It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sensible gun control

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

It's funny how the pro-gun nuts skirt the issue:

1. Possible number of rounds that could be fired per minute (manual or automatic).
2. Magazine size.
3. Caliber size
4. Muzzle velocity




posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I'm a big fan of the good old bolt action rifle. The mechanism is durable, so durable that I've personally handled one from 1918 and it was still firing perfectly.

I don't see the need to get something smaller or automatic.

The bolt action rifle is a weapon of war, only designed to kill people. It can fire rounds much faster than a single shot.

That is the same argument against people owning a semiautomatic rifle.

It is a silly argument.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: dfnj2015

It's funny how the pro-gun nuts skirt the issue:

1. Possible number of rounds that could be fired per minute (manual or automatic).
2. Magazine size.
3. Caliber size
4. Muzzle velocity

Charles Whitman used a bolt action rifle to kill 18 and injure 31 at the University of Texas.
Yes , he used a Remington deer rifle to do that.
Rate of fire on that rifle....? Is it too fast?
edit on b000000282018-02-23T09:38:18-06:0009America/ChicagoFri, 23 Feb 2018 09:38:18 -0600900000018 by butcherguy because: Fixed link.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


1. Possible number of rounds that could be fired per minute (manual or automatic).


"Manual" isn't even a shooting term. Beyond that, anything short of a muzzle loading weapon can be fired as fast as the trigger can be pulled and the action worked.


2. Magazine size.


Irrelevant to anything that isn't a muzzle loader. It's been demonstrated that a limited magazine capacity does almost nothing to slow down a proficient shooter, and does only slightly more to slow down a completely novice shooter.


3. Caliber size


What does that matter? A .22 can kill a person as dead as a .45 can.


4. Muzzle velocity


You can easily achieve 1200 feet-per-second from a muzzle loader (which you seem to be trying to chop the 2nd Amendment down to with this post), which is a muzzle velocity on par with many handguns.


It's funny how the pro-gun nuts skirt the issue:


It's funny how you clearly know next to nothing about firearms beyond that they make loud noises, have no problem showing how little about them you actually know, and then complain when you don't understand the responses to your ignorant commentary about firearms as if it's somehow everybody else's fault for knowing what they're talking about.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: dfnj2015

It's funny how the pro-gun nuts skirt the issue:

1. Possible number of rounds that could be fired per minute (manual or automatic).
2. Magazine size.
3. Caliber size
4. Muzzle velocity


It's funny that you continue to show your ignorance after it's been carefully explained to you: Very hard for anyone to own a automatic weapon, and....there is no such thing as a "manual" gun.

Rounds per minute fired depends on 3 factors:

1) Is the gun semi-automatic or bolt / lever action?

a) Depending on the gun, this won't mater, see the video of me and my son below.



As you can see in the video, I'm able to shoot a double action revolver pretty darn fast.

2) How fast can you pull the trigger? (see above video).

3) How well maintained is the gun? You can get rounds to jam, or stove pipe on you, which completely halts you from shooting until it's clear.

Magazine size:

Varies, and exactly how is limiting it going to stop people from shooting others? You have to be pretty stupid to not realize that you can quickly eject a spent magazine and load a new one. People that have decided to go mass murder will most likely come with several magazines.

You think these crazy criminals who are already ignoring the law on murder are going to obey a magazine capacity law?

MWAHAHAHAHAHA.

That's the most IGNORANT thinking I've ever seen (except for Flat Earthers).

Caliber size:

You can kill someone instantly with a .22. I can also puncture kevlar with it.

Caliber mostly maters depending upon what you're shooting. People? You can drop them with a .22. Bears and wild boar? Yah, you're going to need something bigger than a .22

Muzzle Velocity:

Do you even know what you're talking about here? There are a LOT of factors involved that will determine the muzzle velocity of a projectile.

However, all actual bullets have one thing in common: their muzzle velocity will be great enough to puncture flesh and shatter bone. However, here is some interesting facts for you:

Muzzle velocity of a .45 ACP round from a government issues M1911A1 semi-automatic pistol: 830 feet per second

Muzzle velocity of a .45 ACP round from a M1A1 Thompson submachine gun: 950 feet per second.

Muzzle velocity of a .30-30 150 grain round from a lever action gun: 2,390 feet per second.

Wow...looky there.....the much slower fire rate of the lever action gun has a muzzle velocity that is over twice that of a machine gun.....

Again: in all cases, they are fast enough to deliver very damaging energy to anyone that get's hit by it.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: openyourmind1262

Automatic firearms... To protect yourself from what?

Fireants? The Ruskies?

Does the Constitution specify that you need a reason?
Or does it mention specifically, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It has already been infringed upon.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

The first two seconds of your video sum up my entire feelings on this debate.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
It's not my hobby to own guns so I don't really care if they outlaw the AR-15.

You should care about preserving rights a freedoms, even in the face of the reality that a tiny, tiny minority of that 320-million population may abuse said rights.


As far as I know the 2nd Amendment rights does not mean guns cannot be regulated by laws. Maybe I'm wrong and someone can enlightened if the 2nd Amendment means gun owners have free reign over their hobby.


Definition of infringe
infringed; infringing

transitive verb

1 : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

Merriam-Webster


Now for the Second Amendment (my underlining):

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Cornell Law School


As you'll note, the "shall note be infringed" references "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms." So, technically speaking, the Second Amendment provides for the right to keep and bear all unspecified arms.

Now, that doesn't mean that the SCOTUS hasn't ruled against the obvious and allowed for some very onerous restrictions to be placed on this right, but if you go to the source and read the statements and writings of the Founding Fathers, they were pretty adamant in this being a broad-sweeping right that could not be...what did Merriam-Webster say...oh yeah, could not be "encroach[ed] upon in a way that violates law or the rights of others."

Gun-control legislation does exactly that--it violates law (the Constitution) and encroaches on the rights of the people to keep and bear and unspecified type or amount of Arms.

I'm not saying that I agree that people should be able to own nuclear bombs or hellfire missiles, but if restrictions are going to be put on the 2nd Amendment, it should be done the correct way--through a constitutional convention and make an amendment that further defines which arms are and are not legal to own by the general public.

The problem is, most of us still hold our freedoms and rights in high enough esteem that it would not pass a constitutional convention, so instead, legislators at all levels pass laws that violate the 2nd Amendment and hope that no one takes it to the SCOTUS at a time when there is a majority of constitutionally minded judges. And, sadly, when laws do make it there, some are upheld (incorrectly, IMO) and others are struck down (like outright bans against concealed carry in states).

It's a crap shoot as to what and when these laws will be upheld or struck down, and that does a disservice to our constitution, which clearly dictates that our right to keep and bear arms "shall not" (meaning "will not") be infringed, but understand that every infringement is technically unconstitutional.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Ok, tell me how you regulate a semi auto to X rate of fire. Being that it fires once for every time you pull the trigger, it fires as fast as you can pull the trigger. So, again, tell me how to regulate that.

Caliber size. What is your idea of a "suitable" caliber? .22? How about deer/moose/elk hunters? Gonna make them shoot a large animal with such a pitiful round so it will suffer? What about duck hunters? Ever tried to hit a dove/duck or geese with a .22?

Muzzle velocity depends on bullet weight, powder charge and length of barrel.

And one last question : Do you actually know f**k all about firearms?

You came up with this crap, now let's see you work all this out.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

I have a Marlin 30-30. Mine was my dads, he got it in 83 with a scope. I replaced it with a nice cabela's scope since it was fogged over. I love my marlin 30-30...its my hog rifle of choice.

I like your little 9mm rifle. That's a cool rifle. Looks kinda like the mini 14.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   
10 minutes now and still waiting. I mean, you had all this worked out ahead of time right? You wouldn't just post BS like this unless you already had the answers would you?

and in case you're wondering?....yeah, I'm gonna keep this up till you show me how to do all the things you suggested.
Buckle up sunshine.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: dfnj2015

It's funny how the pro-gun nuts skirt the issue:

1. Possible number of rounds that could be fired per minute (manual or automatic).
2. Magazine size.
3. Caliber size
4. Muzzle velocity


Alright then.

Let's treat the first the same way your treating the second.

Back to smoke signals,pencils, and paper.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 10:58 AM
link   
..................still waiting



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: eriktheawful

The first two seconds of your video sum up my entire feelings on this debate.


The frustrated sigh?

Yah. Comes from arguing with people who think they hold the moral high ground, but in reality they don't know jack about what they are talking about......and REFUSE to at least educate themselves on the subject, all the while insisting that they must be right.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful


The frustrated sigh?


To be honest, what grabbed my attention in the first two seconds was the N7 hoodie.




posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I am tired of hearing that the AR 15 is a weapon of war.

No crap, it is a weapon of war.

So is the 1903 Springfield rifle.

The AR 15 design has been available to civilians since.... guess what year?

1963.

Yep, they have been available for mass murder all that time... much of it without any background checks before sales.

It is a problem now.

Look at a list of school shootings and see where they spiked... during the Obama years.

What changed?



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

You'd rather see legislation based on emotion rather than facts and data. For instance, what's your issue with magazine size? Surely, if the shooter had to keep reloading this might make a difference right? Actually it doesn't. All of the shooters in all the recent mass shootings had to reload at least once. Most reloaded multiple times. Banning magazines above 10 or 7 won't do anything except make them reload more often. It's not like in the movies where you can rush him or run away while he's reloading. It takes 2 seconds.

You seem to have no problem acknowledging the fact that you don't know what you're talking about, but then you turn around and seem to think somehow you know the answers? Maybe you should listen to people who actually are informed on this subject.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Why? Because you've never paid even remote attention to what happens when the people cannot defend themselves against their own government.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Are you writing about regulating a militia? I have no problem regulating the militia, but leave the right to bear arms alone. The right and the militia are two different things. The right may not be infringed and the militia must be regulated. Can't have much of a militia without some commanders, leadership and training.

a reply to: SaturnFX



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Only someone who believes the politicians will
protect them. Will rescue them, shinning with only
the good intent of Captian Americle. Would think of the right
to defend themselves and thier family in any event
come what may, as nothing more than a hobby.

0% percent survival rating for you.

edit on Rpm22418v21201800000000 by randyvs because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join