The Gun Forum Primer

[TurtleDude]

I didn't label anything, the designers did. There IS a difference between a 30-06 and a BAR wouldn't you say? Which one was specifically designed for heavy combat? A 30-06 could be used as sniper rifle, but in a heavy fire fight, it'd be kind of slow wouldn't it. So of the two, which one do you think the Vegas shooter would have used if he'd been able to get several BARs? He chose the AR15 though didn't he. There's your legal precedent right there. Moreover, the 1994 assault weapons ban set a legal precedent as well. THAT'S the part of this entire thing that spoils your "technicalities argument". These silly rabbit holes you try and take everybody down is exactly what inspired this thread: your nonsense means nothing against sound rational argument of effects and policies that arise from them. You can't prove anything dude; you can'tr answer the simple of questions that make a mockery of your entire case. So I'll ask you again: what got in the way of sound legal gun regulations that have passed muster in this country and the several states since our founding? Which of the founders who wrote, debated and passed the second amendment were "gun experts? THEY decided policy and law, so name the gun experts.

You can'y do it, and that's my point.

That is a stupid question given a "30-06" can mean anything from a Browning Medium belt fed machine gun to a single shot bench rest rifle. BTW-30-06 is the CALIBER of the MI GARAND, the BAR, and many of the machine guns used in ground and aerial combat so your lack of understanding of firearms issues is front and center again because a MI Garand and certainly a belt fed Browning Machine Gun are designed for HEAVY COMBAT (whatever that means)

and NO the AR 15 as the term presently encompasses-was never made nor INTENDED for HEAVY combat or MILITARY COMBAT or anti alien Combat etc

 

[TurtleDude]

Yes, one is a cartridge caliber the other is a firearm. So much for your knowledge on the topic.

When someone continues to make errors that are say equivalent to an astronomer claiming the sun revolves around the earth-the arguments have to be rejected as complete bunk

 

[prometeus]

Clearly a weapon of war:BAR MK 3

 

[TurtleDude]

Clearly a weapon of war:BAR MK 3

You raise a great point though I might suspect it goes beyond your rip of jet's nonsense.

The first BAR was a fully automatic (no provision for semi but its slow cyclic rate allowed skilled shooters to shoot single rounds) rifle designed to support infantry when a belt fed or crew served LMG was not available. Later-after that military weapon became obsolete and was no longer being made-the Company that bears the name of the inventor (Browning) used the term BAR for hunting rifles that were only semi auto.

Much like Armalite that created the AR-15 as a select fire rifle with hopes of military contracts-after the AR 15 (the original version) was made by Colt (after buying the rights from Armalite division and Gene Stoner), and deemed the M16 by the military, Colt-and after patents expired-other makers or prior subcontractors, started selling CIVILIAN rifles that used the original AR 15 name-just as Browning calls semi auto civilian rifles BARs

 

[prometeus]

You raise a great point though I might suspect it goes beyond your rip of jet's nonsense.

It goes to the point that if one is to make an intelligent argument one should have a good knowledge of the topic, the terminology involved and not make vague meaningless emotional drivel their argument. The 30-06 v. BAR post was just simply a demonstration of ignorance and emotional drivel.

 

[TurtleDude]

It goes to the point that if one is to make an intelligent argument one should have a good knowledge of the topic, the terminology involved and not make vague meaningless emotional drivel their argument. The 30-06 v. BAR post was just simply a demonstration of ignorance and emotional drivel.

It is consistent with someone who claims that

Shotguns are rifles
Magazines above ten rounds are for warfare only
that AR-15s are weapons for warfare or designed for military or heavy combat

 

[pinqy]

I didn't label anything, the designers did. There IS a difference between a 30-06 and a BAR wouldn't you say? Which one was specifically designed for heavy combat? A 30-06 could be used as sniper rifle, but in a heavy fire fight, it'd be kind of slow wouldn't it. So of the two, which one do you think the Vegas shooter would have used if he'd been able to get several BARs? He chose the AR15 though didn't he. There's your legal precedent right there. Moreover, the 1994 assault weapons ban set a legal precedent as well. THAT'S the part of this entire thing that spoils your "technicalities argument". These silly rabbit holes you try and take everybody down is exactly what inspired this thread: your nonsense means nothing against sound rational argument of effects and policies that arise from them. You can't prove anything dude; you can'tr answer the simple of questions that make a mockery of your entire case. So I'll ask you again: what got in the way of sound legal gun regulations that have passed muster in this country and the several states since our founding? Which of the founders who wrote, debated and passed the second amendment were "gun experts? THEY decided policy and law, so name the gun experts.

You can'y do it, and that's my point.

The Ruger 10/22 (chambered in .22lr) with folding stock and threaded barrel was banned as an assault weapon under the 1994 ban. A 25 round magazine is available.
The Ruger mini-30 (chambered in 7.62x39mm) was exempted And was not classified as an assault weapon. It comes with 5 round or 20 round magazines.

Which weapon is more dangerous of these two: the assault weapon 10/22 or the mini-30? Which would a mass killer prefer?

 

[jet57]

Yes, one is a cartridge caliber the other is a firearm. So much for your knowledge on the topic.

Here's the Browning 30-.06 rifle




And here's a BAR -



So much for your knowledge on guns. Please see the OP again: you need a refresher course...

So I'll ask you again: in a heavy firefight, say in Afghanistan, of the two, which would you rather use at very short ranges?

So I'll

 

[RF667799]

Here's the Browning 30-.06 rifle

View attachment 67256718


And here's a BAR -

View attachment 67256719

So much for your knowledge on guns. Please see the OP again: you need a refresher course...

So I'll ask you again: in a heavy firefight, say in Afghanistan, of the two, which would you rather use at very short ranges?

So I'll

The BAR is chambered in 30.06 Springfield as well as the old FN Browning rifle you posted.

It's a very popular cartridge and has been since it was first designed as the battle round for the US Government.

 

[pinqy]

Here's the Browning 30-.06 rifle

View attachment 67256718

And what would you call this one?

Huh looks the same. But the one I posted is chambered in .264 win mag

I believe both are the Browning FN High power Safari.

 

[RF667799]

And what would you call this one?

Huh looks the same. But the one I posted is chambered in .264 win mag

I believe both are the Browning FN High power Safari.

I believe you're right.

I also believe that "at very short range" in a "heavy firefight" (as opposed to a light firefight) the M1 Carbine would typically outshine either the bolt rifle or the BAR.

Jet's scenarios sometimes seem of the sort like: "If a tiger and a lion got in a fight, which one would win?"

 

[jet57]

The BAR is chambered in 30.06 Springfield as well as the old FN Browning rifle you posted.

It's a very popular cartridge and has been since it was first designed as the battle round for the US Government.

I've never seen a guy slam on the breaks so fast sense I've been here.

 

[jet57]

I believe you're right.

I also believe that "at very short range" in a "heavy firefight" (as opposed to a light firefight) the M1 Carbine would typically outshine either the bolt rifle or the BAR.

Jet's scenarios sometimes seem of the sort like: "If a tiger and a lion got in a fight, which one would win?"

I believe it's made of Tiger maple; what do you want me to call it?

 

[RF667799]

I've never seen a guy slam on the breaks so fast sense I've been here.

It's typically viewed as unbecoming for someone to brag on his own achievements. Besides, your panic stops just aren't that impressive anyway.

Now- if you're done attempting nonsensical deflection- are you going to address the several relevant questions that have been asked by myself and several others and that you have studiously avoided?

Post 218 would be one for you to start with.

 

[prometeus]

So much for your knowledge on guns. Please see the OP again: you need a refresher course...

Spare me your dishonest tripe. You made a moronic generalization and demonstrated your ignorance on the topic.

 

[jet57]

It's typically viewed as unbecoming for someone to brag on his own achievements. Besides, your panic stops just aren't that impressive anyway.

Now- if you're done attempting nonsensical deflection- are you going to address the several relevant questions that have been asked by myself and several others and that you have studiously avoided?

Post 218 would be one for you to start with.

That got answered a long time ago, ask Pingy.

And no deflection at all on my part. I just showed how "gun experts" jump to the wrong conclusions with your own diversions form OP subject matter, and the bunch of you wind up looking like the Marx Brothers jumbled up at a door and falling all over each other. You're proving the OP more and more as we go on here.

Please; go on...

 

[jet57]

Spare me your dishonest tripe. You made a moronic generalization and demonstrated your ignorance on the topic.

It was YOU who jumped to the wrong conclusion. I asked you a specific question about two types of guns and you painted yourself into a corner. Please see the OP again; you need a refresher.

 

[jet57]

I believe you're right.

I also believe that "at very short range" in a "heavy firefight" (as opposed to a light firefight) the M1 Carbine would typically outshine either the bolt rifle or the BAR.

Jet's scenarios sometimes seem of the sort like: "If a tiger and a lion got in a fight, which one would win?"

The M1 Carbine is a bush gun. The 30-06 is a hunting rifle, the BAR as an automatic worked quite well in both WWI and WWII; lots of close combat there. But a 30-06 wouldn't do so well. That means, when we follow this to it's logical conclusion, that you and your friend would choose the BAR. And THAT'S why the Vega shooter chose the AR15: it's faster, has more velocity and does more damage on impact.

That's a fact.

So how is gun gibberish going to change that fact or dictate policy when it hasn't worked before? Gun regulations are very specific and pass for those reasons.

 

[prometeus]

It was YOU who jumped to the wrong conclusion.

No, you made a stupid generalization because you have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[Bum]

And I see jet is still getting pimp slapped around his own thread like a racquet ball.

 

[jet57]

No, you made a stupid generalization because you have no clue what you are talking about.

Uh no. You jumped to a conclusion in your zeal to make me wrong and it backfired on you.

No what was your choice?

 

[jet57]

And I see jet is still getting pimp slapped around his own thread like a racquet ball.

(chuckle)

Nope. What you're seeing is thread playing itself out beautifully. All the so called "gun experts" are trippin up on their own BS. And no you enter.

Ga'head make an argument.

 

[prometeus]

Uh no. You jumped to a conclusion in your zeal to make me wrong and it backfired on you.

No what was your choice?

I jumped to no conclusion. You made a stupid generalization, demonstrating your lack of knowledge.

 

[RF667799]

The M1 Carbine is a bush gun. The 30-06 is a hunting rifle, the BAR as an automatic worked quite well in both WWI and WWII; lots of close combat there. But a 30-06 wouldn't do so well.

The BAR is a 30.06.

That means, when we follow this to it's logical conclusion, that you and your friend would choose the BAR.

I wouldn't. Your "logical conclusion" doesn't follow a coherent argument on its behalf. Basically, you spouted a bunch of bull****.

And THAT'S why the Vega shooter chose the AR15: it's faster, has more velocity and does more damage on impact.

That's a fact.

That's no where near a fact.

So how is gun gibberish going to change that fact or dictate policy when it hasn't worked before? Gun regulations are very specific and pass for those reasons.

You're the only one gibbering, but do continue. It's entertaining.

 

[RF667799]

That got answered a long time ago, ask Pingy.

And no deflection at all on my part. I just showed how "gun experts" jump to the wrong conclusions with your own diversions form OP subject matter, and the bunch of you wind up looking like the Marx Brothers jumbled up at a door and falling all over each other. You're proving the OP more and more as we go on here.

Please; go on...

Point out where it was answered.