Duchess Jack Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) No No Yes (hollow points are fine and a good round for stopping people) I can see why law enforcement would want to make assault rifles illegal, I'd hate to have people shooting them at me. You always want more fire power than your opponent. But doesn't that fly in the face of the idea that if they are made illegal that they'd still be out there? Seems to me like they are a little to invested in the idea to have half measures. eta: also, I was wondering why you think people should have armor piercing, hollow tipped or explosive rounds? Edited July 25, 2012 by Duchess Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Doesn't an assault rifle have an automatic mode that can fire shots rapidly? As opposed to a shotgun where you shot a round, have to cock the gun to shoot the next round? How long would it take to shoot 10 shots from a shot gun vs. an assault rifle? How quickly can I blast through 10 rounds with an assault rifle vs. a regular rifle? 99% of the so-called "assault-rifles" legally owned in the US are only semi automatic. In order to get a select fire weapon you have to jump through a ton of hoops, including a special ATF background check including finger prints, get permission from local law enforcement, and pay a tax. I've looked into doing it and the process takes about 9 months from start to finish. A quality semi-automatic shotgun will shoot just as fast as a so-called "assault" rifle, unless the rifle is fully automatic. I'm unaware of any mass killings in my lifetime with a legally owned fully automatic weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) Does anybody disagree with background checks for owning guns? No Does anybody disagree with having one's guns registered (other than Ice-T) YES Does anybody disagree with disallowing hollow-tipped bullets, explosive rounds, etc? YES Also... I keep on hearing from law enforcement folk on how they rather see assault rifles made illegal for anyone but law enforcement and the military. Any thoughts on this? With the exception of big city brass who are politicians, which should not be confused with law enforcement officers , I have not heard this. I use hollow point bullets all the time. My 1911 is loaded with them right now. If I ever have to shoot someone, I want them to go down as fast as possible. Additionally I use hollow points when hunting with my revolver, or with some old lever guns I have chambered for pistol cartridges. I do not have any armor piercing bullets or explosive bullets, as they are illegal in Texas. ETA: My .500 S&W Magnum will pierce most body armor, though it is not considered and armor piercing round do to it's components. I use it for hunting hogs and protection while bow hunting. Edited July 25, 2012 by Perchoutofwater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 With the right shotgun you can blast through rounds as fast as you can with a so-called assault rifle. You can get a 20 round drum for a 12 gauge. In a confined space like movie theater 20 rounds from a 12 gauge is going to be much more deadly than 100 rounds from a so-called assault rifle. BTW, if I wanted to kill someone I wouldn't use an so-called assault rifle or a shotgun. I'd either use a large caliber rifle from 1,000 yards away or a bomb, depending on whether I wanted to kill a specific person or kill a bunch of people. The chance of getting caught would be much smaller. How would you cause panic and chaos inside a movie theater with a high powered rifle from 1000 feet away? I can only remember one such shooter in recent history, the one in the DC area back shortly after 9/11. While that may be what you'd do to avoid getting caught, that is not the primary concern of these shooters. Most don't care about getting caught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Here's an interesting article I just read http://m.rapidcityjournal.com/news/nra-finds-some-gop-lawmakers-resistant-to-gun-laws/article_9d84958f-318b-5e8c-b7a5-9536c8646afc.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 How would you cause panic and chaos inside a movie theater with a high powered rifle from 1000 feet away? I can only remember one such shooter in recent history, the one in the DC area back shortly after 9/11. While that may be what you'd do to avoid getting caught, that is not the primary concern of these shooters. Most don't care about getting caught. Again if I was looking for damaging and incite panic I'd use the bomb. If I wanted to make sure I was going to get a specific individual I'd use a rifle from a distance and get them going in or coming out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Again if I was looking for damaging and incite panic I'd use the bomb. If I wanted to make sure I was going to get a specific individual I'd use a rifle from a distance and get them going in or coming out. I'm glad you've thought it through and know what you'd do. But most of the people taking these actions have been using guns, not bombs or long range rifles. Maybe guns are easier to get access to and use than building these bombs or being an expert long range shooter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I'm glad you've thought it through and know what you'd do. But most of the people taking these actions have been using guns, not bombs or long range rifles. Maybe guns are easier to get access to and use than building these bombs or being an expert long range shooter. Not really. You can get the makings for a bomb easier than you can a gun unless you have a CHL. You can look on the internet to figure out how to do it, if you did not learn enough in chemistry class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Doesn't an assault rifle have an automatic mode that can fire shots rapidly? As opposed to a shotgun where you shot a round, have to cock the gun to shoot the next round? How long would it take to shoot 10 shots from a shot gun vs. an assault rifle? How quickly can I blast through 10 rounds with an assault rifle vs. a regular rifle? I wish!!!! You cannot own an automatic rifle unless you have a license from the ATF, pay a $600 fee and wait months to get said license after you clear significant background check. Then the cost of a machine gun (aka automatic weapon) typically is five figures because they do not allow any new sales to the general population and so you have to purchase from the limited amount of used guns out there. If you are in the military or the police, you can get a rifle with the selector switch you refer to but it is not at all on any "assault" weapons that you buy down at the gun store. The only time to my knowledge that automatic weapons were used in a crime was that time in Los Angeles and those weapons I believe were both stolen from the military. You hit on one of the many misunderstandings about "assault" weapons. By the way, my shotgun is not a "pump", it too is a semiautomatic. just pull the trigger sort of gun until it empties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Not really. You can get the makings for a bomb easier than you can a gun unless you have a CHL. You can look on the internet to figure out how to do it, if you did not learn enough in chemistry class. Holmes could have built a bomb for the movies as evidenced by his apartment. But when he wanted a body count, he elected to buy 4 guns instead. Wonder why he did that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I use it for hunting hogs Just a quick question, are these hogs actually edible? Or they more of just a nuisance? I know wild hogs can really tear up land. Just didn't know if they have value for food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Holmes could have built a bomb for the movies as evidenced by his apartment. But when he wanted a body count, he elected to buy 4 guns instead. Wonder why he did that. Either he thought he'd enjoy shooting them more than blowing them up, or he wanted to get caught. He could have gotten everyone in the theater with a bomb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Just a quick question, are these hogs actually edible? Or they more of just a nuisance? I know wild hogs can really tear up land. Just didn't know if they have value for food. Yes and yes. Depending on how big they are, and what time of year it is, they are good eating. I'll only take the meat from boars weighing less than 100 lbs and dry sows less than 150 lbs. Any bigger and I really just don't like eating them. My favorite for eating are 50 lbs or smaller. More than anything though, they are a nuisance. The guy that owns the land I lease to hunt actually paid someone to come in with a helicopter and kill a bunch of them. They think they killed between 60-80, as not all of them were recoverable. They tear up crops, injure and even kill calves, and compete with the livestock and deer for resources. I'll shoot any hog I see, anytime I see it, unless I'm hunting from deer and the hogs are just passing through the area I'm hunting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Either he thought he'd enjoy shooting them more than blowing them up, or he wanted to get caught. He could have gotten everyone in the theater with a bomb. Based on some of the responses here, what I've learned, and what I know, I think this is a very accurate response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Not sure you can apply any rational line of thought to what he was trying to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Does anybody disagree with background checks for owning guns? No but they are not that effective Does anybody disagree with having one's guns registered (other than Ice-T) For what purpose? No one needs to know what I have. Does anybody disagree with disallowing hollow-tipped bullets, explosive rounds, etc? Hollow points are very common - Most every hunter uses them. One range I go to requires them. Explosive rounds are illegal and not available to law-abiding citizens Also... I keep on hearing from law enforcement folk on how they rather see assault rifles made illegal for anyone but law enforcement and the military. Any thoughts on this? Same knee jerk reaction the last time they banned them and it made no difference. How many crimes are actually committed with an "assault" rifle? It is like outlawing switchblade knives because they scare people but it changes nothing and just makes someone think they did something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 so just the criminals? That's how it works. When you criminalize something, generally only the criminals will continue doing it. Either he thought he'd enjoy shooting them more than blowing them up, or he wanted to get caught. He could have gotten everyone in the theater with a bomb. Why wouldn't the fact it is easier to shoot the place up rather than bomb it be an option? Does anybody disagree with background checks for owning guns? Does anybody disagree with having one's guns registered (other than Ice-T) Does anybody disagree with disallowing hollow-tipped bullets, explosive rounds, etc? Also... I keep on hearing from law enforcement folk on how they rather see assault rifles made illegal for anyone but law enforcement and the military. Any thoughts on this? No No Yes Assault rifles are unnecessary for civilians Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Assault rifles are unnecessary for civilians Tell that to the store owners in LA during the 92 riots. I remember vividly seeing a guy on the roof of his store with an uzi walking back and forth as business around him were getting looted. His didn't, and amazingly enough he didn't have to shoot anyone either. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 What this woman went through is what sparked Texas into allowing concealed handguns. Since then, the only massacre in Texas was at Fort Hood, where handguns were prohibited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Not really. You can get the makings for a bomb easier than you can a gun unless you have a CHL. You can look on the internet to figure out how to do it, if you did not learn enough in chemistry class. My chemestry classes did not go into any detail on bomb making. I guess I would have had to extrapolate from the info I learned generally on exothermic reactions. Personally I think the old fashioned non-explosive exothermic reaction of plain old fire would be more devastating than any gun in many situations and would be the go to solution as the tool for destruction if guns magically disappeared. With a few simple locks and chains and a bit of gasoline great havoc can be brought. Most of us are vulnerable to fire in a number of scenarios, being so dependant upon buildings as we are, and considering we are creatures that have to sleep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=sx3+shotgun&mid=AB89F7B10C0A6FB72942AB89F7B10C0A6FB72942&view=detail&FORM=VIRE4 I have one of these. It is amoung the many shotguns I own. I also own several rifles and several handguns. I do not carry concealed or otherwise, though I am authorized to do so. My guns are well locked up, and the ammunition therefore is well locked up as well in a separate location. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 I say civilians don't need machine guns and this is what you offer? Tell that to the store owners in LA during the 92 riots. I remember vividly seeing a guy on the roof of his store with an uzi walking back and forth as business around him were getting looted. His didn't, and amazingly enough he didn't have to shoot anyone either. If he had no insurance, I have no sympathy for him and you don't know if he shot anybody or if his store was looted anyways. What this woman went through is what sparked Texas into allowing concealed handguns. Since then, the only massacre in Texas was at Fort Hood, where handguns were prohibited. First off, I don't need a lecture on the meaning of the Constitution from a career civilian. Unlike a career civilian I was willing to die for it so I have a concept of its meaning an applications to daily living. Here is a list of things that also would have been helpful in those situations: nuclear weapon tank bazooka adamsite lysergic acid cyanide gas mustard gas ricin sarin anthrax penicillin if you are eating at Lubys Besides, she didn't leave her AR-15 in the car, she left her pistol. I don't feel any safer from Arab terrorists or whacked out nerds when everyone brings their pistol to the movies or walks around town with their AR-15. There is not a single shred of evidence that civilians with weapons would have done any good in either situation. See, I have as much of a right to be and feel safe as you do. Why do you surmise that soldiers aren't allowed to carry weapons around base when not on duty? Why hasn't the Army changed that? We all know the answer - even the Army knows you don't need a bunch of people running around with guns looking for a reason to use them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 For what purpose? No one needs to know what I have. Let's say its stolen and a crime is committed with it - or lets say you were short on cash and had to sell your gun (not that you would). Isn't it important for members of law enforcement to know where the gun came from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fingfootball Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Let's say its stolen and a crime is committed with it - or lets say you were short on cash and had to sell your gun (not that you would). Isn't it important for members of law enforcement to know where the gun came from? The government already has to much control of everything. If things ever go really bad in this country I dont want anyone to have an inventory of what is in my gun safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 keepin it real study, out of 653 homes the baseball bat is the weapon of choice for home security, hunters generally have a gun by the bed and a safe, one house where this guy makes his own ammo had guns all over the place, there was a handgun sittin ontop the water heater don't see that eveyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.