Thread: Hillary's "Assault Weapon" Ban.
View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04-20-2008, 03:36 PM
C-D-P's Avatar
C-D-P C-D-P is offline
Analyst
  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 1,695
usa
C-D-P is a glorious beacon of lightC-D-P is a glorious beacon of lightC-D-P is a glorious beacon of lightC-D-P is a glorious beacon of lightC-D-P is a glorious beacon of lightC-D-P is a glorious beacon of light
Credits: 7,991
Send a message via ICQ to C-D-P Send a message via Yahoo to C-D-P
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by votetheoneyouhatetheleast View Post
OK, so how about a compromise. We control the type of ammo not the type of weapon? (outside the range obviously)
It is still controlling something that honest citizens have a right to.

Beach, it is not exactly that easy (special tools and whatnot), and you may notice that many rounds are already loaded to the top with powder (IE .45+P, 5.56, 7.62 etc). And having a higher velocity round does not instantly equate to more penetration.

And it is not the round that can or can not take increased pressure, it is the weapon. That is why you can fire .223 from a weapon chambered in 5.56, but not the other way around.

AP rounds do not automatically mean more lethality either. As they do not deform so the wound channel is not enlarged. AP round create an icepick type would channel. But yes, intermediate barrier penetration will be increased.

When talking terminal effects with pistol rounds (broken down barney style) it is all on the size of the projectile.
Last edited by C-D-P; 04-20-2008 at 03:43 PM.
Reply With Quote