"You don't need an AR15..."

[TurtleDude]

So you're in favor of gun control laws. Good to know.

you seem to be trying to advance an agenda that really is tangential to this discussion about a person shot by cops and whether the shooting was legal or justified

 

[TurtleDude]

Thats how they make criminals out of innocent people that weren't before.

well he was in violation of state law for having the dope so the "innocent" claim is a bit of stretch under current state law

 

[rocket88]

well in a perfect world or a judiciary i ran (or those who think like the founders) there would be no federal power over firearms nor dope. The expansion of the commerce clause "allowed" the federal government power in many areas it was not intended to have power in and when that happened, we started having all sorts of stupid court actions that tried to balance between our rights and the powers the federal government should have never had

So are you usually in the business of defending gun laws?

 

[ttwtt78640]

So you're in favor of gun control laws. Good to know.

I'm in favor of obeying the laws place and seeking to change some of them. If folks only had to respect (obey?) the laws that they happened to agree with then things would not be better.

 

[Goshin]

Getting back to the point.... the rioting is about a dubious case where the facts are not yet well established, but the BLM narrative has taken over.


Personally if your riot spills over onto my property I'm not liable to care what your cause is, or whether it is "just" or not... threaten me or mine, and I'll do the necessary.


Perhaps with an AR.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Then you must've seen something that no one else did because none of the videos show him waving a gun around...let alone holding one.

I'm talking about the timeline of events the police released, the printed statement of the CMPD, which describes the actions taken by Scott and the police prior to the videos starting.

 

[rocket88]

you seem to be trying to advance an agenda that really is tangential to this discussion about a person shot by cops and whether the shooting was legal or justified

I am pushing the agenda that he had every right to have a gun. It was only deemed a crime because he was black.

 

[TurtleDude]

So are you usually in the business of defending gun laws?

uh I am a retired federal prosecutor. I am merely informing those (some like Goshin know the law, you apparently do not) ignorant of the laws what the laws are. I also am noting that I don't find federal gun control laws or federal narcotics laws to have much of a valid basis under either Article One Section 8 nor the tenth amendment. Should a state be able to pass a law saying-IF YOU ARE STONED or smoking DOPE you cannot be carrying a firearm-yes, that seems like a proper police power just as much as saying you cannot operate a motor vehicle while Toking on a Marley

 

[TheGoverness]

I am pushing the agenda that he had every right to have a gun. It was only deemed a crime because he was black.

I don't think that's accurate.

 

[TurtleDude]

I am pushing the agenda that he had every right to have a gun. It was only deemed a crime because he was black.

that's really silly. and if he had a felony record then, under state and federal laws he didn't have a right to own a gun and if he was in possession of dope and using it, state and federal laws prohibit him from being armed with a handgun/

why is it a racial matter?

 

[TurtleDude]

I don't think that's accurate.

I think that is about the most polite way of putting it as possible

 

[rocket88]

that's really silly. and if he had a felony record then, under state and federal laws he didn't have a right to own a gun and if he was in possession of dope and using it, state and federal laws prohibit him from being armed with a handgun/

why is it a racial matter?

This happens to black people with guns. Ask Philando Castile.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Then you must've seen something that no one else did because none of the videos show him waving a gun around...let alone holding one.

None of the videos show him with a book either. How, pray tell, did the UC police "just guess" that while he was sitting in a car, smoking a blunt, that he had a gun in an ankle holster?

 

[Beaudreaux]

I am pushing the agenda that he had every right to have a gun. It was only deemed a crime because he was black.

Why are you choosing to ignore the facts that I and others have shown you? Mr. Scott being black, had nothing to do with the facts of the situation. He broke two firearm laws and two controlled substance laws in front of police officers before they ever confronted him. Four violations, not counting the felony possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, because the police didn't know who he was at the time.

He broke four laws in front of cops, and there is no evidence whatsoever that race had anything to do with this.

 

[TurtleDude]

This happens to black people with guns. Ask Philando Castile.

does the fact that black males commit more than half the murders in the USA-often with handguns-have any relevance to the fact that cops may be say more on edge when having to deal with black males than say-elderly Asian women, or young men with Mormon Missionary badges on their black suits or other young men with Yarmulkes who are obviously Hasidic Jews?

 

[TurtleDude]

did a quick google search and this came up near the top

(Via NYT) […] According to court records, Mr. Scott was born in South Carolina, was about six feet tall and weighed 230 to 250 pounds. While living in South Carolina in the 1990s, he was charged with a number of offenses including check fraud, aggravated assault and carrying a concealed weapon. Later, he moved to Texas where he shot and wounded a man in San Antonio in 2002, for which he was convicted and sentenced, in 2005, to seven years in prison. He was released in 2011. (link)


​

 

[Moot]

Refusing to comply with lawful orders of a peace officer is.... doing so while armed is a REALLY dumb move....

Suppose, just suppose the gun was still in his ankle holster...then how was he supposed to throw the gun down? When police start barking out commands that don't make sense...then what is the suspect supposed to do?

 

[TurtleDude]

Suppose, just suppose the gun was still in his ankle holster...then how was he supposed to throw the gun down? When police start barking out commands that don't make sense...then what is the suspect supposed to do?

I don't know if that is consistent with the facts but smoking dope while you are carrying a gun illegally because you are a convicted felon was where things started going south long before the cops became involved

 

[Moot]

did a quick google search and this came up near the top

(Via NYT) […] According to court records, Mr. Scott was born in South Carolina, was about six feet tall and weighed 230 to 250 pounds. While living in South Carolina in the 1990s, he was charged with a number of offenses including check fraud, aggravated assault and carrying a concealed weapon. Later, he moved to Texas where he shot and wounded a man in San Antonio in 2002, for which he was convicted and sentenced, in 2005, to seven years in prison. He was released in 2011. (link)


​

Here we go....blaming the victim for something he did in his past. So did he deserve a death sentence, TD?

 

[TurtleDude]

Here we go....blaming the victim for something he did in his past. So did he deserve a death sentence, TD?

1) if you don't think it should be illegal for people who shot someone illegally to then be banned from owning a firearm and carrying it on the streets, let me know

2) he is being blamed for what he did that caused the police to get involved

a) smoking dope

b) having a firearm

c) perhaps brandishing a firearm

a death sentence is a punishment given after an adjudication of guilt. being shot by cops because you engage in behavior that MAY HAVE caused officers to REASONABLY BELIEVE that a man with dope and a gun might harm them is a different issue

 

[Tigerace117]

AR 15 is easier to shoot accurately for several reasons

adjustable length stock on most models

peep sight is more accurate than the open sights on the AK

the AR 15 kicks less-M193 ball (55 grains) or SS109 (62) grains has far less recoil impulse than the much heavier but slower moving 762x39 com bloc round where the bullet is around 121 grains or so

the safety lever is far easier to deploy than on the AK

To be fair, the AK series not only was basically a first wave weapon(in that other than the STG-44 it was one of the first weapons of the type) it was also designed to be utilized by a massive conscript army composed of Ivan's, Yuri's, Iosif's and Boris's who'd likely never been off the farm and regarded anybody who showed the slightest competence in handling and caring for a firearm in awe.

You can do everything short of breaking an AK in half and it'll still function. It was a beautiful weapon when it came to arming guerilla armies in horrific conditions where other firearms like the AR-15's big brother showed an alarming tendency to refuse to function.

 

[TurtleDude]

To be fair, the AK series not only was basically a first wave weapon(in that other than the STG-44 it was one of the first weapons of the type) it was also designed to be utilized by a massive conscript army composed of Ivan's, Yuri's, Iosif's and Boris's who'd likely never been off the farm and regarded anybody who showed the slightest competence in handling and caring for a firearm in awe.

You can do everything short of breaking an AK in half and it'll still function. It was a beautiful weapon when it came to arming guerilla armies in horrific conditions where other firearms like the AR-15's big brother showed an alarming tendency to refuse to function.

the two main reasons that the original versions of the M16 failed were this

1) the soldiers being told that the weapon didn't need cleaning

2) the army contractors didn't have the quantity of the right powder and substituted (I cannot recall its rod powder instead of ball powder or vice versa) stuff that was unsuitable for the direct impingement tube in the rifle

3) I will agree that the AK series are more reliable but having 20K rounds through the AR series and a fair amount from the AK series I have had only a couple problems and both involved broken steel cases in a 74. I did have a Colt about 30 years ago that went full auto on me when a part in the trigger group failed-I was shooting prone with a sling at a steel gong at 100 Meters in a 3G event-as the RO noted, I think the time I recorded will never be beat because with the sling and the bipod all of the rounds in magazine hit the gong

 

[Tigerace117]

the two main reasons that the original versions of the M16 failed were this

1) the soldiers being told that the weapon didn't need cleaning

2) the army contractors didn't have the quantity of the right powder and substituted (I cannot recall its rod powder instead of ball powder or vice versa) stuff that was unsuitable for the direct impingement tube in the rifle

3) I will agree that the AK series are more reliable but having 20K rounds through the AR series and a fair amount from the AK series I have had only a couple problems and both involved broken steel cases in a 74. I did have a Colt about 30 years ago that went full auto on me when a part in the trigger group failed-I was shooting prone with a sling at a steel gong at 100 Meters in a 3G event-as the RO noted, I think the time I recorded will never be beat because with the sling and the bipod all of the rounds in magazine hit the gong

According to this; The M16 in Vietnam

"Most problems encountered with the rifle would be based on the Ordnance Corps’ decision to load 5.56mm ammunition with Ball powder instead of the IMR powder it was designed for. The decision was made carelessly and without testing to see if the Ball powder would have any adverse effects on the rifle. This was a grave error, one that the government would be warned about both by Gene Stoner and by Colt’s.

So what difference does the powder make? All the difference in the world. Auto loading firearms are by far one of the most complex of all machines. The tolerances and manufacturing processes are very unforgiving. A military rifle is a weapon system. That system is made up of a weapon, cartridge, propellant, primer and bullet. Any time one is changed, it must be tested and qualified before a change is implemented to insure the integrity of the weapon is not compromised. It was not.

Ball powder caused a series of malfunctions due to its different burning properties from the IMR powder the rifle was designed around. Keep in mind that the gun and ammunition were designed together. Ball powder has a much sharper pressure curve (burns faster) and increased the port pressure of the rifle. This increases the cyclic rate of the firearm by more than 200 rounds per minute. What this means is the timing of cycling of the firearm was dramatically sped up. The rifle was designed to fire at a rate of 700 to 800 rounds per minute, with ball powder it was increased to nearly 1,000 rounds per minute. This alteration of operation caused numerous problems including exceeding the cyclic rate maximum. It was so bad that Colt (by instruction of the Army) performed acceptance testing with older lots of cartridges loaded with IMR powder so that they would meet the lower cyclic rate as specified in the contract with the Army so the rifles could be delivered to the Army. Ball powder has been used going back to World War II. Large stocks remained from that time period that could be converted into rifle powder. This significantly decreased the cost in comparison to IMR powder. The main problem with IMR propellant was the inability for DuPont to manufacture the quantities needed to the specifications required. The actual decision to use ball propellant for this rifle system was not a bad decision, the problem came into how they implemented it. The rifle/ammunition were not tested and qualified before ammunition with Ball propellant made its way to the jungles of Southeast Asia."

Likely you've already heard this but for the sake of discussion I'm posting the link and such.

Target shooting also isn't quite the same as combat, to point out the obvious. The Ross Rifle, for instance, was a fine weapon; but when it came to combat it was totally unsuited for the conditions.

 

[jet57]

A picture is worth a thousand words...

View attachment 67207704

So I take it, your choice would be to take your AR15 and mow 'em down then.

 

[TurtleDude]

So I take it, your choice would be to take your AR15 and mow 'em down then.

this would be much better for that-I suspect Goshin knows that and I don't see where he said anything about mowing down everyone




of course running that thing for a minute is going to cost you about 8000 dollars