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.
I don't have to be a biologist to know what a woman is.
I don't have to be a gun expert to know an 18 year should be allowed to buy and carry a weapon with no background check or training. Especially a weapon that can rapidly shoot massive cartridges.
"massive" cartridges. LMAO
WW1 rifle in the US military was M1 Garand which fires large bullet 30-06
Also, US military just adopted new weapon platform Sig XM5 chambered in 6.8x51mm because the 5.56 NATO round from M16/M4 is underpower
I don't have to be a biologist to know what a woman is.
I don't have to be a gun expert to know an 18 year should be allowed to buy and carry a weapon with no background check or training. Especially a weapon that can rapidly shoot massive cartridges.
Why? And 18 year old is an adult.
These psychos, are well psychos. It's a rare, rare event these school shootings. And we should try some other things before we chip away at a constitutional right - like joining the rest of the world and not prescribing MPH, SSRI/SNRI, amphetamine salts to our young men. Like stop covering this mass shootings at a national level.
I was simply addressing the lunacy of trying to exonerate AR pattern guns by insisting they are not "assault rifles."
It's a dead-end defense. No. One. Cares. See also clip v. magazine. Outside the gun fetish crowd, No. One. Cares.
Of course the anti firearms crowd doesn't care about facts and details that matter. Especially when they base their entire argument on distorting the truth and blatantly ignoring facts, and insulting those that do care. It is completely expected.
They are going to destroy the weapon and possibly injure the operator if they use 5.56 NATO round in Ukraine for the AR
Idiots
Well, to say nothing of using a non automatic fire, long barrel (16+ inches) rifle in a battlefield situation. As it is, I might be able to point out the .223 danger but I can't touch the it's not an assault rifle on that forum, it would "violate my cover".
Otherwise, if the powers that be of the other side lie to the people to get them to give up their weapons, just imagine what they will do when there is no possibility of resistance.
I thought it was an attempted demonstration at the striking force of a 9mm bullet vs an AR-15 bullet.
Does anyone know why the 9mm went straight through and the AR-15 veered upward in the gel block? What happens to the bullet of each (does one fragment more?)
Was there are any analysis of the distance and tissue the 9mm went through on the piece of pork vs the AR-15?
I don't know the answers, but it seems these are valid questions.
As well as - what % of gun homicides are caused by each type of weapon?
The video shown is an extra from the much-longer feature from 2018. You can probably get more data by looking for the longer feature, looking up the names of the experts and doctors interviewed, and see if they are able to answer your questions.
I was simply addressing the lunacy of trying to exonerate AR pattern guns by insisting they are not "assault rifles."
It's a dead-end defense. No. One. Cares. See also clip v. magazine. Outside the gun fetish crowd, No. One. Cares.
You don't know anything and I assume don't want to learn. This why there can be no common ground.
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.