VeteranXX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent
This has no bearing on lethality. You don't use full automatic fire to kill crowds of people, it wastes ammunition. So what is the purpose then of banning automatic weapons?
|
close to full auto fire seemed to work pretty well here
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent
This has no bearing on lethality. You don't use full automatic fire to kill crowds of people, it wastes ammunition. So what is the purpose then of banning automatic weapons?
|
In this case i think it definetly 'helped' if you can call it that.
The big distance to the crowd + a few hundred rpm you get so much spread you effectively blanketfire the area. Way more effective than semiauto. As you can see on the amount injured and dead.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by clu
close to full auto fire seemed to work pretty well here
|
I'm sorry, I meant to write "need to". Also, you can tapfire fast enough to make it seem like automatic fire, especially to someone who doesn't understand anything about firearms.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
gun debate
At least no one is talking about puerto rico any more
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
**** it you guys are right
everyone should be allowed to have everything.. tanks, helicopters, large caliber machine guns, jets, nukes
just give everyone with the money access to anything bc you can't withhold absurd levels of power because of a couple of bad apples
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
I'm not arguing for or against gun control. I just asked what bearing banning automatic weapons has on anything when you can get better results with properly aimed semi automatic shots.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
If only he had a silencer like Hillary said, he could have killed the entire crowd before they knew it
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent
I'm not arguing for or against gun control. I just asked what bearing banning automatic weapons has on anything when you can get better results with properly aimed semi automatic shots.
|
It has no bearing since you can convert an ar15 to full auto for 50 dollars
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
U guys are too far gone to do anything about guns now
Blanket ban on new weapons going forward and just hope that everything just goes to **** and stops working after 3 shots eventually ala fallout3 maybe, but then ur talking about full on civil war to make that happen
I guess dudes lighting up a concert is the new normal
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
AFAIK every one of these mass shooters has been a disgruntled amateur with no idea about what they're doing, except load up on lots of ammo and go pew pew. When you get some Iraq vet 20 years down the line with a carrier, a can or two, and a proper weapon, there's nothing you can do to stop him in any meaningful amount of time.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent
I'm not arguing for or against gun control. I just asked what bearing banning automatic weapons has on anything when you can get better results with properly aimed semi automatic shots.
|
i think in this instance an automatic weapon gives one a much better chance of hitting multiple targets
i understand how quickly a semi-auto can be fired--i own a couple
however, there is a reason automatic weapons exist in the first place, right? they are useful for laying down suppressive fire over an area, and they can also enable a bad-shot to cover an area full of people.... it's much easier to steady a gun/rifle that is spraying vs. pulling the trigger each time
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
I think the people in other hotels heard the echos and thought it was coming from their hotel. Just like the people at Fort Lauderdale airport thought someone was shooting from the garage, when it wasn't true.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
The only way to ban automatic rifles is to ban semi-automatic rifles. There is no way around it. It's just completely trivial to purchase the pin and the kit. Almost every redneck I know privately brags about owning the kit for a rainy day, so yea its about as common as you can get.
Look at one point society needs to decide what is the fundamental purpose of arming its population.
It needs to decide whether its about having a militia willing and able to rebel against the tyranny of government or whether its about allowing people to shoot birds and home protection.
The latter does not need semi automatic weapons... Shotguns and rifles will do.
The former is imo both a ridiculous prospect (good luck using your awesome ARs against military drones, tanks, and f22s) and a idea that is hopelessly dated. We have found that there are better methods of dissent in order to enact political change.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
The ludicrosity of the 2nd Amendment comes into full view when you realize that Americans haven't overthrown their government, regardless of how tyrannical it has gotten. So why bother pretending that that is the purpose of your guns? You don't have the sack to use them for their supposedly intended purpose, so stop pretending you ever will.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
i don't know what the solution is
but we do keep breaking mass-killing records
at some point you have to try to do something, right? or is the answer really "oh well sometimes ppl are gonna do stuff like this and we'd better have our twitter thoughts and prayers ready to go"?
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
So I guess he couldn't wait till Nov 4th.
|
|
|
Pooptruck++
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoGodForMe
I think the people in other hotels heard the echos and thought it was coming from their hotel. Just like the people at Fort Lauderdale airport thought someone was shooting from the garage, when it wasn't true.
|
I know you've been to Vegas and you should know this stuff, but if you weren't sat in your room drinking shop bought beer, you'd see that these hotels are really big and far apart. DERP.
|
|
|
VeteranX
|
except the pro-gun argument has nothing to do with having militias and rebelling against the government
its about an individuals rights
what the **** does banning automatic weapons do when theres still an infinite amount of other options for a lunatic mass murderer to go on his spree
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1teaminlondon
except the pro-gun argument has nothing to do with having militias and rebelling against the government
its about an individuals rights
what the **** does banning automatic weapons do when theres still an infinite amount of other options for a lunatic mass murderer to go on his spree
|
Ban semi autos too. Only allow bolt action rifles and shhotguns
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Livingdeath
It needs to decide whether its about having a militia willing and able to rebel against the tyranny of government or whether its about allowing people to shoot birds and home protection.
The latter does not need semi automatic weapons... Shotguns and rifles will do.
The former is imo both a ridiculous prospect (good luck using your awesome ARs against military drones, tanks, and f22s) and a idea that is hopelessly dated. We have found that there are better methods of dissent in order to enact political change.
|
Not to pick nits, but your supposition that the military would be intact in a revolution is far-fetched. History tells us they fracture into factions and, as often as not, many factions side with the revolutionaries. So such a struggle would not be as one-sided as you suggest.
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
AGENT: claudebot / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:50.
|