Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Should the government ever decide that it wishes to "take over" the great unwashed all they need to do is pull the plug on the internet. That would shut the Nation down. Period.
It is absurd to think that people would be running around in large numbers shooting people who did not "obey".
Should the government ever decide that it wishes to "take over" the great unwashed all they need to do is pull the plug on the internet. That would shut the Nation down. Period.
It is absurd to think that people would be running around in large numbers shooting people who did not "obey".
Yeah, if history has taught us anything, it's that government never kills its own citizens.
Well, except for the nearly 300 million killed by their own governments in the last 100 years.
Anyone who shoots knows that the larger capacity magazines have a greater chance of causing a malfunction, as a general rule.
That's true, especially if the magazines are loaded all the time.
Springs aren't exactly well-made. Many have minor defects and keeping them under constant stress and tension from compression isn't good. Springs can rub against the inside of the magazine and cause the plate to canter. And, the plates are always well-made, either. They rub against the inside of the magazine and then your round is ****-eyed in the chamber.
I've had that happen before. Fortunately, all I had to do was punch the forward assist a couple of times to push the bolt forward and seat the round properly in the chamber.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenCopeland
Very naive and trusting!
A one-hit-wonder. He's never been back to defend himself.
I am 71 and have arthritis. But I bet you would not see much difference time-wise in me firing one 30 round mag or 3 10s.
Rate of fire is inconsequential to me. I don't shoot that way. When I shoot my AR I am looking to hit and group my rounds where I aim. Thus the 5 round or maybe a 10 see the most use. I'm sure the same is true for a lot of folks who have ARs.
It may be capable of very rapid fire but doing so sacrifices accuracy. And the AR is quite an accurate shooting rifle. With 62 grain I see a significant tightening of groups over 55, and with 68 to 72 grain it's
phenomenal. It's a 1/7 twist so it like heavier bullets.
But the gun and gun owner hater crowd likes to point at rate of fire and get people all scared that every round fired equals a hit. These mass shooters miss far more than they hit but OH MY!! He fired (insert number here) rounds in (insert time here)!!
And to folks who don't know any better a rifle like an AR becomes a rapid fire, self actuating, self aiming, self loading rifle. No human operator required. And it has a MILITARY configuration and can use MILITARY ammunition. Which is not nearly as destructive an deadly as people are being led to believe. Hardly at the level of an M1A or even Garand neither of which have ever been used in any mass shooting but are on the ban list.
And getting guns totally banned is the goal for these leftists. Use fear to get it all pushed through and then armed force to enforce it.
The 5.56/223 used the original 222 varmint round as its base. It started as a varmint round.
The .222 was commonly used for Benchrest competition and varmint shooting. The .223 was developed by basically lengthening the .222 by 60 thou. And it was purpose built as a military round, it wasn’t developed as a varmint round.
Quote:
For the 223/5.56 they just necked up the 222. And thus was born the 223.
No. The .222 wasn’t “necked up.” Both cartridges shoot the exact same diameter bullet, .224”
Quote:
I actually saw a guy one day on the range who had loaded 222 in his AR and it actually worked. But we knew something wasn't right. It sounded funny. The repot from the fired rounds was quieter than it should have been because of course that 1000th of an inch was allowing blow by. The smaller diameter bullet wasn't swaging up.
Again, they shoot the exact same bullet. There would be no blow by, and no need for the bullet to “swage up.”
To someone without any experience in cartridge development or wildcatting, it would seem logical that the .223 must be a necked up .222 because the number is bigger, but that is just a quirk of cartridge nomenclature. Just like how a .38 Special and a .357 Magnum shoot the exact same diameter bullet, even though .38 is a bigger number than .357.
You need to stop with the “gun shop legend and lore.” Everything you’ve claimed about the .222/.223/5.56 is wrong.
Well, they are commonly used as varmint cartridges, I’ll give you that.
Modern ballistics took a while to develop. Once we realized there was a thing called resistance with a found out fact that a pointy bullet of the same weight dropped less than a round or flat one ...... We all of a sudden started using slippery bullets. Smart people came up with measurements https://webpath.med.utah.edu/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNBLST.html
The .222 was commonly used for Benchrest competition and varmint shooting. The .223 was developed by basically lengthening the .222 by 60 thou. And it was purpose built as a military round, it wasn’t developed as a varmint round.
No. The .222 wasn’t “necked up.” Both cartridges shoot the exact same diameter bullet, .224”
Again, they shoot the exact same bullet. There would be no blow by, and no need for the bullet to “swage up.”
To someone without any experience in cartridge development or wildcatting, it would seem logical that the .223 must be a necked up .222 because the number is bigger, but that is just a quirk of cartridge nomenclature. Just like how a .38 Special and a .357 Magnum shoot the exact same diameter bullet, even though .38 is a bigger number than .357.
You need to stop with the “gun shop legend and lore.” Everything you’ve claimed about the .222/.223/5.56 is wrong.
Well, they are commonly used as varmint cartridges, I’ll give you that.
Alright. How can I argure with that. But my history of the 30 06 and everything that came from it had no hlole. The 06 gave birth to a whole slew of what are now common rounds. My favorite of which has o be the 243. I have dreamed of an AR 10 type rifle in 308 with a spare barrel in 243. no more than a spare barrel required to have two rifles.
mags, bolt group,everything else crosses over. And I rather fell for the 243 in a 788 I had. I lament it's loss. Everything from coyotes to mule deer.All thanks to the old 06. And its and the 762x51s development as a military round.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
no more than a spare barrel required to have two rifles. 