Just another day in the gun paradise of the world.

[jaF0]

As to the NRA, they used to make the news by promoting gun safety before becoming a political puppet master.

They pull the strings, the GQP and judges dance.

 

[Pad_Foot]

They pull the strings, the GQP and judges dance.

Ahhh but who pulls the NRA strings?

How many members??

Who runs them?? “The Roche?”
Doubt it. Paid off figure head. Corrupt as shit

 

[rockcasbah]

….splattering his firearm wads around the forum.

If that’s your best you might want to pick out a new pronoun or two.

 

[John_von_Neumann]

If that’s your best you might want to pick out a new pronoun or two.

Unlike your imaginary lakeside nubiles, I don’t post for your pleasure.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The AR-15 isn't a direct variant of the Colt AR-15 (Colt bought it from Armalite Rifle, 10 years or so after the company designed it).

Again direct variant, Colt buying the design and production rights changes nothing. Kind of like when the Dodge brothers sold their company to the Chrysler Corp. A dodge was made from the same parts before and after the sale.

The 5.56 NATO is a .223 REM difference is not in bullet size, but in the cartridge specs, in the throat to hold an extra grain of gunpowder. For .223 to be effective and humane/ethical killing of larger then varmint, you need a heavier bullet - but this heavier bullet requires also a modified barrel with more twist rate the 1-8 is ideal for 50-60grain but 1-9 and 1-10 for 70+ grains.

So what? Nice spec read out, which adds or subtracts what from your point?

So, yes the .223 Rem is for varmint hunting, 12 states outright ban the AR-15 for hunting deer (100-140lbs) because it isn't powerful enough for a humane kill

Were not talking about using the .223 for hunting deer or pig......but people, and a .223 is plenty deadly enough to take out people. It is math, Force = velocity x mass. Not to mention how unstable the bullet is, which then tumbles and usually breaks up into pieces upon impact. Now I am not sure and i am not bothering to look it up, but the .223 may even be a boatail style bullet making it even more destructive upon impact.

If you're crazy or stupid enough to use anon-modified AR-15 (typical 55grain bullet 1-8 twist rate) for wild boar hunting, sure a .223 take down a wild boar, with near perfect shot placement (how confident are you to face down a 200-300lb pig charging at you and putting the shot through a ribcage into the heart??) which is why most prefer the .3xx calibers.

View attachment 2160319

I love how you throw "twist rate" in, do you know what that twist rate does? (btw my afore mentioned WW1 .303 has a twist rate of 1-10 surprised I know that?) I doubt it, your just a google warrior, with little actual knowledge about the real world.

Kind of like how you get suckered into posting shit in other threads that actually discredit your post. Why? Well because the people who were looking for data to back up their point, found some that appear to back up the view. But upon actually reading said materials ( which they and you don't) the data doesn't support the argument.

BTW, I am kind of curious how you shoot through a rib cage, at an animal charging you? I don't recall too ( read zero) many times you get broadside views of an animal charging...do you actually even hunt?

 

[jaF0]

Ahhh but who pulls the NRA strings?

How many members??

Who runs them??

The gun manufacturers.

 

[rockcasbah]

( jealousy edit)…. I don’t post for your pleasure.

No, you certainly don’t.

 

[Rightguide]

Ahhh but who pulls the NRA strings?

How many members??

Who runs them?? “The Roche?”
Doubt it. Paid off figure head. Corrupt as shit

The NRA has around 5 million members, with ordinary Americans in the leadership elected by voting members, that being life members and any annual member who has at least 5 continuous years of membership.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Note the number of posts missing .......


View attachment 2160330

My post count doesn't show the posts or count those posts in the running total for people I have on ignore.

 

[Rightguide]

The gun manufacturers.

Bullshit. That isn't true.

 

[coati]

Hi, lace! I do my best not to think about it. But absent the ignore feature it’s a challenge, what with him splattering his firearm wads around the forum.

Excessive mental masturbation is a hallmark of Lit's gun nuts. They could stroke themselves off forever, and never recognize the reasons why they seldom get laid or experience satisfying social relationships.

Did you catch RightGuard's post a little further up the thread where he says that mass murderers are victims of "left wing male socialization"? That's code for "Mass shootings would cease if the left wing would quit keeping the incels from getting laid."

It's only fitting that the underlying causes of obsessive gun nut behavior are revealed on a porn board.

 

[coati]

Nobody supports "nut jobs" getting guns. Nor do we support the left-wing aspects of today's male socialization that creates those "nut jobs" in our society.

Yeah, yeah, it ain't like your good ol' days when you could get sex by offering a can of corn. That damn left wing spoiled everything for the right wing incels, you poor things.

 

[dmonty]

Everybody pushing back against red-flag laws supports nut-jobs getting guns.

For gun-owners, the pattern is all too familiar: a mass shooting, followed by massive amounts of publicity by the anti-gun media and posturing politicians, accompanied by a demand that Congress "do something," such as red flag laws. Three of the governments in the last century that experimented with their versions of red flag laws, allowing government judges to declare political enemies mentally unfit in order to make it easier to subjugate them, were communist (red) China, the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany. Each of those nations had lots of red in its flags.

Due process is the idea that the government must follow the procedural rules under our system of justice. These guarantees protect Americans against arbitrary decisions by the government to take away life, liberty, and property.

Imagine if the government accused you of wanting to be a drug-dealer. You've never been charged with — or even accused of — having actually sold drugs. But still, someone thinks there's a good chance you may in the future. So you're given a hearing, allowed to hire a lawyer, and permitted to testify why you won't become a drug dealer in the future. But at the end of the day, a judge still believes there's an unreasonable risk that you will enter the drug business. So, in order to prevent that possibility, for the next year or so, you no longer have any Fourth Amendment rights. The police may now stop your car and search it any time they wish and enter your home to search for drugs at will. What, that doesn't sound fair? What's the problem? You were given loads and loads of due process!

And so, yet in every instance the "red-Flag" laws ("ERPO's" in NY), they have been misused and abused to disarm people solely based upon their political ideologies, and have yet to flag and prevent a single crime. Anti-liberty hoplophobic leftists repeatedly try gaslighting to advance their obvious goal of confiscating guns. Their latest push for “red flag” laws is no different. These unconstitutional abominations are also known as Extreme Risk Firearm Protection Orders (ERFPO), Risk Protection Orders (RPO), Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO), and Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVRO).

a typical leftist tactic: avoiding certain words because they would convey what is really taking place. Democrats routinely have their best wordsmiths conjure up soft language for wholesale gun confiscation. Start with those so-called “red flag” orders, which imply a government promise to confront serious dangers. On the surface, ‘red flag’ laws appear reasonable. When a person exhibits warning signs they are an extreme danger to themselves and others, the best course of action is to intervene by taking away their arms. Common sense, the Left argues. After all, if a court determines a person poses a societal risk, forcibly seizing their firearms reduces that risk. Right?

If the government takes on the improper role to prevent future crime, that inevitably will result in an Orwellian surveillance state, where freedom is theoretical at best. Many believe we are already on that road, and red flag laws are certainly a big step in the wrong direction.

Unfortunately, history screams of ‘well-intentioned’ legislation by the left that resulted in unintended negative consequences.

Historically, the synonymous concepts of liberty and freedom were assumed to be the inherent right of every citizen born in our country. Not so much these days.

There are inherent risks associated with living in a free society. One of those risks is that free people will harm other free people. Is freedom worth the risk? Of course it is! The reason is because the alternative is far worse. In a society where government controls every aspect of life, particularly the ability to own a firearm, dead bodies are piled upon each other at the hands of government elites who hold little regard for freedom of the masses. If you live in a state that has enacted a ‘red flag’ law, an individual can file an affidavit detailing reasons they believe you represent an extreme risk to yourself or society. Whether or not the accuser’s affidavit is based in truth is irrelevant. The simple act of an affidavit filed against you (without you being notified, by the way) means a judge will determine whether or not to issue an extreme risk protection order (ERPO).

Do you get to defend yourself against the accusation prior to your property being seized? Nope. The decision to seize your property is at the discretion of a judge who has never met you nor heard your defense. Notice the absence of something critical that every American citizen rightfully expects: due process. Due process is a right protected by the Fifth Amendment.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees our right against unreasonable searches and seizure of property. When a person has committed no crime nor is in the process of committing a crime yet their personal property is confiscated without due process, this is the classic definition of unreasonable seizure.

Absurdly, proponents claim ‘red flag’ laws include due process. How so when personal property has already been seized? Because “due process” lies in the Machiavellian wording of these laws. The person whose firearm has been seized may petition the court carrying the burden of proof they are not a risk. Disproving guilt is a legal standard more extraordinarily demanding than establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

In other words, guilt is presumed and the accused must prove otherwise. This is their plan to seize firearms from American citizens who have not been convicted of a crime or even accused. Now, under normal circumstances, it would be instantly obvious that that is unconstitutional. In our system, you have to be convicted before you can be punished, but in the hysteria that understandably follows a tragedy horrible politicians know that they can unconstitutionally suspend civil liberties.

History has taught us time and again that governments are far more dangerous to liberty than are criminals. A person's odds of being murdered by a tyrannical government (termed "democide") are astronomically higher than by a mass shooter. Yet too many people seem oblivious to the fact that far worse than some criminals getting access to guns is a system where the government gets to decide who should be disarmed.

 

[phrodeau]

For gun-owners, the pattern is all too familiar: a mass shooting, followed by massive amounts of publicity by the anti-gun media and posturing politicians, accompanied by a demand that Congress "do something," such as red flag laws. Three of the governments in the last century that experimented with their versions of red flag laws, allowing government judges to declare political enemies mentally unfit in order to make it easier to subjugate them, were communist (red) China, the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany. Each of those nations had lots of red in its flags.

Due process is the idea that the government must follow the procedural rules under our system of justice. These guarantees protect Americans against arbitrary decisions by the government to take away life, liberty, and property.

Imagine if the government accused you of wanting to be a drug-dealer. You've never been charged with — or even accused of — having actually sold drugs. But still, someone thinks there's a good chance you may in the future. So you're given a hearing, allowed to hire a lawyer, and permitted to testify why you won't become a drug dealer in the future. But at the end of the day, a judge still believes there's an unreasonable risk that you will enter the drug business. So, in order to prevent that possibility, for the next year or so, you no longer have any Fourth Amendment rights. The police may now stop your car and search it any time they wish and enter your home to search for drugs at will. What, that doesn't sound fair? What's the problem? You were given loads and loads of due process!

And so, yet in every instance the "red-Flag" laws ("ERPO's" in NY), they have been misused and abused to disarm people solely based upon their political ideologies, and have yet to flag and prevent a single crime. Anti-liberty hoplophobic leftists repeatedly try gaslighting to advance their obvious goal of confiscating guns. Their latest push for “red flag” laws is no different. These unconstitutional abominations are also known as Extreme Risk Firearm Protection Orders (ERFPO), Risk Protection Orders (RPO), Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO), and Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVRO).

a typical leftist tactic: avoiding certain words because they would convey what is really taking place. Democrats routinely have their best wordsmiths conjure up soft language for wholesale gun confiscation. Start with those so-called “red flag” orders, which imply a government promise to confront serious dangers. On the surface, ‘red flag’ laws appear reasonable. When a person exhibits warning signs they are an extreme danger to themselves and others, the best course of action is to intervene by taking away their arms. Common sense, the Left argues. After all, if a court determines a person poses a societal risk, forcibly seizing their firearms reduces that risk. Right?

If the government takes on the improper role to prevent future crime, that inevitably will result in an Orwellian surveillance state, where freedom is theoretical at best. Many believe we are already on that road, and red flag laws are certainly a big step in the wrong direction.

Unfortunately, history screams of ‘well-intentioned’ legislation by the left that resulted in unintended negative consequences.

Historically, the synonymous concepts of liberty and freedom were assumed to be the inherent right of every citizen born in our country. Not so much these days.

There are inherent risks associated with living in a free society. One of those risks is that free people will harm other free people. Is freedom worth the risk? Of course it is! The reason is because the alternative is far worse. In a society where government controls every aspect of life, particularly the ability to own a firearm, dead bodies are piled upon each other at the hands of government elites who hold little regard for freedom of the masses. If you live in a state that has enacted a ‘red flag’ law, an individual can file an affidavit detailing reasons they believe you represent an extreme risk to yourself or society. Whether or not the accuser’s affidavit is based in truth is irrelevant. The simple act of an affidavit filed against you (without you being notified, by the way) means a judge will determine whether or not to issue an extreme risk protection order (ERPO).

Do you get to defend yourself against the accusation prior to your property being seized? Nope. The decision to seize your property is at the discretion of a judge who has never met you nor heard your defense. Notice the absence of something critical that every American citizen rightfully expects: due process. Due process is a right protected by the Fifth Amendment.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees our right against unreasonable searches and seizure of property. When a person has committed no crime nor is in the process of committing a crime yet their personal property is confiscated without due process, this is the classic definition of unreasonable seizure.

Absurdly, proponents claim ‘red flag’ laws include due process. How so when personal property has already been seized? Because “due process” lies in the Machiavellian wording of these laws. The person whose firearm has been seized may petition the court carrying the burden of proof they are not a risk. Disproving guilt is a legal standard more extraordinarily demanding than establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

In other words, guilt is presumed and the accused must prove otherwise. This is their plan to seize firearms from American citizens who have not been convicted of a crime or even accused. Now, under normal circumstances, it would be instantly obvious that that is unconstitutional. In our system, you have to be convicted before you can be punished, but in the hysteria that understandably follows a tragedy horrible politicians know that they can unconstitutionally suspend civil liberties.

History has taught us time and again that governments are far more dangerous to liberty than are criminals. A person's odds of being murdered by a tyrannical government (termed "democide") are astronomically higher than by a mass shooter. Yet too many people seem oblivious to the fact that far worse than some criminals getting access to guns is a system where the government gets to decide who should be disarmed.

Anyone who gets flagged and loses their guns can just learn how to kill en masse with their hands and feet.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

History has taught us time and again that governments are far more dangerous to liberty than are criminals.

Ah, so you finally come clean........*chuckles* you're scared of big bad gobberment........lol.

I can tell you failed history btw.

 

[jaF0]

My post count doesn't show the posts or count those posts in the running total for people I have on ignore.

Uhhh ..... yeah. That's the point.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Uhhh ..... yeah. That's the point.

so you got a bunch of your ignored people posting in this thread...you couldn't figure that out yourself, so you had to ask?

 

[Carnal_Flower]

The insane Right Wing is so Pro-Life they're perfectly ok with 8 yr old boys becoming paralyzed and 2 yr olds left without parents. Oh, not to mention 1st graders mowed down in classrooms. They're a disgusting lot of crazies.

 

[dmonty]

Again direct variant, Colt buying the design and production rights changes nothing. Kind of like when the Dodge brothers sold their company to the Chrysler Corp. A dodge was made from the same parts before and after the sale.

So what? Nice spec read out, which adds or subtracts what from your point?

Were not talking about using the .223 for hunting deer or pig......but people, and a .223 is plenty deadly enough to take out people. It is math, Force = velocity x mass. Not to mention how unstable the bullet is, which then tumbles and usually breaks up into pieces upon impact. Now I am not sure and i am not bothering to look it up, but the .223 may even be a boatail style bullet making it even more destructive upon impact.

I love how you throw "twist rate" in, do you know what that twist rate does? (btw my afore mentioned WW1 .303 has a twist rate of 1-10 surprised I know that?) I doubt it, your just a google warrior, with little actual knowledge about the real world.

Kind of like how you get suckered into posting shit in other threads that actually discredit your post. Why? Well because the people who were looking for data to back up their point, found some that appear to back up the view. But upon actually reading said materials ( which they and you don't) the data doesn't support the argument.

BTW, I am kind of curious how you shoot through a rib cage, at an animal charging you? I don't recall too ( read zero) many times you get broadside views of an animal charging...do you actually even hunt?

again you keep using that word "variant", the Armalite Rifle (the original) is not a variant of the AR-15, the Colt AR-15 isn't either (as it purchased the original design and made no modifications)... the variants that you speak of would be the class of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) that all built their .223 platforms off of the AR-15. In your Dodge to Chrysler, concept, neither Chrysler nor Dodge is the variant.

As for the specs.... The .223 is a varmint, target gun, and yes it can be used to hunt "larger" game like deer (roughly 120 lb game) it is underpowered. Bullet instability? only occurs when the twist rate and velocity aren't at the right rates, if this "tumble" happens before hitting the target its called keyholing and an inaccurate shot most likely. The bullet tumble after a striking a solid object, this is usual and expected behavior as bullet loses its energy quickly (rapid deceleration). There is no "performance" difference between boattailed or flat based bullets, this difference is so minute that the Ballistics Coefficients are nearly identical with the.

The twist rate is am important factor with regards to making AR15's effectiveness in taking down larger game because of the increased grain bullet - the slower twist rate on "bigger" bullet actually reduces its power., which is why you need a higher twist rate to be use heavier ammo against bigger game. Google? No sorry I have been a gun owner for over 38 years (though I have never owned an AR-15, I'm more partial to the .308Win "AR-10") and have been a loader for over 10 years. So I do know something about ammo, caliber and twist rates.

Not sure what other posts you are referring to that I've been discredited on, but hasn't happened, I've posted factual information with source links or pictures (in the caliber hunting charts, or the below wild boar skeletal structure)

The wild boars head covers the opening in the neck area, so to reach the heart the rib cage still exists even when not broadside shot..
View attachment 2160378

 

[dmonty]

Anyone who gets flagged and loses their guns can just learn how to kill en masse with their hands and feet.

and what of those 2 million people that defends themselves with a gun every year? The reason why the have a force equalizer is so that they don't have to fight off bigger, stringer more numerous criminals with a self defense tool that can equalize the force of the attackers.

 

[dmonty]

Ah, so you finally come clean........*chuckles* you're scared of big bad gobberment........lol.

I can tell you failed history btw.

Failed History? No, never got lower than 95 in any history exam though I am unsure why you'd come to that conclusion?

Bad guys, whether it be criminals or government types are all dangerous, and histories body counts have the socialist ideologies tyrannical governments far in the lead

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Not sure what other posts you are referring to that I've been discredited on, but hasn't happened, I've posted factual information with source links or pictures (in the caliber hunting charts, or the below wild boar skeletal structure)

The wild boars head covers the opening in the neck area, so to reach the heart the rib cage still exists even when not broadside shot..
View attachment 2160378

LMFAO...you said when a, and I quote:

(how confident are you to face down a 200-300lb pig charging at you and putting the shot through a ribcage into the heart??) which is why most prefer the .3xx calibers.

View attachment 2160378

Now how about you post a picture of that pig head on, because the pic above is NOT what they look like charging.

ON a charging pig you have no clean shot at the heart, to say otherwise just proves you have zero fucking hunting experience . Not to mention if you're hunting pig, the last thing you want is a rifle. A 12 or 10 gauge with double 00 shot, that is the ticket.

Back to your mindset on the AR, it is a variant, was a variant, and will always be one. You can't change facts, go look at the parts diagrams.

*chuckles* idiots, claiming an AR-15 is not a variant of the Colt AR-15 is like saying a ten speed bike is not a variant of a single speed bike....

 

[jaF0]

so you got a bunch of your ignored people posting in this thread...you couldn't figure that out yourself, so you had to ask?

Ummm, no. It was to display how many useless idiots post on a page.

 

[rockcasbah]

Ummm, no. It was to display how many useless idiots post on a page.

Do you cover your ears as well?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Failed History? No, never got lower than 95 in any history exam though I am unsure why you'd come to that conclusion?

Bad guys, whether it be criminals or government types are all dangerous, and histories body counts have the socialist ideologies tyrannical governments far in the lead

Well lets see, maybe we start with this.

"Three of the governments in the last century that experimented with their versions of red flag laws, allowing government judges to declare political enemies mentally unfit in order to make it easier to subjugate them, were communist (red) China, the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany. Each of those nations had lots of red in its flags."

The first two, China and USSR were dictatorships (China still is), so they had no need of any laws to do what they chose to their citizens. That is how dictatorships work, or did you not learn that in history? Guess that is why you only got a 90 eh?

Germany, now that was bit different, from shortly after WW1 up until 1933, German, was a democracy ( Republic) but when Hitler had Hindenburg sign the Enabling Act, and after Hindenburg's death in 1934, Hitler then rolled up the Chancellorship with the Presidency, and became in all but name, dictator of Germany.

So in all three cases, RED FLAG laws, if any were ever enacted, were for show only.

You are just a rightwing nut-bar, afraid of your own shadow, but people like you, are quickly turn the USA into a potential Germany....and if you can't see that, well as I said earlier, you're just a fucking idiot.