Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?
The bottom line for me is this - would any of those children/teachers killed in Newtown still be alive if the shooter only had handguns?
This is a misleading question. One can just as easily ask are there any children/teachers who are now alive because the shooter wasn't using only handguns? And given the testimony of several regulate shooters (range and hunting types, not mass) here, the answer could very well be yes.
Yep. That is what I am saying. Note the topic of this thread: AW vs. pistol for "dangerousness". You are asserting that "AW" features are better than other rifles w/o those features, which may be true, but the OP is comparing AWs and pistols, as I am.
He's actually trying to compare assault
rifles with other weapons straight out, but won't admit to that.
you keep posting that lie. you are wrong, a pistol grip is for comfort. no matter how many times you lie it will never be a fact.
Now now credit where credit is due. He's only lying if he doesn't truly believe what he is saying and is intentionally trying to deceive through a false statement. He may be wrong but that doesn't make him a lair. And before you go off on word games again, calling someone a lair is a really major thing almost up there with libel. You prove that he is actually lying or call it a falsehood (or some synonym). Otherwise you become the troll.
The fact that there may be better ways to provide a better grip, or stabilize a weapon, does nothing to change the fact that the pistol grip does provide a better grip, and therefore help stabilize the weapon
I believe that this is the crux of the contention between you and the others and that is proving that the grip actually provides more stabilization. And for that matter, with you yourself having noted that the pistol grip may provide less increase to the dangerousness of the rifle than other features, how little of an improvement to said increase of stability would it take before you discount it? a 1% improvement? .1%?, .01%? And with that, can you show what the improvement amount to the stability of a rifle is with a pistol grip over a non-pistol grip. Just one particular rifle is all I'm asking, no need to go through the entire list, although multiple examples would be nice should you find them together.
Now so far I've not really been in on the pistol grip/features argument portion, so at this point I'm not arguing if you are right or wrong. I'm simply asking you to prove your point.
it was about which 1 poses a bigger danger, danger is something that affects people.
not sure what you mean by your post stands. but it wouldn't actually depend on the environment for the situation, it would depend on the people.
situation doesn't mean people
Now who's playing the word games? The situation can and does change depending upon the people involved. Therefore yes, situation
includes people. No, situation does not mean people only. However, I will agree that Kal'Stang's initial post does not address the OP. You are asking, at least by the wording, about a given weapon being more dangerous over another, on an assumption that all other factors are the same, correct? IOW, assuming an equal amount of training (or lack thereof) at the same location with the same number of people to shoot, on the same day with the same weather, etc...is an assault rifle more dangerous than a pistol, or vice versa. Is that correct?
This is the only link that actually says anything about stability from the pistol grip. It's going in the caution list, mostly because I am unaware of this particular author's bias, and no I'm not reading the article right now due to other constraints.
"...pistol grips serve to provide
superior function as well as transforming the look and feel of your firearm." Wow if that's not vague and hazy....
Forum, nothing to show that the posters' opinions have any factual basis...dismissed.
a Wiki article with...wait let me go back and count again....
0 references.....dismissed. Seriously on this last one, I would think that you at least would know better. I'm alright with a wiki article being put up, not for the credibility of the article itself, but for the various references it might have. But none?
situation still doesn't matter, if person A and B are not killers, then the situation isn't dangerous.
The situation can still be and is dangerous in the given situations and any situation with a real gun. Even if these people aren't killers and never intend to fire the gun, there still is the possibility of the weapon discharging anyway due to an accident. The only way for the situation to not be dangerous is to use a gun that is physically not capable of loading bullets into it. The degree of danger can be variable, but it is still dangerous.
And that is time....Sorry for delays on some of these and I'll probably not get back till tomorrow night.