Gun Control & RKBA

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)

48. No, Marengo, this deflection over minutia and an attempt to ad honemiem

Fri Aug 5, 2016, 11:29 PM

Aug 2016

your way out of a losing argument. I confused the ammunition capacity of two WW II era trench guns and the gun nutz DO NOT WANT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION AT HAND. Could the Orlando shooter have shot 103 people with an M1 Garand assuming he could have gotten it inside the venue? Or to the OP, is the M1 Garand more deadly than the AR platform?

Address that issue. Dare ya' and a nany nany booboo to go with it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

144 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Let's call them what they are: [View all] The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 OP

I can appreciate your thoughts on these matters. But this is a culture war... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #1

Ditto... virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #2

My pony real point is that language should serve to clarify The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #3

I agree, and "assault weapons" was purposefully used to obfuscate. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #10

Thanx for the graphics. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #9

the big idea discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #4

But mass killing is already as illegal as anything could be. The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #5

basic answers discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #6

I'm jonseing for a Henry Big Boy in ..357 The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #7

Sounds pretty nice discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #8

I prefer to think of it as a firearm who appreciates craftsmanship and gejohnston Jul 2016 #13

How many rounds does the .357 magazine hold? Maybe 1 more with .38 sp? aikoaiko Aug 2016 #15

Usually 1 fewer .357 than .38 Spl, at least in my Uberti lever action '92 DonP Aug 2016 #16

So, 103 people shot in an Orlando night club with an AR 15 derivative. flamin lib Jul 2016 #11

Wrong again. Straw Man Jul 2016 #12

Not to mention the military went away from full auto Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #14

Nope. The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #18

Really? God that's pathetic. How far will gun people go to defend their fetish. flamin lib Aug 2016 #19

I agree discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #21

Facts, please. Straw Man Aug 2016 #25

10 rounds? Didn't you claim to have more knowledge about guns... Marengo Aug 2016 #30

See 24. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #36

If you are talking about cyclic rate, you're not talking about an AR. benEzra Aug 2016 #35

You are wrong, I've done it flamin lib Aug 2016 #37

Even bump-firing, an AR-15 can't touch the cyclic rate of an M16 benEzra Aug 2016 #42

No. You have not done it. Straw Man Aug 2016 #55

This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #61

Pardon my intrusion discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #56

Jerry Miculek, a professional athlete widely regarded as the fastest shooter in the world, benEzra Aug 2016 #76

Now, wanna' call me a liar? Puha Ekapi Aug 2016 #75

This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #59

Why do you considdr the M1 as "the last trench gun"? Marengo Aug 2016 #87

Trench warfare was a thing of the past by the time the M1 was developed (late 1930's) friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #94

That's what I was wondering. By the time the M1 was adopted, the Army was concentrating... Marengo Aug 2016 #95

"trench gun": discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #96

I've only seen the term used to describe combat shotguns. I'd like to understand the context... Marengo Aug 2016 #97

AFAIK "trench gun" never refers to a rifle discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #98

This message was self-deleted by its author jmg257 Aug 2016 #20

ballistic damage from .30-06 in CQ... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #22

Yeah, 8 vs 10 rounds per clip. Was mixing Enfield with Garand. Thanks for the correction. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #24

The M1 is clip fed, whereas the Enfield is magazine fed. There really isn't any excuse... Marengo Aug 2016 #31

"I daresay that I know more about guns...than most gun nuts here on DU" friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #34

I daresay that is a dubious claim. Marengo Aug 2016 #47

This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #60

Only for bonefide gun nutz. The clip on the M1 is a box loaded outside the rifle. flamin lib Aug 2016 #38

No, this is basic technical terminology which someone of your supposed expertise... Marengo Aug 2016 #46

No, Marengo, this deflection over minutia and an attempt to ad honemiem flamin lib Aug 2016 #48

What "losing argument"? Correcting your erroneous terminology? It's extremely difficult for me... Marengo Aug 2016 #49

You're still deflecting and attacking me instead of addressing the basic premise. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #65

I'm addressing your self professed status as someone highly knowledgeable of firearms... Marengo Aug 2016 #85

"If YOU don't understand the internal mechanisms of assault weapons I suggest that you are... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #67

Why do you refer to the M1 as a trench gun? Marengo Aug 2016 #70

No shit. Puha Ekapi Aug 2016 #78

In that particular venue, the Orlando shooter could have shot 103 people with a full-sized pistol, benEzra Aug 2016 #79

Still wondering why you refer to the M1 as a "trench gun"? Marengo Aug 2016 #140

I wouldn't be holding your breathe discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #141

You're likely right, but I am genuinely curious having owned several M1s over the years... Marengo Aug 2016 #142

Because it's an "Evil Scary Gun Term", and "assault weapon" was already taken.... benEzra Aug 2016 #143

If only the control types could... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #144

I beg to differ. Straw Man Aug 2016 #50

I really want to say thanks for this OP... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #17

You're welcome The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #23

recoil is the rub jimmy the one Aug 2016 #26

addendum on recoil jimmy the one Aug 2016 #27

Dihydrogen monoxide hand-waving... benEzra Aug 2016 #32

Double baloney on you and throw in a nany nany booboo too. flamin lib Aug 2016 #39

No, the MA AG didn't touch function at all. benEzra Aug 2016 #45

Eh? Straw Man Aug 2016 #51

Interesting. A good step in making conversation more concrete... The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #88

For me that would mean flamin lib Aug 2016 #90

Which not even Canada, continental Europe, or the UK bans. benEzra Aug 2016 #138

addendum 2 jimmy the one Aug 2016 #28

A very intelligent post (well, series of them) The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #29

155gr .30-06 is still trading velocity for long range and penetration. Try 110gr. benEzra Aug 2016 #33

Worked okay in Sandy Hook, Dallas, San Bernadino and on and on and on. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #41

6mm Remington "worked OK" (in your words) at U Texas. 9mm "worked OK" (again your words) at VT. benEzra Aug 2016 #43

Why has NATO and our own Pentagon adapted the 5.56 flamin lib Aug 2016 #71

Just a guess discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #72

"Adapted" or "adopted"? Straw Man Aug 2016 #73

Because they were spec'ing it for use in automatic weapons. benEzra Aug 2016 #74

I have... Puha Ekapi Aug 2016 #93

Mainly weight Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #77

Weight is a big issue now, but that was less of an criterion before body armor was general-issue. benEzra Aug 2016 #81

Thanks Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #82

And who says ... Straw Man Aug 2016 #53

Now that we have finished the big dick contest of who knows how much flamin lib Aug 2016 #40

For short range, how about a Garand scaled down for a less powerful cartridge. benEzra Aug 2016 #44

Address the fucking question. Stop with the red herring and deflection. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #66

The red herrings and deflection in this thread are not coming from your interlocutors: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #68

My, my. Straw Man Aug 2016 #52

Everyone has them. beevul Aug 2016 #99

The type of gun is not the problem... Sancho Aug 2016 #54

I have many questions for you discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #57

Because it's a waste of time to "define" the type of guns... Sancho Aug 2016 #62

More of my many questions discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #63

I have been very careful to suggest that nothing is 100% foolproof... Sancho Aug 2016 #64

More discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #69

License a right? beevul Aug 2016 #100

Nothing unconstitutional...carry permits are legal. Sancho Aug 2016 #101

"At a time of increasing gun violence in America" Gun crime has decreased markedly in the US friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #106

Nothing to do with crime...gun VIOLENCE... Sancho Aug 2016 #107

How can gun violence not be a crime, unless one counts paper targets, clay pigeons... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #108

Many examples...here's one.... Sancho Aug 2016 #109

The *number of media accounts* is on the rise, not the rate. That is what is declining. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #111

that has been dropping too. gejohnston Aug 2016 #112

I would like to address this but... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #110

You were talking about a license to own, not a license to carry. Big difference. beevul Aug 2016 #113

Nope...I never mentioned a license to own.... Sancho Aug 2016 #114

Possession and use is an extension of ownership. beevul Aug 2016 #116

The book is by a legal scholar...here's some more...there are many cases...it's legal. Sancho Aug 2016 #117

So what? beevul Aug 2016 #118

You make my point... Sancho Aug 2016 #119

Not so much. beevul Aug 2016 #120

Again, you make my point... Sancho Aug 2016 #121

No, I really don't. beevul Aug 2016 #123

So disagree with carry permits? Sancho Aug 2016 #124

Not desiring prior restraint on an enumerated right =/= "(a) desire to allow dangerous people... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #126

Carry permits are prior restraint... Sancho Aug 2016 #128

I have no problem with carry permits so long as they are given on an objective basis... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #130

A license is a version of a carry permit... Sancho Aug 2016 #131

Your licensing proposal is flawed, IMO, because of the idea "you can have one IF... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #134

Newsflash... beevul Aug 2016 #135

Red herring. beevul Aug 2016 #133

How would you get the gun control lobby to sign up to that, or be constrained by it? benEzra Aug 2016 #137

Acknowledging your rudeness but asserting a basic right discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #122

This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #58

The big question, does it have the ability to kill a lot of people?????? Motley13 Aug 2016 #80

All civilian repeating firearms have the ability to kill a lot of people if misused. benEzra Aug 2016 #83

There should be no civilian repeating firearms mwrguy Aug 2016 #84

Then don't own any. benEzra Aug 2016 #86

Do you expect anyone to take that seriously? Straw Man Aug 2016 #89

And with one sentence........ pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #91

There should be no repeating... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #92

And these "violent idiots", as you term them: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #102

Hunting? Straw Man Aug 2016 #103

Hunting and self defense are the prime reasons that I have seen cited guillaumeb Aug 2016 #104

True but irrelevant. Straw Man Aug 2016 #105

Then maybe... beevul Aug 2016 #115

Responding tp your signature line rather than your post: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #125

Although major cities have had plenty of success identifying the small percent responsible jmg257 Aug 2016 #127

I added a bit to your response. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #129

I thought there were like 8-10,000 gun homicides a year? jmg257 Aug 2016 #132

Around 75%-90% of murderers have prior arrest records, benEzra Aug 2016 #139

Imagine that. N/T beevul Aug 2016 #136