[jamest91]

If we can force someone to use less powerful weapons or no weapon at all, does that mean we can force someone to always obey the law and do what the government says?

Hmmm

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Volucris

Kinetic energy is not a wounding mechanism.

This is what happens. We get people like you who spread rhetoric against gun ownership when you know little to nothing about the subject matter.


Yes, I have a rifle for self defense. Why? Because it's a vastly superior tool compared to a handgun.

Kinetic energy may not be a wounding mechanism but without it there is no wound. It's the easiest stat for comparing ability to impart damage without getting heavily into specifics.

I know nothing about the subject and am spreading anti-gun rhetoric? Did you even read my posts? Rifle for home defense, I hope your neighbors appreciate bullet holes.

[sirX]

There is ammunition available for AR's that are designed to not over penetrate. So it is just as safe, and sometimes safer than handgun or shotgun rounds.

[F1VENOM]

Frangible rounds don't account for feet of length in areas a few feet wide.

[Blake360]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

I know nothing about the subject and am spreading anti-gun rhetoric? Did you even read my posts? Rifle for home defense, I hope your neighbors appreciate bullet holes.

Ever heard of hollow points?

[Volucris]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Kinetic energy may not be a wounding mechanism but without it there is no wound. It's the easiest stat for comparing ability to impart damage without getting heavily into specifics.

I know nothing about the subject and am spreading anti-gun rhetoric? Did you even read my posts? Rifle for home defense, I hope your neighbors appreciate bullet holes.

Yep, you don't know what you're talking about.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Blake360

Ever heard of hollow points?

Ever heard of lint?

Originally Posted by Volucris

Yep, you don't know what you're talking about.

What a compelling argument. The foundation of because you said so really put on an elegant display. Please go on about how I'm a gun hating liberal.

[AlphaNeo36]

Originally Posted by jamest91

If we can force someone to use less powerful weapons or no weapon at all, does that mean we can force someone to always obey the law and do what the government says?

Hmmm

Oh look, james said something dumb again. Holmes bought his rifle and drum magazine legally (home defense, lol). If those were banned, he wouldn't have bought them would he?

[ripdisc]

Originally Posted by BodyCount81

I don't understand this. The Saiga I have has nothing done to it.

No pistol grip, no flash hider, comes with a 10 round detachable magazine, and I don't think it has a bayonet lug(why are these being banned?). That's how it was bought brand new so I don't see why they're trying to ban them.

that's whats silly about it. the things that make a gun an "assault rifle" really don't matter. does a flash hider make a gun more lethal?
a colapsable stock? a pistol grip? a 10 round magazine? the difference these stupid little accessories would make would have to be insanely small if not zero.

a rifle or shotgun are more deadly and it is because of kinetic energy. around 30 percent of people shot with pistols (any from 22 to 44 mag) are dead. rifles and shotguns its more like 70 percent. most pistols shoot around 1000fps and most rifles 3000. shotguns are closer to a pistol but say its 00buck you are getting shot 9 times at once. caliber matters but not as much as people think. http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866

[sirX]

That link also shows that .22(short, long and long rifle) is better than a 9mm. Last time I checked, no professionals are pushing people to carry .22's over a 9mm.


Also, it does not show .223's statistics. Only "All Centerfire Rifles", which could be .223, 30-06, .308, 50 beowolf, etc....


Also, last but not least, he uses the phrase "stopping power".

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Who needs a rifle to protect themselves? Planning on facing the Brits?

What a silly question.

It gets back to philosophy of use. None of my sporting rifles kill anything other than paper. The chances of a purchased firearm being used in a homicide is 0.001%. If they were made to kill wouldn't that number be a hell of a lot higher?

You have a greater chance of ending up in the hospital from a kitchen knife injury than you do a firearm.




It's so sad that people in this country want to take away rights based on 0.001%.
The same can be said for video games. Over 7 million play COD and when 1 kid says that video game violence affected him everyone wants to bring about some knee jerk reaction to demonize an inanimate object. Lets forget the fact that it's 1 out of 7 million.


From a mental standpoint the only thing that all these killings have in common is medication and I don't expect the Obama administration to do **** about the pharmaceutical industry. They make the NRA look like the minor leagues.

[F1VENOM]

Care to substantiate any of those numbers or is this like the wobbly 5.56's?

[ripdisc]

Originally Posted by sirX

That link also shows that .22(short, long and long rifle) is better than a 9mm. Last time I checked, no professionals are pushing people to carry .22's over a 9mm.


Also, it does not show .223's statistics. Only "All Centerfire Rifles", which could be .223, 30-06, .308, 50 beowolf, etc....


Also, last but not least, he uses the phrase "stopping power".

it's real world stats. it's not saying a 22 is better than a 9. he even states that. it is mostly geared towards stopping power in a self defense stand point. most of the time someone shot twice with any of those calibers is done coming after you. some of them do stop in 1 shot quite effectively. a 223 still has much more kinetic energy and is therefore much more deadly than a hand gun, but not by leaps and bounds. it's easier to hit someone with a rifle so that will play in there. check out studies by people like ayoob. or some of the high velocity info out there. some people think more mass is better. some just think its penetration and expansion. it's a bit of all of those mixed in with some luck (shot placement etc).

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Care to substantiate any of those numbers or is this like the wobbly 5.56's?

I'd be happy to.

The numbers are widely available, you just need to do the math yourself. Below are the number for 2011.

2011:
Firearms purchased: ~10,800,000
Firearms homicide: 8583
Ratio: 0.07%

This ignores the same firearm being used in multiple homicides so the number is actually much smaller.

Goes back to my point. The odds of a purchased firearm being used in a crime is EXTREMELY small. It's even smaller when we look at just sporting rifles.

[F1VENOM]

Stats from where?

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Stats from where?

I'm confused. Are you mad that the numbers aren't much higher? Do you think it should be more like 25% of purchased firearms are involved in a homicide?

There are tons of websites that give these numbers I welcome you to grab the highest number of homicides per year and the lowest number of firearms purchased per year and try to come up with a number that is higher than 0.1%.

It's such a small number it's statistically insignificant when trying to correlate guns to crime. It's the ultimate in correlation does not equal causation.

[F1VENOM]

You're confused because I'm asking for the source of those exact statistics?

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

You're confused because I'm asking for the source of those exact statistics?

I hope that this will help you get started on your journey to facts and not what piers morgan tells you to think.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gun+related+homicides+us+2011

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=guns+sold+in+the+us+annually

[sucka T.]

The concept of LMGTFY is funny to me.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

I hope that this will help you get started on your journey to facts and not what piers morgan tells you to think.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gun+related+homicides+us+2011

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=guns+sold+in+the+us+annually

So you won't post the exact source or you don't have one?

[sucka T.]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

So you won't post the exact source or you don't have one?

Are you saying the statistics are wrong? Im sure it wont take much work to find the statistics yourself.