Notice From My Cold Dead Hands......

[Chris Craig]

How is an AR more deadly in a close situation? The first thing I'd want is a hand gun. Far easier to pack, less obvious that you have it, easier to aim quickly... Definitely would prefer a hand gun in a building.

If I'm trying to kill at distance I'd go for the AR. But that wasn't the situation.

What makes you think an AR is be more deadly in a baracaded situation?

Intimidation factor. A bigger gun with faster shooting ammo is going to deter police from getting close enough to take him out. A hand gun, police would be more likely to go after him.

 

[Chris Craig]

Most pistols sold in the US come with between 10 and 17 rounds. It takes about a half a second change a magazine with an afternoon of practice...

I don't think this is as much of a factor as you think it is...

That's between 4 and 11 less dead, maybe more if he expends shots against police before he goes in.

 

[Shaboid]

How is an AR more deadly in a close situation? The first thing I'd want is a hand gun. Far easier to pack, less obvious that you have it, easier to aim quickly... Definitely would prefer a hand gun in a building.

If I'm trying to kill at distance I'd go for the AR. But that wasn't the situation.

What makes you think an AR is be more deadly in a baracaded situation?

It wasn't a close situation. That's what I'm saying. He was shooting at people from range, got himself into a barricade situation, then the officers wouldn't do anything.. If he had a handgun I don't think it would have been the same situation.

 

[barfo]

School shootings were here, for sure. They've always been there.

Not always. When I was a kid there weren't any.


Took so long to load a musket that the teacher could just grab it away.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Couldn't Dems get rid of the filibuster and pass whatever they want without a Super Majority? Couldn't they also pack the court to protect Roe?

Yes, and they could also fly, if they had wings.

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

Intimidation factor. A bigger gun with faster shooting ammo is going to deter police from getting close enough to take him out. A hand gun, police would be more likely to go after him.

Regardless, police need to press in that situation. That's how you save lives.

There would be no further police life lost with an AR in that situation than a handgun.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Yes, and they could also fly, if they had wings.

barfo

So we agree then.

 

[barfo]

So we agree then.

Yes, as in most cases, we do.

barfo

 

[Shaboid]

Regardless, police need to press in that situation. That's how you save lives.

There would be no further police life lost with an AR in that situation than a handgun.

That's a bold statement that I don't think any of us know for sure.

 

[Lanny]

That's a bold statement that I don't think any of us know for sure.

Handgun bullets, although usually of a larger caliber, pack less energy than long barreled weapon bullets. In addition the AR-15 round is designed to tumble through the target causing more damage. Also, handguns are way less accurate at a distance.

 

[Phatguysrule]

That's a bold statement that I don't think any of us know for sure.

Well, it could happen different every time if it were replayed with the same equipment 100 times.

But there is no advantage gained with a rifle of any kind in close quarters.

 

[Chris Craig]

Well, it could happen different every time if it were replayed with the same equipment 100 times.

But there is no advantage gained with a rifle of any kind in close quarters.

Wasn't close quarters when he was outside shooting at the cops. Wasn't until he went in and barricaded himself in the classroom.

 

[crandc]

I don't know for sure exactly how they are getting in. Likely by knowing the code or getting keys. Finding keys seems to be the most likely. In Newtown he killed his mom and got the key to the safe where the big guns were kept.

I personally had access to everything in my house growing up, even the stuff I wasn't supposed to. I never abused that privilege, but I could have very easily.

I use to climb up to the high cabinets where my mother hid candy. Fell down once.

 

[Shaboid]

I don't know for sure exactly how they are getting in. Likely by knowing the code or getting keys. Finding keys seems to be the most likely. In Newtown he killed his mom and got the key to the safe where the big guns were kept.

I personally had access to everything in my house growing up, even the stuff I wasn't supposed to. I never abused that privilege, but I could have very easily.

My parents trusted me too. Even stuff they didn't want me to get into i.e. a locked liquor cabinet, I got access to..

Point is, If we didn't have guns, these kids wouldn't have a safe to break into to access. We're not going to get to that point so I respect your stance.

Make laws at the state and local level until it overwhelms congress and the surpreme court. IDK. Trying to find a solution is very frustrating.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Handgun bullets, although usually of a larger caliber, pack less energy than long barreled weapon bullets. In addition the AR-15 round is designed to tumble through the target causing more damage. Also, handguns are way less accurate at a distance.

The original m16 bullets were designed to tumble, but that was changed due to being inaccurate on the field. So the bullets no longer actually tumble for 12 inches or so... So typically not before it has exited the body.

This is called the Spitzer effect (pointy bullets). You can buy 9mm Spitzer as well as hollow point 9mm.

But, as you say, once you start talking about distance and having time to aim, the rifles accuracy and it's much higher velocity bullet have a decided advantage.

 

[Shaboid]

The original m16 bullets were designed to tumble, but that was changed due to being inaccurate on the field. So the bullets no longer actually tumble for 12 inches or so... So typically not before it has exited the body.

Now they just rely on the Spitzer effect (pointy bullets). You can buy 9mm Spitzer as well as hollow point 9mm.

But, as you say, once you start talking about distance and having time to aim, the rifles accuracy and it's much higher velocity bullet have a decided advantage.

I'm not trying to get in a bullet discussion here, but honestly, what is the purpose for fragmenting rounds besides murder? Why are those sold to the general population?

 

[Phatguysrule]

I'm not trying to get in a bullet discussion here, but honestly, what is the purpose for fragmenting rounds besides murder? Why are those sold to the general population?

With rifles I'm not sure if it's possible to get away from it. I've had a .270 round fragment on impact of a rib and take out the liver and the heart of a deer in a single shot.

I think any round designed for longer range (higher velocity) will have that problem.

But most don't fragment from hitting flesh. I would agree that anything that did should be illegal. Even for the military.

 

[Lanny]

I'm not trying to get in a bullet discussion here, but honestly, what is the purpose for fragmenting rounds besides murder? Why are those sold to the general population?

I've never heard of them being used in hunting or target practice.

 

[Shaboid]

With rifles I'm not sure if it's possible to get away from it. I've had a .270 round fragment on impact of a rib and take out the liver and the heart of a deer in a single shot.

I think any round designed for longer range (higher velocity) will have that problem.

But most don't fragment from hitting flesh. I would agree that anything that did should be illegal. Even for the military.

Bullets kill. Glad we agree on that simple fact.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Wasn't close quarters when he was outside shooting at the cops. Wasn't until he went in and barricaded himself in the classroom.

True. But any rifle could be used that way... I'm not seeing the advantage of the AR...

For example, a Remington .243 is a slightly larger round travels at much higher velocity...

 

[Phatguysrule]

Bullets kill. Glad we agree on that simple fact.

Maybe I misunderstood your question. I agree that bullets designed to fragment should be illegal.

 

[Shaboid]

Maybe I misunderstood your question. I agree that bullets designed to fragment should be illegal.

You answered it. Thanks.

 

[Shaboid]

Maybe I misunderstood your question. I agree that bullets designed to fragment should be illegal.

Why aren't they illegal? I guess that's my follow up. You know more about gun regs than most here.

 

[Lanny]

The original m16 bullets were designed to tumble, but that was changed due to being inaccurate on the field. So the bullets no longer actually tumble for 12 inches or so... So typically not before it has exited the body.

This is called the Spitzer effect (pointy bullets). You can buy 9mm Spitzer as well as hollow point 9mm.

But, as you say, once you start talking about distance and having time to aim, the rifles accuracy and it's much higher velocity bullet have a decided advantage.

https://bgr.com/tech/ar-15-rifle-bullet-wounds/

 

[Phatguysrule]

Why aren't they illegal? I guess that's my follow up. You know more about gun regs than most here.

The stuff I'm thinking of (frangible ammunition) is used in police training for close combat to cut down on ricochet incidents (while they are in hallways, etc).

I guess the argument could be used that those rounds would be less likely pass through a wall and hit somebody in the next room...

https://www.ammunitiontogo.com/lodge/what-is-frangible-ammo/

But I'm also not big on the whole "blow shit up" scene... So maybe there is something legel out there I'm not aware of. From my perspective a bullet is going to cause a lot of damage if it hits somebody.

 

[Phatguysrule]

https://bgr.com/tech/ar-15-rifle-bullet-wounds/

Yep, this would be the same idea as a .243. Though the .243 would probably make 4" of bone turn to dust instead of 3", and leave bigger exit wounds and puddles of jello.

There is no kick with a .243 either.

I would think the .243 would take over if the AR were regulated away somehow. So instead of having millions of new ARs every year to add to what we already have we'd start seeing millions of new .243s which look and function almost exactly the same.

So I'm just trying to figure out what feature or function could be targeted which wouldn't also include nearly all hunting rifles

 

[Lanny]

Yep, this would be the same idea as a .243. Though the .243 would probably make 4" of bone turn to dust instead of 3", and leave bigger exit wounds and puddles of jello.

There is no kick with a .243 either.

I would think the .243 would take over if the AR were regulated away somehow. So instead of having millions of new ARs every year to add to what we already have we'd start seeing millions of new .243s which look and function almost exactly the same.

So I'm just trying to figure out what feature or function could be targeted which wouldn't also include nearly all hunting rifles

Difference is the .243 is legal for big game hunting.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Difference is the .243 is legal for big game hunting.

That's true. But how would that prevent it from being used the same way?

*Note* You can hunt deer with a stock AR in Oregon, but nothing bigger. You'd have to have it chambered in .243 or larger to hunt larger game. Which can be done.

 

[Lanny]

That's true. But how would that prevent it from being used the same way?

*Note* You can hunt deer with a stock AR in Oregon, but nothing bigger. You'd have to have it chambered in .243 or larger to hunt larger game. Which can be done.

If you're a machinist you can do anything.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I think his argument actually has some merit - it will take a while to reduce the number of fire-arms the US has, we have been collecting them for hundreds of years. That's why the ammunition angle makes a lot of sense. Guns are a lot less deadly when they do not have ammunition.

The more I've looked into this the more I think the 2nd Amendment covers ammunition since arms seems to generally cover "Weapons of offence, or armour of defence."

https://johnsonsdictionaryonline.com/views/search.php?term=Arms and

I am brought back to the best course of action being limiting the number of people who want to commit these acts, and making it easy for people to avoid helping those people obtain dangerous items.