Shooting on the Las Vegas Strip!
10-09-2017, 10:23 AM
#361
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Also.. subsonic loads are quieter, especially paired with a suppressor.
But the big tradeoff is lethality. You're shooting less that 3x the velocity.
The effective distance is greatly reduced and the penetration energy diminishes proportionately
If that asshole shot subsonic suppressed rounds from his room, the bullet drop would have been great.
I doubt he would have killed even half as many.
But the big tradeoff is lethality. You're shooting less that 3x the velocity.
The effective distance is greatly reduced and the penetration energy diminishes proportionately
If that asshole shot subsonic suppressed rounds from his room, the bullet drop would have been great.
I doubt he would have killed even half as many.
10-09-2017, 10:36 AM
#362
Needs more Lemon Pledge
Originally Posted by oo7spy
Why would any civilian gun law apply to law enforcement? They ridiculous conclusions being jumped to don't help.
10-09-2017, 10:46 AM
#363
Registered Member
Originally Posted by oo7spy
Why would any civilian gun law apply to law enforcement? They ridiculous conclusions being jumped to don't help.
As a matter of fact, I have helped a number of officer/friends build their own AR rifles using the new tactical braces that let you sidestep getting an SBR. These are certified police officers who don't want to deal with the hassle and red tape to get their duty rifle.
10-09-2017, 11:01 AM
#364
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Originally Posted by wackjum
A lot of the officers I know, especially at smaller departments, acquire their own gear.
As a matter of fact, I have helped a number of officer/friends build their own AR rifles using the new tactical braces that let you sidestep getting an SBR. These are certified police officers who don't want to deal with the hassle and red tape to get their duty rifle.
As a matter of fact, I have helped a number of officer/friends build their own AR rifles using the new tactical braces that let you sidestep getting an SBR. These are certified police officers who don't want to deal with the hassle and red tape to get their duty rifle.
If you don't actually use it to brace against your arm, don't be caught using it against your shoulder.
I'd just fork over the 200, get in line and do it right.
10-09-2017, 11:03 AM
#365
Registered Member
Originally Posted by Costco
I am for the ban on fully automatic weapons. I draw the line there because that if that lethality advantage were taken away from law enforcement, the next step they would take would have significant drawbacks in terms of collateral damage.
During the Falklands war between Argentina and UK, both sides were equipped with the FN FAL. The Argentines had fully automatic versions while the British were issued semi only. Automatics were obviously available, but the British chose to issue their troops semi-autos because the usefulness of the FN FAL on full auto just wasn't there.
In combat, FA has two main uses. The first is suppressive fire to keep targets pinned while the squad maneuvers to a better location. The second is in close quarters combat when accuracy is not very important and the soldier can "walk" the fire into the target.
During the North Hollywood shootout when the two bad guys had illegal modified fully automatic rifles, they did not kill a single person despite a 44 minute gun battle with hundreds of rounds fired. The cops were outgunned, but not because they lacked FA. Instead, it was because at that time officers were only issued pistols and shotguns and what they needed were rifles.
I don't think FA guns should be in general availability, but I do wish the Hughes Amendment was repealed so I could pick one up for a reasonable price. I am fine with them remaining as an NFA item. I refuse to get one right now because the value of transferable FA guns is all legislative fiat.
10-09-2017, 11:06 AM
#366
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Originally Posted by stogie1020
I believe he is referring to the notion that if civilians were allowed to have full auto easily, the playing field with LE would be equal (since LE already has selective fire) and thus not in the best interest of the rule of law. In order for LE to gain an advantage, they would have to move up to RPGs, belt fed systems, etc. and the collateral damage would be too high from the use of those weapons.
Not much of him to remember now.. good riddance.
That was one hell of a plan.
Too bad LE didn't get the chance to do the same in this situation.
10-09-2017, 11:09 AM
#367
Registered Member
Originally Posted by Majofo
The spirit of the use of those braces is being questioned.
If you don't actually use it to brace against your arm, don't be caught using it against your shoulder.
I'd just fork over the 200, get in line and do it right.
If you don't actually use it to brace against your arm, don't be caught using it against your shoulder.
I'd just fork over the 200, get in line and do it right.
We all sat down for a meeting with the local ATF LEO rep. I can't discuss the details of the meeting but in the end police chief gave the green light for the Captain and officers to build their own "pistols" for duty use.
10-09-2017, 11:16 AM
#368
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
I mean sure, put a brace on it for now.. but get a stamp.
I hope you built them piston uppers
I hope you built them piston uppers
10-09-2017, 11:20 AM
#369
Registered Member
Originally Posted by Majofo
I mean sure, put a brace on it for now.. but get a stamp.
I hope you built them piston uppers
I hope you built them piston uppers
10-09-2017, 12:28 PM
#370
Senior Moderator
I guess I maybe missed the point of the LEO comment. I thought it was being said that if automatic guns were banned from civilian use, it would apply to LE use as well, and then criminals would have cops out gunned. If that's not the idea, my bad.
Also, I can see how LEOs building their own guns is acceptable, but that isn't necessary. We are talking about civilian firearm reforms here. If that affects LEOs, you change the laws holding them back too. In the same manner, does our military build their own guns? Should they? Why wouldn't we have similar system for LEOs?
Also, I can see how LEOs building their own guns is acceptable, but that isn't necessary. We are talking about civilian firearm reforms here. If that affects LEOs, you change the laws holding them back too. In the same manner, does our military build their own guns? Should they? Why wouldn't we have similar system for LEOs?
10-09-2017, 01:12 PM
#371
Registered Member
Originally Posted by oo7spy
Also, I can see how LEOs building their own guns is acceptable, but that isn't necessary. We are talking about civilian firearm reforms here. If that affects LEOs, you change the laws holding them back too. In the same manner, does our military build their own guns? Should they? Why wouldn't we have similar system for LEOs?
Short barreled rifles (barrels under 16" and/or overall length less than 26 inches) are regulated separate and apart from regular guns. These guns are called NFA items.
They are legal for anybody to purchase assuming you pass the background checks and do all the appropriate fees and paperwork.
For many reasons I can't get into, officers prefer to sidestep the NFA because it is a pain. On the market there is a "brace" that is not considered a stock and therefore allows you to build a gun shorter than the NFA rules because without a stock it is not considered a rifle.
So the idea that officers are somehow exempt from civilian gun control is actually false. They have to abide by all rules with a single exception and that is they can acquire machine guns made after 1986 (provided they follow all the other NFA rules).
10-09-2017, 01:49 PM
#372
Moderator
Originally Posted by oo7spy
Why would any civilian gun law apply to law enforcement? They ridiculous conclusions being jumped to don't help.
Originally Posted by Majofo
Silencer is the legal term. It's only a misnomer because most people only know about guns through the media / movies. Just like everything else 
Cheesus crusst Costco.. you asian but not good at physics / maffs?!?! what does that term subsonic mean? It literally translates to below / under the the speed of sound.
.300 AAC subsonic loads are about as loud as a .22LR bc many .22LR loads are subsonic. What happens with a supersonic load? It goes over the speed of sound.. and what happens when an object does that????
It creates a sonic boom..
Also, even with subsonic loads, it's usually over 140db.. so you definitely want to wear ear protection..
Are you fucking kidding me with that last sentence. .223 is a very clean shooting round
It's louder because.. can you guess it??!?!.. it's supersonic. The escape velocity is almost 3x the .22lr load.
I wouldn't ever describe it as a harsh round to shoot in terms of noise or recoil.. even in short barrel form.. it's just a notch above 22LR
Most 12ga shotgun loads are much harsher to shoot in terms of recoil and noise.
I have an AK and revolver that would make you shit your pants.
I have hunting rifles that'd make you pass out.
I never double up.. usually foam plugs that's it.
I don't like shooting indoors though. Especially during hunting season. Even with ultimate ear protection, the reverb from some of those rifles can mess with you.
Why not?
Are you saying the police / law enforcement are above the law?
Cheesus crusst Costco.. you asian but not good at physics / maffs?!?! what does that term subsonic mean? It literally translates to below / under the the speed of sound.
.300 AAC subsonic loads are about as loud as a .22LR bc many .22LR loads are subsonic. What happens with a supersonic load? It goes over the speed of sound.. and what happens when an object does that????
It creates a sonic boom..
Also, even with subsonic loads, it's usually over 140db.. so you definitely want to wear ear protection..
Are you fucking kidding me with that last sentence. .223 is a very clean shooting round
It's louder because.. can you guess it??!?!.. it's supersonic. The escape velocity is almost 3x the .22lr load.
I wouldn't ever describe it as a harsh round to shoot in terms of noise or recoil.. even in short barrel form.. it's just a notch above 22LR
Most 12ga shotgun loads are much harsher to shoot in terms of recoil and noise.
I have an AK and revolver that would make you shit your pants.
I have hunting rifles that'd make you pass out.
I never double up.. usually foam plugs that's it.
I don't like shooting indoors though. Especially during hunting season. Even with ultimate ear protection, the reverb from some of those rifles can mess with you.
Why not?
Are you saying the police / law enforcement are above the law?
I just happen to have many friends that do, and we go shooting whenever time and weather permits.The LV attack is a unique one. I don't think there's been another lone wolf-type attack that was carried out at so far of a distance while inflicting so many casualties in such a short amount of time.
I've also played plenty of Battlefield so I am quite accustomed to bullet drop, thank you very much.
I have shot AKs and .308 before. Nothing bigger than .44 mag for pistols/revolvers yet. But like I said, I don't do it much as I don't own my own rifles yet. Tough to go out and shoot what you want, how you want here in Kalifornia. I have shot 12ga 3 1/2 magnum loads before, didn't flinch as I guess I'm used to shotguns, but my shoulder felt like Mike Tyson hit me with a haymaker.
Electronic ear muffs at the minimum for me... I have sensitive ears though. I can hear a gnat queef from 20 yards away.
10-09-2017, 01:58 PM
#373
Moderator
Originally Posted by wackjum
You are dramatically overstating the power and usefulness of fully automatic weapons.
During the Falklands war between Argentina and UK, both sides were equipped with the FN FAL. The Argentines had fully automatic versions while the British were issued semi only. Automatics were obviously available, but the British chose to issue their troops semi-autos because the usefulness of the FN FAL on full auto just wasn't there.
In combat, FA has two main uses. The first is suppressive fire to keep targets pinned while the squad maneuvers to a better location. The second is in close quarters combat when accuracy is not very important and the soldier can "walk" the fire into the target.
During the North Hollywood shootout when the two bad guys had illegal modified fully automatic rifles, they did not kill a single person despite a 44 minute gun battle with hundreds of rounds fired. The cops were outgunned, but not because they lacked FA. Instead, it was because at that time officers were only issued pistols and shotguns and what they needed were rifles.
I don't think FA guns should be in general availability, but I do wish the Hughes Amendment was repealed so I could pick one up for a reasonable price. I am fine with them remaining as an NFA item. I refuse to get one right now because the value of transferable FA guns is all legislative fiat.
During the Falklands war between Argentina and UK, both sides were equipped with the FN FAL. The Argentines had fully automatic versions while the British were issued semi only. Automatics were obviously available, but the British chose to issue their troops semi-autos because the usefulness of the FN FAL on full auto just wasn't there.
In combat, FA has two main uses. The first is suppressive fire to keep targets pinned while the squad maneuvers to a better location. The second is in close quarters combat when accuracy is not very important and the soldier can "walk" the fire into the target.
During the North Hollywood shootout when the two bad guys had illegal modified fully automatic rifles, they did not kill a single person despite a 44 minute gun battle with hundreds of rounds fired. The cops were outgunned, but not because they lacked FA. Instead, it was because at that time officers were only issued pistols and shotguns and what they needed were rifles.
I don't think FA guns should be in general availability, but I do wish the Hughes Amendment was repealed so I could pick one up for a reasonable price. I am fine with them remaining as an NFA item. I refuse to get one right now because the value of transferable FA guns is all legislative fiat.
But as Maj alluded to, if this guy were at the same elevation as the crowd and he were firing horizontally, casualties would have been even worse. It looked like at least one of his rifles had a bipod. Especially if he were theoretically firing while prone...
10-09-2017, 02:03 PM
#374
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
I pass by one of the worst mass shootings sights that was done from high elevation every day. The UT tower. That asshole had a devastating arsenal.
10-09-2017, 03:07 PM
#375
Stephen Paddock's 2013 testimony described unusual habits - CNN killers deposition
10-09-2017, 05:26 PM
#376
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
The second to last person we should pay any attention too just got called out.
I put my money on the marine.
Apparently the King of Instagram put the Marine's number out on the internet, except it was his wife's number.. Internet is serious business.
Ex-Marine challenges 'king of Instagram' Dan Bilzerian to fight after their Las Vegas shooting row comes to a head | The Independent
I put my money on the marine.
Apparently the King of Instagram put the Marine's number out on the internet, except it was his wife's number.. Internet is serious business.
Ex-Marine challenges 'king of Instagram' Dan Bilzerian to fight after their Las Vegas shooting row comes to a head | The Independent
10-09-2017, 05:46 PM
#377
Registered Member
Originally Posted by Costco
I have a question for those who are in support of some kind of ban of guns, or an entire category of guns, i.e. semi-automatics.
Were you for or against the Muslim travel ban and why?
To me they have some similarities at their core. The end goal is to reduce casualties. There's a ton of support from a large and vocal demographic. But in the end it discriminates against millions of people who did not do anything wrong. Religion and firearms both have certain freedoms and rights in this country.
Were you for or against the Muslim travel ban and why?
To me they have some similarities at their core. The end goal is to reduce casualties. There's a ton of support from a large and vocal demographic. But in the end it discriminates against millions of people who did not do anything wrong. Religion and firearms both have certain freedoms and rights in this country.
I am not supporting ban in gun in general. But that is who we are. We like guns... But there has to be strict background check and regulations on what type of gun, how much ammo and how many guns a person can legally own.
While it is impossible to eliminate all the crazies from owning a gun, but if we can stop 1 of them, that could save many lives some day.
Remember people are stupid... when things get heated, people often do shit that they would regret later.
10-09-2017, 05:49 PM
#378
Moderator
Originally Posted by Majofo
The second to last person we should pay any attention too just got called out.
I put my money on the marine.
Apparently the King of Instagram put the Marine's number out on the internet, except it was his wife's number.. Internet is serious business.
Ex-Marine challenges 'king of Instagram' Dan Bilzerian to fight after their Las Vegas shooting row comes to a head | The Independent
I put my money on the marine.
Apparently the King of Instagram put the Marine's number out on the internet, except it was his wife's number.. Internet is serious business.
Ex-Marine challenges 'king of Instagram' Dan Bilzerian to fight after their Las Vegas shooting row comes to a head | The Independent
OMG who cares
10-09-2017, 05:58 PM
#380
Registered Member
UFC PPV. All proceeds go to the survivors/victims. 
10-09-2017, 05:58 PM
#381
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Same.. altho I don't think the Marine cares if it's televised or not..
10-09-2017, 06:00 PM
#382
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Originally Posted by nfnsquared
UFC PPV. All proceeds go to the survivors/victims.
It would have been for charity but what a douche for not respecting his wishes and calling him out
I mean I thought it was chicken shit to run off the stage without telling people what was going on... but still..
10-09-2017, 09:32 PM
#384
Moderator
Pretty indifferent to Bilzerian but I'd like to see his ass kicked. His antics were immature.
10-10-2017, 08:37 AM
#385
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
I am not supporting ban in gun in general. But that is who we are. We like guns... But there has to be strict background check and regulations on what type of gun, how much ammo and how many guns a person can legally own.
While it is impossible to eliminate all the crazies from owning a gun, but if we can stop 1 of them, that could save many lives some day.
Remember people are stupid... when things get heated, people often do shit that they would regret later.
While it is impossible to eliminate all the crazies from owning a gun, but if we can stop 1 of them, that could save many lives some day.
Remember people are stupid... when things get heated, people often do shit that they would regret later.
10-10-2017, 11:34 AM
#386
Registered Member
Originally Posted by fsttyms1
So again, one bad melon and the rest should be thrown out? I personally know a few people who have, well we will just say many guns. They are all responsible people with them. Why should they lose the right to own them legally. Ammo, how do you know how much a person has? What if he likes to go to the range and shoot, or has land and likes to shoot. How do you put a limit on something where you cant keep track of? If the person is intent on doing harm they will find a way. Criminals/people intent on doing wrong dont care about legality and laws.
actually in this case, yes... because the 1 bad melon could take many lives and affect so many families. AGAIN, i said I DO NOT support banning guns, but they should be heavily regulated.
I just find it funny that nunchucks are banned here but you can go buy a gun instead.
The question i asked myself was, if one of my family members was one of the victim in one of these shootings, how would i react to these gun laws?
If you asked urself that question and your answer is still "free for all" then well, we just see things differently.
We all know that no one can stop criminals from doing what they wanted to do, so should we just remove all regulations?
I mean, you cant stop from someone driving 150mph, so should we just remove the speed limit?
Last edited by oonowindoo; 10-10-2017 at 11:38 AM.
10-10-2017, 11:36 AM
#387
Moderator
Originally Posted by fsttyms1
. How do you put a limit on something where you cant keep track of? .
10-10-2017, 12:26 PM
#388
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2007
Location: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"
Posts: 25,200
Liked 3,260 Times
in
1,978 Posts
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
.... they should be heavily regulated. ....
10-10-2017, 01:07 PM
#389
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Originally Posted by thoiboi
Maybe we should figure out a way to keep track of guns
10-10-2017, 01:11 PM
#390
Originally Posted by Majofo
of 400M guns..
like bruh, it could be hot. could have bodies on it.
"Idc, it was only $100"
shieet, you got me fucked up, see ya later homie
10-10-2017, 01:18 PM
#391
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
stupid fuccs.. can just get that hi-point special at Wally world for like fifty more. 
10-10-2017, 01:18 PM
#392
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
They heavy, they ugly, but they can shoot.
10-10-2017, 01:27 PM
#394
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Justn haz all da skeet guns
10-10-2017, 01:28 PM
#395
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Whenever I think of hi-points, I think of this TRG foo who popped his "baby 9" for youtube and made the news.. 
10-10-2017, 01:29 PM
#397
Registered Member
Originally Posted by Bearcat94
I assume in some sense you mean 'more heavily regulated', which I am not opposed to and have listed some additional regulation earlier that, imho, can be done relatively quickly and easily. But what I'm wondering is whether there is a list or compilation of the existing regulations? I sometimes get the impression that people feel guns are relatively unregulated, but I don't think that is necessarily true. A list of existing federal regulations on guns, gun sales, etc. I think would be pretty significant.
Also i think in addition to federal laws, there is also state laws. I think that is where majority of the differences are from, state to state.
Some of the obvious ones: Gun shows (no background check), Online purchases, private gun sales. I mean DMV is even required to be notified if you transferred a POS $1000 car, why not guns? (not to DMV obviously
)
Last edited by oonowindoo; 10-10-2017 at 01:33 PM.
10-10-2017, 01:55 PM
#398
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
actually in this case, yes... because the 1 bad melon could take many lives and affect so many families. AGAIN, i said I DO NOT support banning guns, but they should be heavily regulated.
I just find it funny that nunchucks are banned here but you can go buy a gun instead.
The question i asked myself was, if one of my family members was one of the victim in one of these shootings, how would i react to these gun laws?
If you asked urself that question and your answer is still "free for all" then well, we just see things differently.
We all know that no one can stop criminals from doing what they wanted to do, so should we just remove all regulations?
I mean, you cant stop from someone driving 150mph, so should we just remove the speed limit?
I just find it funny that nunchucks are banned here but you can go buy a gun instead.
The question i asked myself was, if one of my family members was one of the victim in one of these shootings, how would i react to these gun laws?
If you asked urself that question and your answer is still "free for all" then well, we just see things differently.
We all know that no one can stop criminals from doing what they wanted to do, so should we just remove all regulations?
I mean, you cant stop from someone driving 150mph, so should we just remove the speed limit?
Even if they had more regulation and tracking, aside from banning guns, nothing would have kept them out of the hands of the LV shooter.
He was squeaky clean, white, rich, old. That's not typically the type of person regulations would keep guns away from.
Gun enthusiasts feel the same, I'm sure most people tried to empathize. Man.. I fucking cried when I read the Wash Post story on Michelle Vo.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...e38_story.html
We can make changes that will have a positive effect, but we may never prevent events like this from occurring.
Regulations usually only regulate (criminalize) the innocent. I do think we need regulations, but let's use some common sense.
Chicago has some of the strictest regulations, yet there are thousands of victims of gun violence a year and hundreds of deaths.
I think leveling the playing field is safer in our current predicament.
Also.. autobahn is unrestricted speed limit, very low percentage of accidents.
Altho.. licensing is very strict and driving is serious business there.
I wouldn't object to that here (for guns and driving)
10-10-2017, 02:02 PM
#399
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
Some of the obvious ones: Gun shows (no background check), Online purchases, private gun sales. I mean DMV is even required to be notified if you transferred a POS $1000 car, why not guns? (not to DMV obviously )
)People can register for a gun show and put up a table and sell their wares as a private entity.
80-90% of gun show tables are legit businesses that do background checks (4473) on each gun sale.
But there are tables that are non-business entities that sell their private collection of guns.
That's the loophole (think lemon lot, place for private citizens to park their used car to sell).
Online purchases are not a loophole. You must have the gun sent to a FFL for transfer.
There are trader sites where people can post their private guns for sale.
This is regulated state by state and private sellers must follow their local laws.
I think these occurrences need to all fall in line and the system made more robust.
