Notices

Shooting on the Las Vegas Strip!

 
Old 10-05-2017, 03:10 PM
  #321  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
I went to your IG and actually saw pussy

Spoiler


Hello darkness my old friend...
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 03:13 PM
  #322  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Dan has pussy on his IG too..

Spoiler


I've come to talk to you again..
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 03:16 PM
  #323  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Las Vegas
Age: 35
Posts: 56,690
Received 1,370 Likes on 968 Posts








Mizouse is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 03:39 PM
  #324  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
https://www.yahoo.com/news/nra-white...190949986.html

The White House and National Rifle Association both came out in favor of reviewing regulations of bump fire stocks, the device that contributed to the deaths of 58 people in the Las Vegas mass shooting Sunday night.

“The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,” said the NRA in a statement released Thursday afternoon, its first public comments since the shooting.

Bump stocks are modifications that convert semi-automatic weapons to full automatics, allowing them to shoot hundreds of rounds per minute. They were originally created with the idea of making it easier for people with disabilities to shoot, but their demand has skyrocketed in the wake of the mass shooting as gun owners anticipate additional regulations on the devices. Bump stocks were found on twelve of the nearly two dozen firearms recovered from the hotel room of Las Vegas shooting suspect Stephen Paddock.

It was reported Thursday that the NRA had banned bump stocks at its own firing range in Fairfax, Va. While the NRA came out in favor of tighter regulations on bump stocks, it stopped short of voicing support for stricter gun laws across the board. In the same statement in which it endorsed the added bump-stock regulations, it also stated that banning guns would only increase crime and that Americans live in an “increasingly-dangerous world.”A bump stock that attaches to a semi-automatic rifle to increase the firing rate is seen at Good Guys Gun Shop in Orem, Utah, on Oct. 4, 2017. (Photo: George Frey/Reuters)In Thursday’s White House briefing, press secretary Sarah Sanders said that the administration “would like to be part of that conversation” about bump stocks, but that President Trump was a “strong supporter of the Second Amendment, and that hasn’t changed.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said Thursday in an interview that bump stocks are “clearly something we need to look into.” Rep. Carlos Curbelo, R-Fla., planned to introduce legislation Thursday that would ban the sale of the devices.

Republican senators John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Mike Rounds of South Dakota expressed interest in the issue to reporters.

“I’m going to wait until this report’s out from the police and get all that information,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chair of the Judiciary Committee.

However, not all Republicans were in favor of the idea.

“I think people ought to follow their heart, but they ought to take their brain with them,” said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., in an inter;iew with Yahoo News about his opposition to bump stock changes. “This is not about bump stocks; this is about a longstanding assault against the Second Amendment.”
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 04:33 PM
  #325  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Like I mentioned before.. they really serve no legitimate purpose other than some range fun
Good to see this being reviewed, might just be throwing a bone though.
I certainly would never own one because 1) ammo is expensive 2) It's not that fun

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2017...oint-statement

"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence."
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 04:35 PM
  #326  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
I'm guessing with their language, they're not pursuing a ban, but to regulate the sale (stamp.. wait some months, pay $200 essentially)
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 04:38 PM
  #327  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
If that's the case, they should extra scrutinize anyone who actually forks over coin to get a stamp for one.
I know some guys who are like.. it's $99 why not.. but if it's $200 + $99.. no way.
Most shooters would rather spend that on ammo.
For sure there's a run on them now if people think they're going to be taken away.
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 05:05 PM
  #328  
Get off my lawn
 
1Louder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Age: 51
Posts: 12,080
Received 4,581 Likes on 2,416 Posts
IMHO we've got to sack up and have the intestinal fortitude to ban some things at some point. Why not start with bump stocks? Do a buy-back so folks that have them have a way out.

We just have to start somewhere. This guy was rich enough to not care if it was $99 or $299. I don't think cost alone provides the deterrent we are looking for.
1Louder is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 05:09 PM
  #329  
2006 RRP TL "The Comrade"
 
nist7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Honolulu
Age: 33
Posts: 3,206
Received 562 Likes on 386 Posts
Holy fuck. NRA showing potential support for a gun accessory regulation. Is hell freezing over?

Also FUCK that senator who said it's not about bump stocks. THat dude needs to get a brain.

The 3 main factors that caused the massive amount of casualty in this incident, IMO:

1 - Large concentration of people in a relative open and small area (outdoor concert)
2 - High vantage point with good target sighting (high floor hotel room overlooking the site)
3 - High rate of fire (more bullets = more people struck/hurt/killed in a limited time, killer used bump stock mod it seems to dramatically increase his rifle's rate of fire)

Because the dude was firing for what...like 10min? So depending on how many rounds/min it can reduce casualty when the next mass shooting attacks if bump stocks were not available.

A dude was interviewed on NPR and asked about regulating bump stocks...and he carefully dodged the question and said the bump stock is an "accessory" that makes a normal rifle "simulate an automatic" but doesn't turn it into one. Of course fully legal and it can be fun.

But in this case it seems to be a reasonable thing to look at as it directly has an effect on how much damage he could've done.
nist7 is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 05:53 PM
  #330  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,555
Received 2,211 Likes on 1,314 Posts
Wackjum

I don't think a tax stamp should be applied to bump stocks. They should be banned outright.

Suppressors I'm unsure about. Extra scrutiny for anybody applying for a tax stamp is a great idea, as is computerizing the ATF database.
Costco is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 06:11 PM
  #331  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Las Vegas
Age: 35
Posts: 56,690
Received 1,370 Likes on 968 Posts
Mizouse is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 06:53 PM
  #332  
Excels at nothing
 
svtmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Age: 54
Posts: 35,960
Received 2,768 Likes on 1,514 Posts
What's wrong with that?
svtmike is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 07:41 PM
  #333  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
I honestly think more people could have been killed had he not used a bump stock. If he had used a bump stock at ground level, shooting horizontally, different story.
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 07:45 PM
  #334  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 07:47 PM
  #335  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
The article almost makes it sound like he thought about shooting his family.
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 07:48 PM
  #336  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Las Vegas
Age: 35
Posts: 56,690
Received 1,370 Likes on 968 Posts
Originally Posted by Majofo View Post
I honestly think more people could have been killed had he not used a bump stock. If he had used a bump stock at ground level, shooting horizontally, different story.


not sure on how his setup was, but if he had used that rifle with the bipod and had a properly zero'd scope, he'd have definitely killed a lot more people than the spraying and praying he did.

Mizouse is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 09:33 PM
  #337  
Senior Moderator
 
Bearcat94's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: N3503'16.75", W 08051'0.9"
Posts: 25,423
Received 3,377 Likes on 2,045 Posts
Originally Posted by nist7 View Post
.... [a] bump stock .... makes a normal rifle "simulate an automatic" but doesn't turn it into one. .....
Wondering why the phrase above iss in " " marks? It's 100% correct. With a bump stock, it's still a semi-automatic rifle. Each bullet still requires the trigger to be depressed .... one trigger pull, one bullet. The difference is that instead of your finger pulling the trigger, the trigger is pushed against your finger .... at a high rate of speed.

Not saying I support Bump Stocks (or not). Just not satisfied with 'journalism' like the Yahoo article quoted above that says, ".... Bump stocks are modifications that convert semi-automatic weapons to full automatics ...." which is 100% incorrect.

Last edited by Bearcat94; 10-05-2017 at 09:35 PM.
Bearcat94 is offline  
Old 10-05-2017, 10:38 PM
  #338  
Excels at nothing
 
svtmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Age: 54
Posts: 35,960
Received 2,768 Likes on 1,514 Posts
Originally Posted by Bearcat94 View Post
Wondering why the phrase above iss in " " marks? It's 100% correct. With a bump stock, it's still a semi-automatic rifle. Each bullet still requires the trigger to be depressed .... one trigger pull, one bullet. The difference is that instead of your finger pulling the trigger, the trigger is pushed against your finger .... at a high rate of speed.

Not saying I support Bump Stocks (or not). Just not satisfied with 'journalism' like the Yahoo article quoted above that says, ".... Bump stocks are modifications that convert semi-automatic weapons to full automatics ...." which is 100% incorrect.
Technicalities and semantics. The same things people rant against when criminals get off on them.

Maybe the effective thing to do would be to ban semiautomatics too since people like to play technicalities to circumvent the intent of the law banning automatic weapons.
svtmike is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 12:51 AM
  #339  
Senior Moderator
 
Bearcat94's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: N3503'16.75", W 08051'0.9"
Posts: 25,423
Received 3,377 Likes on 2,045 Posts
Originally Posted by svtmike View Post
Technicalities and semantics. The same things people rant against when criminals get off on them.

Maybe the effective thing to do would be to ban semiautomatics too since people like to play technicalities to circumvent the intent of the law banning automatic weapons.

So you're saying it doesn't need to be reported correctly?

Misleading or misinforming people about what these things are doesn't solve the problem.
Bearcat94 is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 06:05 AM
  #340  
Excels at nothing
 
svtmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Age: 54
Posts: 35,960
Received 2,768 Likes on 1,514 Posts
Originally Posted by Bearcat94 View Post
So you're saying it doesn't need to be reported correctly?

Misleading or misinforming people about what these things are doesn't solve the problem.
Not discussing the reporting.

Commenting on compliance with the letter of the law vs the spirit/intent of the law. "It's not an automatic weapon, it only functions like one."
svtmike is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 06:25 AM
  #341  
2006 RRP TL "The Comrade"
 
nist7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Honolulu
Age: 33
Posts: 3,206
Received 562 Likes on 386 Posts
Originally Posted by Bearcat94 View Post
Wondering why the phrase above iss in " " marks? It's 100% correct. With a bump stock, it's still a semi-automatic rifle. Each bullet still requires the trigger to be depressed .... one trigger pull, one bullet. The difference is that instead of your finger pulling the trigger, the trigger is pushed against your finger .... at a high rate of speed.

Not saying I support Bump Stocks (or not). Just not satisfied with 'journalism' like the Yahoo article quoted above that says, ".... Bump stocks are modifications that convert semi-automatic weapons to full automatics ...." which is 100% incorrect.
Because my original post was mentioning a dude who was being interviewed on radio and those were his exact words.

Obviously I agree with you in the ATF definition currently of a fully auto vs semi auto weapon...that it still requires a trigger pull per bullet.

But in the context of the interview, you can tell the dude was trying hard to try his best to distance a bump stocked semi auto with a fully auto that was designed from the factory.

It is also true that journalists need to be very clear about this and that it does not turn it into a fully auto weapon. But obviously, the accessory modifies the human-trigger combined function in such a way as to dramatically increase the rate of fire that would otherwise not be humanly possible with a normal semi auto trigger pull....a rate of fire that is normally only achieved by a gun that was designed from the get go to be fully auto. (edit: I'm assuming a bump stocked rifle cannot go as fast as a factory designed fully auto gun...I will accept corrections if the increase in rate of fire is not nearly as close to a fully auto gun....)

So then the question becomes, it's technically not a fully auto weapon by ATF definition, but by a logical/practical examination of the end effects of this accessory, it appears to function and behave similarly to a fully auto weapon...namely that of much higher rate of fire.

And again goes back to my point about the 3 major factors IMO that caused such a big casualty: condensed area, high vantage point of attacker, and high rate of fire.

One question for my own edification: what is the % increase/range of rate of fire of using a bump stock over what would humanly be possible using normal finger-trigger pull? And how would this compare to a typical fully auto rifle?
nist7 is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 02:38 PM
  #342  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Never go to bed angry

Majofo is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 02:38 PM
  #343  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 02:39 PM
  #344  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Spoiler


I'm just so happy her and her husband are ok and I'm able to give her a hug tomorrow. Please just take a moment to tell your family and friends how much you love them today. I almost made one of the biggest mistakes of my life tryna be funny. Also, it took 20 minutes to get that return text about them being ok. I haven't had a panic attack like that in years waiting to hear they were ok.
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 02:50 PM
  #345  
2006 RRP TL "The Comrade"
 
nist7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Honolulu
Age: 33
Posts: 3,206
Received 562 Likes on 386 Posts
Originally Posted by Majofo View Post
Never go to bed angry

Jesus.

Obviously this looks like good natured jabbing between two friends/family, but I can't imagine if the other guy actually got seriously hurt or killed.....yikes
nist7 is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 02:59 PM
  #346  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Originally Posted by nist7 View Post
And again goes back to my point about the 3 major factors IMO that caused such a big casualty: condensed area, high vantage point of attacker, and high rate of fire.
You keep posting this... it's called... Fish in a barrel

Ways he could have killed more:
Shot everyone from the gate.
Semi-truck rampage.
Semi-truck rampage with all that tannerite wired up.
etc....


and for your edification.. full auto takes a little over 2 seconds to mag dump a 30 rd mag.
That's how I figured he had a 100 rd mag since it was about 10 seconds of fire between mag changes.
There's a reason why the military transitioned away from full-auto rifles for a while..
Because you blow your load and probably missed your target doing so.
Now on the newer full-auto M4s, soldiers are trained to burst shot with trigger timing.



Regarding how fast you can shoot.. as fast as your little fingers can move.
Jerry is one of the quickest in the game.. AR isn't even his gun of choice, don't matter.
I know several guys that can rattle off rounds quickly and be center mass.

Like I said before, he might have killed more without the bump stock.
I'm not defending the bump stock. Again, I'd never buy one for this reason.
I wouldn't miss it if it were gone.

Majofo is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 03:49 PM
  #347  
Registered Member
 
brian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,963
Received 811 Likes on 533 Posts
brian2 is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 03:59 PM
  #348  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
That dude like...I wonder if Tammy has any cookies left...

Roger: Jen, are there any more...
Jen:
Roger: (walks over to Tammy) Hey Tammy, you have any more cookies left?
Tammy: You've asked me three times already
Roger: Well?
Tammy: No Roger, I don't have any cookies
Roger: You sure?
Tammy: Fuck off Roger.
Jackie: Sweetie, here's some cookies, don't let Roger see them.
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 07:26 PM
  #349  
Registered Member
 
oonowindoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15,605
Received 2,550 Likes on 1,779 Posts
I have been watching some of the conspiracy videos on Youtube. They were pretty funny.

The best Comment:
there was another shooter on the 4th floor, (flashing light in the video)
When asked: How come the window did not break? You can't shoot people without breaking the glass.
Answer: Government fixed it very quickly

oonowindoo is offline  
Old 10-06-2017, 09:12 PM
  #350  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Majofo is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 02:48 PM
  #351  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,352
Received 863 Likes on 492 Posts
Originally Posted by Costco View Post
Wackjum

I don't think a tax stamp should be applied to bump stocks. They should be banned outright.

Suppressors I'm unsure about. Extra scrutiny for anybody applying for a tax stamp is a great idea, as is computerizing the ATF database.
Suppressors should be fine. The problem with them is the media/Hollywood teaching everyone it becomes a fucking whisper and thus, someone can kill a lot more people in silence.
This guy fires a M16 without at the beginning and at 6:40 with one. It's still loud.
Rick_TL-S is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 03:00 PM
  #352  
Excels at nothing
 
svtmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Age: 54
Posts: 35,960
Received 2,768 Likes on 1,514 Posts
What is the legitimate purpose of the suppressor?
svtmike is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 03:46 PM
  #353  
Registered Member
 
wackjum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Age: 37
Posts: 4,303
Received 416 Likes on 218 Posts
Originally Posted by svtmike View Post
What is the legitimate purpose of the suppressor?
Brings the noise level down to where you don't need as much hearing protection. My ears can still ring after a few hours at the range while wearing hearing protection and shooting rifles. If it is an indoor range, I have to double up plugs and headset just for it to be comfortable.

We're talking about reducing the sound from 160 db, which is about a jet engine taking off, to 130 db, which is around a jackhammer.
wackjum is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 07:34 PM
  #354  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,555
Received 2,211 Likes on 1,314 Posts
Originally Posted by Rick_TL-S View Post
Suppressors should be fine. The problem with them is the media/Hollywood teaching everyone it becomes a fucking whisper and thus, someone can kill a lot more people in silence.
This guy fires a M16 without at the beginning and at 6:40 with one. It's still loud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM8xvE5B4yk
Absolutely.

I kept seeing them referred to as 'silencers' in the media and other places, which frankly is a misnomer, just like 'assault weapon'. I love hickok45's channel, I've actually seen that video before. The other worry about suppressors is the reduced muzzle flash, which would make it difficult to locate a shooter.

I can't say I've seen or heard any suppressors in person to verify, but I recall comparisons that .300 AAC subsonic is roughly as loud as .22LR. Not that I recommend it, but .22 is basically quiet enough to not necessarily need hearing protection. Nor have I tested how audible it is without hearing protection based on distance.

By comparison, everyone I've seen that shot .223 for the first time flinches for the first shot or so, even if they've shot other pistols and shotguns before. It's surprisingly loud. Well, most unsuppressed guns are. Whenever I shoot .223 or larger I double up on hearing protection... ear plugs as well as electronic ear muffs.
Costco is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 07:44 PM
  #355  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,555
Received 2,211 Likes on 1,314 Posts
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.
Costco is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 09:46 PM
  #356  
Excels at nothing
 
svtmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Age: 54
Posts: 35,960
Received 2,768 Likes on 1,514 Posts
Originally Posted by Costco View Post
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.
People are not manufactured objects. The "Muslim ban" discriminates against people. No one would be discriminated against in a semi auto weapons ban; the ban would apply to everyone.

Are you for or against the ban on full automatic weapons? Why?
svtmike is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 10:19 PM
  #357  
Get off my lawn
 
1Louder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Age: 51
Posts: 12,080
Received 4,581 Likes on 2,416 Posts
Originally Posted by Costco View Post
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.
I agree with mike - it's a difficult comparison because it deals with banning people vs. objects.

That said, I don't support bans for either. Because in both of those cases bans won't achieve the results people think they will. Terrorists will find their way into America with or without a ban. Banned guns will also find their way into America.

I feel the same about both - common sense measures that make credible attempts to keep the most dangerous people/guns out of the country. Knowing full well it won't be 100%, but we don't have to make it easy either.
1Louder is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 11:03 PM
  #358  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,555
Received 2,211 Likes on 1,314 Posts
Originally Posted by svtmike View Post
People are not manufactured objects. The "Muslim ban" discriminates against people. No one would be discriminated against in a semi auto weapons ban; the ban would apply to everyone.

Are you for or against the ban on full automatic weapons? Why?
Gun owners are people too in either case, the ban would apply to everyone. But it would only affect you if you were a part of that demographic.

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.
Costco is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 08:43 AM
  #359  
Senior Moderator
 
oo7spy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 25,168
Received 4,486 Likes on 3,209 Posts
Why would any civilian gun law apply to law enforcement? They ridiculous conclusions being jumped to don't help.
oo7spy is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 10:10 AM
  #360  
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
 
Majofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Waffles, BU
Posts: 84,666
Received 10,348 Likes on 7,587 Posts
Originally Posted by Costco View Post
Absolutely.

I kept seeing them referred to as 'silencers' in the media and other places, which frankly is a misnomer, just like 'assault weapon'. I love hickok45's channel, I've actually seen that video before. The other worry about suppressors is the reduced muzzle flash, which would make it difficult to locate a shooter.

I can't say I've seen or heard any suppressors in person to verify, but I recall comparisons that .300 AAC subsonic is roughly as loud as .22LR. Not that I recommend it, but .22 is basically quiet enough to not necessarily need hearing protection. Nor have I tested how audible it is without hearing protection based on distance.

By comparison, everyone I've seen that shot .223 for the first time flinches for the first shot or so, even if they've shot other pistols and shotguns before. It's surprisingly loud. Well, most unsuppressed guns are. Whenever I shoot .223 or larger I double up on hearing protection... ear plugs as well as electronic ear muffs.
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.


Originally Posted by Costco View Post
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.
Did you huff paint this morning?

Originally Posted by oo7spy View Post
Why would any civilian gun law apply to law enforcement? They ridiculous conclusions being jumped to don't help.
Why not?

Are you saying the police / law enforcement are above the law?
Majofo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.