapid fire can become fairly unwieldy, if not ready for it.
How does one maintain any accuracy, unless they had been trained or spent a ton of time on a range with rapid fire?
Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy cigars and that's close enough.
Kind of what I mean. Bump stock keep a gun shooting. But it's not full autonand the darn thing is all over the place. Even using a drum magazine it takes time to reload. Drop the gun and pick up another and he also used a bolt gun. Frank is right, the report says he was alone, but the evidence. Some of it says otherwise. Who trusts Government reports? Anyway anyone that would do that deserves to rot in hell. Once again, its not a gun that did an evil deed. Its people
My point exactly. Thank God the Vegas gunman had no “professional” training.
Frank took his time to make some good points. In the lengthy process, he may have made some poor points. That happens. The problem here is TLTR. Because Frank went so long and steady at it, people will want to grab at low hanging fruit. If you have a prob with his reasoned effort, read it all again, looking for what makes sense, not just for what you can attack. Don't ask how's it wrong; ask does it make some good sense on balance.
The Christian admires the Golden Rule. The atheist thinks that Christian must be an idiot cause he buys every last word of Deuteronomy. It's a long book. There's good and bad in it. Is the world better today for the Christian principles in it?
Myself, I don't think it's any accident that freedom finally rang after a long dark age only after gunpowder enabled any subject to shoot the King's thug right through his tin suit, transforming that subject into a citizen. Not every uprising is righteous. Not every uprising succeeds. Not every success results in something better. Weapons get more lethal. Nevertheless, we know that there's only one way to get there: power to the people.
Ask them in Myanmar.
Yes all of his guns had bump stocks. Yes he spent crap loads of time on range learning how to use the bump stocks. He had multiple shooting locations from his suite and a pile of guns that were preloaded with big magazines at each station so that he could walk back and forth. The idea was let the barrels cool down.
I'm sure as hell that there was some recoil. I'm sure as hell not every round hit the target. In his first several magazines, he had a tracer in every third or fifth round, I'm guessing it was to judge his accuracy.
But once again. It's time to stop looking for an excuse to account for this guy's mass terrorist act. No he wasn't professionally trained. No he didn't have a cadre of co-conspirators that suddenly disappeared off the face of the Earth. He was a guy. He bought all his s*** legally. Uncle Sam had no idea. He shot 400 people. Would have shot thousands had a bellhop not interrupted him.
We've got to stop that guy in the future. If you don't, you will lose your AR-15s one day soon. That's just the way it works fellas. Not my rules, not even my desire. But as long as you're ostriching this, you're going to lose.
20 million guns aren't going anywhere. They'll never get 10%, let alone most of them. Yes, they ARE for killing. That's the point. We're not arguing that. I don't carry a gun to target shoot or hunt. I carry a gun to stop a threat. If the threat dies, so be it. What happened in Vegas sucked but it changes nothing. Guns still save lives more than they take innocent life. Actually, the ar-15 makes an excellent defense weapon. Less penetration through walls and such than buckshot or handgun ammo. The ar-15 is the most popular rifle on the market today. Sales are brisk. I plan on getting a few more when money allows. And you can use them for sport shooting. Thousands of people use them in 3gun matches every week. They can also be used for hunting. You can buy ar pattern rifles from 9mm all the way up to 300 winmag. Those are pricey, but available. You can hunt antelope up to moose with the ar pattern type rifle. It's state hunting laws keeping most people from using them for sport hunting.
Trapped in the People's Communist Republic of Massachusetts.
Frank, I read your long posts carefully. I am posting here because I posted before and I'd like to clarify a few things.
First, I don't think you can any longer lay claim to a neutral position on this subject, while you may have once been ambivalent, you have committed to a side. My mistake at this point would be to assume that you're committed to every stance that every other person on this "side" puts forth.
And that is the largest error I see in your position above. So, just to make sure that what I've been saying is taken in proper context I'd like to state some things I do believe, some positions I do hold, which may be contrary to the broad-brush strokes you've painted all "gun guys" with in your conversation.
I'm fine with registration and background checks and waiting periods and required training. On that last, I think that if you've been honorably discharged from the military, you've been trained. The upside of registration, it helps with investigation when a human commits atrocities. The downside, it can be used to take legally owned firearms from responsible owners at the governments discretion. This is historical fact, ask an Australian.
I support the 4th amendment, as well as the 2nd. What's been done to the 4th amendment is what worries me about the future of the 2nd. Unreasonable search is rampant, and no one cares about the 4th. What caused you to make this assumption regarding gun owners? Just curious.
I wasn't talking out both sides of my mouth about the need for mental health services and the perpetuation of cultural norms. Why did you think I was?
I don't understand the fascination with the AR-15. I've put thousands upon thousands of rounds downrange with many military weapons systems. I have no need to own them. A shotgun, a few rifles, a couple revolvers and a 22 semi pistol with a bull barrel for fun. But, NO police organization will ever be at my house in time to help me during a home invasion. Maybe those don't happen in Vegas, but they happen here. F***king meth-heads.
So, no anger on my part, I understand and somewhat agree with much that you said, but not everyone on your side thinks like you do. Just like not everyone on my side thinks like me.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I get that people want this or that.
But there is a fine line to what people are willing to give up.
And before anyone jumps on the "rights" BS, I am not talking about that being given up.
I am talking about the fine line of anything that people are willing to give up.
When laws are just arbitrarily passed, without representation of the people, people tend to get pissy. And rightly so.
Everyone has this grand idea that if you eliminate this or that gun, it will stop things. That is naive.
What? Do away with the 2nd amendment? Make all guns illegal?
Cause that works so well everywhere else.
Eliminate the Bill of Rights?
Go socialist, cause socialized medicine works so well?
I have no answers, but restriction isn't an answer. All it does is create animosity.
Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy cigars and that's close enough.
Banning guns will never fully work. People will find a way to hurt/kill each other.
Socialized healthcare - I have a friend in Germany. His dad was diagnosed with cancer a couple years ago, they told him he was past the point that they where allow to use resources towards him. They suggested that if he had the money to go to the US because doctors there would try as long as they got paid.
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/368943
IoT risks
I'm fairly certain that registration has always been followed by confiscation. Not immediately but eventually,you know that is the end game they are looking at.
Don't let the wife know what you spend on guns, ammo or cigars.
Why else would you have registration? That's the only purpose for it.
Trapped in the People's Communist Republic of Massachusetts.
After Katrina, cops went door to door confiscating guns.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna27087738
et al
This can't be. Time and again I've heard Democratic Leadership say the words: "Nobody wants to take your guns...", so, that must not have happened. NBC News is obviously mistaken.
Pass me that tinfoil, would ya? I need a new hat.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
In a ground-breaking experiment, researchers have successfully created the first human-monkey chimera
https://apple.news/AzoWJbzvnSOq20Ss8RH5jyA
And it begins
Thank you @webmost and @Amos_Umwhat. Fair replies there. Fair one even by @ShawnOL and @Diver43 and everyone else. Although we disagree on conspiracies or vocabulary or fine points, I appreciate the adult tone of the conversation. All points well taken and understandable.
A couple of clean-ups that I owe you guys:
Registration is merely MY suggestion. i made it from a non emotional position
I neither want your guns nor want you to have them. Your current proposals, which I can only summarize as "now's not the right time to talk about it" and "enforce the (unenforceable) laws on the books" and "second amendment" won't cut it forever. How many amendments does the PATRIOT Act violate? Plenty, in my estimation.
True the government can't pull 100s of millions of guns off the street. True also that if they tried, you could still have them, but you'd be a law breaker and would risk prosecution and incarceration.
I heard some "that'll never happen" right before massachusetts made newports illegal....
Thanks guys!
Examples please.