Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
Faith, King, Empire
President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 17:03:48 GMT
Oh, I don't know then. The unnecessary shit. Silencers, laser sights, hollow point rounds, incendiary rounds, .50 weapons, dum-dum rounds, all the crap you really don't need for any reasonable purpose (I don't know about the legality of some of those in America, they're just general examples). I'm not trying to run you in circles, but I think you're getting the idea on how complex the issues are. silencers/suppressors are illegal in some states, but legal in others (my father in-law used to shoot 1000yd matches on the Marine Corps shooting team and has hearing loss. He still shoots at the range for a hobby and utilizes a suppressor to save his hearing). I have a laser sight on my handgun for accuracy and it's a very useful tool for home defense in the case that it's dark in your home along with hollow point rounds for self defense in my home defense handgun. Incendiary rounds are already highly illegal, and I'm not aware of any crime being committed in public with a .50cal at any time in our history. I think my incompetence here is showing. I guess "maximum killing ability = unnecessary" is what I'm trying to get at. |
|
Snorelacks
Captain
Posts: 1,779 
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 17:11:46 GMT
I'm not trying to run you in circles, but I think you're getting the idea on how complex the issues are. silencers/suppressors are illegal in some states, but legal in others (my father in-law used to shoot 1000yd matches on the Marine Corps shooting team and has hearing loss. He still shoots at the range for a hobby and utilizes a suppressor to save his hearing). I have a laser sight on my handgun for accuracy and it's a very useful tool for home defense in the case that it's dark in your home along with hollow point rounds for self defense in my home defense handgun. Incendiary rounds are already highly illegal, and I'm not aware of any crime being committed in public with a .50cal at any time in our history. I think my incompetence here is showing. I guess "maximum killing ability = unnecessary" is what I'm trying to get at. What constitutes "maximum killing ability"?- www.gunpolicy.org/documents/5561-22-calibre-rabbit-rifles-kill-more-people-than-any-other/file |
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
Faith, King, Empire
President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 17:18:37 GMT
That's the grey area. As far as I'm concerned, it's the stuff that seems (to me, at least) beyond reason that a normal person should be allowed to possess. Certain ammunition that's designed to gouge flesh and shit, stuff like the laser sights that are, realistically, designed to make it easier to troops to fight in darkened/foggy areas. Ordinary people don't need that shit. |
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant
Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 17:21:46 GMT
Laser sights also have the ability to negate the need to even fire the weapon due to their psychological effect.
Also - hollow points are far more humane than FMJ and the like given appropriate circumstances.
Using hunting as a reference only, monolithic bullets are used in certain situations while expanding type bullets are used in others. In regards to those situations, the bullet types are not interchangeable.
SLB - I want to note that while I don't disagree with everything you've said (nor to I agree with everything) - this is the kind of devil's advocate stuff that makes the gun control process such a...well...mess. We haven't even touched on what could be considered a need vs a novelty.
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 17:24:41 GMT
SLB...the ironic thing is that the military's primary battle rifle round is the 5.56mm NATO round. It's a round that is banned in my state for deer hunting because it's not very effective at ethically killing game due to it's poor kinetic energy and small bullet weight. One of the primary reasons it's used is because it is light and easy for foot soldiers to carry hundreds of rounds on them. Oh, I don't know then. The unnecessary shit. Silencers, laser sights, hollow point rounds, incendiary rounds, .50 weapons, dum-dum rounds, all the crap you really don't need for any reasonable purpose (I don't know about the legality of some of those in America, they're just general examples). Suppressors should be mandatory for gun owners, as they keep the rounds hearing safe and do not disturb other shooters, especially in an indoor range. Laser sights are very handy with people that have poor eyesight or are not physically able to hold a firearm up to see through the sights (Elderly, infirm, etc.) Hollow point rounds are essential in stopping over penetration when you shoot something. They 'mushroom' and keep the round inside the target instead of exiting the target and striking another person behind them. Full Metal Jacket (FMJ) rounds do the opposite - They pass right through the target and keep going out the other side, although somewhat reduced in velocity. These rounds are an absolute must for self defense ammo. Using FMJ rounds in a self defense scenario risks harming other people. Incendiary rounds are just fun, especially when shooting propane tanks. .50 rifles are useful for long range shooting and just plain fun to shoot. Not sure what 'dum-dum rounds are. |
|
Snorelacks
Captain
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 17:26:15 GMT
That's the grey area. As far as I'm concerned, it's the stuff that seems (to me, at least) beyond reason that a normal person should be allowed to possess. Certain ammunition that's designed to gouge flesh and shit, stuff like the laser sights that are, realistically, designed to make it easier to troops to fight in darkened/foggy areas. Ordinary people don't need that shit. So my argument is who should be able to tell me whether I can defend my family and my own home with our without a laser sight or hollow points, or a shotgun, or a AR, or whatever I want to use on my own personal property. I find it highly normal to seek the most effective tool I can be Constitutionally permitted to use in the effort to defend my life, my family's life and my property.
I mean, once the government or an unelected bureaucrat gets the opportunity to dictate to the average person you start having all of your rights infringed upon.
Hell, the EU is just about to ban hair dryers and toasters because they use too much electricity. For fucks sake- www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11061538/EU-to-ban-high-energy-hair-dryers-smartphones-and-kettles.html
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant
Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 17:26:16 GMT
Oh, I don't know then. The unnecessary shit. Silencers, laser sights, hollow point rounds, incendiary rounds, .50 weapons, dum-dum rounds, all the crap you really don't need for any reasonable purpose (I don't know about the legality of some of those in America, they're just general examples). This is why I still don't understand why they are NFA. And don't get me started on Form 1. |
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 17:27:17 GMT
That's the grey area. As far as I'm concerned, it's the stuff that seems (to me, at least) beyond reason that a normal person should be allowed to possess. Certain ammunition that's designed to gouge flesh and shit, stuff like the laser sights that are, realistically, designed to make it easier to troops to fight in darkened/foggy areas. Ordinary people don't need that shit. This is here our ideologies differ greatly. If it helps troops fight in dark/foggy areas, why should I be barred the use of the same technology when defending my family? The part that irks me the most is 'should be allowed...' No one 'should be allowed' to tell me what I can't use to defend my home and family. |
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
Faith, King, Empire
President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 17:33:23 GMT
Laser sights also have the ability to negate the need to even fire the weapon due to their psychological effect. Also - hollow points are far more humane than FMJ and the like given appropriate circumstances. Using hunting as a reference only, monolithic bullets are used in certain situations while expanding type bullets are used in others. In regards to those situations, the bullet types are not interchangeable. The effect of a laser sight is pretty subjective really, to me it doesn't exactly seem like something that would matter, it's the fact you have a weapon at all that's going to have an effect if anything. Exactly what circumstance is that going to work in? If the other guy has a weapon, then chances are yours having a laser isn't going to do much. If he hasn't got a weapon, I'd question what you're doing pointing a gun at him, and even then, the fact you're pointing a firearm at him is going to have as much as an effect, probably more, as having a little red laser pointing at him too. Hollow point bullets are meant to rip flesh and create as big an impact wound as possible, basically make a mess. You don't need that. Perhaps for a quick death for an animal you're hunting, but for things you're not going to use for hunting then it's not necessary. A pistol doesn't need hollow point rounds, really. |
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
Faith, King, Empire
President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 17:48:17 GMT
But anyway, I don't think I'm really communicating anything particularly well here. I'll just stop, I'm only repeating myself at this point.
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 17:48:24 GMT
Laser sights also have the ability to negate the need to even fire the weapon due to their psychological effect. Also - hollow points are far more humane than FMJ and the like given appropriate circumstances. Using hunting as a reference only, monolithic bullets are used in certain situations while expanding type bullets are used in others. In regards to those situations, the bullet types are not interchangeable. The effect of a laser sight is pretty subjective really, to me it doesn't exactly seem like something that would matter, it's the fact you have a weapon at all that's going to have an effect if anything. Exactly what circumstance is that going to work in? If the other guy has a weapon, then chances are yours having a laser isn't going to do much. If he hasn't got a weapon, I'd question what you're doing pointing a gun at him, and even then, the fact you're pointing a firearm at him is going to have as much as an effect, probably more, as having a little red laser pointing at him too. Hollow point bullets are meant to rip flesh and create as big an impact wound as possible, basically make a mess. You don't need that. Perhaps for a quick death for an animal you're hunting, but for things you're not going to use for hunting then it's not necessary. A pistol doesn't need hollow point rounds, really. A lot of pistols that have the laser sight do not have night sights. You can not see your sights in the dark. You can see a red laser. If someone kicks in my back door and I can't turn the lights on, I need to know where my shot will go in the dark. If I put the red dot on the bad guy's chest, I know that's where my round will go. If anyone is in my house, without my consent, at night. They die. There is absolutely no reason why anyone should be inside my home in that scenario. No holding them at gunpoint for the Police. They get shots center mass and any more if necessary. I have my wife and daughter to think about. You miss the point entirely about hollow point ammunition. The round is designed to stay inside what you shoot. So, going back to my earlier scenario, if I shoot bad guy in the chest - A hollow point bullet has a very small chance of exiting his body and hitting anyone or anything else. Hollow point rounds cause traumatic injury meant to keep the threat from harming you or to put game animals down in one shot. If I use Full Metal Jacket rounds and shoot the bad guy in the above scenario, the bullets more than likely will pass through him, causing no injury to vital organs and thereby leaving him able to continue his aggression towards me and my family. The rounds will also pass through him and probably hit someone or something behind him. |
|
I AM The Scouting Authority.
Captain
Invicta Insomniac
Like a circle in a spiral, Like a wheel within a wheel
Posts: 1,683
Likes: 541
Console: Xbox
Preferred server: East
Clan tag: BNKR
Is R35T a Skreb?: Yes
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:12:18 GMT
|
Post by I AM The Scouting Authority. on Jul 8, 2016 17:49:59 GMT
Ok so I've seen several mentions of the .50cal. Im not sure why you would need a weapon that can destroy cast steel or aluminium blocks. Where is the need to own one?? Now if it was a weapon that you could hire at a firing range with enough open space id understand. Its a weapon that can and does destroy what it sees. And im pretty certain its outside the scope of personal protection having seen the size of weapons needed to fire it.
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 17:50:54 GMT
If you are serious about having a discussion about the merits of FMJ vs. hollow point - Watch this video. FMJ vs. Hollow Point |
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant
Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 17:51:16 GMT
Laser sights also have the ability to negate the need to even fire the weapon due to their psychological effect. Also - hollow points are far more humane than FMJ and the like given appropriate circumstances. Using hunting as a reference only, monolithic bullets are used in certain situations while expanding type bullets are used in others. In regards to those situations, the bullet types are not interchangeable. The effect of a laser sight is pretty subjective really, to me it doesn't exactly seem like something that would matter, it's the fact you have a weapon at all that's going to have an effect if anything. Exactly what circumstance is that going to work in? If the other guy has a weapon, then chances are yours having a laser isn't going to do much. If he hasn't got a weapon, I'd question what you're doing pointing a gun at him, and even then, the fact you're pointing a firearm at him is going to have as much as an effect, probably more, as having a little red laser pointing at him too. Hollow point bullets are meant to rip flesh and create as big an impact wound as possible, basically make a mess. You don't need that. Perhaps for a quick death for an animal you're hunting, but for things you're not going to use for hunting then it's not necessary. A pistol doesn't need hollow point rounds, really. I do disagree here. Hunting and shooting a person should be for the same effect - to kill. I don't mean that militantly, I just mean you should never point a gun at anything you do not intend to kill...let alone shoot anything you don't intend to kill. IF you feel there's a reason to shoot, it should be for no other reason. I know people think shoot to wound 'makes sense' - but I assure you, it does not. |
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 17:51:59 GMT
Ok so I've seen several mentions of the .50cal. Im not sure why you would need a weapon that can destroy cast steel or aluminium blocks. Where is the need to own one?? Now if it was a weapon that you could hire at a firing range with enough open space id understand. Its a weapon that can and does destroy what it sees. And im pretty certain its outside the scope of personal protection having seen the size of weapons needed to fire it. Going back to the 2nd Amendment - In the scope of arms the military can have, we can as well. There is no 'need' written into the 2nd. |
|
Snorelacks
Captain
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 18:06:12 GMT
Ok so I've seen several mentions of the .50cal. Im not sure why you would need a weapon that can destroy cast steel or aluminium blocks. Where is the need to own one?? Now if it was a weapon that you could hire at a firing range with enough open space id understand. Its a weapon that can and does destroy what it sees. And im pretty certain its outside the scope of personal protection having seen the size of weapons needed to fire it. Widowmaker....there is a stark difference between a need, a want and a Constitutional "right".
The United States was founded on the idea of Inalienable & Unalienable Rights due to the form of government they revolted from and threw off. These Inalienable rights cannot be surrendered, sold or transferred to someone else, especially a natural right such as the right to own property. However, these rights can be transferred with the consent of the person possessing those rights. We also have Unalienable Rights that cannot be bartered away, or given away, or taken away except if punishment for a crime.
The bedrock of our country's founding was that our Government would be instituted ONLY to secure, not grant or create, these rights. The Constitution is the absolute cornerstone/foundation of what we were meant to stand for as a country.
|
|
I AM The Scouting Authority.
Captain
Invicta Insomniac
Like a circle in a spiral, Like a wheel within a wheel
Posts: 1,683
Likes: 541
Console: Xbox
Preferred server: East
Clan tag: BNKR
Is R35T a Skreb?: Yes
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:12:18 GMT
|
Post by I AM The Scouting Authority. on Jul 8, 2016 18:15:16 GMT
Ok so I've seen several mentions of the .50cal. Im not sure why you would need a weapon that can destroy cast steel or aluminium blocks. Where is the need to own one?? Now if it was a weapon that you could hire at a firing range with enough open space id understand. Its a weapon that can and does destroy what it sees. And im pretty certain its outside the scope of personal protection having seen the size of weapons needed to fire it. Going back to the 2nd Amendment - In the scope of arms the military can have, we can as well. There is no 'need' written into the 2nd. Is Militia defined under the US Constitution in the same way Territorials are in UK Law |
|
Snorelacks
Captain
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 18:22:12 GMT
Going back to the 2nd Amendment - In the scope of arms the military can have, we can as well. There is no 'need' written into the 2nd. Is Militia defined under the US Constitution in the same way Territorials are in UK Law It referred to the eligible pool of citizens callable into military service. |
|
Snorelacks
Captain
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 18:23:58 GMT
Is Militia defined under the US Constitution in the same way Territorials are in UK Law It referred to the eligible pool of citizens callable into military service. These are the exact words from the Constitution- A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
There are and have been many people who have tried to argue that Militia only meant the military; however, there are numerous writings between legislators and congressmen at the time, including framers of the Bill of Rights that more clearly defined what was meant and it was clear that they meant the citizenry.
There are also multiple passages that further clarify the meaning in the Federalist Papers written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison. These "Papers" written in 1787 & 1788 wear meant to clarify the political ideas and their meaning for the new "American Democracy".
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant
Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 18:33:14 GMT
I hope we can all still be friends after this thread.
|
|
