The Gun Industry Should Send The Parkland Three A Gift Basket For Record Gun Sales in March

Wrong. You said:

"If you can't actually shoot with any skill you need that kind of weapon"

We know you have many choices on where to parader your ignorance and we thank you for choosing this forum.

 

And that is true. It doesn't say everyone that has an AR has no shooting skill. Why do you people have such a problem understand English?

 

All modern firearms are capable of being used to kill 17 people in 3 minutes.

 

Exactly. He shot about 40 people in 6 minutes.

That's one shot about every 10 seconds, assuming you can aim. I could do that with a revolver.

 

17 in 180 seconds amounts to a round fired each 10.6 seconds. Easy to do with a single shot weapon with a magazine in the weapon or a clip if it is a pistol.

 

The second amendment does not mention weapons of war. But it does state our rights are not to be infringed.

 

Over/under shotgun and a bag of 000 buck will do nicely.

 

It seems we are debating with ignorance on this subject. First I have yet to see a gun control measure that would make any difference. That is shown by the fact that 90% of all gun crimes are committed with illegally obtained weapons. If laws would stop gun violence that 90% would not occur. Banning, that is a joke. Never has worked, never will work. Just look at the things that are currently banned and tell me why banning guns would be any different than the ban on illegal aliens, marijuana, meth, speeding, on and on. Lastly, guns as with every other item on earth will have some people who will abuse the right to own them. 99% of all gun owners are responsible. Why should they be punished for the ones who aren't? Should we ban cars because some chose to drive drunk. 15 teens die every day from texting while driving. Should we ban cell phones?

The real problem is we have people who want to take freedoms away from others. These people consider themselves as intellectually elite. In truth they are not bright enough to see the whole picture. These people can only see their own circumstances. They say I don't need a gun so no one does. I don't eat meat so no one should. I drive a hybrid so everyone should.

However, the whole debate is for naught at any rate. The libs have less than no chance of revoking the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment protects my right to own guns. Even the ones that are scary to some.

 

I have fired a number of automatic firing weapons. From the .50 cal and .30 cal machine guns to the M-60 machine gun to the BAR and once the M-16 I believe it was. Might have been the civilian AR-15.

Using, held in ones hands machine guns, one learns fast they do not remain on target. Perhaps in the case of the small bore M-16, they stay on target, but larger bores kick to the point they won't remain fixed on a target.

A funny thing happened as we fired the M-30 Browning machine gun that was fixed to a tripod on the ground.

Even with the barrel fixed on the mount, firing the weapon does not fire at a point, but at an area that varies depending on where bullets hit. I do not recall the precise patterns now but they hit areas and not spots.

So if a person is in front of the fixed machine gun, they may well be where the bullets do not land.

This is the pattern by the famous AK-47.

 

Why they are so fearful of automatic fire weapons puzzles me a lot.

http://www.milsf.com/machine-guns/

 

I didn't think you said: "everyone that has an AR has no shooting skill" or I would have replied to that.

I replied to:

"If you can't actually shoot with any skill you need that kind of weapon"

How, exactly, does an AR compensate for lack of skill?

 

A lot of factors enter a shooters minds.

1. How safe from reply is the shooter? What is the urgency.
2. Is the aim sure or just in an area?
3. Are the targets moving or remaining still?
4. Has a plan of escape been made by said shooter
5. Has the shooter bad, marginal or good to excellent skills handling such rapid fire weapons?

As to the weapon
1. Is it staying on target?
2. Has it previously been tested for being on target? Bore sighted or test firings at known targets?
3. If the rate if fire is high, is the shooter melting the barrel?
4. Given a magazine fed weapon, how long can you fire? The AK-47 consumes it's magazine in 3 seconds.

 

A couple of things here. An AR is not an Automatic weapon, it is a Semi-Automatic weapon. Second, high capacity magazines have a high occurrence of jamming. The more the capacity the higher the occurrence of jamming. That is the main reason the military does not use high capacity mags.

A quality AR is a very accurate weapon. It fires at a high velocity and has a relatively flat projector up to 200 yards or so. One of the asset of this weapon is it allows the user to quickly respond with additional shots if the first is off target. You do not have to activate a bolt, pump, or lever, you just pull the trigger.

I use mine for Coyote and Wild Boar hunting. Coyotes are generally running and very hard to get a bead on, making this weapon perfect. Wild Boars are very dangerous when wounded and a split second can mean the difference between getting mauled or having a wounded animal escape into the bush. This makes the quick response of this weapon desirable for this purpose as well. To say that the AR has no use other than kill people is not true.

 

but we all know what weapons we are talking about... machine guns and the like

 

An AR15 is not a machine gun, yet they are calling it a weapon of war.

As I said, all weapons are weapons of war. Every type of weapon has been used in war.

The 1911A1 .45acp is a weapon of war.

The Benelli shotgun is a weapon of war.

The 2nd Amendment is itself, about war.

 

It is relevant to what is ultimately the truth, not politically motivated narrative being presented by those who wish to restrict as many firearms from private ownership on whatever basis.

 

Incidents committed by only a single perpetrator? Or incidents committed with only one firearm? Be specific or leave.

 

Then by all means, demonstrate such to be the case. Show precisely which other firearms are capable of doing everything the AR-15 is capable of doing, and just as efficiently.

 

Why do you have such a problem with veracity?

 

Actually what I said about your failure to grasp the English language is true. That's why you are moving the discussion. No problem though.

 

Sure right after you tell me what the AR-15 can do that other guns can't do. Other than of course killing innocents at an impressive rate which has been well demonstrated.

 

And what ultimatly is the truth. This should be hilarious! Lets see you duck.

 

Do you really want that question to be a measure of your gun knowledge? I will bet slmost anyone on this forum can explain the advantages that lead unskilled mass murders to choose the AR platform particularly when coupled with large capacity magazines.

 

No, you got caught in a whopper and continue to dig a huge hole in the process.

 

No actuslly it says no such thing. Try reading it again.