The Stupidity of AR-15 Bans

[TurtleDude]

“wrong-mini 14 is semi automatic.”

I assumed the poster to mean whatever was most effective. The Ruger mini-14 comes in both a semi version and a 750 rpm fully auto assault rifle model. Since we were also talking AW’s. The semi mini-14 is not an actual AW nor AW style as it does not have any banned AW features, as in CA law, except the detachable clip. The fully auto version is an assault rifle. It just doesn't "look" like one.

“Glocks can be fitted with drum magazines that exceed most rifle magazines”

Yup. Up to 100-round twin-drum. As can any number of AW style rifles, like the AR-15. You can also get those twin drums for the Ruger Mini-14 and the M1A.

“hard cast bullets at rifle velocities quickly lead the barrel, especially if fired rapidly”

Properly lubed, they should not be a problem before the shooter is stopped.

“bullet velocity, after a certain level, does not increase in lethality”

Well, yeah. Both of two considerably different velocity bullets can go completely through the human body. A higher velocity bullet, though, can then possibly go through another and then into another. I mentioned the highest velocity, hardest-cast bullet for that one, though somewhat limited, advantage only.

“You really demonstrate you haven't a clue about this subject”

You really demonstrate you are desperate to prove me wrong on this subject which you pretend to know more about than you do.

I don't need to prove you wrong-everyone else knows it

how many active shooters to date have shot hard cast bullets out of the rifles that cause garment soiling among the left? I bet ZERO. I have thousands upon thousands of rounds through AR 15s. Have never ever shot a cast bullet out of one

 

[dave8383]

well we can dream up all sort of scenarios about where a shotgun is going to cause more damage versus an AR 15

but lets cut through your contrarian BS. Do you support private citizens being able to own AR 15s or do you support additional restrictions or even bans?

Nothing contrarian about my responses at all. I'm merely helping you get back on the track when you stray off course.

Now as for this: "Do you support private citizens being able to own AR 15s..."

I've stated more than once in here that I'm all for citizens of the United States that are leagaly eligable to take advantage of their 2nd Amendment rights to do so if they so desire. That of course includes the legal purchase of an AR15.

Edit to add: Personally I find the M1A to be more fun.

 

[TurtleDude]

Nothing contrarian about my responses at all. I'm merely helping you get back on the track when you stray off course.

Now as for this: "Do you support private citizens being able to own AR 15s..."

I've stated more than once in here that I'm all for citizens of the United States that are leagaly eligable to take advantage of their 2nd Amendment rights to do so if they so desire. That of course includes the legal purchase of an AR15.

Edit to add: Personally I find the M1A to be more fun.

depends on the shooting environment. I have one of them-one of the Krieger barreled Super National Match jobs. don't shoot it much, the only ranges I have access to are limited to 200 yards.

 

[daeler]

depends on the shooting environment. I have one of them-one of the Krieger barreled Super National Match jobs. don't shoot it much, the only ranges I have access to are limited to 200 yards.

Briar Rabbit range has 300 yard targets Rayman and Thunder valley both have 1000 yard ranges.

 

[TurtleDude]

Briar Rabbit range has 300 yard targets Rayman and Thunder valley both have 1000 yard ranges.

where are those located in Ohio?

 

[daeler]

where are those located in Ohio?

Briar rabbit is near Zanesville The others are a bit further out to the east. I think Thunder Valley is about 1 1/2 hrs east and a little north of Columbus Rayman is east and south about the same distance.

 

[TurtleDude]

Briar rabbit is near Zanesville The others are a bit further out to the east. I think Thunder Valley is about 1 1/2 hrs east and a little north of Columbus Rayman is east and south about the same distance.

we have a 600 yard range in Batavia but i am not a member and the wait list is a few years- and long distance rifle shooting is not a top priority

 

[bluesmoke]

The only way banning guns would make any sense is if you ban them all. And the constitution prevents that.

People killed by rifles = less than 300 per year. But that is what you say is the most scary weapon.

“The only way banning guns would make any sense is if you ban them all. And the constitution prevents that.”

At least you agree that banning guns would work.

In the Heller case, it was ruled that a ‘total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense.’ and was thus unconstitutional. They gave no definition of “class of arms” except that handguns were a class of arms. Maybe then “rifles” would be a class of arms, but not semi-auto rifles, like are banned in Australia, and such ban might work in the US. CA does not ban all semi-auto rifles, but the ban on features includes detachable mags, which eliminates most semis except .22s. The SC usually doesn't give "definitions" in cases like Heller. They don't write laws/definitions. They just wait for a law that writes the definition to rule on.

“People killed by rifles = less than 300 per year. But that is what you say is the most scary weapon.”

No, I didn’t say that. I said that semi-auto rifles can kill the most people in the shortest amount of time and that AW style rifles are becoming more popular among mass shooters than ever before.

 

[dave8383]

depends on the shooting environment. I have one of them-one of the Krieger barreled Super National Match jobs. don't shoot it much, the only ranges I have access to are limited to 200 yards.

There's a 600 meter range not very far from me. Used to be all guys with M1As, but now they all have AR15s. Times change.

 

[bluesmoke]

Lots of reasons.

the AR 15 is one of the most useful all-around defensive weapons

If you have had military training, you know how to maintain an AR 15

Parts are readily available and due to the popularity-there are many good aftermarket accessories or improvements. There are at least a dozen companies making really good trigger units for AR 15s

It is easy to change out worn parts without being a gun smith

firearms that use military caliber ammunition are cheaper to feed

if there are massive instances of civil unrest, resupply of ammunition is easier when government agents are using a certain caliber. I read someplace that in Italy you can own military handguns and semi auto rifles but they are much easier to own if they are NOT military caliber because the government figures terrorists are going to try to get military weapons. So lots of Italians own AR 70 Beretta rifles in .222 and Beretta handguns in 9X21

“the AR 15 is one of the most useful all-around defensive weapons”

Handguns are #1 on most "best home defense weapons" lists.

“If you have had military training, you know how to maintain an AR 15”

That’s good for about 7% of active-duty and veterans. Of course, with the right gun safety measures, the required training and education classes would teach maintenance for the firearm of choice. Besides, you can learn what you need to know about any legal firearm.

“Parts are readily available and due to the popularity-there are many good aftermarket accessories or improvements. There are at least a dozen companies making really good trigger units for AR 15s”

What else would you need for a good home defense weapon that you can’t get on the AR-15 or other good home defense weapon at time of purchase?

“It is easy to change out worn parts without being a gun smith”

As is the case with many other effective home defense weapons.

“firearms that use military caliber ammunition are cheaper to feed”

Indeed. Firearms like rifles that use .22LR, .30, 30-06 and .50 that can use .22LR, .30, 30-06, .50 or 7.62mm (in the .30 / .30-06 rifles) “military” ammo. Like .308 rifles that can fire 7.62 NATO military ammo. Like .22LR, .38 Special, .45 ACP and 9mm pistols (there’s a few of those around) that can fire the same caliber “military” ammo. Like various shot 12-gauge shotgun shells. You mean like that military caliber ammo cheaper to feed?

“if there are massive instances of civil unrest”

Are you serious? You mean Trump’s Civil War? The one the Trumpsters start? That’s the civil unrest that Trump is fomenting.

 

[bluesmoke]

time for an honest answer-for once

if normal capacity magazines are banned, who is more likely to be in a gun fight with a 10 round magazine

1) a criminal who already has violated several laws by merely having a firearm that he uses to assault a citizen

2) a citizen who is defending his home or business from a criminal attack

“time for an honest answer-for once”

Time for you to prove what you claim, for once. Like your assumption by the above that I do not give an honest answer. Prove it. Give evidence of fact to back up your own word. Or your own word is worthless as is your measure.


“if normal capacity magazines are banned, who is more likely to be in a gun fight with a 10 round magazine
1) a criminal who already has violated several laws by merely having a firearm that he uses to assault a citizen
2) a citizen who is defending his home or business from a criminal attack”

I don’t know of any magazine capacity bans of 10 rounds or less. Only over 10 rounds, like in CA. So, your premise is wrong to begin with. As usual, it’s difficult to tell if you just made an ignorant mistake, or you’re being tricky, deceptive, disingenuous. You’re so often unclear. So what is it. Over 10 rounds, or what?

What is your definition of “citizen”? Criminals are citizens. Do you mean citizens who are not criminals, do not have a criminal record? Be clear, please.

 

[TurtleDude]

There's a 600 meter range not very far from me. Used to be all guys with M1As, but now they all have AR15s. Times change.

Makes sense-the USAMU and the USMC shooting team both changed over from M14 to M16 rifles. A guy who was the national service rifle Champion about 30 years ago -and then became a shotgun competitor for the Marines, noted that with the heavier bullets, the M16 were almost as accurate at the longest distance (600 Yards IIRC) and easier to shoot and less fatigue

 

[TurtleDude]

“time for an honest answer-for once”

Time for you to prove what you claim, for once. Like your assumption by the above that I do not give an honest answer. Prove it. Give evidence of fact to back up your own word. Or your own word is worthless as is your measure.


“if normal capacity magazines are banned, who is more likely to be in a gun fight with a 10 round magazine
1) a criminal who already has violated several laws by merely having a firearm that he uses to assault a citizen
2) a citizen who is defending his home or business from a criminal attack”

I don’t know of any magazine capacity bans of 10 rounds or less. Only over 10 rounds, like in CA. So, your premise is wrong to begin with. As usual, it’s difficult to tell if you just made an ignorant mistake, or you’re being tricky, deceptive, disingenuous. You’re so often unclear. So what is it. Over 10 rounds, or what?

What is your definition of “citizen”? Criminals are citizens. Do you mean citizens who are not criminals, do not have a criminal record? Be clear, please.

That's some serious ignorance there-NYS imposed a 7 round limit-I believe a court held it up. But lets go with say 15 rounds-meaning Glock and SW magazines are banned.

who is more likely to be limited by such a law? Criminals who plan on using a firearm (they cannot legally own) to harm others, or a private citizen with no criminal record who owns a pistol or rifle for defensive use?

 

[SDET]

Thanks. I was wondering if Koo koo was a word, but now you have validated it. OH , and serena is a cow.

The proper old timer's term is a heifer, in case you were wondering.

 

[bluesmoke]

8 round shotgun, with #4 buckshot is how many lethal projectiles in 3 seconds (which is what I can leisurely fire 8 rounds off at)

vs a 20 round AR 15. well lets see. AR 15-20 lethal projectiles

#4 buck 33-41 projectiles X 8 rounds. Hmmmm

You mean like 33 to 41 lethal pellets in one shot vs. 20 lethal bullets (or 10, or 30, or 100 from a twin drum) from as many trigger pulls? You’re just being goofy, right? It’s been obvious for some time that you don’t know as much as you pretend to others. But I gave you more credit than this.

You’re thinking isn’t so warped as to believe that the spread pattern of a 21-24 (not 33-41, which is wrong) pellet #4 buck is going to hit numerous people fatally. I mean, really. The spread pattern is no more than 17” at 20 yds and 27” at 45 yds, depending on the choke and shell size, and of course well within body size at much under 20 yds. Or, maybe you have an explanation. You rarely do. You don’t give details. You like to remain vague.

 

[TurtleDude]

“The only way banning guns would make any sense is if you ban them all. And the constitution prevents that.”

At least you agree that banning guns would work.

In the Heller case, it was ruled that a ‘total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense.’ and was thus unconstitutional. They gave no definition of “class of arms” except that handguns were a class of arms. Maybe then “rifles” would be a class of arms, but not semi-auto rifles, like are banned in Australia, and such ban might work in the US. CA does not ban all semi-auto rifles, but the ban on features includes detachable mags, which eliminates most semis except .22s. The SC usually doesn't give "definitions" in cases like Heller. They don't write laws/definitions. They just wait for a law that writes the definition to rule on.

“People killed by rifles = less than 300 per year. But that is what you say is the most scary weapon.”

No, I didn’t say that. I said that semi-auto rifles can kill the most people in the shortest amount of time and that AW style rifles are becoming more popular among mass shooters than ever before.

the author of Heller has stated on the record that semi auto rifles are protected by Heller. and your dishonest attempts to use a very rare form of murder to pretend that semi auto rifles are used in more than 2% of murders is patently obvious. The fact is, common use does not change because a few nutcases use the most popular rifle in the USA to commit crimes. The rifle does not become "unusually dangerous" merely because a few nutcases misuse them

 

[TurtleDude]

You mean like 33 to 41 lethal pellets in one shot vs. 20 lethal bullets (or 10, or 30, or 100 from a twin drum) from as many trigger pulls? You’re just being goofy, right? It’s been obvious for some time that you don’t know as much as you pretend to others. But I gave you more credit than this.

You’re thinking isn’t so warped as to believe that the spread pattern of a 21-24 (not 33-41, which is wrong) pellet #4 buck is going to hit numerous people fatally. I mean, really. The spread pattern is no more than 17” at 20 yds and 27” at 45 yds, depending on the choke and shell size, and of course well within body size at much under 20 yds. Or, maybe you have an explanation. You rarely do. You don’t give details. You like to remain vague.

at short ranges, a blast of #4 is invariably- when directed to the torso or head- fatal. at 40 yards one projectile (one #4 buckshot) will still kill and with massed victims, you are going to serious wound or kill two or more per shot.

 

[bluesmoke]

The CA law simply says the grandfathered gun must be re-registered in the new CA owner''s name within 30 days of the transfer.

As long as you:

Render the weapon inoperable,

Sell the weapon to a licensed gun dealer,

Obtain a permit from the California Department of Justice to possess an assault weapon, or

Remove the weapon from the state altogether.

 

[bluesmoke]

I don't need to prove you wrong-everyone else knows it

how many active shooters to date have shot hard cast bullets out of the rifles that cause garment soiling among the left? I bet ZERO. I have thousands upon thousands of rounds through AR 15s. Have never ever shot a cast bullet out of one

“I don't need to prove you wrong-everyone else knows it”

Then quote me wrong, other than what I’ve already admitted, and we can work that one out.

“how many active shooters to date have shot hard cast bullets out of the rifles that cause garment soiling among the left? I bet ZERO. I have thousands upon thousands of rounds through AR 15s. Have never ever shot a cast bullet out of one”

Well, the context was of being a mass shooter and what would be most effective in killing people. I said that a hard-cast bullet, among other factors, would be more effective than otherwise. I said so because, since the scenario was one of a crowd of people, a hard-cast bullet would more likely pass through a target victim and into another than would any other bullet type. Do you disagree? If so, why?

What everyone else should know is that you pretend to know more than you do. Artificial.

 

[TurtleDude]

“I don't need to prove you wrong-everyone else knows it”

Then quote me wrong, other than what I’ve already admitted, and we can work that one out.

“how many active shooters to date have shot hard cast bullets out of the rifles that cause garment soiling among the left? I bet ZERO. I have thousands upon thousands of rounds through AR 15s. Have never ever shot a cast bullet out of one”

Well, the context was of being a mass shooter and what would be most effective in killing people. I said that a hard-cast bullet, among other factors, would be more effective than otherwise. I said so because, since the scenario was one of a crowd of people, a hard-cast bullet would more likely pass through a target victim and into another than would any other bullet type. Do you disagree? If so, why?

What everyone else should know is that you pretend to know more than you do. Artificial.

cast bullets in a high velocity rifle

 

[bluesmoke]

That's some serious ignorance there-NYS imposed a 7 round limit-I believe a court held it up. But lets go with say 15 rounds-meaning Glock and SW magazines are banned.

who is more likely to be limited by such a law? Criminals who plan on using a firearm (they cannot legally own) to harm others, or a private citizen with no criminal record who owns a pistol or rifle for defensive use?

Talk about ignorance. No, the 7-round limit on handgun mags was thrown-out. The previous 10-round limit stands.

We already covered the rest of what you say. Guns in the home cause more harm than DGU does good.

 

[bluesmoke]

the author of Heller has stated on the record that semi auto rifles are protected by Heller. and your dishonest attempts to use a very rare form of murder to pretend that semi auto rifles are used in more than 2% of murders is patently obvious. The fact is, common use does not change because a few nutcases use the most popular rifle in the USA to commit crimes. The rifle does not become "unusually dangerous" merely because a few nutcases misuse them

“the author of Heller has stated on the record that semi auto rifles are protected by Heller. and your dishonest attempts to use a very rare form of murder to pretend that semi auto rifles are used in more than 2% of murders is patently obvious.”

What? I never said anything like you allege and you can’t quote me on any such thing. And you won’t, because you never do. You accuse me of many things, but when challenged, just like with bullies, you back down.

“The fact is, common use does not change because a few nutcases use the most popular rifle in the USA to commit crimes. The rifle does not become "unusually dangerous" merely because a few nutcases misuse them”

Just because something is “common” does not mean it isn’t unusually dangerous. How much more dangerous must a weapon be? I would most certainly say that an AR-15 is unusually dangerous. Not much else out there is more dangerous, is there?

 

[bluesmoke]

at short ranges, a blast of #4 is invariably- when directed to the torso or head- fatal. at 40 yards one projectile (one #4 buckshot) will still kill and with massed victims, you are going to serious wound or kill two or more per shot.

In how many mass shootings are the targets 40 yds away? This is why you don’t give details. When you do, they aren’t appropriate for the case at hand. 40 yds is a long ways off. That far away, people are more likely to be further apart, anyway, and that one pellet, or two, likelihood of hitting an area of the body or head that would be deadly... In any way, your logic is faulty.

 

[TurtleDude]

In how many mass shootings are the targets 40 yds away? This is why you don’t give details. When you do, they aren’t appropriate for the case at hand. 40 yds is a long ways off. That far away, people are more likely to be further apart, anyway, and that one pellet, or two, likelihood of hitting an area of the body or head that would be deadly... In any way, your logic is faulty.

doesn't matter-and trying to ban guns because a few of them are misused is moronic

 

[TurtleDude]

Talk about ignorance. No, the 7-round limit on handgun mags was thrown-out. The previous 10-round limit stands.

We already covered the rest of what you say. Guns in the home cause more harm than DGU does good.

smart people understand that the law proves what the bannerrhoid movement wants.

and lets cut the crap-you want to ban guns not because you are worried about having a gun in your own home, rather you don't like how gun owners tend to vote